Category Archives: Gun News

No Borders, No Rules = Dictatorship!

This was a heavy news week. Tens of thousands of illegals trampled over our borders. Where is the President? Out campaigning. The head of the IRS knew about the missing or lost emails at the last hearing, yet said nothing! Where is the President? Out campaigning! Five very nasty terrorists are released for one U.S. soldier. Where is the president? Out campaigning.

What’s he campaigning for? He already won. We are stuck with him 2.5 more years, maybe! (The smell of impeachment is in the air.) Many of the Democrats running for office don’t want him involved. Some have even asked him to stay away!

The Prez went on attacking Republicans for all his failures. Apparently, the man can’t take responsibility for anything. Anyone who thinks they are right all the time is a danger to himself and to others.

Since I’ve been doing my radio show, (now over 700 of them “in the can”) I have done many stories where this President has failed the American people miserably. At first I thought it was incompetence. I thought maybe his years as a community organizer just didn’t expose him to enough to be a real leader. Surely his years in the legislature surely would have prepared him for the decision-making duties of a president? Right? I’m sure all those “present” votes on tough issues had to teach him something.

Yes, those experiences, and many others, have put him in a position to be the worst president in American history! By now many Dems are begging to have Jimmy Carter back. In fact, I suspect many Republicans would rather have him back, as well!

We’ll pause here a moment to allow some of you to shout “racist” simply because I don’t agree with or like the president. PAUSE. OK, now back to reality.

This president doesn’t care for our borders, at all. He has the money for it but has not finished the border fence. Why doesn’t he care? He doesn’t want borders. If he did, he would finish the fence, send down the guards, and protect Americans. He’s not interested.

It’s interesting that Mexico usually captures, beats, and returns those who cross over their southern borders illegally. Apparently that is no longer the case. We are seeing an influx of illegals coming from South America and Mexico at record numbers. Instead of following our own deportation rules, the president has told his people that we are to care for, document, feed, and clothe those coming over the border illegally. We can’t help our veterans. Only the illegals. We have homeless vets that we can’t put in some of the military bases across the country, but we can, fly, bus, and truck illegals in to occupy those places. We can fly in medical personnel and supplies, but we can’t do the same for our vets.

This president complained about Mr. Bush’s overreach of power and the many executive orders that Mr. Bush signed, however, he is catching up to that number fast! And, if you “lefties” were being honest, there is a difference between the type of executive orders Mr. Bush signed and the ones that Mr. Obama has signed. A majority of Mr. Obama’s executive orders change laws. That’s what the legislative branch is supposed to do. Mr. Bush’s executive orders largely revolved around sending needed medical supplies to third world nations, including Africa, to help stop the spread of HIV.

This president’s continuous lies (not misspeaks) about his healthcare plan, NSA spying, the Mexican-American gun-running scheme, his Benghazi cover-up, his IRS targeting conservatives, DOJ spying on the press, and too many more to list here. I could eat up this whole article listing how this president runs his office as a dictator.

His recent comments about how he will not wait for Congress shows his disdain for the American people, our laws, and way of life. If he loved the people and the country, he would abide by the laws he swore to uphold. But the truth for him is very hard to find.

Read more at The Real Side

America Has a New Owner and It Ain’t George Soros!

This has been a very big news week with lots of stories to draw us
away. Gwyneth Paltrow says water has feelings, Charlize Theron compares “Press intrusion” to rape! Why do we give place to these morons? And Mr. Obama’s “Lets get physical?” workout recording. Even with all that great news, I was stuck on an interview with the President, and King, Mr. Obama.

I was under the impression that Mr. Obama was a constitutional professor at some school who’s records I am sure have been sealed by court order at this time.

I was always taught and have seen that there are 3 branches of government. Please don’t make me explain all of this. If you don’t know, please, immediately rip up your voter card.

The branches of government were created and configured to keep each other in check so that no one group would have all the power. Our Founding Fathers knew that if any one group had the ability to grab all the power they would and we would quickly become a monarchy or dictatorship. These were very smart men.

The current president and constitutional professor can’t seem to find the truth if you put it in a marked bag using orange reflective highway paint and handed it to him. Even members of his own team are calling him out. He claims that the Bergdahl swap was a “time is of the essence” thing. Not true! There was no imminent danger. He wasn’t dying and there was no immediate threat of execution.

President Obama said in the interview that he makes no apologies for his decision because a man was left behind in uniform, fighting for his country. I won’t deal with the desertion issue right now, but this guy has been captured for years with negotiations going on for many months. At first, they wanted to trade for dollars, but his joint chiefs and executive members advised against it.

Now, the opportunity to negotiate came back around again and the president decided this is all his call. He has a pen and a phone and he is not willing to wait on Congress as the law requires. For good measure, he runs it by his joint chiefs and executive staff. They all say it’s a bad idea and sets a bad precedent. But, hey, don’t let the experts or the law get in the way! This president sees no one above himself, in intelligence or power or expertise. No one!

As he has done so many times in the past, he once again disregards the experts and decides he will make the trade and break the law by not informing the Security Council and he makes the deal. Now to prove this is a non-partisan issue, his own senior party members are furious over this. Some agree it was a bad move. Most are mad because he didn’t let them know, once again showing that he sees himself as the supreme leader and overseer.

A phrase he used in the interview made the hair on the back of my neck stand up. When asked by the interviewer was there anything wrong with what he did he says:

I make no apologies for it. It was a unanimous decision among my principals in my government, and a view that was shared by the Joint Chiefs of Staff. This is something I would do again and will continue to do whenever I have an opportunity.

First of all, Mr. Dictator, it is NOT “your government”! It’s the “people’s government.” It’s a government for the people by the people, not for Obama by what’s good for Obama. Second, you lie! Your team, your principles, were not in agreement. They all told you it was a bad move, but, as usual, you ignored the experts because you see yourself in the realm of “godhood” and no one can possibly know more than you. Why even waste everyone’s time with asking those in your staff? He said he would do it again, and will continue, when the opportunity arises. Total disregard for the law, the truth, and the experts hired to guide him!

How about you do this for the first time… pick up the phone and call the Mexican president and get our Marine out of jail! Hello! Do something good! Making THAT phone call would not violate any laws. It’s part of your JOB!


Read the rest at http://therealside.com/2014/06/america-has-a-new-owner-and-it-aint-george-soros/#t9D688rj1HQpJ7C1.99

Political Correctness Brings More Shooting Sprees!

This story is tragic… for the family of the victims and the shooter, and for a community that will be, for a time, trying to piece this all together. I mean no disrespect to the families, victims, doctors, or responders to this event.

Over the weekend, a very disturbed young man killed 6 people (3 stabbed, 3 shot) and injured several others (some with his car) before turning the gun on himself.

The calls on Facebook went out immediately, “full background checks for all gun sales”, “we need to make it harder for people to get guns”, “high capacity magazines need to be banned”, and “no one needs a gun”. But really America, excuse me, really LIBERAL America, get a grip! This is the perfect case to show how foolish all those comments are!

This piece is going to be a little harsh, so stop reading if you don’t want an in-your-face look at this massacre.

Let’s start with the fact that Elliot Rodger was a very disturbed young man. He had been for some time before this killing rampage. As with many of these types of incidents, I am sure we will find out that many around him were “creeped” out by him and that he showed warning signs similar to those seen in other shootings.

Police had had contact with this young man several times. On one occasion they even said that after they met with him they found him to be, “polite and courteous,” even “timid and shy.” He indicated to deputies that he was having trouble in his social life and would not be coming back to school next semester. No big deal. Basically, a routine call.

Reports indicate Rodger was “being seen by a variety of health care professionals” but those details are protected information. In discussions with some of the locals and on police reports, Rodgers showed signs of aggression and irritation towards anyone that would not accept him. His 141 page manifesto and the video testimonials show a very disturbed young man. Let me repeat, a VERY DISTURBED young man.

Rodger’s friends said the reason he was hard to be around, male and female alike, is that he was constantly whining about either how he couldn’t get a date or bragging about his looks, sense of style, nice car, how well-spoken he was, and so on. In his recordings and writings he was obsessed with having sex and couldn’t understand why most of the women at college wouldn’t want to be with such a wonderful, awesome, handsome guy (him). In one of the videos he indicates this has been building up inside him for 8 years. And no one saw it? Or maybe, no one was willing to say anything?

The system failed the families affected by this tragedy! The police, the background checks, the parents, the neighbors, YES, the whole system.

The parents knew there was something up with this guy. They knew he was seeing a VARIETY of mental health professionals. Why? A family member called the police and alerted them to the many videos he had online that were disturbing and should have set off all kinds of bells and whistles with the college, the parents, the police, and others.

But because we can’t talk about someone’s mental health (it’s politically incorrect, you know) it’s better to keep those issues private than make sure we don’t have college campus stabbings and shootings, elementary school shootings, and mall shootings. Does this sound ridiculous to anyone else?

Rodger got these guns legally. He passed a background check. HOW? The system failed him and the community, that’s how. Regardless of all the calls on Facebook for more gun control, this is not a gun issue. It’s a mental health issue. He didn’t just use guns to do the damage he did. He also stabbed 3 people to death and injured several with his car. Will the next call be to control and ban knives and cars?

Looking around just a little into Rogers you find things like an obsession with YouTube videos like, eight minutes of the gory Game Of Thrones “Red Wedding” episode and Philosophy of the Knife, a graphic film about Japanese torture during World War II. Why didn’t his therapists see this as an issue?

Keep in mind he has his guns legally! He passed the federal gun check. WHY? According to the family lawyer he was being treated by multiple therapists and had been diagnosed as “a high-functioning patient with Asperger syndrome.” So, how did he get guns? Political correctness. We can’t talk about the mental health issue.


Read more at http://therealside.com/2014/05/political-correctness-brings-more-shooting-sprees/#GRGWYuGVmvrm2kKH.99

Why there is no .22 long rifle (22LR) ammo on the shelves

.22LR for saleWhile many reports blame capacity or a conspiracy theory, the real reason that .22LR  ammo is short supply is simple – us.

Don’t believe that? Remember when .223/5.56 ammo was selling for $1.00 – $1.25 per round? Remember 9mm at ridiculous prices? That’s not happening anymore is it?

Why not?

Eventually, demand quit being the problem. The average consumer decided that they would no longer pay gouged prices for .223 and 9mm and within weeks that ammo was plentiful on store shelves at much more reasonable prices.

Unfortunately, that crisis mentality has also taught the manufacturers that shooters were willing to pay more than .30 per round for AR-15 ammo, almost as much for 7.62×39 ammo and way too much for .22LR ammo. We are likely stuck with those prices for some time to come – darn it.

Now we come to .22LR.

At a recent local gun show, an older man was selling Federal 50 round red box .22LR for $15 per box – what is worse… people were paying it.

Other vendors were selling .22LR 500 round bulk packs for over $60 (some as much as $105). A complete and total rip-off, but people were paying it. STOP!

Wholesale prices on .22LR allow retailers to make significant profit at .06 – .09 per round depending on manufacturer and cartridge type. That’s $30 – $45 for a quality 500 round brick – not $60-$90 per pack.

When consumers decided that they would no longer pay too much for AR ammo, 9mm ammo or other ammo – those rounds suddenly showed up everywhere. Now, consumers must do the same or risk another year of .22 shortages.

The internals are where the difference is made (aka “grey market” selling.) If consumers are willing to pay too much for an item, a certain “profiteering” portion of the population will take advantage of them. Guess what happens to the profiteers when no one will pay for over-priced stuff?

The grey marketeers are the ones that show up at Wal-Mart and Bass Pro Shops exactly when the truck arrives. They are the close friends of those who work at Wal-Mart, Dick’s and other retailers that sell .22 ammo. They are out to make a fortune on your misfortune and they cannot allow YOU to get ammo at retail or you won’t pay their exorbitant gouge-level pricing.

If shooters want to see an end to the .22LR mess, they only need to do one thing – stop paying more than .09 per round for .22. Shopping for .05-07 would be even better.

Once the profiteers can no longer make a buck off of the shooting consumer, they will move on to something else – and we wish they would do it sooner rather than later.

Are You Smarter Than a Supreme Court Judge?

Stevens’ idea for amending the Constitution is a loser, too.

Stevens’ idea for amending the Constitution is a loser, too.

April was not a good month for Americans that still believe the Supreme Court is a font of legal wisdom. Former Justice John Paul Stevens authored an Op–Ed in the WaPost proving you can be ignorant of history, blinded by ideology and confused regarding the plain meaning of words and still get to wear the black robe.

Stevens’ essay was titled ‘The five extra words that can fix the Second Amendment.’

And no, Stevens’ five words weren’t “you can’t have a gun,” but that’s a good guess.

He began his effort in problem–solving by using the left’s favorite technique: Use distorted statistics to shock the public and advance a disingenuous argument: “Each year, more than 30,000 people die in the United States in firearm-related incidents.”

That’s a big number. Almost as big as the total number of Americans killed each year in car crashes. What Stevens purposely leaves out is the fact that 19,392 — or six in ten — of those deaths were suicide!

Once the suicide is removed from the total, it become obvious that riding in a car driven by a cell phone–wielding woman is much more dangerous than living in Virginia where people are allowed to carry guns openly. And cell phones aren’t protected by the Constitution.

What Stevens should be calling for is federal suicide control. If Congress would stop listening to the mortuary lobby and pass an effective law banning suicide — or at least get the ball rolling by creating suicide–free zones (this alone would speed up Metro travel in DC) — we could eliminate almost two–thirds of the gun deaths overnight.

The rest of the country could experience the safety and tranquility that residents of Detroit and Chicago currently enjoy in their gun–free cities. Once suicide is outlawed only criminals will kill themselves, surely a win–win.

But suicide doesn’t generate much news coverage so publicity–seekers aren’t interested in this sensible step to prevent unnecessary death.

Stevens contends the interpretation of the 2nd Amendment was ‘settled,’ much like global warming science, until the NRA went rogue. “For more than 200 years… federal judges uniformly understood that the right…was limited in two ways: First, it applied only to keeping and bearing arms for military purposes, and second, while it limited the power of the federal government, it did not impose any limit whatsoever on the power of states or local governments to regulate the ownership or use of firearms.”

That’s accurate without being truthful, since for two centuries neither states nor the federal government were trying to ban types of weapons, restrict the sale of weapons or impose ownership restrictions. So who would file a suit to stop an infringement that didn’t exist?

As for not imposing a limit on state or local governments, Stevens proves his knowledge of the Constitution is limited. If what he wrote is true then the Bill of Rights wouldn’t prevent states and cities from limiting speech, searching without a warrant and shutting down the newspaper if it criticized Barack Obama.

Stevens then lurches from urging judges to butt out because, “Public policies concerning gun control should be decided by the voters’ elected representatives, not by federal judges.” To complaining that those same legislators aren’t doing enough to seize weapons from the law abiding in the wake of Virginia Tech and Sandy Hook.

Before gracing us with his five–word prescription for domestic gun bliss, Stevens’ last contribution is to completely misrepresent the Bill of Rights and specifically the 2nd Amendment. He claims the amendment “was adopted to protect the states from federal interference with their power to ensure that their militias were “well regulated.” This is ludicrous on its face. The Bill of Rights was added to the Constitution to protect individual rights and without those 10 amendments the Constitution would not have passed.

The obvious plain language of the 2nd protects an individual right to own weapons, but that’s evidently too subtle for a retired Supreme Court justice.

Then Stevens graces us with his solution: His amended amendment: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms when serving in the Militia shall not be infringed.”

If anything those five words would initiate an explosion of litigation.

In Athens a citizen was subject to military service until age 60. I figure I can pull a trigger until well into my 90’s. Sixteen–year–olds often served in militias, too, so many underage restrictions go by the board, thanks to Stevens.

As a serving militia member I will need my weapons at hand in case of a sudden call out. That makes militia members immune to any restrictions on carrying a firearm. I can carry in schools, courtrooms, national parks, football stadiums and even Toby Keith’s.

Stevens evidently believes the same legislators who aren’t passing the gun laws he wants are suddenly going to come down hard on militias. Historically militias were locally based and locally run without interference or control from the state government.

Each militia decided what weapons to carry, uniforms to wear, method of selecting officers and how often to meet. With Judge Stevens help you can think of the new militia as the Shriners with sidearms.

And as for what weapons to carry, let’s look at the world’s best–known militia the Taliban. The Talibs have RPGs, fully automatic rifles, grenades, heavy machine guns and donkeys. Everything the well–equipped American militia member could want, except for the donkey.

Stevens’ ‘solution’ removes age restrictions, expands the scope of weapons allowed for personal ownership and eliminates most geographic restrictions on where weapons can be carried. It’s the exact opposite of what Stevens wants, but not an unusual outcome for leftist social engineering.

If it weren’t for those boring monthly militia meetings, I would support him 100 percent.

Progressives & The Continued Urban Slaughter

Over the Easter weekend, the City of Chicago experienced a rash of violence that eclipsed anything taking place on the battlefields of Afghanistan or in the uncivilized Taliban-held territories of Pakistan’s border region. 18 people were shot in several incidents, 13 of them dying from their wounds. This is nothing new to Chicago where for years the annual body-count has rivaled, if not exceeded, the casualties reported from war zones in which our military have been engaged. What is new is the political leadership in that city.

Those familiar with Chicago will take issue with that last statement, but the fact of the matter is this. It is true. While the City of Chicago has been staunchly Democrat for decades, its new mayor, Rahm Emanuel, former Chief of Staff to President Barack Obama, is a Progressive. Where the Daleys (both Richard J. and Richard M.) displayed a sincere love for the city, Mr. Emanuel, by all accounts, sees it as a stepping-stone to either the political throne of “king-maker” or executive branch national office…perhaps both.

I can say with confidence, having spent a majority of my lifetime in the nearby suburbs of Chicago, that the Daleys understood that the mean streets of Chicago were just that: mean streets. To that end, while they saw the value in efforts to address the social issues contributing to the modern urban culture of urban violence, they also knew full well that a strong, effective and empowered law enforcement community, coupled with a citizenry supportive of personal responsibility, was necessary to execute the most important role of any chief executive – local, state of federal: the protection of the innocent.

Progressives have, for decades now, fomented a culture of victimization. Everyone is a victim. Where non-Progressives see the innocents affected by those perpetrating violence-as-a-culture to be the victims, Progressives include the perpetrators of said violence as victims as well. Progressives see the people who load the gun, carry the gun and illegally shoot the gun – killing innocents, along with those complicit – as victims: victims of circumstance; victims of culture; victims of social and economic “injustice”; victims of society.

The Progressives’ answer to the modern day urban culture of violence is to create more community assistance, more community activities, and more community engagement. But while a fraction of those embracing the urban culture of violence would benefit from (or even engage in) the existence of these programs, the overwhelming number of those who embrace this culture not only know no other way, but see the lifestyle as glamorous, and who could blame them?

Black urban youth – and to a lesser extent but no less troubling, Latino, Asian and White urban youth – have come to see the urban culture of violence as a lifestyle “choice” (ironic that Progressives are all universally “pro-choice”). The urban youth culture is rife with violence; violence in its music, in its preferred art and entertainment, and in its counter-culture economic system. You can’t go a quarter-hour listening to an urban radio station without hearing lyrics about killing police officers or rival gang-bangers, or lyrics about women being treated like whores; to be used for sex, with those arguably degraded women being painted as accepting it willingly because, hey, it’s all about the money.

And when it all boils down to it, isn’t that the truth? In a culture where our education system is more worried about instilling a false sense of self-esteem (no one is a loser, everyone is a winner; everyone gets a trophy) than in cultivating critical thinking skills, complete with lessons on how to learn and then capitalize from failures, haven’t Progressives really trained an entire generation – if not two – to take the easy way out; that they are entitled to “the good life”; that it’s okay to transgress the law because it is the “victim” inside of you that moves you to do the unlawful? Using the victim-mentality Progressive mindset, who in their right mind would work a degrading minimum wage job for $7.25 an hour ($290 for a 40 hour week) when selling cocaine for a drug gang can garner that same person 10 times that amount in a night?

Mr. Emanuel took to the airwaves after the weekend’s carnage and expressed anger at the violence. That’s where he and I agree. I, too, am angry at the violence. He acknowledged that community engagement programs are necessary. To a certain extent I agree.

But he also sees the issue as one facilitated by the existence of guns. It is with this mentality that I disagree, and vehemently.

For some bizarre reason, Progressives, including Mr. Emanuel, think – and it really is bizarre – that outlawing weapons will somehow keep the criminals from illegally attaining weapons. The stupidity of that argument is stunning. If someone is going to break the law by murdering someone, why would a gun law restrain them from acquiring a weapon? Additionally, study after study after study, based on law enforcement data; prove beyond any doubt that crime – even urban crime – is reduced in areas where lawful concealed carry gun laws exist.

To express my argument more bluntly let’s do an experiment. Load a weapon and place it on the table. If you want to be daring, point the barrel of the weapon in your direction. Now, step back ten feet and command the weapon, “Shoot me!” I am going to bet the farm that nothing happens; that the weapon itself did not, of its own power, shoot you. This very basic experiment proves this thesis: Guns don’t kill people, people kill people.

I will acquiesce to Progressives if they acquiesce to the rest of us (compromise is what the Framers intended for our system of government). I will sign on to community engagement programs for what they are worth in providing safe haven and deterrent to inner-city innocents and vulnerable youth, but only if Progressives cease with the stupidity of :

▪ instilling the falsely elevated self-esteem brainwashing they push in our schools;

▪ the ridiculous notion that inanimate objects kill people;

▪ their tacit support of the urban culture of violence as “cool”;

▪ their neutering of law enforcement’s capability to affect the carnage produced by violent gang crime before it occurs, and their ability to meet criminal force with overwhelming force in the name of serving the law-abiding public.

I would see this as a good trade-off, given the fact that employing this compromise has a better chance to immediately save lives in our urban areas than anything the Progressive victimization culture has ever come up with.

That said, I won’t hold my breath waiting for Mr. Emanuel and his brethren Progressives – including the race merchants among them – to announce their willingness to engage in something so common sense. Progressives, after all, know what’s best for all of us…always.

2nd Amendment Attacked … Again



stevens
Former Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens (appointed by Gerald Ford in 1975), in an article written in response to the shooting of school children in Newtown, Conn., in December 2012, wrote:

It is … legislators, rather than federal judges, who should make the decisions that will determine what kinds of firearms should be available to private citizens, and when and how they may be used. Constitutional provisions that curtail the legislative power to govern in this area [2nd amendment] unquestionably do more harm than good.   [emphasis mine]

Stevens then proposes that, in order to assist legislators, five words (when serving in the Militia) be added to the Second Amendment so that it reads as: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms when serving in the Militia shall not be infringed.”

He then writes this statement: ” The [altered] amendment certainly would not silence the powerful voice of the gun lobby; it would merely eliminate its ability to advance one mistaken argument.”   [emphasis mine]

Now we get to the crux of Stevens’ way of thinking. He suggests that the the Founding Fathers were mistaken when they worded the Second Amendment as they did. At the beginning of the article, Stevens writes: “The adoption of rules that will lessen the number of those incidents should be a matter of primary concern to both federal and state legislators.” By “rules” Stevens means gun control legislation to limit access to weapons approved by government. He wants to make life easier for legislators. He advocates weapons ONLY for the military. He cites and quotes a lot of “legalese” (would you expect anything else from a lawyer?) in an effort to try to substantiate his position. But NEVER, not even once does he ever blame the “killing” problem on people. He never says (or even hints) that the people doing the killing are the problem. Never once does he defend law-abiding gun owners. He only blames the gun! Access to the gun must be limited.

As an example of Stevens’ “legalese” consider this:

The Second Amendment expressly endorsed the substantive common-law rule that protected the citizen’s right (and duty) to keep and bear arms when serving in a state militia. In its decision in Heller [District of Columbia v. Heller], however, the majority [of the Supreme Court] interpreted the amendment as though its draftsmen were primarily motivated by an interest in protecting the common-law right of self-defense. But that common-law right is a procedural right that has always been available to the defendant in criminal proceedings in every state. The notion that the states were concerned about possible infringement of that right by the federal government is really quite absurd.

The above is an example of Stevens’ tortured, twisted logic. Stevens says that our right of self-defense should be struck down. But he offers no alternative to self-defense if a criminal threatens to harm us. I guess Stevens wants us to cite rules to people with guns.

Stevens must really think highly of himself if he concludes that our Founding Fathers were mistaken. We should be thankful that The Washington Post ran Stevens’ article in the Opinions section, but many unthinking readers will accept his opinion as fact. Therein lies the rub.

But that’s just my opinion.

Cross-posted at The Pot Stirrer, my very conservative web site.

Obama Requests $1.1B for Gun Control – and does it wrong

Like the Senator that thought magazines were disposable, another that thought ARs could shoot 30 rounds in 1/2 second and the list of other politicians that misunderstand every aspect of gun ownership – Now, our President has put out a request for more than a billion dollars to spend on a list of gun control measures that is clearly upside down.

From Breitbart.com:

President Obama has requested $1.1 billion and the Department of Justice (DOJ) asked for $382.1 million for gun control “to protect Americans from gun violence.”

Included in the DOJ’s $382.1 million figure is a request for $2 million for smart gun technology grants.

According to The Washington Beacon, Obama’s $1.1 billion “[includes] $182 million to support the president’s ‘Now is the Time’ gun safety initiative.”

“Now is the Time” includes the following:

1. Require background checks for all gun sales.

2. Strengthen the background check system for gun sales.

3. Pass a new, stronger ban on assault weapons.

4. Limit ammunition magazines to 10 rounds.

5. Finish the job of getting armor-piercing bullets off the streets

6. Give law enforcement additional tools to prevent and prosecute gun crime

7. End the freeze on gun violence research

8. Make our schools safer with new resource officers and counselors, better emergency response plans, and more nurturing school climates.

9. Ensure quality coverage of mental health treatment, particularly for young people.

Now, if someone is serious about ending the school shootings and the recent mass-knifing at a school were really serious, they would look at the common cause – mental illness. They wouldn’t be focusing on the weapon. A mentally ill person can do great harm with a knife, dry ice bomb (gonna outlaw dry ice?), pressure cooker or whatever they can find. Let’s first examine the President’s list:

1. Require background checks for all gun sales.

It says sales, but I think they mean transfers. It’s hard to tell with liberals – definitions of words mean little to them. I don’t want to have to do a background check on my son when I give him a new dove gun.

2. Strengthen the background check system for gun sales.

Honestly, the NRA and I agree on this. More criminal data in the system is necessary and a long time coming. What’s scary is that we don’t honestly know if what the President means by this is what WE mean by this.

3. Pass a new, stronger ban on assault weapons.

No such thing. Should we also ban “assault knives” like the one the kid used to harm 23 people today or “assault pressure cookers” like the ones use in the Boston bombings? The weapons they want to ban are semi-automatic rifles (today.) Once they get those, punp-action or bolt-action guns will be next. They just want to push things one step further and give it a scary name. AR actually stands for “Armalite Rifle.”

4. Limit ammunition magazines to 10 rounds.

This will destroy the competition-shooting community and does nothing to promote safety. This is irresponsible and anyone who re-elects someone that votes for anything like this is just waiting to have them decide that 5, or 3 rounds are enough next time. 

5. Finish the job of getting armor-piercing bullets off the streets

Yes, because those are used every day to … well actually they aren’t really used against armored targets in much of any crime. Just think of all the bank robberies or convenience store hold-ups this would prevent … or something

6. Give law enforcement additional tools to prevent and prosecute gun crime

This one, I agree with. As long as I understand what a gun crime is. Fast and furious? That seems like a gun crime.. guess they need additional tools to prosecute someone.. anyone .. for that debacle.

7. End the freeze on gun violence research

Research away, studies come to the conclusion of the organization paying them to do so. More government studies telling us the new ice age is coming (circa 1970) should be totally paid for by American tax dollars .. or something

8. Make our schools safer with new resource officers and counselors, better emergency response plans, and more nurturing school climates.

Armed security yes. Nurturing climate? Seriously? Whose the parent here? Ahhh… yup, just got it.

9. Ensure quality coverage of mental health treatment, particularly for young people.

Who believes the government can make that happen? They can’t even create an effective healthcare marketplace. Imagine a government-regulated mental healthcare regime…. 

The real list is simpler:

  1. Do some research on the anti-depressants, ADD, and other anti-psychotic drugs that a massive and unavoidable majority of the mass-violence culprits were on
  2. End gun-free zones. Most attacks end the instant someone confronts the attacker with a firearm – police response times are long and won’t get better as the population grows.
  3. Don’t nurture kids at school, make them strong and independent. Teach them that not everything is easy, success is not guaranteed and perhaps more of them won’t be propelled into psychosis when the least small thing goes wrong. Let them have their tantrums as 3 year olds or they might just have them at 17 instead.

Senate physician expresses gun rights concerns over Obama’s pick for Surgeon General

President Obama has nominated another far-left extremist for his administration and Dr. Rand Paul, the Senates leading physician, says that the nomination is an attack on the rights of Americans.

The President has chosen Dr. Vivek Murphy for the Nation’s top doc. Dr. Murphy is a co-founder of Doctor’s for America, a pet project of the liberal extremist group Center for American Progress.

Sen. Paul notes in a February 25th letter that “The primary policy goals of Dr. Murthy’s organization have been focused on advancing stricter gun control laws and promoting the Affordable Care Act.”

While Dr. Murphy has expressed a disinterest in using his new position to push a political agenda, Obama’s chosen leadership staff in the IRS, NLRB, HHS and more have all shown a propensity to abuse their positions and their organizations to push the far-left agenda.

Late last year, Democrats changed Senate rules so that only a simply majority was required to confirm Presidential nominees. Sen. Rand Paul’s objection has Democrats taking notice as the 2014 mid-terms get closer.

Dr. Murphy’s association with the far-left leaning Center for American Progress should raise other concerns. With political leaders banning things like sodas, wait until they decide steak, pizza or wings are too detrimental to the health of citizens. Just imagine that Surgeon’s General warning on your next bucket of chicken.

Republican or Democrat, left or right – no matter your political leanings, if you value your right to choose for yourself, this guy is bad news.

 

American Exceptionalism; A loss Or An Opportunity

By Michael Lewinski  02/26/14

Economist, Richard Ebeling attributes American Exceptionalism to a set of principles emanating from the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. On the success of the American economy he noted , “The history of the United States from the time of its founding in the late 18th century up to the early decades of the 20th century was a period during which virtually all market activities were free from government regulation, control or manipulation.”

The reason for this success he observed, “Before ‘America,’ virtually all societies were founded on conquest and plunder. But nowhere else than in America was there such a conscious and explicit claim that kings and their governments were not the giver and taker of ‘rights’ belonging to the people. Outside of protecting each in his individual rights, every individual was self-governing and sovereign in guiding and directing his own life. His life was his own to plan and implement. The government did not control, order, or plan his life for him. He chose his own career; he earned his own way; he was responsible for caring for himself and his family; all of his associations and relationships with others… were based on his voluntary agreement in mutual consent with others.

How far we have fallen. How unexceptional we have become. Where, in America, has big government not “interfered with the free-market interactions and activities of people?” Nowhere! Not in your personal life, your family life, your work life, or any other element traditionally left to civil society.

Look around you. Big Brother wants to put its “minders” in the newsrooms. It’s nullifying Freedom of Religion, 2nd Amendment rights, and spying on the people with its warrentless electronic searches. The IRS harasses and suppresses its political opponents. A regulatory juggernaut is methodically making us poorer by crushing wealth creation and destroying jobs.

The question before us is whether the contemporary rejection of American Exceptionalism will stand, or if instead, we will again embrace the core values which enhance the freedom embedded in a strong, vibrant civil society unencumbered by a Progressive, controlling, centrally planned government.

FBI Report Once Again Confirms What We Already Knew About Guns

BELLEVUE, Wash., Feb. 25, 2014 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — The FBI’s semi-annual uniform crime data for the first half of 2013 confirms once again what the firearms community already knew, that violent crime has continued to decline while gun sales have continued to climb, the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms said today.

The report, issued last week, says murders declined 6.9 percent from the first half of 2012, while aggravated assaults dropped by 6.6 percent nationwide and robberies were down 1.8 percent. Forcible rapes declined 10.6 percent from the same period in 2012 and overall, violent crime fell by 10.6 percent in non-metropolitan counties and 3.6 percent in metropolitan counties.

“This new information reinforces the notion that not only do guns save lives, their presence in the hands and homes of law-abiding citizens just might be a deterrent to crime,” observed CCRKBA Chairman Alan Gottlieb. “The National Shooting Sports Foundation has been reporting a steady increase in firearm sales for the past few years. Taken as a whole, one cannot help but conclude that the predictions from gun prohibitionists that more guns leads to more crime have been consistently wrong.”

Gottlieb said the tired argument from the anti-gun lobby that more firearms in the hands of private citizens would result in sharp increases in violence have run out of traction. Not only has the decline in crime corresponded with an increase in gun sales, it also coincides with a steady rise in the number of citizens obtaining concealed carry licenses and permits, he noted.

“The FBI report says burglaries and auto theft have also decreased,” Gottlieb said, “and it is impossible to look at this pattern and not suggest that increased gun ownership just might be one contributing factor. Gun prohibitionists would, of course, dismiss that suggestion as poppycock, but you can bet your life savings that if the data was reversed, and violent crime had risen, the gun control lobby would be rushing to every available microphone declaring that guns were to blame.

“This continuing pattern brings up a pertinent question,” he concluded. “If the gun ban lobby has been so wrong about more guns resulting in more crime, what else have they been wrong about? The word ‘everything’ comes to mind.”

With more than 650,000 members and supporters nationwide, the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms  is one of the nation’s premier gun rights organizations. As a non-profit organization, the Citizens Committee is dedicated to preserving firearms freedoms through active lobbying of elected officials and facilitating grass-roots organization of gun rights activists in local communities throughout the United States.

Virginia [finally] allows hunting on Sunday

Newtown, Conn. — The National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) today hailed the bipartisan accomplishment of both houses of the Virginia General Assembly for passing legislation that will allow hunting on private property on Sundays in the Commonwealth.

In the final step in the legislative process, the State Senate today by a 28-to-11 vote passed the repeal of the old 19th Century Blue Law preventing Sunday hunting. The House of Delegates passed the bill in January by a vote of 71 to 27. The bill now goes to Gov. Terry McAuliffe to be signed into law. The legislation allows Sunday hunting on private land during designated hunting seasons by hunters who have the written permission of landowners.

“Today’s Senate vote is a real accomplishment for sportsmen in Virginia, but it is equally a victory for the economy of the Commonwealth that will see a more than $120 million annual direct economic benefit as the result of hunters going afield on Sundays,” said Lawrence G. Keane, NSSF senior vice president and general counsel. “We congratulate the legislators and we thank our partners from all the hunting and sportsmen’s organizations and those in the wildlife management organizations that worked to encourage citizens to contact their delegates and senators in support of this legislation.”

Left-Leaning Loon Gun Logic Strikes Again!

Gun Safety is Not the Issue, Disarmament Is

I stated on a recent Facebook post that I was going to deal with the phony report, “Young Guns: A Diane Sawyer Special,” that ABC News was doing on their Sunday show. Someone responded, “I hope you’re not going to spin this the way I think you’re going to.” Me? Spin something?

Why accuse me of spin before I even get there? And why on earth would I question ABC News and Diane Sawyer? I’m guessing that person leans left and feels that ABC News is “THE” definitive news source, or at least one of the many in the mainstream media.

So, am I going to spin it? YES! I’m going to spin it back towards the truth of the matter. The “Young Guns” special makes many “factual” statements. Let’s check them out:

1.7 million —  The number of kids under age 18 who lived in homes with a loaded and unlocked firearm in 2002. (CDC) Sounds like a lot doesn’t it? Considering there are over 220 million registered guns in the country, accounting for unregistered guns I would estimate there are closer to a total of 300 million guns in homes across America. 1.7 million is approximately ½ of a percent. Insignificant, by comparison.

31 — The percentage of U.S. households with at least one child and a gun in the home in 2012. (General Social Survey). OK, less than one third of American homes have both a child and at least one gun. Although we hear about gun violence more often now, it is actually on the decrease.

The next few stats were somewhat confusing. The “Young Guns” report lumps both kids and youth together, whereas the CDC definitions are different:

1,337 — The number of American kids under age 18 who died from gunshot wounds in 2010. This is trending down from 1,490 in 2005 and 1,544 in 2000. (CDC)

7,391 — The number of American kids and teens under age 20 who were hospitalized from firearm injuries in 2009. That means that on average a child or teen is shot almost every hour. (Yale School of Medicine)

98 — The number of American kids under age 18 who died from accidental shootings in 2010. This is trending down from 150 deaths in 2000 and 417 deaths in 1990. (CDC)

85 — Roughly the percentage of accidental shootings of children where the shooter was also a child in 2003-2006. (Catherine Barber, MPA, Harvard School of Public Health)

80 — The percentage of accidental shooting victims who were boys in 2010. (CDC)

Without spinning anything, let’s just break these out. Let me first say, anything we can reasonably do to protect our children should be done. Any loss of life due to negligence from someone with respect to kids is almost unforgivable.

Among the many definitions of “accidental gunshot wounds” and other gun violence sub categories listed by the CDC are:

  • Celebratory firing that was not intended to frighten, control, or harm anyone
  • A person shoots himself when using a gun to frighten, control, or harm another person
  • A person mistakenly thinks a gun is unloaded and shoots himself or another person while fooling around with it
  • A person unintentionally shoots someone while defending himself against an aggressor
  • A person unintentionally shoots another person while using a gun to commit a crime
  • Firearm injuries caused by unintentionally striking a person with the firearm, e.g., by dropping it on someone’s head, rather than with a projectile fired from the firearm (potential homicide or non-NVDRS accident)
  • Unintentional injuries from non-powder guns such as BB, pellet, and other compressed air or gas-powered guns (potential homicide or suicide)
  • A person engaged in a suicidal act, then changed his mind, but still died as a result of the act

Sawyer’s ABC News report does not clearly distinguish between crimes committed by young people vs. accidental gun injuries. Let me emphasize, all of these issues are on the decline except in gun-free, big city zones. That’s a story for another day!

I found more stats than I can print, so let’s just pick on Chicago. A few years back Chicago contributed 508 “kids” to the above statistics in little more than a year. Almost all of the ”kids” were male and a majority of those shootings occurred between 7 p.m. and 7 a.m. Take a minute and think it through. The majority of the shootings were done while committing a crime and because they were under 19, they are categorized as “kids.” An 18 year-old “kid” robbing a 7-11 and getting shot on his way out is considered in the above numbers. These are not accidental!

My irritation with the “Young Guns” story is that they over dramatize and lie about the whole truth in order to get us on their side. How about you just give us the facts, the “real” facts, and let us decide what to do with them? Do you realize when you lie to us we don’t act on the information and then, like the boy who cried wolf, when there’s actually a real problem we don’t believe you and when something bad happens, the blood is on YOUR hands not ours.

The accidental gun death rate has been falling since 1930 and US accidental gun deaths per year were down to 613 by 2007, out of the over 300 million people (CDC). By comparison, there were 29,846 accidental deaths by poisoning in 2007 (CDC). Note that it is extremely easy to prevent accidental gun deaths if you simply take the proper precautions to keep your young children from accidentally gaining access to your guns.

If Sawyer was trying to get us to understand about real gun safety in our homes why use the above? Why not just tell us about the 2000 real kids whose parents or relatives did not secure their guns properly like most responsible gun owners do, who did not teach their kids about proper gun safety, and whose kids were hurt or killed? Because “gun safety” isn’t on the agenda…

America, wake up or you’re gonna lose the country!

« Older Entries Recent Entries »