Big Dogs Weblog

A Song For All The Gun Grabbers Out There

Jan 23, 2014 Second Amendment

This song is to the point and it asks the question; “Who the hell gave you the right to take my guns from me?” In America the Second Amendment is there to protect a preexisting right of the citizen to keep and bear arms. It is not about the military (addressed elsewhere in the Constitution) and it is not about hunting (not addressed at all). The reality is the Founders fought a bloody war against the ruling nation to gain independence. That ruling nation was oppressive and even tried to take away firearms, an act that was not well received.

We fought to gain our freedom and now we must continue to fight to protect our freedom. Ronald Reagan said Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction.

That generation is now and we are in real danger of losing freedom (much of it has been lost already). Listen to the song and think about the law abiding who do no wrong and would never use a firearm to hurt someone without just cause. And then think of criminals who do not obey the law and ask yourself if any gun law will stop them.

You know the answer.

Well, who the hell gave you the right?

Here is an example of tyranny.

Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.

Tags: america, australia, constitution, criminals, gun control, Second Amendment

Can We Ban Guns In Movies?

Jan 17, 2014 Second Amendment

Some food for though; Rambo movies did not stop violence and neither do any others where guns are used…

Harvey Weinstein will make a show that he promises will destroy the National Rifle Association. No real details on the film but it is not going to be a documentary. It will probably be something like the Al Gore global warming crap that tries to indoctrinate people into a different reality. You know, all guns are bad and people don’t need them.

Use these kinds of propaganda and some folks will be influenced. There are plenty of people who recite things based on some movie or story as fact while ignoring the reality of the situation. The faked moon landing conspiracy comes to mind.

I doubt Weinstein will be able to influence the debate as there are far too many gun owners who know that more guns equals less crime. That has been proven time and again but the left, and morons like Weinstein, think that guns are the problem.

Let me reiterate; more guns equals less crime.

As Al Gore might say, the science is settled.

Weinstein has made it clear that he does not think there should be any guns in this country except for the guns in the hands of the government. I saw a movie once about a place where the only people with guns were government and soldiers. The movie was Schindler’s List.

One would think that a Jewish guy would be wary of government confiscating firearms from its citizens considering what happened to the Jews in Nazi Germany but Weinstein seems to live in the world he creates in movies. Emily Miller points out in her article that Weinstein must have watched too many of his own movies if he thinks a fully loaded gun will just pop up when he needs it.

I am willing to bet the film will do nothing to hurt the NRA.

In fact, I bet they get even more members.

I also think that we should ban guns in all movies. We should make it illegal for Hollywood and the rest to possess prop guns and there should be a fine if a gun is used or displayed in a movie. Hell, if, as Weinstein says, we do not need guns in society then we do not need guns in movies in society…

Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.

Tags: emily miller, gun control, harvey weinstein, jewish fool, nazi, Second Amendment

At Least Police Officers Are Safer

Dec 31, 2013 Second Amendment

Police officers carry firearms for one reason and that reason is to protect themselves. There is nothing wrong with that because there are a lot of really bad people in the world and the police get to deal with those bad folks so they should be able to protect themselves.

I don’t think anyone would disagree with that.

Looks like the police are safer as a new report shows that the number of law enforcement officers killed by a firearm in 2013 is at its lowest since the Wild West days. More officers were killed in traffic related accidents than by a firearm (half as many died of a heart attack).

This is great news for police officers.

For the regular person who lives in a state that infringes on rights the news is not so good. Those states restrict or ban (with unconstitutional laws) the right of the people to keep and bear arms. While police officers carry firearms to protect themselves the people they serve are denied that right.

The People’s Republik of Maryland is one such place. The Socialist Governor Martin O’Malley (who wants to be President) and his band of thieves in Annapolis have passed restrictive gun laws that violate the rights of the people who are supposed to be free citizens of the state (his Lt. Governor Anthony Brown is running to replace him. Brown, an Army veteran, is a socialist and supports gun control). Maryland likes to call itself the Free State but it is nothing of the sort.

The number of murders by firearms in Baltimore alone is about 9 times that of police officers NATIONWIDE. The people murdered with firearms were the victims (though often other criminals) of people who have no regard for the law and who do not obtain their firearms legally.

But the Socialist politicians in this state think law abiding citizens (who happen to be THEIR bosses) are the problem and have enacted laws that only affect those who follow the law.

Police officers have jobs that put them in harm’s way. They carry firearms to protect themselves. The people who are denied the right to keep and bear arms are not supposed to be in danger when they go about their lives. But as I stated earlier, it is a dangerous world and criminals love to go after unarmed people.

The people who are denied by their oppressive government (and Maryland is not the only place) are prey to those who have no regard for and do not follow the law.

So while it is great that fewer police officers were killed with firearms the reality is the people who live in tyrannical areas of the country (Maryland being one such place) are at the mercy of criminals and more of us are being murdered by them.

Unfortunately, some police officers support more gun control and take great pride in upholding unconstitutional gun grabbing laws for their puppet masters in the legislature.

Happy New Year. May it come with the overturning of all unconstitutional gun laws so we the people can once again be free.

That, after all, is the best way (but not the ONLY way) for us to regain our rights.

MOLON LABE

Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.

Tags: brown, death, firearms, gun control, lies, Maryland, O'Malley, Second Amendment, socialists

Typical Liberal Hypocrisy

May 30, 2013 Political

Liberals are well known hypocrites. They pass laws that do not apply to them, they pass feel good legislation and then balk when they are affected by it or they do things counter to what they said is best for the rest of us. Some anti gun liberals have concealed carry permits or armed guards or both. These people do not bat an eye at imposing gun control to keep the population disarmed while they carry a firearm for protection or are escorted by armed police officers. Michael Bloomberg, the idiot from New York, is one such hypocrite.

In California two supporters of a homeless bill of rights, legislation that negates many of the vagrancy laws, have been caught having the police shoo “homeless” people from their neighborhoods and places of employment.

People from Project Veritas pretended to be homeless and did everything allowed under the legislation (sat, loitered, begged) in front of the home of one of the sponsors. They were there for a while and nothing happened. Not long after the politician backed out of his driveway and drove past them the police arrived and told them they could not be there.

They were also at the government building where one (or both) work and they were accosted by officers from the DHS. The police state is alive and well as the DHS police threaten them and violate their rights.

This is typical behavior from the brown shirts in the police state and it is typical behavior from liberal politicians.

They pass feel good laws and all is fine unless it affects them. If they are bothered by what they impose on everyone else they call the police and have you harassed.

The video highlights the hypocrisy.

Ironically, the DHS officers demand to see what is on the camera as if it is illegal to record in public. All this from workers at an agency that wants more video surveillance cameras to record everything we do.

We need more recording of what the people who work for us are doing. Hell, the recent number of murders at the hands of police officers is justification for everyone to record.

And for the absolute defense of the Second Amendment.

Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.

Tags: california, hypocrisy, liberals, project veritas, Second Amendment

Media Finally Agree With Framer’s Intent?

May 20, 2013 Political, Second Amendment

[note]”That the said Constitution shall never be construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press or the rights of conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms … ”
— Samuel Adams, Debates and Proceedings in the Convention of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, at 86-87 (Pierce & Hale, eds., Boston, 1850)[/note]

I have always believed that a point of view depends upon whose ox is being gored. With the Second Amendment the media are silent with regard to what our Founders intended and will help push an agenda for anti gun (and anti American) liberals. In order to ignore what our Founders said and what they clearly intended the media will gladly tell us that the Constitution is a living document and that it must evolve with the times. Things change for the media when the right under attack is the one that affects them the most.

The idea that the Constitution is a living document is an incorrect assessment of the Constitution. It is not a living document subject to interpretation based on a particular point in history. It is the Supreme Law of the Land and the Founders did not intend for it to be interpreted this way or that. What they did was give us a method to change it should things change or should new situations arise.

In any event, the media love to bash the Second Amendment and tell us how things have changed. That point of view changes when the right attacked is the one that affects the media.

In light of the Justice Department’s infringement of the AP’s First Amendment right the media, at least the AP, have suddenly decided that the Constitution is not a living document and that the infringement by the Justice department is wrong. Here is what Gary Pruitt, the president and CEO of the AP, had to say about the incident:

Pruitt told CBS’ ”Face the Nation” that the government has no business monitoring the AP’s newsgathering activities.

“And if they restrict that apparatus … the people of the United States will only know what the government wants them to know and that’s not what the framers of the Constitution had in mind when they wrote the First Amendment,” Washington Post

Well isn’t it interesting that Pruitt mentions what the framers of the Constitution had in mind when they wrote the First Amendment? When it comes to the Second Amendment the media will tell us that things have changed, the framers could not have anticipated modern firearms (they did anticipate which is why they do not mention a specific type. People can have what the government has). They tell us that it is a living document and that we need to advance with the times. They dismiss any argument that claims if people are disarmed there will be no way to fight a tyrannical government as if the government is wonderful and would do no wrong.

It looks like the AP incident and Pruitt’s words now reveal that the media were wrong. The incident shows the tyranny of government and Pruitt indicated that this kind of tyranny leads to people only getting the information government wants it to.

I imagine it will be difficult for many anti gun zealots to see that these two issues are one in the same. Many, and I imagine Pruitt would be among them, will not see how the framer’s intent applies as much to the Second as it does to the First (and all parts of the Constitution for that matter). They will continue to dismiss the valid concerns of gun owners and tell us how we need to change with the times while crying foul over what the government did to them.

Mr. Pruitt, conservatives are on your side because we know all parts of the Constitution need to be defended against all enemies foreign and domestic. We know that the erosion of one right will lead to the erosion of another until the domino effect takes place. We wake up one day and are North Korea where people are disarmed, totally dependent on government and fed only the news government wants.

Mr. Pruitt, you and others in the media are responsible for this. You media folks pushed an agenda for liberals for decades. That was the anti gun agenda and it allowed for the slow erosion of the right to keep and bear arms. You folks in the media carried their water on this issue while cheerfully claiming that things have changed, this is a living document, the framers could not have anticipated the future, blah, blah, blah…

While you were helping with the slow erosion of our Second Amendment right you were putting in place the mechanism that allowed government to start going after the other rights. You allowed the camel’s nose to get under the tent and now you are feeling the effect of your failure.

Without a Second Amendment there will be no protection for the First or any other. Without a well armed citizenry there will be government tyranny. You helped bring this upon us by ignoring or dismissing the framer’s intent when it came to our right to keep and bear arms.

[note]”The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subject races to possess arms. History shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by so doing.”
— Adolph Hitler, Hitler’s Secret Conversations 403 (Norman Cameron and R.H. Stevens trans., 1961)[/note]

You in the media became stenographers for the liberals in government. You abandoned your obligation to the people and stopped being our watchdog. YOU enabled government to encroach further and further on our rights and into our lives. You failed us and now you are reaping what you have sown.

How about you get on board and start supporting the Second Amendment the way you want the First supported? How about you push the message of the people and tout the intent of our framers with regard to the right to keep and bear arms? What say we the people and you the media work together to keep government in check?

Let me help you out with it:

• “Whereas civil-rulers, not having their duty to the people duly before them, may attempt to tyrannize, and as military forces, which must be occasionally raised to defend our country, might pervert their power to the injury of their fellow citizens, the people are confirmed by the article in their right to keep and bear their private arms.” — Tench Coxe, in Remarks on the First Part of the Amendments to the Federal Constitution
• “Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States. A military force, at the command of Congress, can execute no laws, but such as the people perceive to be just and constitutional; for they will possess the power, and jealousy will instantly inspire the inclination, to resist the execution of a law which appears to them unjust and oppressive.” –Noah Webster, An Examination of the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution (Philadelphia 1787)
• “What country can preserve its liberties if its rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms.” — Thomas Jefferson to William Stephens Smith, 1787. ME 6:373, Papers 12:356
• “No Free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms.” — Thomas Jefferson, Proposal Virginia Constitution, 1 T. Jefferson Papers, 334,[C.J. Boyd, Ed., 1950]
• ” … to disarm the people – that was the best and most effectual way to enslave them.” — George Mason, 3 Elliot, Debates at 380

Quotes from the George Mason webpage of Walter E. Williams

I along with most conservatives do not like what took place with regard to the AP. We do not like the violation of a Constitutionally protected right because we support all of those rights. It is time for the AP and all other media outlets to get back to doing their jobs.

You can’t cry that your Constitutional right has been violated when you willfully ignore your responsibilities under that right.

Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.

Tags: ap, first amendment, government tyranny, Second Amendment