Nov 13, 2013 Political
The left keeps telling us Obamacare is settled law and it should be left alone. That is, of course, unless B. Hussein Obama wants to alter it to help his friends. He is OK with granting exemptions and delaying certain provisions that help donors or base groups. He, I might add, is not allowed to change a law but then again the Constitution has never gotten in his way.
To strengthen his argument Obama tells us that John Roberts (an alleged conservative) and the Supreme Court have told us that Obamacare is settled and therefore we must leave it alone.
This guy is supposed to be a Constitutional law professor but he never gets it right. The Supreme Court only stated that Obamacare was Constitutional, not that it had to be left alone. The Court is charged with deciding if something is legal, the Congress is charged with introducing and changing laws and it has that authority no matter how long a law has been in place.
In any event, we are supposed to just sit back and allow Obamacare to destroy the nation because it is settled law. Well a funny thing happened on the way to Obamacare, the Democrats who rammed it through are now in a bad position because it is not working and millions of people are losing the plans they like and were promised they could keep. The rollout of the exchanges was a disaster and the website will likely not be working correctly by the end of November as Obama promised. Democrats want to change the law, you know the one that is settled and must be left alone.
When Republicans were debating the budget issues they pushed for many things. One of the compromises was a year delay of the individual mandate. The Democrats refused to negotiate and allowed the government to shut down over the issue. Now that things are going badly many of them (particularly those up for reelection) are seeking a delay of a year in implementing many parts of Obamacare including the individual mandate. Think about it. Democrats refused to do this and allowed the government to (partially) shutdown and now they are asking for it in order to protect them in the next election.
I like the way Obama and his toadies scream about settled law. Why is it that a settled law means nothing to them when they don’t like it?
Case in point, the Second Amendment. The law regarding arms has been settled law since December 15th, 1791 and yet liberals, including Obama, keep trying to change it.
The Second Amendment protects a preexisting right for an individual to keep and bear arms. This is only in dispute from those who want to get rid of firearms. History, SCOTUS rulings and the writings of the Founders all make it perfectly clear that individuals have the right to own and carry firearms for personal protection and any other legal purpose.
But liberals are not happy with this settled law. They want to change it even though it has been in effect just shy of 222 years.
So don’t fall for the mindless prattle of liberals who declare Obamacare settled law that can’t be changed.
You can change any law. Obamacare can be changed by Congress and the President and the Second Amendment can be changed by the people (through the Amendment process).
Ironically, liberal/progressive/socialists want Obamacare upheld and the Second Amendment repealed for the very same reason.
To control people.
This is how tyrants work. Control people’s lives (like their health care) and remove their means to fight tyranny and you can run roughshod over them.
History is full of examples of this.
Let’s not allow America to be added to that list.
Never surrender, never submit.
Sep 20, 2013 Political
If gun control worked then Obama’s Chicago should be the safest place in the world because it is nearly impossible for law abiding citizens to get a gun. However, Chicago is now the top murder city in America topping New York which has three times as many people.
The latest mass shooting took place last evening just after 10 pm. Thirteen people including a 3 year old boy were shot at the basketball courts in a neighborhood called Back of the Yards.
How in the world did this happen? Very few people in Chicago have guns and a carry permit is as rare as an honest politician. Police believe the shootings were gang related so it is safe to assume that none of the guns were obtained legally and none of them were registered (unless they were stolen from the registered owner).
Do you mean to tell me that the gang bangers, you know criminals, did not obey the gun laws? Well perhaps if we had passed EVEN tougher gun laws like say, background checks this would not have happened (background checks are already required).
Right, because criminals would submit to a background check. Criminals do not buy guns from sources that require background checks. Private sales are supposed to have a background check and selling guns without doing them is illegal which would make the gun seller as much of a criminal as the buyer. So it is reasonable to conclude that this was not some issue where the check was not completed when it otherwise could have. It is obvious the guns used were from an illegal source, obtained illegally and sold illegally.
Well hell, that never happens. I mean it is not like Barack Obama and Eric holder were illegally shipping firearms to other countries. It is not like New York police officers have ever been caught smuggling guns in and selling them. It just could not happen.
Heroin is illegal to buy, sell, or use and yet people buy, sell, and use it each and every day. So laws banning something do not stop people from doing what is illegal.
Laws banning guns do not stop people from using guns for violence. Chicago is a prime example as was demonstrated last night.
This will not stop the gun grabbers from trying to impose more gun control. For some reason whenever a criminal uses a gun illegally the gun grabbers want to disarm those of us who had nothing to do with it.
Chicago is an example of what happens in every place where guns are banned. The cities in America with the highest rates of violence with guns are the ones with the toughest gun control.
Gun control does not work. If the daughter of the Former PM of the UK can be held at gunpoint in a nation that collected nearly all the guns and made owning them illegal then gun control does not work.
The reality is this is not a call for gun control it is a call for people control.
Once they have the guns they can control the people. Think the tyranny is bad now?
Wait until they do not fear you as an armed free person…
Never surrender, never submit.
When someone uses a bomb to blow up a building we go after the bomber not the bomb. When a person uses matches to light a building on fire we go after the arsonist and not the matches. When someone drinks and drives we go after the drunk driver and not the car or the alcohol.
For some reason though, when someone uses a gun to commit a crime we go after the gun. Not only that, they go after the guns of all the people who had nothing to do with the crime.
When I wrote for some reason above I knew the reason and you know it as well. They use incidents of violence with guns to go after guns because they want to disarm all of us. Gun control is not about the gun it is about control and government knows that if it can disarm its citizens it can control its citizens.
This is why we have a Second Amendment. Despite the stupidity of people like Andrew Cuomo of New York the Second Amendment is not there to protect hunting or sport shooting. It is there to protect the population from its own government and any other that tries to attack us.
Make no mistake about it, our Founders protected our right to keep and bear arms so that we would never be held as slaves under a tyrannical government. We would always have the ability to fight our government should the need arise.
This is not a radical idea as our Founders did just that to gain our freedom.
But gun grabbers want to disarm everyone. I know they claim otherwise with nonsense terms like “common sense laws” and such but their plan is to incrementally impose more and more bans until we are disarmed. Places like Maryland are already well along in the anti gun, gun ban, confiscation scheme. Communist Governor Martin O’Malley and the Democrat idiots in the legislature have passed gun laws that are unconstitutional and will hopefully be negated by the Supreme Court (though one can never tell with the outside influences blackmailing justices).
In any event, the shooting at the Navy Yard elicited the same visceral response we have come accustomed to. The immediate reaction of the gun grabbers was to call for more gun control. The reality that the shooting took place in a city that has strict gun control on a military base with strict gun control has not even dawned on the people who are so hell bent on enslaving us that they were screaming for more gun control while the dead bodies were still warm.
Barack Obama lamented that we are once again dealing with this kind of tragedy. I will shoot his words back at him. We are once again dealing with you exploiting a criminal to disarm non criminals. You danced on the bodies of the dead children in Newtown and you are dancing on the dead at the Navy yard.
The narrative was the same in the media as we were bombed with stories of an AR 15 and assault this and assault that.
Turns out the gun used was a shotgun and the pistols used were taken from the guards who were shot. Not to worry, the media came to the rescue like they did when George Zimmerman turned out to be Hispanic instead of white (and thus became the new race of white Hispanic) and invented the new AR 15 shotgun…
We are now finding out that the shooter had a real problem with mental illness and that it was reported months ago but not acted upon by the very government that wants to disarm you for the deeds of the shooter. It also turns out that this guy would spend up to 18 hours at a time playing the Call of Duty video game. It is reported that the game took him to his dark side.
In other words, the video game influenced this mentally ill man to act on his inner dark side. Thus, he sneaked a firearm onto a post and went around shooting people like in the video game.
So now that we know this is it safe for us to conclude that we do not need to ban guns we need to ban video games? The game caused the problem and made this man shoot others. In order to stop this senseless violence we must have the following:
- All people who want to buy a video game must be 21
- All people who want to buy a video game must pay money and submit an application with a set of fingerprints
- All people who want to buy video games must sign a release for a medical and mental health records check
- All video games must no longer be capable of being played longer than 2 hours in a 24 hour period. This is our ban on high capacity video games
- Anyone who purchases a video game must wait 3 days before picking it up so a background check can be completed
- No one can buy more than one video game in a 30 day period
- Online video gaming will no longer be allowed so we can close the internet loophole
These are a must because there are millions of people out there using video games. These games cause people to turn violent and result in death. It is not the person, it is the game and you should never forget that.
We must do this…
…for the children.
However, in keeping with the spirit of Barack Obama’s tenure video games may be given to terrorists.
Yep, Barack Obama wants to infringe on our right to keep and bear arms and wants to impose even tougher restrictions on law abiding citizens while at the same time he has waived the law disallowing us from sending arms to terrorists so he can arm the Syrian Rebels.
Think about it folks, Barack Obama trusts terrorists with firearms but does not trust you with them.
And he knows the terrorists would fail the background check. That is why he waived the law…
Never surrender, never submit.
It is not often that I agree with any liberal particularly Dianne Feinstein and particularly on gun control but I find myself in agreement with her statement after the senseless shooting at the Navy Yard. Feinstein stated:
“When will enough be enough?”
“Congress must stop shirking its responsibility and resume a thoughtful debate on gun violence in this country. We must do more to stop this endless loss of life.” Washington Times
This statement is mostly true (more later) but the solution is where we part ways.
First of all it is important to note that the deaths from mass shootings account for an extremely small part of the number of murders. It is less than one-tenth of one percent. These statistics do not count gang related murders and shootings where a person kills relatives or others linked to him. Even those do not put us at an epidemic.
The sensationalism involved makes these things seem much more common and Obama lamenting that once again we are dealing with a mass shooting makes it appear that way. It is like air travel. It is the safest way to travel but a plane crash that kills hundreds of people gets more press than the few people at a time that die in traffic accidents.
More children in the womb are murdered than all the gun related murders combined.
Shootings like the one at the Navy Yard lead to a push for more gun control and the banning of more types of firearms even though these things will not work. Washington DC has very strict gun control laws and federal property, particularly military installations, have extreme gun control (thanks Bill Clinton). One does not just walk around a military post with a firearm unless the job requires them to carry one. Unless there is on post housing or an on post range there are no private firearms registered on the installation. If there are registered firearms they must be properly secured.
In addition, one must go through a secure point when entering a post. The fact that DC has strict gun laws, military posts have even stricter gun rules (and I might add, infringing rules), and that one must pass through a security entrance to gain access did not stop the shooter from murdering a dozen people at the Navy Yard.
Just as the on post rules and security did not stop a radical Muslim soldier from murdering over a dozen people at Fort Hood.
Laws only affect the people who are inclined to obey them in the first place.
No gun law in the world would have prevented any of the mass shootings that have taken place. None of the gun laws passed after the shooting in Newtown would have stopped that event. The gun laws passed in New York, Maryland and other places were all knee jerk reactions that took advantage of a tragedy to get more control over our lives. It matters not to Governor O’Malley of Maryland that his unconstitutional gun laws would not have saved those children. He does not care if children die. His major concern is his next elected office. If he can use dead children to promote his cause he is perfectly OK with that.
But Big Dog, you said you agree with Senator Feinstein, how so?
I agree with her question; when will enough be enough? I also agree with her statement that we must do something to stop the endless loss of life.
OK, I mostly agree because it is not endless. That is hyperbole and drama to make it seem worse than it is but I agree we need to end these shootings.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun. The solution is not what Feinstein wants, it is just the opposite. We need to end having gun free zones and we need to stop infringing on the right of the people to keep and bear arms. The guy at the Navy Yard was able to do what he did because once he illegally sneaked his firearm(s) onto post he had a shooting gallery of trapped, unarmed workers. All citizens who are not otherwise disallowed (felony conviction, mental illness, addiction, etc) should be allowed to carry a firearm either openly or concealed. Teachers and other workers at schools should be allowed to carry firearms. Workers at federal facilities should be able to carry firearms.
We would not have active shooters if they did not have helpless prey to hunt and government does nothing but make us helpless and make us prey.
Feinstein is perfectly happy to continue the failed government policies that have resulted in the very murders she laments because she is not affected. She is part of the protected class. You know who they are. They have armed guards or permits to carry firearms.
The police, by the way, are not the answer. In Newtown every person was dead before the police arrived. At the Navy Yard the on base armed security that effectively had a criminal on a locked down facility could not neutralize him before he murdered a dozen people. Anyone of his victims could have stopped the carnage had they been armed.
If you want to end the violence, and I mean if you truly want to end it, then stop disarming the people who suffer from unconstitutional gun laws.
No law stops criminals from committing crime.
Let us not forget that it is already against the law to murder people…
Never surrender, never submit.
Sep 10, 2013 Political
The liberal governor of the people’s Republik of Maryland, Martin O’Malley, is out of touch with the people and he is out of touch with the Constitution (both the US and the State) but he is right in step with Barack Obama.
O’Malley is a tax and spend liberal. He never met a tax that he didn’t hike and he never met a social program that he did not spend (and overspend) on.
And he wants to be president.
O’Malley led the push of draconian and unconstitutional anti gun laws during the last session and those gun laws are set to take effect on 1 October. These gun laws will do absolutely nothing to stop gun violence in Maryland which already has some of the nation’s toughest laws. Criminal upon criminal with felony records routinely get guns and use them in the commission of crimes. The only people affected by O’Malley’s unconstitutional laws are those who actually obey the law.
The law sets up a requirement for a handgun license in order to purchase a handgun, mandates all kinds of training and removes a number of firearms (that the unintelligent call assault weapons) from the list of firearms that may be purchased.
This was all done after the shootings in Newtown which O’Malley used as a reason for tougher gun laws. His approach was that we need to do something because a Newtown might happen in Maryland. O’Malley thinks that the rare possibility of such an incident warrants the infringement upon the rights of the law abiding. Interestingly, the O’Malley State Police refuse concealed carry permits to people who use the reason that they might be a victim of crime as their good and substantial reason for the permit. Yes, Maryland requires people to show a reason in order to exercise a Constitutionally protected right.
In any event, the possibility of being a victim of crime is not enough to get a concealed carry permit but the possibility of a Newtown type shooting is justification enough to impose gun laws on law abiding people who would never do such a thing. In reality, a Maryland citizen is many times more likely to be the victim of a violent crime than any school here is likely to experience a Newtown type event. But O’Malley danced on the graves of children to get his unconstitutional gun laws passed because he is against freedom and he is against the Constitution.
The US Constitution protects the RIGHT to keep and bear arms. The State Constitution says that the US Constitution will be the Supreme Law of the State.
O’Malley has violated both.
And the irony is that NONE of the laws being enacted will stop gun crime and none of them would have stopped Newtown.
This is just one step that O’Malley and the gun grabbers have taken. Once their law is in place and crime does not go down they will shoot for a complete ban on guns. We can see how such bans work when we look at Chicago or any Communist nation.
Since O’Malley started this anti gun process the number of applications for firearms has skyrocketed so much so that the approving authority, the Maryland State Police, cannot keep up. The police are in violation of the law that requires them to disapprove or not disapprove in seven days. Gun dealers are allowed to release if no determination has been made in that time but the MSP has put pressure on gun dealers not to release. In other words, to violate the law.
O’Malley sees the increase as a fear. He is surprised and disappointed that so many people have purchased firearms ahead of his Communist type ban. People have a right to fear government that violates the Constitution and they are justified in fearing any government attempt to disarm them.
A disarmed population is not a free population it is enslaved. There never would have been slavery in this nation if those who were enslaved had been armed.
When the only people with the guns are the government and the criminals then we live in a tyranny and Martin O’Malley is a tyrant. He is a tyrant that was aided by his sock puppets in the legislature, some of whom have guns and carry permits.
O’Malley does not like guns except for the ones carried by the six police officers who are protecting him at any given time and the politically connected who get a permit.
You see, he is more important than the people who pay his salary. It is good to be the king.
The schemes enacted by the liberals in this state are designed to keep people from buying guns. They are expensive, burdensome and unconstitutional.
O’Malley can be disappointed all he wants. Real citizens are disappointed in his tyrannical power grab and violation of the Constitution. He is an embarrassment and he should never, ever, be considered to lead this nation.
O’Malley is an abortion supporter and the Supreme Court has decided that an abortion is the right of every woman.
Would O’Malley ever consider legislation that required women to provide a good and substantial reason to get an abortion, to pay for fingerprints and a background check to see if they can get one and then make them sit through training to learn about the ramifications of their decision?
We know the answer to that.
And abortion murders more Maryland children each year than all gun related murders (that are committed by people who will not be stopped by the new laws).
Martin O’Moron is a disgrace and should be put in prison for violating his oath and usurping the Constitution.
And so should any politician who voted for the mess.
Never surrender, never submit.