John Legend speaks out on guns, foolishness ensues

Celebrities of all stripes feel compelled, I suppose, to speak out on social issues. I am fine with that, I just wish they would take being well-informed as seriously as they take speaking out.

The Breakfast Club host DJ Envy said, “You travel a lot. You’ve been to Toronto, you’ve been to Japan, and you notice when you go to a lot of these countries, people are not allowed to have guns.” Legend interjected, “Yes, and their murder rates are way lower. Their suicide rates are lower, too, because when people have guns, they end up using them.”

Odd that he mentions that. Canada’s suicide rate did not fall after Canada went with stricter gun laws. And to the comment that people end up using guns if they have them. Hmmm, if that were true, then why are the 300,000,000 guns in America not being used constantly? Legend might also look at the homicide and violent crime rates in America. They are far, far lower than many nations with highly restrictive gun laws.

Envy asked, “So banning guns in full, you’re saying?”

Legend responded:

I’m not saying that necessarily would work. But if we look at Australia, they did something over there. They had a few mass shootings, and they said, “You know what? We’re going to take a pretty significant approach to reducing the amount of guns on the streets.” And it worked. They didn’t have another mass shooting, their murder rate went down, and we won’t do it here because we got the Second Amendment. We got the NRA that’s going to lobby against it. And maybe it won’t be constitutional to do that, but at the end of the day, it actually worked. And if we want to talk about what makes us safer, that would make us safer.

Ah yes, Australia, a popular nation for gun control advocates, including Hillary Clinton, to throw around as an example how gun control works. Not so fast Mr. Legend, Australia is struggling with rising gun crime. To be fair, I doubt Mr. legend knows about that story, but really, facts should not matter right? Legend is a celebrity, so we should all crave and value his wisdom.

Legend also blamed Chicago’s gun crime on Indiana, claiming that criminals in Chicago go to Indiana to buy their guns.

But of course he did. This is another popular tactic with the Cult of Gun Control. Rather than looking honestly at cities with high crime rates and strict gun control, like Baltimore, Chicago, Oakland, Newark, DC, etc The Left blames surrounding states with less restrictive gun laws.. Here is the one question I would pose to Mr. Legend. If it is guns from Indiana causing the violence in Chicago, then why don’t those guns cause similar problems in Indiana? Why do the guns in Virginia, which are blamed for high rates of violence in DC and Baltimore, not cause the same rates in Virginia?

I might also ask Mr. legend why people like himself never blame early release of violent criminals? Like the two thugs who murdered Dwayne Wade’s cousin? Why do people like himself never talk about gangs, which are a massive problem, or absent fathers in the black community? Why do they never point their fingers at the political party (Democrats) that is, and has been in charge of the vast majority of the most violent cities? Finally, I would ask Mr. Legend if he has ever looked up the number of times firearms are used in self-defense in America? Why would he seek to disarm so many, including myself, that have defended themselves with a firearm? Finally, I would ask Mr. legend why America which is #1 in firearm ownership, with gun sales setting new records nearly every month, and with well over 13,000,000 Americans carrying firearms, not the highest in violent crime and homicides? Why are we not in the top 10? Or top 25? Or the top 50? Or even the top 100? 

But, what do I know, right? I am not a celebrity who thinks he has to say certain things, regardless of their veracity. I am just a guy who pours through stats to educate myself before I opine.

Hillary Clinton wants more gun control because “terrorism” or something

Anything to get the guns folks, anything!

Via Breitbart:

In response to questions from AARP Bulletin, Hillary Clinton made clear her position that to be successful, policies for ending terrorism must include gun control for all Americans.

AARP Bulletin asked, “What would you do to address terrorism?”

Hillary offered several talking points on fighting actual terrorism, then she went there!

But I’m looking at violence broadly. … It’s also why I’ve advocated gun-safety reform, like comprehensive background checks, closing the gun-show loophole, closing the online loophole—because, you know, it’s not only terrorists we need to be worried about. Terrorism is part of it, but gun violence kills 33,000 Americans a year. … We’ve got to get serious about stemming violence and terrorism in every way we can.

Oh here we go again. First of all we have background checks, yes, even at gun shows. The only “loop-hole” is private sales. And are we not free to sell our property? Further, such “comprehensive” background checks would likely end up making loaning  a relative or friend a firearm, or even allowing you to allow a friend to shoot your gun, or you theirs at a gun range. I would like Hillary to explain how that will reduce crime or stop terrorism.

Secondly, there is no online loophole. Yes, you can buy a firearm online. Yes it will be shipped to an FFL where you, again, federal law, must pass a background check. Several Democrats have made the false claim that you can buy a gun online and have it shipped to your house, that is simply untrue.

Thirdly, the majority, more than two-thirds of “gun violence” deaths each year are suicides. And murder rates, murder by firearm rates, violent crime rates, and accidental firearm deaths have been dropping steadily. In short Hillary is lying. And you must ponder why she is lying when she knows the facts I laid out as well as I do. You have to ask what her true motives are.

Right On Cue, President Asshat Uses Kalamazoo Murders To Push More Neo-Nazi Gun Control Measures

Obama On Kalamazoo: More Needs To Be Done On Gun Control – The Hill

.

.
President Obama on Monday condemned a weekend shooting rampage in Kalamazoo, Mich., calling it a stark example that more needs to be done to prevent gun violence in America.

The president said he phoned the mayor, police chief and sheriff in Kalamazoo to offer federal assistance in the investigation.

“Their local officials and first responders did an outstanding job in apprehending the individual very quickly,” he told a meeting of the National Governors Association at the White House. “But you’ve got families who are shattered today.”

Obama cited a series of executive actions he took last month designed to expand background checks on gun purchases, but he added that “it’s clear we’re going to need to do more to keep innocent Americans safe.”

An Über driver allegedly killed six people and injured two others during a Saturday shooting spree in Kalamazoo. The man, identified as police as Jason Brian Dalton, reportedly picked up passengers between shootings.

Obama cited last year’s mass shooting in San Bernardino, Calif., by Islamic State in Iraq and Syria sympathizers as an incident that terrorized the nation, adding “here’s a hard truth, we probably lost even more Americans than that this weekend alone.”

“I’ve got to assume that all of your are just as tired as I am of seeing this stuff happen in your states,” the president continued.

“So that’s an area where we need to partner and think about what we can do in a common-sense way, in a bipartisan way, without some of the ideological rhetoric that so often surrounds that issue.”

The shooting in Kalamazoo was just the latest mass incident of gun violence that has occured in Obama’s presidency.

Obama has delivered forceful, emotional calls for new gun laws after shootings in Newtown, Conn., in 2012 and Charleston, S.C. in 2015.

But the president has repeatedly been stymied by Republicans in Congress in passing new gun laws, such as universal background checks and an assault weapons ban.

In January, Obama issued a new executive actions clarifying which gun sellers are required to conduct background checks on buyers.

.

.

Kurt Russell Tells Leftist Reporter It’s ‘Absolutely Insane’ To Think Gun Control Will Stop Terrorists

Kurt Russell: ‘Absolutely Insane’ To Think Gun Control Will Change Terrorists – Big Hollywood

.

.
In a recent interview with Jeffrey Wells, acting legend Kurt Russell responded to questions on the San Bernardino attacks by saying it’s “absolutely insane” to “think gun control will change terrorists’ point of view.”

This was preceded by Russell explaining that he doesn’t “understand concepts of conversation about gun culture” because “we’ve lived with guns since, what, the 7th Century or something?”

But according to Hollywood Elsewhere, Wells continued to paw at Russell, combining the emphasis on terrorism with the suggestion that guns are something “disenfranchised white guys need” so they can “feel good about themselves.”

Russell said:
.

If you think gun control is going to change the terrorists’ point of view, I think you’re, like, out of your mind. I think anybody [who says that] is. I think it’s absolutely insane. The problem, the problem that we’re having right now to turn it around… you may think you’ve got me worried about what you’re gonna do? Dude, you’re about to find out what I’m gonna do, and that’s gonna worry you a lot more. And that’s what we need. That will change the concept of gun culture, as you call it, to something [like] reality. Which is, if I’m a hockey team and I’ve got some guy bearing down on me as a goal tender, I’m not concerned about what he’s gonna do – I’m gonna make him concerned about what I’m gonna do…

.
Wells responded with, “I get that,” and Russell seized the opportunity to go back to an earlier question about the line separating fantasy and reality and said that reality is doing what has to be done to “stop” the guy coming at you–whether that guy is in the hockey scenario or in a scenario hedged in by terrorism. And once you “stop him,” Russell said, “That’s when things change.”

Wells countered by sticking with the gun control theme, saying, “Obama’s point was that the guys on the no-fly list, [they’re on it] for good reason because of terrorist connections or suspicions… they can get hold of a gun pretty easily.”

Russell said, “They can also make a bomb pretty easily. So what? They can also get knives and stab you. Whaddaya gonna do about that? They can also get cars and run you over. Whaddaya gonna do about that?”

Wells said, “They didn’t kill the people in San Bernardino with cars.”

Russell retorted, “But they’ve killed others that way, haven’t they? Yeah, yeah. Whaddaya gonna do? Outlaw everything? That isn’t the answer.”

Wells then said the words, “Just put some controls…” to which Russell responded, “Put some controls? What, so the people, so the people who want to defend themselves can’t?”

Wells tried to right the ship, saying, “No, not so you can’t, just so the idiots can’t get hold of them [so easily], that’s all.”

Russell said, “You really believe they’re not going to? Are you serious about that? What good will that…? Oh my God. You and I just disagree.”

Listen to the audio of the interview here.

.

.

Moms Demand Action helps prove that gun control does not work

Via Bearing Arms

Whoopsie!! Yesterday, the anti-gun group Moms Demand Action jumped at the chance to politicize the terrorist attacks in Paris, likening them to gun violence in America.

But that’s not all they’ve tweeted.

Earlier today, they shared a link to enlighten everyone on how guns get into Paris

Screen-Shot-2015-11-14-at-6.17.55-PM

The article from The Daily Beast says despite France’s strict gun laws, guns still flow through Europe and into the country:

France outlaws most gun ownership and it’s almost impossible to legally acquire a high-powered rifle such as an AK-47, so where did the weapons in the Nov. 13 terror attack—not to mention the bloody January assault by Islamic terrorists on the Paris office of Charlie Hebdo magazine and the 2012 shootings by a militant in Toulouse—come from?

The answer: Eastern Europe, most likely, where the trafficking of deadly small arms is big, shady business. And where local authorities find it difficult to intervene.

The French government and the European Union know they have a foreign gun problem. But as the chain of attacks illustrates, efforts to tamp down on the flow of weapons have, so far, failed to disarm terrorists.

You would think they would be a tad smarter than the average idiot, but, their bloodlust leads them on

Your non-shocker of the day, gun laws did nothing to stop San Francisco shooting by illegal alien

Yet, Liberals will still bleat for “common sense gun laws”

Via Breitbart:

When Francisco Sanchez allegedly gunned down Kathryn Steinle at San Francisco’s Pier 14 on July 1, Breitbart News discovered that Sanchez had been deported from the country five times. We also discovered another interesting tidbit–Sanchez has seven felonies, which means he faces 100 percent gun control 100 percent of the time.

He is completely barred from gun possession and prohibited from having the gun with which he allegedly shot and killed Steinle.

The fact that the allegedly had one anyway proves again that gun control does not affect the behavior of criminals, but it does place law-abiding citizens in a scenario where it is harder for them to get the guns they need for self-defense.

According to NBC Bay Area, “Sanchez has seven prior felony convictions, four of which were for drug charges.” The felony “convictions took place in states including Texas, Oregon and Arizona.”

But those convictions–and the resulting ban on Sanchez purchasing or possessing a firearm–appear to have done nothing to keep him obtaining one and, worse still, using it. Moreover, California’s expanded background check requirement, their state gun registry, and their 10-round magazine limit were powerless to protect Steinle.

Again, gun control merely empowers the criminals