Gun control gets cut down by Occam’s Razor

In the current debate concerning guns in America, I am always astounded by the twisting of facts, logic and reason that the gun control zealots put forth in order to defend their case.  By all sense and logic, gun control cannot be viewed as anything other than a means to oppress a free people and to disarm the law abiding.

When looking at the pro-rights argument against the pro-control argument one needs to cut through the hyperbole and sensationalism with Occam’s razor.

Occam’s razor, for those of you who don’t know, is a term used in logic and problem solving.  Plainly put, Occam’s razor is the process in which, when you have two competing theories, the one that makes the least amount of assumptions is most likely the correct one.  By using the “razor” to cut away the most assumptions you are left with the correct answer.

To apply this to the gun debate, I argue that gun control, when cut to ribbons by the razor cannot stand.

The argument for the 2nd Amendment.

1. An armed people are a free people

That’s pretty much the only assumption that needs to be taken into consideration for the 2nd Amendment.  Freedom does not guarantee safety, it does not ensure absolute happiness, it only assumes that if people are armed they will be free so long as they remain so.

The argument for gun control requires a lot more assumptions to be made.

1. The 2nd Amendment is about hunting
2. The founding fathers didn’t know what weapons would be available in the future and wouldn’t have written the 2nd Amendment if they had
3. Gun control will stop criminals from getting guns
4. The government will never turn on its people
5. The police are enough to keep you safe
6. Criminals will follow gun laws
7. Shall not be infringed doesn’t mean that the 2nd Amendment can’t be infringed
8. Gun control only fails because we don’t have enough of it
9. Only the government needs guns, law abiding people don’t
10. Armed citizenry couldn’t stop tyranny

Those are just 10 assumptions that I have heard the gun control zealots use that come to mind.  I’m sure many of those reading this have heard even more.

The long and short of it is this, you have to make a LOT of assumptions in order to get on board with gun control while the 2nd Amendment only requires you to make 1 assumption.  And that assumption just seems so rational and has been proven in history that it boggles my mind that people still choose to deny it.

So the next time you find yourself in a war of words with some “enlightened” gun control advocate, don’t forget to bring your razor.

 

Revolution era Assault Weapons

We are hearing a lot of talk from those who seek to control the American people and limit their liberty, questioning why anyone would need a so called “assault weapon”.  While it is humorously ironic when British blowhard Piers Morgan spouts off criticizing our 2nd Amendment, it is a little more disturbing when American politicians follow suit.

Since many politicians choose to ignore history and walk all over the Constitution, it is good to talk a look back and see where these radical notions of an armed society and liberty came from.

As I have long pointed out on this blog, the 2nd Amendment isn’t about shooting deer, it’s about shooting tyrants.  Our nation was FOUNDED on such a notion.  The only people who would throw off the chains of tyranny and then undercut the ability for future generations to do so would be tyrants themselves.  I do not view George Washington, Ben Franklin or Thomas Paine in this light and I wonder how today’s gun control zealots can twist the history of our founding so cockeyed that they would make tyrants of our founding fathers.

The Colonists during this time had petitioned the King, wrote to Parliament, and took all the peaceful avenues of redress that they could.  Finally, when their grievances were ignored, their property seized, taxes crippled them and they were denied the rights that their English cousins enjoyed they said ‘enough’.

Now, the gun control zealots like to mock American gun owners today by trying and marginalize the 2nd Amendment saying that when it was written they were talking about muskets and that muskets are the only thing that the 2nd Amendment protects.

Of course, that is like saying the 1st Amendment only protects a hand cranked, single page printing press.  But I digress.

The founding fathers were talking about muskets and early rifles.  Why?  Because those were the most advanced weapons of the day and with those weapons a nation was founded.

The colonists had equal, and in many cases,  superior firearms than that of the British.

The British standard issue rifle of the day was the Brown Bess

The Brown Bess was in production for almost 55 years before the start of the Revolution.  It, or one of its derivations  was in the hands of nearly every British redcoat during the war.  And talk about an “assault” weapon, the Brown Bess came with a bayonet 17 inches long, used when the British lines would literally assault the enemy position.

While the Americans where made up of militias and were less uniformed in their selection of firearms than those of their enemy, in some senses that gave the American the advantage.  The Colonists, by and large, brought their own firearms to the fight.  While many used derivatives of the Brown Bess, the Americans excelled at precision shooting with the Pennsylvania/Kentucky Long Rifle.  The reason for the accuracy of up to 400 yards was due to the rifling of the bore which made the round fly straighter.

If gun control advocates had their way, the Colonists would have needed to use bow and arrows against the British because using their rhetoric, “who needs to shoot something 400 yards away”.

While revolution should never be the first response, the opportunity to cast of chains of tyranny should be a viable option in order to preserve liberty.  As such, weapons are needed that are on par with those carried by said tyrants army.

If the Colonists were denied the use of arms equal or superior to that of the army of King George, then we might very well still be bending the knee to the Crown.

To limit the 2nd Amendment to something smaller than its intent (such as hunting or personal defense) is to limit the essence of American liberty and freedom.  The 2nd Amendment is the line in the sand, and if it is allowed to be brushed away then the freedom that we enjoy today will exist only by the whims of those in charge.

Let us stand resolute to ensure that the leaders of America serve and never rule.

 

Hypocrisy…I name thee Feinstein. Exempts self from Gun Ban

Feinstein’s list of banned weapons has ballooned to a whopping 157 name brands covering some 2,200 different types of guns.  This has gone beyond a simple so-called “assault weapons ban” to include rifles, shotguns and pistols.

The complete list can be found here: http://shtfplan.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/Feinstein-Weapons-Ban.jpg

Not only is Feinstein looking to get the ball rolling on the slippery slope that is the complete removal of the 2nd Amendment from the Constitution, she has the hypocritical audacity to make sure that she and other elected officials are exempt from the legislation.

This type of aristocratic “do as I say not as I do” bull is one of the things that found a bunch of colonists tossing off the yoke of British oppression some 200+ years ago.  We are not subjects to the whims of our elected officials, to be lorded over by those who believe that there are two America’s.  One in which the rules only apply to those who are not in power.

Where does Dianne Feinstein and her gun control cronies get off thinking that they can pass laws disarming the American people yet exempt themselves to laws they don’t care to follow?

That my friends, is TYRANNY.  And it is the reason we have the 2nd Amendment to begin with.  Who knows how many other laws that the Senator and her cadre of craven controlling con men wish to exempt themselves from once they disarm the people.

We must continue to fight to ensure that never happens lest we become a country of two America’s.  One in which those in power are exempt from the law and one in which those who are not must suffer under it.

 

 

 

Life under despotic rule

A man is walking on what passes for a street in his village.  The ground rocks are jagged and the surface uneven.  The rats aren’t as bad as they usually are, but the smell of human waste and decay still hang in the air. He knows that the odor will be more pungent when the sun rises to heat the day once more.

But the man knows that bad smells are the least of his worries as he tries to go about his business finding bread or flour or rice for his family so they do not starve.  The regional warlord holds an iron grip on the food supply for the mans village and all the neighboring ones.  The warlord chooses who is allowed to eat what, he doles out the amounts yet for him and those who are willing and able to pay him off, they are above his edicts.

In this place, as in many places where tyrants rule, money softens the tyrants grip while it strangles those who cannot pay the rate.  To the poor and destitute he denies them food donations.  To new born babies he denies them formula.

He takes and takes and takes from his people, their choices, their money by adding new “taxes” time and again, and he will not let anyone pry the grip of power from his hands.  When a natural disaster hits his soldiers deny access to outside aid so that another group will not pose a threat to his power, yet his people die from the raiding by bandits in the aftermath.

The man has found some food and drink, it is small yet in this village you do not have a choice for the warlord does not care who goes hungry.

The man must hurry home now as it is late and he is of a different tribe than the warlord, his skin darker than he who rules.  The man hurries because of two threats he faces.  One is from the bandits that roam around his village looking to prey upon the hapless traveler.  He lives in a poor village and these bandits reap what others sow.

The other threat is worse for at least you can try and fight the bandits.  The warlords men swoop in like wraiths and what little freedom others in the land may have are denied those who live in the warlords region.  If he is caught by them he will be a victim of their oppression.  They will take his dignity by force.  The only hope is that they tire quickly of their sport and do not choose to punish him out of turn.

Tonight the man is not lucky.  A little ways from his hovel and his family the warlords reavers descend upon the man.  They demand to see his papers, demand he explain himself as to why he is there at that hour.  The man says he was simply getting food for his family.  The reavers are unconvinced.  They knock his parcels from his hand and throw him against a wall.  They tell him that if he moves he will be a dead man.

Their hands grope him and grab him.  They tear at pockets and pull at laces.  From the surrounding hovels the people watch.  Some hide quickly lest the reavers turn their wrath on them, others who believe and follow the warlord unquestioningly assume the man’s guilt and are happy to see the reavers stop at nothing in proving it.

The man hangs his head, sorrowful that he is treated in such a way.  He is thankful that he no longer has his gun.  The warlord decreed that they were to be illegal and that anyone other than his reavers or his gilded elite found having one would be tossed in his pits, not to see the light of day until decades pass.

After the reavers have had their fill of crushing the mans spirit and taking his pride, they give him a warning not to cause trouble and let him go.  The man picks up the little food he was carrying and continues on his way.

“Almost home” the man said to himself…almost.

The other kind of danger comes from the darkness.  A group of bandits armed with sticks and pipe, ooze from the shadows.  They demand the mans money and his food.  The man, thinking of his hungry family thinks to call the warlords men back but knows they would not make it in time and that the bandits would beat him all the more severe.

The man tries to rush past and almost makes it until he is knocked down and beaten.  His bones begin to break, blood begins to pour.  There are others who see this as well, but what can they do.  They are like the man, they have no way to stop the beating of these big numerous bandits.

When it is over, the food is gone and all his money.  The man continues his crawl home and hopes for luckier days.  That is all he can do because this is like under despotic rule.  This is life in New York City.

—————————————————————————————————————————————

As you can tell I changed some words like calling the outer boroughs a village and the city of New York a region.  I made Bloomberg’s title warlord and his police, reavers.  But this was to help you have an open mind about what life in New York is like.

Bloomberg’s war on food.  He limits the serving size of food even though that targets poorer people the most. Going so far as denying food donations to homeless shelters.

He has ordered hospitals to lock up baby formula and not to offer it to new mothers.

He did not allow the National Guard in the city after Hurricane Sandy to help quell the looting.

He fully supports “Stop and Frisk” which eliminates the 4th Amendment when walking in New York City.

He has all but eliminated the 2nd Amendment in the city, save for those with enough money or connections to circumvent his ban.  This leaves the law abiding defenseless against criminals.

This is life in New York.  You are not free to eat what you want, not free from unreasonable search and seizures, not free to have due process, not free to defend yourself with firearms and not free from tyranny.

I tell you this story because now that New York State has hopped on the Bloomberg crazy train with their draconian gun control, it is important to realize what the future of this country would look like if New York City was made the norm.

The line must be drawn there…no further.

 

Constitution is not the only important document

As gun owners, we put a lot of stock in what the Constitution, specifically the Bill of Rights, has to say.  But yet, that is not the only document that the Founding Fathers wrote that was important.  I’m speaking of the Declaration of Independence.  The Declaration was one of the most important things ever written and when signed changed the world forever.

Never had a colony broken away from its mother country.  It was a game changer and those that signed it were trail blazers.  As we look at the signing of the Declaration, perhaps through the fog of time we have lost perspective of what it actually did or says.

This wasn’t some Sunday afternoon folly perpetrating among some old biddies playing bridge.  This was an act of war, a declaration of rebellion and a call to arms.

That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

The Right of the People to alter or abolish it.  But this isn’t to be taken lightly, so that every time the government says something minor you disagree with you break out the torches and set DC aflame.  The Founding Fathers understood that this was a serious undertaking.

But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

But I ask you, how exactly can one to throw off such a government?  Only through the use of Arms.  For a a tyrannical government will not yeild to fair and honest elections, and the Peoples freedom of speech ends at the point of a the Governments rifle.

So, in understanding that they were forming a nation by overthrowing tyranny, the Founding Fathers realized that history may have need to repeat itself in the future.  And should it come again that:

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

The people would have the means in which to enact such a separation.  The Declaration of Independence led directly to the need of enumerating the Right to Keep and Bear Arms in the Bill of Rights.

One cannot be free if one is not able to defend themselves from tyranny.

 

Martin Luther King Jr. – Man of peace but no pushover

In 1956 Martin Luther King Jr. applied for a concealed carry permit in Alabama since he was getting so many death threats.  As you can imagine, since gun controls roots were founded in racism and keeping blacks unarmed was the point of gun control, King was denied.

Now, some of you may think that MLK Jr wanting to carry a gun is incongruent with him being a non violent civil rights activist.  It’s not and here’s why; just because you preach non violence does not mean you need to be a sacrificial lamb to anyone who is going to harm you or your family.

Dr. King believed that through non-violence interaction with the government his dream of equality could be realized.  But he was not naive nor stupid and did not believe that non violence would protect him or his family from those with evil in their hearts.

So Martin Luther King Jr, a black Republican pastor who preached non violence and who had quantifiable reasons to be allowed to carry concealed (the multitude of death threats) was denied a permit.

If we allow gun control to force us to ask permission in order to exercise our rights, then we leave the door open for the government to say no.  And if Dr. King wasn’t good enough to get a concealed carry permit, then what hope do the rest of us have.

 

A snapshot of the world where gun control wins

In a rash of crime criminals are proving that they don’t need firearms in order to commit their acts of brutality.

In a recent trend another person was beaten and thrown onto subway tracks, this time in Philadelphia.  Philly, I remind you is a den of anti-gun sentiment with Mayor Nutter leading the charge.  Hmmm…i wonder what could have helped this woman stop a larger more physically imposing male assailant from beating her and tossing her onto the subway tracks?  According to the gun control zealots it was better for her to nearly die than to have the ability to defend herself with a firearm.

A woman in New Jersey, one of the most restrictive states for the law abiding to get a firearm to defend themselves, was brutally stabbed repeatedly while she was with her baby inside a Bed Bath & Beyond.  Could a woman defend herself and her baby with a firearm against an attacker with a knife?  Gun Control zealots would in New Jersey would prefer you not find out.

In a Dallas Hardware Store, a clerk had his throat slashed and was beaten with a hammer and left for dead.  I wonder if the gun control zealots would think the perpatrator of this attack would be easily found if only his hammer was registered.

A woman had her face slashed at the Fayette Mall in Lexington KY.  I’m not sure how this happened because Fayette Mall lists as number 20 of their Code of Conduct that weapons are not allowed in the mall except by police officers.  This is not only a Gun Free Zone it is a Weapons Free Zone.  Of course, only the law abiding listen, so this group of slashers gets to have a pick of unarmed targets to attack.

Everyone of these situations occurred when a smaller, weaker, or outnumbered victim was violently attacked.  A gun in their hands would have been an equalizer to the roving animals of this world that walk upon two legs.

Yet, the gun control zealots see these four stories as a victory.  So some people got stabbed and were put into a hospital, a pretty girl has her face scarred for life, a man is beaten so badly he can’t even speak to the police to tell them what happened…none of the attackers got shot.  And at the end of the day that is what the Brady Campaign and Mayors Against Illegal Guns must want because every law that they have suggested, pushed for, and/or implemented creates a world where only criminals benefit.

 

 

Sheriffs tell Obama he can take his attack on the Constitution and shove it

Beginning with Sheriff Mueller, a 28 year law enforcement veteran, a number of Sheriffs around the country have begun to voice their opposition to the unconstitutional gun grab being orchestrated by the Obama administration.

Linn Country Sheriff Tim Mueller wrote a compelling letter to Vice President Biden, the head of Obama’s 2nd Amendment Hit Squad, eloquently stating his intentions should the federal government attempt to undermine the citizens right to keep and bear arms.

“In the wake of recent criminal events, politicians are attempting to exploit the deaths of innocent victims by advocating for laws that would prevent honest, law-abiding Americans from possessing certain firearms and ammunition magazines.”

“We are Americans.  We must not allow, nor shall we tolerate, the actions of criminals, no matter how heinous the crimes, to prompt politicians to enact laws that will infringe upon the liberties of responsible citizens who have broken no laws.”

“Any federal regulation enacted by Congress or by executive order of the president offending the constitutional rights of my citizens shall not be enforced by me or by my deputies, nor will I permit the enforcement of any unconstitutional regulations or orders by federal officers within the borders of Linn County, Oregon.”

“In summary, it is the position of this sheriff that I refuse to participate, or stand idly by, while my citizens are turned into criminals due to the unconstitutional actions of misguided politicians.”

This isn’t some whimsical note that some guy sent the administration.  This is a man, elected by his county as the highest ranking law enforcement officer in that county, saying not only that he doesn’t like unconstitutional laws, not only will he not enforce them, but that he will not stand idly by while the federal government tries to enforce them.

This Sheriff is willing to actively defend his people and their rights from the encroaching hand of a federal government drunk on it’s own highfalutin pomposity.

And it would appear he is not alone.  On top of states pushing legislation to arrest federal agents who attempt to impose unconstitutional federal laws in their states, a number of other Sheriffs across the country have followed Mueller’s lead and have vocally announced that they too will not betray their citizens by allowing unconstitutional laws to be enforced in their counties.

In Oregon for starters, 3 other sheriffs have joined Mueller to stand against tyranny.  Sheriffs Bishop, Zanni and Hensley have promised their citizens that they will stand up for them against any federal law that would see their liberty denied and their freedom curtailed.

Jackson County’s Sheriff, Denny Peyman has also come out and assured his citizens that he will not enforce the administrations attack on liberty. “My office will not comply with any federal actions which violate the United States Constitution or the Kentucky Constitution which I swore to uphold.”  He considers it “a moral obligation,” and he’s got “a team of attorneys to step up with me if necessary.”

Pine County Sheriff Robin Cole of Minnesota has joined the wave for freedom by voicing his opposition saying  he would consider any new federal regulation on guns to be illegal and would “refuse to carry it out.”

These are just a few in the avalanche of Sheriffs standing up for their counties and opposing tyranny.

It is a good first step.  If you live in a county where one of these Davids is standing up to Goliath, let them know how appreciative.  If your Sheriff hasn’t voiced an opinion or is willing to let your constitutional rights be ravaged by a insatiable federal meat grinder, contact them and let them know where you stand.

With enough voices joining in, the walls of Obama’s gun grabbing regime will crumble beneath our shout.

 

The War of the States

With the 23 executive actions that Obama has set forth on top of his desire to reinstate the assault weapons ban one can see the federal fight shaping up for the future of the 2nd Amendment.  But I wonder if that is where the real fight is going to take place.

I think that for every New York State, that pushes senseless and ineffective measures under the auspices of reducing gun violence, you will have a half dozen states like Texas and Wyoming who seek to strengthen their gun rights.  States that are going so far as arresting federal agents who try and enforce federally backed infringements to the 2nd Amendment.

There will be a divide in the States over gun rights but it is far from evenly split and oddly enough does not necessarily follow the traditional red/blue dichotomy.

Sure, when someone thinks of New England and the West Coast they think of a bloc of gun grabbing zealot states who will stop at nothing to infringe upon the 2nd Amendment rights of its citizens but that is not always the case.

For instance, think of Vermont.  Pretty blue when it votes, but it has one of the best understandings of what the 2nd Amendment means and holds almost no restrictions therein.  They are not going to follow New York’s lead. Also, I don’t see New Hampshire, the live free or die state, lining up to follow the Empire State.

So while the exploitation of dead children and the media driven sensationalism and hysteria might draw some New England states away from liberty, it is not as clearly defined as our national elections would have one believe.

The same can be said for the Pacific Northwest.  While the machinations of Californian politicians look to further hamstring the 2nd Amendment in Sacramento, the gun grabbing fever looks to be quarantined there and unlikely to spread.  Though Washington and Oregon have streaks of blue come national election time, on a state level they tend to lean Libertarian and their gun laws reflect it.

If the North East and the West Coast are where gun control support is supposed to be at its greatest then I feel a little better about the whole thing.  Because it is plain to see that in truth, only a few radical rogue politicians are pushing for it.  Outside of those regimes, you have neighboring states that will either do nothing and enjoy the 2nd Amendment freedoms their currently have, or you will get states that will actively move to defend the right to keep and bear arms such as the entire Midwest.

South Dakota, Idaho, Arizona, Texas, Wyoming, and Tennessee all have legislation being put forth to strengthen gun rights for its citizens in order to protect them from both criminals and an overreaching infringing federal government.

Not to mention that Utah, Montana and Alaska have all ready passed the Firearm Freedom Act with AZ, ID, WY and SD and doesn’t include the 25 other states that have introduced the Act.

My prediction is as follows.  As some states in decline begin to seize more and more personal liberties through abusive taxes and infringing upon rights, people will begin to emigrate from them to places that are more free.

Is it a coincidence that states that value the 2nd Amendment rights also have the lowest personal income taxes and the most freedom overall?  Whereas California and New York crush not only the rights of the people but also their livelihood.

Obama and his collaborators like to make it appear as if there is a wave of gun control fever sweeping the nation when in fact there are only a few radical and opportunistic puppets that have followed his lead.

In the elections that come in the next few years, be they state or federal, we must remind them that indeed a wave is coming, it will be carrying freedom and liberty with such force that it will drown the ambition of tyrants.

 

New York Gov exploits death of 20 children to pass worthless gun control measures

The politicians in Albany have decided that now is the time to push forward their radical anti-gun agenda while the blood is still fresh from the deaths of 26 innocent people.  By the end of today the State Assembly will follow the lead of the State Senate and pass the draconian gun control measures that Gov. Cuomo has been harping on for the past month.

Why do I call this exploitation and not a reasoned response to a tragedy?  Simple.  If this was a valid response to the Sandy Hook tragedy then SOME measure of this bill would have stopped the tragedy from happening in the first place if it had been enacted in Connecticut.

But no, the bill is a wish list for gun control zealots chock full of infringements that would not have been able to pass if not augmented with the blood of dead children due to sensationalized hysteria of the liberal 24 hour news cycle.

So what does this bill, ridiculously named the NY SAFE act, do?  For starters, the moment it is signed all magazines that can hold more than 7 bullets are made illegal.  Magazines with a capacity of more than 10 rounds and manufactured before 1994, which are currently legal, would have to be turned over to authorities or sold out of state within one year. If a magazine has a capacity between eight and 10, it would have to be retrofitted to only hold seven rounds.

Apparently it’s just a numbers game.  Cuomo has been spouting off saying “No one needs 10 rounds to kill a deer”.  Once again this shows the ignorance of gun grabbers who falsely believe that the 2nd Amendment has anything to do with hunting.

The Second Amendment isn’t about shooting deer, it’s about shooting tyrants.

Cuomo unwittingly though, revealed himself for the craven gun grabbing zealot that he is with that reasoning.  If shooting deer is going to be the litmus test for magazines then it allows for further restrictions.  Of the hunters I know, it only takes one shot to kill a deer.  But for all the double barreled shotgun users out there Cuomo might allow 2 rounds.  So this slippery slope of magazine restrictions based on deer hunting opens the door to limit magazines to 2 rounds.

Why wouldn’t this stop the Sandy Hook massacre?  A few reasons, since the school was a gun free zone full of women and children, even if the shooter had to stop and reload after 7 magazines, no one was going to use that time to return fire on him, nor were they going to charge and tackle him to the ground.

Funny how Cuomo and other gun control zealots like to dismiss gun owners as watching too many movies because they are willing to shoot back at an armed assailant, yet they propose that it is more logical that people pull a Batman and go hand to hand commando in the moments between the shooters reloading.

The SAFE Act further abolishes the NYS lifetime permit and now will be needed to be renewed every 5 years.  Not only is this a pointless hassle for law abiding gun owners, it also opens up the ability for the issuing body to say no, on a whim, to someone who has had their license issued by a more gun friendly issuer.  New York is a may issue state after all, and anytime you have to ask to exercise your right you play roulette with whether or not you will be denied.  On top of that there is the ability to make the fees for the permit cost prohibited for the working man, as such only the rich and privileged will be able to afford one.

Why wouldn’t this stop the Sandy Hook massacre?  Because the shooter didn’t have a license to carry in the first place and as a rule criminals don’t follow the law to begin with.

Within one year, the state will set up an instant background check system for all ammunition purchases. Law enforcement would be alerted to large purchases of ammunition.  Pointless invasion of privacy and a hassle to gun owners who may blow through a thousand rounds every time they go to the range.  Plus, where will the money come to cover yet another New York bureaucracy?  Most likely a bullet tax.

Why wouldn’t this stop the Sandy Hook massacre?  The shooter stole the guns AND the bullets.

Then there is the granddaddy of them all.  The so called “assault” weapons ban.  Assault weapons — defined as any rifle with a “military style” feature, such as a bayonet or a telescoping stock — that are currently owned would be grandfathered and would have to be registered with the state.  It is said that registering is the first step to confiscation.  The bill was written in such a way to make just that happen. The rifles will be grandfathered only for you and cannot be transferred, EVER.  So even when you die the guns must be turned over to the state to be destroyed.  That is CONFISCATION.  It’s just a long con.  Within one generation, these weapons will be completely gone in the hands of the law abiding citizens in New York.  Criminals of course will get them easily. I mean, the war on drugs hasn’t stopped people from getting high, why would the war on guns stop criminals from getting theirs?

Why wouldn’t this stop the Sandy Hook massacre? The shooter STOLE the guns and besides he primarily used a pair of pistols.  You are more likely to be killed by being beaten to death by an attackers bare hands than you are from any type of rifle.

Furthermore, Cuomo showed his true colors by waiving the 3 day aging period for bills, set up in order to give the public the right to be heard between when a bill is presented and when it is voted on.  This was done directly in order to silence people who support the 2nd Amendment from informing their legislators of their displeasure with the bill.

That’s not conjecture, the gun grabbing zealots actually SAID SO directly. Assemblywoman Ellen Jaffee, D-Suffern, Rockland County, said a quick vote was prudent, saying she was concerned that a delay could lead to less stringent regulations.

“I’m concerned that the anti-gun-safety lobbyists would have influence in a way where we would lose the opportunity to move forward with gun safety,” she said.

Now, I don’t know what any of this bill has to do with gun safety, but the intention on her and Cuomo’s part is clear; RAM this unconstitutional bill down the throats of New Yorkers and get it signed before anyone realizes just what is going on.

Weak willed Republicans in the Republican controlled Senate rolled over quickly enough since their constituents didn’t have the time to have their voices heard and the Democrat controlled Assembly are chomping at the bit to follow suit.

Even the addition of a measure to protect the privacy of gun owners was lukewarm at best.  A gun owner can request that their information remain private but it is up the issuing authority whether to allow it to be so.  This way they can keep the information of police and politicians private while legally leaving the common citizen flapping in the wind.

From top to tail this bill is disgusting and pathetic.  Born of political opportunism and the exploitation of dead children.  Those who crafted it and are glad to have the Sandy Hook Tragedy happen in order to press their agenda should be ashamed of themselves.  So too should those who have given lip service to the 2nd Amendment only to roll over so easily in the name of political expediency and feel good legislation.

Cuomo even has the gall to say that this isn’t an attack on law abiding gun owners.  “We’re not looking to demonize gun owners,” Cuomo said. “Gun owners have done nothing wrong.”  Yet his legislation does nothing but harass and infringe upon the rights of  gun owners in New York.

At least there are a few New York State Senators who are willing to call a spade a spade. Senators such as Greg Ball, R-Patterson, Putnam County who said on the Senate Floor during the vote, “We haven’t saved any lives tonight except for one — the political life of a governor who wants to be president.”

For want of political ambition, liberty dies in New York and not a single child will be safer.

 

Since when is being practical, paranoia?

I was thinking over the weekend about how often I have needed to use my seat belt because I got into a car accident.  Surprisingly, it was the same number of times I have had to use my gun to protect myself or someone else.

Now, when I wear my seat belt nobody tells me I’m being paranoid about being t-boned, nor do they tell me I have been watching too many car movies like Fast and Furious and am styling myself as Vin Diesel.  Nobody says that I am looking to get into car crashes.  Nobody tells me that if I too scared not to go out in the world without my seat belt on that I should just stay inside.  Nobody questions my manhood for wearing a seat belt nor do they make some allusion to my seat belt compensating for something.

No.  No one tells me that taking the small precaution of buckling up is anything other than a sound and safe action (and in some places the law).  But yet, even though I have needed my seat belt as often as I have needed my side arm, the gun control zealots admonish me for carrying a gun.

They tell me that I am being paranoid, that I am looking for trouble, that if I am too scared to go out in the world without a gun I should just stay home.  Yet, I bet they wear their seat belts.

They will call gun owners paranoid.  In truth we are just realists.  Evil exists in the world.  That’s a fact.  And no law or legislation will eliminate evil.  But that brings up an interesting dynamic.  Isn’t it really the rabid gun control zealots who are paranoid?

I mean, they want to infringe upon the rights of everyone in America just so that they can feel safe, not actually be safe.  If you disarm the lawful then the unlawful have easy targets.  How many “gun free” zone tragedies do we have to see before we realize that evil doesn’t care about the stupid sign.  Are gun control zealots so paranoid of an inanimate object that they would rather delude themselves into thinking that they don’t exist by denying the law abiding access to them?  That is akin to saying that drunk drivers don’t exist in my town because I live in a dry county.

To go back to my earlier allusion, driving under the influence of alcohol is illegal yet people still do it; speeding is against the law but it is done; driving recklessly is also a no-no yet it is done everyday and 30,000 people die every year because of these violations.

Yet the paranoid gun control zealots would have us believe that by stripping the law abiding from their 2nd Amendment rights they would somehow stamp out evil and nefarious intent.  Even in an authoritarian society as China, the absence of guns does not equate to the absence evil.

In the past 2 years a series of uncoordinated mass stabbings, hammer attacks, and cleaver attacks in the People’s Republic of China. The spate of attacks left at least 25 dead and some 115 injured.  I guess we should ban knives, hammers and cleavers too.

Understanding that evil exists in the world is not paranoia.  Just like wearing your seat belt, having home owners insurance and going to the dentist for a cleaning aren’t symptoms of paranoia…just common sense.

 

 

State and School buck the Obama Narrative

In encouraging news, the State of Wyoming and the School District of Montpelier Ohio have decided to embrace the 2nd Amendment in defense of their freedom and their charges.

In Wyoming, legislation has been proposed that would protect gun owners from any federal bans on assault weapons or large-capacity magazines by making federal laws against semiautomatic rifles and clips unenforceable within the state.  Not only does it state that it will protect gun owners from federal laws infringing upon their rights, but also backs it up by charging a felony to any federal agent who would try enforce a federal anti-gun law within the state.

For a state who prides itself for its defense of Civil Rights, going so far as officially nicknaming itself, “The Equality State”, I am not surprised that Wyoming would stand firm in defense of the rights of its citizens.

If more states join Wyoming along with the other states that have all ready passed similar Firearms Protection Acts, combined they can force the federal government and the Obama Administration to back down from their attack on the 2nd Amendment.

In the Montpelier School District in Ohio, the school board has approved a resolution that would allow some staff members to have firearms on school grounds.  Ohio Revised Code prohibits any and all guns on school property unless the individual has a concealed carry license and  “has written authorization from the board of education or governing body of a school to convey deadly weapons”.  Montpelier has decided to give that written authorization in order to protect the children.

It is good to see that common sense still exists in places and that the children of Montpelier are just as precious as Obama’s daughters and as such shouldn’t be denied similiar protection from the evil that exists in the world.

Would any parent prefer their school age child go a school that proclaims itself a “gun free zone” or would they rather have someone there, in loco parentis, willing and able to stop a criminal with murder on his mind?

The gun control zealots can squawk all they want about their twisted sense that an inanimate object can be evil, but if they would prefer their children to attend a school that keeps them as prey and unprotected, one must wonder about the fitness they have as a parent.  At least Obama and David Gregory are hypocrites…but if your hoplophobia endangers your children, what kind of parent are you?

 

Emperor Obama desires to bypass laws and rule by fiat

Barack Obama’s # 1 henchman, Joe Biden, has let it slip that Obama will consider moving forward to ban guns unilaterally using executive orders.

Joe Biden, one of the chief authors of the Brady Bill who introduced it in the Senate, has been tapped by the self styled Emperor Obama to head up a task force on gun violence.  The name of this task force is a misnomer though as it is not looking to deal with any type of solution toward actual gun violence.  Rather, it is comprised of gun grabbers whose main objective is the banning of guns for law abiding people and the rewriting of the 2nd Amendment.

The task force met with representatives of the following groups on Wednesday:

• Arizona for Gun Safety
• Brady Campaign to End Gun Violence
• Campaign to Keep Guns off Campus & States United to Prevent Gun Violence
• Cease Fire Pennsylvania
• CT Against Gun Violence
• Cure Violence
• Illinois Council Against Handgun Violence
• Mayors Against Illegal Guns
• Protect Minnesota
• Violence Policy Center
• Wisconsin Anti Violence Effort

While you have a geographically ranging of gun grabbing groups, you will see that classics like the Brady Campaign are in attendance as well as the Bloomberg run mob of Mayors Against Illegal Guns.  These groups have been outspoken and consistent in their hatred for the right of free people to keep and bear arms.

Fitting that Bloomberg’s group would be in attendance when Biden discussed the possibility that Obama would run this country like a dictator, outside the democratic process of passing laws and representational governance.  Bloomberg has run New York City in the same fashion for years.

The Dictator in Chief must be stopped because once he starts ruling by fiat to undermine not only the 2nd Amendment but the very nature of our Republic, we may wake up one day soon as servants in an Obama-Nation.

Not only does Obama hate the 2nd Amendment (a fact that Gun Owners of America have chronicled since his Chicago days) but apparently he also has decided that he can openly reveal his disdain for America and the entirety of the Constitution without repercussions from the electorate.

Not for not, but a power hungry tyrant who will ignore the democratically elected government in order to impose his own will upon the people is kind of exactly what the 2nd Amendment is meant to stop.  Just sayin.

 

Time to ban fists and feet

Here’s a little factoid that the foaming at the mouth Assault Weapons Banning crowd might find interesting.  According to the FBI you are TWICE as likely to be beaten to death by someone using their hands or feet than you are being killed by a rifle.

And that’s not just a so called “assault” rifle…that’s EVERY kind of rifle combined.

The numbers break down like this: In 2010 when this information was compiled there were 358 murders committed by a perpetrator using a rifle.  Over that same time, 745 people were killed were the perpetrator used only his hands, fists or feet to do so.

At a ratio of 2 to 1 there is an epidemic of fist and feet murders going on in the country and as such, according to the rationale of the gun control zealots, action must be taken.  Immediately everyone must register their hands and their feet.

Also, we live in the modern age and 10 fingers and 10 toes are antiquated so we must modernize the definition of what hands and feet are.  Since we as a society have evolved to use keyboards and touchscreens and barely write anymore we should, as a society, cut off the 6 fingers of everyone in the nation.  I mean, think of how hard it would be to kill someone when you only have a thumb and an index finger on each hand.

Of course, some people still need/want all 10 fingers so I guess we can set up a ridiculous set of bureaucratic hurdles for those who are privileged and affluent enough to get through, in order to give them special dispensation in order to retain all of their assault fingers.

A similar process would be in order for the feet as well.

And that is only the hands and feet.  I haven’t even mentioned that you are 10 times as more likely to be murdered by a knife, blade, rock or other blunt and non-firearm related object than you are a rifle.

So when a gun control zealot starts spewing their nonsense about their fictional “epidemic” of assault weapons what they really mean is that they are against those weapons in principle and regardless of what tragedy they have to exploit they will continue to try and assert control over you.

I call it a fictional epidemic because, as the FBI has proven, being killed by any sort of rifle is extremely rare.  The epidemic lies in the gun control zealots mind.  They hate these weapons because they are the biggest obstacle in their pursuit of control.  Millions upon millions of law abiding citizens own semi-automatic rifles and they will never use them to commit a crime or heinous act.  Yet their presence in the hands of free men and women are the deterrent that those who seek total control cannot stand.

When we lose those weapons, those in power need not cut off our fingers because our hands will all ready (metaphorically) be in chains

 

If you are a gun owner at Bank of America…it’s time you left them

Bank of America has once again shown its hostility and disdain for the 2nd Amendment, its gun owner customers and for free enterprise.  I first reported a story last year about McMillan Co. which had their accounts closed by BoA because they branched out into firearms manufacturing.

Well, apparently Bank of America has decided to double down on the harassment of gun manufacturers in an attempt to dictate how they should operate their business and what that business should entail.

Bank of America business customer American Spirit Arms discovered that during a sales rush in December, BoA decided to freeze their accounts and effectively hamstring the gun manufacturer.

Owner of American Spirit Arms, Joe Sirochman recounts his discussion with the bank after he inquires about the frozen funds:

“After countless hours on the phone with Bank of America, I finally got a manager in the right department that told me the reason that the deposits were on hold for further review — her exact words were — ‘We believe you should not be selling guns and parts on the Internet.’”

So BoA arbitrarily decides that they will try and sabotage a law abiding company because of their gun control agenda.  If that is a bank you wish to do business with that is your prerogative,  though I suggest you do not try to purchase a firearm with their debit card, you may be labeled a gun runner and have your account frozen indefinitely…just for kicks.

This whole situation reminds me of the Obama Administrations plan to involve big business as his allies in order to push through his radical and un-American gun control agenda.  Initially, the idea was presented as a way for gun sellers such as Wal-Mart and Dick’s to be able to support the Obama measures without losing business as they would get the equivalent to a loophole kickback.  I don’t see why that same type of cronyism wouldn’t extend to the bankers who could use their accounts to cripple and undercut gun shops and manufacturers thus driving them out of business.

I’m sure the payoff for their support of Obama and his draconian attack on the Constitution will massaged into some fiduciary deal down the road.

Once again, even when he’s not hiding his hatred for the 2nd Amendment, Obama is still operating “under the radar” in order to lull the American people into a belief that their constitutional rights aren’t under attack.

All this talk of gun bans may only be a feint while his machinations reveal themselves later when the only people who are buying and making firearms are in his back pocket.  Once that happens, our rights extend only at the pleasure of the President.

Don’t support businesses that don’t support your 2nd Amendment rights…and certainly not ones that are openly hostile to them like Bank of America.

Now, with all this doom and gloom do not think that all businesses are out to trod over your Second Amendment rights.  Gun Owners of America also urges you to support businesses in your area that have shown themselves to be true supporters of the 2nd Amendment.

Even businesses that may not necessarily be PRO gun can and have stood up against the heavy handed extortion policies of gun grabbing zealots.  Starbucks coffee springs to mind.

In case you are unaware, Starbucks coffee has a company policy that allows gun owners to openly carry their firearms in their coffee shops in states where it is legal.  As you can imagine, when this first came out anti gunners flipped out and demanded Starbucks change their policy to make all of there coffee shops into gun free zones.

Starbucks refused and as such your chances of being murdered in a Starbucks is greatly reduced compared to other places that kow tow to the gun control lobby and created Criminal Opportunity Zones… euphemistically known as gun free zones.

As more stories of pro gun and other non capitulating businesses come up I’ll be sure to pass that information on because just as we should avoid businesses that hate the 2nd Amendment, if other businesses are going to stand by gun owners, we should return the sentiment in kind.

 

Connecticut seeks law to ostracize gun owners

In the wake of liberal rag The Journal News crusade to try and intimidate and harass law abiding gun owners in New York, Connecticut lawmakers are looking to follow suit.

Democrat State Rep. Stephen Dargan has introduced legislation that would reverse a 20 year old law barring the release of 170,000 CT firearm owners home information to the public.  Dargan has tried to spin this as not pitting pro gun vs anti gun people but rather ““to get a broader discussion going on gun issues and mental health in the state.”

My question, is how does this legislation actually HELP anything?  How does it decrease crime?  How does it lessen the likelihood of a school shooting?  How does it do ANYTHING other than try and ostracize gun owners and put non gun owners on criminal wish lists?

Oh yeah…this isn’t only an attack on gun owners, but it also makes it easier for criminals to target defenseless homes.  Not to mention it makes women who are armed and in hiding in order to protect themselves from abusive relationships vulnerable.

Not only does Dargan want to try and publically shame gun owners because he thinks the Connecticut society he associates himself with will collectively shun gun owners, but also he doesn’t care that it victimizes abused women and makes targets out of those people who don’t personally believe in the 2nd Amendment.  Not to mention Officers of the law who now face the fact that criminals they have put away have a roadmap (literally) to their front door, endangering not only them but their families.

State Rep. Dargan is the worst kind of public servant.  He cares little to nothing about his actions or the ramifications of his legislation but rather just wants to get his name associated with the cause celebre that his high brow intelligentsia have come to support.

The self serving aggrandizing of slugs like Dargan is really putrid and it is going to get people killed.  I’ll go so far as to say that he doesn’t care who has to die so long as his war on the 2nd Amendment is pushed forward along with his rise in the gun control circles.

I’m done with talking about filth like Dargan for now.  I’m going to put something in perspective for you that you can counter to people who think making road maps to firearm owners houses is a good idea.

I have nieces and nephews, young children from a few months old to pre teen.  AIDS still exists in America and I do not want them to run the risk of being in an environment that may present them with the opportunity to be infected.

As such, I want newspapers to publish the names and addresses of every HIV or AIDS infected person so that I know where they are and I can pass that information onto their parents so they can make the decision whether or not to associate with those people.

I mean, kids are young and maybe someone gets cut by accident or their friends parents are infected and are making them a snack of fruit and vegetables and cuts themselves and bleeds on the food and serves it unknowingly.  That endangers my nieces and nephews and as such I should be made aware of all people infected with HIV and AIDS in order to know whether or not I want my family to associate with them.

I DARE gun control zealots like Dargan and his ilk to drop their hypocrisy and openly support the HIV and AIDS registration and dissemination of that list…you know…for the children.

As usual, when it comes to their hypocrisy, I’m pretty sure I will be answered with deafening silence.  If I, or someone else, were to seriously offer this idea for legislation Dargan, the ACLU, and the cadre of liberal gun grabbing zealots who support the Journal News, would virulently claim that I am trying to shun or shame people with HIV or AIDS out of society or at least my neighborhood.

Yet, for some reason, they don’t want to admit that that is exactly their intention of publishing the names and addresses of gun owners.  I guess when you exploit the death of children for your own petty and personal agenda a little hypocrisy is not too much of an extra burden.

 

Can’t define it with words? Use a picture book

Apparently, the gun grabbing zealots are a lot like the layman art critic who says, “I don’t know art, but I know what I like”.  Only in this version it’s, “I don’t know guns, but if they are black and scary then I want them banned”.

I am speaking of the grabbers long cherished boogeyman, the so called “assault weapon”.  Why do I use the term “so called”?  Because if you ask a dozen rabid mouth foaming gun control zealots to define what an assault weapon is, after they inundate you with the vitriol of why you don’t need them and nonsense like the founders only intending you to have muskets, chances are you will get a dozen different answers.

You see, when the grabbers decided to come up with this spooky term, it was enough just to point to any black gun and say, assault weapon.  Mainstream America wasn’t as initiated in the finer points of the firearm industry as they are now.

So it was simply a matter of playing on peoples fear of the unknown.  Affixing the term “assault” to any weapon makes it sound more menacing without having to actually define it.

An assault knife, an assault ax, an assault vehicle.

See?  All I was describing was a steak knife, a double sided ax and a pick up truck…but they SOUNDED menacing and if you just accepted the term out of ignorance then you may decide these things are innately violent.

But it has been some 20 years since the term was hijacked into the American lexicon by gun control zealots and over the past 2 decades the American people have started to become familiar with these weapons.

AR style rifles are the best selling rifle in the nation.

Now the gun control zealots have a problem.  Where they once had used ignorance and terminology to scare the American public into acquiescence, a more discerning populace is looking for definitions.

Enter Dianne Feinstein and her Picture Book!

Yep, Feinstein and her gun grabbing cronies will point to pictures in a book and will ban the ones that are scary looking.

Never mind that assault weapons are hardly ever used in crime (1/5th of 1%) and that the last assault weapons ban had no impact on the reduction of crime.

Never mind that law abiding citizens are not the ones who commit crime to begin with and that criminals will ignore whatever ban is put in place.

Never mind how disgusting the hoplophobia and hypocrisy Feinstein and others display by being protected by these weapons while denying them to the average American.

Never mind all that.  They want to ban guns that LOOK SCARY TO THEM.

Think about that. At what point does every gun begin to look scary to them?  If we allow this kindergarten approach to gain any traction in the halls of congress we run the risk of opening Pandora’s Box.

Continue to contact your legislators and have them find the courage to stand up to Feinstein and her Sesame Street approach to legislation.

Speaking of which, I wonder if Feinstein will utilize the power of The Count when pitching her 10 bullet Magazine limit.

Todays blog is brought to you by the letters G, O, A and the number 2

 

School’s back…but what has changed?

Today marks the first day back for students and faculty of Sandy Hook Elementary after a lunatic murdered 20 children and six adults.  They are holding the classes in another building seven miles away from where the massacre took place.

That is one difference.  But I was wondering, with all this agenda driven, gun control hysteria that’s being stoked by the likes of Sen. Feinstein and Pres. Obama  what has actually been done to make these children safer?

I mean, if the gun control zealots are going to exploit the deaths of 26 people for their own agenda you’d think they would offer up solutions that would have stopped the massacre in the first place.

Of course, since the majority of the gun control measures proposed were all ready in place in CT, that just means that the gun grabbers don’t have a solution and would prefer to capitalize on the death of innocent children to duplicate the agenda that failed in the first place.

But for Newtown Connecticut, they (for at least a little while) have embraced a solution that was roundly mocked by pundits and gun control advocates alike.

Namely, today at Sandy Hook Elementary there are armed police guarding and protecting the children.  My question is why?

I mean, Sandy Hook Elementary isn’t an affluent private school the likes of President Obama’s daughters and David Gregory’s children attend.  They have armed guards of course because for some reason, rich gun grabbers don’t care about their own hypocrisy.

But they keep telling us that guns aren’t the answer.  So why then are there people at that school today armed to defend those children?

BECAUSE FIREARMS DETER CRIME.  Criminals and crazies are often times cowards.  They target the weak, the helpless and the defenseless.  Criminals to maximize their crimes, crazies to maximize their body count.

Yet the mere presence of a law abiding citizen or law officer, ready to defend the sheep against the wolves, is enough to move them onto easier targets.  Unfortunately, while Sandy Hook is protected today, there are hundreds of Schools in CT that are defenseless and prime hunting ground for those with evil intent.

I wonder what the thought is.  Do the officials fear a copy cat attack and are protecting the school?  Most likely.  But what about all the other schools.  They are just as likely to be a target by someone CRAZY enough to steal some guns and commit such a heinous act.

I guess all those schools and all those children are on their own.  I guess in the minds of some, you must experience a tragedy first before you are allowed to protect yourself from it repeating.

That goes along the line of thinking that many who carry for self defense have in relation to police.  The job of law officers is to investigate crime, not to stop it.

So in all those other schools without protection today, where Principals are denied the right to defend themselves and their charges in loco parentis, I guess they just need to be sacrificed on the alter of gun control to sate the agenda driven lust of Feinstein, Bloomberg and Obama.

If guns weren’t the answer, then why are they present at Sandy Hook today?

And if guns ARE the answer…why aren’t they at every other school too.

 

Voice your disapproval with your wallet

Much like your average politician, many businesses are spineless craven entities that have little backbone and will only do what is in their best interest at a given moment.

Then there are true believers.  Politicians and businesses and voices that will stand up for what they believe in all the time, regardless of backlash, political expediency, or loss of revenue.  These latter true believers should not only be admired but also supported.

Being principled is a difficult road to travel.

That is why we must support principled politicians who have always stood strong by the 2nd Amendment as well as businesses who will not cave under the sensationalized media hysteria and astro turf activism by liberty hating gun grabbers

That is why stores like Dick’s Sporting Goods should be avoided.  Not only have they ceased selling sporting rifles but they have gone so far as to not honor the sales they have all ready made.

There are other places to purchase these weapons and sporting gear and I for one will seek them out.  I do not wish to be a patron of a company that would so easily turn against the Second Amendment.  I would rather reward those who are stalwarts with the Constitution by being stalwart with them.

While I am on the subject, I’m not sure I have mentioned this before but the Wounded Warrior Project, whose claims to help those wounded in defense of our country and constitution  are rabidly anti gun.  Oh sure, they’ll take funds generated by gun companies and sellers but the WWP big wigs refuse any official connection to anything regarding guns.

Much like Black professional athletes of the 50’s playing on white teams, we are good enough to help them succeed, yet they don’t want to be associated with us or for us to stay in the same hotels.

There are a number of great charities that help and support our wounded veterans who have sacrificed so much so that we can remain free.  Let us not cheapen their sacrifice by supporting an organization that doesn’t even believe in Constitution that they were fighting for.

Then there are the backers of the anti-gunners.  Businesses that support those who would try and subvert the right to keep and bear arms.  The Journal News in New York has created and published an online database showing pinpoint directions to the homes of those with a firearms permit.  The masses responded by creating a database of the locations of the office and homes of those who work at the Journal News.  As you can imagine those at the Journal News didn’t care for that bit of turnaround.

After the backlash the Journal News decided to complete their hypocrisy by hiring armed guards to protect them.  The Journal News is unrepentant in their thuggish attempts to shame gun owners so appealing to them might be moot.  But the paper lives on local advertisements and as such, New Yorkers of the area start pressuring the businesses that support the Journal News to stop, that may put an end to the witch hunts that those gun grabbers are foaming at the mouth for.

I guess the point is this.  Those who will brave the storm and stand with the 2nd Amendment should be rewarded for it.  Those who are wishy washy should hear our voices so that they know that their actions against the 2nd Amendment will have greater repercussions than some artificial agenda driven outrage that the Bloombergs and Feinsteins of the world can muster.

I am reminded of one of my favorite movies, Scent of a Woman.  In one of the final scenes the character Charlie Simms was given the opportunity to betray his principles for his own advancement.  Not doing so would come at a high price.

There’s something to be said for being uncompromising…it’s not always easy…but no one ever said doing the right thing always was.

 

New Year, old fight

Looking back on 2012, I lament the fact that the predictions that I made have come to pass.  The most dangerous is no doubt that Barack Obama is an out of the closet, rabid gun control zealot.

To all those Obama gun owners who had the gall to tell me that Obama was a supporter of the Second Amendment because he signed a bill that was necessary for his agenda that just happened to have a last minute National Parks Carry amendment attached; I TOLD YOU SO.  And even before my blog, Gun Owners of America has been telling you for the past four years.

Not fearing re-election, Obama’s true intent on the utter destruction of the peoples right to bear arms has been revealed.  Fortunately for him and his other gun control ghouls, he even has some political cover because some madman in Connecticut stole some weapons and went on a rampage.

Obama has announced a gun-control task force last week led by Vice President Joe Biden to make proposals for new laws and actions in January.

“I’d like to get it done in the first year. I will put forward a very specific proposal based on the recommendations that Joe Biden’s task force is putting together as we speak. And so this is not something that I will be putting off,” said Obama in a “Meet the Press” interview.

Now, not only are domestic laws on the table to infringe the free people of America the use to defend themselves from tyranny and danger, but also International Treaties are being invigorated such as the UN Small Arms Treaty which will basically strip the US of it’s own sovereignty.

When Obama nominates his radical anti gun justices to the Supreme Court they are going to defend their stances with the exploitation of 20 school children from Sandy Hook. Don’t get me wrong, I wasn’t a fan of Romney’s stance on guns, nor did we at GOA endorse him for President, but if you think that Romney would buck his own party to go hell bent on banning guns as Obama is going to do then you might as well finish the kool-aid because it’s gonna be a bumpy ride.

For six straight months this blog has warned and informed you of the true disdain that President Obama and other rabid gun control zealots like Sen Fienstein and Mayor Bloomberg have for the 2nd Amendment.  Yet here we are.  I feel like Cassandra warning the Trojans not to let in the horse only to be ignored.

These haters of the Constitution and the Liberty enumerated therein will exploit every tragedy, ignore the statistics and the logic, silence stories of the use of guns to defend, protect and save lives, all in order to cripple and eventually litigate the 2nd Amendment out of existence. That is the truth.  GOA has led the charge for 4 years.  I have written about it for 6 months and now, like a prophecy fulfilled, even Obama is admitting it.  American voters, we reap what we sow.

———————————————————————————————————————

That was 2012.  This is 2013.

Time for feeling sorry for ourselves is over.  Time for action, intestinal fortitude and (don’t forgive the pun because the pun is intended) for us to stick to our guns. In the wake of tragedies involving a firearm the anti gunners will try to gain the narrative and sway in uninitiated with simple emotional reaction. They will exploit the children in order to get non-gun owners to say “why do we need semi automatic rifles” or “no one needs more than 10 rounds in a magazine”.

Don’t be silent.  I have spent a great part of my Christmas season explaining what the 2nd Amendment means to extended family and friends.  Even in my immediate family I have had to discuss what the 2nd Amendment truly means. My sister is an elementary school teacher and I know the thought of what happened in Connecticut affected her deeply.  She was never into guns and never understood the need for anything more than a pistol for defense. I explained to her that the 2nd Amendment was crafted to defend against ones life from both a criminal AND tyranny.

Do people abuse the liberty that we enjoy here in America?  Yes.  Is it tragic when that happens?  It can be.  But should we all forfeit our rights in order to try and minimalize it?  To do that would be the death of freedom. I also explained to my sister that CT had among the strictest gun control laws in the nation yet that does not stop a madman or criminal from finding ways to doing crazy or criminal things.

If we are forfeiting rights in order to protect people why don’t we start with the 4th and 5th Amendment rights?  If police can just bust into places without warrants and just go on a whim I’m sure they can pick up a few more criminals.  Sure, a lot of INNOCENT people will be affected…but if just one life is saved… (a favorite line of the gun control crowd).  Or lets have the police beat out confessions from suspects and ignore that self incrimination bit.  Or keep trying someone until we get a guilty verdict, let’s keep double jeopardy to a tv game show.

Will the anti gunners be for this?  Of course not, at least not until they take our 2nd Amendment rights, then how exactly would we stop them from taking the rest? But I digress.  The anti gunners want control, and they use the “evil black gun” as a boogeyman to scare those who are ignorant to the fact that a gun is a tool.  Just like a car and like a car can be a dangerous tool if misused.  More people are killed in auto accidents every year than by a gun yet I do not see the push to ban fast cars.

You have better odds of being struck by lightning than being a victim of a mass shooting.

Until the Newtown horror, the three worst K–12 school shootings ever had taken place in either Britain or Germany with extreme gun control measures. A lengthy study by Mother Jones magazine found that at least 38 of the 61 mass shooters in the past three decades “displayed signs of mental health problems prior to the killings.”

But those are facts and statistics that rabid gun control dogs like Mayor Bloomberg doesn’t want to acknowledge.  The hypocrite Mayor has the gall to tell New Yorkers that they should put the recent subway murders “in perspective” yet would never dare to say the same if a gun had been used. This is the example of the despicable deceit and hypocrisy that we, as gun owners, must endure in order to protect the rights our founding fathers fought and died to ensure.

The gun grabbers do not blame the crazy person who stole the guns used to shoot up a school, nor do they blame the ex-con released too early after beating his grandmother to death with a hammer who illegally acquired guns in order to shoot some firefighters. Instead, while making excuses for the criminally insane, the rabid gun control zealots want to only point at the gun.

Well, I point a finger at the mental health industry (an estimated 40% of individuals with Severe Mental Illness go untreated) in America and states that let off hardened criminals who go back to their criminal ways (with a 70% recidivism rate for parolees). And beyond the deceit and they hypocrisy, I am curious how seemingly intelligent people can be so completely ignorant and downright stupid in believing that a law, or a gun free zone, will stop a CRIMINAL who has all ready decided to break the law to begin with from breaking one more.

Laws only effect the law abiding.

I don’t make New Year’s resolutions, but I think that may be a mantra that gets repeated often for 2013. With that being said, we still have the right to keep and bear arms and if we are going to keep them, we are going to have to fight for them.

Contact your legislators, talk to your friend and family, win the hearts and minds of those who love liberty but may have been hoodwinked by the media.

If you want to join Gun Owners of America and help us fight the fight you can do so here:   http://gunowners.co/new-annual-membership

 

How my 1 year old nephew reminded me of gun control zealots

While spending Christmas with family I had the chance to observe my nephew (who is 11 months old) at play.  Watching him reminded me of the maturity level and well versed opinions of the majority of gun control zealots.

We were playing with blocks and all he wanted to knock down the towers no matter how well they were made or how strong their foundation.  He just didn’t like the look of any tower that was made by his mom or me and as such he dictated that they must be utterly destroyed.

Much like the rabid gun control zealots like Dianne Feinstein.  She wants to ban all guns, regardless of the constitutional protections provided, based on her own sense of being the center of the universe and the fact that she doesn’t like the look of them, much like my young nephew.  At least he’s under a year old and has an excuse.  Sen. Feinstein is 79 years old.  You would think she would have learned something about being less self centered in all those years.

Also, at least my nephew wasn’t a hypocrite and only wanted towers for himself.  He just didn’t want ANY towers built.  I doubt Feinstein on the other hand, on top of being a CCW permit holder, is going to forgo armed security for herself or her family.  I guess when you think you are privileged like Feinstein believes, you and your family are just more important than those of “regular” people.

This hypocrisy seems to extend to gun control zealots in general as I doubt that David Gregory or President Obama will call off the armed guards who protect their children while at school.  Even as they mock the suggestion that armed guards at “regular” schools as silly.

Hmmm…maybe I shouldn’t say that my nephew acts like gun control zealots.  He lacks the hypocrisy found in the gun control movement and he doesn’t whine or cry nearly as much as they do.  Though when he drops a boom boom in his diapers it does smell like their policies suggestions.

If you want to join the fight against the gun control toddlers that want to knock down the Constitution like it were a tower of blocks they don’t like, join today.

For the rest of the year, when you enter the code: tony2012 when purchasing an annual membership you will get 25% off.  My Christmas present to you for being faithful readers.  Thanks and have a Happy New Year.

You can make the purchase here:  http://gunowners.co/new-annual-membership

 

Talk about a strawman

We often hear about “strawman” purchases when gun control is discussed but what about the strawman arguments that the gun control crowd likes to put forth.

Basically, the gun control zealots prefer to use the gun as the strawman and not the root of the problem.  Often times it is mental illness.  The state of mental illness treatment in America is appalling and until we get a handle on that, tragedies will continue to happen regardless of what gun control measures are passed.

Crazy guy on a subway platform pushes people on the tracks in front of an oncoming train.

Knife rampage by someone suffering a psychotic break.

Social outcast makes bomb out of fertilizer and household project and detonates in a crowd.

These things can and have happened and will continue to happen unless our country wants to come together and pass some real solutions to violence in America.

Why isn’t there a registry for the psychologically disturbed that can be checked when a person is purchasing a firearm?

Because the ACLU wants to protect the civil liberties of people with dangerous psychological defects rather than protect children.

Yet liberal rags like The Journal News in New York has no qualms about publishing the home addresses of those people with a pistol permit in their county.  Not only a list, but an interactive map that will give you directions to their house.  Not only is this a gross infringement upon the privacy of law abiding citizens but the paper seeks to try and ostracize these people in their own communities.

For myself, everyone I know in Pittsburgh knows I am a gun guy and that I carry and if they have a problem with that I could care less as I would simply stop associating with them.  Yet I do not expect my level of comfort in dealing with this issue within my sphere to expand to other gun owners.  The Journal News would seek to make these people into pariahs.  It’s an underhanded and pathetic move by a paper that hides behind the First Amendment while trying to extort those who exercise their Second.

So instead of attacking gun owners and trying to make them feel like THEY’VE done something wrong, how about we have a real conversation about what we are going to do with the utter failure of the Mental Health Industry in regards to stopping these tragedies.

While we are looking for real answers, lets also take a look at the recidivism of criminals we let out of jail.

In Webster, New York a man set fire to a building and when the fire department showed up he shot 4 firefighters, killing 2.  Now the gun control zealots are out in force saying that New York needs stricter gun control.  NEW YORK?!?!

None of these gun control zealots are bringing up the fact that this man, who beat his grandmother to death with a hammer, shouldn’t have been out of jail in the first place.

Those firefighters are dead, not because of a gun, but because of a weak willed judicial system that let a man who beat his grandmother to death with a HAMMER, out of jail after only 17 years.

This psychopath left a note behind saying that he was going to die doing what he does best, “killing people”.  So not only do we have this lunatic slip through the cracks of our mental healthcare system, but also was given a pass on serving the rest of his life behind bars after bludgeoning his grandmother to death with a hammer.

As you may have noticed, I repeated the fact that he killed of his grandmother to death by beating her with a hammer, a number of times.  I do this so that you can conceptualize why this guy might not have been worthy of being released from prison let alone being pinned as a person with a mental disorder.

But no…liberal organizations like the ACLU and rabid gun control zealots want to protect the dangerously deranged and use the gun as a strawman.  They push their own agenda at the expense of innocent children and for them to say otherwise is as duplicitous as it is disgusting.

People want to have a conversation about gun violence and preventing tragedies like Newtown from happening again?  Fine.  That conversation begins with how this country will fix mental healthcare and lower the recidivism of criminals.  Any talk about guns is a strawman argument used by morally contemptible people who want to push their own agenda at the cost of innocent lives.

 

Merry Christmas

Dear Friends,

Grant me the opportunity to wish you and yours a Merry Christmas.  Beyond the gift giving and the stockings stuffed with care, let us take this time to be good to one another and embrace the spirit of the holiday.  Peace on Earth, good will toward your fellow man.

And let us keep in our hearts those who will be far from home this Christmas.  Soliders and sailors and Marines who are on duty, with rifle in hand, willing to do violence on our behalf so that we may celebrate with our families in peace.

In this upcoming year let us hope, though the days are short and dark, that it is always darkest before the dawn.  That this great country of ours will once again find its way into the light and will keep the wolves at bay.

That this land, with its soldiers abroad and patriots at home, will continue to be the land of the free and home of the brave.  That we may serve the Lord if it is our choosing but be subject to no man.   That our right to freedom and liberty be not infringed by those who would see us thusly diminished.

May we always be armed against evil, and that if evil strikes out that it only knows, at most, small and fleeting victory before it is cut down by the righteous who would defend against it.

But for today, let us put the thoughts of evil aside and embrace the love of our friends and family, those present, abroad and those who have gone to their final reward.

From to me and mine, to you and yours: Merry Christmas to all.

Tony

 

 

Jesus wasn’t against bearing arms

Seeing how it is Christmas Eve, I thought I would take a moment to reflect on the good book and what Jesus had to say about the use of arms.

Now, a lot of people out there want to paint Jesus as some long haired hippie peacenik who was all about turning the other cheek.

While it is true that He spoke of turning the other cheek, that was in regards to turning from vengeance and not that one should abandon the defense of oneself.  To turn the other cheek from small slights but not to suffer grievous wounds a second time.  Jesus never expected us to walk around like lambs waiting to be slaughtered by wolves.

What he taught us was that we shouldn’t go looking for trouble, that we shouldn’t strike out with hatred in our hearts or vengeance in our mind.  That we shouldn’t be the aggressors.  But that does not mean we should roll over and allow evil to befall us.

So what did Jesus say about defending oneself?

In the Book of Luke, Chapter 22 verse 36, Jesus told his disciples that:

“He that has a purse, let him take it, and likewise his bag: and he that has no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one.”

Sell the shirt of your back if necessary…but make sure you are armed.  That’s the Gospel right there.  As we remember His birth this Christmas season, let us not forget his words.

And don’t go thinking that being “meek” means that one needs to go around like a pacifist punching bag for others to beat upon.  Meek, in its older (now obsolete) definition, means gentle or kind.  So if you are looking to inherit the Earth, be kind, be giving and charitable, gentle your condition.  Not just around the Holiday’s but all year round.

In the same time, do not be a pushover, do not let evil befall you because you are not prepared.

Even Jesus used violence when faced with evil in order to put an end to it.  When the temple in Jerusalem was turned into a marketplace and filled with moneylenders, and the like, desecrating the sanctity of His fathers house, Jesus took a whip and drove the animals from the market.  He overturned tables and scattered the coins.

Jesus wasn’t a pushover and he never intended for us to be as well.

But as He also said, “those who live by the sword shall die by the sword”; turn away from corruption and using violence for your own gains.  From highwaymen of the old west, to mobsters of the 20’s and gangbangers of today; to build your life upon violence is surely a way to end it in violence.

But to have a sword ready to turn back evil is no sin.

The sin falls upon anyone who would try to deny the ability of another to defend themselves from the evil in the world and thereby making them slaves to the whims of evil men.

During the Christmas and the Holiday Season be as lambs to each other and lions to those with malice in their hearts who would dare harm you and yours.

Merry Christmas to all!

 

It’s the end of the world as we know it…if gun grabbers have their way

Never a group to let a tragedy go to waste when they can exploit the blood of innocents for their own purposes, rabid anti gun zealots have been coming out of the woodwork recently to promote their agenda on the backs of 20 innocent children.

Firstly we will start with the President.  The President who so many have defending in regards to the Second Amendment by saying he didn’t try to pass gun control in his first term so he must be pro gun.

Oh, those naive fools.  How many times did I tell them that when a politician has to face a re-election he will LIE in order to get re-elected and if he doesn’t have another election then his true colors will show.  I detailed his statements and actions for the passed 20 years yet they only listened to his words from the last 8 months (minus that little “we need an assault weapons ban” slip in the debate).

But here we are.  Obama doesn’t have to placate anyone anymore.  He can do what he likes, and what he likes is GUN CONTROL.  Actually, considering he runs the office of President the way third world dictators run their country, it’s more that he likes CONTROL and guns are the last hurdle for him in regards to control.

Obama asked gun control supporters to help pass laws banning the sale of military-style assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition clips and requiring background checks for all gun purchases.

Yep…he wants your guns.  If only someone had tried to tell you Obama gun owners that…hmmmm…

But its not just from the top.  Galvanized like ghouls bathed in blood, the stalwarts of gun control have oozed to the forefront of the conversation looking to push their agenda of the back of tragedy.

Dianne Feinstein has once again vowed to reintroduce a Federal Assault Wepaons Ban.  She claims its “for the children” but her insincerity is palpable seeing how CT all ready had an AWB in place and it did nothing to prevent the tragedy at Newtown. She is just a gun control hack, and now she sees an opportunity to move forward with it.

I’m not surprised by Feinstein’s actions, it’s just her modus opperandi.  What does surprise me is some of the other names who are joining the gun control hysteria.

Namely the Democratic Senators from Pennsylvania and West Virginia.  Bob Casey and Joe Manchin have long espoused their pro gun stances, though when push came to shove they were never very reliable.  But at least they would give enough lip service to get the support of gun owners in their states to get elected.

But now?  Bob Casey has come out and said he will vote in favor of a federal assault weapons ban.

Joe Manchin is trying to have his cake and eat it too.  When he intially spoke out after the Newtown shooting, many took his comments as supporting gun bans.  After enough flak he “clarified” by stating he is “pushing for a discussion not a ban”.

What discussion?  We’ve been having a discussion since at least 1994.  Just because the gun control zealots don’t like the discussion because its full of facts, logic and statistics doesn’t mean we haven’t had it.  Just because gun control zealots can’t defend the fact that Gun Free Zones allow for massacres to take place, that the AWB of 1994 produced no change in crime nor did its repeal increase crime, and that the states with less laws controlling guns have a lower crime rate than oppressive states; just because the zealots don’t like the conversation doesn’t mean they are allowed to say we haven’t had it.

Unless, their idea of a “conversation” is a way to twist public sentiment with a tragedy for a complete gun ban.

But this gun ban frenzy is trickling down to the state and local level as well.

A freshman state senator from Maryland, Brian Frosh, is leading state efforts for banning guns.  Included is an assault weapons ban that would make illegal 45 guns, a handgun ban in public places, bars and places of worship and a reduction of clip sizes.

While similar measures have failed to pass before, Frosh (echoing Manchin) has said that the terms of the gun control debate has changed.

In other words, Frosh will use a isolated tragedy to push for an agenda that has failed a number of times before.  All under the auspices of “the children”

Frosh states:

“The message from the tragic shootings in Newtown, Connecticut is clear. We must act now to protect our children, our families and our communities.”

I guess Frosh feels that by replicating the environment that caused the massacre in the first place (bans for law abiding, GFZ’s etc) that will somehow improve things.

But while one can see how a state like Maryland may get behind this, even in places like New Hampshire, the “Live Free of Die” state, has looked to curtail that freedom.

A New Hampshire House committee has voted in favor of a ban on carrying guns on the House floor, gallery and adjacent areas.

These are just the some of the actions that are getting cobbled together before the Holidays.  The worst is yet to come no doubt.  I haven’t even broached what might happen if Obama gets the chance to replace one of the Heller 5 on the Supreme Court with another two faced, lip service giving, anti gun justice like Sotomayor.

If a portion of these measures are passed, then it will be the end of the world in which there is a Constitutionally enumerated personal right to keep and bear arms.

Join us in the fight to ensure that never happens.

 

 

Companies knee jerk reaction to gun control hysteria

There are several corporations and companies that have decided that they will kow tow to the vocal hysteria of the gun control zealots.

Dick’s Sporting goods will no longer be selling sporting rifles at their locations.

Wal-Mart, while saying they will not be changing their inventory has removed the Bushmaster AR-15 from its website.

CheaperThanDirt.com has halted online sales of guns

Even non gun grabbing politicians are backing away from pro gun legislation.  Michigan Governor Rick Snyder picked political expediency over common sense by vetoing a bill that, if enacted in Connecticut, may have saved a number of lives.   The bill would have gotten rid of schools illusionary gun free zone status, thereby not disarming law abiding citizens and teachers from carrying on school grounds.  Considering that criminals and lunatics don’t adhere to the GFZ to begin with, how vetoing this bill does anything for the safety of the children is beyond me.

The worst offender I discovered is the Discovery Channel.  The Discovery Channel has cancelled 2 popular television shows due to the fear of backlash.  The shows are “American Guns“, about a family of Colorado gun smiths and Ted Nugents “Gun Country“. With Sons of Guns being on the chopping block.  Discovery seems to be trying to stagger the announcements of each show as to give off the appearance that they aren’t targeting gun related shows.

Discovery Channels craven and cowardly cave in to gun control zealots both here and abroad is one thing.  The message they send based on there other programming is appalling though.  I took a look at some of their other programs and the fact that Discovery will cancel gun shows because they are viewed as a bad influence on American culture gives de facto credence to the shows that are not cancelled being good for American culture.

Shows like Amish Mafia and Bootleggers.

So, promoting criminal activity is fine for Discovery Channel but shows about the exercising and enjoyment of a Constitutionally enumerated right is beyond the pale?

These companies should be shunned so that they realize that their knee jerk reactions have consequences and that if they will not support our rights than we should not support them.  Let the foaming at the mouth rabid gun control crowd have their sign toting protests and hurl vitriol as they are wont to do.  I protest with my wallet and if Dicks Sporting Goods doesn’t want my money I am sure to find another store who will.

If Rick Snyder will not stand tough to do what is right, I hope the voters of Michigan remember that during the next election.

And if Discovery Channel believes in promoting Amish Mafia and bootlegging instead of legal pursuits like firearm manufacturing than I don’t really need to give them my viewership.

Perhaps when the companies that have turned their backs on the 2nd Amendment see the amount of money they are losing they will reconsider their decisions.  Though that doesn’t mean I am prone to reconsider mine.

 

Massacre that wasn’t due to an armed Principal

Mayor Bloomberg claims that he doesn’t know what good a gun would do in stopping a school shooting.  Allow me to remind him of Pearl High School and a would be massacre that occurred on Dec. 17, 1997.  “Would-be” being the operative term.

Bookish and overweight, a 16 year old kills his mother with a butcher knife, puts on a trench coat, hides his .30-30 rifle under it and drives to school.  Upon arriving in the parking lot he opens fire killing two and injuring others.

He would have continued his killing spree, killing countless others, until hero assistant Principal Joel Myrick heard the shots and ran to his truck. He unlocked the door, removed his gun from its case, removed a round of bullets from another case, loaded the gun and went looking for the killer. “I’ve always kept a gun in the truck just in case something like this ever happened,” said Myrick.

The shooter, surprised that anyone would be armed and that his life might actually be in danger, tries to talk to Myrick but eventually drops to the ground and is subdued until police arrive.

This just strengthens my argument that mass shooters, by and large, are cowards and that is why they go to gun free zones.  They do not need to fear an unarmed population.  But the minute someone steps up to confront them with a firearm (be they police or a lawful citizen) they cower and either give up, flee, or kill themselves.

Chances are you never heard of Joel Myrick.  Most periodicals that ran the story at the time, just wrote as little as they could about him.  It is as if the press only grudgingly acknowledged his role.  An armed principal stopping a school shooting?  Nonsense, according to gun control zealots and their media accomplices that just never happens.

I am sure there are dozens of people who are alive today thanks to the heroism of Joel Myrick.  The shooter, upon his arrest admitted that after he was done shooting up the high school he was going to make his way to the Junior high and continue his rampage.  That was before an armed principal stopped the carnage in its tracks.

But for the media and ghouls like Bloomberg who feed their agenda with tragedy, such things apparently never happen.

 

I guess stopping a shooting spree doesn’t make you a hero

Or at least that is what the press would have us believe.

The anti gun media, with their sensationalism will go on and on about how unarmed people acted bravely as they died at the hands of a lunatic, but nary a word about an armed person stopping a massacre before it barely begun.

I’m speaking of the actions displayed by Nick Meli.  Actions that gun control zealots and the media would have you believe didn’t exist.  You see, before the Gun Free Zone facilitated 27 murders in Newtown Connecticut, there was an attempted mass murder clear across the country in Portland Oregon.

A masked man stormed into the Clackamas Mall and opened fire, killing 2 and injuring 1.  The shooter had no intentions of stopping.  That is when Nick Meli made his move, drew his concealed pistol and lined the shooter up in his sights.

As with many of these rampage shooters, they are cowards.  They will cull unarmed sheep, but when they find any resistance  or have to look down the barrel f a gun themselves, their cowardice is revealed and they often times flee or shoot themselves.

In this case, it was the latter.  Nick Meli didn’t fall into the caricature that gun control crowd draw of gun owners. He didn’t launch a salvo of bullets at the killer, he didn’t think himself some vigilante praying to use his gun.  He was a guy just trying to help.

He saw that there was people behind his target and that if he missed he may hit them.  He positioned himself in a store and waited for his shot.  The killer opted to take his own life. Nick Meli saved countless lives that day.  But apparently, that isn’t sexy enough for the national media.

And in ignorance and a bit of outlandish blind eye turning, the gun control zealots do not even allow that such a thing as using a gun to stop a mass murder is possible.  Not only is it possible, but it happens, yet unless you live near and hear it on the local news, you would be led to believe that such things are a fantasy of gun rights activists.

I’m don’t want to take away any praise for a teacher who saved her students by shielding them, but why do we only praise unarmed victims who have to die for the propagation of Gun Free Zones?  Why can we not also praise the good Samaritan, who was armed with a gun, who not only lived, but saved dozens (if not hundreds) of lives himself?

Pompous blowhards like Bloomberg contend that having a gun when someone is on a murder spree will have no benefit.  Perhaps Bloomberg doesn’t view saving the lives of children at the cost of his own agenda as a benefit…but I do.

What can one sheep dog do when a wolf descends?  More than the sheep can do alone.

 

Rabid Gun Control Zealots Descend Upon Tragedy

I was on a plane for most of Friday.  I heard about the CT school shooting while talking to some fellow travelers in Chicago’s Midway Airport.  Out of respect for the victims I wanted to give it a few days before I broached any political topics in regards to the shooting at Newtown Elementary School in CT.

Of course, like a pack of rabid dogs the gun control zealots descended upon the tragedy and while traipsing over the still warm bodies of children, called for the utter elimination of the 2nd Amendment.

They do not highlight that the shooter was a sociopath.

They do not highlight that he stole the guns.

They do not highlight that CT has strict gun regulations and an assault weapons ban.

No, the demonize his tool for his actions.  In truth, to hear some of them talk, it was the guns fault that he committed this heinous act.  THEY ARE MAKING EXCUSES FOR HIM.

My fury and contempt for these sniveling gun grabbing cowards has been stoked.  How dare they, these pathetic examples of Americans, try to mitigate the fault laid at Adam Lanza’s feet?

I do not want this to become an angry rant, but I cannot help recall in Shakespeare’s  Henry V, when the unarmed boys of the baggage were killed by the French in cowardly knavery, Henry responds:

I was not angry since I came to France, Until this instant.

And I was not angry at the gun grabbers until now.  They were always craven and cowardly in my eyes, but I felt that a response to ignorance and naivete.  But now?  How dare they?  They would blame an inanimate object and by thus try to lessen the guilt of the murderer.

And not only lessening his guilt but by trying to rake the killers mother, his first victim, over the coals by painting her as an extremist and kook.  They want the public to feel sorry for Adam Lanza ‘the killer of children’, because if they do, then they can look for scapegoats.  And the Schumbers, Bloombergs and Feinsteins of the world are chomping at the bit to name that scapegoat…firearms and those who have them.

Before the little bodies of the children were cold, these “Champions of Gun Control” were on the air, paying lip service to the victims while reveling in the opportunity to “tip the scales” in favor of banning guns.

With Schumer giddy about the idea of tipping the scales, Feinstein wasted no time in promising that she will introduce an assault weapons ban immediately upon the beginning of the next congress.

Bloomberg, the ghoul of gun control, who has never let a tragedy go by that he doesn’t insinuate himself into, has gone so far as saying he has a gun control wish list that Obama should adhere to and then absurdly claims that these types of tragedies only happen in America.  Apparently, we annexed Norway when I wasn’t looking.

Of course, these slimy opportunists are trying to give America the Kansas City Shuffle because their real agenda is not, “common sense” gun laws, because Connecticut had these “common sense” gun laws AND an assault weapons ban.

The school was a gun free zone and there is a waiting period to purchase firearms.

Adam Lanza, was 20 years old and he stole the firearms he used.  Any gun control measure short of an absolute ban would not have stopped this tragedy and even then, since Prohibition and the War on Drugs worked so well, why do people believe a ban on guns would be any better?

But that is what these rabid zealots want.  They lull in people with buzz words like “common sense” and stoke the fire of fear with straw men terms like “assault weapon” but the fact of the matter is, they are ghouls who will use the dead in order to advance their agenda.  An agenda that has utterly failed 20 children in Connecticut

Blood runs in the streets because gun free zones deny the right to the lawful…the criminals and the insane care not.

I agree that there should be a discussion.  The discussion should be about how to eliminate gun free zones so tragedies like this can be mitigated.

The only politician I have heard that has the character and courage to face the blistering attacks by the zealots and their complicit media allies is Texas Congressman Louie Gohmert who said that an armed Principal could have made all the difference.

“I wish to God (the principal) had had an M4 in her office, locked up, so when she heard gunfire she pulls it out … and takes him out, takes his head off before he can kill those precious kids,”

How many more innocent lives must be sacrificed for the illusion of a “Gun Free Zone”?  Tell me again how criminals and lunatics follow the rules.

And the gun banners like Schumer, Feinstein and Bloomberg make suggestions that would not have prevented this tragedy.  Rep. Gohmert is the only person I have heard of that is suggesting something that might help.

Once again, CT has an assault weapons ban.  So Feinstein trying to renew an AWB is her own pet project that she is disingenuously trying to launch of the backs of 20 innocent souls.  Her selfishness is sickening.

As I have said, I am angry.  Angry at the lunatic who murdered these innocent children and their teachers and if possible, angrier still at those cowardly bastards who would excuse his behavior in order to advance their own agenda.

The tragedy at Newtown can be laid directly at the feet of Gun Control. And if the gun control zealots have their way…blood will run in the gun free streets.

 

Florida loophole fear mongering debunked

Despite what rabid pittbull AG-elect Kathleen Kane of Pennsylvania might have you believe, there is no threat from the “Florida loop hole” that Bloomberg generated as a straw man.

For those of you who may not be aware, citizens of states in which they are arbitrarily rejected for a carry permit (without good cause) have a back up option in applying for a Florida carry permit.  This is of great help to those who live in may-issue states or cities that make it difficult to get a permit (such as Philadelphia) in which the issuing officer may be a gun control zealot.

Plus, the Florida permit is recognized in 33 states.

The gun control zealots and foaming attack dogs like Kathleen Kane would have you believe that serial killers are being denied gun permits in their home states and then are flocking to Florida in order to get a permit in which they have to qualify with their weapon by shooting baby otters while high on cocaine.

The fact of the matter is that Florida still runs background checks and probably does it more thoroughly than other states.  ESPECIALLY may issue states.  Florida wants to be thorough because they cannot stop a law abiding citizen from getting a CCW so they want to make sure that said person is law abiding.

This is what qualifies a person for a Florida CCW:

Who Is Eligible To Be Licensed?

A person who meets the following minimum
eligibility requirements can obtain a license:

• You must be a United States citizen or a
permanent legal resident alien.
• You must currently reside in the United
States.
• You must be 21 years of age or older.
• You must be able to demonstrate competency
with a firearm.

Who Is NOT Eligible?

There are several disqualifying conditions that
will result in the ineligibility of the applicant and the
denial of the application. Possible reasons for denial
include the following:

• The physical inability to handle a firearm
safely.
• A felony conviction (unless civil and firearm
rights have been restored by the convicting
authority).
• Having adjudication withheld or sentence
suspended on a felony or misdemeanor crime
of violence unless three years have elapsed
since probation or other conditions set by the
court have been fulfilled.
• A conviction for a violent crime in the last
three years, either misdemeanor or felony.
• A conviction for violation of controlled
substance laws or multiple arrests for such
offenses.
• A record of drug or alcohol abuse.
• Two or more DUI convictions within the
previous 3 years.
• Being committed to a mental institution or
adjudged incompetent or mentally defective.
• Failing to provide proof of proficiency with a
firearm.
• Having been issued a domestic violence
injunction or an injunction against repeat
violence that is currently in force.
• Renunciation of U.S. citizenship.
• A dishonorable discharge from the armed
forces.
• Being a fugitive from justice

SO…in order to get a CCW from Florida you have to pass ALL of these requirements, stricter than many states including Kathleen Kane’s Pennsylvania.  My question is, if a person can pass muster and come up with a clean background check and doesn’t have any of the reasons for disqualification, why were they denied in their home state?

That’s simple, the rabid gun control zealots of their home state don’t want people to exercise their second amendment rights so they arbitrarily deny these people.  Then the foaming at the mouth zealots get affronted that the peons would DARE seek out a more reasonable clime for which to get a permit.

To even further debunk Ms. Kane’s virulent attack on people’s rights, Florida has had to revoke an infinitesimal .3% of its permits for one reason or another.  That’s not 3%…that’s three tenths of one percent.

In 25 years the state of Florida has issued 2.3 million carry permits.  Out of all these permits issued only about 7,200 have needed to be rescinded.

2,300,000 issued

7,244 revoked

3/10 of 1 percent.

But try telling that to fanatical mouth foamers like Kathleen Kane and you will be ignored because it’s not about facts or truth or rights, but rather pushing her and her puppet master Bloomberg’s radical anti gun agenda.  The reason the so called “Florida loophole” angers them so is because it shows that people are being denied in states that shouldn’t be denied.  It’s an affront on their power to control the people they view as subjects.

Florida Loophole?  Only if you think legally exercising your rights against tyranny is a loophole…oh wait…that’s exactly what Kane and Bloomberg think a loophole is.

 

And then there were none

The Illinois handgun carry ban has been struck down by the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals.  Illinois was the lone hold out banning its citizens from carrying firearms away from their homes.  I wanted to take a day and let some of the dust settle before I took a critical look at what this actually means.

First of all, by no means is this a BAD thing.  So don’t think that just because it seems like I am not doing back flips it means I think the court ruling was a negative.  The court ruled that banning the carrying of a weapon is unconstitutional, and that’s good.

The problem is, that unless the opponents of personal defensive carry fight on to the Supreme Court, this ruling will only have limited reach.

What do I mean by that?  Well, let’s look at what roadblocks that Illinois, and by that I mean Chicago, will try to throw up in order to derail and undermine the spirit of this ruling.

You have a Governor who tried to ban so called assault weapons by fiat.  You have a legislature that tried to levy a luxury tax on bullets and successful passed a punitive tax on firearms.  And you have the biggest city in the state a den of thugs and vipers who tend to use Constitution to wipe their butts after they’re done taking a dump on the rights of citizens.

This is not necessarily the ideal situation to see a great deal of pro gun carry legislation passed into law.

What I am afraid to see happen is that, much like Hawaii, Illinois will pass may issue and then just refuse to issue to anyone.  Though with the size and diversity of Illinois it may be more of a may issue situation like Maryland that it is difficult to impossible in some parts of the state to get a permit, and relatively easier in others.

If given the freedom, Chicago will most likely follow New York City’s example and give permits via cronyism, where only the connected, rich or famous are issued permits.  When crime doesn’t go down in Chicago, gun control advocates will claim that the carry legislation has done nothing for crime, though will fail to point out that their law abiding citizens are still unarmed and that the criminals are not getting CCW’s in the first place.

The courts gave the state 180 days to come up with legislation to enact a carry system.  Outside of that they gave them very little direction to go on.  So the state legislature may still come up with the harshest, most cost prohibitive and arbitrary permitting system to which all but keeps a de facto ban in place.

Listening to  Barbara Flynn Currie, the House Majority Leader and a longtime gun control advocate, I think that is exactly what she has in mind.  Currie spoke out after the ruling:

“I expect a battle, the proponents of concealed carry have not yet carried the day.”

Not yet carried the day?  Them’s are fightin words.  Currie seems set to dig her heels in and stop any sensible legislation.

But with this ruling, perhaps the pendulum has swung enough that it won’t matter how big of a petulant hissy fit Currie and other gun control zealots throw.  They have been so unreasonable for so long, perhaps they have marginalized themselves out of a position of influence.

I like what Richard Pearson, the executive director of the Illinois State Rifle Association, had to say:

“We bent over backwards before and tried to accommodate everybody, and they just threw it in the garbage. Maybe we won’t be so accommodating now.”

Hear hear.  Nor should they be accommodating.  The inception of carry legislation holds the most potential.  Proponents must shoot for the moon (pun) and try to get the most initially.  It will be harder to expand carry rules after they are initially set because the gun control crowd will always say “but you have enough all ready”, “blood in the streets”, “the children” etc etc etc.

Even in pro gun states like Florida and Texas, they haven’t been able to pass Open Carry after numerous attempts because “it’s fine the way it is”.  I say poppycock to that, infringement is never “fine”.

I don’t expect Illinois to pass constitutional carry right off the bat (if they did I would have to cup my ears because my mind would be BLOWN) but that should be the goal of every state that have people who believe in the constitution.  The closer you start to Constitutional Carry, the less you have to travel to get there.

It’s sad that, like a number of states, Illinois is a pretty conservative pro gun place, minus the one ugly boil of thuggery and oppression that festers therein…known as major cities.  New York has NYC, Pennsylvania has Philadelphia and Illinois has Chicago.  Hopefully, gun proponents within the state will stay strong and not cave to Chicago style politics.

It will be an interesting 6 months.  I have hope for the state, but in a place where the dead rise and vote often, nothing is guaranteed.  But who knows, maybe IL will become a shall issue, open carry, FFA state right off the bat.  Tis the seasons for miracles after all!

On a side note, the ruling in this case was 2-1.  That means there was a Judge who did NOT believe that the 2nd Amendment gives you the right to bear arms.

Considering the Supreme Court holds a single vote difference as well, let us hope that Roberts, Scalia, Thomas, Kennedy, and Alito are training, eating their vitamins and sayin their prayers, staying true to themselves and true to their country like all good Hulkamaniacs.  We need them to stick around until we have a president who will not sell out the 2nd Amendment under the radar.

Regardless of what the future holds, this is a good step.  Even if there are gun grabbing justices who would like to legislate from the bench and use the Constitution for toilet paper, so long as we keep winning cases and securing the right enumerated at our founding, we’re heading in the right direction.

Carry on Illinois!