Aurora Shooter Did Not Get The Memo

An Occupy anarchist named James Holmes busted into a theater in Aurora Colorado during a midnight screening of the new Batman movie and shot dozens of people. When he was done there were 12 dead and many more wounded. Among the dead are young children.

As with any mass murder involving a firearm the left wing went into hyper drive in an effort to blame right wing talk and to ban guns. Twitter was all atwitter as left wing moonbats blamed Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, the right wing and talk radio while politicians stumbled all over themselves to declare we need more gun control.

The shooter turned out to be an occupy anarchist type who is a registered Democrat and who reportedly voted for Obama. Does this mean that Obama and the left wing are responsible for what happened?

Of course not. There is only one person responsible for this, and that would be the shooter.

Unless, of course, we find out that Eric Holder and Barack Obama supplied him with guns ala Fast and Furious so that they could push forward with their gun ban agenda.

But I digress.

I want to know how this could have happened. The movie theater was a gun free zone which means even though Colorado citizens are issued concealed carry permits they are not allowed to carry those firearms in that theater. Cinemark Holdings does not allow firearms in its theaters so no guns are allowed.

So I must ask; how did the shooter get a gun into the theater? The rules are pretty clear, no firearms and yet Holmes was able to enter with firearms.

Oh, that’s right, he ignored the rules. This is why all the calls for more gun control are way off base. The people who will do these kinds of things will not obey the rules. If gun control worked then Chicago would not have hundreds of murders by firearms. That city has twice as many as Phoenix and people in Phoenix are free to carry firearms (and it is my understanding they don’t need a permit from the government to do so).

If one person in the theater had a firearm the outcome might have been different. I know that we cannot tell what might have been but at least there would have been a fighting chance.

People like Nancy Pelosi will tell you that if another person had a gun it would have resulted in a shootout and more people would have been injured. Let me translate that for you:

A good guy with a gun is a danger so when a bad guy shoots you should just die in a bloodbath because otherwise others might get hurt too.

Ask any person who survived that ordeal and I bet you will hear that they would rather have had a fighting chance. They would have been happy if someone would have shot at the bad guy. It beats getting shot like sitting ducks.

I wonder what advice Pelosi would give to people who might get raped…

If more people with guns would end in a shootout and more people would be hurt then Nancy thinks, by extension, that you should accept your fate and get murdered. With this in mind perhaps we need to end the Secret Service or police protection for Pelosi and Obama and all the others who think they are more important than the rest of us.

If some shooter pops up and the hundreds of armed guards that protect these people respond there will be a bloodbath and more people will get hurt or killed. It is best to disarm the guards and if a shooter pops up the politicians will just have to hope for the best.

It is always easy for those who are surrounded by armed guards to tell the rest of us how safe we are and what we need for protection.

Our Founders ensured the Second Amendment was in place so that the right OF THE PEOPLE to keep and bear arms would not be infringed.

The incident in Aurora demonstrates that we need more armed citizens and not fewer. The rules there were clear, no guns, and yet guns were used to cause death and destruction.

No gun ban, no law, no method of infringing including the complete ban on all guns would ever stop this kind of thing from happening.

Bad people will always get what they want because they do not care about the law.

If laws banning things actually worked there would be no cocaine or heroin users in this country.

It is time to stop the nonsense of trying to ban guns and trying to blame every act of violence on the right.

As an afterthought, how many DUIs are there in this country each year (whether they result in death or not)? Do politicians try to ban driver’s licenses or alcohol because of the DUIs?

Then why ban guns because of murder? As far as I know murder is against the law. In other words, murder is banned in this country and yet people still murder.

I read somewhere this weekend that after an incident like the one in Aurora they always want to take guns away from the people who had nothing to do with it.

That is true because gun control is not about guns it is about control. The government wants to control the people and it can do so much more easily by taking away their arms.

Incidents like the Aurora shootings are just a means to accomplish the goal of total control. It is a convenient excuse for the left and keeps them from having to commit crimes to get what they want.

The shootings are not a tragedy they were mass murder and my thoughts and prayers are with the families of the victims. They deserved better than to be the victims of a senseless act by a deranged person.

And they deserved to be in a safe environment instead of a free fire zone of a no guns theater. Perhaps people should avoid businesses that do not allow citizens to exercise their right to carry a firearm.

[note]Signs at businesses where firearms are not allowed should read “No Firearms on Premises (Except Criminals)”.[/note]

Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Big Dog

Gunline

The Obama Dilemma

Barack Hussein Obama (mmm, mmm, mmm) is an anti gun liberal/progressive/Socialist. He does not like guns and, like any typical liberal, he does not think anyone should be allowed to own them. He claims to believe that the Second Amendment is an individual right but that government can constrain that right (it is obvious that some regulation is due but Obama’s idea of constrain is to ban). Obama is on record as supporting state legislation to ban the manufacture, sale, and possession of handguns.

There is no denying that fact because he wrote it on a survey (and yes, he was the one who filled it out).

Obama has been an opponent of the Second Amendment throughout his life. His political career is a testament to the gun grabbers of the left and if he had his way he would ban guns, period.

If he gets reelected he will have “more flexibility” to enact all kinds of bans and work on all kinds of legislative tricks to restrict our rights.

Remember, liberals love to have armed guards around them and they love to be protected but they do not believe that the rest of us (the ones paying for their armed guards) should enjoy the same protection.

Obama has a dilemma on his hands. There has been a 66% increase in gun sales since Obama took office. The upsurge in gun sales has increased by 12 BILLION dollars and accounted for a 30% increase in jobs (98,750) last year. 1

It also led to $2.5 BILLION in federal taxes. 1

If Obama had been able to ban guns in his first term there would have been an even more dismal economy and the jobs reports would be worse than it is.

Obama is not worried about the economy except where it will affect his chances for reelection. He wants the economy to tank so the government can take complete control of everything.

It is ironic that the very thing that Obama hates would provide a boost to the economy and that he would benefit from it.

It is also important to note that Obama will not give up his dream of an unarmed population (which would be a slave population). If he is reelected he will try to ban guns and our government could well try to follow the British or Australian model of disarming citizens (neither of which has solved illegal gun crimes).

There is a reason that so many more people are buying guns. I don’t think it is so that they can just give them up based on the whim of a Socialist who desires to be the Dear Leader of our nation.

The vote in November is very important to the Republic. We have an opportunity to correct a mistake and get back to being a great nation.

In November we have the opportunity to see the end of an error…

1 The Washington Times

Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Big Dog

Gunline

When Is It OK To Be A Rape Victim?

In 1990 Republican Clayton “Claytie” Williams of Texas made a joke involving rape by comparing it to the weather:

As long as it’s inevitable, you might as well lie back and enjoy it.

It was distasteful when it was said and people expressed as much when he was defeated in his bid to become Governor of Texas. The words came back to life in 2008 when Williams hosted an event for John McCain. The left, well known for selective outrage, wondered if McCain would return campaign donations associated with Williams. The association game the left played had already forced McCain to cancel his attendance at a fundraiser held at Williams’ home.

Game? The left was so worried about associations that it jumped all over McCain for something that Williams said nearly two decades earlier while ignoring or defending the Obama associations with Jeremiah Wright, Bill Ayers, and a long list of other anti American radicals. Associations only matter when they are the ones Republicans have. Williams told an awful and insensitive joke, Ayers blew up the Pentagon and murdered people. McCain’s association with Williams is the one that garnered opposition from the left.

The Democratic Underground commented on the issue at the time.

Even though the joke by Williams was distasteful he only expressed the feelings of liberals when it comes to people protecting themselves.

In Washington, DC the elected officials were discussing people exercising their Constitutional right to keep and bear arms. The politicians in DC feel that carrying a weapon to protect one’s self only escalates a situation and that the best thing people can do is give criminals what they want and though you might get injured you will heal and your stuff can be replaced.

In other words, they think that if it is inevitable you might as well enjoy it.

I am obviously not a woman but I think that any woman who is faced with being raped should do what every person faced with crime should do. FIGHT. I would rather die fighting for what is right and what belongs to me than to live as a coward who gave in to criminals but this is what liberal politicians want us to do. They are so entrenched in a victim mentality they want us all to be victims.

I am not wired that way and neither are the people I know.

Claytie Williams was wrong on several levels when he made his insensitive remark in 1990.

If the weather is inevitable you prepare for it. If it is going to be hot and sunny you get sunscreen, if it is going to be cold you get a coat and if it is going to rain you carry an umbrella. In other words, you make sure you are prepared for the challenge presented.

The same applies to rape or any other crime. If you are able to exercise your Constitutional right then you have the ability, or you are prepared, in case someone tries to make you a crime victim. You might hope it does not rain but you carry an umbrella just in case. You pray never to be a crime victim but you carry a gun just in case.

But to a liberal it somehow makes more sense for a woman to be found bound, gagged, throat slit, and raped than for her to be explaining to the police how the dead criminal got a bunch of bullet holes in him.

Maybe if we are not allowed to carry a gun and become a crime victim we should be allowed to exact revenge on the politician who felt it was better for us to be harmed than to defend ourselves.

Better yet. what say we forbid any politician who thinks this way from buying a gun or obtaining a permit to carry one and we remove that politician’s protective detail. We can include Obama and we can remove the police at the Capitol who screen people entering the building.

I mean, wouldn’t it be better if these politicians just surrendered to any criminal rather than drawing a weapon or having the police draw weapons?

That might escalate the situation.

This is one of the many reasons liberalism/progressivism is a mental disorder.

Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Big Dog

Gunline

Pelosi Says What The Rest Think

Nancy Pelosi let slip her feelings about unions in the private sector and her slip reveals a person who wants total government control. It reveals a person who wants a government that knows no bounds and a government that completely controls out lives. We already know this about the liberal/progressive/Socialist bunch infesting government at all levels from the courts, to the Capitol to the White House. Now Pelosi has put into words how far she will go for complete government control.

Heritage finds a nice catch in this CNBC interview with Nancy Pelosi last week, as Maria Bartiromo queries Barack Obama’s favorite House Speaker on the role of government in business expansion. Should agencies like the NLRB have the authority to shut down private-sector plants simply for not being unionized? Pelosi barely waits for the question to conclude before blurting out her “yes” Conservative Byte

Pelosi thinks a government agency should be able to shut down a private business for not being unionized. This is the mindset of those who want total government control. If there are no unions we will shut you down until you get one. If you don’t want to purchase healthcare we will force you to under threat of a penalty.

Yes, they encroach even more into our lives each and every day and they do so because we do not stand up to them.

Someone remind Pelosi that she and the government have no control over this and that our Second Amendment provides us a means to fight tyranny no matter how it manifests.

Our Founders would be shooting by now.

Ladies and gentlemen, if you do not fight for your freedom then your own government will take it away.

Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Big Dog

Gunline

Robber Probably Forgot He Was Not In Maryland

A Maryland man has been shot and killed at a convenience store in Indiana. Evidently, Terry Wilson of Baltimore tried to rob the store at gunpoint when the clerk pulled a gun and shot him to death.

Wilson is from Maryland where criminal prey on the law abiding because the law abiding are not allowed to carry guns. The state and its moron governor, Martin O’Malley, will tell you they have a process to allow one to carry but that process infringes on law abiding citizens and violates the Second Amendment. You must show a reason why the state should allow you to exercise your right. According to the politicians there is no real need to carry but it is often difficult to see how dangerous things are when one is surrounded by armed police officers. O’Malley has an armed protection detail. He thinks he is more important than the people for whom he works.

In many other states law abiding citizens can carry a concealed weapon (usually red states) and crime rates are lower. Wilson probably forgot that he was not in the killing fields of Maryland when he decided to rob that store. Besides a bullet, I wonder what the last thing that went through his mind was. Toto, we are not in Maryland anymore…

If that had taken place in Maryland and the clerk pulled a gun and shot the felon the state would arrest the clerk for murder. Only felons are allowed to carry guns in Maryland.

I imagine that if several robbers were killed in such attempts in Maryland there would be fewer and fewer robberies. That won’t happen because Maryland seems to like being at the top of the crime stats list.

The morons in elected office from the Teflon Leprechaun governor to the legislators in Annapolis have no clue because they do not believe in individual liberty and in following the Constitution.

They believe in state control of the people and hell, as long as they can live in their gated communities or have armed guards, why should they actually care about the crime?

That is why we are the People’s Republik of Maryland.

Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Big Dog

Gunline

[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]