Ridiculous Gun Control

In Bedford, Massachsetts, they again demonstrated their stupidity, not only by holding a “gun buyback,” but also getting mostly BB guns, and they’re still very happy about it. Never mind the only real guns that get turned in are old unreliable guns that are more likely to blow up in the person’s hand. Or guns that have been used in a crime and were destined for the deep lake or a river, anyway. These events are always “no questions” events, where no questions are asked of those turning them in. I remember a “Blue Bloods episode where a couple of cops noticed that one of the guns being turned in had been used in a murder and got in trouble for pursuing it. Never mind that money is fungible, and that gained at these events will most likely be spent to obtain newer, working guns to use in victimizing the law-abiding. Gun buyback programs are like “gun-free zones.” They are a good place to “dump” a “dirty gun” because the cops are restrained from pursuing charges against those turning in “dirty guns.” In gun-free zones, criminals freely bring their guns in and victimize people, being pretty sure none of the law-abiding there will be armed, and able to fight back. They SEEK OUT such areas for that reason. Gun buybacks are just a good way to get rid of “dirty guns” and those that are no longer reliable to get money to buy newer, better ones. Anti-gun fools don’t know this, just like they don’t know their other laws are USELESS, and unenforceable. (Bearing Arms)

What SHOULD We Do?

Anti-gun fools constantly blame the NRA and other pro-gun people for all the deaths attributed to ILLEGAL guns in the hands of the lawless, whether they be simple criminals, crazies, or Islamic terrorists. Yet, truth be known, it is the anti-gun fools who make it worse by limiting the number of guns in the hands of the law-abiding, making them defenseless. They decry the “fact” that we “do nothing” to stop “gun violence,” but I have to ask them, What the hell would they have us do? My granddaddy always said, “If you complain about something, give us an idea what to do about it.” Now I’m the “granddaddy,” and anti-gun fools are complaining that “we do nothing about gun crime,” but never make any suggestions that WORK. They only complain that WE don’t do something. It’s easy to complain that “somebody else” does nothing, but a little harder to actually come up with something that will work. So far, nobody has come up with anything that WILL work to reduce “gun crime,” because all the anti-gun fools are getting laws passed that actually make it worse, under the PRETENSE that they’re actually DOING something. If somebody ever comes up with a REAL solution, I’ll be right there with them. But I’m not holding my breath, because the anti-gun fools scoff at the real solutions, such as allowing the law-abiding to have their guns so they can defend themselves. The cops can’t do it, because they’re at least minutes away, while the law-abiding citizens are THERE. (CNBC)

No Updates Tomorrow

I won’t be updating this blog tomorrow. I will be “taking it easy” and spending some time with my family, and stuffing my gut, as all people should be doing. Hopefully, the world will not “go to hell in a handbasket” (any more than usual) tomorrow because the handbasket will be full of turkey. Happy thanksgiving, folks!

Why're They So Stupid?

Gun control does not work. Everybody knows that. But anti-gun fools operate as if they didn’t know it, and by so doing, make it worse by disarming the law-abiding so they’re defenseless in the face of the illegal guns used by the lawless. You ask them why they continue to be so dense, and continue to insist on passing more and more of those useless, unenforceable anti-gun laws that don’t work, and you get no answer. They immediately start calling you names while ignoring your question. They can’t be that stupid, so what is their ultimate purpose? Outfits like the Presbyterians are simply dupes who have bought their garbage. The anti-gun fools are the ones to blame for all the “gun crime” that is rampant in our society, today.

They SAY it’s rampant, but it is actually going down. It’s not nearly the problem it was, because of the increase in the number of “carry permits” gained by the law-abiding. They don’t like that because it proves them wrong, every day, as “good guys with guns” even things out by killing many lawbreakers as they try to victimize them. The more legal guns there out there, the less those with illegal guns can successfully victimize then law-abiding, and they hate that. Almost all “gun crime” is committed by ILLEGAL guns, but all they want to do is get rid of LEGAL guns. I think the politicians are just frightened of those legally “carrying” because they count themselves as “kindred spirits with those lawbreakers. They’ll deny it, of course, but that’s what it is. They just don’t want to meet guns when they come to take what is yours. (Presbyterian Outlook)

Complete, Absolute Stupidity

In the Old West, most men carried guns, because to not do so left them open to the marauding bandits that rode the countryside. That way, they at least had a chance to defend themselves against them. If anybody had suggested that they “get rid of their guns,” they’d have laughed in their face because, the way to self defense is NOT to make yourself defenseless, and they knew it. Somewhere along the line, people lost that knowledge and many are now blaming the gun for “gun violence,” and pushing to “get rid of the guns,” making themselves defenseless against the “bandits” that still abound, with their ILLEGAL guns. Whenever some fool shoots up a school, or other “gun-free zone” with an illegal gun, the anti-gun fools immediately clamor to get rid of more LEGAL guns, and make ourselves defenseless. That’s sheer stupidity! But they don’t know that. Stupid people have no idea they ARE stupid. They think they’re the “smartest people in the room,” and all the others are stupid. I don’t know about others, but if some fool comes at me with a gun, I want to have a gun to use to stop him. That’s just common sense. (Just common sense)

Making Excuses

I get tired of hearing the city of Chicago blaming “lax gun laws in other states” for their major “gun crime” problem. The fact is EVERY big city could likewise blame guns coming from other states because, unless those guns were manufactured IN Chicago, they came in from other states. Not just the ones with what Chicago calls “lax gun laws. Making this claim excuses them from their own responsibility in the burgeoning “gun crime” rate in their city, which stems from not only their own lax enforcement of gun carry laws on their own books but their refusal to prosecute illegal gun carrying. They have recently confiscated 10,000 guns from criminals, and prosecuted them rarely. Usually waiving prosecution to gain convictions in other crimes. That’s just lax law enforcement, generally. There are other ways to get convictions other than “looking the other way” about illegal gun carrying. Their very tight gun laws also have an effect, by disarming the law-abiding, making it easy for the law-breakers to victimize them. If they allowed the law-abiding to be armed in self defense, they would get rid of a lot of illegal gun carriers when they killed them as they tried to victimize a “concealed carrier.” But they will never hear of that. They aren’t intelligent enough. (WBBM)

Biden Blames the NRA

Senile Dumocrat presidential candidate Joe Biden is blaming the NRA for the fact that a 15-year-old CHILD got a gun ILLEGALLY, and killed a couple of his fellow students in California the other day. How the NRA, who only champion the American’s constitutional RIGHT to be armed, is responsible for a kid getting a gun ILLEGALLY and killing some people is beyond my muddled thinking. But hey! I’m only an old blogger who is still able to see things clearly. Not like “Ol’ Joe, who speaks to walls instead of the audience. Damn! How the Dumocrats think such a man is capable of running this country is something else. Of course, this senile old man would be easy to control. Of course, Joe is not alone in his stupidities. Every Dumocrat running has similar views on guns. They all think the way to self defense is to make yourself DEFENSELESS. I don’t know. Maybe it’s something in the water I DC that promotes stupidity. Of course, such stupidity is not, in any way, limited to those in DC. They’re EVERYWHERE that Dumocrats congregate. And they spawn anti-gun fools like one former congresswoman who got shot in the head and not killed, who really thinks if nobody had a LEGAL gun, she wouldn’t have gotten shot. How ANYBODY can think keeping guns out of the law-abiding can do anything about guns in the hands of the lawless shows a stupidity beyond belief. (Bearing Arms)

"Good Guy With Gun"

Anti-gun fools confidently tell you that the “good guy with a gun” thing is something that’s only in the imaginations of pro-gun people. Then a guy enters a known “gun-free zone” on a WalMart parking lot and kills his former wife and her new boyfriend. Whether or not he intended to kill any more people there is not known, because a legal concealed carrier was there with his gun, also violating Walmart “policy,” and it’s good he was, because he threw down on the killer, making him stop. Whereupon the killer turned the gun on himself, committing suicide, before anybody could stop him. Both men violated Walmart’s “policy” of not allowing guns on their property. They’ll probably ban this guy from entering their stores with his gun in the future. They’re short-sighted, that way. But this is a good example of one violation canceling out the other. If that “good guy” hadn’t been there with his gun, this murderer might have gotten away with a double murder—and we don’t want that. And this whole thing graphically shows the fallacy of Walmart’s “gun-free zone” policy on their property, which makes their customers and staff vulnerable to such people. (Gun Watch)

3-2-1 "Gun Control!"

In other news, “Water Is Wet.” The anti-gun fools are out in full force demanding more and more of their USELESS, unenforceable gun control laws that never do ANYTHING to stop, or even slow down “gun crime” after the latest school shooting in “gun-free” California. Each and every one of their stupid laws is in effect there, but somehow this 15-year-old student still got hold of the gun he used to kill two fellow students and almost himself. His actually HITTING those students must have been an accident because he is the only person I know who could put a gun in his mouth, pull the trigger, and miss. Naturally, the anti-gun crowd automatically want to do more to keep guns out of the law-abiding while completely ignoring the fact that the gun he used HAD to have been gotten illegally since he was too young to buy one legally. So how the hell would their laws stop him? The way to self defense is NOT to make yourself defenseless. The anti-gun fools have to know that, yet they keep on insisting on doing the same things, over and over again, hoping for a different result. That’s the very definition of insanity, but the insane have no idea they are insane. (Breitbart)

Gun-Grabbers Piling On

It’s what they do. Regardless of facts, they always do the same thing. Any time somebody fires a gun at somebody else, even if it’s in self defense, or a police action to protect us all, the anti-gun fools scream for more of the same useless, unenforceable anti-gun laws to be made. Never mind they not only do nothing to stop, or even slow down “gun crime,” they make it worse, by disarming the law-abiding, so they are defenseless against the lawbreakers, who just ignore their insipid laws. I really get tired of writing these same words over and over again, while being roundly ignored by the anti-gun fools. The Saugus killings, for instance: numerous laws were violated by the killer, and the shooting happened in a state with very strict anti-gun laws, already on the books, that were useless to stop this killer. “What the Saugus High School shooting may underscore, according to gun rights activists, is the failure of strict Golden State gun control laws. It’s against the law to have a gun on a school campus, illegal for a teen to be carrying a concealed handgun, illegal for a minor to have a handgun and for anyone to obtain a firearm without a background check in California. It’s also against the law to shoot people and commit murder. None of these restrictions prevented the Santa Clarita tragedy.” But anti-gun fools, true to form, are jumping up and down, demanding all kinds of anti-gun laws be “piled on top of” existing laws—which do NOTHING to stop such tragedies. For instance, they demand “assault weapons bans,” when assault weapons did not enter into the killings. (Just common sense)

Yes, They're That Stupid!

In Oklahoma, at First Union Baptist Church, they put up signs that might as well say, “We’re defenseless. Come on in and kill us.” Actually, what they say is, “We are a gun-free zone.” Churches all over the state are following suit, as they rush to make sure their parishioners are totally defenseless if a gunman comes in to kill a few of them. It’s the usual stupid response to “gun violence.” Make yourself defenseless against the lawless, who ignore such signs and bring their guns, anyway. Anti-gun fools bemoan the very idea of several people in the congregation “packing,” as if they are going to bring their legal guns and those legal guns are going to kill a few people. Lost on them is the whole idea that it is the ILLEGAL guns that are the problem, not those legally owned. That the way to self defense is NOT to disarm yourself. The lawless will bring their guns there, anyway, no matter what those stupid signs say. They might as well post “No Wolves” signs on a sheep ranch. The wolves aren’t going to pay any more attention than will the lawless, if they want to bring their guns.(KTUL)

"Only Racists Own Guns"

That remark was made by Dumocrat presidential candidate Pete Buttcrack...er, uh, Buttgurgle. Or is it Buttgaggle. I can never tell. Such a crack is ample evidence that Dumocrats simply want to control access to guns for ALL Americans so they can do what they want with them if they get elected to office by gullible voters. They will never be able to control access to ALL guns, but they don’t worry about that. The ones they can’t control are in the hands of lawbreakers, and they feel a definite kinship with them, since they are lawbreakers pretending to be the government. Slamming people who simply wish to be able to defend themselves against those lawbreakers is a common ploy used by would-be demagogues to “criminalize” a legal action. And having guns for self defense IS legal, and NOT racist. That is only true in the “fevered imagination” of such fools as ButtGiggle, and is used only as a means of demonizing those with whom he disagrees. Frankly, just making such a declaration shows a certain racism on his part. A racism that should never be allowed near the White House. We need to stop electing such people to office where they can make many attempts to usurp the Second amendment to the Constitution. Being against gun ownership should be a bar to being elected to anything, for our own safety. (The Moment)

Ignorant, Stupid Fools!

That’s the best description I can give to the anti-gun fools who insist on making more and more anti-gun laws when they have to know they don’t work worth a damn to limit the number of guns in the hands of criminals. All they do is limit the number of guns in the hands of the law-abiding, most of whom are NOT the problem, anyway. They only make the law-abiding, who are the favorite targets of the lawless, defenseless against the millions of ILLEGAL guns out there in the hand of the lawless. The very idea on which the anti-gun scam is based is illogical. First, you can’t eliminate crime by eliminating guns. Next, you can’t stop the lawless from getting the guns they use to victimize the law-abiding by making laws. They just ignore them. They ARE criminals, after all. They don’t obey laws. Period. So why would they bother to obey a piddling little law that says they can’t be armed while they commit their other crimes? I think their main goal is to criminalize self defense for everybody but those working for the government, one way or the other by first, making guns very hard to get for the law-abiding, while criminals get their guns easily in a back alley somewhere. They call their laws “common sense gun laws,” but they’re anything BUT common sense. They’re ignorant, stupid, and illogical, but the law-abiding DO obey them, making them “easy targets” for the lawless. (Just common sense)

What Will Happen Then?

The anti-gun fools would dearly love to eliminate all LEGAL guns from existence. They have no way to do anything about the millions of ILLEGAL guns there are in existence, so what happens then? First off, law breakers are “enabled.” With legal guns no longer in existence, they can have “free rein” over the law-abiding, who are then defenseless against them. But those lawless thugs will be in fierce competition with the government, which will no longer be constrained by their citizens being armed, and well able to resist their efforts to take what is theirs. So millions will die, as they have in other countries where guns were completely banned. A dictator who has “taken over” in an unfortunate country sees, as his first necessary action, the banning of legal guns from existence in his newly-acquired country. Then he sets out to murder each and every citizen who may, or may not, oppose him, in any way. He will have no trouble doing that, for they have nothing to use in defense. That has to be their ultimate goal, because all their anti-gun laws do NOTHING to stop, or even slow down “gun crime,” and, in fact, INCREASE it by disarming the law-abiding, making them defenseless. It’s a tragedy, but one that is self-imposed, by allowing their government to disarm them.. (Just common sense)

Why're Gun Sales Down?

It’s a strange reason, and not as a result of the anti-gun hysteria—in a way. The gun industry had a real boom going during the Obama administration, fearing that Obama was going to somehow take their guns away. So they bought more and more of them and hid them away so he couldn’t get them all. But today, it’s a different thing. They aren’t so much afraid that Trump is going to come for their guns, so they’re not buying so many. It’s a reverse effect of gun control. The more they try, the more guns we’re going to get. Obama was one of the biggest anti-gun fools ever to become president. Or maybe THE worst. So inversely, he was the bet gun salesman there ever was. The more he spoke against guns, the more guns Americans bought, both legally, and illegally. The result was more and more guns out there, not fewer. And that makes things more difficult for the miscreants who use their guns (legal and illegal) to victimize the law-abiding, because they can’t be as sure that their intended victims will not be armed, and able to defend themselves. Criminals LOVE gun control, for that reason. They SEEK OUT “gun-free zones” because they can be pretty sure the law-abiding will not be armed, there. they’re law-abiding people, who OBEY gun laws, even while knowing they’re stupid, and useless for reducing gun crime and, instead, INCREASE it by disarming the law-abiding. (Prepared Gun Owners)

Felon Cops

When gunfire broke out in Santa Clarita, California school, the response time for the cops was 16 seconds. How is that possible, you may ask. Well. Cops are people, too, and several off-duty cops were dropping their children off at the school when the gunfire started. They rushed in and saved some lives by giving instant First Aid to victims. I don’t know if one of them was the “armed civilian” who put a stop to the shooter’s day, but they are heroes, even if they did not get a chance to confront the shooter. But it they had done this in Connecticut, they’d have been felons and could possibly be sent to prison for “being on school grounds armed.” Their law applies equally to simple citizens, AND cops. It’s an idiot way to make a law, but that’s the way their law is written. Believe it or not, California’s similar law does NOT apply to cops, but I’m sure some simple-minded lawmaker will soon introduce a bill to change all that. Anti-gun laws are DESIGNED to only apply to the law-abiding, because lawbreakers just IGNORE them. The way the Connecticut law is written illustrates graphically the STUPIDITY of anti-gun lawmakers in liberal Connecticut. They still think the way to self defense is to make yourself DEFENSELESS against the law-breakers. (Bearing Arms)

Gun Control Insanity

The politicians have no idea what to do about “gun crime,” so they PRETEND they’re doing something by passing incessant anti-gun laws that shooters just IGNORE as they go about getting their guns ILLEGALLY or just stealing them. Yes, anti-gun laws can help, AFTER the killings. We must have laws making it illegal for a felon to be in possession of a gun, and against USING that gun in an illegal manner, so we can prosecute offenders. But they’re USELESS to keep that “gun crime” from happening, in the fist place. That must be very frustrating for the anti-gun fools, and the gullible legislators they convince to make their useless laws. Their very approach to limiting “gun crime” is wrong, and short-sighted. You can’s stop gun crime by taking guns away from the law-abiding. You just can’t. But since they have no idea what to do, they keep doing things that will not, and do not work, and tell everybody they’re “doing something” to end gun crime. But they aren’t. That is proven, every day, buy the fact that where anti-gun laws are the tightest, gun crime is at its highest. And where anti-gun laws are loosest, or non-existent, gun crime is DOWN. Those are figures the anti-gun fools routinely ignore. They just want to disarm America, for their own purposes. (Just common sense)

In Gun-Free California

What? This should never happen, according to the anti-gun fools in California, because they have some of the most oppressive anti-gun laws on the books in liberal-run California. But in the THIRD mass shooting in California lately, four people are dead and 10 more injured when a gunman opened fire on an innocent backyard party being held to watch a football game. “It is the third mass shooting in California in less than a week. It follows a school shooting in Santa Clarita that left two students dead, and a domestic violence incident in San Diego, in which a father shot his wife and four children before turning the gun on himself.” My question is this: how is it possible for this to happen ONCE, much less three times in less than a week, in a state with such draconian anti-gun laws? Liberals are quick to tell us those laws PREVENT such killings, but they do NOT. They are not stupid. They have to KNOW their anti-gun laws are USELESS and, contrary to their claims, INCREASE “gun crime” by disarming the law-abiding, leaving the way wide open for the lawless, who just IGNORE them. There has to be an ulterior motive, and it is POWER. The power to tell us what we can, and cannot do in all things. (Time)

Knee-Jerk Reaction

That’s what happens after every “gun crime.” Most gun crimes are committed by people who get their guns illegally, but after a gun crime, stupid politicians immediately clamor for the passage of more laws to control LEGAL gun ownership and use. What the hell good that does in keeping criminals, who obey NO laws, from getting and using guns, I don’t know. They call their anti-gun laws “common sense” laws. But nothing could be further from common sense. They have to know they don’t work worth a damn, but they keep making them, making the law-abiding “easy targets” for those who get their guns illegally before committing their other crimes—with their illegal guns. I know what drives the politicians—it is the knowledge that they will someday come for your property, and don’t want to get shot when they do. But the anti-gun fools? That’s impossible to figure. I think it’s the fine salaries they pay themselves out of the money given them by the fools who “buy” their lies. And lies they are, because they can’t tell the truth and still promote controlling LEGAL guns while criminals go wild using ILLEGAL guns. (Just common sense)

Ignoring the Warnings

In just about every mass shooting (mostly in “gun-free” schools), the shooter gave off many signals that such an event was imminent. One shooting at a military base in Kentucky, the man who became a mass killer gave off many signals. He was supposed to be a “counselor,” but was, himself, in need of counseling. He dressed like a Muslim, spouted Muslim terrorist pap, and generally made a nuisance of himself before he took a gun and killed a bunch of people. In another case, one mass killer was “contacted” by the cops 69 times before going into a school and killing some students, In all these cases, the shooter gave off many warnings, all of which were IGNORED. The anti-gun fools predictably target the guns, and ignore the whole idea of NOTICING such warnings and doing something about them. They also refuse to allow one of the best defenses against such school shootings, which is allowing teachers and other staff who are already legal gun carriers to bring their guns to school, as if those people will “go wild” and become mass killers, themselves. Actually, having guns there in the hands of people who are not in uniform and can’t be located and killed FIRST would be the first line of defense against a mass killer. But they refuse to credit that while kids get murdered. (Bearing Arms)

Gun Control Equals Death!

 “If your government tells you that you don’t need a gun, you need a gun.” I don’t know who said that, but it is a truism. Adolph Hitler had complete gun control, and then he went on to murder millions. Not just Jews, other people, as well. And they had no recourse, because they didn’t have guns to use to oppose him and his “Brown Shirt” thugs. Josef Stalin had complete gun control in Soviet Russia, and HE went on to murder millions of defenseless, unarmed citizens. Fidel Castro made guns in the hands of his citizens illegal on his first day after taking over in Cuba, and predictably murdered many defenseless citizens. Disarming citizens is the first step for a dictator when he takes over. No dictator wants his “people” to be armed when he comes to victimize them because he doesn’t want himself, or his thugs to get shot as they victimize his citizens. All the Dumocrat candidates for president want to “take your guns.” Doesn’t that tell you something about what they have planned for you if you’re dumb enough to elect them? You think it can’t happen here? They want to repeal the Second Amendment. What do you think they’re going to do if that ever happens? (Just common sense)

Gangs Won't Surrender Guns

Surprise, surprise! The “police commissioner” in New Zealand met with a number of “gang leaders” in an effort to get them to give up their guns. Not unexpectedly, that effort fizzled. The gangs refused to give up their guns. They know that the new anti-gun laws are a boon for them, as they disarm more law-abiding people, making it easier for them to be victimized by those gangs, who will still have their guns. I doubt if it’s much different here, since most of the “gun violence” is committed by gangs. Especially in Chicago, but in any big city you could mention, too, and even in some smaller ones.. The lawless are the lawless, no matter what the laws. They ignore them. In the US, one of the worst places for mass shootings is a school. Every school in the nation is a gun-free zone, and the lawless SEEK OUT places like that, where they can be pretty confident there will be no guns there they don’t know about. Any uniformed “resource officers,” they can locate and “deal with (kill)” early on, before they start killing children and other staff. The anti-gun fools have to know this. It is obvious, even to the most ignorant. But they keep them that way, while wondering why people go there to kill children. (Gun Free Zone)

California Gun Killings

Wait a minute. California has some of the toughest anti-gun laws on the books, so how is this possible? Someone had to have either gotten his guns illegally or passed a background check and got them legally in order to bring off this outage. I thought all these tight laws were supposed to STOP things like this? Why weren’t they able? The truth is, this is yet another proof that anti-gun laws are useless to stop, or even slow down “gun crime.” Only the law-abiding obey them, and they aren’t, for the most part, the problem. The problem people are criminal, crazies, and Islamic terrorists, who regularly kill innocent people to make a political point. And they couldn’t care less about anti-gun laws. They are bent on violating much worse laws than those insignificant prohibitions on their use of guns in committing their other crimes. Laws are for those who obey them. Thus, the only people to whom these laws will apply are the law-abiding, who obey them. Completely ignoring the lawless, who routinely DISobey them. So what the hell good are they? They merely make it easier for the lawless to victimize the law-abiding. The anti-gun fools have to know this, but they ignore it and keep making their useless anti-gun laws, then ask in wonder, why gun crime persists. The news articles are still reporting that 5 people died in this California killing spree, but the death toll has risen to 6. So what are California lawmakers going to do, now? Make more useless anti-gun laws for them to ignore? (People)

"Common Sense Gun Control"

That’s what they call it, but nothing about gun control is common sense. The very basis for gun control doesn’t track. You CANNOT end gun crime by taking guns away from the law-abiding; and there is NO WAY you’re ever going to do away with every gun in existence. You may take some legally-owned guns away from gullible owners who believe your guff, but the criminals, who are the ones who ARE the problem, are not going to give up their illegally-gotten guns. They are, after all, a staple in their “toolbox.” You can establish all the “gun-free zones’ you wish, but the lawless merely regard them as “target-rich areas” where the law-abiding will not be armed—thus giving them an “easy ride” when robbing, raping, and killing innocent people. The way to self defense is NOT to disarm yourself and make yourself an “easy target” for the lawless, who routinely IGNORE gun laws while committing their other crimes. The anti-gun fools, who push all these useless laws must have an ulterior motive because they have to know they don’t work worth a damn in doing what they claim they want to accomplish. (Just common sense)

And Do What?

Dumocrat Kamilla Harris bemoans politicians not doing anything about “gun violence” after that shooting at a Halloween party. So next is the question: “Do what?” What the hell does she want us to DO? She doesn’t say, because she doesn’t know. And neither does anybody else. Because the ONLY thing we can do is make it legal for the law-abiding to have their own guns, so they can dispense with the users of ILLEGAL guns by killing them when they come to victimize the law-abiding. That is a sure way to “reduce gun crime,” one gun criminal at a time. If we stop one shooting by so doing, we will have done more than ALL their anti-gun laws have ever done. She, and other anti-gun fools are quick to condemn us for “doing nothing” to reduce gun crime, but, like the others, have no idea WHAT to do. So she only gripes about it and thinks she is “shaming us” into doing something. But what she wants us to do is the impossible. We know how we can help, but, like all other anti-gun fools, she won’t hear of it. It involves letting the law-abiding defend themselves by letting them have guns to use to do that. (NRA-ILA)

Airbnb: No More Parties

Not surprisingly, Airbnb has banned rentals of its properties for parties after that mass shooting in Orinda, California. Not a lot different from banning guns, hoping to eliminate gun violence. Word is, that the property owner himself told the renter “no parties” and was told the rental was for a small gathering of 12 people for a family reunion. Meanwhile the party was advertised on social media and hundreds showed up. So the party was shut down. The motive for the shooting is still unknown, and nobody has been apprehended. So if course Airbnb blames the party, before even finding out why he shooting even happened. This rather than finding out why the customer lied to the renter while advertising the party widely. It’s not the party, it’s the PEOPLE. Who wanted to kill people at that party, and why? Was it a gang killing designed to kill a certain victim, that got out of hand? We don’t know yet, and may never know. This is California, you know. Where some of the tightest anti-gun laws in the country are in effect, but somehow didn’t stop the shooter, or shooters, from getting their guns. What’s next? In the future, when a house is rented for a honeymoon and someone gets shot, will they stop renting for honeymoons? (KTVU Fox 2)

Gun Control Is Deadly

I like to talk about Chicago, where gun control is tight, while criminals have no trouble getting their guns, and the gun crime rate is the highest in the nation. But Chicago is not the worst example of the fallacy of anti-gun laws. Every large city with tight anti-gun laws has correspondingly high gun crime statistics. But that’s not the whole story: In Mexico, where the anti-gun laws are really draconian, and where only ONE PERCENT of Mexicans can legally buy guns, the gun crime rate has DOUBLED since those laws were written and imposed upon the people. This is but one more instance that proves my point. But the anti-gun fools, as usual, are not listening. They have a “tin ear” to facts that disprove their ignorant theories. They see these things, and then go on to make more and more stupid anti-gun laws they SAY reduces gun crime, while they do NOT. They only INCREASE it by making “easy targets” of the law-abiding, who DO obey their laws, while criminals (who obey NO laws) predictably do not. What drives them, I don’t know. I only know their ideas are worthless, and deadly to those who obey them, while they make it easier for the lawless to victimize the law-abiding. (John Lott)

Everybody Gets A Gun

Anti-gun fools are quick to tell you their laws “keep us safe.” But they don’t. They make us much LESS safe by disarming us in the face of all the millions of illegal guns there are out there in the hands of the lawless, who do not obey laws—ANY laws, much less those that say they can’t be armed when they commit their other crimes. The people who think they can “eliminate gun crime” by passing a law against it are fools. And they must be willful fools who have to be aware that their laws do not stop, nor slow down anybody who wants to victimize us with their illegal guns. And the lawmakers who go along with them, passing many useless, unenforceable bills into law to take away our right t be armed for self defense—something that is guaranteed us by the Constitution—are worse, because they ought to know better. Each and every Dumocrat now running for president is an anti-gun fool, and most are fools otherwise, too. More reasons never to vote for a Dumocrat. (Bearing Arms)

"Common Sense Gun Control"

That’s one of the biggest contradiction in terms I have seen in my many years of life. What is “common sense” about laws that do NOTHING to “stop gun crime” and, instead, PROMOTE it by disarming the law-abiding, making them “easy targets” for the very gun crime their laws pretend to stop? What is “common sense” about creating many “gun-free zones” that become “killing zone” for potential mass killers who SEEK OUT such places in which to do their killing? What is “common sense” about making all schools gun-free zones when to do so makes them tempting targets for mass shooters while prohibiting legal gun owners from being able to bring their guns to school so as to have some chance at not only self defense, but defense of their students? The entire concept of targeting the guns is so far from being “common sense” as to be ridiculous. Criminals don’t obey laws. So making laws against them carrying guns is so silly, it’s sublime—and far from being “common sense.” And it is based completely on the IGNORANCE of those passing such laws. They can’t be intelligent ans support the passage of such laws. (Just real common sense)

What Fools Thy Be!

I don’t know what drives anti-gun fools, but their every move so far has been stupid. Now Elizabeth Warren wants to eliminate all armed school resource officers, making school students ABSOLUTELY defenseless against any fool who comes in wanting to kill a few children. She must really hate children to want them to be killed so easily. The very idea that the way to self defense is to make yourself defenseless is pure stupidity! But they continue It, and call it “common sense.” Being so stupid should cause them to be BARRED from running for ANY office where they can actually personify their stupidity by making laws that get law-abiding people killed. Dumocrats vie with each other to come up with the stupidest laws, and anti-gun laws are only part of their stupidities. Warren wants “Medicare for All,” which is a pipe-dream. The cost ($52 TRILLION) over just ten years will absolutely BANKRUPT this country. She thinks she can finance it by taxing the rich. She really thinks the rich will not take steps to avoid any tax she levies, even if they actually made enough to pay this stupid theft of their earnings. Where we get such stupid politicians is a mystery to me, but we get them in large quantities, mostly in the Dumocrat Party. There are some in the GOP, but not nearly as many. (Truth About Guns)

"Leftist Policies At Fault"

Andrew Pollack, whose daughter, Willow, was murdered along with others, at the Stoneman Douglas High School, in Parkland, Florida. He rightly rejects the idea that anti-gun laws will, in any way, prevent such shootings, in the future. What will prevent them is actually PUNISHING students for their criminal acts instead of refusing to punish them to “reduce juvenile arrests.” You don’t “reduce crime” by refusing to punish the criminals. The shooter in Parkland PASSED a “background check” when he bought the gun he used in that massacre, because the school ignored previous criminal acts, so his record was clear, and he was able to pass that background check. Refusing to punish criminality among students to “reduce juvenile arrests” is a left-wing idea, and CONTRIBUTES to law-breaking, including mass shootings. Punishing student law-breakers is a good start, but allowing legally-armed teachers and other staff to bring their guns to school would be a good thing, too. But anti-gun fools will not hear of that, while they remain defenseless when somebody comes in and starts killing their students. Their ideas haven’t worked, so why not try something that WOULD? (Breitbart)

Jews Hate Firearms

They always have, and for several silly reasons, among them the Utopian thinking that, if you could eliminate guns, crime would disappear, and the world would be safer, and the “Ostrich ‘head-in-the-sand’ syndrome.” But there is no way we are ever going to get rid of all guns. Millions of guns are “out there,” and they aren’t going to go away. It is that “Ostrich Syndrome” that is responsible for the miserable deaths of six million Jews during WWII. If they had had guns, the Nazis would not have found them so easy to line up, put in rail cars, and send to the gas chambers. Of course, there are some Jews who are not so ignorant, and do arm themselves. They will not be so easily murdered as the “victims of the holocaust.” The stories of civilizations that allowed themselves to be disarmed, and then were murdered by the millions by their own government are rife. The Jews were not the only people the Nazis murdered by the millions. ALL dictators, and would-be dictators disarm their people first thing, when they take power because they know an armed population will not be easy to subdue, and they don’t want to die. (JPFO)

Anti-Gun Hysteria

It’s as if any gun is a living thing, an instrument of evil, never to be spoken of, by anti-gun fools, and sometimes people who CLAIM to be gun experts. In one case, the military called a bunch of soldiers together for a “briefing.” They were taught many different ways to keep their identities as soldiers a secret, including such things as never doing the same thing twice, so nobody could predict what you might do, at any given time. But there was one thing that was suspiciously missing from they “briefing.” Mention of being armed when off base. When asked why that was, the “briefer” replied with that age-old anti-gun saw, that you’d be more likely to shoot yourself than a criminal. This was being told to a bunch of SOLDIERS, who were well trained in gun use. The instructor was then asked if HE was armed when off base, to which he sheepishly replied, “Yes.” There it is, the usual, “for me, but not for thee” of anti-gun hysteria. In many cases, they recommend “running,” but I don’t think that’s anything real, since you can’t outrun a bullet. As a LAST RESORT, you can FIGHT, using anything you can get your hands on. Laptops, scissors, knives, coffee mugs. Everything BUT a gun. They just can’t get their minds around the idea of average people actually being armed, and trained in gun use. Except for them, of course. (National Review)

"Shoula Coulda Woulda"

This would be funny if it weren’t so serious. The mother of a gunman who tried to rob a store and got shot to death for his trouble, bemoans the fact that the store he tried to rob with his gun was not a “gun-free zone,” so there wouldn’t be a chance for the store clerk to defend himself. These parents are really angry that the intended victim was allowed to be armed, completely forgetting, of course, that their son WAS also armed, illegally. Mom said, “If there was to be a death, it was not the place of an employee at Pizza Hut. It was the place of the police.” Oh, yeah—when they finally arrived, long after a pizza place employee had been shot and killed by their son! Some people have strange ways of thinking. To bemoan someone being able to legally carry a gun for self defense because he killed a robber who was using a gun illegally is really stupid. But they’re too damned stupid to know that. It’s too bad for the robber that one of his intended victims was armed, and could defend himself. Maybe Mom should have taught her son better. Those parents should be slapped down for even thinking that way. People have a right to defend themselves against people like her son, who just ignore laws they don’t like. You point a gun at someone, you take your chances. He lost. (Bearing Arms)

A Win In Montana

In Montana they did what should be done routinely all over the country. The state Supreme Court struck down an unconstitutional law passed in Missoula to limit gun ownership and use early in the process. Such laws are patently unconstitutional and should be struck down routinely. But unfortunately, they are not. The Constitution states clearly that “the right of the people to bear arms shall not be infringed.” Such laws infringe on that right and, according to the Constitution, are not laws, at all. But they are often enforced until the Supreme Court declares them unconstitutional. That sometimes takes a long time, and by the time it happens, lives and reputations are ruined, families broken up and financially ruined; by an unconstitutional law. In Montana, they ‘short-circuited” that, and declared it unconstitutional before it could do much damage. Politicians who pass such laws should be punished, but will not be. They would have to themselves vote in a law for such punishment, and they will not. The Founders were geniuses in their writing of the Constitution, but they were not perfect. They thought the embarrassment of having a law declared unconstitutional would prevent politicians from trying to pass such laws, They were wrong. (The Gun Watch)