If She Had A Gun
Feb 10, 2015 Second Amendment
Many food chains that offer delivery do not allow their drivers to carry firearms even if they have a permit to do so. The people who deliver food carry cash and are often required to deliver at late hours in dark places.
A Domino’s pizza delivery woman in Antioch California delivered a pizza to an address where she was forced back into her car by a man with a gun and then forced to drive to another place where he raped her.
This happened in California so it is unlikely that she was able to carry a firearm at any time because that state, like many other anti firearm states, would rather have its citizens end up as victims.
Yes the rapist had a gun and if she had one it might not have made a difference but at least she would have had a chance. In fact, if people in California were allowed to carry there is a chance the rapist might never have targeted her. If criminals know people could be carrying firearms they are less likely to attack them.
In places where people might be armed (whether they are or not is not the point) criminals do not know who has a concealed firearm and who does not. They do not like those circumstances.
Criminals prefer unarmed victims and they prefer knowing that no one else will be armed. This is why nuts attack gun free zones like schools, malls and movie theaters. They know that the odds are in their favor and that no one is probably armed because responsible firearms owners follow the law.
In a just world instead of being the victim of rape the young lady would be standing over a bullet riddled body describing what happened as the police draw a chalk line around the dead would be rapist.
Liberals (and face it, these are the ones who want us disarmed) can’t have that. If you can take care of yourself there is no need for government to be your everything.
Well how is that working out? The police were not there BEFORE the rape to prevent it. They showed up afterwards to take a statement.
The fortunate thing is this rapist was an idiot. The police went to the address the pizza was to be delivered to and he was there. They were able to arrest him and charge him with multiple crimes.
While it is great they caught the animal the reality is the victim has been scarred for life.
She never had a fighting chance because the government made her a potential victim by pushing for and enacting gun control.
Speaking of gun control; how well did it work out for the criminal in this case? He used a firearm to commit his crime and he is 17. He should not have had a handgun at that age to begin with regardless of his criminal record (which is not discussed in the article). If criminals obeyed the law he would not have had a firearm…
Even if states follow the Constitution there will still be problems as long as there are gun free zones or jobs where people who have the potential for danger are not allowed to carry.
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Tags: crime, gun control, liberals, lies, rape, Second Amendment
Liberals End Run The Second Amendment
Jan 5, 2015 Political, Second Amendment
A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. ~ Seconed Amendment US Constitution, 15 December 1791
The Second Amendment protects a preexisting right. It does not grant a right and it does not allow for caveats. It states that the right (a preexisting condition) to keep and bear arms shall NOT be infringed.
The liberals who are against gun ownership and who do not like the Second Amendment are working overtime to develop ways to ignore it and confiscate firearms from law abiding citizens. We have heard all their schemes. They want background checks (which we have and that many of the people who did bad things passed despite their questionable background. Chalk one up for government efficiency) to ensure only the right people have firearms. By right they mean the government and its enforcement agencies.
They want all firearms registered so there is a database of firearms and who owns them. They tell us that will allow them to track firearms recovered during criminal investigations and help with law enforcement but the reality is it will allow them to track people, see who has firearms and then target those people. It will make it easier for the government to confiscate firearms when that directive is given. Does anyone put it past Obama to issue an Executive Order mandating they be turned in?
The Nazis required firearms registration. Part of the information gathered was what religion the gun owner was. Then when Hitler decided to eradicate Jews he had THEIR firearms confiscated. No longer able to resist the Jews were rounded up and murdered.
Places like New York have registration requirements and they have a database of firearms owners. But there are plenty of ways for government to collect that information. Has anyone gone to the doctor’s office and been asked if there are firearms in the home? What does that have to do with your medical treatment? The VA asks veterans if they have firearms and doctors are paid a bonus to adjudicate people as mentally deficient so their guns can be confiscated. It is a scheme designed to do an end run around the Constitution.
In New York and Navy Veteran and former police officer had his firearms confiscated and pistol license terminated after he sought treatment for insomnia. He was diagnosed as having mild depression and insomnia (keep in mind everyone gets depressed throughout life and bouts of transient depression are different than a clinical diagnosis of chronic depression). The clinical notes clearly indicate he is not a danger to himself or others but his visit was shared with the State police who then notified the local Sheriff.
The Sheriff confiscated his guns.
This is why registration is dangerous. They will make up laws to use the database to disarm people and in this case they even violated their own law to do it.
Do not divulge to your doctors that you own firearms. If you are in a place where they make you register (like Maryland, a state that says it is voluntary but requires you to sign the voluntary registration to receive the firearm) then do not seek treatment for anything that might get your guns confiscated (obviously if you are having a real mental health issue you need to see a doctor) because they will find a way to take your guns.
If your doctor asks about guns tell him it is none of his business and ask how it pertains to your care.
As an aside, Obamacare provides for them to ask but specifically states that none of the information will be used to establish a database. Looks like they are violating that law as well.
Democrats put that in to circumvent the Second Amendment and they have been working on many clever things to get your guns.
They are evil people and leaders like them are the very reason our Founders felt it necessary to protect this preexisting right.
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Tags: confiscation, gun grabbers, liberals, lies, registration, Second Amendment
Supreme Court To Take Up Gun Rights Case
Oct 22, 2014 Second Amendment
The Supreme Court passed over major gun issues this past year. The Court had an opportunity to look at several cases that would have given it a chance to clear up some issues regarding the Second Amendment. The Court decided that it was better to leave things murky.
The Court did though, take up a case of a felon who has firearm issues. A former border patrol agent was convicted of a felony and had to surrender all his firearms. He foolishly surrendered them to the government rather than transferring them to his wife or another family member (or just selling them).
He wanted his guns back so that he could sell them or transfer them to his wife. The government will not let him have them back.
I feel for this guy in that those firearms are his property and he should have been able to sell them to get money for his family. Instead the guns are in the hands of the government which means he will likely never see them again.
Unless, of course, the Supremes decide that he has a right to his firearms so he can dispose of them in a manner more beneficial to his family.
I am glad the Court took this case but I am left wondering why it passed on all the cases that affect LAW ABIDING citizens who are being infringed upon by out of control state and federal governments.
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Tags: felon, firearms, infringe, Second Amendment, supreme court
Gun Grabbers like Their Own Guns…
Oct 22, 2014 Second Amendment
Liberals love to infringe on the Second Amendment right of the people to keep and bear arms. While it might appear as if liberals hate firearms the truth is they only hate YOU having firearms. They are perfectly happy to have their own firearms or body guards who have firearms. They are much too special to be put in danger.
How many liberal politicians have claimed that we need gun control or told us that no one needs certain types of firearms or that no one should be carrying them only to be exposed as a firearms owner and, in many cases, the possessor of a concealed carry permit?
Missouri State Senator Jamilah Nasheed is one such politician. She has been labeled by the NRA as anti gun and has sponsored bills requiring a gun owner registry. She has also been involved in other anti Second Amendment legislation.
This hypocrite was protesting in front of the police department in Ferguson MO and was arrested. When she was arrested police found a 9mm handgun in her possession. She stated that she had a concealed carry permit.
In addition the police suspected her of being intoxicated because she “smelled strongly of intoxicants” but she refused to take a breathalyzer test.
I have no problem with this woman having a carry permit and actually carrying a firearm. She is covered under the Second Amendment just like the rest of us. I have an issue with her carrying that firearm if she was intoxicated but that is a different issue and only speculation since she did not submit to the test.
What I do have a problem with is that she is a liberal gun grabber who wants to make it tough for the rest of her state’s law abiding citizens to exercise the same right she exercises.
She is like Bloomberg who is anti gun but has armed guards. Ditto for Martin O’Malley, Rosie O’Donnell, and Barack Obama. Then there are folks like Nasheed who are anti gun but have (or had) permits. Dianne Feinstein and Chuck Schumer come to mind.
Liberals love to make rules so long as they don’t have to follow them.
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Tags: anti gun, concealed carry, ferguson, jamilah nasheed, liberals, lies, Second Amendment
Rioters Avoid Armed Citizens In Missouri
Aug 11, 2014 Second Amendment
A police officer shot and killed an unarmed black man in Missouri and the riots started. Once the riots started the looting started. People who had nothing to do with the shooting became victims of those who fail to see the irony of protesting in support of someone who was wronged by wronging other people.
The left in America tells us that no one needs guns. Oh they claim that guns are OK for some things but that no one needs an assault weapon to hunt. They ignore the fact that the Second Amendment is not about hunting, it is about protection. That is protection from others and protection from our government.
Call the police the anti gun folks say. Well the rioters in Missouri overwhelmed the police and the community. There were two courses of action for those who were attacked by the rioters. Either become a victim or stand their ground.
A number of business owners decided to stand their ground as people with the dreaded AR 15 style “assault” rifles protected themselves and defended their property. Yes, the bad black rifle was used for protection.
You see, there is no such thing as an assault rifle. That is a name given by the anti gun crowd to cause fear but if they insist on calling it an assault rifle I will insist that the people in Missouri showed it was an effective deterrent if you are assaulted.
The rioters were causing problems but any business that had armed people standing watch did not have trouble. The criminals (and rioters and looters are criminals) did not want to risk getting shot so they moved on to unprotected targets.
Firearms are a way of life and are necessary for a free people. Those who are disarmed are slaves to the government and victims to the criminal element.
It is tragic that the young man lost his life. It is also tragic that people feel the only way to solve the issue is to riot. Keep in mind; cops shoot people of all colors all over the country. For some reason only certain communities resort to rioting.
In any event, this episode demonstrates one of the reasons we have a Second Amendment. Thank goodness well armed citizens were there to thwart the rioters.
You have to have priorities
Well armed men guarded a liquor store from the rioters.
One must have priorities…
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Tags: looters, missouri, police shooting, riots, Second Amendment