Will They Get A Slap On The Wrist
Jan 15, 2015 Second Amendment
A lady was fortunate to win one thousand dollars at the Maryland Live Casino. Unfortunately, two other people noticed her good fortune and followed her to her home that was about an hour away.
When she got out of her car one of the two brandished a handgun and took her purse. The couple was arrested four days later by detectives and they are charged with assault, armed robbery and theft.
Given that they committed a crime with a firearm in Maryland they should expect a stiff penalty and some jail time. But, this is Maryland and even though they broke the law they might get a plea bargain for lesser crimes and end up walking only to commit more crimes in the future.
Maryland is easy on criminals but tough on the law abiding. The man who had the gun is Mark West. He has a lengthy criminal history that includes assault, CDS possession with intent to distribute and violation of both probation and peace orders. I don’t know his specifics but this history would indicate he would not be allowed to legally own a firearm.
In many of his past cases he was not prosecuted (looks like the charges were dropped) and for those he was prosecuted he received little in the way of punishment.
Maryland would rather keep putting criminals on the street and harass law abiding citizens.
In Maryland the law abiding cannot carry a firearm at all openly (it is alleged that one may carry a long gun but that would be unwise) and concealed carry permits only go to special people. Maryland has decided that certain firearms are not allowed in the state and its citizens may not purchase them.
The laws are designed to keep the law abiding from getting or carrying firearms. Self protection is not a valid reason in the state.
It would appear though, West had no trouble getting a firearm and using it in a crime even though he has a criminal history and probably would not be allowed to have one.
The point has been made many times that gun laws only apply to people who obey the law in the first place.
This story proves that point.
Maryland is a nanny state that infringes upon the rights of its citizens.
I hope this trend reverses starting next Wednesday when a new governor is sworn in.
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Are Minorities Brainwashed Into Inferiority Complex?
Apr 23, 2014 Commentary, Terrorism
The Supreme Court upheld a Michigan law that banned affirmative action. The Michigan law basically states that race will not be used as a factor in determining who gets into college. In fact, the Michigan law does not allow colleges to ask the race of the applicant.
The race baiting poverty pimp, and government informant, Al Sharpton is rallying the black folks to do whatever it takes (you know, like riot and protest) to reverse this huge injustice. But what huge injustice is there? We are told that we need equality and a long hard fight was waged for that equality. The Republican Party led the way in ensuring that civil rights were made into law. While one can debate if it was necessary or Constitutional, the fact is we passed a lot of civil rights laws.
So if we want equality why do people of color have to be “more equal” based on their race? Should not one get into college (or anything else like the White House) based on merit and not skin color?
Not according to Al Sharpton and the rest of the race baiters who think that affirmative action is the only way to solve past injustices. In other words, there needs to be a continual advantage for people of color because of inequalities that existed before many of them were born.
One does not solve racial inequality by reversing the racism by giving a leg up based solely on skin color.
Then again, how would Al Sharpton make any money?
It is bad enough that Al uses the issue to provide a solution for a problem that does not exist but what is worse is that many people of color have been told for so long that they are inferior to white people that they seem to believe it. Why are there threats of riots and other civil unrest over the Court’s decision? Why are people fighting for an act that basically says people of color can’t make it on their merits so they need extra help?
It would seem to me that if people believed in equality they would jump at the chance to prove they are on equal footing and worthy of consideration based solely on their abilities. To paraphrase Martin Luther King, Jr., they should be judged not on the color of their skin but on their merits and abilities.
The problem is that many of these folks have been told for so long that they are not as good (and that is the message of affirmative action) so they need a little extra help.
When a state like Michigan says that race will not be asked and will not be used to determine admission folks who have been brainwashed into believing they are inferior get riled up by the race baiters, whose sole job is to keep people down by making them think they are inferior, and act on emotion.
If your scores are not good enough to get you in then your color had nothing to do with it. Perhaps if people (of all colors) spent more time learning and less time listening to people like Sharpton or skipping school to get involved in drug and gang activities they would achieve the scores necessary for admission.
Here is a wake up call. You do not need special treatment to get into school. You have the ability to achieve as well as anyone else regardless of color. There are many highly successful people of color who chose to study and do well in life and you can do that too.
First though, you need to tune out the likes of Al Sharpton and the rest of the race baiters. They will continue to drag you down while they get rich exploiting you (and Al might rat you out for something).
Affirmative Action is a bad program that needs to go away. It causes all kinds of problems.
Look at what happened when we got the Affirmative Action president…
I wonder if Harry Reid will call Al and those he incites domestic terrorists?
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Tags: affirmative action, Al Sharpton, civil rights, justice, lies, michigan, supreme court
Liberal Logic Demands Supporting Second Amendment
May 15, 2013 Political
Liberals who want more gun control will tell you they support the Second Amendment. They will tell you that nothing they are doing will interfere with people and their right to keep and bear arms. This is a lie because the things they enact infringe. Maryland is a prime example where the Nazi Governor and his minions have imposed unconstitutional gun laws that restrict law abiding people. The tragedy is that these gun laws will do no good which will lead to calls for even more gun control.
Liberal logic (if you can call what liberals use logic) demands supporting the Second Amendment.
In light of this week’s revelation that the Department of Justice has obtained phone records from the AP the media is up in arms and there will be backlash. The first thing to note is that what Justice did might not be illegal under the law.
But what they did is much larger in scope than anything that has happened before and though the reason given is to find the source of a leak the reality is it gives the appearance that the First Amendment right of the media has been violated. It looks like Justice is trying to intimidate the media (in this case specifically the AP but indirectly all media) and is sending a message that it will go through huge amounts of records to get what it wants.
The media are out discussing how this took place and expressing their outrage while those at the AP have expressed anger, shock and disbelief. They feel their communications are being monitored and that their rights have been violated.
They have the support of conservatives who are also wary of these kinds of government tactics. In other words, conservatives support these organizations in their belief that even if it is legal to do (and that is a questionable thing right now) the idea of trampling on a right is sickening.
I only wish the media and other liberals outraged by the AP records scandal felt the same way about other rights. When other rights are violated, particularly if the violations affect conservatives, the liberals say it is OK and justified. Look at how the former head of the NAACP and others have reacted to the IRS violations of the rights of conservative groups. They have said that it is OK because those groups are racist. First of all, they are not racist BUT even if they were they have the same rights as everyone else.
Racist groups like the KKK, the Nation of Islam and the Black Panthers all have rights and those rights should not be violated just because we do not agree with the message.
Once we start rationalizing the violation of our rights it becomes easier to rationalize other violations until pretty soon we have no rights left.
The left loves to push gun control even though most gun control laws violate the Second Amendment. They rationalize that it is for safety or for the children or that no one needs certain types of firearms. This allows them to continue eroding our Second Amendment right until the judiciary is comfortable removing those rights based on what we have allowed to creep in.
I wish that these liberals would be as outraged by the violation of the Second Amendment as they are at the alleged violation of the First. We on the right support ALL rights and do not like when any of them are violated. It is high time the left jumped in and supported us the way we are supporting them.
Perhaps they now know how those of us who believe in and support the Second Amendment feel each and every day as we battle the forces of evil that are hell bent on denying us that which has been endowed by our Creator. Perhaps, but I won’t hold my breath.
So the AP scandal shows that liberals, if they actually had any integrity, would fight for the Second Amendment (and all other rights) as hard as the one that affects them the most.
Interestingly, the Gosnell abortion/murder case gave Harry Reid the chance to show why there should be less gun control instead of more.
Dr. Kermit Gosnell was an abortion doctor who murdered babies born alive and performed late term abortions in violation of Pennsylvania law. He was found guilty of murder and a number of other charges and will spend the rest of his life in jail.
Harry Reid wants us to believe that pro life supporters have forced women to go to clinics like the one run by Gosnell. He says that people have been pushed into holes like that clinic because of people who picket abortion clinics. Reid also blamed this all on restrictive laws.
He believes that having less restrictive abortion laws would have prevented the murders Gosnell committed.
Interestingly, Reid and his ilk are the ones who think that MORE restrictive laws will curb gun violence. Yes, to Reid and other gun grabbers more restrictive laws will stop gun crimes but less restrictive laws will end the crimes like those committed by Gosnell.
If we were to apply Reid’s logic to gun ownership (and publicly carrying them), then we can conclude that less restrictive laws will prevent more gun crimes. In fact, this has actually been proven time and again.
Reid is incorrect about Gosnell. We do not need less restrictive laws for abortion. The crimes committed by Gosnell had nothing to do with laws being too restrictive. They had to do with this; First Gosnell is a monster. Second, Gosnell performed late term abortions (after the time PA says they can be performed) so women who waited too long or did not know went to him because he would do it. They went to him because he would skirt the law.
His clinic was not filthy because of laws that are too restrictive and he did not have all those aborted kids in containers because the law was too tough.
His clinic was in that condition and he was doing what he was doing because it was not inspected by the government agency responsible for ensuring medical businesses are clean and operate according to established law (and medical standards). The Health Department (or whichever agency PA has given the task) did not make unannounced visits to ensure his clinic was clean and up to standard. Less restrictive regulations would not correct this and it did not happen because people protest abortion clinics. It happened because the laws in place were not followed; the laws requiring health inspections as well as the laws regarding late term abortions. Any inspection at any time would have caught these problems early on.
Keep in mind; they were only brought to light because a woman died at his clinic because of his negligence.
Harry Reid is wrong because his root cause analysis is wrong. He is right that less restrictive laws would lead to fewer problems if this were applied to gun control because that has been shown time and again. Criminals do not obey the law.
Gosnell got away with his crimes because the state did not enforce the law (which, by the way, is why many gun crimes happen).
So the media is now positioned to defend rights. Good, defend them all and apply the same standard to the Second Amendment as to the First.
Harry Reid is now on record saying less restrictive laws would lead to fewer problems. Good, beat him and the other anti gun zealots over their heads with Reid’s words. Make them apply the same standard he wants to apply to abortion. He might be wrong about why they happened but there is no doubt he believes fewer laws would mean fewer problems.
It is ironic how all of this has come to light at this time.
I think it is quite possible that these items (including the IRS scandal) were made public (and Reid commented on Gosnell) because they want to draw focus away from Benghazi.
I have read a lot of liberal sites where they are calling the AP scandal the only real scandal of the Obama regime. If the left can get the public to believe the AP phone records scheme is the only scandal and then later show Justice acted legally then the other scandals (which are REAL scandals) will be swept away.
I do not put anything past these criminals but we should use their words and deeds to our advantage. Who knows, maybe we can change their minds and get them to see where they have been wrong. We might be able to make them leave the liberal plantation.
Hell, a few pro abortion folks have changed their views after the horror of Gosnell.
And David Axelrod now agrees with TEA Party folks that government is too big.
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Tags: ap, gosnell, Harry Reid, holder, justice, lies, obama scandals, rights, Second Amendment
The New Black Panther Vigilante Party
Mar 25, 2012 Commentary
The lawbreaking racists of the New Black Panther Party (NBPP) have weighed in on the killing of Trayvon Martin. The NBPP has decided that George Zimmerman, the guy who shot Martin as Martin was allegedly beating him, is a child killer and has issued a “Wanted: Dead or Alive” poster for Zimmerman.
Never mind that the NBPP, taking its cues from the MSM, has published a 5 year old picture showing Martin as a child rather than the thuggish looking photos from his Facebook page and never mind that the police are investigating the issue and can arrest Zimmerman at any time should the situation warrant it. No, the NBPP has decided that it will play vigilante and has published the poster. The NBPP has also stated it will recruit 10,000 men to hunt Zimmerman down.
Remember how the left focused the blame for the Gifford’s shooting on the right and talk radio? Remember how Sarah Palin was blamed for this and how quickly the MSM toned it down when it was discovered that the shooter was fairly apolitical but his beliefs echoed the left? Look at how the left has blamed Rush Limbaugh and other talk hosts for the shooting of Martin.
Ignoring the fact that the left always finds someone else to blame for something, who will they pin the blame on if the NBPP or one of the mush heads who follows that racist group ends up killing Zimmerman?
Will they blame talk radio or will they place the blame where it belongs and that would be in the hands of Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, Louis Farrakhan, Barack Obama, the NBPP and a number of others who have incited violence by refusing to allow the police to investigate the shooting and to gather all relevant facts in the case. A witness says that the 6’2″ Martin attacked Zimmerman and was on top of him beating him as Zimmerman screamed for help. It was then that Zimmerman shot Martin which seems to me to be a pretty open and shut case of self defense. This might play out differently but the important thing is to let the police investigate.
Zimmerman is in danger from radical black racists who are intent on exacting vigilante justice. It has issued a Dead or Alive poster and there is now a great possibility that one of the morons who follow that group will kill Zimmerman. Will the media call it justified and will we then issue wanted posters for those who kill Zimmerman? When will it stop?
Suppose groups of people issued wanted posters for the blacks who have raped and murdered white people across this nation. There are plenty of examples of this happening with no rallies from the race baiters and certainly no presence of the NBPP calling for the death of the criminals. I imagine that if wanted posters went out the race baiters would then rally to defend the murderers.
Imagine what would have happened if a wanted poster had been issued for the NBPP morons who threatened people at the voting polls in Philadelphia thus violating their right to vote.
Do you think Barack Obama and his racist Attorney General would get involved then?
There is no need for the hype surrounding this case but the stakes get higher each day as the race baiters are allowed to incite violence. This would include the race baiters in the media who continually referred to the shooter as a white man when he is clearly a Hispanic.
Let the police do their jobs and let the facts in this case come forward absent the threats of violence.
If we truly want justice then we need the race baiters to tone it down and stop inciting violence.
If the NBPP ends up killing Zimmerman there will be all kinds of hell to pay in this nation as race relations get set back decades.
UPDATED: The NBPP has offered a 1 million dollar bounty for Zimmerman. These morons are blaming white America. Better be careful what you ask for guys. Where is Obama and his pleas for civility?
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Tags: black panthers, eric holder, george zimmerman, justice, lies, nbpp, Obama, police, trayvon martin, vigilante
Unions Oppose Voter ID Except When It Is A Union Vote
Mar 12, 2012 Political
Imagine you belong to a union and that union is voting on something (contract, leadership, etc). You arrive at the union hall which belongs to the union and its members. Before you are allowed to vote you must show an ID. Why? What are the odds that the people in the room are not part of the union? Could they really get so many non union folks in there to affect the outcome of the vote without someone noticing they don’t belong? If there is any place where the likelihood of voter fraud is low it is in a union hall (with regard to non members voting, all kinds of fraud takes place in unions) so why is an ID required?
Better yet, why do the same unions that require an ID to vote in its processes oppose voter ID laws with regard to our state political elections?
The unions oppose voter ID when the general population is voting in political elections even though the potential (and actual) fraud is much higher than could ever be expected in a union hall where ID is required.
The reason is pretty simple. The unions do not want voter ID laws because those laws would keep the unions from committing voter fraud. The unions are heavily vested in the Democrat Party and the unions do a lot of fraudulent things. They intimidate people who are campaigning, they intimidate people who vote, and they help the dead get to the polls while also ensuring there are an adequate number of “extra” votes for the people they want to win.
Democrats and unions are one in the same. The same philosophy, same criminal activity, and same voter fraud (ACORN anyone) found in unions are found in the Democrat Party. They work hand in hand because unions work to get Democrats elected and then Democrats work to transfer taxpayer money to the unions. The violation of law leading to investors being shafted while unions took ownership of auto companies was a payoff and this kind of stuff happens all the time.
Since Democrats and unions are the same it should come as no surprise that Democrats oppose voter ID. Eric “The Red” Holder and his Justice Department just put the nix on a Texas voter ID law because of the phony claim that it might disproportionately affect Hispanics. Evidently, all those Hispanics in Texas who have jobs do not have ID. Evidently, all the Hispanics in Texas who receive welfare or drive a car do not have a valid ID. I can’t imagine how so many people could be affected by this law but evidently in Texas they let people work, drive, or receive welfare without an ID.
Let me tell you the real concern of Holder and the Obama regime. They are worried that a voter ID law would keep illegals from voting in elections and those would be lost Democrat votes. Illegals are not allowed to vote and ID laws would prevent more of them from doing so and this is a non starter for the Obama regime. The regime needs the illegals and all the other votes it can get in Texas because it is a very red state that contains a lot of electoral votes.
I know Texas is under special scrutiny because of past discrimination as are a few other states. It always seemed arbitrary to me because there are states not subject to the scrutiny and they were as discriminatory as any on the list.
Be that as it may, the argument that the law is discriminatory to Hispanics does not hold water. The Supreme Court has already ruled that a similar law in another state is Constitutional.
But Holder has pressed on with his crusade against voter ID.
He knows that those laws will likely be upheld by the SCOTUS (because they already have) but the legal process takes time.
And Holder only needs to delay until after this November.
If we are lucky, he will be in jail by then…
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Tags: eric holder, justice, lies, texas, union, voter id, votes