Tag Archives: gun grabbers

“Statistics”

You’ve heard that “polls show that 90% of Americans want…” garbage; usually universal preemptively-prove-your-innocence checks, but often any other infringement of your human/civil rights the gun grabbers can dream up. And you’ve wondered where the heck they found that many idiots.

In New Hampshire, the claim by UNH was 93% in favor of UPPYI checks. But I could never find a single person who would admit to participating in the survey. At all. Responding pro or con. The university refused to release their raw polling data. Actual voting (as in electing pro-gun politicians) doesn’t reflect that claim.

In Washington, the Bloomberg Ban Bunnies trotted out the same 90% claim. Granted, when it went to referendum, the infringement passed.

By slightly under 60 percent, as I recall. So where did the the other 30% disappear to?

Yes, the 90% claim has consistently been shown to be low-grade, poorly composted bovine ejecta. Real “polls” — votes — don’t support the numbers, so…

Katie Couric: ‘Silent Majority’ of Gun Owners Want More Gun Control
“The NRA only represents five percent of gun owners, so there’s this huge silent majority, and they represent common ground.”

[Digression: By that logic, the Bloomberg BBs represent — maybe — a few hundred people, so 99.999999999% percent of Americans must want everyone to be heavily armed at all times. -psst- Couric; I’m not NRA, but I’m pro-RKBA.]

See that? Now that the polls are clearly biased, manipulated, and maybe in the NH case, where no data exist, even made up, they have to fall back on the “silent majority” who huddle fearfully under their beds, refusing to voice what they truly want. A silent majority that can’t be verified because they run and hide form pollsters. But who transmit psychic emanations to Couric so she can discern their hidden desires.

Well, that got weird and creepy pretty quick. But that “silent majority” obviously has a thing for submission.

There’s the BBB playbook: Fake the polls; when that doesn’t work, lie. When that still doesn’t work, claim you’re speaking up for those who won’t speak up, or vote, for themselves.

How convenient.


Ed. note: This commentary appeared first on TZP’s weekly email alert. If you would like to be among the first to see new commentary (as well as to get notice of new polls and recaps of recent posts), please sign up for our alert list. (See sidebar or, if you’re on a mobile device, scroll down). Be sure to respond when you receive your activation email!

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

Victim’s Mindset

For decades — ever since I really became aware of RKBA as a political and moral issue, and educated myself on the subject — one particular question has nagged at me.

Given history (Maccabees, Basel, Warsaw Ghetto, and the Holocaust in full, to pick out a few), why and how do so many American Jews support victim disarmament? If any single group has thousands of years of experience with the value of arms, it must certainly be Jews.

The closest I’ve come to understanding this, if only on an intellectual level and certainly not agreement, is expressed by Charlie Deitch. So far as I know, he isn’t Jewish, but this seems to be the same mindset.

Deitch: Fight for gun control now, you don’t know whose life you’re saving
I’m only alive today because she killed her husband 64 years ago.
She felt so certain of her death because she only knew him as an abusive monster her entire young life. Her siblings, the oldest in his teens, had dealt with it much longer. The fact that this was her daddy made her even surer of what was coming.

An account I got later in life, the account I’m inclined to believe, is that [grandmother] got the gun away and took her shot. My grandfather, a World War II veteran and inveterate drunk, was dead; my grandmother was arrested; and six months later a grand jury, who heard the first version of events, ruled the shooting self-defense, according to a news report from the time.

Now some will say, of course, and I’m just waiting for the emails, that a gun actually saved my mother’s life back in 1952. And who knows, maybe that’s how you might think of it if you’re not a 5-year-old with a rifle in your face or her 44-year-old son who sometimes thinks about how close he came to not existing so someone else could exercise his Second Amendment rights. But I don’t see it that way, and most rational people wouldn’t see it that way either.

One man with one rifle nearly ended our entire bloodline in one night.

So the fact that everyone knew him as an abusive monster likely to kill them all means nothing. It’s the gun’s fault.

The fact that his grandmother got the rifle away from the would-be killer, yet still felt sufficiently threatened by the disarmed man to find it necessary to kill her own husband in self defense, means nothing. It’s the gun’s fault.

I’m surprised Deitch doesn’t condemn his grandmother for using that nasty, evil rifle. Isn’t it still the gun’s fault, if guns are evil by default?

No, sir, most rational people wouldn’t see it that way. You’ve confused rationality with your own delusions.

And so, I believe, do the Schumers, Feinsteins, Spielbergs, and Creditors of the Jewish world.

Rationally, a firearm is neutral; neither good nor evil. It isn’t even specifically designed to kill. “Firearms are chemical/mechanical devices designed to direct a projectile at a target. That’s all.” The target is chosen through the intent of the person using it. Deitch, of all people — his mother threatened with a gun by his grandfather, and saved by his grandmother with the same gun — should see that.

And so should should anyone whose forebearers used arms to put off their own involuntary participation in the Holocaust.

In the end, it seems that the answer to my question is that those people are irrational, not quite sane. And one does not help a crazy person get better by compromising with them and adopting part of their delusions.


Ed. note: This commentary appeared first on TZP’s weekly email alert. If you would like to be among the first to see new commentary (as well as to get notice of new polls and recaps of recent posts), please sign up for our alert list. (See sidebar or, if you’re on a mobile device, scroll down). Be sure to respond when you receive your activation email!

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

Happy Patriots’ Day

Celebrating Americans resisting gun grabbers at Lexington-Concord.

minuteman-statute

Oh.

Wait.

Town of Lexington Voting To Ban Commonly Owned Firearms & Magazines
For the record. The basic premise of Rotberg’s Article 34 is an insult to all law abiding gun owners. His logic is also flawed in that he insinuates that a gun is inherently “dangerous”. A firearm is an inanimate object incapable of doing anything on its own. The only thing that has the potential for being dangerous is the person and there is nothing in any of the versions of Article 34 which addresses this. It’s just more bigotry, harassment and blame of lawful gun owners.

Never mind.

-sigh-

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

Rational Discussions

” If you carry a gun in public you are a terrorist. Period. There is no other way around it, because you are using the gun to intimidate in the name of feeling “safe.” But you know what? Your “safety” is a threat to every other person. Every other person. Shouldn’t that scare you? Oh, and they won’t be telling you when they are about to take you out.”
Daniel Carr, commenting on the Moms Demand Victims F******k page, who has the most appropriate profile picture on FB

Armed = Terrorist. Period.

Like this guy. Or 8yo Alexis. Or this pregnant woman.

My “safety,” Mr. Carr, is only a “threat” to someone credibly threatening me with death or bodily injury. If you consider me a threat to you, I’d like you to explain why you’re planning to kill me.

The victim disarming rights-violators frequently claim that we need to have a rational discussion about guns, and whine that RKBA proponents won’t listen to them. This is why: their idea of “rational” is a display of a pathological fear of inanimate tools. They fail to realize that universal preemptively-prove-your-innocence backgrounds checks are not going to be conducted by the 70% of criminals who get their firearms through illicit transactions, nor that they cannot even be required to do so.

The victim disarmers cite research that claims to have studied the laws that best correlate with lowered gun deaths, and conclude that firearm identification (whether through ballistic fingerprinting or microstamping) would help lower deaths by 90%, even though only two states have even had ballistic fingerprinting databases, and one of those gave it up after 15 years of it never leading to a single arrest (and no one has microstamping yet). We are expectedly to “rationally” accept a study that literally cannot support the conclusions it drew because the data is nonexistent or directly contradicts the claim.

To the victim disarming blood dancers, it is rational to believe that surveys in Washington state showed that 90% of the people wanted universal PPYI checks, when less than 60% would actually vote for it.

We are to accept as “rational” the idea that a convicted felon on probation, under a restraining order, who obtained his gun via an illegal straw purchase, and killed 3, and injured 14 would have been stopped by universal PPYI checks.

Two blood dancers from Sandy Hook Promise gave statements to the New Hampshire legislature that it would be “rational” to believe that universal PPYI checks would have stopped that school killer, who obtained his weapons by killing his mother in her bed and stealing her guns.

It is supposed by the people-controlling gun grabbers to be “rational” to ban steel pipe, sheet metal, blocks of metal, nails, springs, rivets, iron oxide and aluminum, and even plastic bags to stop gun violence.

It would be “rational” to lift a nonexistent ban on gun violence research.

“Rational” discussion would accept that gun deaths are increasing, and are caused by the increasing number of guns, when the rate of gun deaths is at the lowest level in decades (while guns per capita is at a record level).

“Rational” discussion by the gun controllers’ standard means accepting delusion over reality.

Let’s have that rational discussion just as soon as your doctors get your medications balanced.


Ed. note: This commentary appeared first on TZP’s weekly email alert. If you would like to be among the first to see new commentary (as well as to get notice of new polls and recaps of recent posts), please sign up for our alert list. (See sidebar or, if you’re on a mobile device, scroll down). Be sure to respond when you receive your activation email!

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

Mask of the Blood Dancers

In response to a convicted felon on probation, under a restraining order, killing 3, and injuring 14 “Gabrielle Giffords” is dancing in the blood:

Gabrielle Giffords ‏@GabbyGiffords: In just the last week, 11 mass shootings have brought terror and tragedy to our country. This is not the America we strive for. #Hesston

Yes. This is exactly what “you” are striving for: a world in which honest people have to preemptively prove their innocence just to hope to exercise their right to self defense against murderous thugs who recognize no such restrictions. Helpless targets, so bastards like Ford can victimize them in perfect safety. Unarmed people in magical gun free zones that never work.

But no doubt, every time the policies that “you” push enable another horrific incident like this, you can call for more action that somehow requires more people to donate more money to your little Criminals’ Workplace Safety organization.

So I guess “you’re” happy.

I actually feel sorry for Gabby Giffords. Unless she has recently made a miraculous recovery, it’s unlikely that she formed that thought and typed that tweet. Medical professionals who are familiar with the sort of bullet-induced brain trauma that Giffords suffered, and who have observed her public appearances, tell me — while carefully noting it’s only a general observation and not a valid diagnosis, since they haven’t examined her –that her behavior is consistent with extreme brain damage that she will never further recover from; that most likely her understanding of the world, much less victim disarmament, is that of a young, innocent child. And always will be.

Giffords is most likely perpetual child who just wants to please the nice people surrounding her. One being used by her own husband, Mark Kelly, and the gun people controlling puppeteers around her. Think on the utter lack of morals and ethics it takes to abuse and manipulate a trusting child like that. Contempt only begins to describe my thoughts about them.

Then consider what Mark Kelly et al would be willing to do to everyone else, whom they don’t obstensibly love and care for.

Gabby Giffords is the mask that the victim disarmers use to hide the true face of gun control.


Ed. note: This commentary appeared first on TZP’s weekly email alert. If you would lik>e to be among the first to see new commentary (as well as to get notice of new polls and recaps of recent posts), please sign up for our alert list. (See sidebar or, if you’re on a mobile device, scroll down). Be sure to respond when you receive your activation email!

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

Traitorous Bagel-Brains Against Gun Victims

bagel-brain-x-ray

U.S. rabbis’ anti-gun violence group starts in Berkeley
Like many Americans, Creditor reached a boiling point on guns after the 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting in Newtown, Connecticut, where 20 young children and six adults were killed.

If Rabbi Creditor wants to reduce gun violence, it would be a fine thing for him to organize gun safety classes for the young people of his community. He could work to expand economic opportunities so fewer would resort to the illegal drug trade. He could perform direct outreach to at-risk kids. He could exercise the prime responsibilty of a rabbi by teaching these people the difference between aggression and defensive use of force.

But Creditor is a rabbi in name only. He doesn’t want to teach.

“Our vision is to amplify the work that’s being done, knowing that Congress has failed us so far,” Creditor said. “The ability that faith leaders have to marshal civic activism is unrivaled.”

More laws. More violations of the rights of honest people. The kind of laws that those honest people — and even Congress — have rejected.

Because, when violent crime rates are dropping to levels not seen for decades, some crazy minor murdered a woman to steal her guns and take them to a designated gun-free victim disarmament zone to murder more people…

…he wants to inflict more human/civil rights infringements on the people who didn’t do it. Because the gun laws didn’t work there, Rabbi Creditor wants to turn the entire nation into Sandy Hook.

For safety.

Because disarming Jews worked so well there, he wants to turn America into Nazi Germany.

For safety.

I think not. I strongly suspect his motivation is a little more crass.

Creditor also got Eileen Soffer, a Mountain View resident who had worked as the national deputy field director of Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America, to come aboard as the full-time national coordinator.

That is the same Moms Demand Victims that is under the umbrella of Everytown for Gun Safety (along with Mayors Against Illegal Guns), which is chaired — and heavily funded — by billionaire Michael Bloomberg who never saw a gun in civilian hands that he liked (except his own bodyguards). Soffer undoubtedly brought along the promise of financial backing for yet another bloody-handed victim disarmament group.

Perhaps I’m being unfair; maybe he wants something other than restrictions on rights. But since he does want “further expanded background checks, public health research into gun violence, I doubt it. The fact that he runs their F******k page as a closed group implies that they want to hide their agenda from those who appreciate civils rights.

I invite Rabbi Creditor to answer a few questions.

  1. Have you ever read the complete Constitution, to include the Bill of Rights?
  2. Do you comprehend the difference between a constitutional republic and a democracy?
  3. Exactly what gun laws do you propose to stop another Sandy Hook scenario (where the perpetrator violated a series of laws just to get the guns)?
  4. How do you propose to protect the rights of those who didn’t do it?
  5. How do you propose to enforce your laws on criminals (bearing in mind that criminals cannot be required to submit to a background check)?
  6. If your agenda includes weapons bans, will you man up and conduct confiscations peronally?
  7. Would any ban/confiscation recompense gun owners for the loss of property? Have you considered how much money that would be?
  8. What will you do when the good guys just say, No”?
  9. What will you do if the good guys say, “All righty, then“?

I await Rabbi Creditor’s response, though not with bated breath.

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

Cause or Effect

“Shoulder thing that goes up.”

“Bullet-piercing bullets.”

“TEC-9 rifle.”

“Heat-seeking .50 caliber bullets.”

Semi-automatic assault rifles, high-power .223 Remington, .9 mm and 40 caliber bullets, flash hiders that make guns invisible to the target… And I’m sure you can add plenty more stupidities to the list of things victim disarmers say. It’s hard to find a news report on an anti-RKBA proposal that isn’t stuffed full of such absurdities, and harder to find a reporter who’ll call out the speaker on it. I used to make a hobby of contacting reporters to explain why that “submachinegun” wasn’t a submachinegun. I gave it up because I couldn’t keep up, and because never even once would the media whore make the correction.

I recently challenged a NYC congresscritter to identify a national army — anywhere in the world — that issues semi-auto AK or AR variants instead of the auto-capable assault rifles. Rather than correct his mistake, he settled for silence.

Moms Demand Action, as one of their early Facebook entries, posted a chart supporting the Kellerman “43 times more likely” claim. I commented, noting that that particular study had been thoroughly debunked (even by pro-gun control types). Shannon Watts (or more likely some intern) replied that they weren’t referencing the Kellerman paper, that it came from a different study, to which I pointed to their chart and noted that it was labeled with the Kellerman paper reference.

I became one of the first people banned by MDA, and my comments disappeared. The chart stayed. Since Watts has a habit of shoving both feet into her mouth clear up to the knees, you probably can think of similar examples.

Does stupidity cause gun control, or does gun control cause stupidity?

In all honesty, the most vocal gun grabbers cannot seem to get the most basic facts right. Sometimes it’s intentional, as in Sugarman’s desire to equate cosmetic “assault weapons” with select-fire assault rifles in people’s minds. Sometimes it’s sheer stupidity (-cough- McCarthy).

And it hurts their cause. On more than one occasion, I’ve been able to explain some actual facts to a victim disarmament supporter, and seen that person become outraged at having been lied to. One took up shooting herself. Another simply refused to take the Bradys seriously again, and called me to confirm or deny stuff she saw in the news after that.

So why do the disarmers do it? Are they stupid? Is that why they promote mass violation of human and civil rights, and create safe work places for violent criminals?

Or do they deliberately create outrageous, clearly false statements as a sort of social engineering filter? Like “Nigerian scammers:”

“Finally, this approach suggests an answer to the question in the title. Far-fetched tales of West African riches strike most as comical. Our analysis suggests that is an advantage to the attacker, not a disadvantage. Since his attack has a low density of victims the Nigerian scammer has an over-riding need to reduce false positives. By sending an email that repels all but the most gullible the scammer gets the most promising marks to self-select, and tilts the true to false positive ratio in his favor.”

If Nigerian bankers can filter to ensure they’re dealing with the most gullible, why not anti-gun pollsters? That would account for the “90% of Americans want universal background checks” results. That would be 90% of everyone who didn’t say, “Are you [********] me? Take me off your call list,” and hang up.

“Shoulder Thing” McCarthy is clearly stupid, but Schumer is pretty darned smart; evil, but smart. When he calls a pistol a rifle, he knows the difference; he is sifting for gullible folks he can manipulate.

So, despite their words and actions, the victim disarmament leadership are not stupid. Nor do they truly hate firearms (else Schumer and Watts wouldn’t surround themselves with armed guards). They do have an over-arching agenda that causes them to fear guns out of their control.

The gun control foot soldiers — MMM attendees, writers of letters to the editor, silly petition signers — often are stupid, or at least gullible. Others are not really either, but haven’t looked into issues closely, for assorted reasons. They aren’t really gullible, but may not realize how blatantly the Schumers, Watts, and Bloombergs of the world are willingly to lie to them. The Große Lüge has a long history of effectiveness.

Aaron Zelman understood this. And he understood that propaganda of this sort is best countered with education. Thus, his informative Grandpa Jack comic series that explained issues in a down-to-earth simplified style, and documentaries on the true origins of gun control. If No Guns for Negroes could run just once on a major mainstream media channel, race-baiting gun banners would lose their poor, urban constituency over night.

Education comes in many forms, and is best tailored to the specific demographic.

Bloombergian Plotters: They aren’t stupid. They don’t expect gun control to solve problems of violence. For them, it is merely a tool of manipulation. They are best countered with ridicule. Every time one appears in public with an armed guard, photographs should suck up Internet bandwidth. Point out their hypocrisy and falsehoods. Laugh at them. Their lesson is that we are onto them, watching.

The Ignorant: These are the ones who bought the Big Lie. They need the Big Truth. If I had the funds, I would buy ad space in major outlets; whole page ads showing the functionally identical, but cosmetically differing, AR-15 and Aries SCR,noting that no national military has ever replaced their assault rifles with either. Below that would be the actual M-16A2 assault rifle. The text for that one would be: “Confused? That’s exactly what [insert name of local/national gun grabber] wanted. Learn more at www.zelmanpartisans.com.” Comparison charts of firearms deaths by country would be good, too. Chart 1: the usual showing the US at the top. Chart 2: the real raw numbers that show the middle ranking. Caption: “What else did they lie about? Learn more at…”

The Gullible: To some extent, the Big Truth will work with this group. But… they will often have a vested emotional interest in not admitting that they were used so cynically, that they were wrong. Like a puppy who won’t admit his mess, we have to rub their noses in it. Most often, I have found that works best one on one.

For instance, victim disarmers are real proud of that “if it saves just one life” meme. Recently, someone threw that at me during a discussion of prohibited persons. I responded with this:

“And how about if but one person is _killed_ by baseless restrictions? My brother died because immoral idiots prevented him having a defensive tool when he needed it, based on _one_ incident, not involving weapons, thirty years before.”

Presented with a hypothetical life, I countered with a real, personal to me, death directly blamed on the Lautenberg Amendment. Suddenly the troll shut up.

“No good guy with a gun…” My counter there is three personal incidents in which I did just that against multiple assailants.

“A woman is safer without weapons…” I tell them about my friend who was attacked on a gun-free campus. She stopped the sexual predator in his tracks with the pepper spray we gave her (and trained her on).

The gullible, with guilty consciences, won’t respond well to simple impersonal numbers, or news reports that run counter to their belief. Hit them with personal anecdotes and facts.

Nose, meet mess. Now clean it up.

None of this will be easy. To personally address every gullible fool requires every honest gun owner to step up and talk to them. Paying your annual TZP or GOA membership dues can help with media ads, but you still need to act personally.

Ad placement will be difficult, as the well-financed NRA has learned, with Comcast refusing to run ads that show firearms or a gun show vendor area even in the background. To start, I would probably try local print papers that cannot afford to turn down revenue. And niche magazines (truckers, cars, gardening and such, as opposed to big circulation general interest magazines like Time, People, or Cosmo).

If you have more cash on hand, try short local spots. Some might even run them at low/no cost to meet their public service requirements.

If inherent stupidity causes gun control, there is only so much we can do. But where gun controllers are trying to inflict stupidity, we can fight back.

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

Beware of legislators seeking anonymity

The National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) reports that a band of cowardly legislators quietly got together to form an association dedicated to relieving you of your gun rights.

These pusillanimous twits announced the creation of American State Legislators for Gun Violence Prevention (ASLGVP), claiming it’s a “non-partisan” effort to reduce gun violence further infringe on the rights of law-abiding citizens across America, given Congress’ fail to do anything about the issue.

The NSSF reports that the “ASLGVP boasts having 200 members from all 50 states but the group will not release a list of their membership, due to a fear of “political backlash.”  So, outside of the eight members that participated in the inaugural press conference, no one knows who is or is not a member of this group.

We do know that non-partisan seems to be the biggest load of BS since “the check is in the mail” and “I’ll still respect you in the morning” went out of style.

Founding members include Adam Ebbin (D-ullard, VA) and Brian Kavanagh (D-olt, NY).

Ebbin is known for his “undercover video” in which he purchases a 30-round “extended clip” (is that like an assault clip?) without a background check. *GASP!*

Kavanagh’s latest claim to gun-grabbing fame is the introduction of a bill that would allow anyone who is concerned paranoid and hoplophobic to report anyone else to a court in order to persuade the court to issue a temporary order preventing the person from acquiring or possessing guns. Without a trial. Without so much as a legal standard. Just, “Oh! I feel threatened by my ex husband, so take guns away from him!

If these two gun-grabbing monkeys are any indication, this group is hardly non-partisan and has nothing to do with safety or reducing violence.

But more disturbing than that is the insistence on secrecy. Won’t release its membership for fear of “political backlash”??? What does this tell you?

The legislators know what they’re doing faces stringent opposition, and they want to keep it secret from the very people who put them in power.

They’re cowards, plain and simple. They don’t want to be accountable to their constituents. They don’t want to be held responsible by the people whose rights they betray.

Here’s the deal, people. Any legisleech who feels him or herself entitled enough to participate in an effort or initiative that quite plainly and obviously aims to infringe on basic, natural, Constitutional rights needs to be exposed for the liar, petty statist that they are.

Cockroaches aren’t fond of sunlight, so shine that light on any politician who seeks to keep secrets from you – the people from whom their power stems – especially if that secret aims to impact, hinder, or otherwise infringe on your natural rights.

Start with this horde of leeches.

leeches

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

Mike vs. Hoplophobe

What happens when a famous science fiction author, gun rights advocate and gun enthusiast takes on an angry, frothing, hysterical hoplophobe?

It’s a TKO. I know of no one who can dismantle an anti-gun zealot better than Michael Z. Williamson, so it’s worth your time to read the entire article. But here’s just a snippet below:

Gun freaks say if you take away their guns only outlaws will have guns. That’s a chance worth taking. Because if we ban guns, eventually the tide will turn. It might take 10 years or 20 years. Hell, it might take 50 years. But if we make it illegal to own a handgun, eventually there will be no handguns.

I have functional guns from 1872 in my collection.  In the UK, criminals convert dummy and airsoft guns to fire bullets.  Once again, the gun freak (you), opens his ignorant yap about a subject without doing the faintest modicum of research. That’s probably why you’re in “reporting,” the Special Olympics of writing. Real writers have to do research.

Let the hunters keep their rifles and shotguns; those weapons are ineffective tools in a mass shooting.

BWUAHAHAHAAHA!  You went full retard.  Never go full retard.   Your typical deer rifle has 3 times the muzzle energy of an “assault weapon” (please define what that is for me.  Go ahead) and about 10 times that of a handgun. But they’re “ineffective.”  Because nothing that can kill a bull elk could be useful for killing people.

Mike’s language and sarcasm can be strong, so be warned. That said, there’s nothing more fun than watching a professional author take down a sniveling, barely educated coward.

I give it a decided thumbs up.

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

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.

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail