Oct 22, 2014 Second Amendment
Liberals love to infringe on the Second Amendment right of the people to keep and bear arms. While it might appear as if liberals hate firearms the truth is they only hate YOU having firearms. They are perfectly happy to have their own firearms or body guards who have firearms. They are much too special to be put in danger.
How many liberal politicians have claimed that we need gun control or told us that no one needs certain types of firearms or that no one should be carrying them only to be exposed as a firearms owner and, in many cases, the possessor of a concealed carry permit?
Missouri State Senator Jamilah Nasheed is one such politician. She has been labeled by the NRA as anti gun and has sponsored bills requiring a gun owner registry. She has also been involved in other anti Second Amendment legislation.
This hypocrite was protesting in front of the police department in Ferguson MO and was arrested. When she was arrested police found a 9mm handgun in her possession. She stated that she had a concealed carry permit.
In addition the police suspected her of being intoxicated because she “smelled strongly of intoxicants” but she refused to take a breathalyzer test.
I have no problem with this woman having a carry permit and actually carrying a firearm. She is covered under the Second Amendment just like the rest of us. I have an issue with her carrying that firearm if she was intoxicated but that is a different issue and only speculation since she did not submit to the test.
What I do have a problem with is that she is a liberal gun grabber who wants to make it tough for the rest of her state’s law abiding citizens to exercise the same right she exercises.
She is like Bloomberg who is anti gun but has armed guards. Ditto for Martin O’Malley, Rosie O’Donnell, and Barack Obama. Then there are folks like Nasheed who are anti gun but have (or had) permits. Dianne Feinstein and Chuck Schumer come to mind.
Liberals love to make rules so long as they don’t have to follow them.
Never surrender, never submit.
The Islamic Terrorist group (but I repeat myself) causing havoc in the Middle East is setting its sights on America. The US finally did something to slow the advance of ISIS and allowed the affected people to fight back and recapture some land and an important dam. The terrorists are not happy and vow to kill Americans if the bombings result in hits on the terror members.
In fact, the group states that it will drown all of us in blood.
The video, which shows a photograph of an American who was beheaded during the U.S. occupation of Iraq and victims of snipers, featured a statement which said in English “we will drown all of you in blood”. Yahoo News
Well good luck trying you little pukes. The American public is armed and there are millions of us who are ready, willing and able to take you out. It has been said that there are more people with firearms in the woods on the opening day of hunting season in Pennsylvania than we have in our armed forces and that is only in one state.
Come on over here and try to take OUR country and see what happens to you. There will be lots of blood but it will be yours and we won’t drown because we can swim.
I guess living in a desert puts you at a disadvantage in that regard.
We are not afraid of you. I know I am not afraid of you and look forward to finally putting an end to you.
You see, I came into this world through another person covered in that person’s blood.
I am not afraid to go out the same way…
So bring it boys and not with the cowardly little terror attacks with airplanes and bomb vests. No sir, come here as a somewhat organized herd of camel shaggers and fight like men.
Don’t worry, you still have the virgins to look forward to. Though I doubt there are many virgins in Hell…
Never surrender, never submit.
Regardless of how one falls on the controversy in Missouri regarding who is at fault for the death of Michael Brown one thing is clear; the victims of the rioting and looting had nothing to do with it. The owners of these businesses are the victims of people who have no regard for society. If people are mad at the police then protest the police. If they are mad at government then protest government. They should not however, be destroying and stealing the property of people who did them no wrong.
There is no justification for it and it does not make their case stronger. It makes them look like a bunch of animals that were looking for a reason to riot and found one.
No one denies that these folks or any others have a basic right to protest. The First Amendment protects the right of people to PEACEABLY assemble and that is the key. There is nothing peaceful about what is happening in Ferguson.
The only businesses that seem to have escaped most of the damage are those whose owners and supporters protected the properties with firearms. Interestingly, the AR 15, the gun a Federal Judge said was not common and not a defensive weapon, has been displayed prominently in defense of property and life.
The police are not doing anything to protect the buildings. They can’t because they are overwhelmed and they really couldn’t care less about the safety of a building (or for that matter its occupants) when they are focused on their own safety.
This reality that the police cannot protect people might be why some police departments are telling citizens to arm themselves.
The latest example comes from none other than Detroit where residents have been advised by the police to buy firearms to protect themselves. Detroit is a dangerous place (as are most cities run by liberals) and the police usually show up to draw chalk lines around victims.
Their advice to people is to arm themselves and many people are taking that advice to heart.
A well armed citizen is the first line of defense of life and personal property. Liberals would have you believe that no one needs a gun but the police and the people who must live in the real world know differently.
The armed citizens of Ferguson are protecting themselves, their loved ones and their property.
Now folks in Detroit are being told to do the same.
Perhaps Detroit will thrive again when the criminals realize that the citizens are no longer easy targets. The criminals need not worry because they will move on to another place that is target rich.
Maryland might be inviting to them since the state has imposed unconstitutional gun laws.
A public service announcement to the criminals. Stick to the liberal parts of the state. Those folks do not like guns so you are not likely to get shot while robbing them.
Why should the rest of us be bothered with you when they refuse to protect themselves?
Never surrender, never submit.
Aug 11, 2014 Second Amendment
A police officer shot and killed an unarmed black man in Missouri and the riots started. Once the riots started the looting started. People who had nothing to do with the shooting became victims of those who fail to see the irony of protesting in support of someone who was wronged by wronging other people.
The left in America tells us that no one needs guns. Oh they claim that guns are OK for some things but that no one needs an assault weapon to hunt. They ignore the fact that the Second Amendment is not about hunting, it is about protection. That is protection from others and protection from our government.
Call the police the anti gun folks say. Well the rioters in Missouri overwhelmed the police and the community. There were two courses of action for those who were attacked by the rioters. Either become a victim or stand their ground.
A number of business owners decided to stand their ground as people with the dreaded AR 15 style “assault” rifles protected themselves and defended their property. Yes, the bad black rifle was used for protection.
You see, there is no such thing as an assault rifle. That is a name given by the anti gun crowd to cause fear but if they insist on calling it an assault rifle I will insist that the people in Missouri showed it was an effective deterrent if you are assaulted.
The rioters were causing problems but any business that had armed people standing watch did not have trouble. The criminals (and rioters and looters are criminals) did not want to risk getting shot so they moved on to unprotected targets.
Firearms are a way of life and are necessary for a free people. Those who are disarmed are slaves to the government and victims to the criminal element.
It is tragic that the young man lost his life. It is also tragic that people feel the only way to solve the issue is to riot. Keep in mind; cops shoot people of all colors all over the country. For some reason only certain communities resort to rioting.
In any event, this episode demonstrates one of the reasons we have a Second Amendment. Thank goodness well armed citizens were there to thwart the rioters.
You have to have priorities
One must have priorities…
Never surrender, never submit.
Aug 2, 2014 Second Amendment
Any citizen of the People’s Republik of Maryland knows that it is nearly impossible to get a permit to carry a firearm. Maryland law does not allow open carry and unless one is wealthy or politically connected then one has a better chance of winning the lottery than getting a concealed carry permit.
The hold up is that Maryland requires good and substantial reason against apprehended danger to carry a firearm and though what constitutes good and substantial is not well defined the Maryland State Police has decided that self defense is not within the definition.
After the original Woolard decision many people applied for a permit based on the ruling that stated the existence of the right was reason enough. Through stays and an eventual overturn of the ruling those who applied and listed set defense and all other legal purposes as their G&S reason were denied. The state has violated its provisions for a hearing to appeal the decisions but that is another story.
In any event, a recent court case shows that a Maryland jury believes that self defense is a justified reason for carrying a firearm.
New Jersey police officer Joseph Walker was involved in a road rage incident in Maryland and he pulled his car over. The other driver, an intoxicated man with a criminal history, pulled over some 150 feet from Walker and got out of his vehicle (as did Walker). Walker retreated to his vehicle and retrieved his service weapon and shot the man three times (two of the shots after the man reportedly raised his hands).
There are plenty of issues here. Walker is allowed to carry a weapon in any state because he is a law enforcement officer. But, we in Maryland hear all the time that police officers are better trained to handle tense situations in which deadly force might need to be used. Walker exercised no such restraint. He could have shown is badge with the firearm and told the guy to move on. He could have phoned the police and told them what was going on before he ever pulled over (or instead of pulling over), he certainly could have allowed the man to get within 50 feet and then got back into his vehicle and drove off. He would have been long gone before the victim was able to get back into his vehicle.
I will not debate here whether the jury was right or wrong. I was not there but I do feel there were many options before the use of a firearm was needed.
However, the Maryland jury said that the cop’s actions were justified in the name of self defense. In other words, self defense is a good and substantial reason to shoot someone who is threatening bodily harm. In order to do that one must be allowed to carry a firearm. Walker is a special case because he is a cop and allowed to carry one. What would have been the outcome if this had been an unarmed Maryland citizen?
I venture to say that the outcome would have been different.
While I believe that a citizen should not have to demonstrate any reason to carry a firearm, assuming of course the person is not otherwise prohibited (mentally ill, a felon, etc) I will state that if Maryland is going to continue to play games in this regard it is time for the state to recognize that self defense is a good and substantial reason against apprehended danger.
Average law abiding citizens are many more times likely to be harmed by bad people than are police officers and they all get to carry an assortment of weapons including a firearm. Let us not forget the number one reason a police officer carries a firearm (and his other weapons) is to defend HIMSELF against apprehended danger.
Law abiding citizens who pay the salaries of all government employees including police officers deserve the same consideration.
In fact they are entitled to that consideration as enumerated in the Second Amendment and Maryland’s Constitution which states the Constitution of the United States shall be the Supreme Law of the state (that would include the Second Amendment for the liberals out there).
Art. 2. The Constitution of the United States, and the Laws made, or which shall be made, in pursuance thereof, and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, are, and shall be the Supreme Law of the State; and the Judges of this State, and all the People of this State, are, and shall be bound thereby; anything in the Constitution or Law of this State to the contrary notwithstanding.
It is tragic that a man lost his life in an incident that has so many questions but the result demonstrates that self defense is a natural right that does not depend on government.
Therefore government should not infringe on that right or the right to bear arms as a means to defend.
The Second Amendment is the only good and substantial reason needed and it is time for Maryland’s liberal politicians to get their head’s out of their rectal cavities and do what is right, proper and CONSTITUTIONAL.
Remember, gun control is not about guns it is about control.
Just ask any survivor (if you can find one) of tyrannical governments that disarmed their populations.