Washington State Fair Bans Guns – Workers Immediately Robbed At Gunpoint

Washington State Fair Workers Robbed At Gunpoint After Fair Bans Guns – Gateway Pundit


The Washington State Fair banned firearms this year.

Which sounded like a good idea.


What a surprise that the criminals didn’t obey the gun ban at Washington State Fair.

All of the law abiding citizens who were barred from arming themselves were defenseless.

And they got robbed at gun point.

Ammoland reported:

State Fair Bans Guns; State Fair Workers Robbed at Gun Point

Washington State Fair is one of the few locations in the State that bans the legal carry of firearms. That policy is directly stated in the rules for the fair. From thefair.com:

The following items will not be allowed at the Washington State Fair,

Weapons of any kind, including knives and all firearms

The effect of creating a weapons free zone was not lost on a group of criminals. They used the fact that fair workers were known to be disarmed to their advantage. Three different armed robberies of State Fair workers were committed in less than 20 minutes, on the 15th of September, Sunday night, shortly after the Fair closed. From komonews.com:

But Strom had just finished a 10-hour shift selling items at the fair and had been paid $100 in cash.

“But then he pulled out a gun and he asked me for it all, and so I gave him $100 and just walked away before he asked me for my phone or anything,” Strom said.

Strom said the robber was only 5’8″ tall. Strom stand 6’6″ tall. Strom said the man’s gun made up for the size difference.

“I guess you feel pretty big when you have a gun,” he said.

Just 8 minutes later and a mile away on the complete other side of the fair grounds, two more pairs of State Fair workers were robbed at gunpoint. Police believe they were targeted by the same group of robbers.



Kurt Schlichter: Lets give The Cult of Gun Control the response they deserve

Yep! Works for me!

American gun owners are beginning to respond with a fresh, powerful argument when facing anti-gun liberals. Here it is, in its entirety. Ready?

“Screw you.” That’s it. Except the first word isn’t “Screw.”

It’s not exactly a traditional argument, but it’s certainly appropriate here. The fact is that there is no point in arguing with liberal gun-control advocates because their argument is never in good faith. They slander gun owners as murderers. They lie about their ultimate aim, which is to ban and confiscate all privately owned weapons. And they adopt a pose of reasonability, yet their position is not susceptible to change because of evidence, facts or law. None of those matter – they already have their conclusion. This has to do with power – their power.

You can’t argue with someone who is lying about his position or whose position is not based upon reason. You can talk all day about how crime has diminished where concealed carry is allowed, while it flourishes in Democrat blue cities where gun control is tightest. You can point to statistics showing that law-abiding citizens who carry legally are exponentially less likely to commit gun crimes than other people. You can cite examples of armed citizens protecting themselves and their communities with guns. You can offer government statistics showing how the typical American is at many times greater risk of death from an automobile crash, a fall, or poisoning than from murder by gun.

But none of that matters, because this debate is not about facts. It’s about power. The liberal anti-gun narrative is not aimed at creating the best public policy but at disarming citizens the liberal elite looks down upon – and for whom weapons represent their last-ditch ability to respond to liberal overreach.

OUTSTANDING! Go read it all!

Preach it Vince Vaughn!

He gets it!

Vince Vaughn makes in in a wide-ranging interview to the UK edition of GQ magazine that includes his views about the rights of Americans to carry firearms.

“I support people having a gun in public full stop, not just in your home. We don’t have the right to bear arms because of burglars,” he said. “We have the right to bear arms to resist the supreme power of a corrupt and abusive government. It’s not about duck hunting, it’s about the ability of the individual.

“It’s the same reason we have freedom of speech,” he added.

But Vaughn, 45, wasn’t done. He said he also wanted American schools to have firearms to protect their students.

“You think the politicians that run my country and your country don’t have guns in the schools their kids go to? They do,” he said. “And we should be allowed the same rights. Banning guns is like banning forks in an attempt to stop making people fat. Taking away guns, taking away drugs, the booze, it won’t rid the world of criminality.”

Vaughn said most mass shootings occur where people aren’t allowed to defend themselves with firearms.

“They’ve only happened in places that don’t allow guns. These people are sick in the head and are going to kill innocent people,” he said of the perpetrators of mass shootings.

“In all of our schools it is illegal to have guns on campus, so again and again these guys go and shoot up these … schools because they know there are no guns there,” Vaughn said. “They are monsters killing six-year-olds.”

CHL holder rescues hostage, helps kidnapper find new clothes

Because I am sure the police found some clothes for the attacker

Henry Clinton Yancy Jr. was arrested and charged with criminal attempt homicide, aggravated assault, burglary, criminal trespass and a raft of other offenses after taking his ex-girlfriend hostage and assaulting her for 20 hours in Altoona, PA.

She finally managed to escape Friday morning, and only to be attacked by a naked Yancy yet again when a good guy with a gun stepped in and stopped the attack,saving her life:

On 05/15/2015 officers from our department were dispatched to the rear of the 1000 block of Lexington Avenue for a report of a naked man assaulting a female. Upon arrival officers located Henry Clinton Yancy Jr. naked, being held at gunpoint by a neighbor who had come to the female victim’s rescue. Yancy was taken into custody without incident. The investigation revealed that Yancy, the victim’s ex-boyfriend, had held his victim hostage for approximately 20 hours prior to her being able to escape. The victim reported that Yancy physically assaulted her throughout the night and stabbed her in the left leg. Yancy made several threats to the victim indicating that he was going to eventually kill her. At approx. 10:00 AM the victim believed she could escape and fled the residence. Yancy chased her and continued to assault her at the rear of the residence prior to neighbors intervening. Both the victim and the defendant were taken to UPMC Altoona for treatment. The defendant’s treatment stemmed from a pre-existing medical condition. At this time Yancy is awaiting arraignment for Criminal Attempt Homicide, Aggravated Assault, Burglary, Criminal Trespass and lesser included offenses. We would like to thank all of the neighbors that came to the victim’s aid, stopping the attack and subsequently rendering first aid.

Of course, David Frum will be most shocked, because this type of thing never happens according to him. More details here

Your Self-Defense Stories of the Day

A double kick in the nuts for old David “No One Defends Themselves With Guns” Frum

First, this from North Carolina not far from where Bob Owens says he grew up

I grew up in Winterville, NC, in what was a bedroom community of larger Greenville.  I was a bit stunned when I discovered that this Friday night home invasion and self-defense shooting was in a neighborhood just blocks from my former home, in an area I knew well:

One person is dead after a home invasion and shooting at a residence in Winterville late Friday night.

The Winterville Police Department responded to a home invasion on Ashley Meadows Drive at approximately 10:40 p.m. Friday night. Upon arrival, officers found one man shot inside the residence.

Police reports say there were visible signs of forced entry into the residence, and the suspect was armed with a handgun when he entered the residence.

One of the occupants of the home shot the suspect several times. After speaking to the residents, police found that the suspect was the estranged husband.

Police say the suspect died at Vidant Medical Center.

Now to Oklahoma, where an armed citizen saved a police officer

New information is coming out regarding the rookie Oklahoma City police officer who was beaten by a suspect with his own baton following a burglary on the northwest side of the metro.

An armed witness may have been the only thing that kept that officer from a more serious beating, or worse.

It happened just after 2 p.m. Tuesday in the 2800 block of W. Park Pl. Rookie Officer Adam Eller and field training officer Sgt. Michael Lambert were responding to the burglary call.

The two suspects in the burglary, Tremaine and Jermaine Williams, are twin brothers. Police say Tremaine was already gone when they arrived, but Jermaine was there and when he saw the officers he took off on foot.

During the chase the two officers became separated. Eller found himself alone when he caught up to Jermaine in a driveway of a nearby home and as he tried to place him under arrest, a fight ensued. During the struggle, Jermaine was able to take Eller’s police baton and then proceeded to strike him over the head somewhere between six and 12 times.

According to a report, that’s when a witness nearby charged up with his weapon drawn and told Jermaine he would shoot him if he did not stop hitting Eller. That heroic witness has not been identified.

Both Tremaine and Jermaine Williams were eventually taken into custody and booked into the Oklahoma County jail Tuesday night. Eller was rushed from the scene to OU Medical Center with serious injuries, but was released on Wednesday and is expected to make a full recovery.

Very nice work!

New Texas bill would forbid doctors from asking patients about guns

Via Bearing Arms. If you, like me live in Texas, get ahold of your representative and tell them to to support this!. If you live in another state with such a law, thank your representative if they supported it. If your state has no such law, then get after your representative and tell them to write such a law.

Stewart Spitzer (R-TX) has authored a bill which would essentially bar doctors from talking about guns with their patients. House Bill 2823 was introduced March 16th and not only prohibits doctors from asking if there are guns in the household, but also recommends doctors who continue to talk to patients about firearms be punished.

“Pediatricians are asking children away from their parents, ‘Do you have guns in your house?’ and then reporting this on the electronic health records, and then the federal government, frankly, has access to who has guns and who doesn’t,” Spitzer said in a recent interview about the proposed legislation. He said he experienced the phenomenon firsthand when he took his daughter to the doctor, who asked her whether there were any guns in the house.

While HB2823 has some parents breathing a sigh or relief, the medical community has had a far less enthusiastic reaction.

“We, as physicians, ask all sorts of questions—about bike helmets and seat belts and swimming pool hazards, dangerous chemicals in the home, sexual behaviors, domestic violence. I could go on and on,” Gary Floyd, a Fort Worth pediatrician and board member of the Texas Medical Association, in an interview with the Texas Tribune.

While the bill would allow doctors to discuss guns with patients deemed suicidal, Spitzer says that in most cases discussions about firearms are “not appropriate.” Spitzer, a surgeon, said he wanted to make sure that doctors “have the right not to ask that.”

Doctors are currently reporting who has access to guns and who doesn’t based on patient answers to medical questionnaires. I teach my children to never answer any questions pertaining to our household when I am not present, but with the feds wanting to weigh children at daycare facilities and public schools already dictating what foods children should eat, we need to take every opportunity we can to eliminate the government’s reach into our homes. HB2823 is a step in the right direction, but we should all speak to our children about keeping our families’ business private and out of the government’s intrusive reach into our parental rights.

The time to stop the nanny statists is now folks.

10 States Respond To Leftist Claims Of College Rape Epidemic With Push To Legalize Guns On Campuses

10 States Want To Permit Guns On Campus To Stop Rape – Sweetness & Light


From the New York Times:

A Bid for Guns on Campuses to Deter Rape

By ALAN SCHWARZ | February 18, 2015

As gun rights advocates push to legalize firearms on college campuses, an argument is taking shape: Arming female students will help reduce sexual assaults… [L]awmakers in 10 states who are pushing bills that would permit the carrying of firearms on campus are hoping that the national spotlight on sexual assault will help them win passage of their measures. “If you’ve got a person that’s raped because you wouldn’t let them carry a firearm to defend themselves, I think you’re responsible,” State Representative Dennis K. Baxley of Florida said during debate in a House subcommittee last month. The bill passed.

Talk about being hoisted on your own canard [sic]. This is the kind of jujitsu that conservatives should do more often.

The sponsor of a bill in Nevada, Assemblywoman Michele Fiore, said in a telephone interview: “If these young, hot little girls on campus have a firearm, I wonder how many men will want to assault them. The sexual assaults that are occurring would go down once these sexual predators get a bullet in their head.”

“Hot little girls”? That isn’t very PC. Ms. Fiore must not be a card-carrying feminist. Therefore her opinions on such matters are meaningless – even mockable.

In addition to those in Florida and Nevada, bills that would allow guns on campus have been introduced in Indiana, Montana, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas and Wyoming.

So only red (neck) states really want to protect young women? How telling.

Opponents contend that university campuses should remain havens from the gun-related risks that exist elsewhere, and that college students, with high rates of binge drinking and other recklessness, would be particularly prone to gun accidents.

And yet we let them vote.

Some experts in sexual assault said that college women were typically assaulted by someone they knew, sometimes a friend, so even if they had access to their gun, they would rarely be tempted to use it…

Huh? Then it doesn’t sound like rape rape. (To quote the political sage, Whoopie Goldberg.)

Other objectors to the bills say that advocates of the campus carry laws, predominantly Republicans with well-established pro-gun stances, are merely exploiting a hot-button issue. “The gun lobby has seized on this tactic, this subject of sexual assault,” said Andy Pelosi, the executive director of the Campaign to Keep Guns Off Campus. “It resonates with lawmakers.” …

How dare conservatives seize upon a made up crisis to advance their agenda? Only Democrats are allowed to do that.



Retired Cop/Navy Veteran Sues Leftist Governor Cuomo After Guns Confiscated Over Insomnia Treatment

Veteran And Former Cop Sues After Guns Confiscated Because He Sought Treatment For Insomnia – Daily Caller

A veteran of the U.S. Navy and decorated retired police detective is suing New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo and other state officials for infringing on his constitutional rights after his pistol permit and four handguns were confiscated after he voluntarily sought hospital treatment for insomnia.


Donald Montgomery filed the lawsuit in U.S. District Court for the Western District of New York in Rochester on Dec. 17.

He alleges that his constitutional rights were violated by New York’s SAFE Act – a law Cuomo signed in Jan. 2013 that is considered one of the toughest gun control laws in the U.S.

Montgomery’s woes began on May 6 when he sought treatment from his primary care physician for insomnia, which he said he had been experiencing following a move from another state.

Montgomery and his wife had moved from several hundred miles away in order to be closer to their adult child and grandchild. The move involved the purchase of a new home and the sale of an old one, Montgomery’s complaint states.

Several days after his initial doctor visit, Montgomery went to the emergency room at Eastern Long Island Hospital, still complaining of insomnia.

Staff there diagnosed Montgomery with “Depression; Insomnia” and he was prescribed medication and told to report back to his primary care physician if symptoms worsened over the next several days.

Montgomery went back to the hospital on May 23 with the same complaint. He stayed at the facility for 48 hours.

Though Montgomery voluntarily sought treatment, he alleges in the suit that staff at the facility erroneously listed him as an involuntary admission – a designation that appears to have put the SAFE Act’s wheels in motion.

The SAFE Act created a new section under New York’s Mental Hygiene Law which requires mental health professionals to report individuals who are deemed threats to others or to themselves to mental health directors who in turn report serious threats to the department of criminal justice services.

But none of the records or diagnoses from Montgomery’s hospital visits support that criteria, the suit claims.

“Nurse’s notes” from Montgomery’s stay show no documentation of mental health issues.

“Patient has no thoughts of hurting himself. Patient has no thoughts of hurting others. Patient is not having suicidal thoughts. Patient is not having homicidal thoughts,” the notes read.

A psychological assessment labeled him “mildly depressed,” but otherwise determined “there is no evidence of any psychotic processes, mania, or OCD symptoms.”

“Insight, judgment, and impulse control are good,” the assessment reads.

Montgomery’s suit also states that a hospital psychiatrist told him “You don’t belong here” and “I don’t know why you were referred here.”

Montgomery’s suit states that he was not labeled a mental defective, nor did he meet the criteria for an emergency mental health admission.

But Montgomery’s records were somehow referred to the Mental Hygiene Legal Service, which is an agency which represents and litigates on behalf of individuals receiving services for mental disability.

Four days after leaving the hospital, New York State police sent a letter to the Suffolk County clerk’s office stating “has been adjudicated as a mental defective or has been involuntarily committed to a mental institution” and that he was prohibited from possessing any firearms.

The next day, Montgomery received a call from an officer at the Suffolk County Sheriff’s Department informing him that his guns would have to be confiscated.

Montgomery says that on May 30, the Suffolk County Sheriff’s Department showed up to his house and confiscated his pistol license and four handguns – Colt .38 revolver, Derringer .38, Glock 26 9mm, Smith & Wesson Bodyguard 380.

Montgomery, a 30-year police veteran who had reached the rank of detective sergeant and had won a Bravery medal, had obtained the four guns through various means over the years.

One was issued to Montgomery by his police department; Montgomery won another at police academy for being the top recruit; he bought another in 1975; he purchased the last one two years ago.

In early June, the sheriff’s department notified Montgomery that his pistol license had been suspended. By September, he was notified it had been terminated – making it officially illegal for him to own a firearm.

Montgomery’s suit alleges that his Second, Fourth, Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment protections were violated and that the hospital violated his privacy rights by sharing his medical information with state police. He demands that a judge strike down New York’s Mental Hygiene Law and that the state issue written notification to all individuals whose health information has been collected under the state law.



Sandy Hook families suing Bushmaster, gun store, and a firearms distributor

This is sad. Grief-stricken families being used by greedy lawyers. The claim that any of these parties is in any way “responsible” for the acts of a mad man like A*** L**** is asinine and indefensible. Bob Owens believes this case will be tossed. I hope he is correct

…..we have to look at the frivolous lawsuit filed by fame-hungry lawyers against firearm manufacturer Bushmaster, a firearms distributor, and a gun store, and shake my head at the sheer stupidity of the case.

A law firm representing the families of nine of the 26 people killed and a teacher injured at the Sandy Hook Elementary School says it has filed a lawsuit against the manufacturer, distributor and seller of the rifle used in the shooting.

The negligence and wrongful death lawsuit asserts that the Bushmaster AR-15 rifle should not have been made publicly available because it is a military weapon unsuited for civilian use.

In addition to Bushmaster, the families have named Camfour, a firearm distributor, and Riverview Gun Sales, the store where the Bushmaster rifle was purchased in 2010. Messages seeking comment from the defendants were not immediately returned.

Of course an AR-15 is a semi-automatic rifle, not a military weapon and of course the very idea of holding a manufacturer, distributor, or seller of a product for evil committed with said product is specious. Using these frivolous lawsuits is another strategy of the gun grabbers, like taxing ammo, or any number of other tactics. I pray, as we all should that this fails. 

Krogers profits soar, Moms Demand Statism hardest hit

As I have often said, if corporations stand up to whiny Liberals, they gain costumers!

Our friend AWR Hawkins at Breitbart made me smile with his headline, Kroger Profits Up 21 Percent After Refusing To Ban Guns.

In mid-August Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America launched a campaign pressuring Kroger to bar law-abiding citizens from openly carrying guns for self-defense in their stores. Kroger refused to change its policy and in the third quarter–“ending Nov. 8″–Kroger saw a “21 percent increase in profit…compared with the same period last year.”

According to Supermarket News, Kroger’s “net earnings for the quarter were $362 million.”

Breitbart News previously reported that Moms Demand launched their campaign on August 18. On that day Kroger subsidiary grocer Fred Meyer said it would not change its polices and less than two weeks later, Kroger said it would not be changing policies either. Both said they would continue to honor state and municipal laws at their store locations.

Bottom line? Standing up to the Bloomberg flunkees pays off

The owners of TBonz Steakhouse in Augusta, Georgia, decided to be proactive when Republican Gov. Nathan Deal signed into law one of the most comprehensive pro-gun bills in the country this April, which allowed firearms into the state’s bars and restaurants.

The eatery hung up a “No Guns” sign on its front door.

Its customer backlash was so harsh and quick that the steakhouse immediately took down the sign and then posted a mea culpa on its Facebook page.

“The sign that was put up regarding firearms has been removed,” TBonz said in its Facebook posting this May. “It was our intention to get the attention of IRRESPONSIBLE gun owners. But then we realized that irresponsible gun owners do not pay attention to signs.”


Home intruder gets it through his head that he is not welcome

Good shooting reverend!

A minister in Valley Center, Kan. defended himself and his family on Sunday morning by shooting a would-be intruder in the head.

The suspect, Cory Landon, sustained a graze wound to the forehead and was picked up by police while walking down the road in a rural area just north of Wichita.

The minister was home with his wife and three children, one of them only six months old, when he heard his home alarm going off and found Landon trying to enter the residence through a window.

The minister, who has not been named, grabbed his gun and fired, hitting Landon.

Court: Cops Can Kick In Your Door And Seize Your Guns Without A Warrant If They Feel It’s In Your Best Interest

Shock FedGov Court Ruling: Police Can Kick In Your Door And Seize Guns Without Warrant Or Charges – Daily Sheeple

The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals may have just dealt a serious blow to the U.S. Constitution.


In a unanimous decision earlier this month the Court determined that law enforcement officers are not required to present a warrant or charges before forcibly entering a person’s home, searching it and confiscating their firearms if they believe it is in the individual’s best interests.

The landmark suit was brought before the court by Krysta Sutterfield of Milwaukee, who had recently visited a psychiatrist for outpatient therapy resulting from some bad news that she had received. According to court records Sutterfield had expressed a suicidal thought during the visit, perhaps tongue-in-cheek, when she said “I guess I’ll go home and blow my brains out.” This prompted her doctor to contact police.

For several hours the police searched for Sutterfield, speaking with neighbors and awaiting her return home. They received an update from her psychiatrist who said that Sutterfield had contacted her and advised that she was not in need of assistance and to “call off” the search, which the doctor did not agree to. Police eventually left and Sutterfield returned home, only to be visited later that evening by the lead detective on the case:

Krysta Sutterfield vs. city of Milwaukee, et al.

Sutterfield answered Hewitt’s knock at the front door but would not engage with her, except to state repeatedly that she had “called off” the police and to keep shutting the door on Hewitt. Sutterfield would not admit Hewitt to the residence, and during the exchange kept the outer storm door closed and locked. Unable to gain admittance to the house, Hewitt concluded that the police would have to enter it forcibly.

Sutterfield called 911 in an effort to have the officers leave; as a result of that call, the ensuing events were recorded by the emergency call center. Sutterfield can be heard on the recording telling the officers that she was fine and that she did not want anyone to enter her residence.

After informing Sutterfield of his intention to open the storm door forcibly if she did not unlock it herself, Berken yanked the door open and entered the house with the other officers to take custody of Sutterfield pursuant to the statement of detention. A brief struggle ensued.

Sutterfield can be heard on the 911 recording demanding both that the officers let go of her and that they leave her home. (Sutterfield would later say that the officers tackled her.) Sutterfield was handcuffed and placed in the officers’ custody.

At that point the officers conducted a protective sweep of the home. In the kitchen, officer James Floriani observed a compact disc carrying case in plain view. He picked up the soft-sided case, which was locked, and surmised from the feel and weight of its contents that there might be a firearm inside. He then forced the case open and discovered a semi-automatic handgun inside; a yellow smiley-face sticker was affixed to the barrel of the gun, covering the muzzle. Also inside the case were concealed-carry firearm licenses from multiple jurisdictions other than Wisconsin. Elsewhere in the kitchen the officers discovered a BB gun made to realistically resemble a Glock 29 handgun.

The contents of the case were seized along with the BB gun and placed into police inventory for safekeeping.

Berken would later state that he authorized the seizure of the handgun in order to keep them out of the hands of a juvenile, should a juvenile enter the house unaccompanied by an adult while Sutterfield remained in the hospital.

Sutterfield subsequently filed a lawsuit against the City of Milwaukee with the district court, a case that was initially dismissed. She then filed an appeal with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th District claiming that her Second and Fourth Amendment rights were violated.

In a 75-page opinion the court, while pointing out that the intrusion against Sutterfield was profound, sided with the city of Milwaukee:

“The intrusions upon Sutterfield’s privacy were profound,” Judge Ilana Rovner wrote for three-judge panel.

“At the core of the privacy protected by the Fourth Amendment is the right to be let alone in one’s home.”

But the court also found, that on the other hand, “There is no suggestion that (police) acted for any reason other than to protect Sutterfield from harm.”

“Even if the officers did exceed constitutional boundaries,” the court document states, “they are protected by qualified immunity.”

As noted by Police State USA, the court may have just created a legal loophole for law enforcement officials around the country, giving them immunity from Constitutional violations if they merely suggest that exigent circumstances exist and that they are acting in the best interests of the health and safety of an alleged suspect, regardless of Constitutional requirements:

In short, Sutterfield’s privacy (which was admittedly encroached upon) was left unprotected by the Bill of Rights because of the “exigent circumstances” in which police executed an emergency detention – with no warrant, no criminal charges, and no input from the judiciary. Similarly, the gun confiscation was also deemed as acceptable due to the so-called “emergency” which police claimed had been taking place for 9 consecutive hours.

The federal ruling affirms a legal loophole which allows targeted home invasions, warrantless searches, and gun confiscations that rest entirely in the hands of the Executive Branch. The emergency aid doctrine enables police to act without a search warrant, even if there is time to get one. When the government wants to check on someone, his or her rights are essentially suspended until the person’s sanity has been forcibly validated.

The implications of the courts legal decision are alarmingly broad. Though this particular case involved exigent circumstances in which an individual suggested she wanted to commit suicide, albeit tongue-in-cheek, the court’s opinion suggests that such tactics can be applied for any “emergency” wherein police subjectively determine that an individual may be a danger to themselves or others.

Under new statutes passed by the federal government these emergencies and dangers could potentially include any number of scenarios. Senator Rand Paul recently highlighted that there are laws on the books that categorize a number of different activities as having the potential for terrorism, including things like purchasing bulk ammunition. Last month, when a group of concerned citizens assembled at Bundy Ranch in Nevada to protest government overreach, Senator Harry Reid dubbed them “domestic terrorists.” Even paying with cash or complaining about chemicals in water can land an American on the terror watch list. Non-conformists who do not subscribe to the status quo can now be considered mentally insane according to psychiatrists’ Diagnostic and Statistics Manual of Mental Disorders.

Law enforcement has an almost unlimited amount of circumstances they can cite to justify threats to one’s self or others, and thus, to ignore Constitutional requirements when serving at the behest of the local, state or federal government.

Have the Federal Court’s latest decision made it possible for these vaguely defined suspicious activities to be molded into exigent circumstances that give police the right to enter homes without due process, confiscate legally owned personal belongings, and detain residents without charge?

Click HERE For Rest Of Story


Georgia Governor Nathan Deal Signs Bill Into Law Allowing Guns In Churches, Bars And School Zones

Georgia Gov. Signs Bill Allowing Guns In Churches, Bars, And School Zones – CNS

Georgia Gov. Nathan Deal signed into law Wednesday a bill that expands gun rights in the state to allow weapons in government buildings, bars, places of worship, and school zones under certain circumstances.


Under House Bill 60, also known as the Safe Carry Protection Act of 2014, school districts will get to decide whether to allow authorized personnel to carry weapons within school safety zones under certain circumstances.

In addition, church leaders will be able to decide whether to allow licensed gun owners to bring weapons into their place of worship. The law also removes fingerprinting requirements for renewal licenses.

The National Rifle Association’s Institute for Legislative Action called the bill the “most comprehensive pro-gun bill in state history.”

Deal, who characterized himself as a staunch defender of the Second Amendment, said the measure “will protect the constitutional rights of Georgians who have gone through a background check to legally obtain a Georgia Weapons Carry License.”

“Roughly 500,000 Georgia citizens have a permit of this kind, which is approximately 5 percent of our population,” Deal said in a press release. “License holders have passed background checks and are in good standing with the law. This law gives added protections to those who have played by the rules – and who can protect themselves and others from those who don’t play by the rules.”

“Our nation’s founders put the right to bear arms on par with freedom of speech and freedom of religion. Georgians cherish their Second Amendment rights, and this law embodies those values,” he added.

Executive Director Pia Carusone of Americans for Responsible Solutions, which lobbied against the bill, called it “extremism in action.”

“It moves Georgia out of the mainstream,” Carusone said. “Since the Georgia House first passed this expansive legislation, thousands of Georgians and tens of thousands of Americans have said loud and clear that they are tired of the gun lobby advancing its extreme agenda at the expense of their families’ safety.”

Click HERE For Rest Of Story


*VIDEOS* Bill Whittle IS Your Virtual President










Obama Regime Secretly Declaring Thousands Of U.S. Veterans Incompetent… Then Taking Away Their Guns

Outrage! Obama Administration Is Secretly Declaring Thousands Of US Veterans Incompetent… Then Taking Away Their Second Amendment Rights – Gateway Pundit

US veterans started receiving letters from the government last year informing them that they are disabled and not allowed to own, purchase or possess a firearm. If the veteran does decide to purchase a firearm he will by fined, imprisoned or both.

This comes on page 2 of the VA letter.


Here is the full copy of the letter-

Here is page 1 of the letter:


Here is page 2:


The majority of US veterans receive basically the same letter. Many of the veterans do not even know the VA declared them incompetent. The targeted veterans say the VA offers an appeals process but then does not share required information.

VA Benefits Administrators are the ones making these declarations against veterans robbing them of their due process rights and arbitrarily submitting their names to the FBI’s NICS database without cause and many times without a veteran’s knowledge.

This is an outrage!

Last April the United States Justice Foundation (USJF) filed a suit against the Obama Administration on behalf of these abused veterans.

Katharine Russ reported:

The United States Justice Foundation (USJF) has filed the first lawsuit of what promises to be a string of lawsuits in the US District Court for the Southern District of California against the US Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) and the Veterans Benefits Administration (VBA)…

…Current policies of the VA have caused more than 129,000 veterans to, arbitrarily, be deprived of their Second Amendment Rights to own firearms without due process simply because they were declared financially “incompetent.”

These arbitrary policies, in no way, consider whether a veteran represents a danger to themselves or to others.

It is, unequivocally, unsound and irrational thinking that sends our young men and women off to war and expects them to come home “whole.” Most veterans experience minor depression, minor PTSD, and even minor short-term memory loss when they return home but can still function- competently.

No court would find them incompetent and strip them of their second amendment rights for such minor diagnoses unless they were proven to be a detriment to society. In some these cases, the VA does not even offer reasons or evidence for such a Determination.

It is outrageous to think that over 100,000 US veterans are the victims of this sort of abuse.

US veterans deserve the same Constitutional rights as the rest of us.

Click HERE For Rest Of Story


Feds Confiscate Completely Unrelated Files Of Reporter During Raid To Seize Husband’s Guns

Feds Confiscate Investigative Reporter’s Confidential Files During Raid – Daily Caller

A veteran Washington D.C. investigative journalist says the Department of Homeland Security confiscated a stack of her confidential files during a raid of her home in August – leading her to fear that a number of her sources inside the federal government have now been exposed.


In an interview with The Daily Caller, journalist Audrey Hudson revealed that the Department of Homeland Security and Maryland State Police were involved in a predawn raid of her Shady Side, Md. home on Aug. 6. Hudson is a former Washington Times reporter and current freelance reporter.

A search warrant obtained by TheDC indicates that the August raid allowed law enforcement to search for firearms inside her home.

The document notes that her husband, Paul Flanagan, was found guilty in 1986 to resisting arrest in Prince George’s County. The warrant called for police to search the residence they share and seize all weapons and ammunition because he is prohibited under the law from possessing firearms.

But without Hudson’s knowledge, the agents also confiscated a batch of documents that contained information about sources inside the Department of Homeland Security and the Transportation Security Administration, she said.

Outraged over the seizure, Hudson is now speaking out. She said no subpoena for the notes was presented during the raid and argues the confiscation was outside of the search warrant’s parameter.

“They took my notes without my knowledge and without legal authority to do so,” Hudson said this week. “The search warrant they presented said nothing about walking out of here with a single sheet of paper.”

She provided TheDC with a photo showing the stack of file folders in a bag marked “evidence/property.”

On Thursday, a spokesman for the Maryland State Police declined to address any specifics about the search.

“Due to the ongoing criminal investigation and the potential for pending criminal charges at the state and/or federal level, the Maryland State Police will not discuss specific information about this investigation at this time,” spokesman Greg Shipley said in a statement to TheDC.

At about 4:30 a.m. on Aug. 6, Hudson said officers dressed in full body armor presented a search warrant to enter the home she shares on the bay with her husband. She estimates that at least seven officers took part in the raid.

After the search began, Hudson said she was asked by an investigator with the Coast Guard Investigative Service if she was the same Audrey Hudson who had written a series of critical stories about air marshals for The Washington Times over the last decade. The Coast Guard operates under the Department of Homeland Security.

Hudson said that investigator, Miguel Bosch, identified himself as a former air marshal official.

But it wasn’t until a month later, on Sept. 10, that Hudson was informed by Bosch that five files including her handwritten and typed notes from interviews with numerous confidential sources and other documents had been taken during the raid.

“In particular, the files included notes that were used to expose how the Federal Air Marshal Service had lied to Congress about the number of airline flights there were actually protecting against another terrorist attack,” Hudson wrote in a summary about the raid provided to TheDC.

Recalling the experience during an interview this week, Hudson said: “When they called and told me about it, I just about had a heart attack.”

She said she asked Bosch why they took the files. He responded that they needed to run them by TSA to make sure it was “legitimate” for her to have them.

“‘Legitimate’ for me to have my own notes?” she said incredulously on Wednesday.

Asked how many sources she thinks may have been exposed, Hudson said: “A lot. More than one. There were a lot of names in those files.”

“This guy basically came in here and took my anonymous sources and turned them over – took my whistleblowers – and turned it over to the agency they were blowing the whistle on,” Hudson said. “And these guys still work there.”

The Daily Caller reached Bosch on his cell phone on Thursday. “Before I talk to you, I’m probably going to have to run this by our legal department,” he said.

Carlos Díaz, the chief of media relations for the Coast Guard, said in a statement that the Coast Guard Investigative Service was asked to participate in the raid because the search involved a Coast Guard employee. Flanagan is an ordinance technician for the Coast Guard in Baltimore.

Díaz explained that the files were taken because they found official government papers, which Hudson had obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request.

“During the course of the search, the CGIS agent discovered government documents labeled FOUO – For Official Use Only (FOUO) – and LES – Law Enforcement Sensitive. The files that contained these documents were cataloged on the search warrant inventory and taken from the premises,” Díaz said.

“The documents were reviewed with the source agency and determined to be obtained properly through the Freedom of Information Act,” he said.

Diaz said Flanagan was notified that the documents were cleared and he later picked them up after signing for the files.

But Hudson doesn’t buy the explanation: “That explains the one file they took but does not explain why they took four other files with my handwritten and typed interview notes with confidential sources, that I staked my reputation as a journalist to protect under the auspices of the First Amendment of the Constitution,” she said.

Hudson said she and her husband knew something was up in February when the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives wanted to talk about a purchase Flanagan made about five years ago.

The court documents note that ATF investigators asked Flanagan if he obtained “possible machine gun parts from a Swedish National.” Flanagan responded that he once purchased a potato gun but threw it away because it didn’t work.

In July, according to the documents, Bosch interviewed several of Flanagan’s Coast Guard colleagues, who said Flanagan spoke often about being a “firearms collector.”

“One party that was interviewed remembered distinctly about Flanagan advising he had recently purchased a Bersa .380 handgun, and observed pictures of firearms similar to AK-47 semi-automatic rifles which were identified by Flanagan as being his,” the court documents state.

The documents also note that Victor Hodgin, the trooper in the criminal investigation division of the Maryland State Police whose name is on the search warrant, accessed Flanagan’s Facebook account in his investigation.

“Records maintained by Facebook.com will allow him to further implicate Paul Roland Flanagan in the illegal possession [of] firearms,” he wrote.

Hodgin didn’t return a voicemail left on his phone. Shipley, the spokesman with the Maryland State Police, said the “evidence and information developed during this investigation is currently under review by both the Anne Arundel County State’s Attorney’s Office and the United States Attorney’s Office.”

“A determination will be made by officials in these offices regarding the state and or federal charges that may be placed as a result of this investigation,” he said.

Hudson told TheDC that the couple had a run-in with the Maryland State Police about six years ago. “A neighbor complained on New Years Eve about one of us shooting a gun off the pier here,” she said. “We live right on the bay.”

Hudson said the police gave them a slap on the wrist then. “They knew then we had these guns,” she said. “If this was a problem – that he wasn’t supposed to be around them – they should’ve told us then.”

During the raid, the officers also went after Hudson’s three pistols and three long guns, which she obtained legally.

“I’m a Kentucky girl,” she said. “I come kitchen trained, and firearm ready. I grew up with guns and I’ve always been around guns.”

Hudson has been a reporter in Washington, D.C. for nearly 15 years and was nominated twice by The Washington Times for the Pulitzer Prize. She is a freelancer for Newsmax and the Colorado Observer.

While at the Times, Hudson reported extensively on the air marshal program – specifically about whether Homeland Security officials had lied to Congress and reported protecting more flights than they really were. Using her sources inside the government, Hudson has also reported for years about possible terrorist “dry-runs” on airplanes.

Unlike some other reporters whose sources have been targeted in recent years by the government, Hudson said none of the information she had was classified or given to her by someone who broke the law.

“None of the documents were classified,” she said. “There were no laws broken in me obtaining these files.”

Hudson said she wants to let her sources know that they may have been exposed.

“Part of the reason I’m coming forward with this is I’m scared to contact them,” she said. “I’m terrified to contact them…I’ve got to let these guys know somehow.”

Click HERE For Rest Of Story


Concealed carry permit holder stops potential mass shooting by shooting man armed with rifle

Of course the media will not have time for this story


This is a story of a mass shooting that might have been if not for the efforts of a concealed carrier. However, don’t expect to see this story on the national news since there were no fatalities.

Several guests, in their 20′s and 30′s were attending a party at a Glendale, AZ home when one of the guests, identified only as a 27 year old male, got into an altercation with several people at the home.

The 27 year old was asked to leave, which he initially did. However, shortly thereafter, the 27 year old returned, this time armed with a rifle.

The suspected shooter fired rounds off outside the home and when he pointed the gun at other guests, a 39 year old guest drew a concealed handgun and fired on the suspect, who was hit by the gunfire.

The concealed carrier waited for police, explained what happened and was released after giving a statement to police.


Stick to tennis, OK Martina

Doug Powers has an example of how shallow and simplistic the minds of Liberals can be

I’m always amazed by how the liberal mind works — or doesn’t as it were.

Here’s a question about guns from tennis legend Martina Navratilova:

As a law abiding citizen without a gun,how can I tell a difference between the law abiding citizen with a gun and the criminal with a gun?

Powers gives a good answer, basically that the criminal will use their gun to ROB or harm you, but allow me another response.

Martina, not sure where you reside, but if you live here in Texas, or Florida, or any other stare that has the good sense to allow shall issue carry permits, you pass people with such permits carrying guns every day. They are beside you in stores, restaurants, walking on the sidewalk, most any place you are, you will encounter them. Of course, you would never know they are carrying. Their weapons are secured in holsters, out of sight, and frankly you have nothing at all to fear from them. Of course that guy thinking of committing a crime like assault, rape, armed robbery, etc does not know who is armed either. And that guy, unlike you, has every reason to be wary don’t they? Concealed carry laws have reduced the violent crime rate in states that pass them.

So, as to how you tell the difference? Well, as Doug Powers said

The question she should be asking is “How do the criminals with guns spot law-abiding citizens without guns?” 

That is a very important question because those criminals AVOID armed citizens, so, yes, the very presence of SOME armed citizens makes everyone safer, because that bad guys do not know who is prepared to fight back with equal or greater force.

Leftards Caught On Tape: NJ Democrats Chatter About Guns, “Confiscate. Confiscate. Confiscate” (Video)

Caught On Tape: NJ Democrats On Guns, “Confiscate. Confiscate. Confiscate” (Video) – Gateway Pundit

Democrats are too afraid to admit it in public. But they want your guns.

…And they’ll admit it when they think the cameras are off.

New Jersey Democrats were caught on tape recently after a session on guns, “Confiscate. Confiscate. Confiscate!”


Guns Saves Lives has the transcript:

BREAKING: NJ State Senators Caught on Open Mic Saying They Need a Bill to CONFISCATE Guns.. You will need to turn speakers way up around the 0:15 mark to hear as they aren’t speaking directly into the mic. In the above vido we hear remarks by several NJ State Senators talking about guns after a session had ended.

We can assume they didn’t know the mic was still recording.

The discussion is as follows:

“We needed a bill that was going to confiscate, confiscate, confiscate.”

“They [gun owners] want to keep the guns out of the hands of the bad guys, but they don’t have any regulations to do it.”

“They don’t care about the bad guys. All they want to do is have their little guns and do whatever they want with them.”

“That’s the line they’ve developed.”

These same Democrats passed 22 gun control bills on Thursday.

Click HERE For Rest Of Story


Veteran’s Guns Confiscated After Forced ‘Psychiatric Evaluation’

Veteran’s Guns Confiscated After Forced ‘Psychiatric Evaluation’ – LiveLeak

A US Navy veteran had his guns confiscated by police following a forced “psychiatric evaluation” in another example of how the Veterans Administration is accelerating a purge of armed ex-servicemembers in accordance with a federal government demonization campaign that has labeled vets domestic terrorists.


50-year-old David A Schmecker is an honorably discharged disabled US Navy veteran from Connecticut with no criminal record and no psychiatric history. On February 5, Schmecker’s hospital primary care doctor called and heard a message on Schmecker’s answer machine that “sounded peculiar,” prompting him to contact the local police and urge them to visit Schmecker to perform a “wellness check”.

“The police came to my home, and, without any justification whatsoever, hauled me away for a psychiatric evaluation at a local hospital. I submitted to their forceful insistence under duress and fear of arrest or worse. I wasn’t arrested, no crime was committed nor any threats were made to myself or others,” Schmecker told Survive and Thrive’s George Hemminger.

“They confiscated my guns and pistol permit. I was released two days later from the evaluation on my on recognizance. I have since attempted to use the courts and attorneys to fight the revocation of my pistol permit. Then on top of everything else, the bills from the short stay at the hospital and EMS bills that they billed me, along with what I had to pay the attorney adds up to a large amount of money,” he adds.

Schmecker warns that the harassment he suffered is part of “a campaign orchestrated to disarm law abiding citizens,” adding that he is “concerned about where this country is headed.”

As with all contemporary authoritarian governments, the psychiatric system is being used to circumvent courts and bypass normal legal due process.

In August 2012, we reported on how a veteran in Ohio had his guns taken because he was adjudged to be mentally incompetent, despite the fact that his previous VA psychiatric evaluations were all clear, he was not on medication, and he had no criminal record.

As we reported last year, David Sarti, one of the stars of National Geographic’s Doomsday Preppers show, visited his doctor complaining of chest pains, only to have the doctor later commit him to a psychiatric ward and alert authorities, before Sarti was declared “mentally defective” and put on an FBI list that strips him of his second amendment rights.

Veterans are increasingly being targeted by authorities as part of a broader move to demonize them as domestic extremists and even potential terrorists.

The FBI has repeatedly characterized returning veterans from Iraq and Afghanistan as a major domestic terrorist threat. In addition, Homeland Security chief Janet Napolitano said she stood by an April 2009 DHS intelligence assessment that listed returning vets as likely domestic terrorists.

Just a month later, the New York Times reported on how Boy Scout Explorers were being trained by the DHS to kill “disgruntled Iraq war veterans” as part of anti-terror drills. Back in February, constitutional attorney Michael Connelly warned that the government is now moving to strip veterans it determines to be mentally incompetent of their Second Amendment right to own a firearm. Connelly cites a letter “sent by the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs to hundreds, perhaps thousands, of America’s heroes.”

“A determination of incompetency will prohibit you from purchasing, possessing, receiving, or transporting a firearm or ammunition,” the VA letter states. “If you knowingly violate any of these prohibitions, you may be fined, imprisoned, or both pursuant to the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act, Pub.L.No. 103-159, as implemented at 18, United States Code 924(a)(2).”

“This must be Barack Obama’s way of thanking our veterans for serving,” writes the Gateway Pundit. “US veterans are receiving letters from the government informing them that they are disabled and not allowed to own, purchase or possess a firearm. If the veteran does decide to purchase a firearm he will by fined, imprisoned or both… This comes on page 2 of the VA letter.”

Click HERE For Rest Of Story