Tag Archives: James Holmes

How gun free zones and liberal policies contribute to mass shootings

liberallogic101
Aaron Alexis was allowed to walk into a Navy Shipyard last week and systematically execute 12 people because his prior arrests for gun possession were never prosecuted and his cries for mental help were never addressed.

Instead of prosecuting Aaron Alexis on two separate crimes involving a firearm our politically correct judicial system instead issued him two get out of jail free cards. In addition, the mental health professionals who were supposed to recognize the warning signs instead gave him the benefit of the doubt and never shared their findings with the appropriate agencies who could have determined his mental status.

How did this man pass multiple background checks and evade multiple arrests involving firearm use and possession? Why did Aaron Alexis choose the Navy Ship Yard to perpetrate his crime? What drove this young man to commit this heinous act?

The Democratic Party will have you believe that this shooting was a result of too many guns in too many hands. They will have you believe that a complete ban on guns is the only answer to preventing these acts. They will blame it on Right Wing Extremists, the Second Amendment, and the National Rifle Association. They will give you every single excuse under the sun except for their own failed liberal policies.

What they won’t tell you is the truth.

In 1993 former president Bill Clinton issued an order forbidding members of the military and their civilian contractors from carrying their own personal firearms on military bases. Since this ruling at least 25 military personnel have been murdered as a result of this policy. I bet you never heard this on ABC, NBC, CBS, or CNN did you?

Since 1950, almost every single public shooting in the United States in which more than three people have been killed have taken place in what are commonly known as “gun free” zones. The main reason this tragedy occurred was due to Bill Clinton’s 1993 draconian policy on gun control.

Let’s take a look at some mass shootings that took place in gun free zones.

The last mass shooting on a military base happened only four short years ago. Nidal Hasan shot 13 people to death in Fort Hood, Texas in what is the worst mass shooting on a military base in history. Once again, Fort Hood was a gun free zone.

Last December Adam Lanza walked into Sandy Hook Elementary School and shot to death 26 people, including 20 children. Once again, there were no faculty armed on school grounds essentially making the school another easy target in a gun free zone.

James Holmes, who shot to death 12 people last year in a Colorado movie theatre did so by seeking out the one theatre out of seven in the metropolitan Denver area that was in a gun free zone.

In 2007 Virginia Tech student Seung-Hui Cho shot to death 32 students in the worst mass shooting in United States history. Once again, Virginia Tech was a gun free campus with a complete ban on firearms on school property even for security guards and those that possessed a legal concealed weapons permit.

In 1999 two students who attended gun free zone Columbine High School in Colorado murdered 12 of their fellow classmates before turning their guns on themselves.

There are many other incidents of mass shootings that took place in gun free zones but for sake of time I can’t list them all. The fact is that gun free zones kill innocent victims. The people that commit these crimes are well aware that they will not meet an armed resistance which is exactly why these cowards choose these locations.

If military personnel were allowed to carry personal firearms on base these shooters would have thought twice about committing these crimes. If colleges, universities, high schools, middle schools, elementary schools, and even movie theatres were not in gun free zones than most of these tragedies would not have occurred.

The reality is not all shootings can be prevented. But allowing more law abiding citizens to carry firearms will decrease the amount of mass shootings. If plain clothed officers were allowed to patrol schools and carry a firearm it will make these places less of an attractive target. We need more guns in school not less guns in school. We need more guns on military bases not less guns on military bases. We need more armed citizens at movies theatres, restaurants, shopping malls, etc.

The biggest deterrent to fighting crime is not creating the environment that entices it. Most criminals will take the path of least resistance which is why gun free zones are so deadly. If more law abiding citizens were armed there would actually be less mass shootings. As Robert A. Heinlein once said, “An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his or her acts with their life.”

If you like this article you will love my radio show. Please tune into the The Grit and Grace Show live every Tuesday and Thursday nights from 8-10pm CST or anytime right here: www.blogtalkradio.com/gritgraceradio

Suggested by the author

An armed society is a polite society

Reading, writing, and marksmanship

Obama’s DHS: Drones, Hollow Points, and Secrecy

Barack Obama, liberal policies fan the flames of racism against White America

How the left uses identity politics and fear tactics to influence voters

Aurora shooter insanity plea accepted

Donkey Hotey (CC)

Donkey Hotey (CC)

Donkey Hotey (CC)

Accused Colorado theater shooter, James Holmes was in court today to plead not guilty due to insanity. If found guilty, Holmes could face the death penalty for the deaths of 12 movie-goers at the Aurora theater. The 25-year-old is charged with multiple counts of first-degree murder and attempted murder, arising from the rampage that left 12 dead, and dozens more wounded.

Reuters reports:

The judge, Carlos Samour Jr., had delayed ruling on whether to accept such an insanity plea until legal questions surrounding the matter were resolved.

Among those issues was a challenge to the state’s insanity-defense law by public defenders. They argued that a provision of the statute that requires a defendant mounting an insanity defense to submit to an examination by court-appointed psychiatrists is unconstitutional.

Compelling a defendant to divulge information that could be used against him at trial and at sentencing violates his right against self-incrimination, they argued. But Samour upheld the law last week, setting the stage for Tuesday’s hearing.

Holmes has been hospitalized twice while in custody – once for self-inflicted head injuries, and once when he was held in restraints in a psychiatric ward. He was ordered to stand trial in January, after it had been revealed in testimony by investigators that he had spent months preparing to commit mass murder by acquiring firearms and bomb making materials.

NBC Airs Anti-gun Rehash Story in Horrific After-Math of Colorado Shooting

NBC's Jeff Rossen

NBC’s Jeff Rossen

In the Hellish aftermath of the Colorado Movie Theater shooting, NBC News trots out an anti-gun investigation story it aired back in February to bolster its anti-Second Amendment stance.

On Monday, the Today show re-aired a story by investigative reporter Jeff Rossen, which happened to be the premier story of Rossen Reports on Today which originally aired Feb. 9 of this year. In the story, Rossen and his staff hire security experts to buy guns online to show how easy it is to obtain weapons without a proper background check.

Rossen and company went online to find online private gun sellers and made meetings with them in parking lots of popular shopping malls. This husband and wife team go and meet the sellers and negotiate for the guns. The buyer announces that he couldn’t pass a background check, but the sales go through anyway, no paperwork, no hassle. Then Jeff and the camera crew pounce and attempt to interview the individuals who sold the guns. Some of them talk, others don’t.

Rossen proudly remarks that they turn the guns over to law enforcement to have them destroyed.
While the Today Show and Rossen Reports show a significant loophole in gun sales law in many states, I believe it is irresponsible to try to connect this loophole with what happened in Aurora, Colorado. Below you can see the whole show on You Tube.

It is legal in many states that require a background check at the gun store to forego such a check when a sale is done by a private seller online. That is a problem and is easy to fix. I believe that if you are required to get a background check at the store, you should get a back ground check before you buy online from a private seller, and that seller should get a misdemeanor for knowingly selling a gun without that check.

It would be easy to do the check. In Minnesota, my home state, gun stores fill out a form for the buyer and immediately call a number with local law enforcement to ensure that the buyer is not on a list prohibiting the sale. The buyer must present his permit to buy a handgun, although no such permit is necessary to buy a rifle. The call takes about a minute and the seller gets instant approval or denial, which he can annotate on the form. The buyer can go home with his gun the same day if he meets the approval process.

It’s just that easy. But that’s not what happened apparently with the Colorado “Joker” shooter. James Holmes wasn’t on any kind of a list. He had no recorded history of mental illness and no prior legal offenses that would have prohibited him from buying a gun. And Holmes didn’t buy his guns online, he bought them at gun stores where he filled out the paperwork. He bought his ammo and body armor online, which is legal. The NBC story rehash doesn’t address any of these issues, it just airs the original story.

NBC doesn’t bother to say anything about the illegality of fashioning one’s home into a booby-trapped nightmare. I’m pretty sure rigging your house to explode is illegal, but the law didn’t affect Holmes’s decision making process at all. In fact gun laws only affect the law abiding, not those who knowingly choose to break the laws. But NBC never makes that distinction.

No law will prevent a criminal with mass murder on his mind from committing his crime, but an armed citizen like the 71-year old in the Florida Internet Cafe with his legal conceal carry handgun might prove all that is necessary to prevent a potentially awful crime like the one that happened in Aurora.

Let’s remember that this guy had body armor. A small caliber handgun would be worthless against that, but the gunman gave up without a fight, even though the cops had nothing to defeat his armor. The mere presences of a gun in the hands of a cop or a law abiding citizen is enough to defeat a coward. But continually in American, guns are banned in certain establishments making “defenseless zones” pop up all over the country.

Kyle Becker, a frequent contributor to ConservativeDailyNews.com pointed out in his column last week that the left is consumed with using tragedy like this to push on with their assault on legal gun owners. Becker writes:

“In the wake of the tragic mass murder in Aurora, Colorado, some on the political left have used the occasion to further their assault on citizens’ Constitutional right to bear arms. The charge is being led by New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who apparently believes that a disarmed populace is a safe populace.

“But safe from whom?

“The right to defend oneself and one’s property is inalienable and indisputable. However, the left is taking pot shots at Americans’ gun rights by claiming that gun control or even outright bans are necessary for our own safety.”

Absolutely right Becker!

Kyle’s article cites another great article by Tracy Price, an airline pilot, who wrote a piece for the Washington Times on gun free zones, or what he called, “defenseless zones”. In that article, Price points out all of the incidents in recent history where gun free zones were the sites of awful gun atrocities committed by crazy people who were unafraid of breaking established gun laws and bans.

In the wrap up of his article, Price poignantly writes,

“There is nothing more tragic than laws intended to make us feel safer, when in reality they do just the opposite, especially when it is our children and our brightest college students who pay the final price for our failed policies.

I would recommend you read both the Becker and Price articles again here.

The left will use any crisis to advance an agenda, and have no problem obfuscating the facts to do so. We know that. But, the facts speak for themselves. Crime statistics show that states that allow citizens to legally carry weapons have lower crime rates. But that fact doesn’t fit the Leftist agenda, so forget about it. Just focus on the awful tragedy and reflect on how easy it was for Holmes to get his guns, the Left would say.
I’ve had enough of the Left’s hypocrisy! How about you? I like the Rossen story, but it doesn’t address the real issue. In a society that teaches it’s kids that they are worthless animals evolved from the primordial soup instead of created,  unique crafted spiritual beings with a purpose, fully accountable to their Maker, then we deserve the awful world we live in and all laws, except the law of nature, are null and void.

Rossen has a tab on his website where he asked for tips for future shows. I have a suggestion! I think he should investigate Eric Holder’s Justice Department and Fast and Furious. Just a thought.

 

This article is the opinion of the author and does not necessarily represent the opinion of Anomalous Media, LCC, ConservativeDailyNews.com their staff or contributors.

America’s Trojan Horse

trojan horse

Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) is asking hard questions of DHS secretary Janet Napolitano. He might as well have asked Eric Holder for “Fast and Furious” documents. In our constitutional republic, the main purpose of government is to protect the God-given rights of the citizens it represents. The goal of Rep. Gohmert was to get to the heart of an issue that should concern all Americans across all party lines: Did Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano know she gave a visa and a classified security clearance to a known terrorist facilitator and sympathizer, Hani Nour Eldin.

Eldin is a member of Egypt’s parliament and a member of Egypt’s Gamaa Islamiya group which is listed as a known terrorist organization. Eldin attended multiple meetings last month at the behest of the president and DHS – some of which were conducted at the White House. Issue number two: did Napolitano know that the DHS advisory council member (appointed by Obama), Mohamed Elibiary, used his security clearance (that Napolitano gave him) to access and download classified documents with his personal computer and shop the information to media outlets?

Napolitano couldn’t really answer any of Gohmert’s questions other than telling him that it was “objectionable” to attack or accuse someone because they are Muslim, (classic liberal response, Gohmert asks hard questions and he is deemed “bigoted” or “racist”). Rep. Gohmert also asked Napolitano if she was aware of the fact that Elibiary was affiliated with a charity here in the states named the Freedom and Justice Foundation. This is important because the name of the now defunct foundation here in America also shared its name with the Freedom and Justice Party in Egypt. The Freedom and Justice Party in Egypt is the legislative arm of the Muslim Brotherhood. The administration has been very open to advice from the “Council on American Islāmic Relations” aka (CAIR) which have been named an un-indicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation court case that took place in northern Texas. You will remember, that this is the court case that named all the people responsible for using the giving nature of Americans to secretly fund terrorist activities all around the globe.

If the stonewall tactic looks familiar to you, it should, it worked for Eric Holder at the Fast and Furious hearings. If congress keeps pushing this issue as it should, I foresee Obama pulling rank and invoking executive privilege once again. As a nation we are in a very precarious era. When agencies have absolutely no congressional oversight, we become a dictatorship or a monarchy by definition. The current administration that promised to be the most transparent, is anything but. It seems Obama “leads” better by fiat rather than inside of a constitutional construct.

As a nation, we need to show courage and begin a debate about what role Islam is going to play in our government. Will we cower when liberals attack and call us “bigoted” for asking relevent and important questions? We can not. We must stand courageous in the face of name calling. When we have come to a place in our society where the secretary of DHS is not concerned about men using their personal computers to access classified government information, and known terrorist sympathizers holding meetings in the White House, we are in grave danger. If Janet Napolitano is not going to perform her job as secretary of DHS, why do we have a DHS? We should not cower from the debate simply because it’s politically incorrect to broach these subjects or because of a political agenda. We have already done that, in 1999 when Osama Bin Laden stated that blood would run in the streets of New York city, no one stood against his statement. We also done the same with the Ft. Hood shooter Nidal Hasan, over and over people in the know were reporting to the FBI that he was very anti-American and a possible threat, the FBI did not investigate because they were fearful the investigation would be seen as an “Islāmic witch hunt”. All because of political correctness, thirteen people were shot in cold blood. The man had S.O.A. on his government (Army) business card, S.O.A. meaning Soldier Of Allah. To add insult to injury the government will still not call the acts perpetrated by Hasan a terrorist act, they consider it an incident of “work place violence”. Also, I don’t remember anyone mentioning gun control after Hasan killed thirteen.

We recently seen how political agenda has driven the gun control debate after the tragic shooting spree in Aurora, Colorado. Before the victims were all properly identified news anchors were already blaming those they disagree with politically, pushing accusations on Tea Party members. Guns needed to be outlawed so people would be “safe”. Just a day later, an Afghan police officer opened fire on American contractors killing three. No where did you hear anyone calling for the outlaw of guns in Afghanistan. One shooting spree fits the liberal agenda narrative, and one did not. So one gets the nod for a refreshed attack on the second amendment rights of American people, and one is ignored, because only one story is politically expedient. I bring this up because I want the American people to drive the debate regarding Islam in the government, and not another terrorist attack, God forbid.

Feinstien: Weapons only going to be used to kill people

Dianne Feinstein uses Aurora as anti-gun tool

Dianne Feinstein uses Aurora as anti-gun toolOn Fox News Sunday, California Democrat Sen. Dianne Feinstein chose another tragedy to again push her heavy-handed, misguided anti-gun agenda.

Referring to the AR-15 semi-automatic rifle used by Jim Holmes to murder 12 people and injure many more, she portrays the popular sporting rifle as nothing but an instrument of murder and mayhem. “I have no problem with people being licensed and buying a firearm. But these are weapons that you are only going to be using to kill people in close combat,” said Feinstein. [emphasis added]

The AR designator stands for “Armalite Rifle” not assault rifle as the anti-gun liberals would have you believe. In fact, because it’s an AR-15 and not an M-16, it is not an automatic or select-fire weapon that would be used by troops in an assault. Instead, it’s a venerable sporting rifle used in competitions such as 3-gun, NRA high-power rifle (service rifle) and hunting.

The AR is a component-system, semi-automatic rifle which does not demand that it be used in close combat nor does it entice folks to shoot innocent people in close combat. Instead, it is a great platform for hunters and sporting shooters of all ages, genders and abilities. Some fit them with light, flat-shooting rounds for varmint hunting, others with heavy rounds to help deal with the feral swine (wild pig) infestation in the Southeast, and many calibers in between for everything from wolves to deer.

The fact that banning rifles like the AR-15 will amount to no fewer tragedies was not lost on Colorado’s own Governor Hickenlooper as he said, “”I mean, if he couldn’t have gotten access to the guns, what kind of bomb would he have manufactured.” Holmes’ apartment was littered with homemade bombs intended to kill. Blame the killer, not the tool.

Semi-automatic shotguns are used by today’s waterfowl and upland bird hunters as well as sporting clays shooters. The softer recoil and fire rates make the for better outings.

Rifles and shotguns are not purchased by millions of Americans in order to kill lots of people in close combat situations, in fact, they are almost never used for such purposes. One incident does not indicate the need to strip a huge portion of the American population tools they enjoy and use for legal purposes.

There is also the constitutional issue of the government limiting the ownership of firearms by its citizenry. Allowing the government to slice away little bits of that right will ultimately end with no rights at all. Today it will be AR-15s, tomorrow semi-auto shotguns, then pistols, then revolvers, then muzzle loaders, then black powder itself.

No amount of government regulation would have prevented the Aurora tragedy. In fact, rules disallowing concealed carry in the theater may have prevented that one person that could have halted the massacre as soon as it began. Instead, a psychopath was allowed to wander the theater knowing that his victims could do nothing – theater rules said so.

Outlawing semi-automatic sporting firearms will do no more to protect Americans than outlawing red-haired Phd students from going to the movies. The government cannot protect us at every step. We have to do that ourselves.