I Agree With Senator Feinstein
Sep 17, 2013 Commentary, Second Amendment
[note]This article assumes the shooting at the Navy Yard was not a false flag operation. I have no doubt in my mind that the government or its agents are capable of using mentally unstable people to get what it wants. Life means nothing to those who want to infringe upon our freedoms. If they cared about life they would not allow children to be murdered in the womb. Obama will use Executive Orders to get what he wants leading to speculation of a false flag operation.[/note]
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?”
~snip
“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.
[note]The AR 15 is a firearm hated by the left. The initial reports indicated that the shooter used one at the Navy Yard however; new reports indicate he used a shotgun (he sneaked in) and two pistols he took from security guards. This will not stop the gun grabbers from blaming the black rifle and calling for a ban on it.[/note]
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…
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Tags: constitution, feinstein, gun control, navy yard, Obama
What If They Boycotted Something Else?
Aug 21, 2013 Commentary, Second Amendment
Christopher Lane of Australia was attending college in the US and played baseball on his college team. He had just returned from his home country a few days ago and was murdered when three teens who claimed they were bored decided to shoot him. Lane was out jogging when the three wannabe thugs followed him in a car and shot him in the back.
The murder happened in Oklahoma.
This is a tragedy and I can’t even begin to imagine how his family is affected by this. They sent a loved one to the US a few days ago and now he is gone, senselessly murdered by thugs with alleged ties to a gang.
The incident has the anti gun nuts up in arms. Brit twit Piers Morgan says that America’s gun crisis has become the world’s problem.
Former deputy Prime Minister Tim Fischer said that Australian tourists should stay away from America to protest a need for stricter gun control.
These fellows come from nations that have taken guns from people and now their citizens are at the mercy of criminals. Gun murders have not stopped in their home nations and no gun law would have prevented Lane’s murder.
You see, none of the people who have been arrested are allowed to own a handgun. How did they get one? The same way people who get the banned substance Heroin do, they obtained it illegally. No law will keep people from getting what they want. One only needs to look at prohibition in the US to see that people who wanted alcohol, an illegal and banned item, got it. Criminals do not obey the law. That is exactly why there are people in the UK and Australia who are shot with guns even though they have extreme gun control.
There is not a gun problem in America; there is a societal and criminal problem. One of the suspects in the Lane murder was on probation and there are indications that all of them had a criminal history.
The crimes committed with guns are almost exclusively done by people who have obtained them illegally. The only thing gun laws do is impose restrictions on those who follow the law in the first place. The liberal system of justice that lets criminals go free is at fault as is the mindset that portrays people as victims who are not responsible for their actions.
Perhaps if we spent as much time going after criminals as we do going after guns we would have some meaningful progress in the murders of people by guns. Keep in mind, more people die in car accidents and from tobacco use than from guns but we concentrate on gun control because it is about controlling people.
In New York a few days ago a cab whose driver was full of road rage jumped a curb and hit a woman amputating her leg. The woman was visiting the US from the UK. Would it make sense for UK officials to advise their citizens not to visit the US until road rage is controlled or until cab drivers are held accountable?
But something deeper needs to be investigated. Two of the three suspects in this case were black and a large number of violent crimes are committed by black people (particularly against other blacks). How would anyone react if the former deputy PM of Australia had advised citizens to avoid the US until it got its black people under control?
This is an important question because we have the gun being blamed for the crime. We hear people calling for all kinds of actions against the gun. A broad generalization is being made and all legal gun owners are being lumped in with the small fraction of people who use illegal guns in an illegal way. If they are free to do this and if it makes logical sense to the gun grabbers then why can’t we simply look at the demographics of 66% of the people involved in this crime and indict an entire class of people for what happened. It works like this:
Gun used in crime means all guns (and gun owners) bad so ban all guns.
Blacks committed murder so all blacks are bad so ban all blacks.
The second statement makes little sense to anyone and is readily rejected but gun grabbers who see the absurdity in it will fail to see the same absurdity in the first sentence.
Guns do not commit crimes. People commit crimes and in this case the gun was the object used to do so. We do not ban knives, baseball bats, cars, sulfuric acid and rope when they are used to commit murder. We recognize that all these items have a purpose and that they can be used to murder. Guns have a purpose and they can be used to murder. We should not ban them just because a small number of people use them illegally (which would not stop even with a complete ban).
The Second Amendment protects a right and that right should not be infringed upon because some people do bad things. Criminals do bad things all the time and yet we don’t condone violating their Fourth or Fifth Amendment rights.
When we rationalize infringing on rights because it makes us safer or keeps bad people from being bad (which never happens) we have given up freedom. Freedom comes with risks and the proper way to mitigate those risks is to hold people accountable.
Bored thug gang banger wannabes do not represent the whole of America and their acts should not dictate gun policy in America.
The Constitution should be the only governing document.
Period.
Boycotting America because a criminal uses a gun to murder an Australian makes as much sense as boycotting Australia because a Great White shark ate an American.
We can no more control a determined criminal than we can a shark…
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Tags: absurdity, australia, baseball, gun control, murder, oklahoma
The Terrorists Have Won In The NFL
Aug 14, 2013 Commentary, Terrorism
Before I begin and someone decides to tell me that private organizations can decide their own policies let me point out that taxpayers paid for most (if not all) of the stadiums used in the National Football League.
The terrorists have won. It is that simple. You can no longer take a diaper bag into an NFL stadium. Nor can you take camera bags, purses larger than a clutch bag, fanny packs or any other kind of bag except for a clear 12″ x 6″ plastic bag (with or without a team logo) or a zip lock bag no larger than the above limit (a 1 gallon bag). And you can only carry one of those.
No backpacks, no briefcases (who takes one of those), no anything except the plastic bag OR a bag with medically necessary equipment.
Hell, you can’t even carry a seat cushion.
By the way, the teams will be more than happy to sell you a plastic bag (with logo) to carry your stuff.
This is partly in response to the Boston Marathon Bombing which involved a pressure cooker inside a backpack. None of these rules would have stopped it because people could have easily used explosives another way.
But, this will make us feel better.
Look, I get it. The world is dangerous but will this stop some deranged terrorist wannabe from causing chaos and killing people? No because there are plenty of ways to sneak explosives into the stadium. A determined terrorist could fly a plane load of explosives in or use a radio controlled device. I imagine they could get a small drone if they wanted to.
The world is a dangerous place. How many sports events have been blown up in the US compared to the number that has taken place? One marathon. Hundreds of baseball games take place each week and people carry bags in. For years since 9/11 people have taken bags into the NFL stadiums and nothing bad has happened.
Should these bags be subject to inspection? Absolutely but banning them, while it might make it a little safer, is an overreaction and really only makes it easier for the teams to get people in. They won’t have to spend time screening bags.
If they allowed most types of bags and screened them as they had in the past then those folks could go through tighter security and everyone else the standard screening.
But the NFL has imposed tough restrictions in the name of security in order to spend less time screening bags.
And of course to make money selling plastic team logo bags which the Baltimore Ravens have for $9.95 to $19.95. Interestingly, the Ravens also sell several types of team logo seat cushions.
I would expect that the team should no longer sell any item at the stadium that you could not bring in (excluding things like food and alcohol). That would include those seat cushions and the nice backpacks and other (banned) bags they sell.
I rarely go to a game and when I do I don’t carry much. But I also know that at some point we have to realize that there are risks in life. We also have to realize that this policy will do little to stop a determined person.
It will however, inconvenience a lot of people.
We are at the point where the terrorists have won, at least in the NFL.
Unless you stay home and watch the game on TV.
That is better anyway. No lines at the bathroom.
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Tags: clear bags, diaper bags, nfl, safety, screening, seat cushens
Don’t Clown Around With Obama
Aug 13, 2013 Commentary, Political
A rodeo clown in Missouri has been banned from performing at the Missouri State Fair because he wore a Barack Hussein Obama mask and allegedly asked the crowd if they wanted to see the bull run over Obama (allegedly because the rodeo claims the clown had a mike but others have indicated the rodeo announcer asked the question). The question got plenty of cheers when it was asked and the cheers were even louder when it was repeated.
Rodeo clowns are CLOWNS and they are there to keep riders safe and to clown around with the crowd (pun intended).
That is not the case when the clown wears an Obama mask. You see, when that happens the liberals get their little panties in a knot and talk about how inappropriate it is. Can’t have people making fun of the anointed one, the messiah B. Hussein Obama himself, now can we?
Liberals get all twisted and act as if they are as pure as the driven snow when their messiah is the brunt of a joke. I can only imagine what will happen if a bank robber uses an Obama mask. He will get six months for robbing the bank (just wealth redistribution) and the death penalty for using an Obama mask. Though I am inclined to believe if Obama had a son he would look like the bank robber…
The Democrats in Missouri had to step in and they showed why no one with a brain (and that leaves out the majority that allegedly voted for Obama) takes them seriously. You see, this is no way to act toward a president:
“I am amazed that in 2013, such hatred, intolerance and disrespect towards the President of the United States could take place at the Missouri State Fair. Our fair is supposed to showcase the best of Missouri, instead, it showed an ugly face of intolerance and ignorance to the world.” ~ Rep William Lacy (D-MO)
“If what’s being reported is true, then it’s shameful and it’s unacceptable. The State Fair is funded by taxpayer dollars, and is supposed to be a place where we can all bring our families and celebrate the state that we love. But the young Missourians who witnessed this stunt learned exactly the wrong lesson about political discourse-that somehow it’s ever acceptable to, in a public event, disrespect, taunt, and joke about harming the President of our great nation. Missouri is better than this, and I expect someone to be held accountable.” ~ Sen Claire McCaskill (D-MO) Politico
Did either of these dim bulbs demonstrate such outrage at the public disrespect and taunting that George W. Bush was subjected to during his tenure? In case any of you have forgotten, Bush was repeatedly compared to a chimp (do that to Obama and you are a racist) and there are a large number of images of Bush as a chimp on the web. There is even a tic-tac-toe game where a chimp (you play the chimp’s part) plays against Bush and if the chimp wins he beat the idiot and if the chimp loses he is degraded for losing to an idiot.
Did any Democrat scream about the intolerance and disrespect? Did any Democrat condemn the message young people were subjected to? Did these two politicians specifically address the issue?
We all know the answer to this.
[note]Anyone find it ironic that Clay said the incident showed an ugly face of intolerance and ignorance when the story is about a mask of Obama?[/note]
But Big Dog, pictures of a chimp are not talking about harm coming to the president. Why, why, why, the clown was talking about a bull running down our messiah B. Hussein Obama. That is different Big Dog, it was all so violent.
Yeah, well listen up little liberal. I will type this slowly so you can keep up. A movie was made about George W Bush being assassinated. The movie was called Death of a President and it was filmed and released while Bush was in office. There was only one Democrat I am aware of who said something negative about the film and that was Hillary Clinton (to their credit CNN and NPR refused to air ads for the movie).
Where were McCaskill and Clay when this movie was released? I would not be surprised if they were in the theater taking delight in watching it while they ate stale popcorn. Regardless of where they were just imagine how they would be acting if such a movie were made about Obama…
So before you liberal bedwetters shed tears over a clown talking about a bull running over Obama remember how you reacted when a movie about Bush being murdered was released. If you were not outraged then you can’t be now. In other words, shut up.
I do not get the uproar. This is America and we are free to mock our leaders. If they don’t want to be mocked then perhaps they should not do anything that warrants being mocked.
I also do not understand why people are upset about the mask. One clown put the mask of another clown on.
Big deal.
Put on your big girl or big boy pants and buck up cupcake.
If you want something to cry about try shedding a tear for the four Americans Obama allowed to be murdered in Benghazi and instead of firing a rodeo clown fire the clown in the White House who is covering up the murders he allowed to take place.
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Tags: benghazi, Bush, clay, Clinton, democrat outrage, mccaskill, missouri, Obama, rodeo clown
Imus Admit, Sharpton A Hypocrite
Jul 18, 2013 Commentary
Don Imus caught holy hell and lost his job because he uttered the phrase “nappy headed hoes” when talking about a basketball team of black women. Al Sharpton led the agitation brigade calling for Imus to be fired and pretty soon Imus was out of a job. It mattered not that Imus apologized directly to the women and that he admitted he should not have said it. None of it mattered because the race hustler Al needed another scalp to hang on his race baiting trophy rack.
This might be OK if Al was consistent in his views. Black kids murder black kids and Al does not care. White on black, well Al is rabble rousing the race brigade. Black person says the N word and Al is quiet (Jesse Jackson called blacks the N word saying Obama talked down to them) but let a white person say anything like it and all hell breaks loose.
The latest in the list of Al Sharpton hypocrisy is the way he dismissed the star witness in the Zimmerman prosecution, Rachel Jeantel who used the N word and then explained the difference between the word that ends with an “a” and the one that ends with “er”.
All this was OK with Al who claimed that this is just the way some of y’all talk.
Imagine if Imus had made the claim that this is just the way some folks talk? Imus stressed he was trying to make a joke and it turned out to be in very poor taste. Jeantel is running around discussing the N word and the appropriateness of its use and Sharpton is agreeing with her.
There has been no mention from Sharpton about Trayvon Martin’s use of the phrase “creepy ass cracka” which is a racist phrase. No, that must be OK in line with the way some of y’all talk.
It is amazing that Sharpton and the rest of the race hustlers along with the low information crowd are all focused on George Zimmerman and his statement to the dispatcher that these punks always get away with it. Zimmerman’s characterizations over the phone (none of which were even remotely racist) have been the subject of the race hustling crowd as proof that Zimmerman had hatred in his heart and profiled.
If I were to comment on Zimmerman’s words I would have to agree with Al;
That’s just the way some of y’all talk…
Ann Coulter has some sound advice regarding not being taken for a criminal
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Tags: Al Sharpton, don imus, hypocrite, n word, rachel jeantel, trayvon martin