Again, How Will More Gun Laws Or Bans Help?
Dec 26, 2012 Political, Second Amendment
The anti gun zealots are out in full force trying to usurp the Second Amendment by removing guns from society. Some members of Congress (and other politicians) are touting outright bans on specific types of guns as well as laws forcing people who already own such firearms to sell them to the government, in a sort of forced buyback program. These people are either mentally deficient or are hiding their true agenda. You see, gun laws and gun bans do not stop people who are intent on doing harm with a firearm from doing so.
This is evident in nearly all mass shootings since about 1950. In all but one of them the criminal opened fire in a place where guns are not allowed. The one where guns are allowed is Arizona where Congresswoman Giffords was shot. The gunman, by the way, was stopped by a citizen who was legally carrying a firearm.
I do not think these folks are mentally deficient (they might be but that is not the issue here) because they know what they are doing. They are using mass murder incidents to gin up public support for disarming Americans. They want this because one of the steps to Socialism requires people to be disarmed of the tools that would allow them to resist. Once all firearms are outlawed then government becomes the holder of the weapons and is free to impose its will on those who will no longer have the means to resist. These people need to have citizens willingly turn in their guns (or try to force them to sell them back) because an outright confiscation would lead to a lot of dead government agents. Americans will not be disarmed by force and there are many more gun owners than there are government agents.
Besides, many of those agents have stated they would not follow any order to disarm their fellow citizens.
But will these laws actually work? We have seen time and again that laws banning guns do not stop criminals from using guns. Chicago is a glaring example. In fact, no law stops criminals. The very nature of a criminal is that he breaks laws. Even everyday people break the law (hell we probably break a lot of laws each day because we do not know they exist) as when they go over the posted speed limit. How many non handicapped people park in a handicapped spot? How many times do people drink alcohol and drive? Those who would do violence are no exception to this except they do not know where to draw a line. They will use firearms (that they are not legally allowed to buy or posses) to commit crimes regardless of what society has deemed via its laws.
David Gregory of NBC is not a stupid person. He is an educated man who is quite successful. He is a liberal so he obviously has a brain deficiency but he is otherwise intelligent. He is under investigation for breaking a DC firearm law. Gregory displayed a 30 round magazine on his Sunday show. It is against the law in DC to posses a magazine with a capacity larger than 10 rounds. New reports have indicated that Gregory was made aware of this prior to his show and yet he chose to go ahead and display the magazine.
This means that he knew it was against the law to posses that particular item but he decided to break the law anyway.
The law did not stop Gregory from possessing the magazine and knowledge of the law did not keep him from displaying it to the three or four people who watch his show. He knew he would be in violation but did not care enough about the law to obey it.
We can argue all day about the stupidity of size limits on magazines (they are worthless laws) but the reality is, this is the law and Gregory broke it.
How would any other law have kept him from consciously deciding to break the law? How would any other law have prevented him from doing what he did when the law already on the books failed to accomplish that?
The truth is laws do not keep people from breaking them. They only provide a framework for the law abiding to follow and a system for the legal process to function once someone breaks the law.
We do not need more gun laws, we have plenty of them. We need the government to stop infringing on the Second Amendment rights we all have by virtue of our birth. If law abiding people were not restricted then criminals would think twice.
Laws only hamper those who follow them as the criminal is unencumbered by such things.
Ask David Gregory who unintentionally demonstrated why more laws are not the answer.
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
[jpsub]
Tags: criminals, david gregory, DC, gun laws, investigation
Arizona Fights Back
Jan 21, 2012 Political
What goes around comes around and this is certainly the case with Arizona and the lawless Obama regime. The Obama regime fought tooth and nail against Arizona’s illegal immigration law (meaning a law to control illegal immigration, not a law that was illegal) and violated the Constitution in the process. While the regime was violating the Constitution with regard to the immigration law (specifically the court in which they fought it) they were violating laws in Arizona, or so it seems.
Arizona has launched an investigation into Fast and Furious, the gun running scheme the Obama regime enacted to give them a reason for tougher gun laws. They basically forced gun store owners to allow illegal purchases of firearms and allowed the guns to cross into Mexico where the US lost track of them. They ended up in the hands of drug cartels. The regime wanted to make claims about lax gun laws so it could introduce tougher ones but their plan hit a snag when a border patrol agent was killed with one of the weapons and the scheme was made public.
So now the Arizona officials will look to see if the federal government and people working for it violated any of Arizona’s laws.
What would be more fitting than having some of the people involved prosecuted for violating Arizona laws after the regime worked so hard to interfere with Arizona’s illegal immigrant law?
Two can play the you broke the law game. Right now Arizona has the upper hand and the regime’s schemes are falling apart.
I bet they never figured a state would fight back.
The figured wrong.
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Tags: arizona, fast and furious, immigration law, investigation
It Is Official, Obama Says No Wrongdoing
Dec 16, 2008 Political
When the story about Governor Blagojevich trying to sell Obama’s Senate seat broke, The Sainted One said that he did not have any contact with the governor. He then said that none of his people had contact. For several days there were pictures of Obama and Blagojevich together. There were stories of the two meeting and David Axelrod said that he knew that the two had met. He said it a month before it mattered and then retracted it when Obama contradicted it with a lie.
In any event, Obama assured us that there were no contacts and then he said he was going to have an internal investigation which he knew would show there had been no contacts. After four days he completed the investigation and what do you know, Obama said there were no inappropriate contacts. He had to change from no contacts to no inappropriate contacts because it is now well known that his would be Chief of Staff, Rahm Emanuel, was caught on tape discussing the issue.
Perhaps Obama can explain how it is that he had no contact with Blagojevich when he [Obama] sent Emanuel to discuss the candidates who would be acceptable to him. If Obama sent him then it is contact. It is not face to face contact but Emanuel contacted Blagojevich on behalf of Obama and with his full knowledge. Therefore, Obama had contact with Blagojevich specifically for the purpose of discussing the Senate seat, a topic Obama says was never discussed.
Obama’s desire to be the candidate of change, the guy who brings a new kind of politics to Washington is a pipe dream now. He lied to the public. He and his people might not have done anything wrong but he lied about the contact. His first instinct was to lie which makes him no different than 99.9% of all the other politicians.
It took him four days to investigate and that should say something because, as pointed out at NRO:
Truth Is Available Immediately, But Lies Take Time To Coordinate
They had to make sure they knew what Emanuel said and did and they had to make sure that they all had it straight that The Sainted One has no dirt under his nails.
One last thing that is very convenient. It has been alleged that Fitzgerald kept hush-hush about certain aspects of the investigation prior to the election so as not to hurt Obama’s chances. Now, according to Obama, Fitzgerald wants him to wait until the week of the 22nd to release the results of the internal investigation. Obama will be on vacation and people will be wrapped up in last minute Christmas shopping. This should pretty much bury whatever he found out.
Looks like Barry is getting his very own Fitzmas present…
If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader.
Tags: corruption, emanuel, investigation, Obama, Senate
Will MSM Give Hillary Same Treatment as Bush?
Jan 25, 2008 Political
Drudge is displaying a picture that has surfaced of Tony Rezko with the smiling Clintons, one on each side. This is important because Hillary Clinton mentioned Rezko in the last Democratic debate when she said to Senator Obama; “I was fighting against those ideas when you were practicing law and representing your contributor, Rezko, in his slum landlord business in inner city Chicago.” The photograph looks like one of the many that presidents and their wives have taken, photos that are often with people they do not know and have never met. Often though, these pictures are taken with people who have donated money to the president’s campaign. So the question now becomes, how did Tony Rezko get invited to whatever event this was and how did he get his picture taken with the Clintons? Another question would have to be did this “slumlord” donate money to them?
On the surface this might not seem like a big deal and many Hillary supporters will say that she has taken many photos with people that she does not know. Hillary was making that very case this morning on the Today show. In the glory days of the Clintons the media would be tucking this under the bed and if she were running against a Republican they would certainly make no big deal out of it. The media are not treating the Clintons unfairly as Bill claims, they are just giving Hillary the same scrutiny as other candidates. In other words, the playing field has been leveled and the Clintons are not used to that. Remember, it was Drudge who expose the Lewinsky affair when the media was keeping it under wraps.
As I stated though, the photo looks like one of many except the person in the middle is different so why is this important and why should Hillary be taken to task for this photo? There was a guy named Jack Abramoff who was a lobbyist. He ended up in jail and several Republicans ended up in legal trouble because of illegal dealings with Abramoff (Democrats ignored their dealings with Abramoff as did their partners in the MSM). After the Abramoff scandal broke there was word that the disgraced lobbyist had been tot he White House and that there were photos of him with President and Mrs. Bush. The Democrats and the media went nuts over this and said it proved that Bush was doing illegal things. The Chicago Tribune said that Mr. Bush had some explaining to do even as the President was saying that he took thousands of photos with people he did not know and that he did not know Abramoff (sound familiar?). Here is the Tribune take on it:
“However, now we know there are at least two visits by admitted felon Jack Abramoff that the White House must explain,’’ Fitton said. “What was Jack Abramoff doing at the White House? With whom did he meet? The public deserves to know answers to these questions.†Chicago Tribune
Since Rezko is from Chicago, let’s wait and see how long the Tribune waits to tell us that the public deserves to know about Rezko’s visit with the Clintons.
There is no doubt that Abramoff raised money for President Bush as he did for many politicians from both parties. Many of those politicians, including the President, have donated that money to charity. The point being, if Abramoff was able to get his picture with the President because of fund raising, what did Rezko do to get his picture taken with the Clintons?
This photo, which has to be an embarrassment to Hillary, is probably nothing more than a photo with someone they really do not know, as are the Abramoff/Bush photos. However, the media and the Democratic Party went absolutely nuts over the Bush photos and the words corruption and scandal were thrown around quite often. Therefore, the Clinton photo with Rezko demands the same attention and scrutiny as the Bush/Abramoff photos and that attention needs to be now, not six months after she is elected to the Presidency.
The media cannot drag its feet on this and they must start digging to see if Rezko gave the Clintons money or if there is another relationship between the parties. The media must start using words like scandal and corruption and the Clintons must allow access to all their records so a federal probe can begin.
While the investigators and the media are at it, they can look into Hillary’s ties to Abramoff as well. If she wants to be President then she should be held to the same standard that the Democrats hold President Bush to.
Of course, this could be photoshopped…
Others items of interest:
Outside the Beltway, Blog @ MoreWhat.com, The Virtuous Republic, Rosemary’s Thoughts, Right Truth, The Pet Haven Blog, Shadowscope, Cao’s Blog, Leaning Straight Up, Conservative Cat, Pursuing Holiness, Adeline and Hazel, A Newt One- The Truth Surge, Pet’s Garden Blog, Diary of the Mad Pigeon, Allie is Wired, Woman Honor Thyself, The World According to Carl, Blue Star Chronicles, Pirate’s Cove, The Pink Flamingo, Wolf Pangloss, A Newt One, CORSARI D’ITALIA, Dumb Ox Daily News, and Right Voices, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.
Tags: abramoff, Clinton, investigation, photo, rezko, scandal