Tag Archives: Sandy Hook Elementary

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

Will Your Kids Need Bullet Proof Back Packs and Body Armor For School

Protecting your child with a bullet proof back pack
Will Your child be safe with a bullet proof back pack and body armor

Will Your child be safe with a bullet proof back pack and body armor

Were the mass murders of innocent children, teachers and school administrators at Sandy Hook Elementary in Newton, Connecticut a wakeup call for parents across America concerning child safety? According to Fox News, many parents are seriously considering sending their children to school with bullet proof back packs and various degrees of body armor to keep them safe.

Is the nation now at a point where Barbie dolls, Nintendo games, and toy soldiers are going to be replaced with pink and blue bullet proof backpacks and form fitting child size body armor under the Christmas tree?

The violent murders by Adam Lanza of 20 children has re-opened a national debate concerning just how safe are children and what measures or precautions can and should parents take to keep their precious kids safe.

Fox News reported on Wednesday, December 19th that a Utah company’s sales of bullet proof back backs and other safety clothing manufactured by the company Amendment II is literally going through the roof. With an approximate increase of 500 percent in sales since the murderous assaults in Newtown, Conn., parents and perhaps grandparents are grabbing up the, “pint-sized” protection safety lightweight armor called RynoHide.

While President Obama and his newly designated gun-control czar Vice President Joe Biden search for ways to strip gun rights from legal owners by the president’s end of January 2013 deadline, parents are left to fend for themselves.

If stricter gun control measures was the real solution, how does the president and gun control advocates account for the massacre which robbed the young children of their lives in Newton, Conn.? The state is one of five states with the strictest gun control measures in America.

What about the 270 children who were murdered in President Obama’s hometown of Chicago over the past three years. In fact Illinois leads the nation in strict gun control measures. Their gun ban law ban had deprived thousands of home owners of their right to protect themselves in their residence, from home invaders and gang violence until the 2010 U.S. Supreme Court overturned their 28-year-old handgun ban.

Just how many gun control measures will it take before liberal gun control activists and politicians wake up and address the real problem; which is the mentally unstable shooter pulling the trigger. So, whether it is a Columbine or Aurora Colorado massacre or a Newtown, Connecticut mass shooting, it is the shooter that special presidential task forces, national commissions and any other so-called violence solution panels should and must focus on.

Depriving Americans of their 2nd Amendment rights by using a drip, drip, drip method, until finally the nation’s citizens are disarmed is not an option; citizens are willing to witness or permit. This potential constitutional stripping peril was addressed in 2010, by the U.S. Supreme Court. U.S. Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito was insistent in the 2010 court decision which overturned the Chicago City Handgun Ban.

Justice Alito stressed:

“It cannot be doubted that the right to bear arms was regarded as a substantive guarantee, not a prohibition that could be ignored so long as states legislated in an evenhanded manner.”

Second Amendment U.S. Constitutional rights are not open for debate nor is it optional for discussion about how a state or a citizen’s group can define the right of an American to fully exercise and embrace defense of home and family. This individual constitutional right cannot be abridged or debated out of existence by Obama or Biden.

As a matter of law, the individual right to bear arms was reinforced in the 2008 U.S. Supreme Court District of Columbia et al. v. Heller decision.

The court held: “that the purpose of the right to keep and bear arms extended beyond the context of militia service to include self-defense.”

In the same decision the U.S. Supreme Court also held that it is not up to the state to determine the type of weapon that a homeowner can use in the defense of life and protection of family. The court added:

“The Court, relying on historical analysis set forth previously in Heller, noted the English common law roots of the right to keep arms for self-defense12 and the importance of the right to the American colonies, the drafters of the Constitution..and the states as a bulwark against over-reaching federal authority.”

With history as a foundation, it is clear that the founders and designers of the U.S. Constitution were not merely interested in a congenial debate about the right to hunt deer, moose or bear. The U.S. Constitution’s 2nd Amendment protection against enemies foreign or domestic should and cannot be influenced by emotional threats based upon unfortunate occurrences which are not connected to the right to protect oneself.

The nation’s children are the most precious gift that is given by God to parents. They by right will embrace everything that can be legally done to protect and preserve their child’s safety. If it includes tens of thousands of parents sending their children to school with bullet proof back packs and body armor, then, it must be done.

Take a page out of the book of the Israeli parents who have to send their children to school under the constant threat of possible violence. Consider some of the teachers at Israeli schools who have the right to carry guns, if trained and licensed and use them in case of an outbreak of a terrorist attack at the school.

Instead of dodging the reality of the dangers which confront the children in a 21st century America, spend more time on teaching your children about how to safeguard themselves against the America that has evil-hearted and sinister-minded individuals.

Before another Newtown, Connecticut tragically captures the nation’s headlines organize around defending the constitutional protection that stand between a child’s safety and unstable killers.

(Click – let me know what you think )