Category Archives: gun grabbers

Never had any doubt

“You’re paranoid.”

“The government isn’t after your guns.”

“Nobody wants to confiscate your guns.”

“Registration doesn’t lead to confiscation.”

How many times have we heard gun control advocates snottily ridicule us for knowing our own history? For understanding the nature of statism?

“This isn’t Nazi Germany,” they say. “No one is going to disarm you and victimize you.”

“Registration is a safety measure,” they claim. “It’s a crime prevention measure.”

Is it? From Buffalo, NY comes a report that details a plan by the police department in that city to begin confiscating firearms of legal gun owners after their deaths.

Buffalo Police Commissioner Daniel Derrenda said at a press conference last week that the department will be sending people to collect guns that belong to pistol permit holders who had died so “they don’t end up in the wrong hands.” The department will cross reference pistol permit holders with death records and the guns will be collected when possible, he said.

Derrenda said guns pose a threat if their owner is no longer alive to safeguard them, especially if a recently-deceased gun owner’s home is burglarized.

[…]

The state law says that if the permit holder dies, the estate has 15 days to dispose of the guns or turn them in to authorities, who can hold the weapons up to two years. LoHud.com reported that violation of the law by survivors is a misdemeanor punishable by up to a year in jail and a fine.

So how will the police department find out whether the deceased had a gun? Carry permits? ATF 4473 forms, which licensed firearms dealers have to retain for at least 20 years?

While not “technically” registration, these records give the authorities the tools they need to confiscate firearms – to steal them from the families of the deceased when they are grieving and vulnerable – to violate basic property rights.

And Buffalo isn’t the only place where this odious infringement on basic human rights has happened.

In Connecticut, cowardly politicians rammed through a registration requirement for all firearms they deemed to look scary.  Gun owners resisted, and the majority of what these pusillanimous twits call “assault” weapons remained unregistered.  A few tried to register at the last minute, before the suspense, they wound up in limbo. The state now had their ownership information, and began confiscation proceedings against these gun owners, claiming they illegally held their property.

The state is sending letters to 106 rifle owners and 108 residents with high-capacity magazines saying they can destroy the guns and ammunition, sell them to a federally licensed gun dealer, move the items out of state or sell them to somebody out of state, or make arrangements to turn them over to local or state police.

Those who fail to do so could face serious criminal penalties.

In California, a de facto registration law signed by Jerry Brown in 2011 required the state to retain background-check records of those who purchase guns (although it did not register specific guns to specific people.) And you know what happened? Reason magazine explained in January.

The new law will bolster a program that has generated much controversy. Earlier this month, legislators held hearings on the effectiveness of the Armed Prohibited Persons System, used to confiscate the firearms of California residents who are no longer eligible to own them. The California Department of Justice relies on the current ownership lists to identify gun owners and cross check those with lists of people who have been convicted of crimes or have been involuntarily committed for mental issues.

The state auditor found, in a report released in October, that the department has not sufficiently notified courts and mental-health officials of their reporting requirements. Despite a new $24-million state appropriation, the auditor found that the program has failed to take guns from nearly 21,000 Californians who have forfeited their gun rights.

Not enough for you?

Registration led to confiscation in Australia, and Barack Obama wants to make that nation an example for the United States. (Yes, I know the link is RT – the Kremlin funded propaganda machine – but in this case, it’s actually correct reporting.)

After the 1996 Port Arthur massacre in Australia, its government passed the National Firearms Agreement, banning all semiautomatic rifles and semiautomatic and pump-action shotguns and imposing a more restrictive licensing system on other firearms. They also implemented a mandatory gun “buyback” – also known as confiscation (with perhaps a nominal payment for the owner’s property).

Those who do not remember history are, indeed, doomed to repeat it. That is the warning Canadian news anchor Brian Lilley  gave his American neighbors last year when he emphasized that registration did, in fact, lead to confiscation in Canada.

And in my birthplace – the USSR – firearm registration was introduced in 1918, which led to confiscation of weapons from everyone but… you guessed it… members of the Communist Party, with a stint in jail for anyone who possessed firearms and wasn’t a member. This was how Communists cemented their power over the hated bourgeoisie – those business owners, capitalists, and other undesirables whom they wanted to keep defenseless.

Those of us who grew up in tyrannical holes understand only too well that registering people for exercising their natural rights can only lead to the demise of those rights. Those of us who have studied history understand this as well.

Those who ignorantly seek to treat their fellow Americans like criminals merely for daring to exercise their rights either forgot their history, or are ignoring it.

Those of us who remember history never had any doubt about the end result of registration.

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail

Of fevered dreams and helpless victims

ZelmanPartisans_Groom in the Air_1014

To my non-Jewish eyes, the event above seems like something from long ago and far away. In fact, that’s fellow blogger Y.B. ben Avraham’s newly minted son-in-law balancing precariously on a table being carried by his friends and family. The photo was taken less than a month ago at his wedding in New York City. (Well then; it may not be long ago, but it’s certainly far away, in that land so distant from gun rights.)

Y.B. sent several pictures of the joyous event. But the night they arrived I was in a pensive mood. Instead of feeling the happiness, I worried for the bride and groom and the future they face in a time when Jew-hatred (I’ll never again call it anti-Semitism, thanks to Y.B.’s semantics lesson) is spreading across the globe. In a time when, even in the U.S. “diversity” no longer implies toleration of religious beliefs that happen to deviate from the politically correct. In a time when elitist victim disarmers are feeling new power after their stunning (and stunningly ghastly and stunningly, insultingly duplicitous) election-day victory in Washington state.

—–

Of course I was also aware that even in a time that’s increasingly perilous for them, at least some of the men in that happy photo happily support their own disarmament.

I hope (and expect) that Y.B.’s new son-in-law understands better.

—–

A lot has been written about that ghastly Washington state initiative, that gun-grabbers’ duplicitous dream. Some of it has been said here by Nicki and Vladka and Ilana.

I have only personal impressions — and a dream — to add. Though those wedding celebrants are far away from I-594, my apprehension blended them together.

During my rational waking hours I know that I-594 will never stand as written. It will be challenged in court on numerous grounds. Police will never be able to enforce its completely insane provisions. (If five friends meet at a plinking quarry or go on a hunt together and each brings multiple firearms and they try out each other’s weapons, how will cops catch them, let alone count the number of innocent “felonies” committed on any sunny afternoon?) Whatever prosecutions there may be are likely to be so outrageous that they’ll wake up the v*ters who, in their ignorance, thought they were supporting “common sense gun safety.”

Already Washington state gun owners are planning a mass public non-compliance. Thousands plan to commit harmless felonies outside the state capitol building.

To whatever extent I hold to reason, I do not believe that I-594 will stand — or that the Billionaire Brigade will succeed in passing such a monstrosity on many other states.

—–

But in vulnerable moments — like right before falling asleep or upon waking in the middle of the night — I-594 chills me.

The night I got the happy photos from Y.B., the moment my head hit the pillow I was assailed by dread. I had visions of thousands of unknowing innocents being dragged away from their pleasant days, dragged to jail, dragged before by-the-book judges, dragged into the financial ruin of legal defense, losing their jobs — merely because they handed a gun to a friend or handled a friend’s firearm. I had to sit back up and turn the light on to get past the images.

I slept well — until about 3:45, when I awoke from a dream. All I remember of the dream was its last moments. A train passed by pulling endless numbers of cattle cars. The cars weren’t made of old-fashioned wood and metal, but of some new, high-tech material that was slightly translucent. Every cattle car that ground past was full of people. I couldn’t see the ones deep inside and couldn’t see much detail. But I could see those who were pressed against the outer wall. I saw their mouths, opened in agonized screams. I saw their hands, splayed against the walls of the cattle cars, pushing and clawing to get out.

I understood (don’t ask me how) that these endless carloads were the mildest “offenders.” They were the children or spouses of gun owners. Or they were people who’d broken the law unknowingly. They were also all the vulnerable disarmed, including the happy Jews at Y.B.’s daughter’s wedding.

Eventually, more cars rumbled by and these contained gun owners who had protested the law or boldly violated it. These cars also contained special victims of hatred — people who weren’t PC, who didn’t conform, who were “different.” They couldn’t scream or claw at the walls because they were being tortured — bound into contorted positions, blindfolded, and gagged.

I woke up before seeing what worse things might be near the end of that train.

—–

Yes, it was just a dream. And before that just the terrors of a half-conscious brain. Nothing. Just impressions, phantasms. Meaningless. After all, even the most awful gun controllers wouldn’t seek out and target the innocent. And surely, after the horrors of history, Jews wouldn’t do anything to enable their own destruction?

But the combination of those happy wedding photos, the vulnerability of the people in them, the fact that so many conniving power-trippers want innocents to be more vulnerable, and the fact that there are so many useful idiots who’ll v*te to make it so … all that still chills me days later.

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail

So How Could This Happen?

As I look at the massive amount of “change” our country has endured since I was a child, I’m not feeling a lot of “hope”. I had long wondered how our country had gone from one of fierce independence, strong work ethic and Judeo-Chrisitian values to one where living on the dole is viewed as an entitlement to some people, and it comes with a free obola-phone. The fierce independence and looking after yourself and your family has become “let the government do it”,  “wait for the police” and “there ought to be a law”. We are to have been a country ruled by law, not mobs. And we have moved so far away from that. “How could this happen?” A friend of mine on Facebook asked that the other day. This column was already percolating in my brain when he did. I may have some insight into it.

You know the old saying there is nothing really new under the sun? Well, many of the things we see in America now have been done before, and succeeded brilliantly for those that implemented the policies.

Let’s do a little compare and contrast, shall we?

There is a traveling exhibit from the Midwest Center for Holocaust Education called “nazi Propaganda”. No, I didn’t mean to capitalize nazi. There was an exhibit of artifacts and a lecture series that explored different aspects of the Propaganda.

“Propaganda is a truly terrible weapon in the hands of an expert”~~adolph hitler 1924
hitler had one of the best at propaganda Joseph Gerbils (Goebbels, yes, I enjoyed doing that too), who said that “Any man who still has a residue of honor will be very careful not to become a journalist”. That’s pretty rich coming from a one time journalist.

When hitler came to power in 1933, Germany had a very well developed communications system. There were 4,700 daily and weekly newspapers, a total circulation of 25 million. Of these 81%  were locally owned, although there were some national ones that had even attained international recognition. When the nazis came to power in 1933, they owned less than 3% of the 4,700 papers. Through the elimination of the multi-party system the nazis gained control of the newspapers that had been run by those parties. The nazis used the press and radio to create fears of a communist uprising and then the populace was willing enough to accept limits and the curtailing of their liberties.

The nazis had a great ally in Julius Streicher who produced Der Strumer, a virulently antisemitic “newspaper” and I use that term loosely here. Mostly it ran articles on how the Jews were to blame for everything wrong, and they wanted to start a war while the rest of the world wanted peace. They ran horrible cartoons by “Fips” designed to isolate and dehumanize Jews. It ran from 1923 to 1945 and during the Weimer Republic was the receipient of many lawsuits by politicians and Jewish groups. It did not stop them though, and when hitler came along, it thrived.  The nazi regeime also embraced the new technology of radio and television. They already had a thriving movie culture. With the creation of the people’s radio, hitler’s speeches could be broadcast everywhere, factories, homes and even the streets, and they were. The cheap mass produced radios had very few stations available on the dial, quite the shocker that, eh?

The German propaganda machine was also at work in the US and Britain believe it or not. In many news stories of the time the writing was done in such a was as to create fear among Americans and the British and leave them wanting to just get it over with and give in. Interestingly to me anyway, most of these stores came from the AP. Germany also forbid it’s citizens from getting any news from sources outside of Germany. But with the great radio shows on, why would they want to? I mean who could turn down hitler speeches and home making tips all in one broadcast?  Besides, listening to the BBC was considered very treasonous, and punishable by prison time.

Propaganda was used to sell the majority who hadn’t voted for hitler (was it racist back then to demand voter ID?) that there would be this national community, it’s just that a few people wouldn’t be part of it. Germans by in large it seems, ate that National Community Hope & Change stuff up. It was necessary to convince them not to intervene when they saw their neighbors of many years being hauled off and their belongings taken away. The ghettos were posted with signs warning of health dangers, that was meant to discourage non-Jews from entering and seeing conditions for themselves. With the lack of sanitation, people starving and lack of medical care, that was somewhat true, but not why the nazis posted the ghettos. Films were staged in the ghettos to show the German people that the Jews bred and carried diseases. The goal with that would be to decrease any sympathy the Christians might have felt and any desire to help the Jews. The Jews were also portrayed as not caring about anyone but themselves. Films were also staged to convince the world that the Jews were being treated very humanely, and just in the camps for “re-education” to the nazi way of the thinking and life. Nothing to see here folks, move along.

Part of the goal of the propaganda was not so much to enlist ordinary Germans in killing the Jews, but to convince them not to intervene on the Jews behalf. After all, they weren’t REALLY human were they?

So, why is this relevant today? People would recognize the dangerous conditions and do something about it before it ever got this far again, right?  No set of Americans would sit idly by while one segment of the population was marginalized and attacked by leadership would they?

How about people who believe the Constitution should remain the law of the land, and not ruling by pen and cell phone?

Would the government ever paint such people as “the enemy”?

http://www.theblogmocracy.com/2012/08/08/us-army-using-tea-party-insurrection-scenario-to-train-officers/

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2013/10/23/does-army-consider-christians-tea-party-terror-threat/

http://sipseystreetirregulars.blogspot.com/2012/08/bringing-war-back-home-full-spectrum.html

Would the government ever single out those people and use the force of the government to go after them?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2711039/Emails-IRS-official-Lois-Lerner-called-conservatives-crazies-holes-Eric-Holder-gets-new-pressure-investigate.html

http://www.commdiginews.com/politics-2/erev-rosh-hashanah-lois-lerner-degrades-conservatives-now-judaism-26594/

Remember all the antisemitic cartoons? Some of these appeared in newspapers, some were made up by readers.

http://lumberjocks.com/topics/34254

The Media Research Center put together a lovely list of some of the worst attacks by the mainstream “media” on ordinary American Citizen. Curiously, the “media” was very supportive of Occupy Wallstreet.

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/mike-ciandella/2014/02/27/5-years-after-7-worst-media-attacks-tea-party

What happens when a reporter actually tries to do the job, and report on Government and investigate stories? Um, doesn’t turn out well.

http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/102714-723693-former-cbs-news-reporter-blows-whistle-on-pro-obama-bias.htm?p=full

So, while in Germany many of the newspapers MAY have been forced to regurgitate the party poop, in America it seems we see this kind of reporting, not because of being forced into it, but because the media itself is on board with the ideology of the current regime.

Anyone remember Candy Crowley from CNN a “moderator” (chuckle, chuckle, snort) helping the President out during the debate against Mitt Romney? Or who can forget the classic of CNN making it appear a semi-automatic rifle is a automatic by the way they talked during the “report”.
Speaking of ideology, when the media constantly calls a semi-automatic rifle an “assault rifle” and report on someone shot breaking into a house as a “gun shot victim” because the home owner shot him? Does that not seem to be allowing their ideology to drive the story, to influence people that haven’t a clue about guns? To convince people that the ability to defend themselves and their families from any kind of a threat is not something they should want.

Nice blog post about CNN and guns.

http://dustinsgunblog.blogspot.com/2007/11/cnn-lies-fakes-story-once-again.html

And a great video to show anyone who doesn’t understand about a semi-automatic and fully automatic.

If you want to compare how the obama infatuated press handles a story think about what you are hearing now that there was a Republican landslide on Tuesday. The media is marginalizing that, saying the people want Republicans to work with obama. The British press presented the story a bit differently.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2822484/WHAT-LANDSLIDE-Obama-threatens-vetoes-executive-orders-Americans-reject-giving-Republicans-historic-gains-Congress.html#ixzz3IIYedBh1

As did the Candadian http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/67371

I discovered the first time I went to Ireland and listened to the news on the radio as I was driving that the way I heard stories on the radio in Ireland was vastly different than the way they were presented at home.

Why would the media do this? Lie to citizens, target certain individuals (think Sarah Palin or Phil Robertson) certain businesses (Chik-fil-A or Hobby Lobby) try to isolate them, polarize and demonize them?

Some pretty good answers can be found in the film Grinding Down America. You can watch it on YouTube, but you have to find the different sections. Or, if you don’t mind the Spanish subtitles, the movie is in English, and it is well worth watching.

So, my first villain in “How could this happen”, is the media. And unlike Germany, the mainstream media in America is part of the problem, not the watchdog.

I mean seriously, if they can’t even report a story involving a gun correct AFTER it has happened, why do we even listen to them give a weather FORECAST?

Der Sturmer

Just create the indifference
Just create the indifference
Allow none to show sympathy
Allow none to show sympathy

 

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail

Shootings take their toll

How many times do we hear gun grabbers accuse us of itching for that next kill, being bloodthirsty, hoping we get to use our firearms to kill others?

I suppose it’s part of their public affairs tactic – make the enemy seem as unpalatable and unsympathetic as possible. Most of them don’t understand the difference between murder and killing – and if they do understand the difference, they have a tendency to gloss over it in order to paint the adversary as a monster.

In Jewish law, there is a very specific difference – even in terminology.

As in English there are two different words: “retzichah” for murder, and “harigah” for killing.

It is obvious that not all killing is murder, for the Bible itself imposes the death penalty for certain crimes! Jewish Law also says that if one sees person A about to murder person B, one is allowed to save B with lethal force—if necessary.

Some killing is justice, allowed by law – both in Jewish law and in United States statutes – and frankly, I know of no one who would claim defensive actions that result in death and outright murder are one and the same.

Of course, that doesn’t stop those who labor to relieve us of our basic rights as human beings from glossing over the difference.

A Twitter user (or more likely a brainless bot) by the moniker of @usgunviolence6 (if this is the sixth account this liar uses, I wonder whether the other five accounts were deleted by Twitter) makes it a mission to post every incident of what it calls “gun violence” it can possibly find on the Internet. It doesn’t matter whether the incident was a case of self defense, negligence or outright murder. It doesn’t differentiate, and by glossing over the nature of the incident, it attempts to ignore certain details.

murder

 The above link wasn’t just a random murder committed against Mr. Jess. Dean Randolph Jess was an escaped inmate – a monster who raped a child. Twice. Not that it matters to “US Gun Violence.” It simply posts the link and attempts to paint it as just another person killed in the United States by a gun.

Let’s ignore for a second the fact that this… thing… does a full body, naked dance in the blood of every innocent who is shot in order to promote its repulsive, anti-freedom agenda.

The dishonest attempt to paint the death of an escaped rapist as just another “US gun death” is beyond the pale, but nonetheless par for the course for those who seek to destroy the Second Amendment.

Lack of honor is their trademark, emphasized by the fact that they constantly accuse gun owners of waiting impatiently to fire their weapons at someone. They don’t understand how much agony, how much courage it takes to end another’s life. They weep for the criminals, and excoriate those who dare take responsibility for their own safety and the safety of others as bloodthirsty savages.

Barbara Waters Griffin I just wouldn’t feel any safer with a gun toting “can’t wait to shoot someone” person in a store with 50 more gun toting ” can’t wait to shoot someone ” people than I would with 1 criminal……….because either way there will be innocent people shot….

This is the kind of sick, hysterical attitude gun grabbers have toward their fellow Americans. They like to portray them as toothless rednecks who want to shoot someone just for the hell of it.

The truth is far from it.

Even police officers who kill someone in the line of duty have visceral reactions to having to take a life.

 Although every experience is different, officers who take a life often experience severe bouts of depression, alcoholism, marital problems, sleepless nights and feelings of being alone in the aftermath.

A fear of admitting a weakness often results in more severe problems for the officer.

“It’s not something anyone should have to go through,” Gar­ri­son said. “The emotion of it never ends. It changes who you are.”

Regular gun owners go through the same range of emotions. A year ago, Gareth Long fatally shot a home invader who was breaking into his house in the middle of the night. Not only did Long warn the intruder he was armed, but he begged – BEGGED the bastard not to make him shoot him. The invader approached the family anyway, and Mr. Long was forced to take the steps necessary to protect him and his family.

“It wasn’t just one life taken that night — there were three lives taken that night,” Gareth Long said. “It was his life and our lives. It will never be the same for us, ever again.”

Worse yet, the drug addled vermin who entered his home was high on drugs, and the nephew of the local mayor, so the Longs had to face the town’s wrath, as well as a police and grand jury investigation.

Think it was easy? Think this is something every gun owner hopes for?  “It was the worst experience I’ve ever had,” Gareth Long said.

In 1954 a pilot named William Bonnell shot and killed a teenage thug who attempted to hijack a plane full of innocent people. Raymond Kuchenmeister was 6’5” tall and weighed over 250 pounds. He was by all standards a large man, who, according to reports, had to be removed from the airplane by four men and some baggage-moving equipment. He was a threatening presence – intimidating and aggressive both due to his size and the stolen gun he was brandishing. 

William Bonnell shot this “kid.” He legally carried a gun (because in those days, that’s what pilots did), and he chose to use that gun to save the lives of the passengers on his plane.

William Bonnell was indelibly changed by what he had to do.  He was so affected by this tragedy, he never fired that gun again, and could barely complete his flight that day. He was an expert marksman, but he never again picked up a firearm. The overwhelming decision he had to make that day saved lives, but had a profound effect on his own emotional well-being.  I had spoken with Bill Bonnell’s son at the time I wrote this story, who gave me a complete picture of what his father was like.

Bill Bonnell was the only pilot available to make the scheduled flight that day, so even though he was obviously shaken by earlier events, he was forced to make the return flight from Cleveland to Fort Worth. 

Upon learning that Kuchenmeister died en route to the hospital, Bill Bonnell returned to Cleveland and contacted the teenager’s family.The family of Raymond Kuchenmeister planned no funeral service, and had apparently all but disavowed him, so William Bonnell – a father himself, a pilot, and a hero who was forced to do the unthinkable – paid for a funeral service and the burial for a disturbed youth who nearly killed him, his crew, and the men, women and children aboard his plane.

He didn’t consider himself a hero. This was an incident that had changed him – profoundly so – and he didn’t speak of it much to anyone. Those who knew him, those who were on that plane July 6, 1954, friends and family knew how deeply Bill Bonnell cared – how profoundly he was affected by what he had to do – he was a hero. But he was a hero who never got over having to shoot a man at close range – a teenager who was threatening to kill a plane full of innocent people.

These are the types of people gun grabbers refer to as “extremists” and “gun touchers,” and accuse them of being excited about the prospect of killing another human being.

Remember what they think of you. Remember you are the enemy to them – faceless, soulless, and barely even human. Remember they will paint you as monsters in order to promote their agenda, without actually giving any thought to what is in your heart.

I know I sound despondent, but I think what I really am is realistic.

And I never underestimate the adversary.

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail

Elections: I got those I wish I didn’t care but I care anyway blues

You know what they say about elections. “No matter who you vote for, the government gets elected.” Or “If voting could change anything, it would be illegal.”

It’s also been said that elections are advance auctions of stolen goods and (unlike the legitimate acts of self defense and justice described by Ilana and by commenter Tahn) that voting is a form of violence because it’s trying to force our will on others.

So true. I try not to think of elections as anything more than a team contest, sort of like the Super Bowl or the World Series, but for people with less talent. This month I care very much, though. Mostly I care in the same way I might care about who wins the SuperBowl. It might be dramatic or suspenseful to see if the R’s beat the D’s for the Senate as most oddsmakers are saying, but life and freedom probably won’t depend on whether Joni Ernst grabs that Senate seat from Iowa (though I like her) or Mary Landrieu has to go into a runoff election in Louisiana (though I’d like to see that political biotch driven back into the bayous, never to be seen again).

The thing I really care about this month has nothing to do with politicians and everything to do with common people and our rights. I’m talking about initiative 594 in Washington state. Even for people who don’t live in or near Washington this is a big one.

Since you’re reading gunblogs I suppose you already know that I-594 is the anti-gunners’ dream this year. Under the pretense of being ‘only’ a universal background check bill (common sense, you know!), it would criminalize nearly all transfers of firearms, including the most helpful, innocent, and momentary. Loan a gun to a friend in need? Felony. Instructor hands a gun to student and student hands it back? TWO felonies. So on so on so on.

Because this is just about the only victim disarmament measure on the ballot anywhere in the U.S. this year, the Billionaire Brigade has poured money into it by the millions. Of course Washington state has quite a few homegrown anti-gun billionaires like Microsofties Bill Gates and Paul Allen, plus Nick Hanauer (a Jew who ought to come here and read some of the posts by Ilana and Y.B. if he thinks leaving people helpless is what Judaism is about), but naturally Bloomberg is in for his million, too.

The pro-gunners are way out spent and, according to every poll, also outnumbered. The NRA came in late with its anti-594 money and Washington’s biggest homegrown (supposedly) pro-gun activist, Alan Gottlieb, proved his true intentions once again by getting another measure on the ballot (I-591) that appears to protect rights but in fact doesn’t “give” anybody anything they don’t already have and sets the stage for later federal UBCs. So another million or so that could have been spent to fight 594 got diverted into supporting 591.

The big reason the fight against 594 matters even to people who live elsewhere is that if Washingtonians can kick 594 to the curb, it’ll be the best sign ever that bigoted billionaires should spend their money on something other than disarming the common people. On the other hand, if 594 wins, it’ll just encourage them to keep hammering at us and our rights.

The polls all say 594 is not only going to win but win big. They may be wrong. They’ve been dead wrong about gun rights in Washington before. (For a blue state, it has decent gun laws.) They’ve been polling registered voters, not likely voters. I’ve also got to wonder how much of the polling covered only the Puget Sound urban area (already leaning anti-gun and the place where the billionaires have been pouring all their ad money). If the pollsters have missed a lot of likely rural and eastside (that is east of the Cascades) votors, they’ll be dead wrong.

So this year I’m watching and caring and I’d even say if you live in Washington state get the heck out and vote against that awful thing.

There’s also the possibility that both 594 and 591 will pass and then the championship game of gun rights, or at least the NW Regionals of gun rights, will go into some long and probably pretty weird overtime.

Free people will keep their rights no matter what. The Billionaire Brigade and their useful idiots can’t vote them away, but we shouldn’t even give them the illusion that they can make a successful try.

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail

A Video to Make You Tear Up

It’s Tuesday morning, and I ran across this video that I felt I needed to share with you. There’s not much left to say that Aaron Weiss didn’t say in this flawless 3-minute speech.

It’s eloquent and true. Those of us who volunteered to serve in the Armed Forces know why we did so – and it’s not for that generous $1800 per month you receive as a PFC.

I graduated Johns Hopkins with a degree in International Relations, and there was little doubt in my mind about what I wanted to do. I gave it some thought for a few months, but in the end I joined the Army.

I joined, because I understood what it’s like to live in a tyrannical state where rights matter about as little as human beings do.

I joined, because I wanted to defend the freedoms and opportunities this nation afforded me – freedoms the former USSR, Nazi Germany, and every other statist hellhole has destroyed.

I joined, because when I came to this country as a kid, I realized that I had opportunities here to live, achieve, and succeed that I would have never had as a Jew in the USSR.

And I was grateful. I was grateful enough to put on that uniform and swear an oath to defend our Constitution and those freedoms with my blood and my life.

Regardless of who resides in that White House at 20220, that oath and that promise remains the same. Politicians come and go. We may agree with them, nor not. But our oath and our promise remains: should any enemy threaten our country, our Constitution, or our people we will be there.

The young man in this video understands this. He served to protect those rights we hold dear. He continues to do so on a local level as a law enforcement officer. And he let those statist swine in New York know that he – as a veteran and law enforcement officer – will actively oppose their efforts to destroy everything he swore to protect…

…and do so by hypocritically using the deaths of children at Newtown to do it.

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail

A Few Questions About Jaylen Fryberg

A shooting at the Marysville-Pilchuk High School in Washington state has resulted in a familiar deluge of cries for MOAR GUNZ CONTROLZ from the gun grabber camp.

The Zelman Twitter feed is rife with #gunsense #notonemore #enough #stoptheNRA hashtags, and the Mad Moms Demanding Attention have once again robotically began to retweet their leader Shannon Watts’ snarky calls for more gun control.

Note the dismissive, arrogant, sarcastic tone about the tragedy. Very much typical of Shannon’s normal MO.

And mind you, the calls started before anyone knew exactly what happened, who the shooter was, where he got the gun, or why he went on a rampage.

Soon, details began to emerge, and a picture is beginning to take form.

The shooter has been identified as 14-year-old Jaylen Fryberg, who took his own life after shooting several classmates, two of whom were his cousins.

Tweets he posted prior to his rampage show a kid who was obviously angry at a break-up, upset, and threatening others.

He was suspended from the football team prior to his rampage after getting into a fight about “racist comments,” directed toward him, according to the Daily Mail.

Jaylen was too young to legally buy the handgun he used to murder his classmates, so he took his father’s gun and proceeded to shoot his cousins and classmates.

Let’s put aside the obvious – that the “universal background checks” the Mad Moms are demanding would have done nothing to stop Jaylen’s actions. He stole the legally-owned gun from his dad.

The bigger question was: where were the parents?

Why were they not following their son’s social media posts?

And if they were, why were they not concerned about the violent nature of a number of his Twitter posts, and the pain this kid was obviously feeling?

And if they were concerned, why didn’t they get him some help, or at the very least lock up their firearms until the kid either explained his angst-ridden, violent statements or got some help.

As a mom,  have full access to my son’s social media. We talk. We discuss his life. We find the time to chat each night, even if he’s working or swamped with homework. I guarantee you that if I suspected my son’s mental condition was deteriorating, the first thing I would do is get him help, and the second thing I would do is ensure his access to firearms was revoked until things were cleared up.

My house. My rules. He has full access to guns, and he is very proficient with them. But the moment I suspect something is wrong, that access goes away.

So where were the parents?

Why did this obviously depressed kid grab a pistol that belonged to his father and head on over to the school to commit murder and ultimately suicide?

Why are the Mad Mommies not discussing the roots of this problem, rather than trying to use the tragedy to push their political agenda?

Wouldn’t you think that if they were truly interested in helping kids, they would focus on the true causes of these shootings, rather than merely using them as agitprops in their senseless disarmament campaign?

Shannon Watts’ snarky tweet and the renewed drumbeat for more control and punishment for people who didn’t commit this senseless act of violence, once again confirms that the Bloombergian Stepford Moms’ mission has nothing to do with protecting children and everything to do with imposing Bloomberg’s nanny statism on their fellow Americans.

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail

But If It Saves Just ONE Life!

How many times have we heard the plaintive cry from the anti-gun crowd? More gun/people control is needed to save just one life. You can tell how much life matters to the anti-gun crowd when the call for “SWATing” of innocent open carry citizens is suggested and celebrated. Even when it results in the death of two innocent people. One of who died of a heart attack after watching another innocent man be gunned down by the police. And Mommies Demanding Atrocities celebrated their death. Yep, if it saves just one life. Whine on. And people take Mommies Demanding Atrocities seriously. SERIOUSLY? Why?

According to this article:

“If you sync the phone call to the footage,” Bob Owens tells me, “you’ll notice that Ronald Ritchie, the caller, makes claims that are not true.” Among those claims, the Guardian records, were that “Crawford was pointing the air rifle at customers,” that he threatened “two children,” and that he was recklessly “waving it around.” This does not appear to have been the case. Indeed, when the lattermost statement was made, Owens notes, “the gun’s muzzle was pointed to the ground.” So pronounced are the discrepancies between Ritchie’s story and the surveillance footage that John Crawford’s family is hoping to take legal action. “He’s basically lying with the dispatchers,” the family’s attorney, Michael Wright argues. “He’s making up the story. So should he be prosecuted? Yes, I believe so.”

In this case a black man was shot because of a false police call made by Ronald Ritchie.

A radio show host has called for people that open carry to be gunned down by the police, according to this article he hates guns, and the police, so figures pitting them against each other is a great idea. The fact he has to lie, put every innocent person at risk doesn’t seem to trouble him a bit. But then he is a liberal, and anti-gun idiot. But I repeat myself. He doesn’t care that the open carry advocate is innocent, he doesn’t care that the other people around are innocent, he doesn’t care that the police that show up are innocent. He just wants them dead, because after all, guns are evil, they kill people. Life is so important to him, he’s willing to kill off a few innocent people to save just one.

My solution to people like Ronald Ritchie? I think he needs to be charged with premeditated murder. He knew what would happen when he lied to the Police and told them Mr. Crawford was threatening children. I think anyone, especially Mommies Demanding Atrocities, that SWAT someone because they are opening carrying should be charged with premeditated murder.

Ok, hang on to the saddle horn, we’re going to make a jump sideways.

If you look at what is going on in Ferguson, MO right now you see a mess. A black man was shot by a white police officer. While this is fine with Mommies Demanding Atrocities if he was doing nothing wrong and innocently carrying a BB gun through a Walmart, it’s not ok if he may have been in the process of assaulting a police officer. Initially the media portrayed him as this “gentle giant”. That narrative kind of came off the rails when video surfaced of him assaulting a store clerk a bit before his run in with the police. Oops. Then it was the Police “gunned him down” needlessly. Well, it seems forensics may not exactly bear that out.

Then protesters rioted, torched stores (it seems they left a tatoo parlor being guarded by armed owners with those “deadly, no sporting purpose, evil black rifles” alone) demolished a Quick Trip to achieve justice for Michael Brown. Um, well, hmm. While it may have appeared to the rest of the country that the Ferguson Police were a bunch of racist Barney Fifes running around with an itchy trigger finger (and who knows, maybe they are) but what has not been pointed out is that a large portion of those arrested are not, in fact, from Ferguson. Duane Lester of The Missouri Torch did a lovely job of detailing some of the out of town guests that showed up to the party. One of the first being Greg “Joey” Johnson, a communist revolutionary arrived fresh from Chicago, to stir the unrest. Photos too!

ACORN was also involved, as were the Black Panthers. You know, they ones that showed up during the Trayvon Martin debacle. Sort of Govenor Jay Nixon did his best barak obama impression by stating “a vigorous prosecution must now be pursued” of the officer that shot Michael Brown. Wrong Way Jay might have wanted to wait till some actual facts came in before he said that. But since obama had already used “the police acted stupidly” I guess he was trying to come up with the next best idiot line before someone else thought of it. Some of the other out of town guests were Code Pink, RevCom, the New Black Panthers, Socialist Party USA.

Several pictures have come out of Ferguson with the cops suited up like the military, and there were certainly charges of heavy handedness. I do not like seeing local police with tanks, humvees, nor do I like seeing them act like they are fixin’ to storm Bin Laden’s lair. That being said, they have families, they want to go home of a night in one piece. I understand. There are certainly an abundance of out of town scum that are there trying to stir the people up into a frenzy and they want more rioting and social unrest. Heck, just yesterday a anti-gun state Senator got herself arrested drunk and carrying a gun. She has a CCW. What a shocker. She’s anti-gun for thee, but not for, well, herself.

So where am I going with all this? While I don’t want to open carry because I choose not to give away my tactical advantage and because it scares the sheep, I don’t want to deny those that want to do so their rights. Those in my state, with a CCW have undergone a FBI background check, taken a class and passed a proficiency exam and written test. All necessary to utilize your Second Amendment rights in this state. Can Mommies Demanding Atrocities PROVE they are such law-abiding citizens? I doubt it. The Police and the CCW or Open Carry people SHOULD be allies. We are the law-abiding ones that just want to be left alone, we want to protect ourselves and our families. We don’t bother anyone, and we don’t want anyone to bother us. We don’t riot and burn down Quick Trips, we don’t SWAT people because we disagree with them politically hoping they will be killed. We don’t go out and incite people to attack the police. And yet, the left, the people of “tolerance” are the ones showing up, inciting strife and suggesting it’s a great idea to walk out of a restaurant without paying or make a false police report hoping it results in the death of an innocent person.

And people listen to these moonbats when they call for more gun control howling “if it saves just one life”? Inconceivable!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qhXjcZdk5QQ

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail

No, we don’t want to be like the UK!

Quite often, in my travels on these here Interwebz, I find gun grabbers pontificating how cool it would be if we were just like Britain. After all, they have stringent gun control, and their homicide rates are SOOOOOO much lower than ours!

Must be the fault of the evil gunz, right?

After all, the United States, according to recent figures, has 4.7 murders per 100,000 residents, while the United Kingdom has 1.

Must be the fault of the evil gunz, right?

Ehhhh… not so fast.

While the United States does, in fact, have a higher murder rate than the UK and much more guns in circulation, anyone with a shred of an education knows that correlation does not equal causation, and that the presence of guns tells a very limited and very inaccurate story.

We have by far one of the highest per capita gun ownership rates in the world, and yet, we’re far from being the most violent country out there.

Countries such as Latvia, that have the same per capita murder rate that we do, have a much lower gun ownership rate.  Whereas we boast 90 firearms per 100 people, and despite this fact, our per capita homicide rates are below those of Estonia and Lithuania, Haiti, the Cayman Islands, and Mexico, which all have gun ownership rates far below ours.

So is it really the guns?

B0JTUOVCcAAK0wg

 

I’m thinking not so much, especially with our homicide, accidental death and violent crime rates on the decline, while gun ownership increases.

homicides-per-year

The UK enacted its strict gun control legislation after the 1996 Dunblane massacre, which resulted in the deaths of 16 children and their teacher. The ban did not stop murders in the UK. As a matter of fact, they increased dramatically in the aftermath of the legislation, and reached their peak in 2003/2004.

That said, the nation has had historically low homicide rates to begin with, so the increase was definitely noticeable.

What also is notable are the low homicide rates prior to the enactment of the gun control legislation, which left most Britons disarmed and vulnerable to armed thugs.

So in a country with historically low homicide rates, one incident prompted a comprehensive infringement on the people’s right to bear arms, and said infringement had no appreciable effect on the already low homicide rates in this country.

Meanwhile in the United States, we finally got rid of the odious and worthless “assault” weapons ban, gun ownership rates have been climbing, and homicide rates have been declining steadily.

But if you think that the Brits are finished spanking the gun owners for incidents of violence for which they are not responsible, you would be wrong.  According the latest news from the UK, if you’re a registered gun owner in Britain, you will be subject to unannounced police visits to your home, and warrantless inspections of firearms storage.

Right to privacy? Forget it.

Right to property? Screw you.

If you are a gun owner in the UK, you have no rights. And yet, we have Mommies Demanding Action for Gunsense screeching about safe storage laws… for the children.

They either don’t understand that such mandates would involve massive violations of Americans’ Fourth Amendment rights, or they don’t care.

My bet is on the latter.

They want more stringent controls. They demand universal background checks that would essentially eliminate private firearms sales, infringing on the people’s right to dispose of their property without government interference.

They want a ban on scary, black rifles for no other reason than they’re black and scary.

And all for what?

For nothing. The UK’s example shows that their gun control laws have had no effect on actual murder rates, but instead of looking at actual causes of violence, the gun grabbers in this country want to be just like the UK.

Do we want to emulate a nation that routinely infringes on its citizens’ right to privacy, right to property, and right to self defense in vain?

I would hope the answer is a resounding “NO!”

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail

Faith and Firearms Revisited

Years ago – when I had time to write more than an occasional blog post, I wrote an article on faith and firearms for the U.S. Concealed Carry Association.

Having grown up Jewish, I always wondered why it is that major Jewish organizations were always pushing disarmament, and worse yet, leaning on faith to do it!

For an answer in this article, I turned to Rabbi Isaac Leizerowski – a friend of my dad’s and an authority on Jewish law. Rabbi Leizerowski confirmed that the right to self defense is actually mandated by Jewish law.

From the sanctity of Life comes an imperative to safeguard Life. The directive to defend your life is written in the Talmud, the 70-volume Code of Jewish Law, in at least three places. “And the Torah says, ‘If someone comes to kill you, arise quickly and kill him.’”

For a reply on the psychology of disarmament, I turned to another friend, who shed some light on the issue.

Jack Feldman, Professor of Psychology at Georgia Institute of Technology, has one theory: “Jews are called on to care for others who are troubled, suffering, etc. and to stand up for the oppressed,” he says. “It’s a mitzvah. Democrats and socialists (traditional proponents of gun control) have taken that role, in appearance if not reality…A lot of us have yet to get the message about the Left, and [continue to] cling to these fallacies.”

Life is sacred, my friends. We must work to change the mindset that disarmament somehow promotes safety, and is therefore a mitzvah.

It’s not.

Disarmament is death. It’s slavery. It’s tyranny. It’s the antithesis of everything Jews strive to achieve in the social sphere – life, liberty, goodness.

The Nazis knew this, and we should never forget this.

And we must strive to show it for what it is and challenge its proponents – especially in organized Jewish circles!

Because if we allow gun grabbers to control the message and spread the lie that gun control is somehow beneficial, we’ll be swimming upstream for a long time.

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail