Family Upset That Thug Relative Was Shot
Dec 2, 2013 Commentary, Second Amendment
A young thug went into a store to rob it at gunpoint. A law abiding citizen with a Concealed Carry Permit pulled his firearm and told the thug to put his gun down. The thug turned toward the law abiding citizen and before he was able to raise his weapon the thug was shot.
The Good Samaritan was able to put down a criminal and keep innocent folks from possibly being injured or killed.
Anyone find anything wrong with this?
Well the thug’s family did. Thug momma said the person who shot her thug son should have minded his own business. You see, this thug using a firearm to commit a crime is no one’s business and that fellow who shot the thug was wrong in this.
Notice momma thug never says her boy was wrong for committing an armed robbery. Notice she does not discuss how her son involved himself in the business of the people who just wanted to conduct their transactions without fearing for their lives.
No, the way she sees it her little thug son should have been left alone to rob that store like his momma raised him to do.
The thug boy will live and when he is released from the hospital he will have new charges added to his already colorful rap sheet.
The only problem I see is that the law abiding citizen fired five shots and the thug is still alive. I am not saying he should have been killed or that I wish him dead. What I am saying is that the guy might need some more range time to ensure he hits his target when he shoots. I can’t imagine he hit the thug five times and he still lived so he must have missed a few times.
Regardless, he is a hero (though he probably does not think so). I don’t care what momma thug says, this guy did the right thing.
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Tags: business, good samaritan, robber, thug
Chicago Is Murder Capital
Sep 19, 2013 Political, Second Amendment
In 2012 more people were murdered in Chicago than in New York even though Chicago has a third of the population. The linked article has a lot of information regarding the murders and how many of them are related to bad people who use firearms but the overarching theme is that nearly every city on the list has a strict gun control policy.
Another reality is that many, if not all, are heavily populated with Democrats and run by liberals.
There is no denying that liberalism and Democrat leadership are the root cause of the high murder rates because liberal policies encourage this kind of behavior.
Liberals do not believe in personal responsibility. One needs look no further than Barack Obama who has never taken any responsibility for anything bad that happens under him. He blames everything bad on George Bush or the Republicans in Congress or the TEA Party.
He is quick to take credit for anything good. He took credit for the death of Osama bin Laden even though the military took him out.
Look at the two politicians recalled in Colorado. They are blaming voter fraud, misinformation and anything they can think of rather than the reality which is they thwarted the will of the people.
These murder cities, led by Chicago, have dense populations of liberals who support liberal politicians so they can get their “free” stuff. Get me my food stamps and Obama phones and I will vote for you while my children and peers are out knocking off liquor stores and committing welfare fraud.
The criminal elements in these cities prey on the poor and the defenseless. It is nearly impossible for law abiding citizens to own or carry firearms in Chicago and many of these other murder cities. The criminals, on the other hand, get plenty of weapons including firearms.
Liberalism is hazardous to your health.
This is Obama’s Chicago. It is his buddy Rahm’s Chicago.
Obama was a ghetto organizer before he got into office and those ghettos are now well organized.
Don’t worry though. In keeping with the lack of responsibility inherent in liberalism they will blame this on everything from Bush, to guns, to poverty. Remember, the people who are doing this are not responsible for their actions.
They must be victims of something other than the liberalism and liberal policies that they have in common.
These cities have been turned into shooting galleries and murder-hoods.
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Tags: chicago, FBI, firearms, liberalism, lies, murder rate, Obama
We Need To Ban Video Games
Sep 18, 2013 Political, Second Amendment
When someone uses a bomb to blow up a building we go after the bomber not the bomb. When a person uses matches to light a building on fire we go after the arsonist and not the matches. When someone drinks and drives we go after the drunk driver and not the car or the alcohol.
For some reason though, when someone uses a gun to commit a crime we go after the gun. Not only that, they go after the guns of all the people who had nothing to do with the crime.
When I wrote for some reason above I knew the reason and you know it as well. They use incidents of violence with guns to go after guns because they want to disarm all of us. Gun control is not about the gun it is about control and government knows that if it can disarm its citizens it can control its citizens.
This is why we have a Second Amendment. Despite the stupidity of people like Andrew Cuomo of New York the Second Amendment is not there to protect hunting or sport shooting. It is there to protect the population from its own government and any other that tries to attack us.
Make no mistake about it, our Founders protected our right to keep and bear arms so that we would never be held as slaves under a tyrannical government. We would always have the ability to fight our government should the need arise.
This is not a radical idea as our Founders did just that to gain our freedom.
But gun grabbers want to disarm everyone. I know they claim otherwise with nonsense terms like “common sense laws” and such but their plan is to incrementally impose more and more bans until we are disarmed. Places like Maryland are already well along in the anti gun, gun ban, confiscation scheme. Communist Governor Martin O’Malley and the Democrat idiots in the legislature have passed gun laws that are unconstitutional and will hopefully be negated by the Supreme Court (though one can never tell with the outside influences blackmailing justices).
In any event, the shooting at the Navy Yard elicited the same visceral response we have come accustomed to. The immediate reaction of the gun grabbers was to call for more gun control. The reality that the shooting took place in a city that has strict gun control on a military base with strict gun control has not even dawned on the people who are so hell bent on enslaving us that they were screaming for more gun control while the dead bodies were still warm.
Barack Obama lamented that we are once again dealing with this kind of tragedy. I will shoot his words back at him. We are once again dealing with you exploiting a criminal to disarm non criminals. You danced on the bodies of the dead children in Newtown and you are dancing on the dead at the Navy yard.
The narrative was the same in the media as we were bombed with stories of an AR 15 and assault this and assault that.
Turns out the gun used was a shotgun and the pistols used were taken from the guards who were shot. Not to worry, the media came to the rescue like they did when George Zimmerman turned out to be Hispanic instead of white (and thus became the new race of white Hispanic) and invented the new AR 15 shotgun…
We are now finding out that the shooter had a real problem with mental illness and that it was reported months ago but not acted upon by the very government that wants to disarm you for the deeds of the shooter. It also turns out that this guy would spend up to 18 hours at a time playing the Call of Duty video game. It is reported that the game took him to his dark side.
In other words, the video game influenced this mentally ill man to act on his inner dark side. Thus, he sneaked a firearm onto a post and went around shooting people like in the video game.
So now that we know this is it safe for us to conclude that we do not need to ban guns we need to ban video games? The game caused the problem and made this man shoot others. In order to stop this senseless violence we must have the following:
- All people who want to buy a video game must be 21
- All people who want to buy a video game must pay money and submit an application with a set of fingerprints
- All people who want to buy video games must sign a release for a medical and mental health records check
- All video games must no longer be capable of being played longer than 2 hours in a 24 hour period. This is our ban on high capacity video games
- Anyone who purchases a video game must wait 3 days before picking it up so a background check can be completed
- No one can buy more than one video game in a 30 day period
- Online video gaming will no longer be allowed so we can close the internet loophole
These are a must because there are millions of people out there using video games. These games cause people to turn violent and result in death. It is not the person, it is the game and you should never forget that.
We must do this…
…for the children.
However, in keeping with the spirit of Barack Obama’s tenure video games may be given to terrorists.
Yep, Barack Obama wants to infringe on our right to keep and bear arms and wants to impose even tougher restrictions on law abiding citizens while at the same time he has waived the law disallowing us from sending arms to terrorists so he can arm the Syrian Rebels.
Think about it folks, Barack Obama trusts terrorists with firearms but does not trust you with them.
And he knows the terrorists would fail the background check. That is why he waived the law…
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Tags: communism, gun control, lies, navy yard, Obama, tyranny, video games, violence
I Agree With Senator Feinstein
Sep 17, 2013 Commentary, Second Amendment
[note]This article assumes the shooting at the Navy Yard was not a false flag operation. I have no doubt in my mind that the government or its agents are capable of using mentally unstable people to get what it wants. Life means nothing to those who want to infringe upon our freedoms. If they cared about life they would not allow children to be murdered in the womb. Obama will use Executive Orders to get what he wants leading to speculation of a false flag operation.[/note]
It is not often that I agree with any liberal particularly Dianne Feinstein and particularly on gun control but I find myself in agreement with her statement after the senseless shooting at the Navy Yard. Feinstein stated:
“When will enough be enough?”
~snip
“Congress must stop shirking its responsibility and resume a thoughtful debate on gun violence in this country. We must do more to stop this endless loss of life.” Washington Times
This statement is mostly true (more later) but the solution is where we part ways.
First of all it is important to note that the deaths from mass shootings account for an extremely small part of the number of murders. It is less than one-tenth of one percent. These statistics do not count gang related murders and shootings where a person kills relatives or others linked to him. Even those do not put us at an epidemic.
The sensationalism involved makes these things seem much more common and Obama lamenting that once again we are dealing with a mass shooting makes it appear that way. It is like air travel. It is the safest way to travel but a plane crash that kills hundreds of people gets more press than the few people at a time that die in traffic accidents.
More children in the womb are murdered than all the gun related murders combined.
Shootings like the one at the Navy Yard lead to a push for more gun control and the banning of more types of firearms even though these things will not work. Washington DC has very strict gun control laws and federal property, particularly military installations, have extreme gun control (thanks Bill Clinton). One does not just walk around a military post with a firearm unless the job requires them to carry one. Unless there is on post housing or an on post range there are no private firearms registered on the installation. If there are registered firearms they must be properly secured.
In addition, one must go through a secure point when entering a post. The fact that DC has strict gun laws, military posts have even stricter gun rules (and I might add, infringing rules), and that one must pass through a security entrance to gain access did not stop the shooter from murdering a dozen people at the Navy Yard.
Just as the on post rules and security did not stop a radical Muslim soldier from murdering over a dozen people at Fort Hood.
Laws only affect the people who are inclined to obey them in the first place.
[note]The AR 15 is a firearm hated by the left. The initial reports indicated that the shooter used one at the Navy Yard however; new reports indicate he used a shotgun (he sneaked in) and two pistols he took from security guards. This will not stop the gun grabbers from blaming the black rifle and calling for a ban on it.[/note]
No gun law in the world would have prevented any of the mass shootings that have taken place. None of the gun laws passed after the shooting in Newtown would have stopped that event. The gun laws passed in New York, Maryland and other places were all knee jerk reactions that took advantage of a tragedy to get more control over our lives. It matters not to Governor O’Malley of Maryland that his unconstitutional gun laws would not have saved those children. He does not care if children die. His major concern is his next elected office. If he can use dead children to promote his cause he is perfectly OK with that.
But Big Dog, you said you agree with Senator Feinstein, how so?
I agree with her question; when will enough be enough? I also agree with her statement that we must do something to stop the endless loss of life.
OK, I mostly agree because it is not endless. That is hyperbole and drama to make it seem worse than it is but I agree we need to end these shootings.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun. The solution is not what Feinstein wants, it is just the opposite. We need to end having gun free zones and we need to stop infringing on the right of the people to keep and bear arms. The guy at the Navy Yard was able to do what he did because once he illegally sneaked his firearm(s) onto post he had a shooting gallery of trapped, unarmed workers. All citizens who are not otherwise disallowed (felony conviction, mental illness, addiction, etc) should be allowed to carry a firearm either openly or concealed. Teachers and other workers at schools should be allowed to carry firearms. Workers at federal facilities should be able to carry firearms.
We would not have active shooters if they did not have helpless prey to hunt and government does nothing but make us helpless and make us prey.
Feinstein is perfectly happy to continue the failed government policies that have resulted in the very murders she laments because she is not affected. She is part of the protected class. You know who they are. They have armed guards or permits to carry firearms.
The police, by the way, are not the answer. In Newtown every person was dead before the police arrived. At the Navy Yard the on base armed security that effectively had a criminal on a locked down facility could not neutralize him before he murdered a dozen people. Anyone of his victims could have stopped the carnage had they been armed.
If you want to end the violence, and I mean if you truly want to end it, then stop disarming the people who suffer from unconstitutional gun laws.
No law stops criminals from committing crime.
Let us not forget that it is already against the law to murder people…
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Tags: constitution, feinstein, gun control, navy yard, Obama
What If They Boycotted Something Else?
Aug 21, 2013 Commentary, Second Amendment
Christopher Lane of Australia was attending college in the US and played baseball on his college team. He had just returned from his home country a few days ago and was murdered when three teens who claimed they were bored decided to shoot him. Lane was out jogging when the three wannabe thugs followed him in a car and shot him in the back.
The murder happened in Oklahoma.
This is a tragedy and I can’t even begin to imagine how his family is affected by this. They sent a loved one to the US a few days ago and now he is gone, senselessly murdered by thugs with alleged ties to a gang.
The incident has the anti gun nuts up in arms. Brit twit Piers Morgan says that America’s gun crisis has become the world’s problem.
Former deputy Prime Minister Tim Fischer said that Australian tourists should stay away from America to protest a need for stricter gun control.
These fellows come from nations that have taken guns from people and now their citizens are at the mercy of criminals. Gun murders have not stopped in their home nations and no gun law would have prevented Lane’s murder.
You see, none of the people who have been arrested are allowed to own a handgun. How did they get one? The same way people who get the banned substance Heroin do, they obtained it illegally. No law will keep people from getting what they want. One only needs to look at prohibition in the US to see that people who wanted alcohol, an illegal and banned item, got it. Criminals do not obey the law. That is exactly why there are people in the UK and Australia who are shot with guns even though they have extreme gun control.
There is not a gun problem in America; there is a societal and criminal problem. One of the suspects in the Lane murder was on probation and there are indications that all of them had a criminal history.
The crimes committed with guns are almost exclusively done by people who have obtained them illegally. The only thing gun laws do is impose restrictions on those who follow the law in the first place. The liberal system of justice that lets criminals go free is at fault as is the mindset that portrays people as victims who are not responsible for their actions.
Perhaps if we spent as much time going after criminals as we do going after guns we would have some meaningful progress in the murders of people by guns. Keep in mind, more people die in car accidents and from tobacco use than from guns but we concentrate on gun control because it is about controlling people.
In New York a few days ago a cab whose driver was full of road rage jumped a curb and hit a woman amputating her leg. The woman was visiting the US from the UK. Would it make sense for UK officials to advise their citizens not to visit the US until road rage is controlled or until cab drivers are held accountable?
But something deeper needs to be investigated. Two of the three suspects in this case were black and a large number of violent crimes are committed by black people (particularly against other blacks). How would anyone react if the former deputy PM of Australia had advised citizens to avoid the US until it got its black people under control?
This is an important question because we have the gun being blamed for the crime. We hear people calling for all kinds of actions against the gun. A broad generalization is being made and all legal gun owners are being lumped in with the small fraction of people who use illegal guns in an illegal way. If they are free to do this and if it makes logical sense to the gun grabbers then why can’t we simply look at the demographics of 66% of the people involved in this crime and indict an entire class of people for what happened. It works like this:
Gun used in crime means all guns (and gun owners) bad so ban all guns.
Blacks committed murder so all blacks are bad so ban all blacks.
The second statement makes little sense to anyone and is readily rejected but gun grabbers who see the absurdity in it will fail to see the same absurdity in the first sentence.
Guns do not commit crimes. People commit crimes and in this case the gun was the object used to do so. We do not ban knives, baseball bats, cars, sulfuric acid and rope when they are used to commit murder. We recognize that all these items have a purpose and that they can be used to murder. Guns have a purpose and they can be used to murder. We should not ban them just because a small number of people use them illegally (which would not stop even with a complete ban).
The Second Amendment protects a right and that right should not be infringed upon because some people do bad things. Criminals do bad things all the time and yet we don’t condone violating their Fourth or Fifth Amendment rights.
When we rationalize infringing on rights because it makes us safer or keeps bad people from being bad (which never happens) we have given up freedom. Freedom comes with risks and the proper way to mitigate those risks is to hold people accountable.
Bored thug gang banger wannabes do not represent the whole of America and their acts should not dictate gun policy in America.
The Constitution should be the only governing document.
Period.
Boycotting America because a criminal uses a gun to murder an Australian makes as much sense as boycotting Australia because a Great White shark ate an American.
We can no more control a determined criminal than we can a shark…
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Tags: absurdity, australia, baseball, gun control, murder, oklahoma