Colorado Sheriffs standing against useless new Colorado gun laws

God bless them! Stephen Green as some thoughts on this you should read at the link

DEFIANT

Video double feature time

Twice the Blogging role Model, Twice the fun,

First Michelle destroys a Leftist gun control zealot.

I do wish Michelle had told this nitwit that it is ALREADY illegal for anyone under 21 to buy a handgun. But, it is hard when he would not shut his mouth for fear of facts being brought up. My question is this guy that stupid, or is he just preaching what has been programmed into his brain?

Next Michelle points out the racist motive of the Oklahoma murder, and the typical Leftist double standard

 

 

I think the Founders would approve

The Founders would use more eloquent language, but I think A Nod to the Gods has captured their spirit here

a15

 

 

 

 

 

 

To those who will argue that I should use more “respectful” language I would pose one question. Do those miscreants seeking to deprive Americans of the right of self-defense have “respect” for our rights, or for the Constitution? Do they respect the truth when they deliberately lie about the number of times Americans use firearms to defend themselves? Do they respect honest debate when they seek to ram through legislation that would limit, or eliminate entirely my God-given natural rights? Do they show me any respect when they paint me, and other gun owners as nuts? Do they show us respect when they falsely seek to blame us for horrific tragedies like Newtown? The answer is no. So, why do I owe tyrants, seeking to rob my natural rights any damned respect?

 

——————————————————————————————————————————–

.
Ed’s interjection:

Indeed, “fuck you” is the very sentiment which spawned this great nation. If it hadn’t been for our forefathers’ “fuck you” mentality, the Boston Tea Party never would have happened. Saying “fuck you” to authority is what America is all about. In fact, the U.S. citizenry is the most profoundly “fuck you”-oriented society on Earth… by tradition. Hell, “fuck you” was the thought that finally motivated Rosa Parks to move to the front of the bus. Our general “fuck you” attitude has helped sustain us as a people for generations, and if by chance you don’t happen to agree with everything I just wrote, then “fuck you” too!

Oregon Democrats ready to throw out 4th amendment with the 2nd amendment

They really are the Totalitarian Party

Democrats in Oregon are pushing legislation that not only bans guns but allows warrantless searches of your home by government officials.

Oregon Firearms reported:

Two days after Senate Democrats claimed they would not seek a ban on modern firearms and feeding devices, Democrats in the Oregon House introduced just that.

Seven Senators joined with eight House Reps to introduce a sweeping ban on virtually all modern firearms. Among the Senators is, of course, Ginny Burdick, who claimed on Wednesday “that she is backing off an attempt to push through a bill on gun clips that she drafted following the December shootings at the Clackamas Mall.”   The other sponsors are:

Representatives BAILEY, BUCKLEY, DEMBROW, FREDERICK, READ, REARDON, TOMEI, Senators , DINGFELDER, HASS, MONNES- ANDERSON, MONROE, SHIELDS, STEINER- HAYWARD.

Remember them.

HB 3200 not only bans most modern guns and magazines, it allows warrantless searches of your home, requires background checks and registration for a firearm you already own and as-of-yet undefined storage requirements. We say “a firearm” because even if you comply with the restrictions in this bill you may still only own one.

I never want to hear anyone say we should not call Democrats Marxists.

Vanity Fair writer goes berserk launches boycott against The Other McCain

Guess that will teach McCain not to poke fun of goofy haircuts. Such things enrage writers at places like Vanity Fair, who automatically launch into Super Emoting Mode

Thursday I posted a “coming out” video by a mopey kid with a bad haircut. This evidently enraged a Vanity Fair writer:

Thu, February 21, 2013 7:38 PM
From: KURT EICHENWALD <kurtewald@me.com>
To: Chris Smith <smitty1e@gmail.com>; “r.s.mccain@att.net” <r.s.mccain@att.net>
Subject: you are both despicable

I will address you both as adults, even though you clearly are not. The fact that you could use your site to make fun of an abused, frightened teenager is the most abhorrent thing I have ever seen by supposed “professional” commentators. Your decision that this kid was a fake was the type of arrogance I would expect to see from a 5th grader, not an adult. If you have nothing better to do than direct derision and contempt towards a child, then maybe you should stop pretending you are anything more than bullies who have nothing better to do with their lives.
You deserve all of the contempt possible. And hopefully, you will pay a price for your arrogance and immaturity.
Kurt Eichenwald

Not content with that, he followed up with this:

Thu, February 21, 2013 8:01 PM
Re: you are both despicable
From: KURT EICHENWALD <kurtewald@me.com>
To: Chris Smith <smitty1e@gmail.com>; “r.s.mccain@att.net” <r.s.mccain@att.net>
Oh, and by the way, you immature bastards….
I have invited my 7,000 twitter followers to contact your advertisers and demand they stop advertising with your site. And they’re doing it.
Have a nice life. You bastards.

Well, this was certainly a charming introduction to Kurt Eichenwald, and he is a man of his word, because a few hours later, one of our advertisers forwarded to me this e-mail:

Subject: your add on a hate site
Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2013 20:00:11 -0600
From: KURT EICHENWALD <kurtewald@me.com>
To: [REDACTED]
You are currently advertising on a site called http://theothermccain.com. In the last two days, these “adults” took a youtube video of a young gay teen who was both coming out and revealing abuse he has been suffering at the hands of his mother and not only made fun of him (for his haircut!), but invited their followers to do the same. The followers happily complied. This site does not represent your values. Moreover, this child is clearly depressed and discussed the times he considered suicide. If the torment of these “adults” on this site contributes to the boy acting on those feelings, you would not want to have any connection to it.
Many thanks.
Kurt Eichenwald
Contributing Editor
Vanity Fair
914-552-2588

Go read it all, Stacy McCain, A.K.A. Stupid Haircut Hater makes some good points. This kid DID go public with this, so he made it public. And, yes, a bit of cynicism is not a bad thing

The thought occurred to me that (a) the kid is basically inviting everybody to attend his pity party, and (b) our sarcastic commenters were likely to say rude things about him.

The video already had nearly 20,000 views in barely a week and — in case this didn’t cross anybody else’s mind – that translates to a bit of YouTube advertising revenue for young Austin Gates. So he’s like a professional pity-party event planner or something.

Are his tales of abuse and suicidal thoughts true? Has anyone verifiedhis story? “If your mother says she loves you, check it out,” but if a kid says his mother hates him, don’t bother, eh?

Habitual cynicism, that’s my problem. Having been a teenage hoodlum myself, I see a video like that and instantly think: “Scam.”

Kid’s probably hustling contributions to buy himself some weed. Or maybe he’s angling for a guest spot on daytime TV talk shows, maybe even a reality TV series deal. For all we know, the minute the video ended, Austin Gates was high-fiving his buddies: “How was that, huh? Did you like that whiny thing I did at the end about suicide? Hey, man, fire up the bong and let’s burn some buds.”

We’re not supposed to think that way anymore, I guess. It’s “bullying” to see a mopey kid and say, “Stop moping — and get a haircut!”

If this kid has gone through the things he describes, then I feel for him. I would not wish that on any kid. And I hope he gets whatever help he needs to get past it Some might accuse Stacy McCain of being insensitive, and maybe that is fair. But, from what I know of the man I doubt he would deliberately add to anyone’s pain. And, in a larger sense, I abhor these boycotts. They smack of censorship, and totalitarianism to me. So maybe Kurt Eichenwald ought to wait and see what all the facts are? And maybe everyone who loves free speech, and making fun of bad haircuts should contact Kurt Eichenwald 914-552-2588, and let him know!

 

Texas college students could be allowed to carry on campus soon

Via Doug Giles

Students with concealed handgun licenses could soon carry guns on Texas college campuses.

More than a dozen state senators have signed on to Senate Bill 182, also known as the  “Campus Personal Protection Act.”

The bill’s primary author, Senator Brian Birdwell,said the bill is about preserving the 2nd Amendment.

Of course, Liberals will howl over this, and I know they will predict Wild West shootouts, and blood in the halls of academia, and so on. Of course they said similar things when Texas passed our concealed carry law in 1996, and they said the same in Florida when my native state passed that CC bill in 1987. And, to date, those Wild West shootouts have still not happened. I hope Governor Perry gets the chance to sign this into law.

 

Pro 2nd Amendment Rally in DC May 25th

Nice Deb has the scoop. It would be great to get as many folks as possible. And remember tomorrow, at every state capitol

On January 19, thousands of 2nd Americans from every state rallied at their state capitols to show their support for the 2nd Amendment and send a message to Congress. The MSM pretty much ignored the huge numbers, so now it’s time for  round two:

2nd Amendment events that will be taking place in every U.S. state capitol city on Friday, February 8, 2013 at 10:00 a.m. This is a critical time to show our support for the 2nd Amendment and opposition to currently proposed legislation.

Of course I have to work, but, if you can, get out there and show your support for our liberty. And again, May 25th, at The mall in DC

Another 2nd Amendment rally has been organized for May 25 in Washington DC:

Calling all Gun Owners and Patriots you are cordially invited to attend the first 2nd Amendment rally at The National Mall in Washington D.C. on Saturday May 25th 2013 at Noon Eastern Time (Tentatively Pending Sponsors).  We are hoping to attract up to 10 Million Gun Owners/Patriots  to the National Mall for a rally to show our support for the 2nd Amendment. The 2nd Amendment of the United States Constitution is the part of theUnited States Bill of Rights that protects and insures the right of the people to keep and bear arms.

Once we have secured the venue we will confirm the date and time. This is a grass roots endeavor so any national celebrities that would like to help please contact us at the e-mail address below.

The United States Supreme Court has ruled that the 2nd Amendment protects an individual right to possess and carry firearms.

Gee, I wonder how much doctoring of video MSNBS will engage in after that rally.

Your quote of the day

Comes from Victory Girls, in response to those miscreants who mocked the death of American hero Chris Kyle

I’ll get straight to the point today. Most of humanity is gifted a sense of empathy and a soul, and then there are those who should be fed broken glass thrice daily with gasoline chasers to wash it down. I like to call those people “liberals”.

It is powerful, go read the entire post. And I love the final line, advising us how to address these types of bottom feeders who spend half their time bemoaning “Right Wing vitriol” and the other half engaging in Left Wing vitriol

“Bless your little hypocritical heart, fuck you.”

Indeed!

 

So where is news made these days?

The Liberal Consensus Factory of course!

Otherwise known as the news media:

In the wake of the horrific school shooting in Newtown, Connecticut on December 14, the Big Three (ABC, CBS, NBC) networks quickly moved to exploit the tragedy to push for more gun control legislation while mostly ignoring solutions that respect gun owners’ Second Amendment rights.  . . .
Stories advocating more gun control outnumbered stories opposing gun control by 99 to 12, or a ratio of 8 to 1.

And they wonder why we think they are biased?

 

Do Conservative Bloggers have to think of EVERYTHING?

Doug Powers, Austin’s brother, notes that the pro-gun rights arguments need to change to match the emotionalism in the anti-gun rights side. And he is right. 

The Senate Judiciary Committee has been having hearings on gun control. On the pro gun control side, Gabby Giffords, victim of a crazed gunman, said “too many children are dying.” At a hearing in Connecticut, the father of a child murdered at Sandy Hook Elementary gave similar testimony (and gave some in the blinded-by-bias media a chance to show off their mad video editing skillz).

And on the pro Second Amendment side we most often hear testimony from Wayne LaPierre, somebody else from the NRA, or lawyers arguing on behalf of the Second Amendment. They make arguments on constitutional grounds and even speak about people whose lives are saved because they had guns — but where arethose people? Ask them to come forward at hearings and press conferences.

Let’s face it, the left usually kicks the right’s ass when it comes to emotional arguments that are designed to tug at the heart so aggressively that onlookers are too distracted to use their heads to think through what’s actually being presented to them (and that’s not necessarily a bad thing as we pride ourselves on being on the side of reason). However, emotional arguments can be constructed without selling out on the logic and common sense end of things, and that’s where the right needs to do a better job.

There certainly are no shortages of children (and adults) whose lives have been saved because of gun ownership. Almost every day there’s a story. Here’s one from just the day before yesterday:

A home invasion suspect was arrested at a hospital after a mother shot him during the crime at a Montgomery County home, deputies said Wednesday.

Erin, who asked to be identified only by her first name, told Local 2 she was putting her 6-year-old son to bed when she heard a loud noise coming from her bedroom on Mink Lake Drive Friday night.

“I threw the cover over my son and I took off running, screaming to the living room to let my dogs out,” she said.

Erin said she turned around and saw three masked men, pointing a gun right at her.

The woman had a gun — at least two actually — and it didn’t end well for one of the criminals. The other two fled, and the mother and her son were unharmed as a result.

Powers is right, we could find literally thousands of Americans whose lives have been saved because  they, or a friend, parent or neighbor was armed. Does this not seem the perfect way to fight back against the Left’s Emotionally based testimonies? Of course it does, because it is. So why has the leadership of the NRA, or Republican Congressmen not thought of it? Or maybe I should ask, why have they chosen NOT to go that direction since surely it has been suggested to them. I mean honestly, this is one of the biggest issues the Right faces. Too often the best arguments, ideas, etc come from people like Doug Powers, and other Conservative bloggers. Are we just that much smarter than our “leaders”? Or are we more intent on fighting? Do they fear unvarnished Conservatism?  What are they thinking? Seems too often they are thinking about not losing, rather than about winning.

 

Ted Cruz dismantles Dianne Feinstein’s gun grab bill

You go Ted!

Feinstein, in introducing the bill, invoked the Sandy Hook tragedy, saying, “If 20 dead children in Newtown wasn’t a wakeup call that these weapons of war don’t belong on our streets, I don’t know what is.”

“Washington politicians shouldn’t be taking advantage of recent tragedy to try to push an aggressive gun control agenda,” Cruz said. “Real assault weapons — machine guns — are already functionally illegal, and they have been since 1934.”

Cruz noted Feinstein’s “proposal would have done nothing to prevent the terrible murders in Newtown, but it would limit the constitutional liberties of law-abiding citizens.”

“And gun control doesn’t work – the empirical data overwhelmingly demonstrate that strict gun-control laws consistently produce more crime and more murders,” Cruz added. “The Second Amendment exists to ensure that law-abiding Americans can protect their homes and families, and I look forward to helping lead the fight to defeat this bill and to protect our constitutional right to keep and bear arms.”

Amen Senator!

 

Emily Miller refutes the Left’s “high-capacity magazine” propaganda

Emily Miller, columnist, shooter, and a fine spokeswoman for the right of self-defense

Deception is the key component in the latest push for more gun control laws. During her soap opera press conference Wednesday, Sen. Dianne Feinstein used a liberal clergyman to give her the moral high ground in her campaign to infringe on the Second Amendment.

The Very Rev. Gary Hall, dean of the Washington National Cathedral, donned his clerical collar for the all-Democrat event to say he can “no longer justify a society” that “permits the sale of high-capacity magazines designed for the purpose of simply killing as many people as quickly as possible.”

The anti-gun crowd labels any firearm magazine capable of holding more than 10-rounds “high-capacity.” It’s a scare tactic.

The Left has to lie and use the fear campaign, hoping enough Americans are ignorant enough about guns to fall for it, Emily Miller is not going to let that happen

Many firearms come from the factory with devices that feed between 15 to 30 rounds — some hold more, some less depending on their configuration and purpose. Ten is a number chosen out of thin air for reasons of political theater. The gun grabbers use it to imply the higher-capacity magazines enable murderers to kill more people, but it doesn’t actually work out that way.

In a 2004 study for the Department of Justice linked on Mrs. Feinstein’s own website, Christopher S. Koper, a professor of criminology, reported that “assailants fire less than four shots on average, a number well within the 10-round magazine limit” of the “assault weapons” ban.

“Studies prove that the arbitrary magazine capacity restriction that was in place for a decade did not reduce crime,” Lawrence Keane, the National Shooting Sports Foundation’s senior vice president and general counsel, told The Washington Times. “In searching for effective means to reduce violence, we should not repeat failed policies, especially when they infringe on the constitutional rights of the law-abiding.”

Violent crime has decreased 17 percent since the assault weapons ban expired.

That last number might be the most important of all. the Left, and the media are pretending that violent crime is running high, and increasing. that is not true. Violent crime has been falling, and so have “gun crimes” for 20 years now. Great piece by Miller, who is writing a four-part series at the Washington Times dispelling gun myths, You can read part one, and I strongly suggest you do, here And pass these around, especially to friends who might not be so familiar with guns.

H/T Donald Douglas who has a video of Emily laying waste to the Liberal lies. I think I am in love

Also check out Jessie Duff explaining some other facts about guns Feinstein will never tell you.

City Councilman Freaks Out Shows His Ass Over Veteran Packing Heat With Concealed Carry Permit

Via Donald Douglas This shows clearly that some people do not belong in a y position of authority

Candy ass, he should keep walking if he does not believe in the right of self-defense. And let me, and Michelle Malkin remind you all how much the Left hates your guns, and YES, they are definitely looking to confiscate your guns

Another Day, another Marxist Moron

And today, it is Danny Glover, spouting the latest Leftist propaganda on gun rights. Billy Bob has the details

You know the actor Danny Glover, right? The guy from Lethal Weapon, with Mel Gibson? Umm, he might be retarded. Or maybe he has done some bad narcotics. I’m not sure exactly, but something is wrong with the guy.

This is what he said to a group of students at Texas A&M recently…

“I don’t know if you know the genesis of the right to bear arms,” he said. “The Second Amendment comes from the right to protect themselves from slave revolts, and from uprisings by Native Americans.”

“A revolt from people who were stolen from their land or revolt from people whose land was stolen from, that’s what the genesis of the second amendment is,” he continued.

This is one of the lies being spread around right now by the Neo-Marxists who are pushing gun control. It is an effort to discredit the Founders, and the second amendment. The Founders were VERY clear on gun rights, do not fall for this load of BS!

 

A list of President Obama’s 23 executive orders on gun violence

Via the Lid, who sums up the usefulness of these EO’s

What a pile of nothing. Both the POTUS and the SCHMOTUS had been warning that Obama would take hard constructive action on gun control.  For days advocates of the constitution were worried that Obama would seek to destroy the Second Amendment by executive fiat. Instead his actions were the typical political “We will do better and we will study.” One thing the POTUS missed…there is no executive order preventing the Federal Government from selling weapons to Mexican Drug Cartels…everyone would support that one. 

Basically, these 23 EO’s are a pile of emptiness. Of course, the Democrats can use these later when they do nothing at all to stop the next high-profile shooting. They can then tell us that they did not go far enough. Of course, they can say the very same thing if they get a new assault weapon ban pushed through too. They new that new gun laws will not prevent the next school shooting, but, they are hoping they can get some more restrictions in place now. Then, when those restrictions are ineffective, they can use their emotional appeals to aim for even more restrictions in the future. The Left is all about getting what they want incrementally folks. This is why we must never sleep on them. They are persistent if nothing else.

Chris, at Wyblog points out two troublesome items from the list

16. Clarify that the Affordable Care Act does not prohibit doctors asking their patients about guns in their homes.  

17. Release a letter to health care providers clarifying that no federal law prohibits them from reporting threats of violence to law enforcement authorities.

I do not like these either. I have never had a doctor ask me about guns in my home, and I would never answer such a question, but, again, this is one of those cases where we might rightfully wonder where these two executive orders could lead.

Your doctor is spying on you. And depending on what you tell him, he’ll rat you out to Dear Leader faster than you can say “Second Amendment.” Because it’s now his duty to ask you about your guns.

Newark, NJ Mayor Cory Booker started us down the fascist trail by offering a $1,000 bounty to folks who turn in their gun-owning neighbors. Dear Leader took it one better. Your doctor can’t tell you if your teenage daughter asks for birth control pills. But now he’s required to tell the feds if you own a gun.

Remember when asking librarians to report “suspicious” reference requests was tantamount to detonating the pillars of our civilization? Me neither.

Yeah, so much for that patient confidentialty and “right to privacy” thing. It only applies when it doesn’t conflict with progressive groupthink. Like I said, fascism.

As I stated above, never trust the political Left. Always assume they have ulterior motives. And remember that their number one priority has always been total control of our lives. 

Do you notice that the Left always categorizes “gun crime” as different than “other” violent crimes?

It might seem odd that the Left always wants to talk about gun crimes, gun murders, gun deaths as if putting a gun into the equation makes a violent crime less violent somehow. Personally, I do not wish to get shot, nor do I wish to  be stabbed, or beaten with a bat, or hammer, or to be jumped by a gang of thugs, a gang of NFL cheerleaders is a different story but that is a another matter altogether. The point here is that the Left cannot win the debate over guns by sticking with legitimate stats. So they use emotional appeals, or cooked statistics that are meant to make us believe that gun violence is  a raging epidemic, and that America is awash in gun deaths. Of late their tactic seems to be to segregate crimes, committed with a gun from other violent crimes committed with other weapons. Zion’s Trumpet links to Mark Steyn who explains that while the Left loves to hold the UK up as a shining example of the glorious bliss that are gun bans, the truth is that the UK is a lot more violent than America.

Between the introduction of pistol permits in 1903 and the banning of handguns after the Dunblane massacre in 1996, Britain has had a century of incremental gun control—“sensible measures that all reasonable people can agree on.” And what’s the result? Even when you factor in America’s nutcake jurisdictions with the crackhead mayors, the overall crime rate in England and Wales is higher than in all 50 states, even though over there they have more policemen per capita than in the U.S., on vastly higher rates of pay installing more video surveillance cameras than anywhere else in the Western world. Robbery, sex crimes, and violence against the person are higher in England and Wales; property crime is twice as high; vehicle theft is higher still; the British are 2.3 times more likely than Americans to be assaulted, and three times more likely to be violently assaulted. Between 1973 and 1992, burglary rates in the U.S. fell by half. In Britain, not even the Home Office’s disreputable reporting methods (if a burglar steals from 15 different apartments in one building, it counts as a single crime) can conceal the remorseless rise: Britons are now more than twice as likely as Americans to be mugged; two-thirds will have their property broken into at some time in their lives. Even more revealing is the divergent character between U.K. and U.S. property crime: In America, just over 10 percent of all burglaries are “hot burglaries”—committed while the owners are present; in Britain, it’s over half. Because of insurance-required alarm systems, the average thief increasingly concludes that it’s easier to break in while you’re on the premises. Your home-security system may conceivably make your home more safe, but it makes you less so.

Conversely, up here in the New Hampshire second congressional district, there are few laser security systems and lots of guns. Our murder rate is much lower than Britain’s and our property crime is virtually insignificant. Anyone want to make a connection? Villains are expert calculators of risk, and the likelihood of walking away uninjured with an $80 television set is too remote. In New Hampshire, a citizen’s right to defend himself deters crime; in Britain, the state-inflicted impotence of the homeowner actively encourages it. Just as becoming a drug baron is a rational career move in Colombia, so too is becoming a violent burglar in the United Kingdom. The chances that the state will seriously impede your progress are insignificant.

Now I’m Canadian, so, as you might expect, the Second Amendment doesn’t mean much to me. I think it’s more basic than that. Privately owned firearms symbolize the essential difference between your great republic and the countries you left behind. In the U.S., power resides with “we, the people” and is leased ever more sparingly up through town, county, state, and federal government. In Britain and Canada, power resides with the Crown and is graciously devolved down in limited doses. To a north country Yankee it’s self-evident that, when a burglar breaks into your home, you should have the right to shoot him—indeed, not just the right, but the responsibility, as a freeborn citizen, to uphold the integrity of your property. But in Britain and most other parts of the Western world, the state reserves that right to itself, even though at the time the ne’er-do-well shows up in your bedroom you’re on the scene and Constable Plod isn’t: He’s some miles distant, asleep in his bed, and with his answering machine on referring you to central dispatch God knows where.

Yes, I know, Liberals will screech that this piece was written over a decade ago, but, as recent stats show, the UK is still a lot more violent than America. The murder rate, burglary rate, robbery rate and stabbing rate are all much higher in the UK. Yes, I understand the Left will ignore those facts. In fact, I have heard more than one Liberal say that somehow a gun makes every crime worse. Not sure how that happens, but we are dealing with Liberals here, their arguments do not have to make sense, they just have to feel like they do to Liberals. Despite the negative impact on the feelings of liberals facts still do matter. And the fact is this. the Left has been pushing gun control for a long time, and they often use the UK as the shining example of how the UK is a more safe nation. This is simply not true

Britain’s violent crime record is worse than any other country in the European union, it has been revealed.

Official crime figures show the UK also has a worse rate for all types of violence than the U.S. and even South Africa – widely considered one of the world’s most dangerous countries.

The figures comes on the day new Home Secretary Alan Johnson makes his first major speech on crime, promising to be tough on loutish behaviour. 

The figures, compiled from reports released by the European Commission and United Nations, also show: 

  • The UK has the second highest overall crime rate in the EU.
  • It has a higher homicide rate than most of our western European neighbours, including France, Germany, Italy and Spain.
  • The UK has the fifth highest robbery rate in the EU.
  • It has the fourth highest burglary rate and the highest absolute number of burglaries in the EU, with double the number of offences than recorded in Germany and France.

But it is the naming of Britain as the most violent country in the EU that is most shocking. The analysis is based on the number of crimes per 100,000 residents.

In the UK, there are 2,034 offences per 100,000 people, way ahead of second-placed Austria with a rate of 1,677.

Less guns means less crime? No, it does not. The USA has a violent crime rate of 466 per 100,000 people. Canada, another panacea of strict gun laws has a rate of 935 per 100,000 people. In the UK, which bans guns, the rate is 2,034 per 100,000 people. FIVE TIMES the rate in America. 

This is why the Left talks only of GUN crimes, rather than violent crimes. They are lying by omission. And they KNOW they are lying. So, ask yourself this. Why? If their agenda is not truly reducing crimes, what is it? 

 

Noted lunatic AKA Alex Jones, is the last person I want defending my right to keep and bear arms

Alex the Crazy was on Piers Morgan the other night, debating gun control. Of course, Piers ONLY had Jones on his show for one reason. Jones is a nut job, and Morgan wants every American to think that all gun owners are like Alex Jones. I would bet most gun owners, and mos defenders of the second amendment would cringe at the thought of Alex being compared to them in any way. In fact, I would say that most of us agree with The Other McCain’s summation of Alex the Loony 

English: Radio host and documentary film maker...

Crazy is not an ideology

Crazy is not a political philosophy, and neither is anger. So, naturally, when anti-gun fanatic Piers Morgan wants a “typical” spokesman for Second Amendment rights, he brings on the permanently angry Alex Jones, who begins his rant with some signifying jive:

“[W]e did it to point out that this is globalism, and the mega banks that control the planet and brag they have taken over — in Bloomberg, AP, Reuters, you name it — brag that they’re going to get our guns as well. They’ve taken everybody’s guns, but the Swiss and the American people and when they get our guns, they can have their world tyranny while the government buys 1.6 billion bullets, armored vehicles, tanks, helicopters, predator drones, armed now in U.S. skies, being used to arrest people in North Dakota.”

Your key phrase there is “mega banks that control the planet.” This is classic kook-talk, the kind of paranoid stuff like Zeitgeist that inspired Jared Loughner. Recall that Zeitgeist not only demonized bankers, but also suggested that 9/11 was a hoax.

These are the ideas that circulate on the kook fringe, and Alex Jones first became notorious as a promoter of 9/11 Truther craziness.

His appetite for kook-fringe conspiracy theories discredits Alex Jones, as does his implacable raging anger. The only reason Piers Morgan had Jones on CNN was in order to discredit the Second Amendment by saying, “See how dangerously crazy these gun nuts are?

You can watch the video The Other McCain has posted of Jones on Piers Morgan. Jones starts out fine, with some good facts, then devolves into screaming about the New World Order. Like I said NOT the guy we want defending oue rights on national TV.

This guy, Joshua Boston, a former Marine , he knows how to go into the lion’s den and win. As Stacy McCain points out, Boston has a good way about explaining liberty to ignorant news folks

But there are lots of people who have taken that oath to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States,” and one of them is Marine Corps veteran Joshua Boston, who had a few words for Sen. Dianne Feinstein regarding her plan to disarm American citizens:

I am not your subject. I am the man who keeps you free. I am not your servant. I am the person whom you serve. I am not your peasant. I am the flesh and blood of America. I am the man who fought for my country. . . .
I will not be disarmed to suit the fear that has been established by the media and your misinformation campaign against the American public.

It’s kind of a tricky business, this question of who is serving whom, and some people seem rather confused about this. Many of the most confused people are, alas, a disgrace to my own profession. One of them, a CNN news anchor, got schooled by the former Marine corporal:

See how facts work, when applied with reason and sanity, instead of of the Crazinese that Jones uses? God bless Joshua Boston, and God bless Stacy McCain’s son who is in the Army now. We pray that God keeps him safe, and thank him for his service.

What Would the Father of the Constitution say to gun grabbers?

Gun control you say? The Left is pushing hard to negate much of the second amendment, and part of that is to call anyone who defends that amendment as a lunatic. Well are these people who say the Constitution MEANS what it says loony? Let us consult THE expert on the Constitution, James Madison. Via Steve

James Madison wrote in Federalist Paper #46:

But ambitious encroachments of the federal government, on the authority of the State governments, would not excite the opposition of a single State, or of a few States only. They would be signals of general alarm. Every government would espouse the common cause. A correspondence would be opened. Plans of resistance would be concerted. One spirit would animate and conduct the whole. The same combinations, in short, would result from an apprehension of the federal, as was produced by the dread of a foreign, yoke;and unless the projected innovations should be voluntarily renounced, the same appeal to a trial of force would be made in the one case as was made in the other. But what degree of madness could ever drive the federal government to such an extremity. In the contest with Great Britain, one part of the empire was employed against the other. The more numerous part invaded the rights of the less numerous part. The attempt was unjust and unwise; but it was not in speculation absolutely chimerical. But what would be the contest in the case we are supposing? Who would be the parties? A few representatives of the people would be opposed to the people themselves; or rather one set of representatives would be contending against thirteen sets of representatives, with the whole body of their common constituents on the side of the latter.

The only refuge left for those who prophesy the downfall of the State governments is the visionary supposition that the federal government may previously accumulate a military force for the projects of ambition. The reasonings contained in these papers must have been employed to little purpose indeed, if it could be necessary now to disprove the reality of this danger. That the people and the States should, for a sufficient period of time, elect an uninterupted succession of men ready to betray both; that the traitors should, throughout this period, uniformly and systematically pursue some fixed plan for the extension of the military establishment; that the governments and the people of the States should silently and patiently behold the gathering storm, and continue to supply the materials, until it should be prepared to burst on their own heads, must appear to every one more like the incoherent dreams of a delirious jealousy, or the misjudged exaggerations of a counterfeit zeal, than like the sober apprehensions of genuine patriotism. Extravagant as the supposition is, let it however be made. Let a regular army, fully equal to the resources of the country, be formed; and let it be entirely at the devotion of the federal government; still it would not be going too far to say, that the State governments, with the people on their side, would be able to repel the danger. The highest number to which, according to the best computation, a standing army can be carried in any country, does not exceed one hundredth part of the whole number of souls; or one twenty-fifth part of the number able to bear arms. This proportion would not yield, in the United States, an army of more than twenty-five or thirty thousand men. To these would be opposed a militia amounting to near half a million of citizens with arms in their hands, officered by men chosen from among themselves, fighting for their common liberties, and united and conducted by governments possessing their affections and confidence. It may well be doubted, whether a militia thus circumstanced could ever be conquered by such a proportion of regular troops. Those who are best acquainted with the last successful resistance of this country against the British arms, will be most inclined to deny the possibility of it. Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate governments, to which the people are attached, and by which the militia officers are appointed, forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition, more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of. Notwithstanding the military establishments in the several kingdoms of Europe, which are carried as far as the public resources will bear, the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms. And it is not certain, that with this aid alone they would not be able to shake off their yokes. But were the people to possess the additional advantages of local governments chosen by themselves, who could collect the national will and direct the national force, and of officers appointed out of the militia, by these governments, and attached both to them and to the militia, it may be affirmed with the greatest assurance, that the throne of every tyranny in Europe would be speedily overturned in spite of the legions which surround it. Let us not insult the free and gallant citizens of America with the suspicion, that they would be less able to defend the rights of which they would be in actual possession, than the debased subjects of arbitrary power would be to rescue theirs from the hands of their oppressors. Let us rather no longer insult them with the supposition that they can ever reduce themselves to the necessity of making the experiment, by a blind and tame submission to the long train of insidious measures which must precede and produce it.

Go read the rest. As a side note, it is amazing that more and more liberals are openly saying we need to scrap, or at least IGNORE the Constitution. I have long-held that destroying the Constitution is the end goal of the Left. For years, Liberals would scoff at such a suggestion. But, as the Left becomes more sure that they can render the Constitution, in this case the second amendment mute, they begin to be more honest about their disdain for our founders and their principles. The truth is the Left is as far removed from our Founders as the East is from the West. And their masks are slipping.

Ignorance is the fuel that feeds the engines of Leftism

The left would fall apart if not for ignorance. The Left survives because enough people are foolish and ignorant enough to buy the lies the Left sells. Ignorance leads people to be too emotional, thus falling for the emotionalistic appeals the Left pedals. Our Founders knew the value of education, of genuine knowledge and wisdom. The Left desires people to be the opposite. the debate over gun control is a great example, as Stacy McCain notes today

“Senator Feinstein’s latest attack on the Second Amendment relies entirely on public ignorance of firearms and their legitimate uses,” writes William A. Levinson in an American Thinker article answering the question, “Why Does Anybody Need a 30-Round Magazine?”

The Politics of Ignorance is what enraged me so much about the so-called “assault weapons” ban that Feinstein supported in 1994. Repeat after me: A semi-automatic rifle is not an “assault weapon.”

Of course, Feinstein and the Left wants to revive her bill, with more draconian measures of course, and they will use, or attempt to, public ignorance to push it.

That idiotic law expired in 2004, thank God, but gun-control advocates continue relying on appeals to ignorance, particularly when talking about the so-called “gun show loophole.” What this rhetoric is about is trying to inhibit the private re-sale of weapons, thus depriving gun owners of the full economic value of their assets.

Many millions of Americans own guns and these are actually economic investments, as firearms tend to retain value. There is a ready market for antique and collectible guns. A model 1911 Colt .45 semi-automatic pistol can sell for more than $1,000. And so the family gun cabinet represents a real financial asset to the owner – if he is permitted to re-sell them.

However, when liberals talk about “closing the gun-show loophole,” what they actually mean is requiring these private gun owners to run background checks on purchasers, just like federally licensed gun dealers. This would impose an all-but-prohibitive restriction on the private seller –how much would compliance cost? — and thus makes it practically impossible for him to reap the full value of his asset. True, he could sell his guns to a licensed dealer, or place them for sale on consignment with such a dealer, but in the process he would lose not only the price difference between wholesale (what the dealer pays the seller) and retail (what is paid by the dealer’s customer), but also the convenience of being able to sell the gun himself.

This is why it is so important that we,a s Conservatives speak up. Last week, a co-worker, OK it was my boss, was asking why anyone “needs” a semi-automatic gun. I was happy that I was not the only person who corrected the term semi-automatic for him, in fact three of us did. He really had no clue that almost all guns are semi-automatic. He also was not aware that machine guns had been banned since the 1930′s. He actually thought you could just go buy one. He had been taken in by Leftist rhetoric. Now, though, he understands the facts. And facts can trump rhetoric when applied properly.

A Marine responds to Dianne Feinstein’s gun ban

Saw this at Victory Girls. It is short, to the point, and written in the spirit of the Founders! If we only had political leaders with this Marine’s character and sense of duty.

Her gun ban legislation has made one person in particular so concerned that he, as an active duty Marine, decided to come out of the shadows and go public with his feelings. His name is Corporal Joshua Boston and he wrote a very polite but direct letter to Senator Dianne Feinstein regarding her gun ban legislation. You can read it below.

CNN’s iReport letter from Cpl Joshua Boston to Senator Dianne Feinstein:

Senator Dianne Feinstein,

I will not register my weapons should this bill be passed, as I do not believe it is the government’s right to know what I own. Nor do I think it prudent to tell you what I own so that it may be taken from me by a group of people who enjoy armed protection yet decry me having the same a crime. You ma’am have overstepped a line that is not your domain. I am a Marine Corps Veteran of 8 years, and I will not have some woman who proclaims the evil of an inanimate object, yet carries one, tell me I may not have one.

I am not your subject. I am the man who keeps you free. I am not your servant. I am the person whom you serve. I am not your peasant. I am the flesh and blood of America.
I am the man who fought for my country. I am the man who learned. I am an American. You will not tell me that I must register my semi-automatic AR-15 because of the actions of some evil man.

I will not be disarmed to suit the fear that has been established by the media and your misinformation campaign against the American public.

We, the people, deserve better than you.

Respectfully Submitted,
Joshua Boston
Cpl, United States Marine Corps
2004-2012

God bless this man.