Emotion, emotion, and more emotion fueled by gun control propaganda.
Emotion, emotion, and more emotion fueled by gun control propaganda.
Oh Bloomberg, he just does not quit does he? No matter how often he fails, no matter how wrong he is, he just keeps writing checks
Bloomberg, bless his heart, seems convinced that the real problem is his marketing, and so he’s sinking $50 million dollars to launch yet another citizen control group, Everytown for Gun Safety.
In his first major political investment since leaving office, former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg announced plans to build a nationwide network aimed at curbing gun violence and battling the National Rifle Association, according to published reports.
Bloomberg told the New York Times that he is planning to spend $50 million this year to establish the grassroots gun control lobbying group, called Everytown for Gun Safety.
The new organization will encompass two other Bloomberg-funded gun control groups – Mayors Against Illegal Guns and Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America – and will first take aim at expanding background checks for gun buyers both at the state and national levels, according to the Times.
Everytown for Gun Safety will borrow from some of the NRA’s field operation tactics to grow influence, targeting mothers and other women that might be swayed on gun issues. The group has already targeted 15 states across the country with varying views on gun control, with the goal of recruiting 1 million new supporters.
Bloomberg’s Achilles heel is that he thinks that a) authoritarianism is the solution for every problem, and b) that throwing more money at the issue is how to make authoritarianism palatable. What he doesn’t seem to be able to grasp despite his considerable business success is that many and perhaps most Americans aren’t driven primarily by money, but by a love of liberty and individual sovereignty.
I would argue that Bloomberg’s weakness is his insatiable thirst for power over the lives of others. He cannot stand to be told no, or to have anyone differ from him. He knows best for you, and damn you if you dare disagree. Bloomberg despises freedom, and individualism because he is a Statist. Therefore he will spend any amount of money, and tell as many lies, and intimidate in any way he can to dictate your choices to you! He is a dangerous man, never forget that. We must never underestimate his fanatical hunger for power. If given his way, he would dictate what we eat, drink, how we raise our children, and completely strip away any right to self-defense.
Last week, we reported that the state of Idaho passed emergency legislation that would take effect immediately that nullifies all future federal gun control in the state. That bill was just signed into law by Governor Butch Otter. This is a huge victory for the Second Amendment.
Idaho joins states like Arizona, Missouri, Kentucky, and others who have passed or are considering substantive legislation that would nullify federal gun control by outlawing it in the state outright or preventing the state from cooperating with the feds in the enforcement of gun control measures.
The strategy the Idaho law and similar laws use is one that uses the anti-commandeering doctrine, which was set down by the Supreme Court to protect the Tenth Amendment by preventing Congress from commandeering state officers in the enforcement of a federal regulatory scheme.
From Ben Swann:
On Thursday, Idaho Governor Butch Otter (R) signed a bill, which would effectively nullify future federal gun laws, by prohibiting state enforcement of any future federal act relating to personal firearms, a firearm accessories or ammunition.
S1332 passed the house by a vote of 68-0 and the senate by a vote of 34-0. Alaska and Kansas have also passed similar laws.
Erich Pratt, Director of Communications for Gun Owners of America, cheered the governor’s action. “By signing this nullification bill into law, Idaho has joined an elite class of states that are telling the feds to ‘get lost’ – especially when it comes to unconstitutional gun control infringements”
The key text of the legislation provides that:
any official, agent or employee of the state of Idaho or a political subdivision thereof who knowingly and willfully orders an official, agent or employee of the state of Idaho or a political subdivision of the state to enforce any executive order, agency order, law, rule or regulation of the United States government as provided in subsection (2) of this section upon a personal firearm, a firearm accessory or ammunition shall, on a first violation, be liable for a civil penalty not to exceed one thousand dollars ($1,000) which shall be paid into the general fund of the state…
This is fantastic news. States are openly rebelling against federal gun control, and their refusal to cooperate in enforcing it will render it ineffective in many areas. The feds need states to participate in the enforcement of these kinds of laws, because there simply aren’t enough federal resources to do so. If we get enough states on board with this type of legislation, we can beat back federal gun control just by default.
Please share this article on Facebook and Twitter if you agree with Idaho’s attempt to nullify federal gun control. Let’s fight back.
A New Jersey man warned a State Assembly committee last week that he and other gun owners in the state “will not comply” with a proposed gun control bill to further limit magazine capacity.
During the March 13 hearing, Anthony P. Colandro told lawmakers that the proposed bill would turn law-abiding gun owners into criminals overnight. Colandro is the CEO of Gun for Hire, a firearm training center in New Jersey, and expressed concern regarding what the law could do to his business.
“I own, personally, approximately $30,000 of guns, contrary to what Cease Fire New Jersey Says, that they do not make 10-round magazines for,” he explained. “I also have in my possession at my range over $20,000 of magazines that hold more than 10 rounds.”
He then asked the chairman of the committee who exactly would be compensating him if the items suddenly become illegal.
“Have you guys seen what is happening in Connecticut right now?” he continued. “One million gun owners in New Jersey are also gonna say, like our brothers and sisters in the north, that we will not comply. And I can tell you here and now, I will not comply.”
The bill currently under consideration, known as A2006, bans all magazines that hold more than 10 rounds. The proposed law exempts firearms with .22 caliber tubular magazines.
After more than three hours of testimony last Thursday, the Assembly Law and Public Safety Committee voted 5-3 to advance the bill. The bill then cleared Democratic-controlled Assembly on Thursday with a 46-31 margin. A version of the proposed law has been introduced in the state Senate but has yet to come up in a committee for a vote.
As TheBlaze reported last week, Shyanne Roberts, a 9-year-old competitive shooter, also appeared before the New Jersey Law and Public Safety Committee last week speak against the proposed law.
“I have worked and trained very hard to get to the level I am at and if A2006 becomes law, I will be forced to choose between giving up on a very great and promising future in a sport that I love or asking my dad to move to another state,” she said. “I will not be giving up my sport.”
We said registration always leads to confiscation……..
Fox News is reporting that the government of Connecticut announced yesterday that it sent out letters to gun owners that failed to register the modern sporting rifles made illegal by a blatantly unconstitutional “assault weapon” ban:
Connecticut officials are urging owners of now-illegal assault weapons and large capacity ammunition magazines to relinquish them to the police or make them permanently inoperable.
The Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection announced Friday it had sent a letter to owners who had failed to register the items by a Jan. 1 deadline, part of last year’s gun control law. Officials offered advice on what to do now with the weapons and magazines.
The letter says gun owners are in compliance with the new state law if their items are no longer in Connecticut or were sold to an authorized gun dealer.
The majority of gun owners refused to comply with this bill, and rightfully so. The question is now how far will Connecticut go? Are they willing to make felons out of these folks? Are they going to do the right thing and repeal this foolish law? As I said, all eyes are on Connecticut now. And we will soon know if Chris Christie REALLY wants to be president
A Buffalo, N.Y. community activist who is well known locally for pushing for a highly restrictive 2013 gun control law has been arrested for – wait for it – carrying a gun illegally at a public elementary school.
The arrested gun-control advocate, Dwayne Ferguson, caused quite a scene at Harvey Austin Elementary School, reports local CBS affiliate WIVB.
At about 4:15 p.m. on Thursday, police acted on a pair of anonymous 911 tips. A battalion of cops quickly swarmed the school. The brigade included over a dozen squad cars, the SWAT team and K9 units. The Erie County Sheriff’s Air One helicopter and what appears to be an armored vehicle also turned up.
The school was immediately placed on lockdown. Parts of two streets were closed.
About 60 students who were still on campus participating in after-school activities were funneled to the cafeteria.
Cops searched the school room by room and would not let parents on campus until they were satisfied that no shooting threat existed.
Ferguson, 52, was at Harvey Elementary because he works as a mentor in an after-school program for disadvantaged students.
He said he frequently carries a pistol. He has a license but the license does not matter under the strict state law Ferguson helped pass.
Among much else, the 2013 law, deemed New York’s SAFE Act, made it a felony to carry a gun on school property, according to The Buffalo News.
While it was always illegal to carry a gun on school grounds, the new law bumped the crime from a misdemeanor to a felony in response to the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting.
The community activist has claimed that he forgot he was carrying his gun in a felony gun-free zone he helped create.
Rev. James E. Giles, Ferguson’s friend and the president of Buffalo’s Back to Basics Outreach Ministries, vouched for this claim.
“I’m sure Dwayne went into the school not thinking he had the gun on him,” Giles told The Buffalo News.
Giles said Ferguson even asked police on the scene what was going on.
“Dwayne’s reaction was to get his kids – he had about 50 of them – and make sure they were safe,” Giles explained.
Ferguson was eventually busted when police were patting down the people at the school so they could evacuate. He was wearing the gun in a holster. Throughout the duration of the terrifying lockdown, the community activist never bothered to tell the cops that he was carrying a gun.
“He had opportunities,” local chief of police Kevin Brinkworth told the News.
“I will say he had no ill intent to harm these students,” Brinkworth noted. “I don’t know why he had it on him.”
Ferguson is the head of the Buffalo chapter of MAD DADS, a national group that opposes gang violence and illegal drugs. MAD DADS is an acronym for Men Against Destruction Defending Against Drugs and Social Disorder.
The father of three also belongs to Buffalo Peacemakers, a separate anti-violence group that stands athwart gang-related crime.
Still more, Ferguson is something of a professional vigilante in Buffalo. He can be seen patrolling local malls and city streets in an effort to stop gang violence.
Ferguson now faces two felony charges of criminal gun possession.
He faced his first court hearing on Friday, reports local NBC affiliate WGRZ. Prosecutors had asked Judge Jeanette Ogden to set bail at $10,000. However, Ogden allowed Ferguson to walk out of her courtroom on his own recognizance, citing his community involvement and his squeaky clean criminal record.
Ogden did order Ferguson to submit all of his guns to authorities and to stay away from Harvey Austin Elementary until his criminal case has been resolved.
WOW! This was the best defense of the Second Amendment EVER!
Martinez passionately compared the state lawmakers’ attempts to pass gun control to his past in Marxist Cuba.
“You say you want to protect the people. You’re not going to protect nobody… A very powerful man tried to sell me this 50 years ago. I didn’t buy it… This is Marxism, plain and clear. Come on, tell me I’m wrong, I’ve been there when you were learning how to walk… A very powerful man put me in chains… You sell THIS to the people who do not have self respect, self-determination. And they are weak. And they love to be subjugated. And be dependent on the government. You don’t sell that to me sir. This is TREASON. This is an ASSAULT on the dream of the founding fathers. They didn’t die for THIS. I come here, for years, talking about what happened, while you people, sink to this.”
Via SGT report:
Demonizing and marginalizing dissent is what liberals do routinely. They pick an issue — from atomic energy to abortion, from global warming to gay marriage — and declare that people who disagree with them are dangerous ignorant extremists.
So now a gun-control group called Moms Demand Action is trying to give Dana Loesch the “extremist” treatment. Dana has volunteered to go into the lion’s den — appearing as the sole pro-Second Amendment voice on ABC’s The View — and these liberals evidently consider it intolerable that anyone in favor of the right to keep and bear arms should appear on a major broadcast network program.
Panic reaction at Media Matters: “The decision to give Loesch a national platform on a highly-rated television show is troubling . . .”
Translation: “OMG! An outspoken conservative woman on national TV! This cannot be permitted! No dissent allowed!”
Silencing dissent is what the Left does. They do not have the facts, so they must demonize their opponents. More on #istandwithdana at Twitchy
Make sure to tune in Monday as I guest co-host @TheViewTV ! Looking forward to joining the ladies and dishing on topics.
Dana Loesch (@DLoesch) February 02, 2014
Moms Demand Action isn’t quite demanding that Dana Loesch be barred from appearing on ABC’s “The View,” but the gun control group is certainly making its displeasure about Loesch’s Monday appearance known. Shannon Watts is the founder of Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America and has been tweeting and retweeting opposition to “hate monger” and “pro-gun extremist” Loesch.
Many more stupid tweets at the link, typically from people who are incredibly ignorant about guns, self-defense, and the number of crimes stopped by armed citizens, Take that last tweet above
Never mind the fact that @nhdogmom labels Dana a “hate monger” a charge with no basis in fact, Focus on her championing of the ABC special Young Guns as good work, In fact it was, at best shoddy work meant to panic people about kids and guns
ABC News ran their anti-gun propaganda feature “Young Guns” last night in an attempt to convince their audience that their elementary school aged children were at a high risk for gun accidents and death.
But that simply isn’t the truth.
As the Crime Prevention Research Center shows, the numbers are heavily skewed by gang violence from older teens.
ABC News is planning multiple hours of coverage on Friday that is only designed to incorrectly scare people into not owning guns. While the Pediatrics Journal study that they are emphasizing here has problems, ABC News doesn’t even come close to accurately reporting what the study does show. The ABC News report constantly talks about the significant risk of guns to children generally, recommending that people ask their neighbors about gun ownership. Their report makes it look like these accidents involve young children, but the numbers are driven by 17, 18, and 19 year olds, overwhelmingly blacks in drug gangs.
About 80% of the firearm injuries are related to violent crime, not accidents or self harm. Requiring your average family to lock up their guns or to scare them into not owning them, isn’t going to stop incidents involving violent crime or drug gangs. Indeed, disarming people will make this problem worse.
Moms Demand Action really ought to inform themselves about guns and crime stats. That will involve thinking rather than emoting but if they try really hard…….
She has no problems, it would seem, with cashing in on her loss, or with spreading Left Wing Propaganda either
Jan. 16 (UPI) – Sybrina Fulton, who’s 17-year-old son Trayvon Martin was shot by neighborhood watchman George Zimmerman in 2012, visited the University of Utah on Thursday to discuss racial profiling.
Hundreds attended the Martin LutherKing Week event, in which Fulton said that an “upside” to her son’s death was the “opportunity to save someone else’s child.”
“Don’t think for one second racial profiling doesn’t happen. Don’t think for one minute even in your community of Salt Lake City it doesn’t happen,” she said. ”Racism is still alive. Racial profiling is still alive. Injustice is still alive.”
Fulton said that the circumstances of her son’s death — he was wearing a hoodie when Zimmerman shot him — applied all over the country.
“There should not become a time when we are comfortable with burying our children,” Fulton said. “What happened many miles away in Sanford should be uncomfortable for you.”
“Is it the hoodie that really made the difference? Or the color of his skin?” she asked. “And if by one second, just by one mere second, we think that it’s the color of his skin, then something is wrong with America.”
“”At the end of the day, it’s not about Trayvon. It’s about the person that felt he was suspicious,” she added.
Actually it WAS all about your son. He attacked someone, and was in the process of pounding his head on a sidewalk when he was shot. And, no, your son was NOT racially profiled, and NO, Florida’s Stand Your Ground Law did not play a role. But, of course, you do not mind travelling the country, lying through your teeth in the pursuit of trampling the right of self-defense.
No, not Sheila Jackson-Lee, but, anti self defense advocate Carolyn McCarthy
Carolyn McCarthy is retiring:
“I have decided not to seek re-election to the United States Congress in 2014,” McCarthy said in a statement. “I am forever grateful to my constituents for giving me the privilege of representing them in Congress for the past 18 years. As I plan for the next chapter of my life, I look forward to resuming my role as a citizen activist for the causes and principles that are so close to my heart.”
McCarthy spent nine terms in office as a Congresswoman from New York, attempting to strip away the gun rights of all Americans. McCathy’s hatred of guns came after her husband was killed and her son was wounded by Jamaican racist Colin Ferguson in what became known as the Long Island Railway
Is there anything more pathetic than a buffoon who thinks they are smarter than everyone else? How about a comedian that thinks they are funny when in fact they are just crass and obscene? Sarah Silverman has both of those bases covered
Comedian Sarah Silverman sent out a tweet today equating gun owners with “gun boners” and suggesting they should listen to the Pope, as if he is pro gun control.
Hey gun boners–at least listen to THE POPE. RT @Pontifex How much suffering & devastation has the use of arms carried in its wake.
She was referencing the following September 2 tweet from Pope Francis:
How much suffering, how much devastation, how much pain has the use of arms carried in its wake.
What Silverman failed to catch is that the Pope’s tweet was a statement drawn from a larger set of remarks about the conflict in Syria.
Anyone who reads the Pope’s statement in context will see that he was not even bemoaning guns or gun ownership per se, but the use of chemical weapons against defenseless Syrians–especially children.
Sarah, you ignorant woman, you ought to broaden your horizons a bit. Try getting to know some gun owners. Try reading some real stats on the number of times guns are used in self-defense. Hell, Sarah, you might even want to try some of that tolerance you Liberals always whine about.
Simply put, they are trying to make you afraid of guns. Saying gun violence over and over and over puts the notion into people’s heads that ALL violence is committed by bad guys with guns. In truth gun control laws are not, and never have been successful in curbing violence. In fact, the gun “control” movement is about control, of you. In fact, Liberals pushing for gun control also lie when they spout their “gun deaths” propaganda. In those numbers, they include criminals killed by police officers, concealed license holders, and by Americans who kill home invaders in self-defense.
If you are an advocate for gun control ask yourself why you should believe people who must lie, and lie deliberately to further their cause. Also look at what banning guns does to violent crime rates vs allowing people to own and in many states carry guns Gun control proponents love to point to the UK and say “see, their gun violence rate is so low. We should follow their example”. Yet, the truth is that disarming the people does not lower violent crime rates. Do not believe the lies folks.
When Sheriff John Cooke of Weld County explains in speeches why he is not enforcing the state’s new gun laws, he holds up two 30-round magazines. One, he says, he had before July 1, when the law banning the possession, sale or transfer of the large-capacity magazines went into effect. The other, he “maybe” obtained afterward.
He shuffles the magazines, which look identical, and then challenges the audience to tell the difference.
“How is a deputy or an officer supposed to know which is which?” he asks.
Colorado’s package of gun laws, enacted this year after mass shootings in Aurora, Colo., and Newtown, Conn., has been hailed as a victory by advocates of gun control. But if Sheriff Cooke and a majority of the other county sheriffs in Colorado offer any indication, the new laws – which mandate background checks for private gun transfers and outlaw magazines over 15 rounds – may prove nearly irrelevant across much of the state’s rural regions.
Some sheriffs, like Sheriff Cooke, are refusing to enforce the laws, saying that they are too vague and violate Second Amendment rights. Many more say that enforcement will be “a very low priority,” as several sheriffs put it. All but seven of the 62 elected sheriffs in Colorado signed on in May to a federal lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the statutes.
The resistance of sheriffs in Colorado is playing out in other states, raising questions about whether tougher rules passed since Newtown will have a muted effect in parts of the American heartland, where gun ownership is common and grass-roots opposition to tighter restrictions is high.
In New York State, where Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo signed one of the toughest gun law packages in the nation last January, two sheriffs have said publicly they would not enforce the laws – inaction that Mr. Cuomo said would set “a dangerous and frightening precedent.” The sheriffs’ refusal is unlikely to have much effect in the state: According to the state’s Division of Criminal Justice Services, since 2010 sheriffs have filed less than 2 percent of the two most common felony gun charges. The vast majority of charges are filed by the state or local police.
In Liberty County, Fla., a jury in October acquitted a sheriff who had been suspended and charged with misconduct after he released a man arrested by a deputy on charges of carrying a concealed firearm. The sheriff, who was immediately reinstated by the governor, said he was protecting the man’s Second Amendment rights.
And in California, a delegation of sheriffs met with Gov. Jerry Brown this fall to try to persuade him to veto gun bills passed by the Legislature, including measures banning semiautomatic rifles with detachable magazines and lead ammunition for hunting (Mr. Brown signed the ammunition bill but vetoed the bill outlawing the rifles).
“Our way of life means nothing to these politicians, and our interests are not being promoted in the legislative halls of Sacramento or Washington, D.C.,” said Jon E. Lopey, the sheriff of Siskiyou County, Calif., one of those who met with Governor Brown. He said enforcing gun laws was not a priority for him, and he added that residents of his rural region near the Oregon border are equally frustrated by regulations imposed by the federal Forest Service and the Environmental Protection Agency.
This year, the new gun laws in Colorado have become political flash points. Two state senators who supported the legislation were recalled in elections in September; a third resigned last month rather than face a recall. Efforts to repeal the statutes are already in the works.
Countering the elected sheriffs are some police chiefs, especially in urban areas, and state officials who say that the laws are not only enforceable but that they are already having an effect. Most gun stores have stopped selling the high-capacity magazines for personal use, although one sheriff acknowledged that some stores continued to sell them illegally. Some people who are selling or otherwise transferring guns privately are seeking background checks.
Eric Brown, a spokesman for Gov. John W. Hickenlooper of Colorado, said, “Particularly on background checks, the numbers show the law is working.” The Colorado Bureau of Investigation has run 3,445 checks on private sales since the law went into effect, he said, and has denied gun sales to 70 people.
A Federal District Court judge last month ruled against a claim in the sheriffs’ lawsuit that one part of the magazine law was unconstitutionally vague. The judge also ruled that while the sheriffs could sue as individuals, they had no standing to sue in their official capacity.
Still, the state’s top law enforcement officials acknowledged that sheriffs had wide discretion in enforcing state laws.
“We’re not in the position of telling sheriffs and chiefs what to do or not to do,” said Lance Clem, a spokesman for the Colorado Department of Public Safety. “We have people calling us all the time, thinking they’ve got an issue with their sheriff, and we tell them we don’t have the authority to intervene.”
Sheriffs who refuse to enforce gun laws around the country are in the minority, though no statistics exist. In Colorado, though, sheriffs like Joe Pelle of Boulder County, who support the laws and have more liberal constituencies that back them, are outnumbered.
“A lot of sheriffs are claiming the Constitution, saying that they’re not going to enforce this because they personally believe it violates the Second Amendment,” Sheriff Pelle said. “But that stance in and of itself violates the Constitution.”
Even Sheriff W. Pete Palmer of Chaffee County, one of the seven sheriffs who declined to join the federal lawsuit because he felt duty-bound to carry out the laws, said he was unlikely to aggressively enforce them. He said enforcement poses “huge practical difficulties,” and besides, he has neither the resources nor the pressure from his constituents to make active enforcement a high priority. Violations of the laws are misdemeanors.
“All law enforcement agencies consider the community standards – what is it that our community wishes us to focus on – and I can tell you our community is not worried one whit about background checks or high-capacity magazines,” he said.
At their extreme, the views of sheriffs who refuse to enforce gun laws echo the stand of Richard Mack, a former Arizona sheriff and the author of “The County Sheriff: America’s Last Hope.” Mr. Mack has argued that county sheriffs are the ultimate arbiters of what is constitutional and what is not. The Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association, founded by Mr. Mack, is an organization of sheriffs and other officers who support his views.
“The Supreme Court does not run my office,” Mr. Mack said in an interview. “Just because they allow something doesn’t mean that a good constitutional sheriff is going to do it.” He said that 250 sheriffs from around the country attended the association’s recent convention.
Matthew J. Parlow, a law professor at Marquette University, said that some states, including New York, had laws that allowed the governor in some circumstances to investigate and remove public officials who engaged in egregious misconduct – laws that in theory might allow the removal of sheriffs who failed to enforce state statutes.
But, he said, many governors could be reluctant to use such powers. And in most cases, any penalty for a sheriff who chose not to enforce state law would have to come from voters.
Sheriff Cooke, for his part, said that he was entitled to use discretion in enforcement, especially when he believed the laws were wrong or unenforceable.
“In my oath it says I’ll uphold the U.S. Constitution and the Constitution of the State of Colorado,” he said, as he posed for campaign photos in his office – he is running for the State Senate in 2014. “It doesn’t say I have to uphold every law passed by the Legislature.”
Matt at Conservative Hideout makes the case and explains why the Left so loathes gun rights
That state of passive captivity is exactly where the state wants all of us. And, the political left attempt to create this by use of the Alinsky Method. People that dissent, believe in freedom, and such are singled out and destroyed. They are harassed in public, and in their own homes. Their children and tracked and harassed. They receive death threats, false lawsuits are filed. Basically, the target is relentlessly isolated and attacked until they submit. They want the target to submit and be passive, and they want to people witnessing it to not get any bright ideas about having independent thoughts of their own. Also, when children are singled out for punishment in school for being Christian, or c0llege students are threatened with failing grades for not embracing the “tolerance” of the regressives. we see the isolation and attack mode that seeks to create passive sheeple, and punish those that stand up.
How this applies to gun control is simple. A firearm provides a sense of security and confidence. As the old saying goes, “God made man, but Samuel Colt made them equal.” Meaning, that it became very difficult to intimidate and subjugate a man that is armed. It is a catalyst for independence, as when a human can defend themselves, they will stand up to the state, community organizers, or union goons. It’s the “emboldening agent” that could be applied to the picture. It’s the great equalizer of our Republic. It is the counterbalance to tyranny; the gun owner is confident, and the one(s) that would attack him are wary. It doesn’t matter that the gun owner cannot impose his will on others, as others cannot impose their will on him. There is a certain reciprocity there, as all sides are potentially “equal” in terms of their power to protect themselves.
If you will notice, we see stories about union attacks, andcommunity organizers intimidating people far more in urban areas. Why is this? I think most of you will understand why. In the cities, there are more gun control laws, so these thugs have less of a chance of being confronted by an armed citizen. In the suburbs, and especially in rural areas, the thug’s shenanigans would be confronted with the sound on dozens of “metallic clicks.” It’s hard to intimidate someone that can fight back, even if he or she is outnumbered (or, unless the government limits the amount of bullets that go in magazines).
Go read the whole thing, It is quite insightful, and dead on accurate. as I often say, the Collectivist Left despises anything that supports Individualism, and individual liberty, nothing does more to those ends than the right to own firearms.
I mentioned previously I purchased a new handgun, a Sig Sauer P250 .45 compact a couple of weeks ago. I have now been to the range twice, and after 200 rounds I can say I LOVE THIS GUN! It is accurate, the sights are super easy and once I really got the feel of the trigger action, it is a blast to shoot. It is the most accurate, and the easiest to field strip and clean, and reassemble of any gun I have ever owned. In short the gun is simple, and crafted to perform. It feels better in my hand every time I fire it.
In appreciation for the fine work Sig Arms does, I am making Sig Sauer the OFFICIAL gun maker of The Daley Gator. Maybe they will hire me to go over tp Switzerland one day to test fire their weapons? Yeah, I know a guy can dream though. Of fine arms, and hot Swiss gals!
Evie Hudak is resigning, before she is booted from office by the people of Colorado! Good riddance to bad rubbish!
Democratic state Sen. Evie Hudak has resigned her seat to forestall a recall effort launched by constituents who sought to oust her from office for her support of gun-control laws passed by lawmakers last spring.
The senator made the announcement in a letter to Democratic leadership Wednesday. She did not attend a news conference scheduled for 10:30 a.m. at the Arvada Library, where some constituents offered words of support.
“By resigning I am protecting these important new laws for the good of Colorado and ensuring that we can continue looking forward,” Hudak wrote in her resignation letter in regard to her gun votes.
Hudak’s move ends the recall process, as now a Democratic vacancy committee can appoint someone to fill her seat until 2014.
Coward! She should have had the guts to face the recall. Of course, she should have never backed such foolish, meaningless gun control laws, but what else do you expect from a Democrat with no clue?
Greg Abbott, our current Attorney General, and likely the next governor is a proponent of allowing concealed handgun license holders to open carry their weapons. I am fine with this. Open carry brings another level of responsibility with it. With concealed carry no one else knows you are armed. That goes away when you open carry, so it will be interesting what a new law would require of the license holder, and how police would handle the new laws. Of course, the nervous Nellies who would freak out when they saw a man or women with a .45 on their hip are an issue. We have largely become a society that fears guns, I wonder how that will be handled? Possibly requiring the license holder to wear their permit in a visible place when they open carry?
In 1987 Florida passed concealed carry legislation, and the Left predicted Wild West shootouts and streets running with blood. That has not happened, but violent crime has been reduced. In 1995, I moved here to Texas, and the debate over concealed carry was raging, with the same predictions of blood in the streets, etc. Well, again, those anti self-defense zealots were wrong, as they have been in Georgia, Arizona, and many other states that allow concealed carry. Bob Owens reports today that two years after Wisconsin passed their concealed carry law, the gun grabbers are still wrong
Two years after 200,000 Cheeseheads get concealed carry, EVERYONE in Wisconsin is dead, just as gun control cultists predicted.
November 1 marks the second anniversary of the passing of the once high profile – and still highly contentious – Wisconsin concealed carry law, with more than 200,000 permits issued in that time. Just as noteworthy are the 5,800 permit applications that were denied for various reasons. The permit fee has also dropped to $40, down from $50 when Wisconsin became the 49th state to allow concealed carry two years ago.
In every state where “shall issue” concealed carry has been implemented over the past 20+ years, gun control fanatics have warned that every minor conflict and fender bender will turn into a combination of the OK Corral and the St. Valentine’s Day Massacre.
The fanatics, of course, give not the first damn about public safety, their twisted Collectivist minds just cannot tolerate armed Americans defending themselves. If it is one thing a Collectivist loathes, it is Individual liberty. These miscreants will only be sated when we are all wards of the State, and totally dependent on the government for everything, especially protection from criminals
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun who knows how to use it, and this Reading, PA concealed carrier certainly did:
The armed men took cash, cigarettes and lottery tickets before exiting the store. Outside they were confronted by the concerned citizen who told them not to move and that he was calling police.
Adams said a struggle ensued and the suspects took out their weapons. The citizen, however, was also armed and fired at the suspects.
The suspects were both shot in the chest and died at the scene.
Bearing Arms asks a great question about Moms Demand Action, a gun control group
Moms Demand Action—the anti-gun astroturf group of older women run by veteran PR maven Shannon Watts—knows that they are losing the public relations war against firearms. Young urban, and female gun owners are the fastest growing demographics in the shooting sports, turning shooting into truly social events.
Aware of the fact that gun controllers are losing this younger generation before they can be conned by anti-gun hysteria, Moms Demand has attempted to slow their hemorrhaging support by telling women that if they bring guns into their homes, that they are more likely to die of domestic violence.
They assert that if you bring a gun into your home, that Evil Males™ will simply take your gun away from you, and kill you with it.
Presumably, Watts and her ilk would rather you take your beating quietly.
A woman in Henderson, Nevada, apparently wasn’t too keen on taking the “let me sit here and take my beating instead of protecting myself with a gun” advice dished out by Moms Demand. Though she lacked a firearm of her own, she did have a neighbor with one that may have saved her life when her estranged boyfriend invaded her home with ill intent.
Earlier in the night, the couple got into an argument at a party before the woman took her boyfriend home and drove to her own apartment. Police described the couple as estranged.
Fearful that he might show up at her home, she called a man who lives in her apartment complex, Paul said. Her boyfriend, 49, eventually arrived and tried to kick in the front door before climbing in through a window.
The neighbor cautioned him to stop and told him that he had a weapon, Paul said. The alleged intruder reportedly continued to advance toward them, and the armed man fired several shots, striking and killing him.
The gun grabbing left has been pushing this nonsense for decades. They ignore, deliberately, the tens of thousands of Americans, many of them women, who use firearms to defend themselves annually. Like all Leftist groups, they use lies, and fear tactics to pursue their real aim, control, of people.