Now that’s Awesome!

Son, don’t go pointing guns at people unless you mean it!

Do you want fries with that gunshot wound to the leg?

That is what one Arkansas would-be robber may have been asked, as the Burger King worker he allegedly tried to holdup Monday grabbed the gun and fired it right back at him.

Good for the store clerk, may she get exactly what she wants for Christmas this year. A note to her boyfriend if she has one, she’s a keeper!

New Jersey Senator loves criminal safe zones

Senator Lautenberg feels that it is better to expand the areas of an airport so murderers can work unhindered law abiding citizens cannot protect themselves.

“In the post-9/11 world, it simply defies common sense that it would be legal to carry a gun into an airport,” he said in a statement. “Our airports face threats every day and allowing someone to walk into a major airport with a loaded gun is a recipe for disaster. My legislation will ban guns in airports and make air travel more safe and secure.”

Already you cannot carry a firearm on a plane legally. What is changing is that when your family comes to pick you up from the airport they cannot be armed. Your husband or wife will have to leave their self-defense tools in the vehicle, to possibly be stolen, instead of carrying them with. Your family is just meeting you at the baggage claim and then walking back to the car, they’re not going anywhere near the “secured area”. Why would you need a gun though, all those security guards inside make it perfectly safe. Sure you feel safe inside, but what about all those people outside. They know you’re unarmed so instead the thug can wait to rob you in the garage where there are no security guards. Way to go genius!

Also, I love the use of the 9/11 crutch. I’m surprised I don’t hear more Pearl Harbor crutches currently to support internment of the Japanese. But we can totally trust the government. I would also like to point out the Democrat hero FDR interred the Japanese. Still trust those democrats?

An inanimate object did what?

So I came across this online tonight, “A gun took his son, now Rock Hill dad puzzled by NRA rally.” I fail to understand how the gun magically pointed itself at your son, pulled its own trigger, and then hopped in the car and drove off.

In 1998, Krenn’s 16-year-old son, Erik, was dropping off a buddy on Rock Hill’s South Jones Avenue when four guys carjacked Erik.

Oh wait, it was four individuals that car-jacked your son Erik, pointed the firearm at your son, and then pulled the trigger. These four individuals had no respect for the law then, what makes you think that banning firearms from the hands of law abiding citizens is going to change anything.

Reading the article though, we can tell there is absolutely zero bias and this was in no way written by a bigot.

Erik was shot with a Saturday Night Special handgun, and died. Among them, the four scoundrels got 120 years in prison.

Oh wait, Saturday Night Special, that’s the term coined by politicians to prevent poor blacks from being able to buy firearms for self defense from the Klan in the south. But that statement isn’t bigoted at all.

Not hunting guns, or sportsmen’s guns – Krenn isn’t worried about people deer hunting – but handguns and assault rifles.

So he’s just concerned about people being able to defend themselves and a class of rifles whose definition changes on the whim of politicians. Assault weapons bans actually focus on banning safety features. A pistol grip, a collapsible stock, and a barrel shroud all serve to aid in usability, prevent injury, and tailor the rifle to the operator.

The loss of his son hurts; however blaming that on inanimate objects is not the solution and will not help his grief. The men who committed that atrocious crime are responsible, not the gun. One final question, if defensive firearms are banned, how would one defend themselves from an armed criminal? The police obviously did not save your son, so you cannot expect us to believe that lie. Response is measured in minutes, combat takes seconds. You sir want to rob law abiding citizens of their ability to save their own lives. This woman would be dead if you had your way. This woman would still have her husband if it was not for bigots like yourself.

My suggestion is to seek some grief counseling and seek treatment for your Hoplophobia. Attacking law abiding citizens and forcing them to end up victims like your son serves no purpose. If I had a son who ended up a victim because of your bigotry I would have every reason to be angry because he was robbed of the liberty of self-defense. Your son was the victim of criminals, not an inanimate object.

-B

Qotd – Jeff Snyder May 13, 2010

As the Founding Fathers knew well, a government that does not trust its honest, law-abiding, taxpaying citizens with the means of self-defense is not itself worthy of trust. Laws disarming honest citizens proclaim that the government is the master, not the servant, of the people. — Jeff Snyder

[After writing the previous post, I felt this as fitting quote. –B]

Well that’s no surprise

Obama claims to support second amendment rights, and states his administration has no position on gun control. Yet all of us who actually have a brain find this to be no surprise. Instead of destroying the second amendment over night, he’s just going to do it over 30 years.

B

Duly qualified eh?

So the city of Harvey Illinois, a suburb of Chicago had 21 guns stolen. It is a suburb of the same Chicago that some politicians claimed recently the National Guard was needed to bring the murder rate under control.

Let me get this straight, the bigots claim that civilians are too irresponsible and are not capable of safely handling and storing a firearm, yet the bastion example of Law Enforcement for a single municipality looses 21 by themselves. Lest the fact that the ATF has lost firearms that were then later used to commit crimes. Though I am beginning to see a pattern emerge from behavior of those determined to be “duly qualified” to carry and handle firearms.

The scariest line from the article was this:

At 4:15 p.m., Harvey spokesman Sandra Alvarado said, “after some really awesome investigating this afternoon, many of the stolen weapons were recovered, along with many other items that were stolen out of the gun range.”

Followed by:

Alvarado could not say where the guns were recovered – or if anyone has been arrested. Or how many guns are still missing.

This confirms the suspicions created by the first line. The public has no idea how many weapons are still unaccounted for, and the most depressing thing is that they will probably be used to commit a crime against a law abiding citizen who paid for those weapons through taxes. That citizen will be deprived of life and/or property by a criminal because his government deprived them of the liberty of self-defense. Self defense is a Devine right that cannot be restricted or limited by the laws of man yet for some reason some men think ill of that right and demand it be restricted. It is restricted by the same group of individuals that are inadvertently arming the criminals, it is not irony, it is idiocy.

Quote Of the Day May 11, 2010

“The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.” — H. L. Mencken

[Somehow after the attempted bombing in Times Square the idea that the rights of law abiding citizens needed to be further restricted for our own safety is by no means a coincidence. Our would-be masters know the above and adhere to the policy, “Let no good crisis go wasted.” I am ashamed that Michael Bloomberg is an Eagle Scout, obviously he learned nothing from that trail. –B]

“Green Economy”

So I was searching around catching up on recent events and stumbled across an article from The University of Washington. Evidently the college Republicans and Democrats had their debate recently.

I was skimming through the article, it had the standard boiler plate arguments about “cap and trade” and concealed carry on campus. What caused the sudden in-depth review of the article is the following line:

‘”A green economy doesn’t have to be a successful one,” Rigsby said’

Did you just say what I think you said? We need to legally mandate an economy that will be unsuccessful. Obviously you’re a little short of brain cells. If our economy stops being successful everything is going to come to a crashing halt. Here’s a question, if the economy structure is going to be unsuccessful, why will anyone invest money in it, including China which is paying for the bailout and Obama-Care? This includes both private and government investors. The goal is to make money; if something is uneconomically viable something has to change. You can NOT legislate that change, though you can try to provide incentives.

I just find the above statement as the prime example why I think government should be extremely limited. Often those in power are not faced with the immediate and harsh consequences of their decisions. What’s worse is when their idea fails; they insist that the failure is the result of some outside influence that needs to be fixed.

A prime example of this is the gun-control debate. Chicago has one of the highest homicide rates in the country as well as the most strict gun control measures. The problem according to Daley and the bigots though is not that gun-control doesn’t work; it is that guns are brought from the outside. Now the powers that be would like to bring in the National Guard to help fight the crime wave. Evidently Chicago’s finest is not enough and they think that deploying the soldiers will somehow curb crime.

Here is a solid lesson in how things work. Police are there to enforce the laws and punish those who break the law. Note I did not say prevent. It is the duty of the civilian population to prevent crime. This is done by making the criminal environment an unsafe one. Why is Chicago’s homicide rate so high? It is because the environment for criminals is safe. A law abiding citizen cannot protect themselves without breaking the law themselves.

Gun control doesn’t have to be successful about controlling crime, just in controlling the slaves.