Category: Gun Grabbing Fascists

  • Drama Queens not welcomed in the gun discussion

    Some old turd in DesMoines who should have stayed in retirement instead of thinking that the world needed his idiot opinion on control, named Donald Kaul penned this in the DesMoines Register (sent to us by ROS). He’s upset that everytime he wrote something about gun control, weapons sales went up, so in his purely emotional diatribe, he tells us what the cure should be;

    • Repeal the Second Amendment, the part about guns anyway. It’s badly written, confusing and more trouble than it’s worth. It offers an absolute right to gun ownership, but it puts it in the context of the need for a “well-regulated militia.” We don’t make our militia bring their own guns to battles. And surely the Founders couldn’t have envisioned weapons like those used in the Newtown shooting when they guaranteed gun rights. Owning a gun should be a privilege, not a right.

    Yeah, that’s not emotional in the least. Do you really want the current crop of politicians tinkering with any part of the Constitution, whether it’s the parts you disagree with or not. The Bill of Rights was written to protect the minority of voters from the majority of voters, so do you want to start fiddling with the parts you don’t like, so that I get a chance to get that “right to abortion” thing you found taken out?

    • Declare the NRA a terrorist organization and make membership illegal. Hey! We did it to the Communist Party, and the NRA has led to the deaths of more of us than American Commies ever did. (I would also raze the organization’s headquarters, clear the rubble and salt the earth, but that’s optional.) Make ownership of unlicensed assault rifles a felony. If some people refused to give up their guns, that “prying the guns from their cold, dead hands” thing works for me.

    According to the Black Book of Communism, 100,000,000 people died from Communism. Many leftists doubt the scholarship of that book, but if you look at books they do except, you can find instances of kulaks being shot for hiding a crust of bread beneath floorboards of their hovels. it sounds like Kaul wants to bring back Stalinism and instead of targeting kulaks, he wants to treat legal, law abiding gun owners like Stalin treated his own countrymen. That’s not emotional at all.

    • Then I would tie Mitch McConnell and John Boehner, our esteemed Republican leaders, to the back of a Chevy pickup truck and drag them around a parking lot until they saw the light on gun control.

    Yeah, that’s completely rational. How about someone drag Kaul behind a pickup until he loses that Stalinist bent of his. After a diatribe like that, I hope the police are checking Kaul’s home for guns, because he doesn’t seem to be grasping reality all that firmly.

  • How to lose the gun control “conversation”

    bullets1

    Whenever I read an article from the traditional media about guns and gun control, I think of the picture above. This Iraqi woman told reporters that she dug those bullets out of her bed where she was sleeping during a raid nearby and those rounds were strays. Except that anyone who has fired a rifle knows that the casing would not be not attached to the actual bullet if it had been fired.

    So, we know that even though those reporters who took the picture were in Iraq, they’d never seen an expended shell casing, and neither had their editors. Yet, they think they have a legitimate voice in the gun control debate…er…I mean…national discussion.

    If you only look at the recent events and the recent reporting on those events that have spurred this, um, national discussion, it’s easy to see that this isn’t really a discussion at all. We’re being set up.

    The day of the Newtown massacre, reporting was as sketchy and discombobulated as any reporting we’ve ever seen. At first, there were two shooters, and then it was paired down to one and we had the wrong name…they gave his brother’s name. And then there was another suspect arrested nearby, who suddenly turned to dust before our eyes.

    Then “state and federal officials” said that the shooter had only used handguns in the school, but that he had a rifle in the trunk of his car. Now we’re hearing that the rifle was his primary weapon. Questions to clarify this important aspect of the crime have gone unanswered.

    And since high capacity magazines are illegal in Connecticut, did Lanza’s mother, the first victim, illegally bring high capacity magazines into the State somehow? Questions that aren’t being asked because the Bushmaster is a semi-automatic weapon which, apparently comes equipped with those bottomless magazines they use in Hollywood.

    Then we get to the ambush of Webster, NY firefighters. The culprit, of course was the Bushmaster rifle which happened to be used by a guy who beat his grandmother to death with a hammer a few decades ago. So the politicians came out screaming that Bushmaster rifles seemed to have mind control powers which forced otherwise perfectly good citizens to shoot up schools and firefighters responding to a fire which was obviously started by the Bushmaster rifle.

    In the Webster, NY case, the Bushmaster rifle also commanded a cute Asian chick [Editor’s Note: all Asian chicks are cute, except Yoko Ono, and we’ll never figure out why John Lennon married the only ugly Asian chick in the history of the world] to purchase the rifle and give it to the guy who had once succumbed to the wiles of an evil hammer. We’ll never know if high capacity magazines were used in that shooting – or if Spengler could have done just as well with a bolt action or lever action rifle – since high capacity magazines are illegal in New York State, we doubt that even a cute Asian chick could have bought them for Spengler.

    Then the media’s own metro-sexual pretty boy, David Gregory shows how easy it is to break gun control laws and flaunt your crime on national TV. While that idiot who doesn’t even live here, Peirs Morgan, demonstrates what “national discussion” really means when he calls guests on his show names instead of giving them a showcase for their views as part of a discussion. Then, when everyone gets mad and petitions for Morgan to be tossed out on his scurvy dog ass, he threatens to leave the country, like that’s not what the petition writers had in mind in the first place.

    By the way Peirs and David, why didn’t either of you mention the shooting on Capitol Hill a few blocks from the People’s House last week in which a man was found shot dead in his car in one of the most highly gun-regulated, highly policed city in the country? That shooting was so important to DC that the mayor is calling for the city counsel to hire more cops as a result, but not a peep from the national media.

    And then some fish wrap in down state New York thinks that giving criminals an interactive map to all of the homes of legitimate gun owners contributes to the “discussion”. They didn’t provide a map to the homes of people who own guns illegally, which would probably be an actual public service, and might require, you know, some actual investigating. But, since all guns are evil, people have a right to know which houses they’ll be shot in if they rob them. So the criminals should go in heavily armed and blasting.

    And, oh, if you’re the President and you want to convince people that you want to have a “national discussion” about guns, make sure you find the biggest boob you can find in your cabinet, the one best known for being a bully and bragging about how smart he is in the media to head that “national discussion”.

    Don’t forget to convince utter morons from the Los Angeles Police Department to pose with inert fiberglass tubes to make everyone think that the NRA is calling for missile launchers in every school and that every street corner in America is occupied by petty criminals about to rob them with RPGs.

    And then send the media out with pretty catch phrases like “high-capacity background checks”. Or something.

  • Obama won’t be “putting off” gun control

    In an interview with the crowd at “Meet the Press” who don’t see a problem with breaking DC gun laws, President Obama will guarantee base Democrat voters that he won’t forsake their agenda, according to the Washington Post;

    Obama, who recently established a task force led by Vice President Biden to offer recommendations for how to best curb gun violence, also pushed back against an idea the National Rifle Association put forth following the mass shooting earlier this month at a school in Newtown, Conn. As gun control advocates called for tighter restrictions, the NRA urged that armed guards be placed in schools to deter and defend against future acts of violence.

    “I am skeptical that the only answer is putting more guns in schools. And I think the vast majority of the American people are skeptical that that somehow is going to solve our problem,” Obama said.

    Obama reiterated his support for a ban on military-style assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition magazines that gun control advocates in Congress have said they will be pushing for.

    So much for the “national conversation” we’re supposed to be having. A “national conversation” actually means for those of us who support the constitutional guarantees, that we should sit down and STFU while they preach to us.

    I’m not exactly comfortable with the idea that Joe Biden will be dictating our policy to us – you know the guy whose robot-ninja-zombies policy in Afghanistan has done such a bang up job. The guy who thought that we should partition Iraq. The guy who opposed the first Gulf War. The guy who has been absolutely wrong on every single policy issue since he went to the Senate. Now he’s going to interpret the Constitution for us.

    So all of you gun owners who didn’t bother to go to the polls last month, I just want to say “thank you”. I’m not sure that Romney would have been much different, but at least he could be bullied. Those of you who think that this can stopped in the House, look at the great job they’ve been doing the last few years holding the line against Obama’s policies. The most we can expect, I suppose, is the spectacle of John Boehner weeping on national TV.

  • Feinstein’s onerous gun ban

    Yup, gun control writ large is coming to the Senate floor, boy-os. Feinstein has published on her website what she intends to present to the Senate come January. She wants to specifically ban 120 weapons and reduce the “military characteristics clause” from the 1994 bill from two to one – in other words just having a bayonet lug, flash suppressor or pistol grip by themselves will get a gun banned. And she’s including “thumbhole stocks” for the first time.

    Handguns are included in the ban, specifically if they’ll accommodate a magazine larger than ten rounds.

    Think you’re grandfathered? Yep, you are. But;

    Requires that grandfathered weapons be registered under the National Firearms Act, to include:
    o Background check of owner and any transferee;
    o Type and serial number of the firearm;
    o Positive identification, including photograph and fingerprint;
    o Certification from local law enforcement of identity and that
    possession would not violate State or local law; and
    o Dedicated funding for ATF to implement registration

    In other words, they’re coming for your guns – why else register them? And what sheriff wants to sign a piece of paper certifying that you won’t commit a crime at some point in the future? I’m pretty sure that I went through a background check when I purchased my guns. And then again when when I applied for my CCW license. Fingerprint? You mean like a criminal gets fingerprinted? Like that?

    Thanks to Old Trooper for the link.

  • Some updates on David Gregory

    Honestly, I think it’s absurd that David Gregory is being investigated for brandishing what appears to be a 30-round box magazine on the air while he was physically in the District of Columbia, not because of who he is, but rather because the law is stupid. According to Politico, he was warned by the DC police;

    “NBC contacted [the D.C. Metropolitan Police Department] inquiring if they could utilize a high capacity magazine for their segment,” Gwendolyn Crump, a police spokeswoman, said in an email. “NBC was informed that possession of a high capacity magazine is not permissible and their request was denied. This matter is currently being investigated.”

    But, I guess Gregory thought that his point was too important and that he is above the law, so yeah, he should be arrested. But the law is stupid. In Maryland, a loaded magazine in a vehicle is considered to be a loaded weapon even if there’s no weapon in a vehicle that can be attached to the magazine. That’s stupid but not as stupid as considering an unloaded magazine to be a loaded weapon.

    Howard Kurtz of the Washington Post, on his own blog, the Daily Download, says that the anti-gun control crowd are out of control and that we should “Free David Gregory”;

    Was it a stunt? Yep, and an eye-catching one. Was Gregory being aggressive with the NRA chief, or seeming to push gun control in a confrontational interview? All that is up for debate.

    But a police probe over what I assume was an empty ammo clip is a total waste of time. What it demonstrates above all is that journalists are getting ensnared in the political war over gun control.

    How about making it a crime for Joe Onthestreet getting arrested for the same thing, Howie? I didn’t see anyone in the media, besides Emily Miller at the the Washington Times, sticking up for the soldier who was transporting his weapons through the District in a perfectly legal manner.

    Kurtz goes on to defend Piers Morgan, that idiot on CNN who thinks Americans still want to be ruled by England’s crown.

    Even more absurd than a criminal inquiry into David Gregory is an effort by pro-gun enthusiasts to kick Piers Morgan out of the country. His crime? Carrying on a passionate crusade for gun control.

    What’s more absurd is that gun control morons made rifles illegal to purchase because they have flash suppressors, bayonet lugs and pistol grips because they look scary – none of those things make the weapon more dangerous or more deadly.

    In fact, I’d submit that the gun control crowd have been consistently more absurd about their agenda than the pro-gun folks have been in recent weeks. And the gun control crowd have been more persistent, for a very long time, to the point of being completely obnoxious about it.

    The real problem is that law enforcement folks are reluctant to enforce the laws, because enough gun laws have been written so that legitimate and law abiding citizens can keep their guns and criminals can’t. So, yeah, I don’t think that Gregory should be arrested and charged, but only because the idiot laws written by Leftist gun grabbing fascists has gone too far, but as long as he broke the law, he should pay for it, however DC courts think he should.

    And if Howard Kurtz doesn’t like that Gregory was arrested, he should work to change the law instead of blaming folks who had nothing to do with writing the law.

  • Committment, and the Blood of Innocents

    A bit over a week ago, a guy named Adam Lanza snapped.  He went full-blown batshit crazy, murdered his own mother, then stole her guns and used them to commit mass murder of innocents.  He then killed himself.

    Ever since, the “liberals” and “progressives” have been virtually falling over each other to be seen advocating more gun laws.  How dare Lanza’s mother have owned those “evil” guns!   Those guns were to blame for this tragedy!  And in true “never let a crisis go to waste” spirit, we’re already hearing rumblings about more Federal legislation to restrict exercise of rights guaranteed by the 2nd Amendment vice any actual discussion of what happened.

    Let me offer a theory to explain this.  They’re following the playbook.  In part, this is a deliberate attempt to change the subject and divert attention from the actual cause of the Sandy Hook massacre.

    In fact, the political left is directly responsible for the massacre at Sandy Hook – not law-abiding gun owners or morally-neutral things called guns.  I’ll explain why.

    By all accounts Adam Lanza was a profoundly mentally disturbed youngster.  While he allegedly had been determined to have Asperger’s syndrome, very obviously that wasn’t all that was wrong with Lanza.  His actions prove that quite clearly.

    Lanza’s mental health issues appear to have become more pronounced as he got older.  In fact, Lanza was so profoundly disturbed that his own mother – who’d consistently supported and protected her son, pulling  him out of school and home-schooling him when his issues started to become severe – was apparently at her wit’s end.  She was reportedly in the process of attempting to have her son institutionalized at the time her son murdered her.  Indeed, her attempt to have Adam Lanza committed is thought by some to have been the trigger for his rampage.

    Now, here’s something you won’t see much of in the media.  Under Connecticut law, Lanza’s mother had little to no chance of getting him involuntarily committed.  It seems Connecticut law in general only allows people to be involuntarily committed after they have harmed themselves or others.  Before they hurt someone?  In general, you can file that under “Not Gonna Happen”.

    That’s bad enough, but it gets even “better”.  It also seems that Connecticut considered a change to its laws earlier this year that would have allowed Lanza to have been involuntarily committed.  However, the proposed law did not pass the Connecticut legislature.  It was defeated.

    Connecticut is quite liberal.  It is today one of the bluest of the Blue states.  The Democratic Party rules there with an iron grip.  It currently has in excess of a 60% majority in each house of the Connecticut General Assembly:  22 of 36 seats in the Connecticut Senate, and 99 of 151 seats in the House.  The current Governor is also a Democrat.  Clearly, laws in Connecticut pass or fail as the Connecticut Democratic Party desires.

    I’m not a fan of making it easy to involuntarily commit a person to a mental institution.  That’s an extreme step; it should be rare, and should always be the option of last resort. So long as a person isn’t a danger to themselves or others, and is capable of caring for themselves, more power to them – whether we consider them crazy or not.

    But society does have the right to protect itself.  Some people are simply full-blown batshit crazy and are also dangers to themselves and others.  There should be a legal mechanism – one having  appropriate legal due process and other safeguards – to allow dangerous lunatics to be removed from society before they injure or kill themselves or others.

    One doesn’t need to wait for the car to roll over the cliff before hitting the brakes.  By then, it’s too to save the driver – or the folks at the bottom of the cliff who get hit.

    In practice, such a mechanism does not exist in Connecticut today.  The Democratically-controlled Connecticut legislature had the chance to institute such a measure earlier this year – and refused.

    Viewed in this context, it’s easy to see why the liberal side of the political spectrum is beating the gun control drum so hard.  IMO at least part of the reason is that they’re doing so to distract attention from the fact that the blood of innocents is on their hands.  They’re simply trying to shift that blame to someone else.

    They could have acted to take Adam Lanza off the street earlier this year. And they consciously decided to let that remain impossible, consequences be damned.

    So if you want to see who’s truly responsible for the murdered innocents at Sandy Hook, my liberal “brethren” – just look in a mirror.  You’re the ones who decided that letting lunatics live free among you – danger to others be damned – was more important than the lives of innocents.

  • They just don’t see it

    Washington Post reports that “Chicago grapples with gun violence; murder toll soars” without looking at the real and obvious problem in Chicago;

    Since Jan. 1, Chicago police have recorded 2,364 shooting incidents and 487 homicides, 87 percent of them gun-related. Shootings have increased 12 percent this year and murders are up 19 percent.

    Young people are often targets. In the school year that ended in June, 319 Chicago public school students were shot, 24 of them fatally. The total does not include school-age children who had dropped out or were enrolled elsewhere.

    In the wake of the Newtown school shootings, as the nation talks anew of guns and the laws that regulate them, President Obama’s adopted home town of Chicago is struggling to retake its most violent neighborhoods from the gunmen who shoot with impunity.

    Chicago has the toughest gun laws in the country and yet gun crime filters through the legal barriers to the streets. Handguns were outlawed in the nation’s capitol in 1974, yet 2,000 guns are gathered up by cops there every year since.

    The article continues to run through the gun crime statistics of large American cities, failing to mention that guns are largely more regulated in those cities than they are in the rest of the country. No one commits gun crimes in West Virginia or Vermont because criminals don’t know when, in these states, they might run into someone else legally carrying a gun. That’s not a problem in Chicago, New York or Washington, DC.

    One puzzle is that gun violence has remained high in Chicago while the incidence of other crimes has fallen.

    Puzzle? Really? It’s only a puzzle if you’re doing your level best to avoid an actual workable solution and unable to admit that you’ve been wrong for the last 30 years.

  • Loughner judge wants gun/magazine confiscation

    Gabriel sends us a link to an Associated Press article in which the judge for the Jared Loughner trial, U.S. District Judge Larry Burns, writes in the Los Angeles Times that he supports confiscation of semi-automatic rifles and high capacity magazines;

    So what’s the alternative? Bring back the assault weapons ban, and bring it back with some teeth this time. Ban the manufacture, importation, sale, transfer and possession of both assault weapons and high-capacity magazines. Don’t let people who already have them keep them. Don’t let ones that have already been manufactured stay on the market. I don’t care whether it’s called gun control or a gun ban. I’m for it.

    I say all of this as a gun owner. I say it as a conservative who was appointed to the federal bench by a Republican president. I say it as someone who prefers Fox News to MSNBC, and National Review Online to the Daily Kos. I say it as someone who thinks the Supreme Court got it right in District of Columbia vs. Heller, when it held that the 2nd Amendment gives us the right to possess guns for self-defense. (That’s why I have mine.) I say it as someone who, generally speaking, is not a big fan of the regulatory state.

    Blah, blah, blah. I’m not a big fan of regulations…well….except one that ignores the bill of rights. Does the judge relish the idea of making criminals out of people who’ve never broke a law in their life until his wish list of gun control measures take effect? Hiding behind Republican credentials doesn’t make him right, either.

    Some generous fellow offered me a “grandfather clause” for my weapons and magazines because I’ve been a good boy for the years since 1984 when I bought my assault rifle – as if my beliefs aren’t a principle and I can be placated because I’m just that selfish.

    It’s become vogue in the anti-gun reactionary thugs crowd to call us cowards for clinging to our guns, but people like this judge are the real cowards, wetting their pants and wringing their hands over law abiding citizens with guns – citizens who haven’t committed crimes and have no intention to commit crimes with their guns. Well, until you make the guns illegal, that is.

    Some of us have a need for weapons like the ones that the diaper-wearing crowd wants to ban. Prove I don’t.