Category Archives: shooting

Poll closing soon — results so far

This week’s poll will close shortly. Here are the results so far (click to embiggenate):

Screenshot from 2015-10-02 15:23:15

We’ve had 150 votes (usually with multiple votes per person). I’m not surprised that the largest number chose participating in online pro-gun discussions as one of their gun-rights activities. But in second place is hands-on firearm instruction. Kudos to you — especially those of you who regularly train shooters via Appleseed, hunter education classes, 4H, NRA-certified training, or any other regular means.

And hooray for the resisters of bad laws everywhere!

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

A Shooting in Virginia (UPDATED)

There was a shooting in Virginia today. The shooter, a former WDBJ journalist pulled a gun on two of the station’s reporters and killed them both. He also wounded the woman being interviewed on the air. She is thankfully listed in stable condition. He then proceeded to drive north on I-81 and east on I-66 with police in pursuit before shooting himself in the head.

Before the bodies of 24-year-old reporter Alison Parker and 27-year-old cameraman Adam Ward were even cold, Virginia’s opportunistic swine of a governor Fast Terry McAuliffe started immediately calling for more gun control.

“There are too many guns in the hands of people that shouldn’t have guns,” McAuliffe said during an interview with WTOP. “There is too much gun violence in America,” he said, adding that he has long advocated for strengthening gun background checks and that it should be made a priority.

The only problem with Fast Terry’s contention is that no background check would have stopped Vester Lee Flanagan from purchasing a gun.

Let’s for a moment ignore the fact that he could quickly and easily have gotten a firearm through illegal means.

Let’s for a moment forget that Vester Lee Flanagan did not have a criminal record, and the only crime he had ever been charged with was driving with an altered or revoked licence and having no registration on his vehicle in Pitt County, North Carolina in 2004, which certainly would not have made him ineligible to purchase a firearm.  And he had no history of mental illness either. In other words, he would have passed any background check any time.

So what would Fast Terry suggest?

Depriving him of his Second Amendment right, because he had a history of filing grievances against his employers?

How about making him ineligible to purchase a firearm because he was black? Or gay?

Or how about taking away his rights because he was upset about being fired and refused to leave, forcing the station to call the police to physically remove him from the premises? Would Terry have infringed on his right to keep and bear arms, because he was a jerk to his co-workers?

I’ve always said that the gun grabbers’ goal was not to reduce violence or save lives, but to disarm those of us who committed no crime whatsoever all for the sake of political expediency.

Fast Terry knows perfectly well that no new law would have stopped this shooting. Flanagan would have passed every background check in the world, so the only option left is for Fast Terry to start working to deny others their rights. Others who may be odd… or gay… or black… or difficult to work with…

As my friend Mike said in an article a long time ago, these politicians want to keep guns out of the “wrong hands” – your hands.

UPDATE: In an interview with Megyn Kelly last night, Alison Parker’s father pledged to do everything in his power to keep guns out of the hands of people he called “crazy.”

I grieve along with Mr. Parker. I cannot imagine the unbearable grief of losing a child! I understand the emotion behind that pledge to shame “legislators into doing something about closing loopholes and background checks.”

However, I also understand the following as a rational person: There was no loophole, and no background check that could have prevented Flanagan from getting a firearm! He was not even seeing a psychiatrist! He was not a prohibited person. There is no background check he would not have passed. The fact that he was an entitled jerk, a bad employee, and a crappy co-worker does not make him mentally ill or ineligible to own a firearm.

There is literally no loophole and no law that allowed him – a law abiding citizen, until he pulled that trigger yesterday – to purchase a gun when he should not have been allowed to do so. None.

And yet, in the heat of grief, the push for more ineffective laws that will do nothing but disarm those who have committed no crime continues, with the likes of Fast Terry and Hillary Clinton leading the charge.

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

Fun with targets — put your thinking caps on

Next item for the TZP store — targets. And we’d like you to help us create the first design.

Here’s the idea: We’ll find five of the dumbest, most idiotic anti-gun quotes we can and print them in the rings of the target. Finding the quotes is where you come in. Please use the comment section on this post to suggest your favorite brain-dead hoplophobe remark.

If you’re the first to suggest a quote that makes it onto one of our targets, you’ll get a free packet of the printed targets.

Rules are simple:

1. The quote must be short enough to fit in the rings of a 8-1/2 x 11 (or maybe slightely larger) target.

2. It must be verifiable (providing a link will help but isn’t required).

3. To have a chance at a free target pack, you must be the first to post it in comments.

4. Entries close midnight EDT July 31, 2015.

So … go for it and have yourself some fun.

—–

And don’t forget the other nifty items in our store. Their numbers are few so far, but their quality high. You can get yourself a membership, a custom Kershaw folding knife, or a highly attitudinal yarmulke with the TZP logo.

I just got my own yarmulke last week and it’s a very nice, well-made, attractive item. Being a Gentile female, I’ll display, rather than wear, mine. But we’ve had multiple purchases from happy customers who plan either to use them as intended or gift them to people who will. We just lowered the shipping cost on the “buy three and save” offer, also.

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

The Klown Kar of Stoopid Drives On

The looting, riots, violence, and downright ignorance in the aftermath of the grand jury decision not to indict officer Darren Wilson for shooting thug extraordinaire Michael Brown continue.

In case you were wondering, the horsebuggery currently includes investigation charges into the “family” of Michael Brown for a violent incident that erupted over some Michael Brown merchandise.  Yes, you got that right. The worthless “parents” of the dead thug have decided to cash in on their son’s demise, by attacking Brown’s paternal grandmother, who was… trying to cash in on her grandson’s demise. (Try to contain your shock and awe, please.)

Communists and Jihadist scum joined the party, using the Ferguson riots as cover to promote their own agendas. This is nothing new. These parasites do have a tendency to glom on to any protest they can find and use it to screech about overthrowing capitalism, call for a Palestinian state, call for violence against police, you name it.

Tolerant, peaceable social justice warriors chose to threaten a young lady who posted a limerick on Tumbler condemning Michael Brown as a thug. Not only did they expose her identity, phone number, address, and university on the Internet (an odious practice called “doxing” that essentially bullies those who might disagree with you into silence for fear for their very lives), but they threatened to rape her mother, to burn down her house, and decapitate and dismember her. Because social justice for anyone who disagrees with the victim mentality is harassment, death, rape, and dismemberment.

The New York Times chose to publish Darren Wilson’s address and the name of his wife (which they later deleted, while leaving his location intact for any miserable thug to exploit). There was no need to publish this. It was not part of the story, and had no relevance to the case. And yet, reporters Julie Bosman and Campbell Robertson chose to publicize the location of the man’s home, almost certainly exposing him and his family to unhinged Ferguson thugs. The New York Times defended the practice, while a social justice warrior on Twitter took the opportunity to publish the exact address and a photograph of the house that he claimed belongs to Wilson. Care to guess how many threats to burn down the house there were?

And finally, a bit of irony on this Tuesday afternoon.The NYT reporters got a taste of their own medicine, when a number of readers decided that turnabout was fair play and published both journalists’ physical addresses, as well as home and work phone numbers. Oooops! Well, apparently, little Julie Bosman wasn’t comfortable with the level of attention she was getting for publishing an innocent man’s and his family’s location in a national press report, so she waltzed her entitled rear end into the nearest police station and demanded protection… yep… from the police… one of whom she worked to get killed without so much as a thought to the consequences.

Sources inside CPD say that Julie Bosman demanded a level of protection afforded A-List celebs and dignitaries, but an investigation revealed that she was not in any danger, and deserved no more than extra attention paid to her address by patrol.

Despite hundreds of phone calls and not a few unsolicited delivery food sent to her Chicago home Bosman “wasn’t under any real threat” says a Chicago police officer.

“She came in thinking she was Steven Spielberg or something shooting a movie” demanding all kinds of protections says a law enforcement source with knowledge of the Chicago police. “The police laughed at her.”

In a world where the Internet gives everyone easy access to almost any kind of information, the right to self defense becomes even more important.

Dissent is not tolerated, and the Internet is used as a tool to threaten, intimidate, and facilitate violence.

Whereas in the past, information on individuals was largely at the fingertips of government agents, it is now at the disposal of any miscreant with a keyboard, who is too cowardly to confront the subject of his consternation in person, but prefers the cyber world to accept that task en masse on his behalf.

Whereas in the past, one may have had to worry about random break-ins, psychotic madmen, and statist government agents, today we can add vindictive cretins compromising your identity, bank information, school, family, and property by making it publicly available to any thug online.

Whereas in the past, you could disagree with someone’s politics, confront them in person, and even publish your disagreement in a press piece without too much fear for your life, now you have to worry about every social justice warrior whose battle cry of “RACIST!” galvanizes bullying Internet jerks to publish your location, threaten your family, and expose your personally identifiable information (PII) for every sociopath and thug to peruse.

They hide behind the First Amendment, claiming the right to publish anything they want without consideration about the consequences of their actions, and they expect unlimited freedom to do so. Meanwhile, they demand that you be disarmed, bound by bureaucracy, castrated by statism, and punished for the deeds of a tiny minority of others who abuse their Second Amendment rights, even as they use the First Amendment to threaten your well-being, your life, your livelihood, and your loved ones.

This is what we’ve come to, boys and girls. This is the state of our society.  If you wonder why more and more of us insist that the government stop infringing on our right to life, right to self defense, and right to keep and bear arms, this is why.

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

Ferguson: Thankful For The Founding Fathers’ Legal Legacy

“Ferguson: Thankful For The Founding Fathers’ Legal Legacy” is my current column, now on WND. An excerpt:

Grand-jury deliberations were conducted behind closed doors. The decision was announced at night. It was too dark. Jurors were given too much information to absorb. The St. Louis County prosecuting attorney was not sufficiently involved in the proceedings. The latter, Bob McCulloch, was too “cold” in sharing the cold, hard facts of the case with the public. His remarks were excessively long; or redundant all. The police were too passive in their response to the pillage that followed the unpopular decision.

These are a few of the complaints voiced by the “Racism Industrial Complex (RIC)” against a grand-jury decision in the shooting death of Michael Brown, in Ferguson, Missouri. A quorum of ordinary Americans has determined that Officer Darren Wilson was not “the initial aggressor,” that the officer “acted in self-defense”; that he “was authorized to use deadly force,” in a situation in which he found himself being punched—and then bull-rushed by a demonic-looking mountain of flesh, Michael Brown. …

… I hate to say it, but these riots are an object lesson as to what transpires in certain chaotic communities when the police practice peaceful resistance.

Let’s face it: Had St. Louis County Prosecuting Attorney Bob McCulloch, a Democrat, opted for an open, probable-cause hearing before a judge, as opposed to convening a grand jury, the “Racism Industrial Complex”—forced to face a decision not to its liking—would be decrying the despotism of this single judge. They’d be calling for a jury of the people’s representatives, as bequeathed by the Founding Fathers, in the 5th Amendment of the Bill of Rights. The grand jury institution, as legal analyst Paul Callan has explained, “was actually created by the Founders to provide a wall of citizen protection against overzealous prosecutors.”

Had the decision been revealed in the AM, the RIC herd would have argued for a night-time reveal.

Had Mr. McCulloch meddled with the jury, he’d still be accused of rigging the outcome against Brown.

Had McCulloch hand-picked the evidence for the grand jury, instead of providing the 12 jurors with access to all of it—a “document dump,” brayed Big Media—he’d have been accused of concealing information.

Had the cops moved to curtail the crowds from “venting” over “legitimate issues,” caused by “the legacy of racial discrimination”—the president words—they’d have been convicted of police brutality.

As to the affective dimension, McCulloch’s alleged frigid demeanor: A silent majority whose “culture” is being crowded out still finds such WASPY mannerisms comforting and familiar; a sign of professionalism, dignity, decorum and rationality. Profoundly alien and disturbing was the wretched excesses of Michael Brown’s mother (Lesley McSpadden) and her new husband (Louis Head)—both of whom have had brushes with the law—howling, “Burn this bitch down.” …

… Read the rest. “Ferguson: Thankful For The Founding Fathers’ Legal Legacy” is now on WND.

Happy Thanksgiving.
ILANA

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

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.

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail