Quote of the Day – Russ (3/4/2013)

Politicians who don’t trust law-abiding citizens to own guns do NOT see them as equal members of a democratic republic. To put it bluntly, they see them as serfs. Or children who need to be protected from themselves. And that sort of attitude will NEVER get you the nomination from a Republican Party that wants to keep Conservatives inside the Big Tent. NEVER. The way he treats the voters of New Jersey is the way he will treat the voters of America. Take it to the bank. The Second Amendment is not just one amendment in the Bill of Rights: It’s the Founders’ message to the citizens of America – “We Trust You”. And if you fold on that amendment? You’ll fold on all the others. Guaranteed.

Russ – Chris Christie Won’t Be At CPAC This Year…and That Doesn’t Bother Me.
March 3rd, 2013

[If we the people elect “you” as our representative don’t trust us with  firearms, well that proves exactly how little we should actually trust “you” doesn’t it?

I consider the Right to Keep and Bear Arms a solid litmus test for the worthiness of an elected representative and how much they trust and respect my rights.  It seems some though don’t see the connection. -B]

h/t Sebastian

Quote of the Day – Sebastian (3/1/2013)

Do our opponents still want to continue to operate under the delusion they are fighting the evil gun industry and some faceless “gun lobby” rather than millions of their fellow Americans? Do they still want to suggest we’re all the stereotype of the OFWG? Want to continue to pretend all this is manufactured when most of these people are carrying homemade signs?

If yes, I understand. The illusion is important to you. Because the alternative is that you want to take something very important away from millions of people who care deeply and passionately about it, and that, well, kind of makes you a monster, doesn’t it?

SebastianNew York Rally in Pictures

March 1st, 2013

[And we’re not talking about the cute monsters from Monsters Inc.  No, were talking about monsters that look like this bastard here.


Remember one ugly monster who lives in congress considers your rights nothing more than a “unnecessary personal pleasure“.  It’s obvious what they think of you and your rights and what they really are. -B]


SSCC #534 – LAPD

Los Angeles police officers bought and sold guns from the police armory for profit, and told the lieutenant in charge of the armory to “watch his back” after he reported it, the 25-year LAPD veteran claims in court.

So the people of the state of California are screwed and stuck with a bullet button and magazine capacity limits, yet look at the behavior of the police forces.

Remember according to our overlords we should surrender our “unnecessary personal pleasures” for the betterment of the state.  Yeah lady and you should surrender your unnecessary personal pleasure of opening your fat mouth for the betterment of the rights of Americans.

To refer to the right to keep an bear arms as an unnecessary personal pleasure is to trivialize the significance of the right.  Being able to shoot your assailant  stop your rapist, and otherwise defend yourself is an “unnecessary personal pleasure”.  Which in her eyes might be true since the American people probably pay for her own armed security detail.

State Sponsored Criminal #534: LAPD

Because there are the laws for “our betters” and their servants and then there are the laws to enslave the rest of us.

Quote of the Day–John Eastborough (2/19/2013)

Liberal Rape Tips: urinate on yourself to ruin your rapist’s mood. Republican Rape Tips: pull out a Glock and make him piss HIMSELF.

John EastboroughTweet

February 19, 2013

[So in case you missed it yesterday, a Colorado state legislator said the following:

“It’s why we have call boxes, it’s why we have safe zones, it’s why we have the whistles. Because you just don’t know who you’re gonna be shooting at. And you don’t know if you feel like you’re gonna be raped, or if you feel like someone’s been following you around or if you feel like you’re in trouble when you may actually not be, that you pop out that gun and you pop … pop around at somebody.”

Then our boy genius, Joseph Salazar doubled down on stupid by issuing the following “apology”.

“I’m sorry if I offended anyone. That was absolutely not my intention,” Salazar said. “We were having a public policy debate on whether or not guns makes people safer on campus. I don’t believe they do. That was the point I was trying to make. If anyone thinks I’m not sensitive to the dangers women face, they’re wrong.

“I am a husband and father of two beautiful girls, and I’ve spent the last decade defending women’s rights as a civil rights attorney. Again, I’m deeply sorry if I offended anyone with my comments.”

Emphasis mine.

Mr. Salazar, you state that you’re a defender of women’s rights yet you are arguing for their disarmament as well as the removal of their right to choose their method of self-defense.  Yes Mr. Salazar I get angry when hypocrites like you spout their lies and attempt to trample the rights of the innocent.

You argue that we should make safe zones, because you know gun-free and drug free zones have worked so well.  Your call boxes and whistles are merely methods to call for help.  When you call for someone else to come help you, mainly the police, what are you doing?  You are calling for someone else to bring their gun.  Tell me Mr. Salazar, why not cut the response time from minutes to mere seconds?

Is it that you like rapists and thieves and want to see them work in a safer environment?  Do you dislike the idea of a woman being independent and self-reliant?

Mr. Salazar, you argue that women are more likely to shoot someone who isn’t a threat to them, can you present actual factual documented evidence of that your assumption has happened?  Not only that it has happened though, but with such a frequency as to out weight the number of women who have lawfully defended themselves from an aggressor.  Or is this merely a similar claim to the argument that there will be blood in the streets over parking spaces if citizens are allowed to carry concealed weapons?

The fact is Mr. Salazar you honestly hate women and the law-abiding public.  You would rather they be easy disarmed prey for your criminal friends.  The thought of a rapist eating lead at the hands of their intended victim upsets you and that Mr. Salazar tells me all I need to know about your character, more specifically your lack there of.

If Mr. Salazar is your representative, I highly suggest you let him know* how you feel. –B ]

*You can also call him at 303-866-2918.

Well Said Sir!

This is by far one of the best speeches I’ve seen directed towards the petty tyrants attacking our rights.

Good to see I’m not alone in getting angry for much the same reasons, and honestly has more of a reason than anyone else to be angry.

And yes, I was grinning as he called those representatives tyrants.

Along the same lines we need more people in politics like this mayor.  If you haven’t seen this video, I suggest watching it to the end.

I like how the mayor called out the two petty tyrants at the end.  Hopefully that ass who walked out is recalled from office.

Quote of the Day – Marshall K. Robinson (02/05/2013)

In your infinite wisdom, you outlawed bayonet lugs, flash hiders, and collapsible stocks. In over forty years of being a firearm and tool mark examiner, I have never seen these components inflict any injury whatsoever on any person. In your infinite wisdom, you outlawed fully automatic firearms that have the capability of firing a single shot. Ladies and gentlemen, I really need help with that one.

(Emphasis mine.)
Marshall K. RobinsonPublic Testimony
January 2013

[I’m glad to know I’m not the only one who is baffled and confused by the actions of our elected representatives.  There is a large group of people who are completely uneducated regarding firearms and this includes the people attempting to legislate our rights away.

The powers that be currently even admit that the new laws would do nothing to prevent tragedies like Sandy Hook, yet here they continue to push their falsehoods and lies.  Why?  I think this nailed it on the head. -B]

Your Friday Afternoon Laugh

Not sure why, but this just struck a chord with me.

Also Bitter has an interesting note regarding our opponents and their refusal to believe how united our side of the fight is.  There’s a post I want to do regarding the ESOS incident and just haven’t had a chance to write it up yet.  Not to mention I have a couple other ideas rumbling around for posts yet but keep getting distracted.

Keep up the fight folks, we’re not out of the woods yet, not even close.  To those paying attention though, our resolve is more than they expected to see.

Quote of the Day – Jennifer (1/25/2013)

There is one thing and one thing only that has proven time and time again to stop someone bent on violence. A gun. And I promise you that no amount of gun control legislation will ever eliminate them, it will just change who has access to them.  The thing you need in that moment where the law has already failed you, will only be accessible to criminals and representatives of the government (some overlap). Or do you really believe the criminals will just turn them in? Even if they did, that doesn’t really offer me a whole lot of comfort if I am staring down a 266lb criminal (the observant among you have already noticed that is twice my weight; a big guy, but not freakishly so). My husband is nowhere near that size, but he could easily overpower me physically.

JenniferIn Is Not Gun Control; It Is Citizen Disarmament
January 24, 2013

[And that folks is the meat and potatoes of this debate. Criminals don’t obey the laws, and in a just world we wouldn’t even need laws. But we live in reality. The reality is that the laws work to constrain those who are good, while benefiting criminals who don’t care about the law as it is.

Anyone who cannot seem to understand this basic fact is disregarding how the law works.  They wish to do nothing more than criminalize those with opinions they disagree with.  They wish to criminalize those who would willingly defend themselves as others would wish to criminalize gay marriage or criminalize interracial couples.

Criminalizing those who have no ill intent towards society serves no purpose other than to quell dissent and remove those from society that you would disagree with.

And that my friends is their end game, even if it means sending us to camps in box cars, those who would take our arms have no problem doing that if that’s what it takes. -B]