Should Monica Sue The Cigar Company?
Jan 13, 2016 2016 Election, Second Amendment, Tyranny
Hillary Clinton and the rest of the anti-gun zealots in this nation want the ability to sue gun manufacturers if their products are used in any manner that causes harm. One assumes they mean unlawful harm as I doubt anyone would want a gun manufacturer to be sued for a police officer that shot someone in the performance of his duty.
Regardless what they really want the entire idea is stupid. Firearms are manufactured and sold in this country. So long as the manufacturer provided them legally and they were not in some way defective then that manufacturer should not be held accountable for what the end user does with the product.
This is another overreach by the people who routinely violate the US Constitution. These people are tyrants and they will try everything they can, legal or not, in order to rule over people with an iron fist and they can’t quite do that until they can disarm people and make it tougher for them to get firearms.
How many firearms companies would go out of business if they could be sued because some moron uses a gun illegally and someone gets harmed? How many could stay in business if a legal owner shoots a home invader and the invader’s family sues the firearms company because the product caused harm?
It is moronic to hold the companies responsible in these instances.
The law in place has many provisions that would allow manufacturers to be sued but she [Hillary] wanted the version that allowed lawsuits for improper use of the gun by the end user (Sanders voted against that one and she is attacking him for it). Someone using the product in a manner that harms others SHOULD NEVER BE something a company can be sued for.
For those of you who think this is a good idea let me ask:
- Should Microsoft or Dell be sued if someone uses Microsoft software and a Dell computer to steal identities?
- Should Apple be sued because a person using a cell phone and not paying attention walks off a cliff?
- Should a sports company be sued because a person uses baseball bats to beat the hell out of people?
- Should condom companies be sued because rapists use their condoms when committing rape?
- Should a small appliance company be sued because an idiot used a hair dryer in the tub and died of electrocution?
The obvious answer to these questions is no. The companies did not do anything wrong and the companies did not use its products in a manner that harmed someone. This is just as true for the gun makers.
But guns are scary and liberal bed wetters do not like them so they have to have ways to do it. They don’t like guns so they want to sue the people who make them rather than go after the people who use them illegally.
This is the liberal mind set. It is never the fault of the person who did it. There must be some reason and the blame game begins. No matter what problems people have in life liberals will always find someone or something to blame for those problems. Look at any person in Baltimore picked up for a violent crime and that person has a record a mile long for other violent or gun related crimes (along with drugs) and the joker is still on the street. The problem is not some other thing, the problem is the person who did it and a liberal justice system that refuses to punish offenders.
Period!
But I am latching onto Hillary’s idea here. I think we should be allowed to sue politicians who enact laws and make decisions that harm the public. We should be able to sue the hell out of any politician who does anything that violates the Constitution.
Then we might get some reform in this country.
As for Hillary and suing gun makers, a stupid idea from a stupid person and makes as much sense as Monica suing the cigar company for the harm done to her…
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Tags: gun control, Hillary, lawsuits, lies, manufacturers, nra, tyranny
Obama Assumes He Has The Power
Jan 4, 2016 Second Amendment
All tyrants do…
It is not hard to figure Barack Obama out. He was a drug using spoiled brat kid raised by Marxists and Communists who has grown into an adult who thinks he knows everything and that what he wants done is best for all. He also thinks that the Constitution and the laws do not apply to him and that he can ignore them as he sees fit.
This is evident in the actions he has taken. I will not list them for you. Suffice it to say any time he has used his pen and his phone or issued some executive action he was usurping his authority.
[note]It is important to note that Executive Orders do not have any weight of law for, and do not apply to, the citizens at large. They are orders for the EXECUTIVE BRANCH of the government and are designed to instruct that branch on what it must do. So when Obama tries to issue an EO telling us we must do this or that keep in mind his orders have no authority over you.[/note]
Obama met with Attorney General Lynch today and he then told reporters he has some actions he will take in the coming days. You know that they will infringe on our rights and be illegal by the way he described it.
He said the actions he is taking are completely within his legal authority. Anytime Obama says that he is trying to convince the dunderheads who support him that what he is doing is legal. IT IS NOT. He said that about a few things and the courts have told him otherwise. Remember, Obama told us he had the legal authority with regard to his immigration plans but a court told him otherwise. Of course that did not stop Obama the Tyrant as he ignored the courts.
He also said that a majority of people agree with him.
This is a lie. Congress took this issue up several times and the members of Congress decided against this based on what constituents were saying. People do not agree with Obama on this mess. People do not agree at all.
But, if that is the standard we now use then why is Obamacare the law? A huge majority of people were opposed to it when Obama and the Democrats were debating it and when they passed it. If Barack Obama actually cared about what the people wanted he would have scrapped Obamacare.
He did not because that is what he wanted. This is the same for his gun control measures. He wants this so he really does not care what the people want. He will tell the world that the majority agrees with him but that is a lie.
Obama lies to get his way and he ignores the Supreme Law of the Land. He bypasses Congress and he does things the way he wants and he really does not care if anyone likes it or if it is legal. It is what his magnificence wants so that is what he will do.
Well Barry, you ignore the law and that is fine with you and your idiot followers. Even Martin O’Malley thinks you did the right thing on this issue and you can’t get more of an idiot following you than O’Malley so let me be clear.
I will not obey any order you impose. I will NOT follow anything you say I have to do. I do not care if you like it because you work for me and I am not obligated to follow unconstitutional laws and since you have no authority to even make law I am certainly not going to follow what your pea brain comes up with.
So go fornicate yourself because we will not comply.
MOLON LABE
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Tags: executive action, gun control, lies, Second Amendment, tyranny
Obama The Tyrant Awakens Again
Jan 1, 2016 Second Amendment, Tyranny
Upon return from his refreshing tax payer funded millions of dollars vacation in Hawaii where he beat golf courses to death, Barack the Tyrant will head to the District of Corruption on Monday to discuss more gun control. Obama will meet with AG Lynch to discuss more laws that won’t do a damn thing, wouldn’t have stopped any of the previous shootings and will only hamper law abiding citizens and deny them their rights.
[note]I would truly like to see Obama lose all the armed guards who protect him. He should be required to go about his life without armed protection simply because of his stance on firearms. I certainly want to see his family stripped of armed protection.[/note]
Barack Obama is a lying tyrant who is working hard to undermine this nation and bring it to its knees. He despises everything we stand for and will work hard to change us.
His actions on gun violence do nothing to address the reasons people are murdered with firearms. Keep in mind that gun violence and mass shootings are down while gun ownership is WAY up. The problems is not firearms and it certainly is not this false narrative of easily obtained firearms because it is not easy to buy a firearm. Barack wants to close these alleged loopholes and require people who sell arms to conduct background checks (small volume, non regulated private sales). This is not going to work.
The first thing to realize is that these kinds of sales are a small part of the transactions that take place. Secondly, an investigation was unable to find any firearm sold without a background check used in a mass shooting. Third, Maryland has the kind of system in place Obama is discussing. All regulated firearms (the so called assault rifles, basically any rifle that is not rim fire or bolt action) and all handguns MUST be transferred through a holder of a federal firearms license or through the Maryland State Police. ALL transactions including at gun shows or between two neighbors that involve these regulated firearms MUST take place in this fashion. Maryland, with all this and its Draconian gun laws, has a city that is one of the most deadly in the nation. Baltimore had hundreds of gun related homicides last year. It has been shown time and again that those committing the crimes are not permitted to possess a firearm and yet they have them.
None of these laws affect criminals. We call them criminals because they do not obey the law.
Obama wants people to think that buying a firearm is as easy as buying a condom:
“The gun lobby is loud and well organized in its defense of effortlessly available guns for anyone. The rest of us are going to have to be just as passionate and well organized in our defense of our kids.” The Hill
It is not effortless to buy a gun. Many private transactions do not require background checks but they are a small amount of the transactions AND they are not the kinds of firearms used in crimes. Obama is telling people it is effortless to get firearms and this is WRONG. I can understand how he might have this impression because he has been carelessly distributing firearms around the word. For those he supplies it is real easy to get guns.
For the rest of us, not so much.
Notice that Obama once again tugs at the heart saying we must do this for the kids. If you want to do something for the kids how about you end abortion which murders more children than guns?
How about you pass laws making it as difficult to get an abortion as it is to get a gun?
I mean if Obama is really serious about protecting children then he should do this NOW.
No, this sorry excuse for a human and waste of flesh fights to fund Planned Parenthood and to remove all barriers to abortion while going after law abiding citizens and their firearms. He does not care about children.
He cares about control and he will do whatever he has to in order to get it. That includes lying, cheating and breaking the law.
Just think how many more law breakers Obama can make by making laws that the responsible will NOT follow?
MOLON LABE
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Tags: gun control, lies, lynch, Obama, tyrants
Maryland Gun Control, Absolute Failure
Dec 9, 2015 Second Amendment
We are well aware of the failures of places with tough gun control laws. Chicago has thousands of shootings this year and it is nearly impossible to legally own a firearm there. California’s gun control failure was on display in San Bernardino last week when Muslim terrorists murdered a bunch of defenseless people.
Maryland is not far behind the crowd of gun control hell holes where criminals get guns and murder people while the law abiding are denied their protected right and are treated like the criminal class.
Martin O’Malley, former governor and presidential candidate, is responsible for pushing through these restrictive and unconstitutional laws. He relished in the moment and thought it would increase his bona fides with the liberal base. O’Malley, like his fellow Democrats, called for more gun control exploiting the dead while they were still warm and before all the facts were known.
The reality is these people were defenseless because their government made them so. The reaction of those in charge is to increase security from unarmed guards to armed guards. The only folks that there was no mention of arming are those who will suffer at the hands of bad people, the citizens.
It has been nearly two years since Maryland passed all the tough gun control. Baltimore City has over 300 murders this year, most of them with firearms and there are plenty more shootings where people were only injured. Perhaps the criminals did not get the memo about gun control because they keep getting guns and they keep using them.
Case in point, the first line from a Baltimore Fox 45 (WBFF) article indicates that police have taken two more guns off the street. They arrested two men who were involved in drug distribution and each of them had a gun. The article clearly indicates that neither of them was legally allowed to possess a gun and yet, they both had one.
You see, criminals do not obey the law, period. It is against the law to murder people and yet that happens. What makes anyone think that gun control laws will keep criminals from getting guns?
In fact, the two who were arrested had 200 bags of cocaine in their possession and I know that possessing, buying, selling or using cocaine is against the law.
Anyone see a pattern here?
Gun laws only affect the law abiding and they make us sitting ducks for those who have no regard for the law or for human life.
Martin O’Malley brought this to Maryland (mostly the urban areas as most of the suburbs are full of conservative people who own guns and obey the law) and now he wants to bring it to the nation.
I have no time and no desire to be lectured about guns by people like O’Malley particularly ones who are protected by armed guards.
MOLON LABE
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Tags: baltimore, criminals, gun control, lies, morons, O'Malley, tyranny
O’Malley Gun Control Plan Dismantled
Nov 3, 2015 2016 Election, Political
As governor of Maryland Martin O’Malley pushed through gun control measures that violate the US and Maryland Constitutions and he assured the morons who follow him that this would make life better and safer. The only thing O’Malley accomplished was to make it tougher for the law abiding. Criminals in Maryland still get firearms and they still shoot people. Led by Democrats the criminals in Baltimore riot and destroy with impunity.
Martin does not dislike firearms. He was perfectly happy with all the armed State Police officers who protected him and his family. He is just not too keen on everyone else having firearms. He is a typical liberal who thinks that he is better than everyone else and that he knows how to run other people’s lives. He is wrong but in his little brain he thinks he is not only correct but that people love him and think he is brilliant.
O’Malley (or O’Moron as I like to refer to him) will unveil his anti-gun platform as he tries to out liberal the other morons running for his party’s nomination. Let us take a look at his platform and dismantle it. Each item of his plan is presented and then I will comment.
Using procurement contracts to advance gun safety by requiring manufacturers that seek federal contracts to make design changes. O’Malley says the changes will “advance gun safety and improve law enforcement’s ability to trace firearms. These include hidden serial numbers that cannot be defaced, micro-stamping, magazine disconnect mechanisms and other next-generation safety improvements.
The last thing first. Being able to track firearms is only effective for tracking those legally owned. If firearms are stolen or obtained via other illegal means they might be able to track back to an individual but not necessarily the person who used the firearm illegally. As for forcing firearms manufacturers to make design changes in order to secure government contracts, what happens if none of them do so? Suppose the gun makers decide not to make changes and not to bid on contracts for government purchases? What happens when government can’t get firearms because of this insanity? I think fewer government agents having guns is a great idea and would applaud any manufacturer who told O’Malley to pound sand. Imagine a President O’Moron {{{shudder}}} who has Secret Service without firearms because no one would buckle to governmental pressure. The government should not be using OUR money to force compliance. Imagine how O’Moron would react if a contract required a company bidding on a government contract to NOT provide abortion services in its employee health care?
Ending the federal defense of gun dealer immunity by stopping enforcement of a 2005 law that O’Malley says protects irresponsible gun dealers and manufacturers from lawsuits by victims and families of victims of gun violence
Irresponsible by whose definition? There are already laws that define how gun dealers must act and how they must conduct business. If they are doing things incorrectly then they should be fined or lose their license. But a blanket statement such as this opens the door for lawsuits based on some arbitrary idea of irresponsibility. Someone could be shot with a legally purchased firearm that was later stolen and an idiot like O’Moron would claim the dealer should have known it would get stolen so he is irresponsible and therefore subject to litigation.
But hey, let’s take this idea a little farther. The government at all levels allows the sale of tobacco and alcohol. The government should not have immunity from lawsuits by those affected by its irresponsible permission for the sale of tobacco and alcohol. The government KNOWS people will be harmed by these products and that is why there are warnings on the labels of tobacco and alcohol products. So the government is being irresponsible in allowing these items to be sold. Based on what O’Moron thinks about firearms dealers the government should not have immunity from lawsuits by those harmed by these products.
Strictly enforcing existing bans on gun ownership for domestic abusers and stalkers, to “disarm those convicted for committing domestic violence
This is a tricky one. The first thing that needs to happen is that we ensure people who did not actually commit domestic violence or stalking are not convicted or charged or discriminated against. A single incident that involves two people might be domestic violence or it might not. By all means, if a person is involved in domestic violence then that person (he or she) should not be allowed to own a firearm. But before we take away this right we need to make absolutely certain and there should be a method to regain that right if circumstances warrant it.
The reality though is we already have laws that prohibit these folks from owning firearms. If these people decide they want a firearm they will get one. No law preventing the ownership of a firearm will prevent a person who wants to get one from doing so. Protective orders and orders banning a person from owning firearms are only pieces of paper that will not prevent a person from getting and using firearms. These work no better than gun control laws because those inclined to break the law will do so. This is more of a method for government to define what a person did as domestic violence and then remove guns that way. How will government strictly enforce this as O’Moron wants? It can’t enforce the gun control laws liberals have already enacted. If they could Baltimore and Chicago would be safe places instead of shooting galleries. The best thing to do would be to ensure the victims of such violence can get and carry a firearm for protection. But O’Moron opposes this. Once again, you are not as important as he and his family.
Banning so-called “cop killer” ammunition by working to close loopholes that O’Malley’s campaign says “have made hundreds of kinds of dangerous cartridges available for sale.” The campaign says he will act in his executive capacity as president to tighten current regulations
This is one of those slippery slope deals in that he can ban “cop killer” ammunition and then define all ammo as cop killer. There are bans on the manufacture of certain types of ammo and those laws should be good enough. If manufacturers are making this ammo then they need to be dealt with. But let me be clear, if government agents are allowed to have this ammo then so should the general population. Once again O’Moron talks about tightening current legislation as if that will stop people from breaking the law. It is illegal to buy, sell, possess or use Heroin but people do so every day and no law has ever stopped that. People can buy ammo from other countries and get it in here. If we can’t stop millions of illegals from walking in we sure as hell won’t stop illegal guns and ammo from getting in (though with Obama and Holder it went out of the country instead).
A new “electronic alert system” to inform local law enforcement officials when those who are prohibited from purchasing firearms attempt to do so. The campaign says the system will be “modeled on the FBI alert system used when fugitives purchase guns” and will help law enforcement officials identify which attempted sales to prosecute
This is Mickey Mouse stuff. What happens if a person is unaware that something in his past prevents him from owning a firearm and he attempts to buy one? Would not it be more prudent for the dealer to inform the person and tell him who to contact in government to see if this can be rectified? Then a notation can be made that the person was so informed and if that person attempts to buy firearms later then the police could be notified? In fact, it might be better for the dealer to inform the police of the first attempt and that the person was notified and then for the dealer to notify law enforcement of any subsequent attempts. If the system were properly annotated and working correctly this would be quite easy. O’Moron is looking for a bigger government boondoggle to further gum up the works.
Requiring the safe storage of firearms in homes by issuing and enforcing federal rules that make clear safety standards for gun locks and safes
Here is the short story. What I do in MY house with MY property is none of the government’s business and I will not be regulated by them. The reality is there are two ways to determine if you did not secure your firearms the way people like O’Malley want you to. The first is for there to be a problem with the firearm (like a child getting it and shooting someone). The second is government coming to check. Government will NOT be checking in my house to see what I do with MY property. Responsible people do not leave firearms in an unsafe manner. Yes, we hear some stories about some kid getting a gun from under a bed and shooting himself or someone else but the story usually involves a firearm that was not legally owned by a person who should not have it. Regardless, if you want to leave a loaded shotgun in the corner of a room, that is YOUR business.
Strengthening enforcement and audits of licensed dealers to ensure that they are in compliance with the law. The campaign says this action includes “conducting background checks of gun dealer employees; ensuring that dealers who have their licenses revoked do not become unlicensed sellers without first liquidating their inventories; and using audit inspections to check dealer inventories for stolen guns
This is harassment of licensed gun dealers. They already have to comply with a mountain of laws and paperwork. They get inspected and they have to renew their licenses regularly. I am fairly sure most, if not all, of this is in place. I would also imagine that a dealer runs a serial number before purchasing a firearm so it would be unlikely that he would have a stolen one in his possession.
Martin O’Moron is an elitist who thinks that responsible people should not have firearms and should have their lives run by people like him, you know, their betters. He is a low life cretin who infringes upon the rights of law abiding citizens for political gain and so that he can control them. He is not bothered by the firearms that protect him but he does not want others to have that protection.
Given the rumors of O’Malley’s extramarital affair(s) perhaps he should spend more time taking care of his own life and less time getting in our business.
I do not like this troll and I sincerely hope he is never elected to another office. It is time for him to get a real job and earn money that did not come from the sweat of OUR brows.
To paraphrase George W Bush, you are either with the Constitution or you are against it. If you are against it then you are a domestic enemy. My oath says I have to protect against people like you, Marty….
MOLON LABE Marty, you little twit.
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Tags: constitution, elitist, gun control, liberal, lies, martin o'malley, moron, statist