Dishonest Headline

I’m ashamed of my former home newspaper, The Indy Star. They published a story about a “road rage incident” that resulted in a woman being killed, and the headline (which is all many people read) gave the impression that she was shot by the other driver without cause. The story does tell the whole story, but way down in the lower paragraphs, which many people never get to. What happened was that when the altercation started, somebody IN HER CAR took a shot at the other driver, who returned fire, killing her. The “stand your ground concept” ruled, since he was only returning fire. But that was not reflected in the headline. Or in the early paragraphs, which made it a “hit piece” on the stand your ground laws, completely twisting it into a firm anti-gun article. This is how the anti-gun fools operate. Twist the news to fit their narrative, then insist on continuing that narrative, even after it has been debunked. (Bearing Arms)

Beating A Dead Horse

Anti-gun fools are “beating a dead horse” with all their USELESS laws, limiting gun ownership for the law-abiding, and making guns useless with all their “safe storage” laws. They just can’t seem to understand the simple fact that none of their anti-gun laws do ANYTHING to reduce “gun violence.” I’ve become convinced that they aren’t after controlling guns because their laws only apply to the law-abiding, who DO obey laws, while the criminals just ignore them and get their guns illegally. These people aren’t stupid. They have to know their laws are USELESS to “reduce gun violence,” but they keep on making them. And all they do is make it easier for the criminals to victimize the law-abiding. We keep telling them that, but they ignore us and keep on doing the same things that do not work, over and over, though they have to KNOW they don’t work. They’re either stupid, or they WANT to make it easier for the law breakers to victimize the law-abiding. And they’re not stupid. One of their favorite devices is the “gun-free zone,” which is an “engraved invitation” to the law breakers to come in and do their dirty work because they can be pretty sure the law-abiding there will not be armed, because they DO obey laws, even if they’re stupid laws. (Just common sense)

Silly Anti-Gun Ideas

The anti-gun fools come up with many silly ideas in support of their useless, unenforceable anti-gun laws. One of the silliest is the notion, by one state “lawmaker” (whose state I will not divulge, to keep from embarrassing them) who thinks the Second Amendment was written only for hunters and hunting. Another is that if background checks are instituted, there will no longer be “gun sales on the street.” How that politician thinks that will happen is not clear, as with all such ignorant comments. They think making somebody who fears being killed should WAIT until some nameless, faceless bureaucrat decided they’re waited long enough to get their gun to defend themselves is being made safer by that waiting period. Some time ago, a woman in Denver was threatened by an old boyfriend and tried to buy a gun. Faced with a mandatory waiting period, she went out and bought a gun “off the street,” illegally. A couple of days later she used that gun to kill the boyfriend when he came to kill her. She was not charged in his death, because it was a clear case of self defense. But she did spend some time in jail on illegal gun charges, but she’s still alive, which she would not be if she had sat back and waited until they “allowed” her to buy that gun legally. Which says to me, “Better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6.” (Just common sense)

Sit Rep: "Scalise Up"

Dumocrats refused to hear what Republican Rep. Steve Scalise had to say about HR 8 to the House Committee, that this law, like all the others, would NOT have stopped him from being shot by that left-wing fool. Their favorite “disqualifier” when people talk against gun control is, “You’ve never been shot, so shut up!” They knew Scalise didn’t fit that picture. He got shot, and he is STILL against their useless laws against gun ownership for the law-abiding. He knows, as do all intelligent people, that no amount of laws banning guns will do ANYTHING to reduce gun violence, and would have testified to that, as, HIMSELF a victim of gun violence. And they couldn’t have the truth being told at their sham “hearing,” so they blocked him from testifying. It has become obvious that they are NOT against gun violence, because their laws do not do that. They simply want to be able to tell us we CAN’T have the means to self defense. One proof of that is that the cops routinely “confiscate” anything people use in self defense so they can’t do it, again. That’s even if it was legally-owned. Their basic goal is to destroy the very concept of self defense. Banning guns is just part of that. (Town Hall)

NASCAR and the Second

The liberal media is making a big thing of a NASCAR team being sponsored by a promoter of the Second Amendment. Like that makes them nasty—or something. Truth is, NASCAR people are big supporters of the Second Amendment, and it is a good move for that team. The Second Amendment is a GOOD THING, since it makes politicians who think they should control everything, and all of us, in everything we do (like AOC) think twice before going too far in controlling us. It is a known fact that would-be dictators always disarm their citizens to make them easier to control. On the side of the race truck is an “in-your-face” picture of Donald Trump as “The Punisher,” which is what he is—at least for the “swamp” dwellers. NASCAR people also tend to be Trump supporters too, which makes that simply something funny to them, and a “slap in the face” to liberals—which can only be good. This sponsorship is guaranteed to “trigger” all liberals, who tend to be in favor of taking your guns away, and triggering liberals, anywhere, can only be a good thing. I try and do it, every day. And they’re so EASY to “trigger!” (Story Warrant)

NRA Teachings Work

Two young boys (age 9) found a gun frozen in the snow while waiting for a school bus and never touched it. They told their school bus driver, who held it until the police arrived, and took possession of it. This is exactly what the NRA teaches kids to do, although this article doesn’t mention the NRA. Those teachings may have saved the life of one or more of those kids, if they had done the “kid thing” and started playing with it, thinking it was a toy. The gun was probably dropped by a criminal the cops arrested the night before. This is what the anti-gun fools don’t talk about: a child being saved by the teachings of the NRA. To them, the NRA is only obstructing their efforts to get rid of the Second Amendment, one detail at a time. Nothing else. And they hate the NRA for that. But what the NRA is doing is simply standing in the way of the government totally destroying our right to self defense. Period. In addition, they are doing things those anti-gun fools SHOULD be doing: teaching kids how to properly act when finding a gun, instead of pretending guns don’t exist. Kids are curious. They are “sponges for knowledge,” although they hate some of the methods and institutions created to accomplish it. So it’s always best to give them that knowledge, of they’ll find out for themselves, sometimes in disastrous ways. (Fox 13 Now)

"Cops Can Protect You!"

“So turn in your guns. You don’t need them.” WRONG! At least, in Detroit, where the cops can take from 12 minutes to DAYS to respond. Meanwhile, you’re on your own. So either get a gun, or run and hide—if you can. The bad guys don’t have any trouble getting the guns they use to victimize you. And Detroit is not the only city with horrible response times for the cops to come when called. It’s a growing problem, nationwide. Maybe not as bad (yet) as in Detroit, but even a few minutes can make all the difference to people who are disarmed, for the most part, by their government—IF they are law-abiding, and actually OBEY laws. Some police agencies boast response times of three minutes (sometimes). But a bad guy with an ILLEGAL gun can kill a lot of people in three minutes if not opposed by someone else with a gun. At the risk of being visited by the cops (of some kind) for advocating illegality, even if such speech is protected by the First Amendment, I will say, probably the best course is to get a gun, any way you can, so you can effectively defend yourself because it’s “better to be judged by 12 rather than carried by 6.” (WXYZ Channel 7)

They Want Dumber Voters

Oregon can’t get enough voters to agree with their anti-gun fool policies, so now they want to reduce the voting age to 16 to get more ignorant voters. This is not a slam to those 16 years of age, it’s just a realization of reality, that kids that have only been ALIVE for 16 years haven’t learned enough to really know what’s going on. I know at 16 I didn’t, and I can tell you honestly that others at 16 aren’t fully aware of all the important things—such as NO gun control laws have EVER done anything to limit, or stop “gun crime,” so why vote in even more of them? So those voters that are only 16 DON’T KNOW those laws do nothing, and more easily fall for the “brainwashing” that we MUST HAVE more gun control, and will vote that way, in their ignorance of the facts. This is how Dumocrats work, and anti-gun fools tend to be Dumocrats. It’s their thing. And they like to “move the goalposts” when they meet too much opposition. That’s what promoting voting for those 16 years of age is all about. Moving the goal posts. Another way they’re trying to move the goal posts is to eliminate the time-honored “Electoral College” method of electing presidents to make it easier for them to steal elections. (Bearing Arms)

Tipping Their Hand

HR8 destroys ANY transfer of ownership of a gun without the knowledge and APPROVAL of the government. It criminalizes private sales, giving a gun to someone, even LOANING a gun to someone without their knowledge and approval. Nancy Peelosi (D) says a future Dumocrat president could declare a national emergency over “gun crime,” and “Pocahontas” Elizabeth Warren (D) piled on, saying when she’s president (a real long shot, that) she would definitely declare a national emergency about “gun crime. Another good reason NOT to vote for her, to add to the plethora of other reasons. Currently, the law has a “safety valve” in the fact that if the government doesn’t act on a background check in three days, a dealer is free to complete the sale. HR1112 kills that. Which means a president could declare a national emergency and SHUT DOWN the NICS checks for any amount of time, which would stop ALL gun sales in that time. And he or she could do it over and over again, making it almost impossible for anybody but the government to buy a gun, for any reason. Of course most privately-owned gun stores could not survive even three months without a sales, which would CRIPPLE the gun sales industry—which is their goal. If you can’t just ban guns, just make them impossible to get—legally. Of course, this will just give the ILLEGAL gun sales business a “shot in the arm,” but they don’t talk about that. The only problem with their plan is that ANY law that limits gun purchases is an “infringement” on a constitutional right, which is PROHIBITED by the Constitution, to which ALL LAWS must conform. But they just ignore that, until the supreme Court sets them straight. (Gun Talk)

Packing the Court

FDR tried to pack the Supreme Court by increasing the number of Justices so he could get to appoint several more liberals to the Court, and failed. For good reason. Now Dumocrats are trying (again) to increase the number of Justices because President Trump has already been able to appoint TWO new Justices, and, with Ruth Bader Ginsberg’s health problems, may well get to appoint another, making THREE possibly non-liberal Justices on the Court. That scares liberals to death. Liberals are always trying to “move the goal posts” when they lose. And they have lost big, with Donald Trump in the White House and holding onto the Senate. They’re also trying to get rid of the Electoral College we use to elect presidents because they think they can better steal elections without it. They aren’t going to be able to do either, because we have been able to successfully use both for many years. If they do succeed in either case, I don’t want to live in the world they will create. If so, their very first action will be to also get rid of the Second Amendment, and make self defense totally impossible, without the law-abiding becoming law breakers themselves, if they get guns in spite of the law, like criminals do. (AmmoLand)

What "Common Sense?"

The anti-gun fools like to call their unenforceable, useless, anti-gun laws “common sense laws.” But ARE they common sense? Or are they just “wishful thinking” from people who have no idea how to stop “gun crime” and want to do SOMETHING, even if it doesn’t work, that they can CLAIM is to “stop gun violence” and make themselves feel better? “Gun-free zones” are an “engraved invitation” to would-be shooters since they can be pretty sure the law-abiding there will not be armed. “Gun registries are also useless, since they do NOTHING about gun violence, and only allow the cops to (maybe) locate a shooter IF he stood for one when buying a gun LEGALLY. Criminals do not. “Safe storage” laws only serve to make the guns we have useless in defending against the holder of an ILLEGAL gun fast enough to actually do anything in self defense. All their laws are just “flailing around,” trying to find SOMETHING that will work. But as long as they concentrate on the GUN, nothing is going to work. (Just common sense)

"We'd Rather Teachers Die"

That’s what they seem to be telling us with their most recent effort at making a law that might actually WORK to keep mass shooters out of their schools in Florida. They don’t want to ALLOW any teacher to bring their gun to school, so they could protect themselves and their students in case some crazy comes in to kill a few children. They think there should be NO guns carried in schools, except those carried by school resource officers (who can be easily located and “dealt with” before the killing of the children begins). School resource officers are human beings. Teachers are human beings. What is different between the two? Both are presumed to be responsible people, so why shouldn’t the teachers be ALLOWED to bring their already legally-carried guns (if they are “concealed carriers” already) to school, so a potential mass shooter cannot locate, and kill ALL the gun carriers in the school BEFORE the killing of the children begins, since he will not be able to identify them? All their ideas still seem to be silly and unenforceable. But they haven’t a clue to that. They keep doing the same things over and over and expecting a different result. Idiocy. (Tallahassee Democrat)

Gun Control Fools

What the hell is WITH them? Anti-gun fools spend all their time trying to come up with more and better ways to take away a cherished constitutional right; the right to be armed for self defense. What drives these people is unknown. It can’t be “gun safety” because there isn’t a single one of their highly touted laws and regulations that does ANYTHING to limit gun violence. They have to know that, but they keep making them, anyway, and gun violence continues, unabated. The only thing I can think of is that they simply want to be able to tell us what we can or can’t do. Everything Dumocrats do is geared toward telling us what we can, or cannot do, and this is just one area. If they ever came up with something that would actually WORK, I’d be right there beside them, working to get it passed. But that is not going to happen because, as long as they concentrate on the gun, there is nothing that will ever work to reduce gun violence. They need to concentrate on preventing people from WANTING to do violence with a gun, not banning guns. Bad guys will ALWAYS get their guns, no matter how many laws are passed to control gun ownership and use for the LAW-ABIDING, that never do anything to limit gun ownership and use for law BREAKERS. And that’s the weakness in all they do. (Just common sense)

Gun Grabbers Getting Cocky

They’re celebrating the fact that Dumocrats have “taken over” the House and they think that’s going to make it easier for them to pass their useless, unenforceable anti-gun fool laws. A “Gabby Giffords associate” has actually said so. Robyn Thomas, executive director of the Giffords Law Center (a real official name for a bunch of fools, that) says, “This will be a good year for gun control.” She really thinks their foolish attempts at lawmaking will actually DO something to reduce “gun crime.” How Gabby finds these fools who are as silly and stupid as she is, I don’t know. It must be mental illness to be so completely blind to reality. The reality that none of their laws work worth a damn. One of the most useless is their “universal background check,” which is “just the beginning,” according to Thomas. Background checks only do anything if the criminal bought his gun legally and actually stood for one, which a majority of people who want to use their guns to do ill do NOT do. The very use of that dumb kid, David Hogg, as a spokesman, shows their ignorance by having someone so ignorant with such a big mouth represent their views. It makes it obvious that they can’t find an INTELLIGENT spokesman. (Breitbart)

"Do As We Do; It Works"

That’s what Chicago says. But it does NOT work. They have some of the tightest “anti-gun laws” in the country, coupled with one of the highest, if not THE highest gun killing rate in the nation. THIS is “what we do is working?” The people who insist on this must be having an “opium high,” because nothing could be further from the truth. And one of the “mayor hopefuls” says the way to success is to somehow FORCE the sovereign states of Indiana and Wisconsin to institute the Illinois/Chicago “victim disarmament laws” upon their citizens, even suing them, if necessary. As if one state suing another sovereign state will work. They blame it all on guns “imported from other states,” thinking that, if they can get Indiana and Wisconsin to help, they can solve the problem. The basic flaw in their plan is that none of these laws work. So FORCING them on other states will not stop anything. In addition, if they do cooperate, criminals in other states will “rush in” to fill the void. That is a given. Of course, the fact that ALL guns always “come in from elsewhere” (unless manufactured in the state) is not mentioned. (Zelman Partisans)

Anti-Gun Laws Useless

In the UK, they have laws that almost completely ban the ownership and usage of guns for self defense by the law-abiding. Which does NOTHING to stop the law breakers from getting the guns they use in victimizing the law-abiding. They have actually admitted that “gun crime” is at its highest it has been in a decade in 2018. What the hell? Their “tough gun laws” were supposed to REDUCE “gun crime.” Why didn’t they? Because the people who misuse guns are the people who violate laws on a daily basis. So why in hell would they bother to obey a silly little anti-gun law? I get really tired of writing the same things over and over again and having them be continually ignored by the anti-gun fools. These people have amply proven their ignorance. No, not ignorance, STUPIDITY. Ignorance is simply lack of information. Stupidity is having sufficient information but acting ignorantly, anyway. And that perfectly describes those stupid fools who keep making those USELESS anti-gun laws. (BBC)

The "Crime" Of Sleeping

Adventures in the media trying their best to convince the world that cops go out with the goal to shoot and kill some black man. In this case, some headlines read, “Six cops shoot man sleeping in his car.” Not mentioned is the fact the cops were going to simply wake him up when he grabbed the gun in his lap and turned it on the cops. Of course, out of six cops, some are bound to be black, but that is not mentioned. Fools like this don’t care about that. Cops are racist killers, period. NO matter what race they happen to be.

The black man (who happened to be an aspiring rapper) was NOT shot while sleeping in his car, but that is the false narrative the liberal media wanted to push. And this is not the first time they have pushed a false narrative. Trevon Martin, for instance, was NOT “killed for wearing a hoodie.” He was sitting on top of “Neighborhood Watch” member George Zimmerman slamming his head on concrete when he was shot and killed. And not even by a cop! Michael Brown was NOT a “gentle giant,” he was a giant THUG who had just “strong-armed” a store owner so he could steal some cigars to use in making some drugs and was dancing down the MIDDLE of a street with some of his thug friends when a cop asked him not to do that.

He was NOT “backing away with his hands up crying “don’t shoot” when shot. He was viciously attacking the smaller cop who shot him in self defense. The victim’s family (who weren’t there and knew nothing substantive) were quoted extensively while they “decried police brutality.” That’s how they do it. This also gets into the sphere of “gun safety,” even though the gun seems not to even be mentioned. Also not mentioned is whether or not the gun was legally owned. The victim’s brother bemoaned the “fact” that there “was no attempt to work out a better solution,” but that’s what screaming, “Don’t reach for that gun!” and “Put your hands up!” ARE, which they did, several times.

The writer of this article asks, “How do you tell when the media is creating a false narrative? The answer is easy. “They’re covering the story.” Also asked and answered, How do you avoid getting shot by the cops?” Again, the easy answer is, “Don’t threaten them with a gun.” (Legal Insurrection)

What Should They Do?

The anti-gun fools among us are fond of taking the lawmakers to task for “not doing their jobs” and making more anti-gun laws. Which demands answer to the question, “What in the hell should they DO?” They make law after law, and the people it should apply to just ignore them and continue to buy their guns illegally or just steal them. Meanwhile, the law-abiding, who OBEY laws, even STUPID ones, are defenseless in the face of those law breakers. It’s almost like they planned it that way. The whole point is, nobody can figure out a law that will actually WORK. I certainly can’t, and I’m presumed, by politicians, to be “not as smart” as they are. I keep asking this question of the anti-gun fools, and they keep not answering. Maybe because they HAVE no answer? Because there IS no answer. If there were a law they could pass that would make one iota of difference, those “smart folks” would have come up with it, and passed it. But NO! All they do is bi-ch and gripe that nobody HAS passed up such a bill into law, as if they are derelict in their duty for not doing so. (Lewiston Tribune)

Are McDonald's Gun-Free?

McDonald’s and some other franchises are somewhat “wishy-washy” about being “gun-free zones,” although they definitely lean in that direction. They say they will “abide by local laws,” most of which mandate that such places ARE “gun-free zones.” How then, did a “gun fight” happen in a Charlotte, NC McDonald’s? Word is that two groups were talking when one person pulled out a gun and shot another, causing another to pull out his gun and do some more shooting. Luckily, they were very poor shots, and nobody was killed, although a car in a parking lot was hit. It is not known how badly the car was injured. What is obvious here is that McDonald’s customers think nothing of ignoring such things and bring their guns everywhere they go, “gun-free zones” notwithstanding. On the contrary, “gun-free zones are a MAGNET for would-be illegal shooters, everywhere. 100% of all mass shootings have HAPPENED in “gun-free zones.” Why then, do they keep making them? Are they just stupid, or what? (Charlotte Observer)

Revealing the Weakness

Sen. Kamala Harris, Dumocrat from California, is basically calling for a GUN BAN, which reveals the logical weakness in the arguments of all anti-gun fools. Even though a gun ban would be immediately judged to be unconstitutional, such a ban would be roundly IGNORED by criminals, who don’t obey ANY laws, so why does she expect them to obey hers? She claimed, “[T]here is no reason in a civil society that we have assault weapons around communities.” But there is. A GOOD reason. There are also lots of ILLEGAL guns of all kinds, already there, and we need to be similarly armed, in order to defend ourselves against them. Anti-gun fools like her talk about all the “gun violence,” never mentioning that almost ALL of it is done by people who have NOT gotten their guns legally. But fools like her never mention this. They assume that such people go to gun stores and stand for background checks, while accepting those tiny magazines that hold less than ten rounds. They do NOT. And no amount of LAWS will ever make them do so. That’s the weakness in their thinking. (NRA-ILA)

Mexico Murders 5 Times Higher

Mexico doesn’t have a Second Amendment. Which means the only way to get a gun if you don’t work for the government, or don’t have “political pull,” is to get it ILLEGALLY. According to the anti-gun fools, they should have a crime-free society, right? WRONG! Mexico’s murder rate alone is FIVE TIMES that of the United States. If you were intelligent, that would tell you something. But the anti-gun fools apparently aren’t too bright, because they either don’t notice, or they deny the fact that it us an important thing. Mexico, like most backward countries, has very tight anti-gun laws, way ahead of those in America. But predictably, they do NOTHING to stop, or even slow down “gun violence,” and only make it easier for those with illegal guns to victimize the law-abiding. I get very tired of pointing this out to the anti-gun fools, while they go on, in their “blissful ignorance,” making more and more USELESS LAWS that do NOTHING to stop “gun violence,” just like in Mexico. (Mexico News Daily)

"Right to Be Safe"

“Trumps the right to be armed.” That’s the very confusing statement that was made by known anti-gun fool Dumocrat California Rep Eric Sawlwell. It’s difficult for INTELLIGENT people to understand how making yourself DEFENSELESS against the millions of ILLEGAL guns there are already out there makes you “safe.” This fool has to know that NONE of those highly touted “anti-gun laws” have ever done ONE THING to stop, or even slow down “gun crime.” Criminals, who obey NO LAWS, simply ignore them and go on using their ILLEGAL guns to victimize the law-abiding who, since they DO obey laws, are usually unarmed. We keep throwing this at anti-gun fools, but they never answer it. They just ignore us, and keep making their USELESS, unenforceable “gun laws.” This tells me they’re either stupid, or just corrupt, and want to disarm ALL Americans, so their friends, the criminals, can more easily victimize the law-abiding. I can’t think of any other reason why, KNOWING their laws don’t work, they insist on making more and more of them, while IGNORING sure solutions because the require arming the law-abiding. I get very tired of repeating the same things over and over while they just ignore me and keep making their insane, useless laws. (Breitbart)

Pushing A Lie

That’s what the anti-gun fools DO. They recently posted a “study” that “determined” that there was a school shooting (nearly) once a week. Of course, they included fist fights in the playground, or NEAR it. They also included shootings OUTSIDE the school grounds but within earshot. And they based their “findings” on the “school year,” not the real 12-month year. This is ample evidence of how they get their “bad-sounding” statistics. They LIE, include things that are NOT shootings, and happen not even ON school grounds, but NEAR the school. They don’t have any REAL statistics to report, so they just make it up. Meanwhile, they disarm the victims, so they will be “easy targets” for the fools who come to kill students using their ILLEGAL guns. And if anybody comes up with an idea that will actually WORK to stop school shootings (like letting the teachers bring their guns to school), they dismiss them, out of hand. They’re fools, but they “have the ear” of gullible politicians, so they can get their illogical, useless anti-gun laws on the books. Laws that only make it easier for the mass shooters to kill defenseless students and faculty. (Jo Huffman)

Gun Control Doesn't Work

In Maryland, gun control laws haven’t worked to reduce gun crime. So what do “MOMS” want to do? Make more of them, of course! Never mind that doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result is the very DEFINITION of insanity. Anti-gun fools never learn that what they perennially propose is absolutely USELESS in accomplishing their goals. They flail about and make more and more of those USELESS laws, in spite of the fact that they do not work, and only make it easier for law breakers to victimize the law-abiding, by DISARMING them, for the most part. The other day, a tiny woman who was running a convenience store was approached by a big man who pointed a gun at her and demanded her money. So she shot him to death. That should happen much more often. Then maybe these fools who want to just TAKE what others have EARNED will go into another line of work. Maybe go to work for the government, which is in the same business they were in, but using laws, instead of guns, as the first level of intimidation. (WBAL TV)

Gun Siezures Spike

Anti-gun fools are “concerned” about mass shootings. So what do they do? They seize as many legally-held guns as they can, completely ignoring the millions of ILLEGAL guns there are out there. That this makes it easier for a potential mass killer to “do his work,” doesn’t seem to occur to them. They think taking legal guns away from people will solve their problem. WRONG! It just makes it worse. It leaves the field wide open for the would-be mass shooters. One of the sure solutions to this problem is to ALLOW teachers that already have concealed carry permits to bring their guns to school, but they dismiss that, out of hand. Maybe we need to get some people who have some common sense into the ranks of the anti-gun fools, because they don’t seem to have any. All they seem to want to do is take away any possibility of people being able to defend themselves from such shooters, who all have their guns, anyway. The way to self defense is NOT to make yourself DEFENSELESS against a threat. But they just can’t seem to understand that. They just want to continue to do the same things that don’t work, over and over again, and demonize those who realize they’re useless and oppose them. (Washington Examiner)

NRA Is Still Immense

The liberals and other anti-gun fools are exulting over what seems like a “decline” in the amount of money the NRA has to use in opposing their efforts to eliminate our constitutional right to own and use arms for self defense. What they don’t figure is that, maybe there are just not that many people left who want to retain that constitutional right who think it necessary to join the NRA. What they don’t tell you is that NRA membership is at 5 million paid members—the largest membership in their long history. Maybe there are so many who think the way they do are ALREADY members, so new memberships have “leveled off.” They are still the strongest voice in defense of that constitutional right, and will continue to be, despite a temporary lull. The point is, the desire to retain that constitutional right hasn’t ebbed at all. Just new memberships, for whatever reason. They’re still strong, and will remain strong, while anti-gun fool forces will decline, since their whole thing is based on an illegality. What the anti-gun fools propose is anti-constitutional, making it ILLEGAL. And that will ultimately defeat them. (Roll Call)

Non-Gun Self Defense

I’m an old man on Social Security. As such, according to the anti-gun fools in our government, I cannot own a gun for self defense. That’s how they decide just who they will “allow” to have the means for self defense. At my age, and in my physical condition, I’m a “prime target” for those fools who just wish to “strong-arm” an “easy target” and take what is not theirs. So I have to “make do” in the weapons department. Actually, there are weapons all around you, and they can be very effective, even in the hands of an “old duffer” like me. One I like is a “page holder” you can buy in a book store that looks very much like a “sap,” and can be used the same way. It’s a piece of leather with a lead weight at each end. Hit somebody with it, and he’s “going down.” Other objects, such as large glass ash trays, lamps, and anything that can be used as a club are also good weapons for emergency use. You just have to be aware, at all times, of the possible weapons close by, and not be afraid to use them if you are attacked. I remember in one movie the actor bought $20 worth of quarters in rolls and put them in a sock, which he carried whenever he went out at night. Very effective. Substitute the quarters with a bar of soap, or anything heavy, and you have a very efficient self-defense weapon. Of course, if you ever have to use it, the cops will take it away from you, as they are wont to do with ANYTHING we can use to defend ourselves. But a bar of soap or some quarters in a sock are not legally a weapon unless they twist a law to include them. But better convicted, than dead. So if you have to use it, don’t report it. Just walk away—if you can. (Just common sense)

Bloomberg Wants More Guns

For HIS protection that is, not yours. He is demanding more ARMED guards for his appearance at Johns Hopkins University. He says, and I quote: “When you have a city that has the murder rate that Baltimore has, I think it’s ridiculous to think that they shouldn’t be armed.” So he’s worried about his own safety, as he should be. But he worries not about YOUR safety in the same places. Notwithstanding the danger, he still wants to DISARM you. It’s a typical “disconnect” between what he pushes on the rest of us, and reality. He wants protection for himself, while denying it to the rest of us. But he’s a billionaire. He can afford to hire his guns, while most of us cannot. We have to be our own “armed guards” every day. But he wants to make that impossible, with all the stupid, useless, unenforceable anti-gun laws he wants to put into effect. This is true of most of the anti-gun fools out there who want to make us all DEFENSELESS against the millions of ILLEGAL guns out there, in the hands of criminals, crazies, and Islamic terrorists (a growing problem). Another good example of this disconnect is Sen. Feinstein, one of the most prolific anti-gun fools, who caries her own gun, in addition to the “armed security” she can afford to hire, probably mostly being paid for by US (tax money). (Legal Insurrection)

No Gun, Killed Anyway

This guy didn’t have a gun to use in his mass killing spree, so he stabbed eight people to death before he was stopped. At least we think he was stopped. This happened in china, where NO citizens are allowed to have guns unless they work for the government, or have an “in” with a politician. They SAY he was “arrested,” but no further details are coming out. This situation shows graphically what I’ve been saying for a long time: if a killer can’t get a gun, he’ll use something else. As this guy did. And eight people are dead because he thought his wife had cheated on him, so he got drunk and killed eight innocent people with a KNIFE. That’s in a country where legal guns are almost non-existent, except for government employees or those who have purchased the right from corrupt officials. Yet this man successfully murdered eight innocent people. But the anti-gun fools in our country and others take no note of this, and keep making more and more laws restricting the law-abiding from having the means for self defense. This is silly. The way to self defense is NOT to disarm yourself. This COUNTRY will not disarm itself, but it disarms its honest citizens while ignoring the millions of ILLEGAL guns out there. (New York Post)

Today's Gun Save(s)

Anti-gun fools say it never happens. They say concealed carriers are more likely to shoot themselves than anybody else. They say that the average person carrying a gun NEVER is able to stop violence from being committed. They're WRONG, as usual. And today's “gun save” proves it, yet again. I’ve been resisting reporting every instance of defensive use of a gun because there are so many, it’s actually boring. Readers don’t really want to read the same story over and over again, even if it proves their thesis that, contrary to the lies the anti-gun fools tell, somebody shoots a burglar or other kind of criminal, every day, somewhere. In this instance it is the same old story: a couple of goons decide to break into the home of a woman—somebody they consider to be an “easy target” for their robbery. Robbery, not burglary, because they know she is home, and they figure they can overcome anything she has to offer. WRONG! The upshot is, she’s okay. One bad guy, DEAD. The other probably still running. That’s in Atlanta. In St. Louis, the homeowner didn’t even bother to kill the bad guy. He just shot in the air and the burglar set sail for less dangerous areas. I don’t think his feet even hit the ground, all the way to the hills. (Atlanta Journal-Constitution)

Don't Want to Hear It

Dumocrats won’t allow Republican Whip Steve Scalise, who was almost killed by a left-leaning fool, to testify on their gun bill because they know he will tell them, on the record, what they don’t want to know: that their proposed law would NOT have prevented the shooting in which he was almost killed. Which pretty much reveals them. They don’t want to hear the truth, so they keep a real victim of “gun violence” who still believes in gun rights from testifying, so he won’t “take the wind out of their sails” by actually putting the truth on the record. Their big problem with him is that, unlike Gabby Giffords, their “poster girl” for gun control, he still believes gun control is useless, even though he was shot with a gun. A LEGAL gun. Which amply proves that the law banning a felon or a crazy from getting a gun was useless in stopping his shooter from getting his gun. They don’t want to hear that. Their minds are made up. So don’t confuse them with facts. In his letter to the committee, he pointed out several of the millions of instances where legal “concealed carriers” saved the day when a would-be mass killer showed up. (Town Hall)

Gun Control Imbeciles

That’s what they are. It is the most obvious thing in the world to those with any intelligence, at all. The entire idea of gun control is based on a fallacy. That you can actually eliminate all guns from our society by simply making a law. The very idea that this will eliminate “gun violence” is similarly imbecilic. Also imbecilic is the idea that you CAN eliminate all guns. All you can do is eliminate most of the LEGAL guns from society because only honest people OBEY laws. Dishonest people do not. They routinely ignore every “gun control” law passed by ignorant legislators, and the numbers of the guns they hold are in the MILLIONS. They create lists of gun owners that only allow them to find the user of a gun in a crime AFTER they commit the crime, IF that person got his gun legally. Criminals in prison for more serious crimes, who have no reason to lie, willingly tell us they mostly got the guns they used in their crimes illegally. Limitations on the capacity of magazines is equally imbecilic, as all it does is make the law-abiding into “easy targets” for those criminals, who don’t obey laws. So what are they gaining, except to make it easier for the law breakers to victimize the law-abiding? (Just common sense)

Paid Anti-Gun Demonstration

In Portland, Oregon—the capital of “gun control,” they had a “massive spontaneous student demonstration” against guns. Only thing is—it wasn’t “spontaneous.” The Portland School District either PAID students to demonstrate, and/or gave them time off from school to do so while physically ORGANIZING all the “demonstrations.” I wonder how many of the students are REALLY “against guns,” or are participating because they got paid, and/or got time off from school? Or got ordered to participate? Frankly, I don’t trust anything the politicians in this state do. Remember, this is the state that registered UNDERAGE people to vote. They called it “pre-registration.” It’s also the state where the very first city in the country set their minimum wage at $15.00 an hour, for people with NO experience, that needed extensive training to do ANY job, so they could make as much as other people who DID train for their job. And thus RUINED many industries, and made many “entry-level jobs” disappear, to the detriment of the part-time student employee crowd, as well as the owners of the affected businesses (all of them). Today, I don’t trust ANY demonstration, anywhere, because I know the Dumocrats use PAID demonstrations all the time, and pay for the buses that get them there. They learned that technique from the Russians. (Victoria Taft)

Liberals Are Outraged!

So what? Liberals get outraged any time they are proven to be wrong about something—anything. This time it’s because a woman, who was a legal “concealed carrier” shot and killed a would-be robber at a bus stop in Chicago. He pulled an illegal gun on her and she shot him to death. It took him a while to die though, and the cops found him on his mother’s doorstep, where he died. One liberal used the “time-honored old saw” that robbery should not be a death sentence. But it should, if the robber was threatening the would-be victim with death. THAT does call for a death sentence, if the victim has the means to carry it out. This was the editor of Think Progress, an obvious liberal rag, who apparently thought she should just give him all her money and maybe let him kill her. That’s how liberals think. If the gun is legal, it should not be used. If it’s illegal, it’s okay. That editor says she should have just let him rob her, and both could have survived. Really? What if he decided to take her around the corner and rape her? Or just shoot her anyway because she didn’t have as much money as he thought she should have had for him to steal? He makes a big thing of his age: 19. But, 19 or not, he had a gun in his hand and was ready to victimize this woman when she killed him. This should happen a lot more, and maybe stupid kids like him would go into other kinds of crime—or maybe not go into crime, at all. The Hot Air writer says he’s not suggesting this kid had to die. But I am. He chose his life of crime. Some people just don’t deserve to breathe the same air as honest people, and this was one of them. Dana Loesch says, “Make predators afraid.” And I agree with that, wholeheartedly. (Hot Air)

MS-13 Gang Killing

Dumocrats say there isn’t a problem with MS-13 gang members coming into this country illegally and bringing their “out-of-control” gang activities up from Mexico with them. But their ACTIVITIES put the lie to that. Almost daily we hear of some thuggery by MS-13 members, and one of the most recent is the open KILLING on a subway platform in Queens, a place where many of them congregate, and where the murder rate has risen precipitously in recent days, because they are there. They also poo-poo the fact that there are MANY members of numerous street gang members coming in and bringing their killing ways with them, thus making our streets resemble the daily gang warfare in Mexico City. Even though we already had some, since gang members have slipped into this country, it has intensified. Dumocrats don’t care about this, as witness their refusal to allow Trump money to build his wall which, while it isn’t a COMPLETE solution, is a very real PART of the solution. Yes, they can climb over one, or tunnel under it. But that takes time, and money, while Border Control people get a better chance to catch them at it. (New York Times)

Gun Control's A Fantasy

A fantasy supported by the fallacy that all you have to do is make a law against something and criminals, who obey NO laws, will magically OBEY this one. And another fallacy that it is even POSSIBLE to eliminate guns from the world. You cannot. It’s like putting toothpaste back in the tube. It can’t be done. There are billions of guns in existence, both legal and ILLEGAL, and millions of them are ILLEGAL. There is NO WAY a person can defend him/herself against one of those millions of illegal guns in the hands of criminals and other miscreants, without having his OWN gun. But the anti-gun fools will not hear of that. They think that, if the law-abiding are able to have guns, they will “go wild” and start shooting each other over trifles, such as a fender-bender. That completely discounts the fact that holders of illegal guns are doing that, right now. Gang members, who are too young to legally buy a gun, are shooting each other over “turf.” You can get killed for being in the wrong place. Gun control cannot be obtained by doing away with only legal guns. But you can’t convince the anti-gun fools of that. They don’t have the INTELLIGENCE to understand it. (Liberty Park Press)

Worried About Guns

“Gen Z,” America’s youngest, are more worried about “gun violence” than anything else. Yet they “take on” the very organization that actually wants to do something meaningful about it, and support those anti-gun fools who pass laws that do NOTHING to “reduce gun violence,” the NRA. They have been “programmed” to believe that the NRA is stopping all efforts to reduce gun violence, when they are the ones who are actively working to do so. The anti-gun fools have to know their laws and regulations not only do not work, but actually make it worse, by disarming the law-abiding, making them “easy targets” for those who obey no laws and want to victimize the innocent. This leads me to believe that they are NOT interested in “gun control.” They are interested in “people control.” Having the power to tell us we can or can’t do a thing, or own and use an item that is, without a human being to use it, is an inanimate object. They “bad-mouth” legislatures, saying they aren’t “doing their jobs” by not passing more USELESS laws that accomplish NOTHING. It’s all just a stupid exercise, but they either don’t realize that, or they just don’t care. (YouTube)