Chuck Schumer Thinks He Is More Important Than You
Oct 5, 2010 Political
Chuck Schumer is not a supporter of the rights of Americans to keep and bear arms. He is in favor of more gun control and more restrictions on Americans in violation of our Constitutional right. But Chuckie is not completely against the Second Amendment. Chuck has a gun permit and carries one even though he is in a state where it is extremely tough to get any kind of carry permit. The kind of permit Chuckie has is nearly impossible to get.
Not only does Schumer carry a handgun, the New York City Police Department also provides armed escorts for the good senator. In fact, the Government Accounting Office — the investigative arm of the US Congress — slammed Schumer’s use of police resources for personal protection. It’s clear that Schumer believes he’s special. He wishes to ban private citizens’ ownership of firearms, while he enjoys layers of protection.
“No wonder Chuckie Schumer shoots his mouth off so much — he’s able to protect himself,” says a 25-year police veteran.
Also, a check of Pistol License records shows that Senator Schumer possesses an “unrestricted” pistol permit, a rarity in New York City. Licenses are distributed in different categories in the Big Apple: Target Permits allow only use of a firearm at a licensed firing range; Premises Permits allow weapons to be kept in a home or apartment; Restricted Permits allow the gunowner to carry their firearms concealed but only within the purview of their job (security, jewelers, armored car guards, etc.). So it’s evident that Senator Schumer has two sets of rules — one for Americans and one for himself. American Daily
Yes, Schumer is part of the political class that thinks he is more important than you. He thinks he deserves more protection than you so much so that he even has police officers who escort him. He can defend himself and he has an escort detail of police officers.
Most citizens I know do not want their own police officer and if the state of New York wants to pay cops to tag along with Chuckie then it is their business as long as it is only New York taxpayers footing the bill.
But what we do want is to be able to exercise our Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms. The people of New York (and all of the states for that matter) deserve THE EXACT SAME carry permit that Chuckie was able to get. The people are his boss and if he can get a permit then they all should have one.
In fact, if we were to follow the Constitution (assuming that requiring permits is not a violation of it) then people should be issued permits unless there is some compelling reason not to allow an individual to carry.
Obviously Schumer feels that he has certain inalienable rights that the rest of us do not. He would like to disarm you while packing his own heat.
And this people, is why we need to get rid of all these pukes.
It is November or never.
Cave Canem!
Never surrender, never submit.


Tags: chuck schumer, do as i say, elitist liberal, gun control, gun permit
Maybe One Last Attempt Before They Are Thrown Out
Sep 9, 2010 Political
I am not sure exactly what this meeting is about but anytime liberals have meetings about guns it is not good. The Senate Judiciary Committee is having a meeting entitled “Firearms in Commerce: Assessing the Need for Reform in the Federal Regulatory Process” which is rather vague but when they talk about reform or a regulatory process it cannot be good.
The other concern is the word Commerce is mentioned. Given how Democrats think they can regulate anything by invoking the Commerce Clause it is not a stretch to assume they might be trying to regulate firearms through commerce in a more restrictive way.
We will need to be vigilant and ensure these gun grabbers are not trying to backdoor us before they are thrown to the curb.
We must always be on the lookout because they will never allow us to protect ourselves unless we force them to leave us alone.
This man defended his family and property with a legal AK 47 and he was arrested for firing warning shots into the ground. Why did he shoot? The place he lives has the shot detector technology and he knew if he fired the police would arrive quickly.
Why was it necessary? A gang was congregating and threatening him. If the gun grabbers get their way he would be at the mercy of the gangs.
Which is just about as bad as being at the mercy of the government and its willful disregard of our right to keep and bear arms.
November cannot come soon enough.
Cave Canem!
Never surrender, never submit.


Tags: ak 47, commerce, gangs, gun control, gun grabbers, lies, nra, senate judiciary
Mayor Daley Out Of Touch With The People
Jun 29, 2010 Political
Mayor Daley is not happy with the decision by the Supreme Court that says the Second Amendment applies to the states. He is an anti gun politician and he wants guns banned. He has no concern for the Constitution or for freedom. He only cares about power and how to get rich through Chicago corruption.
The people of Chicago see things a bit differently. They are happy with the decision. Some indicate that they have weapons to protect themselves even though the weapons are illegal (by virtue of the gun ban). People are willing to break the law to ensure their safety.
Daley cares not one bit and he vowed to enact a new law that will make it extremely difficult to own a gun. These tactics usually involve undue barriers that prevent people, particularly the poor, from getting weapons. The very same tactics that liberals used after slavery to terrorize the freemen.
Why should Daley care? He has armed guards to protect him.
At least the people get it. As one person puts it:
Another neighbor, 50-year-old Charlene Figgins, thinks Chicago Mayor Richard Daley is living in a different Chicago than she is and that he doesn’t understand the citizens’ need for protection.
She says it can take 30 minutes for police to respond to calls for help in her neighborhood. She says the mayor doesn’t have that problem. Chicago Tribune
Or as the bumper sticker says, when seconds count the police are minutes away.
9-1-1, government sponsored dial a prayer…
Never surrender, never submit.


Tags: armed guards, chicago, daley, gun control, liberty, Second Amendment
Supreme Court Decides What We Already Knew
Jun 29, 2010 Political
The fact that the Second Amendment is an individual right is indisputable except to lefties who have trouble understanding what the words “The People” and “shall not be infringed” mean. These are the same folks who refuse to believe in individual rights even though the Founders clearly stated such in their writings.
The issue changed to one of applicability to the states once the left lost its battle against individual rights. Then the issue became, well sure it applied in DC but that is not a state. It does not apply to the states.
The SCOTUS cleared that all up today with a decision that overturned a lower court ruling and remanded the issue back. The SCOTUS, in a 5-4 decision, ruled that the Second Amendment applies to the states and that is because of the Fourteenth Amendment. For a long time the Fourteenth was not considered to apply to the states but that changed a half century or so ago and decisions have been reached that made the Bill of Rights (with exceptions to some portions) apply to the states. This idea is what allowed abortion to become legal and forced the states to comply. If the rights spelled out in the Constitution did not apply to the states then the Court could not have ruled that abortion was legal because it would be a federal, and only a federal, issue. This ignore the fact that abortion is not a right and is indicated only because it is “settled” law where the right was somehow found.
The Second was never considered though thinking people knew that it was included in the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth; “No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States.” Which, as an aside, means the Arizona cannot violate Due Process since illegals are NOT citizens of the United States. But that is an issue for another time.
Interestingly but not surprising, gun grabbers are vowing to basically ignore the ruling issued today. Mayor Richard Daley of Chicago has vowed that his city will enact a new law soon that will prevent people from getting guns. This amounts to ignoring the law and is typical for Alinsky progressives. If the courts don’t rule your way then just ignore them. After all, this is what the Obama regime is doing with the drilling moratorium. They have vowed to ignore the court and issue a new moratorium.
How long will they do this before WE THE PEOPLE, decide to ignore the rules they come up with?
As for Daley, he is a first class slug and a hypocrite. While Daley does not believe that the people should be allowed to have guns, his aldermen are allowed to carry them. Richard Daley has about a dozen body guards on his detail and all of them are armed. Why is it that a person who works for the people of Chicago can have armed guards to protect him but will not allow the people to be armed to protect themselves.
No politician is any more important than the lowest in our society because even that person is the employer of the politician. I have little problem with presidents having armed security. Our enemies would love to attack a president and kill him. Other politicians are not that important and their demise would not cause turmoil in this country.
Think about it. If Richard Daley was killed by a would be criminal, would Chicago be in turmoil? No, they would replace him with another corrupt politician and keep on going. But Daley does not have to worry about that because he deems himself more important than the people who pay his salary. He is so against the people for whom he works that he will enact a law to keep people from getting guns because he knows better than our Founders, our Supreme Court and YOU.
Daley has no worries because his armed guards go with him even when he travels out of state. One of Daley’s armed guards caught an escaped criminal near the family vacation spot in Michigan while Hizzoner and the family were there. If you or I had been there we might well have been victims of the criminal.
I have a real problem with people like Daley, politicians who feel they are more important than the average folks and who deserve more protection. And the people are not even asking for taxpayer funded security. All we want is the ability to defend ourselves. This goes for people like Barack Obama who would love to ban guns and put more people in danger because average citizens are much more likely to be victims of crime than most politicians, particularly a president.
The Supreme Court put an end to the idea that the Second Amendment does not apply to the states today and it should be as sacrosanct to liberals as the issue of abortion. If it is settled law then let it be settled and let the people have their guns.
The opinion is a good read and in it Justice Scalia excoriates Justice Stevens as well he should. Stevens (and Breyer) ignore US history and the words of the Founders in their opinion and rely on the actions of other nations as well as their liberal views. Even though the facts are completely spelled out with historical references as to what keeping and bearing arms meant (and still means), these two ignored the facts and presented the progressive view. Justices should provide a legal view, not a political one.
How nice for the dress down of Stevens to be in the record for all time and to be issued on his last day on the Court. As Scalia put it (after destroying Stevens’ arguments):
In a vibrant democracy, usurpation should have to be accomplished in the dark. It is JUSTICE STEVENS’ approach, not the Court’s, that puts democracy in peril.
While today marks a victory for Americans and for freedom one thing is overshadowed. There are four Justices who voted against the Constitution and against the long history of this matter. They voted with the legacy of the Democrats in the south who made gun control laws that applied to blacks in order to control them.
These progressive liberals perpetuate that desire to enslave the citizenry in this nation. And this time they want to enslave all of us, regardless of color.
One last note. Any politician who is in favor of gun control and/or denies people the right to keep and bear arms should not be allowed to own or carry a gun and should NOT receive armed guards.
If you believe that there should be NO guns then there can be none for you. That goes for Obama, Daley and all the other hypocrites who think they are more important than we who employ them.
UPDATE: After the Heller decision Mayor Daley predicted all hell would break loose. That has not happened and gun crime in DC has dropped to pre gun ban levels.
Never surrender, never submit.


Tags: blacks, gun control, Obama, scalia, Second Amendment, slavery, stevens, supreme court, thomas
Actor, Obama Adviser, Fakes Robbery In PR Move
Apr 21, 2010 Satire
It has been reported that Obama adviser and actor Kal Penn (Kalpen Suresh Modi) was robbed at gunpoint in Washington DC near Dupont Circle sometime after midnight. Penn, who starred in House and the Harold and Kumar movies has obviously staged this to gain attention as he intends to leave DC and resume his acting career in a new Harold and Kumar Christmas movie.
Penn reports that the gunman got his wallet, cell phones, and other belongings but this must be fabricated.
Washington DC has a gun ban so a person with a gun could not have robbed him. Gun control laws, we are told, work so this could not have happened. If he wanted to be believed he should have left the part about the gun out. Everyone knows that people do not carry guns in DC. If they did Penn might have had a chance against the supposed gunman. Then again, maybe not. Liberals don’t carry guns, they negotiate…
Interestingly, there was a rally consisting of a bunch of gun owners who showed up near DC (in Virginia where carrying guns is legal) and despite all those loaded weapons and “angry” people, not a single shot was fired.
Penn is obviously well off so if this happened maybe he should not look at it as a robbery. He should look at it as the manifestation of his political beliefs. It was redistribution of wealth. The person who allegedly robbed him had less money so he just leveled the playing field.
The only difference between what happened to Penn and what happens to the rest of us is that the IRS does not use guns to steal our money and they do it in broad daylight.
Source:
Yahoo News
Never surrender, never submit.


Loading ...
Loading...

