All posts by Nicki

authoritarian swine, gun control, gun grabbers, guns, hoplophobia, Politics

Beware of legislators seeking anonymity

2 Comments

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

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail
guns, self defense

U.S. Jewish Groups Strengthen Security Infrastructure

4 Comments

One would think that taking responsibility for their own safety in the wake of horrific attacks on the synagogue at Har Nof and increased anti-Semitic sentiments both in the United States and in Europe would be a wise thing for every Jew to do. I certainly was thrilled to read in the Washington Post that U.S. Jewish institutions were beginning to examine their security…

Until I actually read the Washington Post article.

The security structure called Secure Community Network that allows Jews and other religious groups to share intelligence among themselves has been around since 2004. But now, the groups have become more intent on protecting their own.

Last month’s attack on a Jerusalem synagogue popular with Americans is the kind of thing that spurs U.S. institutions to look at their security. Since 2004, a primary clearinghouse for information and training on how to handle potential threats has been the Secure Community Network – a nonprofit created that year to beef up security at U.S. Jewish institutions.

The group, founded by several major Jewish institutions, also created an information-sharing network meant to connect Christian, Muslim and other faith groups to help one another if they learn something about a hate group that could potentially threaten others. It trains people on things including how to know whether to hire private security if you are attending or participating in a demonstration.

It all sounds well and good, right? Except, that the training it provides is “lock yourself in your office, and hope an active shooter doesn’t get you while you wait for law enforcement to arrive.” At what point do Jews say, “ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!” and stop acting like sheep by relying on the government to do the protecting for them?

At what point do they begin to understand that waiting for the police to arrive on the scene while an active shooter or an active stabber rampage through the building is not an optimal response (or lack thereof)?

Sharing information is good. Being aware of your surroundings is definitely useful. Having advance warning of potential attacks is critical. If this public/private partnership can help, terrific!

But why does it not provide tactical training? Why are these groups still shunning what is the most effective means of self defense today in favor of cowering in a locked office and praying for the police to show up? Why rely on police or armed security to protect you, when just one individual with a gun can stop a rampage? (For evidence of this, look no further than Jeanne Assam, who stopped a rampaging lunatic at New Life Church in Colorado in 2007.)

If Jews and other religious groups want to effectively strengthen their security, they should consider firearms training. Until they stop fearing guns and panicking hysterically at Bloomberg-funded anti-gun propaganda, their steps to protect themselves will be only perfunctory at best.

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail
authoritarian swine, gun grabbers, guns

Mike vs. Hoplophobe

2 Comments

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.

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail
self defense, shooting

The Klown Kar of Stoopid Drives On

1 Comment

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.

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail
defense of others, guns, mindset, self defense

Some thoughts on Ferguson

8 Comments

Well, not that it was unexpected.

The riots, looting, and destruction were the culmination of weeks of threats the savages of Ferguson issued if the grand jury did not return the  verdict they desired.

The city is burning, and they were ready for war.

They were ready for “war,” because somehow the decision of their fellow citizens based on scientific evidence became a personal slight – an opportunity to project every miserable  event in their lives onto this one event and blame others for what they perceive to be their lousy lot in life.

I’m not good at expressing very many feelings, other than rage.

One of my assignments in grad school for my class in intelligence profiling was to develop a profile of myself. After careful self-analysis, I realized that my background as a Soviet Jew is the reason for my visceral reactions to injustice.

I wrote that injustice – whether it’s the force of the state against the individual, the force of the strong taking advantage and abusing the weak – whether the elderly, defenseless animals, or babies – or the force of those who gather in a mob to abuse those whom they perceive to be ready victims – makes me cry.

It ties my stomach up in knots.

The sheer intensity of the rage I feel takes my breath away.

The helplessness – the inability to do anything to help level the playing field – the utter despair I feel becomes physical pain.

It’s that pain that I felt when I stared down the barrel of a Soviet-made AK in Chop – that little border town in western Ukraine after the guards took my dad away for no reason other than to humiliate the Jews.

That’s the kind of pain and rage I feel when I see the looting Neanderthals victimizing innocent people in savage hordes.

Why?

It’s not because some kind of injustice happened in that grand jury hearing! It’s no because the jury was wrong, or racist, or somehow prejudiced against Michael Brown.

It’s because the jury did its job. They examined forensic reports, listened to testimony from eyewitnesses and others, read multiple written documents,  (the entire pack of documents is linked here) and in the end, they chose not to indict.

The justice system worked. Whether or not you like or agree with the results, based on the reams of evidence they examined, the grand jury did its due diligence and decided not to return the indictment.

That is called justice.

But that’s not why these looters are rioting. They don’t care about justice. They were planning riots long before the decision not to indict came down. They were planning to victimize innocent people – people who were maybe more successful, more well off, and better situated than they were.

And because these miserable, thieving Neanderthals need someone to blame for their lousy lot in life, they chose to project their grievances onto this one case, and to punish those who represent the wealth and success they would not work to achieve.

THAT’s what this is about. It’s a herd of barbarians taking the opportunity to exact vengeance for some nebulous slights against innocent people who had nothing to do with the grand jury decisions.

Merely because they could.

They had bricks, incendiary devices, numbers, and the willingness to victimize others.

Gun sales spiked in preparation for the decision in this case, according to CNN. Many chose not to rely on police to protect themselves and their property, but to take responsibility for their own lives and livelihoods.

That did not stop the looting hordes from setting local businesses and vehicles on fire.  What did the owners of Little Caesar’s Pizza and Auto Zone ever do to these animals?

Nothing. They looted and burned businesses, because they were there. Because this was the opportunity to take out all their rage on someone – anyone! It was the opportunity to, for once, in their miserable, decaying lives, to show their strength, rather than fester in their weakness!

I know I’m not good at expressing my emotions. I know I tend to focus more on factual information, links, evidence, etc.

But this…

This injustice – not the grand jury decision, which by all available evidence was reached after a thorough preponderance of the evidence presented – but the repugnant display of force against innocent people…

…this savagery makes me sick!

It should make anyone sick!

It should evoke tears, rage, horror, and shock.

This is the devolution of our society – the chaos and the agonizing shambles – that comes from this entitlement mentality: the mentality that allows sub-human swine to victimize innocent people en masse, because they somehow feel they somehow have the right to do so as a demonstration of their own impotent rage.

I’m so glad many in Ferguson chose to arm themselves! I’m grateful people began to realize how critical the ability to defend themselves is. I only fear that not enough of them chose to do so.

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail
gun control, gun grabbers, guns

Never had any doubt

1 Comment

“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
authoritarian swine, gun control, guns, Voting

Rights are not up for grabs or votes

4 Comments

Now that Election 2014 has come and gone, and Bloomberg’s Everytown initiative suffered losses in nearly every arena, forcing him to waste $50 million  on an effort Americans obviously oppose, it’s time to ask some questions about our rights.

Among the sea of rejection for the gun control mission, however, there were tiny spots of stupid that gave small victories to the gun grabbers.

Washington state (as if you hadn’t heard Gunsense drones crowing about it) has passed Initiative Measure 594 – a gun control measure that would require every person wishing to purchase a firearm – even those doing so via private sales – to get government permission to do so.

This, in essence, has banned private sales. When you insert a government transaction, done through an FFL, into a private transaction, said sale ceases to be private.

Was the initiative about safety? Anyone who has been following the gun rights debate for any length of time knows that safety has nothing to do with it.  Criminals, for the most part, do not get guns through legal channels.

Guns purchase

Basic economics indicate that as long as there is a demand, there will be a supply, and when you close off legal supply channels, the black market flourishes.

So it’s not about safety. So why is it that Washingtonians were so eager to cede their basic rights to government infringement, even though this measure has no hope of stopping crime?

Why hand over your rights so easily?

Make no mistake, these are rights.

The right to keep and bear arms is a natural right that stems from the right to life and the right to defend your life. Why allow petty elected tyrants to control what tool you use to do it?

What about the right to property? Why would you allow the government to intrude on your right to dispose of your property as you see fit? If it rightfully belongs to you, why would you allow any government to control to whom you sell it?

And lastly, why would Washingtonians subject their natural rights to a vote in the first place?

Less than 50 percent of Washington residents voted in this election, and yet, they decided the fate of the natural rights of their fellow citizens – the right to dispose of their property, and the right to purchase it without government intrusion.

They decided this despite the fact that no loud, screeching, uninformed majority should ever be allowed to decide the fate of our natural rights with a push of a button.

That is not a decision any majority should be allowed to make.  And yet Washingtonians not only allowed the right to keep and bear arms and the right to property to be limited by their fellow state residents, but also allowed those rights to be put on the chopping block in the first place.

Rights exist. They are not and should not be up for discussion, debate, or a vote.

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail
gun grabbers

Shootings take their toll

5 Comments

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
duty, gun control, gun grabbers, guns, Inspiration

A Video to Make You Tear Up

1 Comment

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
gun grabbers, shooting

A Few Questions About Jaylen Fryberg

6 Comments

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