Category Archives: You can’t fix stupid

guns, Media, mindset, resistance, self defense, So Much Stupid!, Terrorism, You can't fix stupid

OH NO!! Not the ___________!

6 Comments

Yeah, I’ll come back to the ___________! A couple of stories caught my eye the other day and got me to thinking. It happens.

So while I was kind of digging around seeing where I wanted to go with this, I ran across some other interesting things to share with you.

One of the things I was looking at was the number of violent crimes against women. And in the course of looking around for this, I ran across some things I hadn’t realized. For example, all around the world it seems in 2016 there was a wave of acid attacks against women. Acid is thrown onto women. This is in addition to the large rise in the number of sexual assaults against women. Many of them perpetrated by recent “immigrants” or “refugees”. The term used depends on the reporting of the country you are reading about. And terms used are important. For example, the “Judge” that decided the young soldier that shot the pieceful Falestinian that had just stabbed another soldier was not a threat. She stated this clearly by saying the “TERRORIST” was not a threat. Jack Engelhard has some pretty interesting commentary on this.

And what you call a person that perpetrated an attack, back to that bit. Well, in some countries you just don’t. The massive amount of sexual assaults last year in Germany was covered up, by the politicians and the media. It now has it’s own wikipedia page. But then the media and the politicians came to their senses and did the right thing by reporting it. Naw, just kidding. The social media outrage, first of the assaults and then the cover up, was huge, then they couldn’t ignore it. Not so much about protecting women as their image. I mean, what paper wants to be thought of as slimy, or in the same class as the NY Slimes? But at least an explanation was finally found. A helpful prominent muslim imam has this to say. It’s all the women’s fault.

In the wake of the Cologne attacks, a prominent Muslim imam, Sami Abu-Yusuf, told reporters women were to blame because they “dress half naked and wear perfume.”

It’s true, the German papers don’t want to warn women by telling them to look out for “Taharrush gamea”. Not that there is much the women could do about it. In fact, German police won’t tell you who to watch out for, because that would be racist. It’s a top level down policy decision. The police on the street in German said they are used to dealing with drunks around the holidays, but dealing with a mass of men that surround a woman or a few women and assault her? They’re seem to be handling it with the “um, what do we do now?”policy. This policy didn’t seem to work, so the German authorities got more aggressive. They began posting signs in different languages telling the new immigrants it’s not okay to grab a woman’s butt. But where they came from it’s fine. What happened to “respecting other cultures” Germany? The Germans also are having to sort out what to do with the influx of immigrants with child brides. While pedophilia is illegal in Germany, where the immigrants came from it’s not pedophilia. Sort of you say potato, we say potato.

It seemed the Swedish newspapers were very critical of the German newspapers reporting such things. Sweden prides itself of being a feminist supporting state. However, when the reports came out about the assaults on the German women, there was outrage. No, not that the German women had been attacked, but that the newspapers admitted, finally, that it was almost all Merkel’s immigrants who had done it. Then stories of the assaults in Sweden started coming out. Some politicians spoke out against the immigrants and in favor of protecting the women. The National Police Commissioner of Sweden came out and said he was so revolted he vomited. No, not about the women being attacked, but the politician that was speaking out against the immigrants. The rank and file police have said they are afraid to say what is happening.

As a result, immigration cannot be discussed frankly in Sweden. If you mention anything negative about refugees or immigration, you’re accused of playing into the hands of the reviled far-right. As a result, even legitimate concerns are silenced or labelled xenophobic.

And so Sweden has a very different idea of protecting women’s rights, or being a feminist than at least I would.

But the HuffPo has an amazing idea of protecting women’s rights. In a story about violence towards women, and attacks on women it praises Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau because he is such a strong “feminist”. Why? Because he supports funding abortion. Huh? By the same token, President Elect Trump was reviled. Partly because he doesn’t, partly because he said something bad and may have even done it. But in my little mind, there is a massive difference between saying something horribly offensive and throwing acid on a woman, gang raping her or killing her. But to HuffPo, well that’s how it is, that’s what they call respecting women’s rights.

So, when a politician tells you they respect women’s rights? Just be aware that may not mean wheat you think it means.

So, solutions. We need better solutions than Ketchup heiress john kerry produces.

One possible solution? The wearable alarm. No, it can’t call 911, but it can be programmed to call a friend or family member to come find you, or your body, as the case may be. But to some folks, this is a very empowering tool for women to have and use.

My personal favorite story? The 74 year old grandma that drove off a armed man wearing mask and gloves who broke into her home. She grabbed her own pistol and shot at him. It was in Texas, so she’s not in any trouble for shooting at him. It’s a shame she seems to have missed him, so he’s still out there. But the police said they have no problem that she shot at him. Now to me? THAT’S being supportive of women.

But then there is another class out there. This is the class that finds a President Elect who said something disgusting and may have done something disgusting to be the biggest threat women face. A fate more horrible than, well, something like living in a town with like, NO Starbuck$. And they have come up with a weapon so powerful, it boggles the mind. And they are fixin’ to deploy it. OH NO! Not the knitted, pink “pussy power hats”!!!!

Pink Pussy Power Hat
Pink Pussy Power Hat

There is going to be a March on Washington DC, the 21st of January. To make a strong statement for women’s rights. That a man who said something vile in the past is now elected. And it’s a world wide event too! There’s a A “pussy power hat” tracker , that shows where they all are. A group of female social justice warriors organized the march.

I’m sitting here thinking “you could be marching to object to crimes against women, or against women being legislated into being defenseless and disarmed. You could be marching against high taxes on firearms and ammunition that prevent poor people in bad neighborhoods from being able to afford the tools to defend themselves.” Yes, they could do those things that would empower women, that would help women remain safer in these odd and changing times and places. But they aren’t. In fact, I’d guess most of them are against such things.

Words matter, yes they do. The judge’s words “terrorist” giving away what they know about the man that was shot. Words that are left out of police reports and media coverage that keep citizens unaware of a dangerous phenomena that has begun because to tell the truth is racist. Vile words uttered that can’t be taken back no matter what, they are out there. Words matter, yes they do.

But NOTHING is as powerful as the knitted pink pussy power hat. Oh NO, NOT the pink pussy power hat! I’m sure the pattern is on the website somewhere…..I think I’ll stick to something else pink in a higher caliber. But that’s just me, and I’d like to think I’m a higher caliber kind of gal.

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail
Politics, self defense, Terrorism, You can't fix stupid

Europe Arranges the Deck-Chairs

4 Comments

Ever since the end of World War II, Europeans have had a fixation in some variation of “hate speech”.  It may be something as overt as legally banning neoNazi or neoFascist organizations.  It may be prosecuting “revisionist” authors and speakers.  Or it may be the general growth, supported by leftist political and academic leaders, of condemning anything not approved as “racism”.

Sadly, rather than directly confront these ideas, and dispose of them by shining a light of critical analysis thereon, and perhaps socially shunning their adherents as dangerous fools or thugs, they instead use the force of government to determine which ideas and advocacy is permissible.

Generally, even deprecating humor, like used so skillfully by, say, Mel Brooks, is set aside for ineffectual forms of censorship.  Censorship which only serves to enhance the uncritical mystique of these organizations, authors, movements, and ideas. Worse, the various governments, their abiding elites, and usually, a lick-spittle media, fall in lockstep, with this program.

The convergence of inexorable demographic, economic, and political realities and the growing, militant, and insidious, dependent, underclass presented by the so-called “Syrian Refugee” is creating a huge rift between the native populations of Europe, and their respective governments. Most are not from Syria at all, and most are not, as the term is commonly understood, “refugees”, but why dwell on these little details, right?

This rift has grown to invigorate and legitimize a broad range of “nationalistic” movements, to the horror of the paralyzed establishment organs.  The establishment desperately repeats the condemnations of popular sentiments, by labeling them as “racist”, when as often as not, they are nothing of the sort.

Witness the threats and machinations in the face of weakening the idiotic supra-governmental European Union, via “Brexit”.  The fact is that this organization, (really, like any government) only serves as a broker to victimizing the stronger and more responsible peoples to the benefit of those less so… with a hefty skim off the top, for good measure.

An important bellwether of this farce is the changing status of the European Jew.  Those few Jews who remain in Europe, are increasingly split in two camps:

One; the secular. As in all other lands and ages of the last 3500 years or so, they inexorably fade from history’s stage, via low reproduction, assimilation, and intermarriage.  Until they are, simply… gone.

Two; the (at least somewhat) observant.  Just as in America, (and Israel, for that matter) they adhere to the principles that make them (to the revulsion of many) “eternal”.  They reproduce.  They marry among their people.  They survive, as a people.

Post-war Europe, out of a sense of guilt, mixed with a desperate need for adaptable, smart, productive, citizens, hitched their wagons to, among others, the few remaining (and, as it happens, largely secular) Jews.

Most of the surviving Jews had left for new lives in America or Israel.  The only exception were those held captive by Communism, and ground away mercilessly, in the Soviet Union and its satellites.

Now, with the twin prongs of the “Refugee’s” often violent, and savage, worldview, and the utter ineptitude & hostility, of their governments to address it, made worse by those few legitimate threats within “nationalist” movements, the smart Jews are packing up, and leaving.

Those that remain hide their Jewishness from the public eye, withdraw their children from public schools, avoid synagogue attendance, and often re-double efforts to assimilate into multi-culti, generic, Europeans.

In exchange for this loss, Europe is gaining a huge body of young Jihadis, and welfare recipients, with highly suspect ages – backgrounds – intentions.  Sweden has become the Rape Capital of Europe. Denmark is barely better. France and Germany are subject to a wide variety of terror attacks by their new “Culture Enrichers”. Ask the British man on the street about Rotherham.

muslim-rape-gangs

After two thousand years of abusing Jews, as with the First Muslim Conquests, Europe is receiving a very harsh lesson.  And there is little sign that they have learned a thing in all that time.

Although America is not Europe, it shares some of its frailties.  Our elites frequently ape the Europeans cultural & political fads.  Will we make the same kind of mistakes, as well?  Will we also  arrange deck-chairs, while _our_ ship slips below the waves?

goodbye

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail
mindset, Politics, You can't fix stupid

Decorum and the “Armed Society…” thesis

9 Comments

Before I start, let me get a couple of things out of the way.  First, I did not vote for Mr. Trump.  Second, I am not in favor of a “Wall”, either actual or metaphoric, for a variety of reasons.  Third, I do not fit comfortably in either the “Conservative” or Liberal” political camp in America.   Okay, here we go…

Over the weekend a video has been flying about on social media.  The original poster says he was in the community room / common area of his apartment or condo complex and it shows two others, a man and a woman berating him continuously for over ten minutes over his “wall” shirt, and ultimately everything about him.

He keeps his cool.  He does a poor job (about what most of us would actually do, given the inevitable stifled emotions) verbally defending himself.  He repeatedly asks the female to stop touching him, and asks them both repeatedly to leave him alone. To no avail.

If this had happened to me, I might have kept my composure through the first two or three minutes. Ten minutes of this?  No way.  Sadly, no way.  I’m not proud of this, but, ten minutes of this crap?

I also would have gone silent after less than a minute.  I would like to think that I’d have the presence of mind to simply call the landlord’s security team and ask for assistance.  If that did not scatter them, I probably would have quietly closed up my computer, packed my stuff, and then drug those two people out of the building, saying simply, “Learn when to shut your mouth”.

Lots of discussion has centered on this episode (typically labeled as Liberals accosting a Conservative in California) with the usual “us vs. them” elements, and most notably, the anticipated “An armed society is a polite society”, assertion.

One discussion I was in on addressed the “Armed society” aspect, albeit poorly.  It is this idea which I’d like to comment on.

It has been my experience that parts of the country one might describe as “Western” are often as not in the West, geographically.  Yet, one aspect common to these areas, and the people who inhabit them, is a far more refined sense of the line between being neighborly, and butting into someone else’s business.

Like it or not, humans both want to live in social settings, and yet have a large degree of autonomy.  When that balance is struck, we do well together.  When not, excuses for creating or strengthening institutions like the State, start to gain credibility.  To everyone’s detriment.

The episode in the video above comes about when there is an imbalance between the freedom to act and having to experience the consequences of that act.  If those two expressed their displeasure at the shirt (even vigorously) and then went on with their lives, it would amount to nothing.

The problem is that they felt free to harangue him without limit.  And they were correct in that risk analysis.  The risk of experiencing harsh consequences for their verbal assault, then and there, were nill.  The law, if present, would quite possibly go after him.  At least they would draw moral equivalence between the bullies and their target.

The presence of guns is not the cause of a “polite society”.  It is an emblem of one.  It says, especially if carried openly, “I am ready and willing to live as a free man or woman, accept the consequences, and refuse to shunt off my responsibilities on others.”

Personally, and socially, the further we stray away from that, the more likely it is that the scales will be balanced with, often over-reaching, violence.

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail
gun grabbers, hoplophobia, You can't fix stupid

What kind of wall is that again?

5 Comments

This post appeared first on TZP’s Monday email alert.

Plans to ban guns based on appearance march on. Late last month, Washington Ceasefire and Ceasefire Oregon announced a joint effort to get “assault weapons” banned in both states.

Specifically, they want to create a “West Coast Wall.” Building on California’s existing bans, they want to make the entire U.S. west coast … um, wait, what do they want to make it? I live here and I don’t even know. More on that in a moment.

The groups say they want legislation that uses “Connecticut’s ban on assault weapons as a guide.”

Whether they chose Connecticut because there’s something they particularly like about that state’s instant-felon creation machinery or because Connecticut = Sandy Hook = emotions overriding thought, I don’t know. At a glance, that state’s AW law seems to focus on banning — very strictly — the usual “shoulder thing that goes up” type features, and standard-capacity magazines, as well as a list of specific firearms and their derivatives.

One thing the Ceasefire activists surely do like is that the U.S. Supreme Court recently upheld Connecticut’s law, giving them a leg up in the enforcement department if they’re able to impose their legislative will.

But the thing I wonder about is that “West Coast Wall.” What is its exactly? How will it work? One can merely speculate.

  • Is it a wall as in “blockade”? Do they believe that somehow they’ll succeed in locking the entire west coast of the U.S. so that those eeeevil assault weapons won’t be able to get in past the Golden Gate, the Columbia, or Puget Sound? Or so that, on the eastern boundaries, all those murderous, rampaging weapons will be forced to pile up uselessly at the borders of Idaho, Nevada, and Arizona, unable to penetrate the True Blue West?
  • Is it a wall as in prison? I suppose. In a way. Surely they hope (without actually calculating the numbers of felons or the cost of imprisoning us all) to put every violating gun owner behind bars. But hasn’t anybody told them how laughably porous prison walls are when it comes to contraband getting in and out? Can they actually imagine that decreeing guns to be illegal will make them go away?
  • Is it a wall as in “wall of noise”? Before announcing their big plans in July, the combined state Ceasefire groups polled a whopping 310 people in Washington and Oregon and concluded that 65 percent of apparently everybody favors banning undefinable but obviously scary “assault weapons.” Sixty-five percent is short of the 90 percent that’s become the standard claim for these things. So maybe the activists figure that a West Coast Wall of clamorous propaganda is needed to bump up that figure.
  • Is it a wall of nonsense? Can we sit down with these Ceasefire people? Can we find out whether they can tell a muzzle brake from a folding stock? Shall we listen to them tell us that magazine bans work because once the “bullets” in the ‘zines are all shot, there are no more magazines left? Shall we ask them how one of those “shoulder things” endangers lives?
  • Or is it a wall as in “Berlin Wall”? A wall that enables the few to impose their will on the many? A wall that authorizes government enforcers to arrest and kill harmless people, a wall that’s feared but always defied, a wall whose very existence ultimately reveals the failure of the builders’ own philosophy?

“West Coast Wall.” Has a powerful sound, doesn’t it? Nice alliteration. Good meme. The antis have always had us gunfolk beat in the slogan-and-meme department. But what it means, if it means anything at all, remains a mystery.

Will Washington Ceasefire and Ceasefire Oregon succeed in building the thing, whatever it may be? Hard to say. Both states are very blue, but it’s always been a different shade of blue than the benighted mid-Atlantic or even California. Sort of a free-and-easy, here-have-a-latte shade of blue. Both states were sufficiently live-and-let-live to be among the earliest to legalize recreational marijuana. Police statism clashes with the laid-back, outdoorsy, brew-pubby, salmon-and-blueberry Pacific Northwest culture.

In Washington over the years, a few key legislators have held the line on victim disarmament. But in the past activists have turned successfully to the initiative process (as they did in 2014 when, with mega-billionaire funding, they imposed universal background checks).

Washington’s grassroots pro-gun defense has sometimes been weak and compromising. Fortunately, up-and-coming activists (especially the many roused by 2014’s defeat at the hands of the billionaires) are less willing to go along to get along.

Oregon’s grassroots are stronger, but on the other hand, their legislature lacks Washington’s long-time and well-placed legislative gun-rights defenders. Both states have rural, pro-gun eastern sides whose populations are outnumbered — but also getting very tired of being pushed around by — effete urbanites near the coast.

Hard to say what’ll happen. If the banners succeed, it’ll be interesting — as in the Chinese curse — to find out exactly what type of wall they build. Whatever it is, do they really imagine it’ll hold us?

Have you entered to win TZP’s historic Nazi-made, Israeli-adopted Mauser 98? All it takes is a few words and a modest entry fee. Please check it out, then enter today!

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail
defense of others, spirit of rebellion, You can't fix stupid

Folks still after Nugent

2 Comments

I have a suggestion for him.

Ted Nugent shows protested over singer’s controversial remarks
“The fair reflects the values of the entire county, and having Ted Nugent perform at the fair would reflect tolerance of racism, anti-Semitism, misogyny, xenophobia, ableism, and incivility toward people who protest his remarks or cancel his shows,” former social studies teacher Jennifer Vogt-Erickson wrote.

He should email the ditz a copy of his Honorary TZP Membership certificate, and wear his yarmulke on stage.

As for Vogt-Erickson, she should learn a little more about Ted Nugent before bleating like an ill-informed, self-entitled fool.

Is Nugent perfect? Of course not. Who is? Despite his flaws, am I still willing to have him as an ally in the fight for freedom?

Absolutely.

“Ableism”? She’s frickin’ upset that he can do stuff she can’t?

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail
gun control, Media, Sellouts and traitors, You can't fix stupid

JPFO now backing gun control?

9 Comments

So says David Codrea about the once-noble organization from which TZP sprang. (And for which Codrea, yours truly, and several other TZP volunteers once wrote before JPFO was sold into the hands of a supporter of the Manchin-Toomey-Schumer gun-control bill.)

Even if this is just yet another case where the poor guy handling JPFO’s alerts was left to scramble for material on his own without guidelines or caveats, this does appear as if JPFO endorses the latest “no due process” nonsense that’s coming from both anti-gunners and the more spineless of supposed Second Amendment supporters.

(H/T ML)

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail
Sellouts and traitors, So Much Stupid!, You can't fix stupid

Dear Douchestick – Don’t quit your day job

22 Comments

I’m a science fiction geek. I love the Star Wars movies, the superhero comic movies, classic science fiction from Asimov, Heinlein, and Bradbury, and yes, even the Star Trek reboots (please don’t start throwing tomatoes at me)!

What makes me absolutely crazy is actors whom I otherwise admire, deciding to use their rather large soapbox to push odious political agendas. They have a mike. They have the influence by virtue of being famous, and by having numerous admirers. And they take advantage of these tools to spout about issues on which they are often ignorant. Ridiculously ignorant. So stupid…

Can you see why the sci-fi nerd in me wants to take Hamill’s light saber and stick it up his… ignorance?

Mark Hamill – a guy who played what essentially is a citizen warrior rebel against a powerful authority – is now telling us that we, peons, only have the right to keep and bear arms that existed at the time of the creation of the Bill of Rights and promoting more government control over We the People!

I’m not even going to touch the whole “dumbass can’t spell ‘amendment'” issue!

The problem with celebrities promoting idiot causes is that many times, while their intentions may be good, their ignorance of the issue prevents them from seeing just how stupid their statements are!

If Hamill is convinced that the Second Amendment only protects the right to own a musket, then the First Amendment only protects his right to spew his lunacy using 18th Century writing implements. His right to spew on national television is not protected, and I’m pretty sure the Founders didn’t have Internet either!

And of course, the ever-present loons at Michael Bloomberg’s Everytown, glommed onto Hamill’s douchery like dobermans on a tasty steak! Because there’s nothing these authoritarian tools love more than idiot celebrities who promote their causes for them!

Here’s a clue, Mr. Hamill: stick to your day job. You’re a decent actor, but constitutional law, philosophical discussions about natural rights, and history are not your strong suits.

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail
gun grabbers, You can't fix stupid

Rational Discussions

5 Comments

” 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!

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail
Political philosophy, Politics, Schools and campuses, So Much Stupid!, Voting, You can't fix stupid

What a RIOT!

I’m probably dating myself here, but I remember when the term, which I still occasionally used, meant “how funny or humorous”.

I want to say up front, this isn’t about endorsing or disparaging a political candidate, this is about something I’m seeing that’s very disturbing and becoming somewhat frightening as it grows more common.

The first time I ever heard of riots was in the 60s. My Dad drove into the city to get his Mom out and bring her out to the suburbs where we lived and it would be safer for her. I was terrified till he got home with her and they were both safe.

It was a few years later that the L.A. riots happened, the ones where the Korean shopkeepers were the only ones that still had stores standing in their area because they were up on top of their buildings with AR-15s. The ones the liberals say have no civilian use.

Then there was George Zimmerman, when the black panthers formed mobs and publicly and openly put a bounty on his head with no repercussions.

This last year we saw Ferguson and Baltimore savaged by mobs, with the blessing of the Missouri Governor and the Baltimore Mayor. Repercussions? Meh, not so much.

But those were riots because something didn’t go the way people wanted it, and since they weren’t happy everyone and everything around them was going to suffer till they got their happy pants on again.

What we saw this weekend with Donald Trump, candidate for President was a different kettle of fish.

Mr. Trump has been having huge crowds at his rallies. Some love what he says, some hate it. Ok, fair enough, I have to leave the room or have a air sick bag handy if I’m in a position I can’t get out of listening to “The Bern” or Hillary discuss how fast they can each seize rights or redistribute the fruits of working peoples labor. That’s the political process, the politicians say what they will do to us or for us and we get to choose who we want to lead us. At least that is how it is suppose to work.

What I’m understanding happened this weekend is more along the lines of Ann Coulter, and other conservatives being prevented from speaking at universities because the precious indoctrinated children attending these universities didn’t want to hear an opinion different from how their liberal college professors had indoctrinated them. Bless their little hearts. Rather than just not attend if they didn’t want to hear, or even put their little hands over their ears and hum to themselves they had to prevent others from hearing what was said. Much like University of Missouri assistant communications professor, Melissa Click yelling for “some muscle” to remove a videographer. See some irony here? Only what WE the tolerant liberals want you to hear, will you hear.

So back to this weekend. There was suppose to have been a Trump rally in Chicago at the University of Illinois at Chicago on Friday. However due to a massive protest, that was canceled. There were people that had lined up since midnight the night before so they could hear the speech. They had broken no rules, but because the tolerant leftists didn’t want to hear what Mr. Trump had to say, then they deemed no one would be allowed to hear what Mr. Trump had to say. The protestors seemed to be a mix of Black Lies Matter, liberals, and turns out barry’s good buddy Bill Ayers was there too.

Apparently only SOME black lives matter as a young black entrepreneur who had been a Trump supporter was beaten and shot  by the tolerant leftists.

A day later when Mr. Trump was speaking at rally in Dayton Ohio a Black Lies Matter activist attempted to jump on stage after throwing something at Mr. Trump. The secret service sprang into action and protected Trump and nabbed the self-identified activist. Trump said the people disrupting were fans of “The Bern” and leftists. The communist Senator from Vermont said Trump was a liar. Old Bernie probably should have checked out his buddies social media pages before he called Trump a liar on that one. The guy was an avid Bernie fan. And besides being a Bernie fan, he is a star in a pro-ISIS video, busy guy.

Dr. Ben Carson had what I thought at least, were some very accurate statements about what is going on with some of this. This is an excellent little video clip. No, I didn’t say that because it had horses in it, I said it because Dr. Carson hit the nail on the head. Oh, guess that was a bit violent too, eh?

I suppose my point is this, whether or not Donald Trump, Ted Cruz or, well, it will probably be one of them, is the nominee for the Republican candidate for president, this is ugly. Because now this huge mob on the left had learned they can shut down the speech of someone they don’t like. The riots I mentioned earlier were basically hissy fits because something didn’t go the way some group of people wanted it to go. Elect better leaders and that sort of thing will be dealt with and you won’t have a part of a city burned. But THIS, this stuff is about affecting the political process. This is about keeping from people going to a rally to investigate candidates and maybe ask questions. They don’t agree with his politics and policies, and they intend to make sure you don’t have the opportunity to make up your own mind whether you do or not by denying you the opportunity to go hear the speaker and make an informed choice. They want to stop it by either stopping the speaker or making people afraid to go hear them, either way, the result is the same. More uninformed voters, and that has yet to work out well for our country.

Again, I’m talking events here, not candidates, rule of mob vs. rule of law. How could such a thing have happened? I guess I never have liked bullies.

But ultimately? The only ones responsible for these reprehensible actions are those that committed them.

Our electoral process
Our electoral process
Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail
authoritarian swine, gun grabbers, Media, You can't fix stupid

“Hey, Moron”

8 Comments

EJ Montini hates it when people tell him the truth.

He is a moron, at least when he babbles about victim disarmament.

Montini: “Hey, moron, name one ‘common sense’ gun law”
“Hey, moron, name me one ‘common sense’ gun law, let alone a bunch. You can’t, can you? Because all you want to do is confiscate everybody’s weapons. That’s the only ‘common sense’ gun law liberal pissants like you want. Admit it! And by the way, I called you a moron earlier because I thought if I called you a (expletive) – which is what you are – you wouldn’t keep reading.”

Okay then.

Fisking time; let’s see how sensible his proposals are:

  • The one I mention most often is a universal, no loophole, no exception background check on every gun sale.
    That isn’t sensible until he proposes a way to enforce that on criminals who bypass universal preemptively-prove-your-innocence checks by purchasing stolen guns on the street from other criminals. They don’t comply now. And they don’t have to.
  • It’s been shown in poll after poll that a vast majority of Americans – up to 90 percent – support it.
    Except that when that 90+% claim was put to the test in an Washington [edited to correct state] referendum, only 60% voted for it. In New Hampshire, the claim was 94%, but the surveyors refused to release their raw data to prove it, and the folks there keep electing (and reelecting) folks who vote it down. (Oddly enough, I have never been polled on that subject, except by a couple of painfully obvious push polls in which I refused to participate. I never found anyone — not one, pro or anti — who claimed to have participated in the NH “survey.”)
  • We could ban the sale or possession of armor piercing and hollow-tip bullets, and we could limit magazines to 10 bullets.
    So he doesn’t want rounds that penetrate too much, but he doesn’t want rounds that limit penetration. “Sensible.” As stated, that isn’t going to fly with anyone. Pretty much any rifle round is “armor penetrating” (unless you only count Level 4+), and armor penetrating handgun ammunition is already banned at the federal level and in several states; it doesn’t seem to have had much effect on crime rates. Defenders and hunters want expansion because it’s more effective, generally, than solid rounds.
  • We could codify in law a wider access to mental health records in order to prevent individuals with serious illness from buying weapons.
    Oh, goody. Let’s start by looking at his health records. If he has nothing to hide, he has nothing to fear by putting his unredacted files on the Internet. In fact, we already have laws in place to handle the dangerously disturbed. Those who have been adjudicated a danger to self or others are prohibited persons. Or do you just want to do away with the due process part of depriving people of human/civil rights. Did he get a mental health exam before exercising his 1st Amendment right to write that column?
  • We could repeal the idiotic 1996 congressional budget amendment that prevents the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention from doing studies on firearms ownership and the effects on public health.
    There is no such research ban to repeal. Wouldn’t it have been “sensible” for MorMontini to figure that out before spouting off?
  • We could expand gun-owning restrictions to more individuals convicted of crimes like domestic violence, stalking and more.
    Those convicted of domestic violence (and any crime punishable by a sentence of more than a year in prison) are already prohibited persons. You know, like the recent Kansas shooter, who was a convicted felon, under a restraining order, who bypassed PPYI checks. “And more…” Maybe we could add “practicing journalism without a license” to that list.
  • We could establish a national waiting period for gun purchases.
    Who could possibly object to that, right? Certainly not Ms. Bowne. Anymore. I wonder what Montini is planning to do, if he needs to be sure his friends and family can’t get a defensive tool quickly.
  • Finally, a law limiting angry impulse responses to news columnists might be helpful. At least to me.
    Well, it’s clear that he wants violations of 1st Amendment free discourse, so I guess he’s cool with the journalist licensing plan.

So long as Montini is determined to sound like an uninformed moron intent on destroying individual human/civil rights (obviously starting with the First and Second Amendments) people are bound to keep thinking he is one.

No.

Your move, Montini.

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail