Democrats Are Stupid!

That’s the only thing I can think of to explain most of their plans for the next Congress. All their plans are stupid, but the stupidest are their plans to increase their efforts at gun control, in opposition to the Second Amendment of the Constitution of the United States. The Constitution clearly states that no law shall be made that “INFRINGES” on the right of ALL AMERICANS to be armed for self defense. Yet they spend most of their time hatching and passing many laws, each one of which DOES “infringe” on that right. Never mind their laws only stop the law-abiding (who mostly are NOT the problem) from getting guns, leaving them DEFENSELESS against the guns in the hands of the people who do not OBEY laws (who ARE the problem). There has not been a single law passed that actually stops a criminal or other miscreant from getting a gun. At the same time, they DISARM the law-abiding, making them DEFENSELESS, and INCREASING “gun crime.” We keep telling them this, but they keep ignoring that, and then they vilify us for saying it, without answering our charges with facts. That’s because there ARE no facts to support their position. (Wall Street Journal)

It Can't Be Regulated Away

Alan Gottlieb, well-known pro-gun advocate, says politicians want to “regulate” the Second Amendment out of existence. If that’s what they want, that would be a “pipe dream” that is impossible. Regulations are only to clarify LAWS that have been passed by a lawmaking body. There must be a LAW before there is a regulation to clarify it. Likewise, ALL LAWS must conform to the Constitution, and the Second Amendment is part of the Constitution, so no regulation can EVER nullify a constitutional provision. Not in a rational society, anyway. But this society has proven itself to be less than rational, so they might get away with it, for a while, until “wiser heads” intervene. The anti-gun fools are trying everything they can think of to “get around” the Second Amendment, and they have been rightfully unsuccessful. They SHOULD be unsuccessful, because the Second Amendment is one of the most plain statements ever made in a legal document. It is one sentence, and very clear. Nevertheless, the anti-gun fools have tried to complicate it by telling us only members of an “organized militia” can be armed. Something that did not even EXIST at the time, so how could that possibly be what they meant. At the time, a “militia” was ALL THE PEOPLE. (Liberty Park Press)

Gun Laws Misguided

They don’t stop criminals and other law breakers from getting guns. They never have, in spite of the fact that misguided politicians rush to make more of them every time some fool misuses a gun. Every law against gun ownership for law-abiding people ASSUMES that the law-abiding are the problem in “gun crime.” They are NOT. It is the CRIMINALS who are the problem, and no amount of anti-gun laws are going to stop them from their “gun crime.” If they are contemplating a much more serious crime like robbery or even a mass shooting, why in HELL would they give a moment’s worry over breaking a silly little law that says they can’t be armed when committing their other crimes? As long as those laws are based on “getting rid of guns,” they will FAIL to “reduce gun crime.” The anti-gun fools have to know that, but they ignore it, in their quest to disarm ALL Americans, for whatever reason. If they ever came up with a law (doubtful) that actually WOULD reduce gun crime without disarming the law-abiding, I’d be right there with them. Buy it ain’t agonna happen, because there AREN’T any laws that would do that. (Informed Conservative)

"We'll Nuke Your Ass!"

That’s what one Dumocrat congressman in California wants to tell gun owners who won’t “give up their guns.” Never mind the Constitution prohibits any lawmaker from doing anything like that. California congressman Eric Swalwell apparently doesn’t know much about the Constitution, or he wouldn’t make such an absurd suggestions. And I hope he’s using “nuke” as a simile. The idea of a nuclear explosion on an American citizen is about as absurd as you can get. If he’s serious, he has committed a crime. For the United States government to even CONSIDER using a nuclear device against Americans would also be criminal, and for a local, state lawmaker to even suggest it is stupidity. Apparently Swalwell, like most Dumocrats, is obsessed with gaining power over the rest of us. They claim that Trump wants total power, but in reality, it is the Dumocrats who do. Somebody needs to wake this jerk up to reality. The reality that there are still SOME limits to his power as a lowly state lawmaker. Somebody told him that to take away our guns would mean war. He replied that the war would be a short one because “the government has nukes.” As if the government would actually USE nukes on Americans. But that person who said taking our guns away completely would mean war is serious. Maybe not “all out war,” but war, nonetheless. And people like Swalwell would be the first casualties. (Legal Insurrection)

Defective Thinking

More and more corporate entities are putting their customers’ lives at risk by banning legally-carried guns from their premises. Walgreen’s Drugs is one of those, and by so doing, have made pretty sure that law-abiding people won’t bring their guns with them, even if they are legally-licensed to do so—which, in itself, is a violation of the “shall not be infringed” clause in the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United states. That reminds me of the time a woman who was licensed to carry in Texas had to leave her gun in her car to go into a restaurant with her mom and dad, and had to watch while they were brutally murdered by a gunman who predictably didn’t obey that law that forced her to do so. The very fact that none of these laws will ever apply to people who don’t obey laws puts customers in places like Walgreen’s in grave danger. They will be completely DEFENSELESS when a criminal ignores the law and brings his gun, while the law-abiding cannot. And people will die because of it. But anti-gun fools don’t seem to care, as they go about making even more of their useless laws that only get people killed by keeping them disarmed. (Gun Free Zone)

What's WRONG With Them?

It is obvious to anybody with any degree of intelligence that the laws that have been made to “keep guns out of the hands of people who shouldn’t have them” only keep guns out of the hands of people who SHOULD have them: the law-abiding, so they can defend themselves and others against those who IGNORE those laws and get their guns illegally. Why then, do they insist on making even more of them? Is it simple stupidity? Or the need to convince gullible people they are DOING something, even if they, and we, all KNOW it accomplishes NOTHING except to make it easier for criminals and other miscreants to victimize the law-abiding, who DO obey their stupid, silly laws, whether they like them, or not—and get killed because of it. Or is it that they just don’t know how to stop, or even slow down “gun crime” and won’t admit it? I know what the politicians are thinking. They’re AFRAID of an armed populace. So they want to take as many guns away from them as they can, lest they be used against THEM when they come to steal what is not theirs. They know they can’t get all guns away from the law BREAKERS, but they’ll settle for what they can get. They know that the best way to end gun violence, or at least significantly reduce it is to arm the law-abiding, so they can reduce it by killing off many of the ILLEGAL gun holders when they come to victimize them, but they will not even entertain the possibility. It frightens them. (Just common sense)

Subjective Laws

Politicians love subjective laws because they are so vague they may be defined in any way that politician wishes. Take “bump stock bans,” for instance. With the advent of the bump stock ban, ANY rifle can be made into a “machine gun.” all it takes is for some unnamed, faceless bureaucrat to DEFINE it as such, and its owner suddenly becomes a law breaker, just for owning it. They love to make laws as wide and vague as possible so they may be used indiscriminately, just by somebody DEFINING something as being whatever is banned. Anti-gun fools especially love their laws to be vague and uncertain so they can make them into whatever they wish them to be, just by changing the definition of something, therefore bringing it under that law. Such laws allow corrupt politicians to cover whatever they want, since they are so vague as to make it possible. (AmmoLand)

No "Thoughts and Prayers"

I never thought I’d agree with CNN’s Chris Cuomo on anything. But his take (echoing the Thousand Oaks bar killer) on that shooting is “right on.” What good have “thoughts and prayers” ever done AFTER a bunch of innocent people have been murdered? The part of the diatribe from both with which I disagree is that we should enact even more of those USELESS anti-gun fool laws that only do one thing: make life easier for the criminals, who just IGNORE them, bring their (usually) illegally-obtained guns with them, and victimize the law-abiding, who DO obey laws—even if they disagree with them. Yes, giving “thoughts and prayers” to the victims of these atrocities do make the SURVIVORS feel better—like they’re actually DOING something in response. But usually they are just homilies to maybe make somebody feel better in their frustration that nothing seems ABLE to be done to stop these senseless killings. The problem is that nobody has been able to come up with anything that will do anything to stop these atrocities, no matter how many useless laws they make, until they start figuring out how to get to those would-be killers BEFORE they go on their killing sprees, OR let responsible, law-abiding Americans be armed for self defense, so a would-be killer can be stopped BEFORE he can kill a bunch or UNARMED, DEFENSELESS people he usually doesn’t even know. (The Blaze)

No Posts Tomorrow

Since it’s Christmas day, I’ll be spending time on family doings. I hope you have a good Christmas, too.

It's Always Trump's Fault

Yes, President Trump did create the safety commission after the killings at Marjory Stoneman High School. But when Trump’s Secretary of Education, Betsy DeVos, was asked if guns would be a subject, she rightly replied, “Not necessarily.”For that, the Washington Post is criticizing her. Never mind the unalterable fact that no amount of gun control has EVER stopped a single mass shooter from killing his victims. “Gun-free zones” are an “engraved invitation” to would-be shooters, and past mass shooters have confidently told us they SEEK OUT such zones in which to do their dirty work because they can be pretty sure the law-abiding people there will not be armed, and thus will be completely DEFENSELESS. Background checks likewise, because all they can do is help the cops find such a shooter AFTER he commits a crime, IF he got his gun legally and stood for a background check. Anti-gun laws ONLY apply to the law-abiding, who are NOT the problem, as a rule. That is the fatal flaw in the thinking of all anti-gun fools, and that’s why I call them FOOLS. The "black children" to which they refer are mostly teenagers, up to 19, and members of street gangs, all of whom cannot buy a gun legally already, but all are illegally armed when they kill each other. (Washington Post)

Anti-Constitution Campaign

The right of ALL AMERICANS to be armed for self defense (unless they’ve been CONVICTED of a felony or legally deemed to have a real mental deficiency making them a danger). That is GUARANTEED in the Second Amendment of the Constitution of the United States, which is the very BASIS for every law made in this country. Every law MUST CONFORM to the Constitution, or it is NOT A LAW. This is a FACT, not just somebody’s OPINION. The very actions of the anti-gun fools violates the Constitution, every day, as they go about getting their UNCONSTITUTIONAL LAWS made, to be enforced until DECLARED unconstitutional by the Supreme Court, or by any number of lesser courts. So how do they justify their actions? They don’t. They ignore us and our righteous arguments, and go right on making their unconstitutional laws while vilifying us for daring to disagree with them. The NRA is their biggest nemesis, so it is their primary target. They call it a “terrorist organization” because it tries to uphold the law, and they don’t like that. You’d think they’d learn, but they don’t seem to have the INTELLIGENCE required to learn anything. They just bull right on through, completely ignoring the fact that their every action violates the basic law of the land. (Just common sense)

Typical Liberal Lie

All liberals are not anti-gun fools, although MOST of them are. And liberals routinely lie, in one way or another, to get their way. One way they lie in the “gun control controversy” is to include ADULTS up to 19 years of age in their “CHILDREN” statistics when they talk about “children being shot.” Those figures then include GANG MEMBERS, all of whom are illegally armed, since they’re too young to even be able to buy a gun legally. Then they go out and kill each other, and many innocent passers-by who happen to get in the way of their badly-aimed bullets. Such “twisting the numbers” should be a prison offense. They KNOW they are lying, but they do it on purpose, to get their way, since they have nothing REAL to offer. Anti-gun laws don’t work. It’s as simple as that. But they refuse to believe it, and LIE to make us believe them. For this reason, we need to examine what’s behind every figure they give us to find the ways they want to fool us. Never believe their figures without detailed examination, and you’ll find they lie every time. (Breitbart)

Repeated Failures, Still Win?

Gabby Giffords’ “Law Center” claims that states with tougher gun laws have fewer deaths by guns. Which is a LIE. They falsify statistics to make it LOOK LIKE that. According to them, California’s “A” rating should mean things like that bar shooting in Thousand Oaks should not have happened—but it did. They gave my home state, Indiana, a “D minus” with a gun rate death twice that of California at 14.9 deaths per 100,000 population. Of course, we know they include suicides, accidents, and “righteous shootings” by cops and legally-armed civilians using their guns to defend against ILLEGALLY- armed criminals to get those figures. The anti-gun fools compete with the weathermen for a profession where you can be deemed a success with a 90% failure rate. To date, nobody has answered my repeated question on how they figure they’re a success when NONE of their highly-touted anti-gun laws has ever stopped a single ILLEGAL sale of a gun to a criminal. (Giffords Law Center)

Anti-Gun Fool Plans

“Crazy Nancy” Peelosi is promising their major push in congress after they become the majority party in the House will be gun control. Their focus groups have decided that the Republicans only lost enough seats in the House to give control back to Dumocrats because of their stance against gun control. I don’t see how they figure that, since it is a proven fact that a MAJORITY of Americans believe the right to be armed for self defense to be sacrosanct. This is another case of them repeating a lie over and over so it will become accepted as “true.” Meanwhile, not a single one of their highly touted anti-gun laws have done a single thing to “reduce gun violence, and nobody has been able to come up with a single law that will. If you ask an anti-gun fool about that, they have no answer. So they immediately start calling you names, like “gun nut” or “NRA member.” (used as an insult) Their favorite anti-gun law is the creation of “gun-free zones” where, they think, nobody, including law breakers, will being their guns. But law breakers don’t obey laws. That’s why they are called law breakers. They actually SEEK OUT gun-free zones in which to do their dirty work because they can be pretty sure the law-abiding will not be armed there, and will be “easy targets.” (Bearing Arms)

"I Should've Been Armed!"

That’s what one survivor of the California bar massacre says. Meanwhile, we watch for the anti-gun fools to stomp and scream and demand that politicians make even more of their useless laws that not only do NOTHING to stop the bad guys from getting their guns, they also make the law-abiding into “easy targets” for them. And if we don’t do it, they call us “insensitive” and say we “wish for more people to get shot.” Never mind what they want doesn’t work, and never will. They vilify the NRA because they are staunch defenders of the constitutional protection (largely ignored) for our right to be armed for self defense.

A good example of this is our contention that these things usually happen IN a “gun-free zone,” which is what this bar was. Laws everywhere deny gun owners from bringing their guns along when drinking, and I’m sure this was true (if not by law, by custom) in California. “Gun-free zones” are one of the anti-gun fools’ favorite things. Never mind they are a MAGNET for killers to “come in and kill people.” Word is, the bar had UNARMED security guards. Unarmed guards are worse than useless in this kind of case (this is not a knock on unarmed security guards, because I used to be one). The proof of that is that the first person to die was a security guard. I say this as a former UNARMED security guard. Had something like this happened while I was on duty, I would probably be dead, now.

Unarmed security guards are told to “observe and report,” which, in this kind of case, is absolutely USELESS. That is NOT “security.” Word is, it only took the cops 3 minutes to respond. Commendable. But in that 3 minutes, the shooter killed 11 civilians, and the first cop on the scene. You do the math. The guy who thinks he should have been armed, is exactly right. The anti-gun fools are WRONG. The shooter had been referred for psychiatric workup previously, after trashing his own house, and he was not only deemed “not a danger to himself or others,” a decision 12 people dead proved wrong, but he was allowed to buy a gun legally. What went wrong there? Whatever did, 12 people are dead because of it. (Bearing Arms)

Acting "Boldly and Decisively"

The Dumocrats, basking in their newfound power in the House, promise to “act boldly and decisively on new gun laws.” Never mind they don’t work worth a damn to reduce gun crime. They want to pass even more USELESS gun laws that only make it easier for the bad guys to victimize the good guys by DISARMING the good guys. That this causes many deaths of innocent people doesn’t seem to bother them. They just want to keep on making these laws, in spite of the fact that they are not only INEFFECTIVE, they PROMOTE gun crime. I don’t know what drives these imbeciles to do that. Are they just STUPID? Or do they have an ulterior motive? I think they have an ulterior motive. To disarm the population and make it easier for the government to oppress them. Politicians always want “total power,” even if they deny it. While denying it, they work assiduously to gain it. They already have a good start in the RICO Laws, ostensibly passed to take away the money rich drug dealers use to defend themselves in court. An unconstitutional wish on it’s face, but one they use all the time. They don’t even have to convict you of a crime to take all your money if they “think” you got that money illegally. This, in effect, denies you the right to an effective defense, something to which we are all entitled, under the Constitution. (The Hill)

"Repeated Failute to Act"

That’s what anti-gun fools say about politicians who have not stepped up and passed more of the USELESS laws like the ones already in force in California. The critics never say anything about what they should do, because they don’t know anything they CAN do. But they continue to criticize these politicians, who don’t know anything more than the anti-gun fools know in the way of HOW to keep guns out of the hands of people who just IGNORE all their laws and get their guns ILLEGALLY, when they can’t get them legally. Their problem is, only the law-abiding, who usually are NOT the problem, obey their laws, making them “easy targets” for those who IGNORE them. It’s a problem NOBODY has yet figured out a way to get around, and will not, so long as they confine their efforts to banning guns, with laws the “bad guys” just IGNORE. They can’t just BAN guns, because of the Second Amendment to the Constitution, which ALL laws must conform. That’s because the founders WANTED Americans to be able to defend themselves against the bad guys. (New York Post)

She Shot Her Husband

Advice for angry husbands: When you set out to strangle your wife to death, make sure she doesn’t have a gun. The husband in this story didn’t do that, and now he’s dead, instead of her. Ian Mastin thought he had the right to beat and choke his wife, and had done it many times. Although she had not complained before, she had ample evidence of his brutality, and she definitely feared he would finally kill her this time. So she probably won’t be charged in his death, since in Louisiana, you are entitled to kill in self defense if you fear your life is at risk. This is the big reason we need the Second Amendment. For self defense. Without it, this woman would be dead, and MAYBE her husband would be in prison. Thanks to he Second Amendment, the husband is dead, and she will probably not be charged with anything. If the anti-gun fools had their way, this woman would be dead. (The Hayride)

California Mass Shooting

In California, where they have some of the toughest anti-gun fool laws in the nation, a man entered a bar where many college students were “line dancing” and otherwise enjoying themselves, and killed 11 of them, wounding 20 others. When a brave cop entered and engaged the shooter, he also killed him. Word is, there were several UNARMED off-duty cops in that bar. This proves yet again how INEFFECTIVE their anti-gun laws are, to stop, or even slow down the legal or ILLEGAL proliferation of guns. It is not known if this shooter was using a legal or illegal gun, but it makes no difference. The anti-gun fools will predictably blame the GUN, rather than the hand holding it, and insist on making even more USELESS, unenforceable gun laws that do nothing. I haven’t seen it yet, but I’d bet they are already “dancing on the graves” of the victims of this shooting, to get their stupid laws made. (CNN)

Against Effective Measures

That’s the “gun control lobby.” They propose many things they CALL “common sense” gun laws that are not common sense, at all, since they don’t work worth a damn to keep ILLEGAL gun owners from their crimes. Not one single anti-gun law has EVER stopped a single shooter from killing people, whether or not he has his gun or guns legally. Meanwhile, they oppose proven methods to reduce gun crime, out of hand, because they don’t agree with them. ALLOWING (not requiring) teachers an other school staff who are LICENSED to carry their guns, to bring them to school with them, so they will not be defenseless when some loony bin comes in to kill a bunch of students is an EFFECTIVE deterrent, but they won’t even entertain the idea. No, those teachers and other school staff are normally responsible people and will NOT “go bananas” and start shooting students for sport, as the anti-gun fools want us to think. They think limiting the size of magazines for legal gun owners will keep ILLEGAL gun owners from having magazines as big as they can buy on the black market. All the laws they propose apply ONLY to LEGAL gun owners, while ignoring the MILLIONS of ILLEGAL gun owners there are out there. No; all they do is endanger legal gun owners while they’re reloading, while illegal gun owners are still shooting with their high-capacity magazines. All their “common sense anti-gun laws” do is make the law-abiding “easy targets” for criminals, who obey NO laws. (Just common sense)

The Second Rules

New York State tried its best to strangle the NRA by CLAIMING it was “doing nasty things” by selling “carry insurance” to concealed carriers in the state. They also tried, through the Department of Financial Services, to stop other businesses from even doing any kind of business with the NRA. Fortunately, wiser heads intervened, and allowed the NRA’s suit against New York State to go forward. New York had arbitrarily decided NRA’s “Carry Guard” insurance was in violation of the law, and even had the temerity to cancel the policies of those who had already PAID for the coverage. The NRA suit was to correct that silly assumption. In the text of the suit, it was alleged that the State of New York had embarked on a campaign to “chill the free speech” of the NRA. They even had the temerity to impose million dollar fines on those companies who had dealings with the NRA. Which is a clear violation of the law in that it attempted to restrain companies from doing lawful business with the NRA. The fact is, the NRA is a legal entity, and doing business with them is not a crime, and is protected by law. New York State attempted to restrict them from doing legal business, and hopefully will ultimately be restrained—and PUNISHED for that. (Breitbart)

It Ain't Agonna Work!

The anti-gun fools have embarked upon a fruitless journey. They deny it, but their final goal is the complete elimination of the very concept of self defense. And eliminating guns from the picture is just the first step. But an impossible one. Getting rid of all guns in the hands of people not working for the government in one way or another, is an impossible job. If criminals and other “bad guys” can’t get their guns legally, they just get them ILLEGALLY. They are criminals, after all, and criminals, by definition, do not obey laws. That’s why they’re called criminals. They can eliminate every LEGAL gun in existence, but there will still be the MILLIONS of illegal guns that are already out there. Yes, they may be able to eliminate every LEGAL gun in existence (except those owned by government people, of course), but they can’t touch the illegal guns the “bad guys” get on the black market, of just steal. Hitler got rid of legal guns, and then murdered six million Jews. That’s what governments do, when they succeed in disarming their people. Disarming the people is the first thing every dictator does. (Just common sense)

Banning Guns Is Futile

Politicians, nationwide, are bent on one thing” to DISARM all Americans, in one way or another. If they can’t just ban guns because of that pesky ol’ Constitution, they do everything they can to make it difficult to buy a gun—and if you actually manage to buy one, they make it difficult to get ammunition—which makes the gun in your hand just a lump of metal, only good for throwing at an ILLEGALLY-armed criminal. Then if you do actually find some ammunition you can buy, there’s the insurance that they want to force you to buy. Special insurance, that is extra expensive, and is purposely made hard to get. If you manage to get that, then you find that there are “gun-free zones” all over the place. Places where you cannot, by law, or rules, bring your gun, even if you managed to jump through all the hoops they place on it and actually have a concealed carry permit. It is becoming more and more obvious, as the “authorities” find more and more new ways to prevent you from getting a gun with which to defend yourself from the criminals who IGNORE their laws, that their purpose is to get rid of the concept of self defense, altogether. And the only reason they would do that is to make it easier on their thugs, who will be coming to take your money and property, and don’t want to meet a gun in your hand when they do. Think about that. None of what they do takes guns out of the hands of criminals, only you. (Just common sense)

Crime Actually Goes Down!

The Anti-gun fools confidently tell us that crime will increase in areas where “concealed carry” is widespread. There are several areas in this country now where it has happened, and a new study of data from all 50 states, shows that, not only does crime NOT increase in those areas, it GOES DOWN. This is based on “hard data.” Statistics from all over the country that shows that letting law-abiding people have the means for self defense actually has the effect of REDUCING crime in those areas where it has happened. Anti-gun fools tell us many things, and they always prove to be wrong, when reality sets in. Most of their dire predictions as to how loosened gun control will increase crime are based on many “mights.” Like where they say that is teachers and other school staff are ALLOWED (not required) to bring their legally owned, licensed to be carried guns to school with them, they “might” shoot students if they make trouble. That, if people generally are allowed their constitutional right to be armed for self defense that a “fender bender” MIGHT be the cause of a shooting. Never mind that it has already happened, with the holders of ILLEGAL guns. Anti-gun laws only make us more vulnerable to criminals, who never OBEY anti-gun laws.(Daily Caller)

"Coffman's Done Nothing!"

That’s what his opponent’s ads say. “He opposes increased background checks and banning certain kinds of weapons, so we need to vote him out.” I wish he would tell me, what would HE do? None of the laws already in force have done a single thing to limit or stop gun violence, and that includes the laws they are talking about. Increased background checks only affect those who get their guns LEGALLY, which people contemplating major “gun crime” never do. Banning guns likewise. Those bans only affect people who buy their guns LEGALLY. “Gun-free zones” only affect those who OBEY laws, which criminals do NOT. I wish politicians like this would tell us what THEY would do that people like Coffman are NOT doing. Coffman wisely refuses to make more USELESS laws that do NOTHING to stop, or even slow down “gun violence.” That is NOT a “negative” in the minds of people with INTELLIGENCE. But then, people with intelligence don’t insist on making more laws that accomplish NOTHING. (Just common sense)

It's About Control

The Anti-gun fools keep saying that “gun control is all about gun safety.” It is NOT. It’s about CONTROL. The ability for a nameless, faceless bureaucrat you don’t know, and may never meet, to say you can, or cannot buy and use a gun for self defense against the millions of ILLEGAL guns that are out there, in the hands of criminals and other miscreants. The power to CONTROL who may have a gun is the power to say “NO.” And more often than not, that’s what they say, while people are dying because they have no defense against those illegally-held guns. I have become convinced that the ultimate purpose of the anti-gun fools is the abolition of self defense as a human right. That they want to be able to DECIDE that ANY use of a gun to be criminal (at their discretion). Something they can, and WILL punish. Then the government can come for what is yours, without appreciable opposition from you. They will not meet a gun in your hands, while they will have plenty of guns in theirs. Full gun control happened in Germany under the Nazis, and what happened next? Hitler didn’t like the Jews. So his troops rounded up as many Jews as they could, and murdered them. It happened in communist Russia, but they were indiscriminate about who they murdered. They killed whomever they wished, because they had all the guns, and the citizens had no defense. (Just common sense)

How Stupid Are They?

The anti-gun fools are stupid. Totally stupid. Laws to keep guns out of the hands of criminals and other miscreants DO NOT WORK. They have to know this. But they insist on making them, anyway. People who want to commit serious crimes just IGNORE their silly laws. And they don’t usually stand for background checks because they get their guns illegally—thus bypassing that “requirement.” When you buy a gun from someone out of the trunk of his car in a back alley somewhere, or STEAL it, no background check is possible, or required. “Gun-free zones” merely provide wannabe mass shooters with a “target rich environment,” because they can be pretty sure law-abiding people who OBEY laws will not bring their guns there. Thus, they will be HELPLESS to defend themselves against the ILLEGAL GUNS the criminals bring, because they IGNORE those restrictions. They’re bent on bloody murder, so why should they care about a silly little law that says they can’t be armed in those “zones?” The entire idea that you can get rid of gun violence by banning or limiting guns is a fool’s idea, promoted by fools. Yet gullible lawmakers “buckle under” to them and make more and more useless laws that criminals just IGNORE. (Just common sense)

Another Gun Control Failure

In California, where some of the stiffest anti-gun laws in the country are in force, gun crime should be almost non-existent, right? WRONG! Gun crime in California is UP 18%! No longer is Chicago, and other liberal-run cities our only “showcases” for gun control failure. This proves, yet again, that those “tight anti-gun laws” do NOTHING to stop, or even slow down “gun crime,” and in fact, INCREASE it by disarming honest people so the criminals, with their illegal guns, can more easily victimize them. As they say in this article, this provides a “target-rich environment” for criminals who want to be pretty sure nobody will be able to shoot back when they attack. They admit this failure of their anti-gun laws, and then go on to pass even more of them. We point out the fact that their laws don’t work, and they can’t answer, so they immediately start calling us names, and imputing ulterior motives to our wish to retain our constitutional right to self defense, and to own and use the means to that end, a gun. I’m getting really tired of pointing this out, and being ignored, while people die. (Breitbart)

"I Smell BS!"

They did a “study” about “pediatric gun victims.” Which included results from “children” up to age 19. That doesn’t sound much like “children” to me. Their results included injuries and deaths from GANG shootings. Gang members may be the same AGE as SOME children, but the very fact that most of them carry their own guns, and shoot back, makes them ADULTS, to anybody who has a scintilla of INTELLIGENCE. The very fact that these gang members are included in this “study” makes its result very questionable, in my estimation, even phony. This is how the anti-gun fools keep their effort to disarm all Americans, making them “sitting ducks” for those with ILLEGAL guns. They SAY they are concerned with “gun safety.” They are NOT. They are concerned with having the ability to tell you that you CANNOT own and carry the means to self defense, a gun. What they are really doing, and which they deny, is destroying the very concept of self defense. (Eureka Alert)

The Germans Get It

Word is, application for gun carry permits have increased 130% since Chancellor Angela Merkel opened the borders and allowed just anybody to come in. “Following the mass sexual assaults on women in Cologne and other German cities on the 2015 New Year’s Eve, many Germans have lost their faith in the state and law enforcement when it comes to tackling migrant crime. ‘Rising perceptions of insecurity have been cited as a key factor in the increase in issued licenses,’ the broadcaster reported.” Hmmm...Germans have “lost confidence” in the cops to protect them. No kidding. The cops themselves (those in the trenches, anyway) will tell you they CAN’T “protect them.” All they can do is arrive AFTER the gunfire ends, clean up the scene, dispose of the bodies (if any), and send the wounded to the hospital, then question everybody to see if maybe they can find and prosecute the shooter. That is, in no way, protection. The ONLY real protection is a gun in the hand of a law-abiding person to MATCH the gun in the hand of the law BREAKER, who will always be able to get a gun, no matter how tight the anti-gun laws are. Until that happens, there will always be those precious MINUTES it takes the cops to get there with their guns, and that can mean DEATH for the law-abiding, who are “easy targets” for criminals, with their ILLEGAL guns. (Legal Insurrection)

Why Don't They Learn?

Every time some fool goes into a school, church, or somewhere else and starts shooting and killing people he doesn’t even know, the anti-gun fools jump up and demand more and more of their useless gun laws. I say useless because none of them work worth a damn. And it has become obvious that their laws don’t work, but they keep making more and more of them, every time they get a chance. Never mind the fact that their laws not only DON’T stop gun violence, but they make it worse by disarming the law-abiding, making them “easy targets” for those who don’t obey any laws. When somebody shoots up a place, they never even ask whether or not he got his gun legally or illegally—unless he did get it legally, which is very unusual. They don’t seem to notice that each and every “mass shooting” has occurred IN a “no-gun zone,” nor that captured mass shooters willingly tell us they SEEK OUT “no-gun zones” because they can be pretty sure nobody there will be armed, and able to oppose them. Why don’t these anti-gun fools LEARN? They have to know their laws don’t work, so why do they insist on making even more of them? They’re just stupid, I guess. (Just common sense)

Is The Truth Racist?

I guarantee you, liberals will call the recent study by the “Centers for Disease Control” that showed that black males were twice as likely to die by gun violence perpetrated by other black males, than white males. That’s how liberals “tamp down” criticism of their policies. Call it racism if it involves blacks in any way. The truth can hurt, and it is constantly hurting the anti-gun fools because theirs is a losing battle to disarm ALL Americans. Something that is PROHIBITED by the U. S. Constitution, the document that ALL laws must conform, or they are in no way laws. What is a racist opinion? Anything that disagrees with the “cherished opinions” of a liberal. I can’t think of a thing that has ever gone against liberal thinking that they haven’t labeled racist. They’ve done it so much that the word “racist” no longer has any meaning. Meanwhile, liberals are trying mightily to CREATE racism against white people, and many gullible white people are helping. Every time I hear or read the words, “white privilege,” I cringe, because I know that is a MANUFACTURED term designed to create racism against white people. (Patriot Post)

"Sauce for the Goose..."

Should be sauce for the gander. But not, apparently, for the mayor of Pittsburgh. He thinks because he is an “important person,” he needs to have armed security, while the rest of you aren’t important enough to have it. And there is nothing new about that. The same is true of all politicians who run around behind a WALL of “armed security” while many of them work very hard to DENY us the same right. But it’s even more important in Pittsburgh, where that selfsame mayor told us confidently that allowing legal concealed carriers to bring their guns to church so there would be guns there to defend the church-goers from fools like the one who killed eleven people in that synagogue is not the answer, when it clearly IS the answer. He just doesn’t recognize it. No anti-gun fool, nor their dupes, will admit that allowing legally-armed people to bring their guns with them into previously “no-gun zones” can be the answer. They think they will “go nuts” and shoot the place up. They will not. No more than MOST of the holders of ILLEGAL guns do. Only a small number of them do. Maybe one out of a thousand legally-armed people MIGHT “go nuts” and shoot up the landscape, but a much higher number of ILLEGALLY-armed people do. Better to let legally-armed people bring their guns with them to counter those illegally-armed ‘shooters. That’s a fact the anti-gun fools aren’t intelligent enough to understand. (Trib Live)

Passed A Background Check

Not being a felon at the time, he had no trouble passing. Then he took his newly-purchased (legally) gun, and went out and killed a bunch of people with it. Another man couldn’t hope to pass a background check because he was either a felon, or had exhibited some mental health shortcomings, so he went out and found another felon in a back alley selling guns out of his trunk, and bought what he needed. Buying guns on the black market requires no background check. Then he took his newly-purchased gun and killed a bunch of people with it. Now I ask you: “What earthly good is a gun law if it doesn’t stop such things?” And the unalterable fact is, none do. They never have. All the anti-gun laws, all over the world, have done NOTHING to stop, or even slow down, “gun violence.” So what the hell good are they? Anti-gun fools have to know this. God knows, I’ve told them every chance I get. But they continue to insist on the making of more and more of them, in spite of the sure knowledge that they do NOTHING. What’s WRONG with these people? Don’t they ever learn from experience? Apparently not. (Just common sense)

Not "Filled With Guards"

Pittsburgh mayor says, “The answer is not filling synagogues with armed guards.” And he’s right. But nobody with any brain power ever suggested that. What HAS been suggested is, simply ALLOWING people who are LICENSED to carry guns to bring them with them when they attend services, therefore being armed, and able to defend against such things as this foul shooting by killing the shooter before he can kill any more people. The shooter will not know they are there, nor who they are. Allowing people who are legally allowed to carry guns, who have, it is supposed, been vetted for their mental stability, to bring their guns with them is COMMON SENSE. If nothing happens, nobody will even know they are armed. If some fool decided to shoot up the place, they can stop him. Without them, they have to WAIT for the police response, which gives the shooter valuable MINUTES in which to kill people before the “good guys with guns” appear. This is a simple solution, but one the anti-gun fools will not even entertain. This tells me there is something missing in their brains. They KNOW their laws don’t do a thing to stop “gun violence,” but they continue to insist on making even more of them. (Breitbart)