It should be illegal for Democrats to own guns.

April 16, 2014

Mayor Bloomberg, try Sensible Gun Control.
In 1865 a Democrat shot and killed Abraham Lincoln, President of the United States .
In 1881 a left wing radical Democrat shot James Garfield, President of the United States who later died from the wound.
In 1963 a radical left wing socialist shot and killed John F. Kennedy, President of the United States .
In 1975 a left wing radical Democrat fired shots at Gerald Ford, President of the United States .
In 1983 a registered Democrat shot and wounded Ronald Reagan, President of the United States .
In 1984 James Hubert, a disgruntled Democrat, shot and killed 22 people in a McDonalds restaurant.
In 1986 Patrick Sherrill, a disgruntled Democrat, shot and killed 15 people in an Oklahoma post office.
In 1990 James Pough, a disgruntled Democrat, shot and killed 10 people at a GMAC office.
In 1991 George Hennard, a disgruntled Democrat, shot and killed 23 people in a Luby’s cafeteria in Killeen , TX .
In 1995 James Daniel Simpson, a disgruntled Democrat, shot and killed 5 coworkers in a Texas laboratory.
In 1999 Larry Asbrook, a disgruntled Democrat, shot and killed 8 people at a church service.
In 2001 a left wing radical Democrat fired shots at the White House in a failed attempt to kill George W. Bush, President of the US .
In 2003 Douglas Williams, a disgruntled Democrat, shot and killed 7 people at a Lockheed Martin plant.
In 2007 a registered Democrat named Seung – Hui Cho, shot and killed 32 people in Virginia Tech.
In 2010 a mentally ill registered Democrat named Jared Lee Loughner, shot Rep. Gabrielle Giffords and killed 6 others.
In 2011 a registered Democrat named James Holmes, went into a movie theater and shot and killed 12 people.
In 2012 Andrew Engeldinger, a disgruntled Democrat, shot and killed 7 people in Minneapolis .
In 2013 a registered Democrat named Adam Lanza, shot and killed 26 people in a school in Newtown , CT.
As recently as Sept 2013, an angry Democrat shot 12 at a Navy ship yard.
Clearly, there is a problem with Democrats and guns.
Not one NRA member, Tea Party member, or Republican conservative was involved in any of these shootings and murders.

This was stolen from a Yahoo comment board, I wish that I could give proper credit!

Engagement Distances

April 10, 2014

Patrick Sperry:

Excellent story about the practicalities of pistol training.

Originally posted on Stuff From Hsoi:

The April 2014 Rangemaster newsletter  discusses engagement distances of private citizen self-defense incidents. You should read the whole article (it’s only a page long), but here’s a key take-home:

We have had over 60 student involved shootings. Of those, two incidents occurred at less than 3 yards. One involved intentional physical contact between the shooter and the offender, the other involved purely accidental contact. The vast majority of these shootings occurred at distances between 3 yards and 7 yards, with the bulk of those at 3 to 5 yards. So, we see that the typical self-defense shooting is well beyond arm’s-length and may be past the length of your car. The average American sedan is 16 feet long. That is approximately 5 yards. My Silverado pickup is a little over 18 feet long, or 6 yards. This is way beyond arm’s-length.

Another useful thing is a graph Tom made:

Now consider…

View original 468 more words

Three Cheers for Idaho; Why not Wyoming?

March 23, 2014

BOISE, March 21, 2014 – On Thursday, Idaho Governor Butch Otter (R) signed a bill, which would effectively nullify future federal gun laws, by prohibiting state enforcement of any future federal act relating to personal firearms, a firearm accessories or ammunition.

S1332 passed the house by a vote of 68-0 and the senate by a vote of 34-0. Alaska and Kansas have also passed similar laws.

Erich Pratt, Director of Communications for Gun Owners of America, cheered the governor’s action. “By signing this nullification bill into law, Idaho has joined an elite class of states that are telling the feds to ‘get lost’ ��especially when it comes to unconstitutional gun control infringements”

Introduced by the State Affairs Committee, the Idaho Federal Firearm, Magazine and Register Ban Enforcement Act, will:

“protect Idaho law enforcement officers from being directed, through federal executive orders, agency orders, statutes, laws, rules, or regulations enacted or promulgated on or after the effective date of this act, to violate their oath of office and Idaho citizens’ rights under Section 11, Article I, of the Constitution of the State of Idaho.”

The legislation continued:

any official, agent or employee of the state of Idaho or a political subdivision thereof who knowingly and willfully orders an official, agent or employee of the state of Idaho or a political subdivision of the state to enforce any executive order, agency order, law, rule or regulation of the United States government as provided in subsection (2) of this section upon a personal firearm, a firearm accessory or ammunition shall, on a first violation, be liable for a civil penalty not to exceed one thousand dollars ($1,000) which shall be paid into the general fund of the state…

S1332 also includes an emergency provision meaning it takes effect immediately upon signature.

Tenth Amendment Center national communications director Mike Maharrey considered the legislation a good start. “This is an important first step for Idaho,” he said. “Getting this law passed will ensure that any new plans or executive orders that might be coming our way will not be enforced in Idaho. Then, once this method is established and shown to be effective, legislators can circle back and start doing the same for federal gun control already on the books. SB1332 is an important building block for protecting the 2nd Amendment in Idaho.”

Passage into law represents a giant step forward in protecting the right to keep and bear arms in Idaho. As the law now stands, state and local law enforcement will not cooperate with all future federal firearm laws.

The bill rests on a well-established legal principle known as the anti-commandeering doctrine. Simply put, the federal government cannot force states to help implement or enforce and federal act or program The anti-commandeering doctrine rests primarily on four Supreme Court cases dating back to 1842. Printz v. United States serves as the cornerstone.

Tenth Amendment Center executive director Michael Boldin said that the new Idaho law has opened Pandora’s box even wider.

“People are beginning to realize that this practice is completely constitutional and legal. In the near future, you will see a wave of states passing even broader legislation to fight the federal government on everything ranging from more traditionally liberal issues like hemp and marijuana, to more conservative issues like Obamacare.” Boldin continued, “Nullification isn’t a left vs. right issue. It destroys the fallacy of the left right paradigm and is the remedy for all unconstitutional laws.”
By: Michael Lotfi - Mar 22, 2014

The answer to my question? Well, we had a similar law being considered here. However our “leaders” succumbed to the pressures that are opposed to freedom and liberty. The election looms friends. Let us all remember who had the courage to stand and be counted as among those that support our most deeply held values. As well as remembering those that did not.

Canadian’s Version of David Letterman’s Top 10. This is Canada’s Top Ten List of America’s Stupidity: From a Yahoo Board…

March 22, 2014

10) Only in America … could politicians talk about the greed of the rich at a $35,000.00 a plate campaign fund-raising event.
9) Only in America … could people claim that the government still discriminates against black Americans when they have a black President, a black Attorney General and roughly 20% of the federal work force is black while only 14% of the population is black. 40+% of all federal entitlements go to black Americans – 3X the rate that go to whites, 5X the rate that go to Hispanics!
8) Only in America … could they have had the two people most responsible for our tax code, Timothy Geithner (the head of the Treasury Department) and Charles Rangel (who once ran the Ways and Means Committee), BOTH turn out to be tax cheats who are in favor of higher taxes.
7) Only in America … can they have terrorists kill people in the name of Allah and have the media primarily react by fretting that Muslims might be harmed by the backlash.
6) Only in America … would they make people who want to legally become American citizens wait for years in their home countries and pay tens of thousands of dollars for the privilege, while they discuss letting anyone who sneaks into the country illegally just ‘magically’ become American citizens.
5) Only in America … could the people who believe in balancing the budget and sticking by the country’s Constitution be thought of as “extremists.”
4) Only in America … could you need to present a driver’s license to cash a check or buy alcohol, but not to vote.
3) Only in America … could people demand the government investigate whether oil companies are gouging the public because the price of gas went up when the return on equity invested in a major U.S. oil company (Marathon Oil) is less than half of a company making tennis shoes (Nike).
2) Only in America … could the government collect more tax dollars from the people than any nation in recorded history, still spend a Trillion dollars more than it has per year – for total spending of $7-Million PER MINUTE, and complain that it doesn’t have nearly enough money.
1) Only in America … could the rich people – who pay 86% of all income taxes – be accused of not paying their “fair share” by people who don’t pay any income taxes at all.

Your new  Facebook ‘friend’ may be the FBI

March 22, 2014

Patrick Sperry:

More big government intrusions on freedom and liberty…

Originally posted on Whiskey Tango Foxtrot:

The Feds are on Facebook. And MySpace, LinkedIn and Twitter, too.

U.S. law enforcement agents are following the rest of the Internet world into popular social-networking services, going undercover with false online profiles to communicate with suspects and gather private information, according to an internal Justice Department document that offers a tantalizing glimpse of issues related to privacy and crime-fighting.

Think you know who’s behind that “friend” request? Think again. Your new “friend” just might be the FBI.

The document, obtained in a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit, makes clear that U.S. agents are already logging on surreptitiously to exchange messages with suspects, identify a target’s friends or relatives and browse private information such as postings, personal photographs and video clips.

Among other purposes: Investigators can check suspects’ alibis by comparing stories told to police with tweets sent at the same time about their whereabouts. Online photos from a suspicious…

View original 169 more words

Illinois Middle School Workbook Reportedly Includes What Could Be the Most Outrageous Definition of the Second Amendment Yet

March 22, 2014

Patrick Sperry:

Utter bullshit!

Originally posted on CITIZENS MILITIA OF MISSISSIPPI:

Jason Howerton

An Illinois father claims a workbook that teaches the Second Amendment comes with a requirement to register firearms was handed out to seventh-graders at Grant Middle School in Springfield, including his own son.

An image posted on the Illinois Gun Owners Rights Facebook page shows a worksheet that defines the Second Amendment as the following:

“This amendment states that people have the right to certain weapons, providing that they register them and they have not been in prison. The founding fathers included this amendment to prevent the United States from acting like the British who had tried to take weapons away from the colonists.”

Facebook

Facebook

The parent reportedly spoke anonymously to Storyleak.com and the Examiner about the workbook, which he says includes a summary of the entire Bill of Rights and the Constitution.

“My son was given a workbook at school that is a compilation of the Constitution…

View original 310 more words

Wanting…….

March 22, 2014

Patrick Sperry:

Not like this is news, but it rings with the truth!

Originally posted on Freedom Is Just Another Word...:

View original

Police Chiefs and AD’s

March 21, 2014

Ignatius Piazza

Dr. Ignatius Piazza

Wednesday, March 19, 2014

Dear Patrick Sperry,

Here is something you will not see every day.

A police chief shoots himself when the drawstring of his jacket lodged in the trigger area of his Glock pistol.

Watch this news video, complete with surveillance video of the actual incident and then see my comments that follow…

Comments:

Even though the drawstring was the culprit in the negligent discharge of the police chief’s weapon, he could use some improvement in his gun handling techniques. Specifically, he should treat all guns as if they are loaded and never let the muzzle cover anything he is not willing to destroy… that includes his hand and those around him. Watch the surveillance video again and you will see what I mean.

As we teach at Front Sight, train to present your weapon quickly, but take your time to holster the weapon, making sure your shirt and jacket are clear of your holster.

Good story by the news agency and good lesson for all to learn.

Good of the police chief to want others to know of his injury, but quite surprising and a bit disconcerting that he is seen in this video covered his hand with the muzzle of the gun he was handling, after previously shooting himself in the hand in 1999 when handling a gun he thought was unloaded.

http://www.ignatius-piazza-front-sight.com/2014/03/18/front-sight-blog-video-jacket-drawstrings-causing-glocks-fire/#vid

If that does not work go here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=o3UPK53GrI8

So let’s review THE FOUR UNIVERSAL SAFETY RULES…

Treat all guns as if they are loaded.

Never let the muzzle cover anything you are not willing to destroy.

Keep your finger off the trigger until your sights are on the target.

Be sure of your target and what is beyond your target.

Avoiding tragedy

March 4, 2014

Patrick Sperry:

A very good read. Just because you can do something, that may well be legal, does not mean that you have too.

Originally posted on Stuff From Hsoi:

Ronald Westbrook, the Alzheimer’s patient, got out of his house during the night of Nov. 27. He appeared hours later at the home of Joe Hendrix, knocked repeatedly on the door and tried the bell, apparently being in a state of confusion. The homeowner, Joe Hendrix, 35, armed himself, went outside, and confronted Westbrook. Eventually, Hendrix shot Westbrook, 72, several times, which proved fatal. According to Hendrix, the elderly man was carrying an object and did not obey his commands.

Full story. (h/t Claude Werner)

By all accounts, Mr. Hendrix acted in a reasonable manner – in terms of the law. However, from outsiders looking in, they will not view what Mr. Hendrix did as reasonable. As Claude states:

While Mr. Hendrix will not face criminal charges, there is no doubt that he will still have issues to deal with for the rest of his life. Assuming he is a…

View original 505 more words

Gun Owners Spank Bloomberg, Schumer, IRS & Governor “Moonbeam” Brown

February 24, 2014

And GOA submits new brief before the U.S. Supreme Court. Click here to help.

“[New Jersey has] subordinated the People’s right to keep and bear arms to the state’s alleged interest in promoting public safety. It is not, however, within the authority of courts to override the Constitution as ratified by the People.” — Gun Owners of America’s legal brief before the U.S. Supreme Court in Drake v. Jerejian, February 12, 2014

Pro-gun victories are coming so fast and furiously (no pun intended) that it’s difficult to keep up with them.

Here is a sample of good news.

GOA CHALLENGING NJ LAW BEFORE U.S. SUPREME COURT IN WAKE OF HUGE LEGAL VICTORY

On Thursday, a three-judge panel of the liberal Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco ruled that California’s requirement that applicants for concealed carry permits show “good cause” were unconstitutional under the Heller decision.

“The right to bear arms includes the right to carry an operable firearm outside the home for the lawful purpose of self-defense,” said Judge Diarmuid O’Scannlain.

Gun Owners of America is pursuing an almost identical challenge to New Jersey’s onerous and restrictive concealed carry law. GOA (and its foundation) filed an amicus brief in the U.S. Supreme Court just one day prior to last week’s Ninth Circuit decision, challenging the New Jersey control scheme that was upheld by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.

In several instances, the Ninth Circuit opinion critiques the Third Circuit’s opinion by using arguments very similar to the ones GOA presented in our amicus brief. Overall the opinion is a refreshing change from most lower federal court decisions, which have refused to engage in the textual and historical analysis required by Heller and McDonald.

As we see it, the Ninth Circuit decision should add weight in favor of the Supreme Court hearing one of these cases to resolve the circuit split. And hopefully the five justice majority from Heller will seize on these two cases because of the Ninth Circuit’s detailed and careful review of the history that supports public carry of weapons for self-defense.

Go here to read more about this case — including the GOA/GOF brief.

Go here to make a tax deductible contribution in assisting Gun Owners Foundation to continue bringing legal challenges like this.

BLOOMBERG DEFEATED IN NEW HAMPSHIRE

Former Mayor Michael Bloomberg had intended to turn New Hampshire into his most recent “victory for gun control” — joining a handful of states that enacted stricter gun control laws in the wake of the Newton school yard tragedy.

Bloomberg figured that New Hampshire would be easy pickings. After all, the “Granite State” had a Democratic House of Representatives and a Democratic anti-gun governor.

Gun Owners of America countered Bloomberg’s muscle by aiding several local gun groups in the state to rally grassroots gun owners in opposition to the bill.

Well, the final shootout occurred last Wednesday. And after the smoke cleared, Bloomberg and his “human props” were sent packing, with their tails between their legs. After a series of votes — and an hour and a half of parliamentary wrangling — the Democratic House declared that a Manchin-Toomey-type universal gun registry bill was “inexpedient to legislate.”

Having failed to buy Congress with his billions of anti-gun dollars, Bloomberg has attempted to buy the legislatures of states like New Hampshire. But, with the exception of seven states with legislatures dominated by anti-gun legislators and governors, Bloomberg has been humiliated.

And “red state Democrats” running for reelection in the Senate are running from Bloomberg even faster than they’re running from Obama.

As a result, Bloomberg has now modified his strategy to turn the country blue by legalizing millions of anti-gun voters who broke the law to get here. And to that end, Bloomberg has announced that he will use his billions to support “red state Democrats” who opposed the Manchin-Toomey amendment — language imposing universal background checks around the nation — so long as such Senators agree to support the anti-gun immigration amnesty bill.

SCHUMER REELS AFTER AMNESTY BILL IS SHELVED

Three weeks ago, it looked like an immigration amnesty bill to create 8,000,000 new anti-gun voters was on the “fast track” in the U.S. House.

That was before you burned up the telephone lines and internet accounts of House Republicans. At a Republican “retreat,” dozens of congressmen lined up to oppose the bill. And Speaker John Boehner was forced to concede that Republicans could not “trust” Obama to implement the enforcement provisions of the bill.

Now, reeling from another defeat, New York Senator Charles Schumer has threatened to file a “discharge petition” to force the House to consider the anti-gun bill, over Republican objections.

The problem is that Schumer, to be successful, would have to convince over a dozen Republicans to openly betray their colleagues, in order to garner the necessary 217 or 218 signatures (depending on the number of House vacancies). For this reason, discharge petitions almost never succeed.

THE IRS BACKS OFF FROM ANTI-GUN REGS

Fresh from a scandal in which it tried to harass conservatives applying for 501(c)(4) tax-exempt status, the IRS has spent the last several months trying to put GOA out of business.

It did this by threatening regulations which would define a broad range of policy activities (including voting guides) as political activities.

But, in its arrogance, the IRS overstepped its bounds. So many policy-related activities would be limited under the IRS rules that a broad range of both conservative and liberal 501(c)(4)’s blasted the proposals. In addition, the chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee introduced legislation (H.R. 3865) which would prohibit the IRS regs from being issued. Given the broad support from both ends of the political spectrum, the Camp bill would surely be passed overwhelmingly.

As a result, the IRS has now meekly testified that it will not push its proposals in 2014.


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 168 other followers

%d bloggers like this: