They Call Us Nazis

They call us Fascists; and terrorists; and many other nasty names because we want to retain our constitutionally guaranteed right to be armed for self defense. They have nothing else. They attempt to “pony up” figures to make people think wanting to be armed is somehow subversive, and fail, every time. So they “select” the figures they put out to make things LOOK like what they wish they were, and get caught, because the truth (which they deny) is so obvious to intelligent people. They know the Constitution’s Second Amendment says, “[T]he right of the people to keep and bear armed, shall not be infringed.” There couldn’t be anything more clear than that. Yet every law and regulation they propose IS an “infringement” upon that right, and if the Supreme Court ever rules definitively ON THE CONSTITUTION about that right, their position will collapse. So actually, it has already collapsed, but they will not admit it. And they have no cogent arguments in favor of their possession, so they just call us names. Think about it: if they ever got all their laws passed and came to enforce them, what would those enforcing them have in their hands? GUNS, of course. They want the only people in the country to HAVE guns be the enforcers. (Just common sense)

Didn't Think It Through

A bunch of ignorant anti-gun fools descended upon the office of Mitch McConnell, Senate Majority Leader, demanding tougher anti-gin laws. Mitch wasn’t even there, but if he had been, he might have asked them, “What laws would you have me pass?” They don’t know, and Mitch doesn’t know. That’s because there are non “tougher anti-gun laws” that will do ANYTHING to “reduce gun crime,” but will, in fact, INCREASE gun crime by disarming the law-abiding, making them “easy targets” for the law-breakers, who don’t obey ANY laws, much less ones that say they can’t be armed when they commit their crimes. One of the stupidest things I’ve ever seen was in W. Palm Beach, Florida, where the cops posted a sign saying, “No Crime Zone. No Criminal Activity Allowed.” Did they really expect a criminal to see the sign and say, “Hey! I’d better not commit any crimes because they say I can’t,” and go somewhere else to disobey the law? I don’t think so. Neither will law-breakers forego their use of guns to victimize the law-abiding because there’s a law against it. Mitch knows that. I know that. Why do those fools not know that? (Newsweak)

Destroying Self Defense

I’ve come to the conclusion that the anti-gun fools don’t care about safety for anybody—except for themselves. And especially not guns. Guns are only an impediment to their aims, in the hands of their intended victims.. They want to destroy the very concept of self defense for the law-abiding, while not doing much about the millions of ILLEGAL guns in circulation. Getting rid of legal guns is just “the first step.” Politicians are deathly afraid of an armed populace because of the nasty things they do to their constituents upon occasion. Not all politicians are this way, but way too many of them are. They beg for money to get elected to office and then think they’re better than the people who elected them to that office—and they don’t want those people to be armed and ready to repulse any attempt at victimization. By them, or other criminals. They go about surrounded by armed thugs while working diligently to deny us “peons” the same right to be armed for self defense. They think because they can afford to have others carry guns for them it is not somehow ironic. They probably hope for the day when the only people who are armed are people like them. (Just common sense)

A "Liberal" Gun Club?

How is this possible? Liberals are, by definition, AGAINST guns; totally. So how do a bunch of California liberals (one of whom describes herself as a “queer activist”) [Remember I’m just quoting her. Don’t shoot the messenger. –RT]. Some of these people regard Obama as being “too conservative.” How damned dumb can you get? They love guns but hate the NRA. Can you find a better contradiction? The NRA provides a valuable service beyond their advocacy of guns and their opposition to the silly gun laws this government (and previous ones) have made. I still can’t figure out what these people stand for. They hate the current useless anti-gun laws but promote their own useless anti-gun laws, but they are hard to pin down. You can't make this stuff up, people! (The Blaze)

"Gun Extremists Are Mysogynists"

That’s what Shannon Watts, founder of MOMS Against Guns (or something like that) says, anyway. My answer to that is that Watts is a fool. And my answer carries just about as much weight as her pronouncement. She has nothing else, so she just insults us. That’s because what she is pushing is a NOTHING law or laws. There is nothing concrete she can say to promote it, so she just calls us names. Like all liberals. I’ve asked many times why people like her are so stupid as to promote laws that do NOTHING to accomplish their aims, but instead, make it worse, and get no answer. Because there IS no answer. The only thing I can see as a reason for her to promote gun control is that she makes a handsome salary, paid out of the money gullible Americans “contribute. When you start simply insulting your opponents instead of giving them good reasons for your position, you HAVE no good reason for your position and you have already lost the argument. You just don’t know it yet, or won’t admit it. Gun control is not only unconstitutional on its face because it infringes on our constitutional right to “bear arms, it is a futile effort that only makes things worse by DISARMING the law-abiding, making them defenseless against the millions of ILLEGAL guns already out there. (MOM At Arms)

"Common Sense Gun Laws"

What is “common sense” about making laws that are impossible to enforce, that do nothing but make it easier for the lawless, with their ILLEGAL GUNS to victimize the law-abiding? I have asked that question of the anti-gun fools many times, and have never gotten an answer. Just abuse. Rather than even TRY and answer my question, they just call me names and IGNORE my question. What fuels their campaign for nothingness is beyond me. They have to know their laws don’t work, but still the make more and more of them, all unconstitutional because they “infringe” on our constitutional right to be armed. The next question is how many have died because of their ignorance? They obviously don’t care, as long as they have the power to tell us what we can, and cannot dd. Because that’s what gun control is all about. Power. Politicians who push gun control see it as simply a way to increase their power over the rest of us. Other politicians want to meet fewer guns in the hands of their intended victims when they come to steal their property later. The point is, any politician who supports gun control is lying to you when he/she tells you those laws are a good thing. They’re not. And they never will be. (Just common sense)

Determined to Be Stupid

Immediately after that Fort Worth, Texas church killings that were stopped cold by a private citizen (not a cop) with his own gun, Dumocrats lined up and demanded the law that allowed him to be armed be changed to disarm him and make him, and that entire congregation defenseless against the next fool who comes in to kill a few of them. What the hell is WRONG with these fools? And these re the people who want to run this country after the 2020 elections. They can’t see the truth that is before their eyes, that the BEST way to stop mass killers is to allow the law-abiding to be armed, so they can stop them. They look at it and immediately demand stupidity—the disarming pf the very people who STOPPED that planned mass shooting by killing the shooter. I don’t know what these people have been smoking, but it should be banned—for all the good that would do. It amazes me that an entire political party can be made up of stupid people, but it’s true. (Western Journal)

Media Inciting Panic

Why is the media working so hard to frighten us because of this pandemic? They never did it with the flu pandemics of yore, and they killed more people than this one has, or will. You can’t turn on your TV without the word “pandemic” or “Coronavirus” appearing on the screen. It’s like there is no other news in the world except the virus. They talk about it incessantly in terms of the “thousands of deaths” instead of noting that the number of deaths PER CAPITA is much LOWER than with previous flu epidemics and pandemics. Yes, this virus is easy to catch, and it CAN kill you, if you have underlying illnesses is can make worse. But the FACT is, it is NOT WORSE than previous flu pandemics, which most people hardly noticed. Yes, people are dying. But at a smaller rate than with the flu. Which means there’s some reason for the media to “beat this dead horse, allowing many politicians to use it as a means to take away many of our rights and threaten others. Just one right they’re trying to take away is our constitutionally guaranteed right to be armed for self defense. Under what reasoning, I don’t know. But anti-gun fools HAVE no reasoning ability, or they wouldn’t be pushing useless, unenforceable laws. (American Thinker)

"Quakin' In His Boots"

That has to describe the Ayatollah in Iran right now. We just took out his top general. The top man running his terrorist scheme all over the world, forcing him to go to the “Second Team” commander who wasn’t smart enough for the top spot as long as his top general was alive. The Ayatollah lives like a king. No, better than a king. Kings are usually forced to follow certain rules. He is not. He makes his own rules. Kings must follow “tradition” in who is to replace him when he dies. He is not so constrained. He gets to appoint his successor. But he doesn’t wear boots. He doesn’t need to, since they carry him when he goes out. But the very way we “took out” his top general must be very frightening for him since we could have taken HIM out just as easily. And he may well be on our list, next. If he thinks we don’t know where he is at all times, he has another think coming. We can keep track of his coming and going just as easily as we did his top general. And he has no viable defenses against drone strikes, which was proven again, the other day. And if we can get to his top general so easily, how safe is he? He has “made his bed and now must sleep in it.” He’d better “tone down” his rhetoric and his actions against us, or there might just be a drone in HIS future. He has “bitten off more than he can chew,” and he’d better swallow—or die. (Washington Post)

Gun Control Defies Logic

It cannot be denied. No one with a modicum of intelligence thinks gun control does ANYTHING to reduce gun crime, but INCREASES it, instead. It does this by disarming the law-abiding, making them “easy targets” for the lawless, who simply IGNORE the anti-gun laws and get their guns illegally. They think their highly touted “gun-free zones” keep bad guys from bringing guns in and victimizing people. Actually, all they do is tell the illegally-armed criminals where there is a “target-rich area” where they can bring their guns and do their damnedest without fear that the people there will be armed, because they DO obey gun laws, even if they think they’re stupid. Criminals and mass shooters SEEK THEM OUT for that reason. “Safe storage laws” simply make the legal guns harder to get into action when a law-abiding person is faced by a criminal with an illegal gun—which usually gets that law-abiding person killed. Each and every anti-gun law has ONE thing in common. It DOES NOT WORK. Yet the anti-gun fools insist on making more and more of them, and criticize us if we don’t agree. (Just common sense)

Sen. Yee Is An Imbecile

California State Senator Leland Yee (Democrat, as usual) is an immigrant from China. He should be sensitive to protecting the Constitution, since they had none there. But he isn’t. He was instrumental in the “bullet button” law that forced gun makers on the AR 15 to create a magazine removing system that required a TOOL to remove. This applies to the AR 15 but not to other weapons with the same firing rate and use the same ammunition like a Ruger Mini-14.. This law is based on the fact the gun “LOOKS” mean. Sen. Yee knows absolutely NOTHING about firearms. He only knows the AR 15 “looks mean” and he is horrified that people can actually BUY such a gun. But he doesn’t seem to be concerned about other guns just like it. And since he can’t just ban the gun, he makes a law to ban the magazine release. This writer asks: “Do we have to weld the magazine in place to satisfy these people?” This law simply shows they just want to make your gun useless for the purpose it is designed: self-defense. (Just common sense)

It Just Doesn't Work!

Every day somewhere, something happens to prove that the “time dishonored” gun law does NOTHING to keep guns out of the hands of those who should not be allowed within a mile of a gun. But the local anti-gun fools work hard to keep such stories as “local news” so it does not affect their false narrative. In Nashville the other day, 41 year old Delbert Porter, a convicted felon, was stopped by the cops. They found an empty gun holster on him, and searched the area around his vehicle, finding a handgun in the grass next to his vehicle. He admitted it was his, and told them he had more at home. This perfectly illustrated our contention that anti-gun laws DO NOT WORK. But is anybody listening? Not a chance. I don’t know what kind of stupid pills politicians are taking, but almost all of them agree that taking guns away from criminals is a good thing. And it is. But it can’t be done. A criminal who wants one will ALWAYS get one, one way or another. He will either buy it illegally, or just steal it, as this felon did this gun. So what do they do? Tighten their anti-gun laws. You know, the ones that didn’t stop this felon from being armed. (Bearing Arms)

Gun Sales Break Records

Obama said (a total Obama LIE) that a majority of Americans favor stringent anti-gun laws, which they do NOT. They’ve proved it by buying more guns than ever before, in anticipation of his promised much more stringent anti-gun laws. They’re telling him, “WE WILL NOT BE DISARMED!” If he persists in making these useless laws, he (and his cronies) will suffer. Notice that most of those pushing “gun control” laws are liberals. They’re frightened of gun-owners because they have plans to come and take what’s ours later on after making “laws” to make it legal and they don’t want to meet a gun at the door. Many cities (and states) are in financial trouble due to the BAD MANAGEMENT OF LIBERALS who run things in almost Every City that is in trouble. Yet we (not me) keep electing ignorant liberals (socialists) and even avowed COMMUNISTS to office. We need to stop doing that or we WILL go “down the tubes” along with them. (Washington Times)

A Wanna-Be Despot

In New Jersey, of course. New Jersey is liberal country. One of the worst in the nation. So who is surprised when their top cop comes out and blurts, “The Second Amendment is not “essential.” But that’s what Colonel Patrick Callahan. NJ’s highest-ranking cop, said the other day. That’s when the governor was struggling with what to declare “essential” and what to declare “non-essential..” under the “guidelines” for handling the Coronavirus. But he’s WRONG, as so many liberals ARE wrong, about everything. The Founders thought it was of sufficient importance as to give it it’s OWN Amendment, right behind the one that, among other rights, promised to guarantee us freedom of speech. And some hired lackey can’t change that just by saying so. If this virus shutdown continues, we are going to absolutely NEED to have our own guns to defend against the criminals who will be coming for what is ours, have their own illegal guns, and don’t hesitate t use them if opposed as they loot us. That’s besides the government looters who loot us with taxes, not guns. Unless necessary. (NJ2AS)

Guns In Chicago

Chicago made an unconstitutional law that effectively BANNED the purchase and ownership of guns in the city. It was a law that was patently unconstitutional and was “struck down” by District Judge Edmond Chang. Chicago gun-haters are incensed. They put up a montage of kids who were killed by guns and most of them were killed by ILLEGALLY-OWNED guns—in the hands of other gang members--which this unconstitutional law would not have changed a whit. But don’t try and tell that to the gun-haters. They don’t use logic. They only use their unreasoning hatred of guns. Luckily, there is one intelligent judge who declared the ordinance unconstitutional. Of course, Chi will take it all the way to the Supreme Court, and hopefully there will be a few intelligent Justices there. Judge Chang acknowledged there is a major problem with guns in Chicago, but failed to demonstrate how allowing the sale of firearms would pose a “serious risk” to society. And he’s right. They need to target illegal USE of firearms, not general ownership by honest people. (L. A. Times)

Nothing New Today

I spent the afternoon with my doctor today and when I got home I was wiped out. I just don’t have the energy for new posts, so there won’t be any until tomorrow. Sorry.

Gangs and Suicide

Those are the two most frequent causes of “gun violence,” with gang activity being the most prevalent. Suicide is a horrible thing, but I fail to see how any law would stop someone who truly wishes to kill himself from doing it. How are you going to punish him/her? He/she is dead. Gang activity is responsible for 80% of “gun crime.” Gang members are already breaking the law, so what do they care about breaking one more law? One that says they can’t be armed when they commit their other crimes? So at whom are all those anti-gun laws aimed? The law-abiding, of course. But the law-abiding don’t commit crimes, as a rule. Any that do are an exception. So how do all those anti-gun laws expect to stop “gun crime” by limiting the right to be armed for the law-abiding, while the lawless go right on getting their guns illegally? So why do gullible politicians succumb to the behest of the anti-gun fools and make more and more unenforceable, useless anti-gun laws? The only purpose I can see it that these politicians are either stupid or they are dictator wannabes who are frightened by an armed populace. They are “hedging their bets” for later, when they hope to come for what isn’t theirs, and they want to meet as few guns in the hands of their potential victims as possible. (Truth About Guns)

Gun RIGHTS Under Attack

Fred Gutenberg, whose daughter was killed in the Parkland School shooting, has let his grief overshadow his good sense when he said that, “Gun rights are not under attack anywhere in the U. S.” I don’t know where he gets that from, but the fact is, gun rights are under attack EVERYWHERE in the U. S. Each and every Dumocrat presidential candidate has promised to enact unconstitutional measures to “infringe” on our Second Amendment rights if elected. Other politicians all over the country work tirelessly to pass many different useless, unenforceable anti-gun laws that do NOT “reduce gun crime,” but in fact INCREASE it by disarming the law-abiding. This leaves the law-abiding, who DO obey laws defenseless against all the ILLEGAL guns out there in the hands of the law-breakers, who DO NOT obey laws. That this increases gun violence is a “no-brainer,” at least, to intelligent people. I question the intelligence of those who think that banning guns will stop violent crime. Or that they CAN “get rid of all guns.” Their laws only apply to the law-abiding, who are, for the most part, NOT the problem, making it easier for the law-breakers to victimize them. (Just common sense)

Most Victims Aren't Innocent

Anti-gun fools want you to think all gun victims are “innocent citizens” just out on their own business when shot. And that is true. Unfortunately, their “business” is often as unlawful as that of their shooters. Most gang members die before they are age 30, and there’s nothing “innocent” in their “business.” And they’re usually shooting back with their own illegal guns when shot. But the anti-gun fools never take that into consideration. They need to separate those “not-so-innocent” victims from those just “minding their own business” who are victimized by criminals of one kind or another. A recent study in Baltimore, MD showed that 82% of the victims had a criminal record. And when they’re killed in a shootout with another criminal, the anti-gun fools just get TWO gun deaths to report. The “average victim had 10.8 arrests with 4.1 for drug offenses. Which tells me the problem is not with guns, it’s with drugs and other criminal acts on both sides. The violence in most areas usually come from certain neighborhoods, where the “drug trade” persists. In Chicago, it’s the South Side. In Indianapolis it’s Kentucky Avenue, and in Denver it’s “Five-Points,” where many good people live, but where criminals also live, in abundance. I’ve lived in two of those cities, so I know that to be true. (Bearing Arms)

"No Guns Allowed"

These signs are popping up all over banning guns in places controlled by private individuals, such as restaurants, convenience stores, etc. It seems to me that the people posting these signs have a RESPONSIBILITY to protect people who come onto their premises without their guns, following the orders in these signs while CRIMINALS, who obey NO laws, NOR signs, retain their guns when entering. Personally, I would not ENTER an establishment posting such a sign; ever. Even if they later took it down. I have a constitutional RIGHT to be armed in self-defense and people who post such signs violate my right while on their property. As such, I will NOT give them my business—ever. (Mississippi Gun News)

Making It Impossible

The cops mostly spend about 110 hours on gun training for their officers. that’s a lot, isn’t it? Do they really need that much training? Probably, but they don’t get it, and they do okay, mostly, while they daily risk some illegally-armed fool shooting at them. The logical answer to school shootings, of course, is to allow teachers and other staff who have carry permits and significant training to bring their guns to school so they could stop a shooter from killing their students, since they are THERE, while the cops will take some time to arrive, while the shooter is killing children. Apparently the school administrators in suburban Cincinnati, Ohio, don’t think so, so they’re putting insurmountable roadblocks in the way of teachers and staff who could save a lot of lives, with a required 728 HOURS of intense training to qualify. This is an excellent example of the short-sightedness of school administrators all over. They think ONE uniformed “Resource officer” is enough, while potential shooters routinely “take him out first” before their shooting spree because he’s so easily identified and “dealt with” first. That shooter cannot know which teachers are armed, and that limits his choices to maybe NOT killing a bunch of people’s children. (Mom-At-Arms)

Instant Karma

A thug walked into a convenience store and “clocked” the female clerk. Then her husband, who was right behind him, ”clocked” him. He thought he had n “easy thing” with nobody behind the counter but a small woman. But he forgot to check behind him, where her husband stood. And he paid for it. It was “instant Karma.” He now has free room and board for a while before he can think about walking up to another woman and “clocking” her. A fool who would do such a thing had it coming when he got put down IMMEDIATELY after hitting this innocent girl. (Just common sense)

Silly Notions of Gun Grabbers

Alyssa Milano is a good example of the silly notions put out by those who would take our guns away and leave us defenseless against the lawless, who always, somehow, get their guns, illegally. It must be a by produce of the futility they feel at not being able to find ANY law to pass that actually WORKS. She says, “All those first-time gun buyers are future school shooters.” Upon what “science” she bases that, I don’t know, and neither does she. She’s just shouting crap in her frustration. Just like the other anti-gun fools who “demonstrate” against our lawmakers for their “inaction” on gun control when they don’t find SOMETHING to pass that does any good, so they don’t try. But the simple truth of the matter is, there ISN’T a “magic law” they can pass to stop gun crime. That’s an absolute. They’re looking in the wrong direction. They need instead to look toward arming the law-abiding so they can defend themselves. But NO! They’re so fixated on their abject hatred of guns they won’t even THINK about arming honest, dependable, law-abiding people so they can reduce gun crime, one shooter at a time. By killing them. (The Gun Feed)

"Cruel and Unusual Punishment"

The Constitution prohibits any law that constitutes “cruel and unusual punishment” for any “crime.” So, of course, Virginia passes a law allowing 12 months’ imprisonment for EACH and every magazine held by a citizen that holds 12 rounds or more. One month in prison for EACH magazine that can hold 12 rounds or more. If that isn’t “cruel and unusual,” I don’t know what is. Yet Virginia has passed that, and other unconstitutional laws, KNOWING they are unconstitutional, which should be a crime in itself, for anybody connected with the making of such a law. Unfortunately, the Founders erred in not making knowingly passing unconstitutional laws a crime for those passing them, so they get away with passing them into law, and enforcing that law on an unsuspecting public, until the Supreme Court gets around to declaring the law unconstitutional. By then, much damage has been done. People’s lives have been ruined, money and property has been lost, and people have died because they are defenseless against the millions of ILLEGAL guns out there in the hands of law-breakers. And when those laws are declared unconstitutional, nobody ever goes back and corrects SOME of the errors that destroy people’s lives. Just as they don’t go back and reverse policies put in place by a president (Obama) who is a president illegally, since he was born outside the United States. (Washington Examiner)

What Are We Doing?

To “combat the virus,” politicians are “confiscating” our constitutional right to guns for self defense against the criminals, who already have their guns. They got them illegally, as they get everything. Then they “early release” even more criminals, who will go out and get guns (illegally, of course) so they can victimize the law-abiding, who are defenseless against them because the government took their right to have a gun (legally) away from the law-abiding. And to cap it off, they’re encouraging everybody to wear a face mask, to guard against the virus. What’s wrong here? Everything they do, it seems, is going to be responsible for a spike in crime, which is already beginning. I know we have to do certain things, to keep this virus at bay. But do we have to release criminals so they can victimize us? What does that accomplish—except maybe to give us more healthy criminals to victimize us while wearing the masks that have become ubiquitous, to hide their identity. Yes, masks CAN limit spreading the virus. Buy why not get a transparent face mask, instead of the ones that help them hide their identity? (Just common sense)

Registry Doesn't Save Lives

It only makes it easier to find a shooter IF—and ONLY IF—that gun was bought legally, which is usually not the case when it comes to guns obtained for nefarious purposes. It is only an AFTER the killing that it can do anything, at all. Of course, other anti-gun laws similarly do nothing to stop, or even slow down “gun crime,” but serve to INCREASE it, by disarming the law-abiding, making them “easy targets” for the lawless, who mostly get their guns “under the table.” If this wording sounds familiar to you, it’s because I have written them many times before. They are almost “boilerplate.” I could keep them in a permanent file from which to “cut and paste” into articles I write, while they are roundly ignored by the anti-gun fools as they go about making more and more such useless, unenforceable laws while KNOWING they don’t work. It is my considered opinion that they care not about “gun crime,” and want to eliminate the very concept of self defense. Gun safes only make int impossible for a potential victims of gun crime to get their guns into action fast enough to avoid being killed. “Gun-free zones” only give illegal gun users a place where they can be pretty sure the law-abiding will not be armed there, making them easy targets” for their ILLEGAL guns. Other laws are just as useless. (Ammoland)

What to Write

It’s getting so I can’t find anything to write that I haven’t already written more than once before. That’s because the anti-gun fools try the same thing over and over again and they don’t work. Then I point that out, and they ignore me and go out and do it all over again. They say they want to “protect people” by getting rid of guns, but they don’t. It soon becomes obvious that their target is not the gun, but the very concept of self defense. It shows every time a civilian uses something—gun or something else—to defend himself, the cops always take it away from him. They just don’t want people to have any legal means of defending themselves. I once had a cop accost me because I had one of those metal flashlights sticking out of my back pocket. He said, “You know that could be used as a weapon, don’t you?” To which I replied, “Yes. And if I ever do, we can discuss it then, can’t we?” But that makes it pretty plain their way of thinking. They know there are millions of ILLEGAL guns already out there, but they don’t give a damn. They’re in the hands of criminals, crazies, and Islamic terrorists—people to which they’re already at odds and that gives them an excuse to just shoot them. But that cop is right. There are many innocent-looking things that can be use as a weapon—like a bar of soap in a sock, or a one-pound dumbbell in your mom’s purse. Things they can’t have an excuse to take away from you UNTIL you use it in self defense. Anything with any degree of heft, like a heavy ash tray, can be a weapon, and those metal flashlights can do a lot of damage to an assailant if he attacks you with anything less than a gun. (Just common sense)

An Illegal Suit

It’s illegal to sue gun makers for the misuse of their guns. But Kansas City and “Everytown Against Guns (or something like that)” sued one, and won, forcing it into bankruptcy. They had no real proof of any wrongdoing, but they sued them, anyway. And a liberal judge, who apparently doesn’t give a Damn about the law, allowed the suit to go forward to allow a win. Kansas City blames that gun maker for the high crime in this liberal-run city, rather than blame their own silly anti-gun laws that don’t do anything to “fight gun control.” It’s easy to blame something other than your own mistakes for bad things, especially if you can count on a corrupt judge to go along with it. Suing gun makers for the “sins” of their customers is akin to suing auto makers for the sins of their customers—something they have no control over. I just hope I haven’t given car-haters an idea. Again I will say, these people don’t give a damn about “gun crime.” They know their laws do nothing to stop, or even slow it down. What it DOES do is destroy the very concept of self defense—and I believe that’s what they’re after, for whatever nefarious reason. (Bearing Arms)

Just When We Needed It

They tell us we can’t have it. While some states—and the federal government—have ruled that gun stores are “essential businesses,” California, true to their gun-hating ignorance, have ordered gun stores and associated businesses closed. It’s unconstitutional, but they have done it, anyway—and it will continue until the courts declare it AS unconstitutional, which may be a long time down the road. That’s how liberals work. Make unconstitutional laws and enforce them until somebody who has enough money to spend goes to court, and the court gets around to acting. So meanwhile, the lawless—who don’t bother obeying anti-gun laws—have a “Field day” victimizing people who DO obey their silly, stupid, unenforceable, USELESS anti-gun laws, which they claim reduces gun crime, but does not. It only makes gun crime easier for the lawless. The PEOPLE, however, actually realize that, if this Coronavirus thing keeps going, and misguided politicians keep the economy closed, there is going to be hell to pay, and we will need guns in the hands of honest people to effectively oppose those in the hands of the lawless. So they go out and try to buy guns, while the politicians mostly do everything they can to make it impossible. (Bearing Arms)

It Damned Sure IS!

Amy Klobachar says “Mandatory gun buybacks are NOT gun confiscation.” Amy, Amy, Amy! What PLANET do you live on? What is there about MANDATORY that you don’t understand? If you’re a gun owner (legal only) and the politicians in your area hold a MANDATORY gun buyback that means you MUST bring your gun and sell it to them for whatever lowball price they’re going to pay you. Then you go back home, gunless. What’s the difference between that and “gun confiscation,” Amy? You can’t fool intelligent people by just saying such things, Amy. Mandatory (forced) gun buyback IS gun confiscation because you are TAKING their guns while “paying” them a pittance—a price YOU set, and which they MUST accept, whether or not they want to accept it. That’s confiscation. You can’t deny that by saying so. Only the gullible will believe you. People who have ILLEGAL guns will not be bringing their guns in for you to “confiscate.” They violated the law to buy or steal them, and they aren’t going to obey the law and let you take them away. They NEED them to use in victimizing those gullible people who bring their guns to you and go home defenseless.  (Washington Examiner)

Real Gun Control

Some fanciful wags say that gun control is “hitting your target.” They say it as a joke, But actually, they’re right. In reality, real gun control is a gun in the hand of a potential victim of a criminal with an illegal gun. Not too many criminals come back to shoot people after they’re shot to death. Some people think that is a joke, too. But it is not. It’s a basic truth. Parity is of vital importance when it comes to defending yourself against a law-breaker coming to victimize you with the gun he or she has gotten illegally. Fact is, no amount of anti-gun laws that disarm the law-abiding have ever done anything to stop, or even slow down “gun violence, so the ONLY effective response is to shoot the law-breaker before he can shoot you. But anti-gun fools are so fixated on disarming law-abiding people thay can’t see this. So they keep working to get their tired, useless, unenforceable anti-gun laws passed, each one of which is unconstitutional, since is “infringes” upon our guaranteed constitutional right to “bear arms.” All that does is get people killed by those illegally armed criminals. Guns in the hands of the law-abiding are the ONLY real “gun control,” making that joke about “hitting your target" a true thing. (Just real common sense)

Give Them 48 Hours

Lots of people try to get guns because somebody threatened them. So the national 48-hour waiting period Bloomberg wants to impose only gives the threatener 48 hours in which to kill them before they can obtain the means to self defense. Unless they get a gun illegally. No waiting periods, there. It is an “infringement” upon our constitutionally guaranteed RIGHT to “bear arms” for self defense. Waiting periods only get people killed, as do all the other stupid, silly, anti-gun laws. And they are ALL unconstitutional because they are all “infringements” upon that right. People like Bloomberg think they know what’s best for all of us because he has more money than he can spend in three lifetimes. Money doesn’t buy intelligence. But then, he isn’t intelligent enough to know that. You tell the anti-gun fools their laws are not only NOT effective to stop, or even slow down “gun violence” and they laugh at you. They think YOU’RE stupid—which is usually a problem with people of little intelligence. They think they’re the “smartest knife in the drawer,” but stupid people are too stupid to know how stupid they are. (Breitbart)

We're Gonna Find Out

I’ve talked many times about why people should spend some time thinking about what we would do if there were no cops. And I think we’re going to find out, soon. Cops in some places are refusing to arrest certain criminals because of the pandemic. Prosecutors are refusing to prosecute them. Cops themselves are getting sick of the virus because many times, they have no option but to get closer to a fleeing suspect than the mandated six feet, or lose them, altogether. Some are just staying home, out of the fear generated by the news media, which flogs the dangers of the virus hourly. Pretty soon there will be no cops to go around, so what are we going to do when some depraved individual, carrying a gun he got illegally, comes to victimize us? The answer is simple: we’re going to shoot him before he can shoot us. The only REAL gun control is a gun in the hand of the potential victim of an armed criminal so he can be “taken down.” Kill enough of them, and you WILL make a dent in “gun crime.” Something none of the laws the anti-gun fools get made have ever done. (Liberty Park Press)

It Just Doesn't Do It

Like all the anti-gun laws, “assault rifle bans” do NOTHING to top, or even slow down mass shootings. Why is that, you ask? Because potential mass shooters, who are contemplating a VERY serious crime, just are not concerned about violating a silly little law that says they can’t get the guns they want to use to kill a lot of people legally. With one or two exceptions, every mass shooting that ever happened was accomplished with an ILLEGAL gun. So how the hell do they figure to stop mass killings by making a law against the very gun they get illegally? There is one thing that is common to ALL anti-gun laws. That is that THEY DON’T WORK. Not only that, they help to INCREASE gun violence by disarming the law-abiding, who are the intended targets of the users of illegal guns. Anti-gun fools are too stupid to see this. They have to know their laws just make things worse, but they keep making them, while criticizing those of us who ARE smart enough to know they don’t work and oppose their making. (Breitbart)

It Must Be Frustrating

The anti-gun fools, led by “MOMS Against Guns” (or something like that) are incensed that President Trump would have the temerity to make a “ruling” that gun stores and shooting ranges are “essential businesses.” It must be very frustrating to be pushing something so patently dumb as gun control. She can’t honestly point to ONE gun law that has ever stopped, or even slowed down gun crime, but she, and her cohorts continue to push them as if they actually worked. Her gullible politicians, which include every Dumocrat presidential candidate and even some prior presidents, push gun control too, in spite of the FACT that it DOES NOT WORK, has never worked, and never will work. It’s just something for the anti-gun fools to do, from which to make handsome salaries, using the money their equally gullible supporters give them. The president shows a spark of intelligence about gun control, and that “tears them a new one.” Trump supports REAL gun control, and that is a gun in the hands of the law-abiding, to use to “take out” the lawless who try to victimize them, therefore reducing gun crime, one gun at a time. Which is a lot more than their laws have ever done. (Breitbart)

Because They Can

In Oregon they are passing many unconstitutional laws, “because they can.” ANY law that “infringes” upon the Second Amendment RIGHT to be armed IS unconstitutional BECAUSE it infringes on that right. But stupid lawmakers pass them anyway, and enforce them until somebody spends enough money on lawyers to get it before the Supreme Court, and the Supreme Court gets around to ruling. Then it depends on how the Supreme Court rules, and even if they declare it unconstitutional, the damage has been done. People’s lives have been ruined, money is lost, people are “stained” with the felon label. Some of this cannot be undone, even if the law is declared unconstitutional. But that’s what those lawmakers depend on. The slowness of GETTING their laws declared unconstitutional, coupled with the cost of getting it before the Court. Then they can immediately pass a similar law and enforce THAT until the next time it can be brought before the Court. Meanwhile, gun owners suffer and are kept as unarmed targets, BECAUSE they, unlike law-breakers, OBEY the law, even if it is a stupid law. (Just common sense)

If It Only Worked

I might even be in favor of gun control it it ever started to work. But so far, not a single one of their highly-touted anti-gun laws has ever stopped a single shooting. “Gun-free zones,” for instance, are not only completely useless in reducing gun violence, they INCREASE it. The lawless, who want to victimize the law-abiding, SEEK OUT gun-free zones in which to do their nefarious deeds because they can be pretty sure the law-abiding—who obey their silly laws—will be unarmed there, and completely defenseless. Schools are ALL gun-free zones, by law. Yes, some do allow UNIFORMED “resource officers” to carry their guns there, but they are worse than useless since they are so easy to identify and “deal with” BEFORE the planned executions of students and other staff. Some schools today have “wised up” and are allowing teachers and other staff who have concealed carry permits and extensive training to bring their guns—and these DO reduce the amount of gun violence in their schools because a potential shooter cannot know which ones ARE armed, and that creates a “chilling effect” on would-be mass shooters who would prefer not being shot down before they can complete their massacres. That’s only two of the best known anti-gun laws that have proved useless in reducing gun violence while INCREASING it. Look at any others and you will see the same results. (Just common sense)

Don't Mess With Grandma

She fired a warning shot when she saw him beating up on her elderly female friend with a baseball bat. He ran off and was not seen again until the cops found him. He was arrested for attempted murder, burglary and trespassing. He burst into her home and started beating her female friend with a baseball bat and this 71-year-old woman took aim and shot, missing. “I was tryin’ to kill him ‘cause he was trying to kill my friend,” she said. If this woman had not had a gun, both women would undoubtedly have been killed. There will be no charges against this woman, according to the cops, who say they’re confident she fired in self-defense. Additionally, the assailant was injured in his fight with the little old lady he was attacking. Cops are proud of her and say she will not face charges because this is not New York City or Washington, DC, where there laws against firing “warning shots.” Or just HAVING a gun. (Just common sense)

Frustration City

The anti-gun fools must be frustrated. IF all their anti-gun laws are actually meant to do what they claim they’re supposed to do. None of them has ever worked that way. What they HAVE worked to do is make it easier for the lawless, who do NOT obey laws, to victimize the law-abiding with their ILLEGAL guns. I am frustrated because, no matter how often I ask them why they continue to make their useless, unenforceable, anti-gun laws if they DON’T work the way they say they will, I get no answer. Just more insults. They are further frustrated when some lawmakers, who are obviously smarter than they are, refuse to make more of their silly laws. They accuse them of “doing nothing about gun control, but that raises the question: what SHOULD they do? What CAN they do that will have ANY effect on “gun crime” except to make it worse? These politicians who buy the bullsh-t put out by the anti-gun fools have an ulterior motive, which I think is more power to tell us what we can and cannot do. But the anti-gun fools re another story. I think theirs is a “created industry” to make themselves money from those gullible enough to buy their bullsh-t. What they demand will never work, and they have to know that. But it keeps them busy and they make a lot of money doing it. And they know there will never be an end to it. (Just common sense)