Obama And His Liberal Fascists Want To Ban Guns. Why Don’t We Ban Anti-Christian Worldviews Instead?

Columbine, Tucson, Aurora, Newtown.  Liberals love to bring up these massacres as “evidence” that we need to ban guns.

But the thing is that, apart from some bizarre Hollywood film, there has NEVER been a single documented case of a gun EVER rising up by itself and deciding to start shooting people.

Liberals are free to try to refute me by documenting cases of guns developing independent consciousness and choosing to go on murderous rampages.  Until then, my statement stands as fact.

But now let’s briefly consider the worldviews of the people who actually pulled the damn trigger of those guns.  Let’s look at the belief systems of the PEOPLE who committed those murders.  You know, rather than contemplating the worldviews of guns that non-liberals understand DO NOT HAVE WORLDVIEWS.

The Columbine killers were atheists who glorified in their atheism.  One of their quotes haunts me to this day.  They recorded themselves claiming, “We are no longer human, for we have evolved beyond human morality.”  In one of their notes they scribbled – and pardon the language – “Why give a fuck what Jesus would do?”  And, “I blew off his head with one shot.  I am god.  He died.”

I welcome atheists to explain in detail how it would be impossible for mankind to ever “evolve” into the kind of alien cultures that wickedly prey on the weak and kill every sentient being they can get their tentacles on that we watched in movies like Independence Day.  Remember that signature line from the film:

President Thomas Whitmore: I saw… its thoughts. I saw what they’re planning to do. They’re like locusts. They’re moving from planet to planet… their whole civilization. After they’ve consumed every natural resource they move on… and we’re next. Nuke ‘em. Let’s nuke the bastards.

Given that liberals love to demagogically and slanderously characterize conservatives in these terms, I demand that evolutionists explain to me how human beings could never so “evolve beyond human morality.”

I remember the exchange from the movie Alien:

Ash: You still don’t understand what you’re dealing with, do you? Perfect organism. Its structural perfection is matched only by its hostility.

Lambert: You admire it.

Ash: I admire its purity. A survivor… unclouded by conscience, remorse, or delusions of morality.

I challenge the atheist with his implicit faith in evolution to demonstrate how it could never possibly happen that human beings could so “evolve beyond human morality” that we would likewise be “unclouded by conscience” and “delusions of morality.”  Especially given the sheer number of human beings who have clearly DONE so.

I submit that there is little question that we are in fact as a culture “evolving beyond human morality.”  Just take a look at the Supreme Court openly considering imposing sodomy in place of marriage while we re-elected the first openly pro-sodomite president.  Which openly flies in the face of the entirety of human civilization and all previous “human morality.”

Liberals WANT the morality that was based entirely on Judeo-Christianity and the Judeo-Christian worldview to “evolve.”  That is their most cherished goal.

Now, on my worldview of Judeo-Christianity, I have a very firm rebuttal to the Columbine killers.  You did NOT “evolve” beyond human morality.  Rather, you were created in the image of a holy God.  And you will be held accountable to the morality that God created you to live out.  What do you have in your moral arsenal to respond to this crisis, atheist?

Right now, according to Judeo-Christianity, the Columbine killers are screaming in hell.  In a trillion years, they will be screaming in hell as God imposes the justice upon them that they denied to their victims.  In a trillion times a trillion-trillion years, they will be viscerally screaming in hell in refutation of the vile atheist crap they believed that motivated their actions.  They were profoundly and wickedly wrong; and all eternity will attest to that FACT.  What punishment do YOU have to deter these moral monsters from committing these terrible crimes, atheist?

It is with this in mind that I recall the famous words of the liberal Supreme Court Justices expressed their opinion that the Ten Commandments – including the one about “Thou shalt not murder” – be forcibly taken down from shcools for the following reason:

“If the posted copies of the Ten Commandments are to have any effect at all,  it will be to induce the schoolchildren to read, meditate upon, perhaps to  venerate and obey, the Commandments… [which] is not a permissible … objective.”

Was it worth it, liberals?  Was Columbine and all the other horrors that have followed worth your adventure into godlessness?  Are you glad that Eric Harris and Dyland Klebold were never allowed the opportunity to read, meditate upon, and yes, perhaps even to venerate and obey, the Ten Commandments?  Was it a good thing that disturbed people with an urge to mayhem were never exposed to the one reason NOT to indulge their murderous fantasies?  If you have a superior reason not to murder than the Judeo-Christian one that you purged from society, perhaps it is time to share your secret.

Let’s take Jared Lee Loughner and his massacre at Tucson, Arizona.

Jared Loughner was, according to those who knew him, an atheist and by consequent a nihilist:

As Loughner and Tierney grew closer, Tierney got used to spending the first ten minutes or so of every day together arguing with Loughner’s ”nihilist” view of the world. “By the time he was 19 or 20, he was really fascinated with semantics and how the world is really nothing—illusion,” Tierney says. Once, Tierney recalls, Loughner told him, “I’m pretty sure I’ve come to the conclusion that words mean nothing.” Loughner would also tell Tierney and his friends that life “means nothing,” and they’d reply, “If it means nothing, what you’re saying means nothing.”

And of course it DID mean nothing – expect to those famous secular humanist atheist thinkers who basically share in Loughner’s moral idiocy.

I’ve described precisely WHERE the belief system - that words mean nothing, that the world is really an illusion – of Jared Loughner originated from: it came from the philosophical systems and worldview of the left – from existentialism, from postmodernism, from secular humanism.  And I’ve pointed out that these leftist ideas have CONSEQUENCES.  These systems of thought don’t sit in the ivory towers of the secular humanist liberals who invent them.  They spread like the malignant thought cancers that they are.

I’ve similarly posted this refutation of this mindless atheist evolutionary nihilist crap by Dr. Gleason Archer many times, so it isn’t hard to find:

“But it should be pointed out that consistent atheism, which represents itself to be the most rational and logical of all approaches to reality, is in actuality completely self-defeating and incapable of logical defense. That is to say, if indeed all matter has combined by mere chance, unguided by any Higher Power of Transcendental Intelligence, then it necessarily follows that the molecules of the human brain are also the product of mere chance. In other words, we think the way we do simply because the atoms and molecules of our brain tissue happen to have combined in the way they have, totally without transcendental guidance or control. So then even the philosophies of men, their system of logic and all their approaches to reality are the result of mere fortuity. There is no absolute validity to any argument advanced by the atheist against the position of theism.

On the basis of his won presuppositions, the atheist completely cancels himself out, for on his own premises his arguments are without any absolute validity. By his own confession he thinks the way he does simply because the atoms in his brain happen to combine the way they do. If this is so, he cannot honestly say that his view is any more valid than the contrary view of his opponent. His basic postulates are self-contradictory and self-defeating; for when he asserts that there are no absolutes, he thereby is asserting a very dogmatic absolute. Nor can he logically disprove the existence of God without resorting to a logic that depends on the existence of God for its validity. Apart from such a transcendent guarantor of the validity of logic, any attempts at logic or argumentation are simply manifestations of the behavior of the collocation of molecules that make up the thinker’s brain.”

Go ahead, secular humanist liberal.  Go ahead, atheist.  Show me how what Dr. Archer is saying doesn’t follow.  Show me how the more you scramble something with random and by definition arbitrary evolutionary “progress,” the more ORDER you’ll get.  Show me how you’re correct in asserting that mind necessarily comes from mindlessness rather than from Mind.  Show me how your drivel is anything other than pure degradation – as St. Paul so eloquently states in Romans chapter one (in which St. Paul also points out that some cultures can sink so low into the moral sewer that it will welcome sodomy just as we are doing RIGHT NOW).

Let us also, through the writing of Dinesh D’Souza, consider what would happen to two tribes if one was religious in worldview and the other was atheist:

The Reverend Randy Alcorn, founder of Eternal Perspective ministries in Oregon, sometimes presents his audience with two creation stories and asks them whether it matters which one is true.  In the secular account, “You are the descendant of a tiny cell  of primordial protoplasm washed up on an empty beach three and a half billion years ago.  You are the blind and arbitrary product of time, chance, and natural forces.  You are a mere grab-bag of atomic particles, a conglomeration of genetic substance.  You exist on a tiny planet in a minute solar system in an empty corner of a meaningless universe.  You are a purely biological entity, different only in degree but not in kind from a microbe, virus, or amoeba.  You have no essence beyond your body, and at death you will cease to exist entirely.  In short, you came from nothing and are going nowhere.

In the Christian view, by contrast, “You are the special creation of a good and all-powerful God.  You are created in His image, with capacities to think, feel and worship that set you above all other life forms.  You differ from the animals not simply in degree but in kind.  Not only is your kind unique, but you are unique among your kind.  Your Creator loves you so much and so intensely desires your companionship and affection that He has a perfect plan for your life.  In addition, God gave the life of His only Son that you might spend eternity with Him.  If you are willing to accept the gift of salvation, you can become a child of God.”

Now imagine the two groups of people – let’s call them the secular tribe and the religious tribe – who subscribe to these two worldviews.  Which of the two tribes is more likely to survive, prosper and multiply?  The religious tribe is made up of people who have an animating sense of purpose.  The secular tribe is made up of people who are not sure why they exist at all.  The religious tribe is composed of individuals who view their every thought and action as consequential.  The secular tribe is made up of matter that cannot explain why it is able to think at all. — Dinish D’Souza, What’s So Great About Christianity, pp. 15-16

We’ve actually seen this experiment played out in actual human history as we’ve seen the rise of an America founded upon the Judeo-Christian worldview versus the society of the godless French Revolution and its resulting Reign of Terror; versus the rise of godless Marxism and its degeneration into state atheist Stalinism with over forty million of its own people murdered during peacetime; versus the rise of state atheist Maoism and its murder of over sixty million of its own people during peacetime; versus the crushing of the human spirit in state atheist Cambodia where over a million were murdered in the Killing Fields; and versus the godless tyrant regime of state atheist North Korea and the fact that the entire nation is dark at night.

But since when did FACTS ever matter to the left?  Even when there have been more than 100 million “facts” murdered by their official state atheism.

“State atheism” equals “communism”:

State atheism has been defined as the official “promotion of atheism” by a government, typically by active suppression of religious freedom and practice.^[1]

State promotion of atheism as a public norm was first practised during a brief period in Revolutionary France. Only communist states and socialist states have done so since.

Which is precisely why we are moving in the direction of socialism and communism today.  Because the Democrat Party consists of secular humanists, liberals, atheists who all have the same agenda: to reshape society by reshaping the economies of the world in their image.

You want to ban something?  I suggest we ban a godless left-wing State that has all the guns versus a disarmed and oppressed people who were promised Utopia but have nothing but misery and the very sort of propaganda that we are seeing right now in America to feed them the manure of self-serving lies.

I would suggest banning that instead of going the opposite direction as Democrats demand.

Let’s continue our tour to Aurora, Colorado and the warped worldview that perpetrated it.  He went from murderer to Muslim.  Which given the rabid tendency of Islam to produce terrorists isn’t that far of a stretch.

Let’s look our show to Newtown/Sandy Hook and consider the worldview of the ghostly little creep who murdered 26 people in a school that had no armed security of any kind:

The Sandy Hook gunman worshiped the devil and  had an online page dedicated to Satan, a former classmate revealed, as his  childhood barber recalls Adam Lanza never spoke and would stare at the floor  every time he had his hair cut.

Lanza’s worshiping page had the word ‘Devil’  written in red, Gothic-style letters against a black background, Trevor L. Todd  told The National Enquirer, something which he said was ‘weird’ and ‘gave him  the chills’.

The FBI are trying to piece together his  smashed up hard drive to see if his online footprint will reveal any motive for  the killing, but they strongly believe he made use of devil-worshiping and  suicide sites and boasted of his murder plans on message forums.

I actually saw claims by atheists that this turd was a “Christian” because his desperate, troubled mother took him to church a few times.

You moral idiots, I can not only walk into a garage, but even lie down on the concrete and start calling myself a “car.”  If Adam Lanza was a “Christian” because somebody else took him to a church and he sat in the pew, I guess that makes me a “car.”  Let’s see four of you moral imbeciles climb into me and start driving me down the road on my nonexistent wheels.  I hope I’ll get really crappy gas mileage, just to irritate you.

Let’s get one thing straight.  Rather than banning guns, let’s try banning all these idiotic and depraved worldviews instead.

Now, some of you are shouting that that would violate the Constitution.  But that never stopped you leftists before.  Just as it’s not stopping you now as you stomp all over the 2nd Amendment.

The day that you secular humanist liberals manage to melt every gun down and turn it into ploughshares – as the Holy Bible declares that Messiah will one day do during the Millennium when He reigns as King of kings and as Lord of lords – then you won’t be a crazy fascist nutjob.  Until then, you are crazy fascist nutjobs.  Because the simple fact is that you CAN’T ban guns; you can only pass laws that prevent LAW-ABIDING citizens from being able to legally buy them as criminals couldn’t give less of a damn about your stupid laws.

I pointed out this inconvenient truth about other Dianne Feinstein attempts to stop crime by criminalizing legal products.  Thanks in large part to liberal Democrat Feinstein, it is now incredibly difficult for anyone to purchase pseudoephedrine – a prime ingredient of “meth” and “crank” – except for the criminals who have explodied meth production as a result.  Her proposed ban on assault weapons does little more than treat law-abiding citizens like criminals even as liberals treat criminals like law-abiding citizens.

Secular humanist liberals stupidly think that human nature is something infinitely malleable, something they can mold and shape by replacing God with “the State.”  They foolishly think that the GUN has the depraved worldview rather than the mind of the person who is pulling the trigger.  They think that they can control human behavior by controlling human environment.

In reality, they are the very ones who are producing these sick, evil minds.  In reality, when you criminalize guns you only allow the criminals who don’t give a damn about your stupid laws to possess them.  In reality, when you criminalize guns, you only keep law-abiding citizens from having the means to protect themselves.

By the way, Adam Lanza parked his vehicle in a fire lane.  I know that’s impossible, because it’s illegal to park in a fire lane.  But that’s what he did.  That’s the “respect” psychos have for your stupid laws.  That’s how successful all your stupid laws are in deterring crime.  And in the same way, NONE of the bans or regulations that Obama is proposing as he hypes and demagogues Newtown would have done ANYTHING to prevent the very mayhem that he is so cynically exploiting.

A pro-2nd Amendment rape victim asked the question, “How does rendering me defenseless protect you against a violent crime?”  I demand that question be answered.

How does it?  How does abrogating the right and the ability of self-defense to the government – a government whose president literally fearmongered to take away the police as he deceitfully demagogued the sequester - do that?  Why should I surrender my own security and protection as a law-abiding citizen to a president who literally threatened to withhold the police protection that I would as a result of his policies depend on for my survival unless I agree to his massive tax hikes?  Why should the American people make themselves hostages to an incredibly cynical political agenda?

Under secular humanism, i.e., under liberalism, no one is responsible for their actions – just as no one is to be given any credit for their hard work or the wealth that they earn as a result of their efforts – and therefore ANYBODY can go nuts at any time and therefore NO ONE should be allowed to possess a gun even as no one should be allowed to work hard and keep the wealth they earned.  Except liberals and the government they erect to advance liberal fascism.  Society is to blame when murders murder; society is to be credited when rich people work hard and become rich.  Individual responsibility and individual credit alike are anathema to the left.  We are herd animals; only the herd matters.

And liberals – who invariably manage to exempt themselves from all their edicts – hypocritically view themselves as having some sole mandate to rule over all others and crush all opposition to their rule.  Society is all that matters; and they get to dominate that society.

We find that Obama has been the WORST president when it actually comes to enforcing the gun laws already on the books.  Just as his home city of libturd Chicago is the worst city in the nation at enforcing the laws already on the books.  These people don’t want to protect the defenseless; they want to exploit the tragedies that their policies create in order to impose more fascist control over the people and render them more and more and more powerless to defend themselves and defend their Constitution from government tyranny.

Every single tyrant regime on earth – whether it be Nazi Germany, or Stalinist Russia, or Kim Jong-Un’s North Korea – seized guns from the people before they imposed their godless agenda.  Every single one.  And now we’re following the same path toward slavery and the ultimate crushing of the human spirit.

That was the whole point of the 2nd Amendment: it was to be the people’s protection against future government tyranny.

Since we’ve already seemingly decided that the Constitution isn’t worth its weight in bovine manure, why don’t we just cut to the heart of the matter and ban something that will actually stop the mayhem???  Why don’t we ban secular humanism?  Why don’t we ban atheism?  Why don’t we ban murderous political systems masquerading as religious systems like Islam does?

In reality, over 55 million innocent human beings have been murdered by Obama’s demonic abortion hell pits.  As opposed to the relatively miniscule number of children killed in gun homicides.  If you care about children, why do you smile sweetly at the millions of precious babies murdered by your abortion???  Why should anybody give one damn when holocaust baby murdering liberals demand children be “protected” by fascist gun laws?  And why is it that it is LIBERAL cities like Obama’s home city of Chicago - rather than the pro-gun conservative areas – where all the children are being murdered as law-abiding people are rendered defenseless and helpless?  Why is it that the murderous policies of liberalism become the basis for even more murderous policies of liberalism?

We’ve got a Democrat doctor right now on trial for delivering numerous babies alive so he could have an easier time slashing their little spines and throats with his scalpel.  Just as we have a Democrat professor demanding that his students stomp on Jesus and everything Jesus stood for.

Why don’t we ban Obama?  Why don’t we criminalize the Democrat Party?

But of course we’re not going to do those things, are we?

The beast will be celebrated, worshiped and praised by the Democrat Party that actually voted to remove God from its Party platform.  He will be celebrated, worshiped and praised by the same Party whose representatives demanded that the idiot youth whose morally-warped minds Democrats have captured stomped on the name of Jesus.  He will be celebrated, worshiped and praised by the same Party that is now exalting in the homosexual sodomy that God in His Word declared to be an abomination.

That’s why when the beast of the Book of Revelation comes, there will BE no guns for people to protect themselves with.  And every single Democrat will eagerly worship the beast and take his mark on their right hands or on their foreheads.

You’ll get yours, Democrat.  In the exact same place where the Columbine killers are already getting theirs.  Your day is coming.

As a P.S. of how liberalism is to blame for these savage murders, it turns out that thirty years ago, a family could petition a court to declare a family member crazy and have him or her committed.  But guess who decided that was inhumane?  You guessed right: ACLU liberals.  Liberals, understanding that liberalism is a mental disease, figured that it was better to keep these psychotic lunatics outside where they could vote Democrat than locking them up and putting them in rubber rooms where they belong.

As a P.P.S. of how liberalism is to blame for these savage murders, it similiarly turns out that Hollywood liberalism is responsible for both the violent movies – which glorify violence – and the video games that literally teach kids how to kill while desensitizing them to the violence they commit.  And again, liberals, apparently understanding that they are entrenching a violence-laden culture, could do something about this problem they created if they wanted.  But they would rather cynically exploit their culture of violence by blaming it on guns.  And of course, on Republicans.

Should I add a P.P.P.S. about liberals and rap music that glorifies violence, hostility toward women and the lowest form of gang-banging nihilism???

Christopher Dorner And The 2nd Amendment: I Bet Some KGB Thugs Went Nuts After Soviets Took The Guns Away From The Russian People, Too

There’s a theory advanced by liberals that since we have police to protect us, we really don’t need our 2nd Amendment freedom and our rights to keep and bear arms can therefore be infringed, infringed away.

Given the fact that a whole host of police officers have demonstrated that they’re as crazy as the rest of us, maybe that’s not such a wonderful premise.

I’ll get to Christopher Dorner and the mayhem this former police officer is causing.  But first, let me say a few preliminary things.

What Democrats want – the only kind of society that they say wouldn’t be truly evil, in fact – is for guns to be confiscated from the law-abiding people and entrusted entirely to the state in order to prevent the terrible shootings we have come to expect since Democrats kicked God out of the schools and declared human life worthless via their mass their abortion mills.  Democrats worship the state the way Christians worship God, and place their trust in the State.

Jesus Christ is my Savior; Democrats’ savior, crassly put, is Obama.  It is Big Government that they turn to.  Deuteronomy 15:4 says that there should be no poor in a nation that turns to God because the LORD will bless them.  Democrats say that’s a giant load of crap and say Obama will bless us; Obama will take care of us; we don’t trust God to take care of us, we trust Marxist class warfare and redistributionism to provide for our needs and we trust Obama to dole it out to us.

God pointed out in 1 Samuel chapter 8:10-18 that trust in big government and the king who rules over amounts to flagrant distrust in God.  And if we actually place our trust in God, we distrust any human government that would rise up to eclipse Him.  I’ve said that before and I’m already planning a more detailed article to say it again.

In the same way, the spirit of redistributionism is likewise flagrant distrust in God.

Let me go back to the soul of redistributionism, as expressed in Karl Marx’s famous statement:

“From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.”

And I challenge any Democrat or liberal to explain to me how the party of the left isn’t the party of socialism.

There is another spirit of Marxism that Democrats have channeled: the spirit of class warfare and the bitterness, envy and hatred that results from it.  Karl Marx put it this way to sum-up how profoundly anti-Christ it truly is:

“Religion is … the opium of the people.  The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is the demand for their real happiness. To call on them to give up their illusions about their condition is to call on them to give up a condition that requires illusions.”

What did Karl Marx mean by this?

Basically, Marx taught that the world is divided into the haves and the have-nots – which is everywhere being shouted around us today.  And the have-nots were being oppressed by the haves.  But rather than the people rising up in rage and taking what is theirs by force as Marx wanted them to, the people were happy in their religion, which had been invented by the rich to keep the proletariat in bondage.  Since God and religion is an illusion, and materialism is all there actually is, the happiness that the people had in their Christianity was nothing more than a narcotic that kept them in bondage.  The only “real” reality is economic reality.  And therefore the solution presented by Marx was for the people to set aside their shackles of religion and rise up in a spirit of rage and take what was theirs by force.  Only then could the people have actual, “material” happiness as the wealth of others was redistributed to them by Marxist government.

This demonic spirit of class warfare, redistributionism and the hatred of God upon which it is based, is the heart and soul of the Democrat Party.

Anyway, Christopher Dorner turns out to be a poster boy for the spirit of entitlement and the rage that goes along with it.  This is a black police officer from a liberal Los Angeles Police Department who strangely believed he was entitled to his job.  He’s a guy who literally writes in his manifesto that goes on and on and on that it’s the police department’s fault that he didn’t get to have a family so he is therefore entitled to kill the families of other cops.

And you’ve got to understand: this guy was a cop.  He was deemed as a top marksman as a cop.  He was given SWAT training because he kept demanding that he was entitled to more and more training.  And now he’s on the loose shooting people.

I never had the opportunity to have a family of my own, I’m terminating yours.

And I never had the opportunity to get off my lazy ass and get a job.  I’m redistributing your wages.

And if you can’t even trust a black, liberal police officer from a liberal city not to go nuts and prove to anyone with a mammalian brain that we need our 2nd Amendment protection, who CAN you trust???

And wah, wah, wah.  I’m entitled to be a cop and the police department was wrong to fire me just because I shredded my credibility by falsely slandering a training officer who gave me a bad evaluation.  So I’m going to prove they’re wrong by shooting people.  At least if I can’t get all the stuff I’m “entitled” to.

This Christopher Dorner spent his whole life before writing his manifesto manifesting extrme liberal entitlement syndrome.

Don’t worry.  You don’t need to have any means of protection.  Trust the police with your life.  Keep chewing that cud of yours.  Everything is fine.  Obama keeps you as safe as he kept our ambassador to Libya.

Oh, wait a minute.  This guy WAS the police just a short time ago.  In fact, he was a member of every group that Obama would have handpicked as THE guy whom you should throw away your weapons and trust to protect you.  He was black.  he was a cop in the most liberal police department in America.  Why do you think you need guns when you’ve got cops like Christopher Dorner keeping you safe???

This kind of raises an interesting question: if guns should be taken out of the hands of all the law-abiding citizens because a tiny, tiny small percentage of people have gun nuts and killed people with guns, then shouldn’t we take the guns away from the law-abiding police when a tiny, tiny small percentage of cops go nuts and kill people with guns???

I’ve got my Democrat thinking cap on.  It comes to a point at the top.  It’s made out of tinfoil.  But if LAPD officer Christopher Dorner wasn’t allowed to have a gun in the first place, then he could never have killed these people, right?

And think about the growing number of wrongful shootings police officers are engaged in.  If they didn’t have guns, they couldn’t have wrongfully shot anybody, could they have?

And let’s think about Obama.  Forget the abject personal moral hypocrisy of a man who has massive armed protection of himself and his family while demanding that everyone else without such protection be denied the right to have guns that are capable of providing them such protection; think about the danger that Obama is in with all those guns around him.

We’ve had Secret Service agents wrongfully shoot people.  And I mean Secret Service agents who were part of Obama’s protection.  Just like a tiny, tiny minority of law-abiding gun owners have ever had any problems with gun violence, a few Secret Service agents are bad people who snap.  And Secret Service agents even plot to break the law in groups at times.  We’ve got to keep Obama safe, don’t we?  We need to make sure there are absolutely no guns whatsoever around him.  Guns are dangerous.  Either guns are dangerous or Democrats are dangerous.

I bet you that there were quite a few of these issues during Stalin’s day, too.  I mean, he took away all the guns from the rest of the people, armed to the teeth his internal security forces so they could crush the rest of the disarmed people, and you’ve got to imagine that more than a few of them went nuts just like Christopher Dorner did.  You wonder how many defenseless people were shot by psycho KGB thugs.

Let’s make sure that if we’re going to be morally stupid enough to take away guns – or any segment of arms that we have a constitutional right to keep and bear – from the people, that we embrace the same “logic” of taking away guns from the people to apply to the police, the military, and everybody else.

It’s amazing: the United States is by FAR and away #1 in gun ownership.  But we are #28 in gun homicides (see also here), with basically all the nations ahead of us having extremely strict gun control laws.  Democrats are pure, lunatic fools for asserting that guns are the problem.  Statistics and actual facts refute them.  Yet they persist.

Interestingly, in America itself, over half of all of our gun homicides, of course, are committed by just a tiny 6% sliver of a demographic group who vote 98% Democrat.  So in trying to confiscate guns, Democrats implicitly acknowledge that the reason we have such a violence problem is because Democrats are truly evil and vile people who cannot control themselves and must therefore be treated like animals.

If Democrats wish to disarm themselves, then that’s fine with me.  It would be fine if Democrats merely insisted on baring their own throats to the next predator and pleaded, “Kill me, only PLEASE don’t hurt me!”  But the rest of us aren’t irresponsible psychos the way Democrats are.

I’m not a farm animal who should be herded into an enclosure and guarded by guards who could themselves snap just as easily as any of the rest of us.  I’m an individual with a constitutional right to keep and bear arms without being infringed upon by the government.  And by the way, unless AR-15s, AK-47s and M4s are somehow not “arms,” then I have a right to protect myself, my property and my family with such “assault weapons” as I see fit, too.

Update: It turns out that Christopher Dorner is even more of a liberal than I thought he was, as documented in the leftist ramblings of his manifesto.  A few examples (I did not delete his frequent use of profanity for the sake of accuracy):

You disrespect the office of the POTUS/Presidency and Commander in Chief. You call him Kenyan, mongroid, halfrican, muslim, and FBHO when in essence you are to address him as simply, President. The same as you did to President George W. Bush and all those in the highest ranking position of our land before him. Just as I always have. You question his birth certificate, his educational and professional accomplishments, and his judeo-christian beliefs. You make disparaging remarks about his dead parents. You never questioned the fact that his former opponent, the honorable Senator John McCain, was not born in the CONUS or that Bush had a C average in his undergrad. Electoral Candidates children (Romney) state they want to punch the president in the face during debates with no formal repercussions. No one even questioned the fact that the son just made a criminal threat toward the President. You call his wife a Wookie. Off the record, I love your new bangs, Mrs. Obama. A woman whose professional and educational accomplishments are second to none when compared to recent First wives. You call his supporters, whether black, brown, yellow, or white, leeches, FSA, welfare recipients, and ni$&er lovers. You say this openly without any discretion. Before you start with your argument that you believe I would vote for Obama because he has the same skin color as me, fuck you. I didn’t vote in this last election as my choice of candidate, John Huntsman, didn’t win the primary candidacy for his party. Mr. President, I haven’t agreed with all of your decisions but of course I haven’t agreed with all of your predecessors decisions. I think you’ve done a hell of a job with what you have been dealt and how you have managed it. I shed a tear the night you were initially elected President in 2008. I never thought that day would occur. A black man elected president in the U.S. in my lifetime. I cracked a smiled when you were re-elected in 2012 because I really didn’t think you were going to pull that one off. Romney, stop being a sore loser. You could’ve exited graciously and still contributed significantly to public service, not now. Mr. President, get back to work. Many want to see you fail as they have stated so many times previously.

========

Mr. Vice President, do your due diligence when formulating a concise and permanent national AWB plan. Future generations of Americans depend on your plan and advisement to the president. I’ve always been a fan of yours and consider you one of the few genuine and charismatic politicians. Damn, sounds like an oxymoron calling you an honest politician. It’s the truth.   Hillary Clinton. You’ll make one hell of a president in 2016. Much like your husband, Bill, you will be one of the greatest. Look at Castro in San Antonio as a running mate or possible secretary of state. He’s (good people) and I have faith and confidence in him. Look after Bill. He was always my favorite President. Chelsea grew up to be one hell of an attractive woman. No disrespect to her husband.

========

Wayne LaPierre, President of the NRA, you’re a vile and inhumane piece of shit. You never even showed 30 seconds of empathy for the children, teachers, and families of Sandy Hook. You deflected any type of blame/responsibility and directed it toward the influence of movies and the media. You are a failure of a human being. May all of your immediate and distant family die horrific deaths in front of you.

Chris Matthews, Joe Scarborough, Pat Harvey, Brian Williams, Soledad Obrien, Wolf Blitzer, Meredith Viera, Tavis Smiley, and Anderson Cooper, keep up the great work and follow Cronkite’s lead. I hold many of you in the same regard as Tom Brokaw and the late Peter Jennings. Cooper, stop nagging and berating your guest, they’re your (guest). Mr. Scarborough, we met at McGuire’s pub in P-cola in 2002 when I was stationed there. It was an honor conversing with you about politics, family, and life.

========

Ellen Degeneres, continue your excellent contribution to entertaining America and bringing the human factor to entertainment. You changed the perception of your gay community and how we as Americans view the LGBT community. I congratulate you on your success and opening my eyes as a young adult, and my generation to the fact that you are know different from us other than who you choose to love. Oh, and you Prop 8 supporters, why the fuck do you care who your neighbor marries. Hypocritical pieces of shit.

So our murderous cop from the liberal bastion of Los Angeles worships the Obamas and Joe Biden and celebrates liberal lesbians and lionizes all the most leftist “journalists” who fed him his fascist liberal propaganda in the purest form.  And of course this liberal police officer with his love of liberal politicians and liberal journalists and liberal celebrities hates and despises Wayne LaPierre and the National Rifle Association.

And of course all of those “journalists” are as busy pointing out what a liberal this cold-blooded gun psycho is the way they rushed to try to frame the Tea Party when one of the last psychos started shooting up a movie theater in Colorado.  That’s one of a good dozen times liberal propagandists using the guise of “journalism” have wrongfully tarnished conservatives for these psychos.  And here’s their chance to actually report the truth for a change: liberalism equals fascist psychosis.

What do you want to bet none of the mainstream media reporters decides its “newsworthy” to report this disgrace to the gullible public the way they have so often tried to tie every killer to conservatism no matter how flimsy the possible connections???

They’re as likely to report Christopher Dorner’s liberalism and support for Obama and Hillary Clinton as they are to cover the fact that the man who went into the Family Research Council headquarters and shot a guard used a liberal Southern Poverty Law Center hate map to get to his destination.  Will they cover that actual fact the way they covered the malicious lie that Sarah Palin somehow “targeted” Gabrielle Giffords?

You’re damned right they won’t.

As long as there are liberals, Americans need to have guns to protect themselves from the resulting fascism.

Police Forensic Scientist At Newtown States As Expert That An Assault Weapons Ban Won’t Work

Facts are to a liberal what sunlight is to a vampire.

I want you to notice: not only are “assault weapons” not being used in crimes; but even weapons that share the same CALIBUR aren’t being used in crimes:

Police forensic scientist at Newtown hearing: ‘Assault weapons’ ban won’t work
3:46 PM 02/04/2013
Patrick Howley

The forensic scientist for the Bridgeport, Conn. Police Department sharply  criticized proposed assault weapon and high-capacity magazine bans and pointed  out the small number of crimes committed by high-capacity weapons in public hearing testimony last week.

Marshall K. Robinson, who said his area of expertise is “firearm and tool  mark identification,” testified at the Gun Violence Prevention Working Group, which  was convened at the Connecticut State Capitol in response to the Sandy Hook  Elementary School shooting. There he opposed statements from many of the other  1,300 speakers in attendance advocating for banning high-capacity AR-15 and  AK-47 firearms.

Robinson pointed out that less than two percent of the firearms he has  examined since 1996 that have been linked to violent crime in Bridgeport have  been the caliber of AR-15 or AK-47 weapons.

“Since November 1996, I have examined approximately 2,370 firearms. Of that  number 36 of them were either .223/5.56 mm or 7.62×39 mm,” Robinson said. “The  percentage of those guns was about [1.5 percent].”

“I did further research on homicides and assaults in the years 2006 to 2012  inclusive. Of the 217 such cases, there were 912 bullets and 466 cartridge cases  recovered. One assault involved .223 caliber and none involved 7.63×39 mm  caliber. The largest number cartridge cases recovered in one case was 37 and  that involved two guns. The investigations that involved the recovery of eleven  or more cartridge cases was 22. Of the 22 cases, 21 involved 2 or more guns,” Robinson added.

Robinson went on to criticize past gun control measures and argued that new  proposals will not work to reduce violent crime in any meaningful way.

“These are real numbers from real cases in a real city police department.  This is not something made up or fabricated. High capacity magazines have been ‘banned’ before. It proved nothing and the ban was lifted a few years ago,” he  said. “There are many guns in existence, since the 1860s, which hold more than  10 cartridges, the early Winchester lever action rifles, for example, and many  tubefeed 22 caliber rifles. There are some modern firearms for which no other  magazine exist. What do you propose we do with them?”

“In your infinite wisdom, you outlawed bayonet lugs, flash hiders, and  collapsible stocks,” he testified. “In over forty years of being a firearm and  tool mark examiner, I have never seen these components inflict any injury  whatsoever on any person. In your infinite wisdom, you outlawed fully automatic  firearms that have the capability of firing a single shot. Ladies and gentlemen,  I really need help with that one.”

“We all agree that the Newtown case is a tragedy. I submit to you that you  cannot legislate away insanity, which I think is the root cause of this case,” Robinson said. “Laws must be passed based on research and logical thinking, not  on emotions.”

Robinson also works at the state police forensic lab in Meriden, Conn.

Marshall K. Robinson testimony

A member of FreeRepublic posted these statistics on homicides around the world:

From the World Health Organization:

The latest Murder Statistics for the world:

Murders per 100,000 citizens

Honduras 91.6

El Salvador 69.2

Cote d’lvoire 56.9

Jamaica 52.2

Venezuela 45.1

Belize 41.4

US Virgin Islands 39.2

Guatemala 38.5

Saint Kits and Nevis 38.2

Zambia 38.0

Uganda 36.3

Malawi 36.0

Lesotho 35.2

Trinidad and Tobago 35.2

Colombia 33.4

South Africa 31.8

Congo 30.8

Central African Republic 29.3

Bahamas 27.4

Puerto Rico 26.2

Saint Lucia 25.2

Dominican Republic 25.0

Tanzania 24.5

Sudan 24.2

Saint Vincent and the Grenadines 22.9

Ethiopia 22.5

Guinea 22.5

Dominica 22.1

Burundi 21.7

Democratic Republic of the Congo 21.7

Panama 21.6

Brazil 21.0

Equatorial Guinea 20.7

Guinea-Bissau 20.2

Kenya 20.1

Kyrgyzstan 20.1

Cameroon 19.7

Montserrat 19.7

Greenland 19.2

Angola 19.0

Guyana 18.6

Burkina Faso 18.0

Eritrea 17.8

Namibia 17.2

Rwanda 17.1

Mexico 16.9

Chad 15.8

Ghana 15.7

Ecuador 15.2

North Korea 15.2

Benin 15.1

Sierra Leone 14.9

Mauritania 14.7

Botswana 14.5

Zimbabwe 14.3

Gabon 13.8

Nicaragua 13.6

French Guiana 13.3

Papua New Guinea 13.0

Swaziland 12.9

Bermuda 12.3

Comoros 12.2

Nigeria 12.2

Cape Verde 11.6

Grenada 11.5

Paraguay 11.5

Barbados 11.3

Togo 10.9

Gambia 10.8

Peru 10.8

Myanmar 10.2

Russia 10.2

Liberia 10.1

Costa Rica 10.0

Nauru 9.8

Bolivia 8.9

Mozambique 8.8

Kazakhstan 8.8

Senegal 8.7

Turks and Caicos Islands 8.7

Mongolia 8.7

British Virgin Islands 8.6

Cayman Islands 8.4

Seychelles 8.3

Madagascar 8.1

Indonesia 8.1

Mali 8.0

Pakistan 7.8

Moldova 7.5

Kiribati 7.3

Guadeloupe 7.0

Haiti 6.9

Timor-Leste 6.9

Anguilla 6.8

Antigua and Barbuda 6.8

Lithuania 6.6

Uruguay 5.9

Philippines 5.4

Ukraine 5.2

Estonia 5.2

Cuba 5.0

Belarus 4.9

Thailand 4.8

Suriname 4.6

Laos 4.6

Georgia 4.3

Martinique 4.2

And

The United States 4.2

ALL the countries above America have 100% gun bans

If I cite Chicago and point out that the city with a complete BAN on handguns has out-of-control handgun violence, doctraire liberal ideologues (which basically means garden-variety liberals) will claim that we need a national gun ban in order for any ban to work.

Chicago and all the liberal cities with gun bans prove them wrong.  The rest of the world proves them wrong.

They are wrong.

This is another example of Obama shoving the stimulus through claiming millions of shovel-ready jobs.  After getting his pork-laden Democrat-benefitting boondoggle, he admitted that “Shovel-ready was not as … uh .. shovel-ready as we expected.”  It was governing by demagoguing crisis.  Then he did the same thing with his ObamaCare, shoving it through Congress with a whole array of lies that have been proven to have been outright lies about access, about cost, about everything.  It was governing by demagoguing crisis.

Now he’s doing it with guns.

Obama is the quintessential fascist.  He is exactly why the founding fathers provided the 2nd Amendment as a means to protect ourselves against tyrants.

If you truly want to ban something that is dangerous and evil, ban Democrats.

If You Like ANY Of The Rights The Bill Of Rights Affirmed, You’d Better LOVE The 2nd Amendment’s Right To Keep And Bear Arms Without Infringement

Let’s take a quick look at the Bill of Rights.

Here’s a few things that stand out: the most important ones mention the rights of “the people.”

4th Amendment: “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated”

2nd Amendment: “the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”

And you see, the same liberal big government worshipers who feel like they are justified in infringing on a right that shall not be infringed will ultimately feel every scintilla as justified in violating rights that shall not be violated.

Maybe a liberal wouldn’t mind explaining to me why “the right to vote” means not having to show ID when the right to keep and bear arms without being infringed upon somehow necessitates not only an ID but background checks up the whazoo.  Their argument might amount to “the right to vote never killed anybody.”  And I’m saying, SERIOUSLY?!?!?  Dude, the Nazi Party in Germany was ELECTED.  We watched several years back as the Palestinian Liberation Organization – a murderous terrorist organization – was ELECTED.  We just watched as the Muslim Brotherhood – a murderous terrorist organization – was ELECTED in Egypt.  And that organization just imposed fascist sharia law over the nation’s constitution by fiat almost immediately afterward.

The right to vote is FAR more dangerous than the right for law-abiding citizens to keep and bear arms.  And you are a moral idiot to the extreme not to understand that.

Moral idiots are far worse and far more dangerous than intellectual idiots.  Because moral idiots are people with dishonest minds and dishonest minds prefer lies to the truth.  Moral idiots such as those who run our culture today devote their intelligence to advancing lies.  And they are the first to justify extreme policies with the notion that the ends justify the means.

Let me point out that the very biggest moral idiots of all are the so-called “intellectuals” who dominate our universities and our political think tanks.  Thomas Sowell interacted with George Orwell to produce this gem:

“George Orwell said that some ideas are so foolish that only an intellectual could believe them, for no ordinary man could be such a fool. The record of twentieth century intellectuals was especially appalling in this regard. Scarcely a mass-murdering dictator of the twentieth century was without his intellectual supporters, not simply  in his own country, but also in foreign democracies, where people  were free to say whatever they wished.  Lenin, Stalin, Mao and  Hitler all had their admirers, defenders, and apologists among the  intelligentsia in Western democratic nations, despite the fact that  these dictators ended up killing people of their own country on a  scale unprecedented even by despotic regimes that preceded them” – Thomas Sowell, Intellectuals and Society, p. 2.

And a lot of the people who are such beyond-belief fools are the very same people who continue to be for banning guns “despite the fact that  these dictators ended up killing people of their own country on a  scale unprecedented even by despotic regimes that preceded them.”  They are consistent only in that they are so consistently morally stupid.

The nature of the big government socialist left was, is and will always be fascism.  And the nature of fascism has always been to deprive human dignity and freedom – starting with the right to self-defense.

Because herd animals shouldn’t have a right to defend themselves.  We don’t want our hamburgers getting guns any more than fascists want their people to resist their policies (such as Hitler’s Final Solution, such as Stalin’s Collectivization, such as Mao’s Great Leap Forward).

Which is why they’re going after our guns first just like Hitler and Stalin and Mao and Castro and Pol Pot and Kim Il-sung did before they brought the Horror against unarmed and defenseless people.  Considerably more than 100 million people were brutally murdered by leftist big government dictatorships during peacetime alone.  And the one thing all these governmental philosophies had in common besides big government totalitarian control was the initial disarming of the people they were about to impose horror against.  This is a fact of history.

What has the left done with the 2nd Amendment?  First of all, they have defined the right as belonging only to a militia.  Okay.  Then the 4th Amendment (and other important amendments such as the First Amendment) needs to be only for militias, because the same amendment which says the right of the people to bear arms says the right of the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures.  And if “the people” in the 2nd Amendment refers only to “militia,” then ALL of the rights accorded to the people only pertain for those belonging to a militia.  Because a right recognized for “the people” either applies to “the people” or it doesn’t.  And which is it?  Which do you want?  “The people” either refers to a militia or to the actual “people.”  Just because the right to arms are also granted to well-organized militias does not in any way, shape or form abrogate the right of “the people” to keep and bear arms any more than the mention of the right of the press somehow abrogates the right of the people to freedom of speech and to peaceable assembly as guaranteed in the First Amendment.

They also try to limit the 2nd Amendment by asserting that it somehow only allows for hunting.  Why shouldn’t we have a right to the frankly dishonestly named “assault weapons”?  Because you don’t need thirty bullets, or even ten, to shoot a deer, we’re told.  That is absolutely absurd.  The founding father’s writings are jam-packed LOADED with their clearly expressed view that the ultimate purpose of an armed citizenry was to serve as a safeguard against a tyrant government along with serving as a means for a free people to defend their homes, their property and their persons.  Lastly, they have infringed ALL OVER the 2nd Amendment guarantee while dishonestly saying they’re not infringing on anybody’s rights.

Fascism and government tyranny has started with the confiscation of guns from the people, to disarm them in order to control them.  Big government is ALWAYS about controlling people.

If you value ANY of the other rights of the Bill of Rights, then you’d damned well better protect the 2nd Amendment.

I keep telling anyone who will read me, over and over again: the beast is coming.  And he most certainly is.  And soon.

The thing you need to realize is that by the time he gets here, the Democrat Party will have given the once-great and mighty United States of America into his hands by disarming the people.  And it will be Democrats who worship this ultimate big government leader and take his mark on their foreheads or their right hands as a sign of that worship.

We just went through a disgusting act of propaganda via incredibly deceitful editing of video by the leftwing MSNBC.  Neil Heslin – the father of a slain Sandy Hook shooting victim – said, “I ask if there’s anybody in this room that can give me one reason or challenge this question … why anybody in this room needs to have one of these assault-style weapons or military weapons or high-capacity clips.”  And then he categorically stated, “Not one person can answer that question.”

Yeah, Neil.  We CAN answer that question.  We have a right to be able to protect ourselves with the same sorts of weapons that either predatory criminals or an even more predatory criminal thug government possess.  Our founding fathers gave us that right, and our ancestors died to preserve that right for us.  Here’s a question for YOU, though: can you answer to the hundreds of millions of families who saw their governments brutally murder their parents, their children, their brothers and sisters, their grandparents, their cousins, etc. etc., just why it was that they didn’t deserve the right to be able to defend themselves???  Can you explain why you believe government ought to have the right to slaughter us like farm animals by the hundreds of millions???

That’s my question.

Consider smoking.  First the left forced restaurants to divide their buildings, airplanes, etc. into smoking and non-smoking sections.  But the nature of the left is to keep taking, keep building more regulations with more penalites.  Now you can’t smoke at all in any government place – whether the owner of that place likes it or not – and many people are not lawbreakers even for smoking in their own homes.  If that isn’t bad enough, you’ve got liberals saying that now that the left has taken over and socialized health care, it is too expensive to give the smokers the Medicare and health services they paid into.  And so they should die.  And I mean literally be killed by denial of medical treatment.

You’re only one government regulation away from being treated like Hitler treated the Jews or Stalin treated the Ukrainians or Mao treated, well, pretty much all of his people.

Obama DHS: You Have A Right To Defend Yourselves From Armed Workplace Crazies With Scissors (But Not Guns)

Does this mean that Obama’s Secret Service detail has handed in their Uzis for pairs of scissors?  I sure hope they’re those safety scissors with the dull tips.  You sure wouldn’t want anybody accidentally putting an eye out while fighting to save Obama’s life, would you?

Under Obama, you have the right to perish miserably in the wake of workplace violence.  The story you are about to read is silent testimony to the fact that a crazed killer is out to murder you and your co-workers, you can’t have an actual weapon to protect yourself with – and there won’t be any cops coming anywhere NEAR in time to help you.  So grab your scissors.

And maybe you could grab a rock and a piece of paper and play with the murdering psycho for your life?

I know, I know.  That’s racist.  Thank you, President Hussein.  Praise you, messiah!  I feel so empowered with my scissors now.  While I’m waiting for my turn to be slaughtered I’ll be able to make arts and crafts!  Origami always did make me forget all about being gunned down by, you know, the only guy allowed to have a gun in your building.

Oh, origami doesn’t use scissors?  That’s okay; NEITHER DO I WHEN I’M CONFRONTING A MAN WITH A GUN.

I actually think it would have been a better idea to teach people to just give in to their terror and wet themselves.  Maybe the gunman would slip or something.

DHS Says: Confront Mass Killers With Scissors

From the New York Post:

Homeland Security has advice for confronting mass murders: scissors

By S.A. MILLER | January 31, 2013

WASHINGTON — Is your workplace getting shot up by a crazed gunman? No problem — just grab a pair of scissors and fight back!

That’s some of the helpful advice in a new instructional video from the Department of Homeland Security that was posted on the agency’s Web site just a month after the massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Connecticut.

“If you are caught out in the open and cannot conceal yourself or take cover, you might consider trying to overpower the shooter with whatever means are available,” says the narrator in the video, which shows an office worker pulling scissors out of a desk drawer.

The video, titled “Options for Consideration,” also advises that people who get caught in an “active shooter” situation should run away, hide under a desk or take cover out of the line of fire.

Thank goodness we have highly paid professionally trained bureaucrats available to give us great advice like that. This is right up their with the DHS’ advice about stretching before shoveling snow, and remembering to take off cold wet clothes.

The nearly four-minute-long video opens with chilling scenes from the 2007 Virginia Tech massacre, the 2009 mass shooting at Fort Hood in Texas, and the 2011 attempted assassination of Gabrielle Giffords.

But the video quickly shifts to hokey footage of office workers scampering under desks, crouching in corners and racing into closets to hide from a rampaging gunman on the loose.

“To protect your hiding place, lock the door if you can. Block the door with heavy furniture,” recommends the male narrator, speaking in measured, authoritative tones.

Other survival strategies promoted in the video include hiding “behind large items such as cabinets or desks. Remain quiet. Silence your cellphone or pager. Even the vibration setting can give away a hiding position.”

They might also recommend taking down any ‘gun free zone’ signs.

Richard Feldman, president of the Independent Firearm Owners Association, said he has a better option for consideration than a pair of scissors when confronting an armed mass murderer — a legal firearm.

“That’s why I prefer a gun, and I usually do carry a gun when it is lawful to do so,” said Feldman. “Clearly, you use whatever you can” to fight for your life, he said…

What kind of crazy talk is that? We hold Mr. Feldman’s doctor contacts the authorities so that he can be put away.

The video is part of the Obama administration’s ongoing campaign to reduce firearm violence in the wake of the horrific mass murder last month of 20 children and six teachers in Newtown, Conn., said a Homeland Security official…

The video was released to coincide with President Obama’s sweeping proposals to curb gun violence in America, said the official…

The only trouble is, all the scissors in that Sandy Hook school would have been ‘safety scissors.’

Besides, once people starting hurting each other with scissors, they will have to be banned as well.

Nobody with one of the 400 million guns already in America will ever dare to attack my workplace now.  I’m armed with scissors.

Now, I guess all I need is to figure out how to do this:

Mind you, I’d kind of rather have a gun.  For one thing, judging by all the scars on poor Edward’s face, it would be quite a bit safer than the alternative pair of scissors that Obama says I can fight back with.  But because I live in the Obama States of America, I am now a farm animal.  And if the slaughterer comes, it is my duty to meekly comply with my turn to be slaughtered.

Wait a minute, what’s that, Obama?  I can’t have these scissors?  Because they’ve been classified as “assault scissors”?  Well, dang.  That just figures.

Dianne Feinstein’s Liberal Solution For Guns: Treat Criminals Like Citizens And Lawful Gun Owners Like Criminals

One of the bright, shining examples of liberalism in action has been our treatment of criminals in society.  The ACLU and most Democrats believe that it is better for a hundred guilty violent predatory criminals to go free than for one innocent person to be falsely convicted of a crime.

This piece from the Congressional Record gives us the perspective that liberals would now like to accord to lawful gun owners: criminalize them.  And it is better that a thousand lawful gun owners have their rights violated and usurped than it would be for one violent criminal  predator to be shot by a homeowner defending his or her property and family.

It will be an uphill battle–all the way. I know this.

But we need to ask ourselves:

Do we let the gun industry take over and dictate policy to this country? Do we let those who profit from increasing sales of these military style-weapons prevent us from taking commonsense steps to stop the carnage?

Or should we empower our elected representatives to vote their conscience based on their experience, based on their sense of right and wrong and based on their need to protect their schools, their malls, their workplaces and their businesses?

This legislation is my life’s goal. As long as I am a member of the Senate, I will work night and day to pass this bill into law. No matter how long it takes, I will fight until assault weapons are taken off our streets.

Put simply, we cannot allow the rights of a few to override the safety of all. That is not the America that our founding fathers envisioned. And that is not the America I want my children and grandchildren to live in.

So I ask everyone watching at home: please get involved and stay involved.

The success or failure of this bill depends not on me, but on you. If the American people rise up and demand action from their elected officials, we will be victorious. If the American people say “no” to military-style assault weapons, we will rid our Nation of this scourge.

Please, talk to your senator and your member of Congress.

By Mr. FEINSTEIN (for herself,) Mr. BLUMENTHAL, Ms. AYOTTE, Mr. BENNET, Mr.

It’s all summed up by the phrase that turns liberalism completely upon its head and proves once and for all time that liberalism stands for nothing but convenient hypocrisy: “we cannot allow the rights of a few to override the safety of all.”  Unless it helps Democrats, of course.

Tell you what, Democrat, if you want to take away “rights,” then please take away the “right” of the government to grow in size and power and debt.  Take away the “rights” of the government to practice Marxist class warfare and demonize and attack people for the crime of working harder to advance themselves and their families.  Take away the “right” of non-citizens and dead people and ineligible citizens the ability to vote.  Take away the ”right” of foreigners to cross our border and enter our country illegally.  Take away the “right” of unions to collectively bargain and collectively strike and collectively shut down businesses while businesses have no right to collectively fire the useless lazy bums who keep demanding higher pay in exchange for less and less work.  Take away the “right” to have unemployment benefits forever.  Take away the “right” to enjoy welfare for five generations.  Take away the “right” for homosexuals to pervert marriage.  And please, PLEASE take away the “right” for a woman to decide to murder her baby and force the father of that baby to stand passively by while his son or daughter is brutally tortured and killed.

And if you really want less gun murders, geez, PLEASE take away the “rights” that the ACLU and Democrats have provided to proven violent animals by executing them like the monsters they are and instituting hard sentencing guidelines that liberals have banned.

There are PLENTY of “rights” you could take away that are not specifically cited in our Bill of Rights.

Just so you understand how incredibly cynical Democrats truly are, and how much they truly do not give one freaking DAMN about saving the lives of innocent children (55.7 million of whom they’ve already murdered in the abortion mills, fwiw), just look at liberals’ reaction to the Fontana Police Department buying a few AR-15s to protect schoolchildren in the event of a targeting of a school in their jurisdiction: outrage.  Liberals are outraged that good and decent people – even police officers – would be capable of protecting themselves against well-armed violent criminals.

This sentence from the LA Times sums up the crazy insanity that will manifest itself in trying to ban all guns:

The rifles are kept either in the trunk of the police officer’s vehicle or in a safe on campus.

“Still, Garcia worries that bringing such a weapon on campus could lead to it falling into the wrong hands.”

If even police departments can’t pass adequate muster to be armed, then what chance do the rest of us have to keep guns if Democrats are allowed the power to ban guns from us???

Mind you, some guns are stolen from gun owners’ homes by criminals because fascist liberals who would never publish the names and addresses of child molesters decided that legal gun owners were a far greater threat than the child molesters or the rapists or the violent murderers.

Police can’t bring guns on campuses that are “gun free zones.”  The mass-murdering psychos know that.  Which is why in every single case but ONE since 1950 in which three or more people were killed in a gun shooting, EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM OCCURRED ON A GUN-FREE ZONE.

Democrats have turned our schools into well-stocked preserves where crazy murdering psychos can have plenty of helpless targets.  And they actually have the blue-whale-sized balls to demonize us for trying to prevent them from creating even more carnage as they pass laws to keep law-abiding citizens from defending themselves knowing full-damn well that the criminals won’t bother to follow their stupid and immoral and unconstitutional laws.

The fact of the matter is that there is absolutely NO relationship between confiscating guns from law-abiding citizens and gun crime.  The so-called “assault weapons ban” had ZERO effect of reducing gun crime of weapons that were largely arbitrarily banned.  And therefore what IS now a proven fact is that Democrats are fascists and hypocrites who want to take away the people’s rights to be safe from their government that is under the Democrat Party walking roughshod all over the Constitution.

Why target assault weapons – which was a deliberately misleading title with the intent to falsely connect fully automatic military “assault rifles” with their semi-automatic civilian counterparts so that Democrats could falsely demagogue a straw man?  Because the left is looking for precedents: if they can take away these weapons, they can go after the next batch of guns using their success against “assault weapons.”

You should realize that most of the weapons on Democrats’ confiscation lists are only different by weapons they currently allow by shades of degree.  For example, a Mini-14 rifle is completely legal; but it is virtually identical to many weapons that share the exact same platform that are on the ban list.  The Democrats are savagely attacking what amounts to cosmetic differences such as a pistol grip and a flash suppressor.  The pistol grip was never on any rifle until the first assault rifles.  Why not?  Because it only provided any help for a shooter who was spraying a target with full automatic fire; it is virtually useless for semi-automatic fire that all “assault weapons” have.  To this day, most hunting rifles have a traditional stock simply because the traditional stock provides for greater accuracy and thus greater deadliness.  Flash suppressors were placed on assault rifles so that a soldier fighting at night on a dark battlefield would not night-blind himself with his own weapons fire.  They do NOT make you invisible to detection by others.  If you’re shooting an assault weapon in a city or in daylight, a flash suppressor is useless to you.  All these things are for style, to make the weapons look like the ones soldiers use on the battlefields.  It’s a marketing gimmick, much the way people buy sports jerseys to look more like their favorite athletes.

Democrats are also targeting ammo magazines.  Their primary justification for doing so is to ask the question, “how many bullets do you need to kill a deer?”  As if the 2nd Amendment only somehow guaranteed nothing more than the right to hunt squirrels with an 18th century musket as opposed to its trule purpose to prevent government tyranny over a helpless people.  They are currently trying to ban any gun with more than seven rounds.  The thing is, they are knowingly setting up massive, MASSIVE collateral damage.  That’s because such a ban would criminalize 95% of all semi-automatic handguns.  Democrats are hoping they can ban handguns without even appearing to have tried to do so.

They view “assault weapons” as low-hanging fruit through which they can grab a branch and tear down the entire tree of the 2nd Amendment right.

If you allow them to do so, they will gladly tear down the tree of liberty while the rest of us stand there stupidly gawking.

Gun Control: Dianne Feinstein’s Assault Weapons Bill Reminds Of Her Abject Debacle To Control Meth Labs

Dianne Feinstein is in the news for being the senator who applied for and exercised a concealed weapon permit who also wants to take guns away from everybody else.

Her assault weapons ban is apparently the Democrats’ favorite monster to devour the 2nd Amendment of the United States Constitution.  After Obama gets finished acting like a fascist and imposing gun control by executive order just like the worst leaders in history did.

As a result of Obama’s demagoguing and he and his Democrats’ lying and slandering to exploit the next crisis, gun sales have absolutely skyrocketed during Obama’s first term.  And that fever-pitch rush for the people to arm themselves now before it’s too late has only escalated as Obama begins his next term.

Let’s say Obama gets his overturning of the Constitution like he wants.  Explain to me how that fascist thug didn’t cause the greatest proliferation of guns as frightened people rushed to buy their guns before Obama’s new dictates took effect.

And a whopping load of those guns are so-called “assault weapons” – because everybody knows that Obama and the Democrats are fascists who are going to take our right to keep and bear arms away and they want to make sure they get the guns that Obama wants to seize from us first.

Hey, if you want to reduce the number of guns, do you think Obama’s presidency did a good job of that?  I mean, hell, Obama HIMSELF was dealing thousands of assault weapons by proxy to Mexican drug cartels.  That’s how you can know that gun sales under Obama have skyrocketed like nothing ever has skyrocketed before.

And this is going to make any kind of intelligent gun control so much more difficult.  Because there are 300 million plus guns in America.  And as long as a thug or a murderer can get his hands on one, I want to be able to get MY hands on one, too.  And gun laws disarm the innocent people while allowing the guilty people to buy guns illegally and then exploit the fact that they’re going to be the only ones with guns when they crash into your house and round up your family for their night of fun before they kill you all.

And Obama has now added massively to that giant stash of guns in America.  Since he was elected in November 2008, Obama has panicked Americans into buying 67 million more guns.  And I mean, to put it in perspective, in just the last two months of 2012, Obama panicked Americans into buying more than enough guns to arm both the 2.29 million active members in the Chinese Army AND the 1.13 million active members in the Indian Army.

Now, assuming that you’re not a rabid Obama worshiping ideologue but rather somebody who actually wants to see fewer guns on the streets, how can you argue that Obama did anything but create a mass panic???  How could you possibly argue that what Democrats have done was the right way to have a responsible discussion about gun control versus the 2nd Amendment???

Have we ever seen a failure like this before?

Yes.  And frighteningly, it was an even bigger failure because it started out as a giant success.

I want to point out a little bit of history.  Once upon a time shy of a half century ago, there was an illegal drug called “meth.”  Oh, you’ve heard of it?  And Democrat Senator Dianne Feinstein decided to win that war with government regulation.  She made it harder than hell for all Californians to purchase any product containing pseudoephedrine.  Because pseudoephedrine was an ingredient in meth, you see.  And by exercising a fascist takeover of a private industry, Dianne Feinstein and Democrats believed that they could use raw government force shut down the meth problem.  You know, kind of like they think they can shut the gun problem down.

What happened?  Well, it’s interesting.  To begin with, you’re still a casualty of the war Democrats waged against pseudoephedrine.  You’ve got to fill our government paperwork and show ID up the whazoo.  And hence criminals will be unable to get the ingredient pseudoephedrine and the drug labs will shut down.  And of course they largely killed a thriving product by largely shutting it down so the government could solve the drug problem.

Was it a brilliant idea?  Is it a story that ought to give liberals hope about how good a job Democrats can be at taking away guns???  Nope.  Not even close.

You see, when meth labs had access to even more abundant supplies of pseudoephedrine, they used a process that generated an incredibly powerful ammonia odor that could be smelled from significant distances.  So the labs had to locate way out in the boonies to cook their product.  And that slowed down the manufacturing process considerably.

Then Dianne Feinstein and the Democrat Party stepped in with their government ban.  And helped the drug makers overcome their inability to manufacture their product in cities.

You want to know what happened?  The meth makers very quickly found a different way to make meth.  They now use a method that is virtually odorless – so the process can be kicked into high gear in ordinary households in ordinary cities.  And its so portable you can now manufacture meth in your car.  As a result, meth production and hence meth addiction have skyrocketed.  Now they can make it right across the street from your kid’s elementary school.  And so what if they blow up next door to you?

All because the same stupid Democrats who think they can solve the drug problem by attacking legitimate private industry can solve the gun problem by attacking ordinary Americans exercising their 2nd Amendment protection.

Here’s the story on what happened with the meth production:

More meth labs showing up in cities, suburbs
Not just a rural drug anymore: Experts say more meth labs showing up in cities, suburbs
By Jim Salter, Associated Press | Associated Press – Thu, Dec 27, 2012

ST. LOUIS (AP) — Methamphetamine lab seizures are on the rise in the nation’s cities and suburbs, raising new concerns about a lethal drug that has long been the scourge of rural America.

Data and interviews from an investigation by The Associated Press found growing numbers of meth lab seizures in cities such as St. Louis, Kansas City, Mo., Nashville, Tenn., and Evansville, Ind. Authorities are also seeing evidence that inner-city gangs are becoming involved in meth production and distribution.

“No question about it — there are more labs in the urban areas,” said Tom Farmer, coordinator of the Tennessee Methamphetamine and Pharmaceutical Task Force. “I’m seeing car fires from meth in urban areas now, more people getting burned.”

The increase in labs is especially troubling because meth brought into the U.S. from Mexico also is becoming more pervasive in urban areas. The Associated Press reported in October that so-called Mexican “super labs” are upping production, making meth more pure and less expensive, and then using existing drug pipelines in big cities.

Data obtained by AP shows that homemade meth is on the rise in metropolitan areas, too.

— St. Louis County had just 30 lab seizures in 2009, but 83 through July 31, putting it on pace for 142 in 2012. The city of St. Louis had eight in 2009 and is on pace for 50 this year.

— Jackson County, Mo., (which includes Kansas City) had 21 seizures in 2009 and is on pace for 65 this year.

— Meth lab seizures have tripled in the Nashville area over the past two years. In one case in late 2011, a man and his girlfriend were accused of recruiting more than three dozen people, including some who were homeless, to visit multiple pharmacies and purchase the legal limit of cold pills containing pseudoephedrine, a key meth ingredient. The couple and 37 others were indicted.

— The Evansville, Ind., area has seen a more than 500 percent rise in meth seizures since 2010, with 82 in 2011.

Authorities cite numerous reasons for meth moving into cities, but chief among them is the rise in so-called “one-pot” or “shake-and-bake” meth.

In years past, meth was cooked in a makeshift lab. The strong ammonia-like smell carried over a wide area, so to avoid detection, meth had to be made in backwoods locations.

As laws limited the availability of pseudoephedrine, meth-makers adjusted with a faster process that creates smaller batches simply by combining ingredients — mixing cold pills with toxic substances such as battery acid or drain cleaner — in 2-liter soda bottles. Shake-and-bake meth can be made quickly with little odor in a home, apartment, hotel, even a car.

“Bad guys have figured it out,” said Rusty Payne of the federal Drug Enforcement Agency. “You don’t have to be as clandestine — you don’t have to be in rural country to lay low.”

Niki Crawford, who heads the meth suppression team in Indiana, said that with shake-and-bake labs, “the odors are not as strong. And they’re just so portable. We find them in backpacks and gym bags.”

And inside stores: A woman was arrested inside a St. Louis County Wal-Mart earlier this year with a meth-filled soda bottle in her coat pocket.

Another reason for the rise in urban meth is a process known among law enforcement as “smurfing” —the abundance of pharmacies in cities attracts meth-makers from surrounding rural areas, who can bring in friends to help purchase pseudoephedrine pills.

“We know the fuel for domestic labs is pseudoephedrine,” Farmer said. “The source for that is pharmacies and the majority of pharmacies are in urban areas.”

Farmer also has seen an increase in meth activity involving inner-city Tennessee gangs, which tend to be better-organized than rural cookers when it comes to marketing and selling the drug. For the most part, the gang members work as smurfers, though Farmer worries they’ll eventually become involved in the manufacture and distribution of the drug. Sometimes, gang members and meth-makers first connect while in prison.

“They see there’s a market there to make money off of pseudoephedrine,” Farmer said. “Pseudoephedrine has become as good as currency.”

Missouri State Highway Patrol statistics are indicative of the growing urban concern: All four of the top meth counties in Missouri were in the metropolitan St. Louis area — Jefferson, St. Charles, St. Louis and Franklin.

Ed Begley, a St. Louis County meth detective, said the drug is attracting users from all socio-economic levels.

“Lower class all the way up to upper middle class,” Begley said. “We’ve even had retired folks who have become addicted. It’s a brutal drug.”

You see, the problem is that you can’t completely shut down pseudoephedrine production.  Why?  Because it’s simply the best drug for congestion ever made.  And Democrat politicians get colds, too, you know.  Also, how are the drug makers getting their pseudoephedrine?  Largely by getting the welfare-slacking life-failures the Democrats subsidize to purchase it for them in exchange for a few bucks a month.  Let’s call that welfare from meth makers.  And it’s shockingly pervasive and the problem is exploding out of control.  Feinstein and Democrats did absolutely nothing to reduce the drug trade with their nanny-state fascism and instead made the problem worse.  In the same way, you ought to know that you can’t shut down gun production, either.  Because what would they protect Obama and his family with if they absolutely banned guns???  As long as Democrats can get colds and need some pseudoephedrine, and as long as Obama needs the guns to protect himself and his family that he wants to take away from you, we’re going to have the same sorts of government-caused disasters.  And don’t think for a second that guns won’t find their way across the border on the backs of the illegal immigrants who are streaming into America with Democrats’ abetting.

The Obama City of Chicago has a complete ban on handguns.  And there are so many gun homicides from the criminals who know that they can prey on helpless people shooting more people than are dying in our worst war zone.  310 Americans were killed in Afghanistan with a total of 405 Coalition deaths.  That compared to 532 homicides in the Democrat-owned city of Chicago.  That ought to tell you how well Democrats’ fascist power-grabs to seize all the guns will have on gun crime.

Democrat Gov. Cuomo gave a speech in which he said:

“No one hunts with an assault rifle. No one needs 10 bullets to kill a deer,” Cuomo said. “End the madness now!  [...]

“Let’s lead the way once again in saving lives,” Cuomo said in an often rousing speech that some observers said better positioned the Democrat for a 2016 run for president.   [...]

“New York leads the nation, it’s time New York lead the nation in this,” Silver said. His priorities are bans on assault rifles and high-capacity magazines of ammunition.

Cuomo has also specifically said he supported the confiscation of legally-purchased and owned guns.

Well, first of all, where the hell does the 2nd Amendment limit the right to keep and bear arms in order to hunt and not to be able to defend yourself???  That genuinely idiotic statement dismissed, I can also personally testify as a hunter that I have seen a fair number of hunters using “assault weapons” to hunt.  They are excellent multi-purpose weapons and in fact they are excellent deer rifles.  As for Cumo’s statement about “ten rounds,” well, on that argument Cuomo’s fascist Democrats ought to ban all weapons but flintlocks on the view that “no one needs” more than ONE bullet.

But that said, Cuomo’s speech was also idiotic in claiming that New York “leads the way” in banning guns.  Chicago leads the way in banning guns.  And if Cuomo wants people to consider the effects of his stupid and immoral and unconstitutional and frankly fascist laws, they have only to look at that city on a hill for Obama’s policies, Chicago.

Oh, we just found a new way for criminals to get guns, by the way.  They can depend on liberals who staff newspapers such as the Journal News and the leftist blog Gawker to publish the names and addresses of gun owners.  So that criminals can break into their homes and steal the guns, we now know.

You still think these demoniacs can keep guns out of criminals’ hands, do you?

What Obama is demagoguing might seem to make sense to you.  I’m sure Dianne Feinstein’s takeover of the pseudoephedrine industry made sense to you, too.

Unfortunately, what Democrats are now demagoguing on guns not only won’t work, but it will make gun crime far, FAR worse than it ever was.

Which is why so many million Americans have rushed to buy their guns before Obama the dictator takes them away.

I believe that a great many Americans realize that something bad is coming.  The sheer number of gun purchases is unreal.  I think a lot of people realize that after Obama implodes America, the Antichrist from the Bible will come.

Fascists Playing Fast And Loose With The Constitution Before They Abolish It Entirely: Since When Did The 2nd Amendment Just Allow People To HUNT?

Barack Obama said something really, really stupid while he was demonizing the so-called “assault weapons.”

He called them “weapons of war” and declared that the American people don’t need them and therefore shouldn’t be allowed to have them.  Even though he demands that his Secret Service have fully automatic machine pistols to protect him and his family and his top political advisers.

First of all, however, Obama is either ignorant or lying about the “assault weapons” being “weapons of war.”  Because no they aren’t: they are strictly semi-automatic civilian versions of “weapons of war.”  The assault rifle – after which the so-called “assault weapon” is modeled – is a weapon capable of selective fire from semi-automatic to full automatic fire.  Actual “weapons of war” have not been sold in the U.S. outside of a rare few gun dealers for generations.

The reason Democrats coined the term “assault weapons” to describe these legal, civilian versions of guns was because they knew they could use the similarity of terms (“assault rifle” vs. “assault weapons”) and deliberately confuse and conflate the two in the minds of the public.  Democrats thrive best at games of rhetorical slandering.  It is all they know how to do well, given the fact that they are clearly incapable of governing or leading when they slander their way to power.

Obama was factually lying when he called the weapons we can buy in gun stores “weapons of war.”  That is simply a fact.  And sadly, it is the consistent, characteristic tactic based on lies and half-truths that the left has chosen in its campaign to join Nazi Germany, the U.S.S.R., and the worst regimes on earth that have banned and confiscated guns.

That said, Obama’s demagogic term – “weapons of war” – was EXACTLY what the 2nd Amendment guaranteed us the right to keep and bear.  Unless you are so breathtakingly stupid that you actually believe there were different types of guns in the America of the founding fathers, and that they only allowed some and specifically forbade the “weapons of war.”

When the founding fathers said that the right to keep and bear arms was a sacred one, THEY SPECIFICALLY INTENDED THOSE ARMS TO BE “WEAPONS OF WAR.”  And the liberals who deny that fact are either abject liars – or they are just the stupid people who are infamously called “useful idiots” in their desire to naively and stupidly help fascists and tyrants.

And no lying, slandering demagogue can change that fact – even if he deceives the people into surrendering their weapons the way Hitler and Stalin and Pol Pot deceived their people into surrendering their weapons.

This brings me to the point that many other lying, dishonest Democrats have been stating: that they aren’t out to take away hunting rifles and thus somehow are preserving the 2nd Amendment if they take away every OTHER kind of gun.

The 2nd Amendment was a reaction against government tyranny in the minds of the founding fathers.  They did not want America to be a repeat of the Britain they had just won their independence from.  They wanted an armed citizenry that the government would have to fear and respect.  They wanted a people who would be capable of rising up against tyrant government.  They wanted a people capable of rising up against abuses of power.

Obama and his ilk have been trying to take us back to the status of a disarmed and therefore helpless people ever since.

Patrick Henry in 1775 said, “They tell us that we are weak — unable to cope with so formidable an adversary. But when shall we be stronger? Will it be when we are totally disarmed, and when a British guard shall be stationed in every house? Three million people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us.”

Noah Webster said, “Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed, as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword, because the whole of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops.”

Richard Henry Lee said, “Militias, when properly formed, are in fact the people themselves and include all men capable of bearing arms. To preserve liberty it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them.”

Does that sound like he meant that Americans ought to have the right to shoot at squirrels but not the right to defend themselves from the far more dangerous vermin threatening them???

John Adams said, “Arms in the hands of the citizens may be used at individual discretion for the defense of the country, the overthrow of tyranny or private self-defense.”  Thomas Jefferson said, “The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.”  And if that isn’t strong enough Jefferson also said, “No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms in his own lands.”

And Patrick Henry again said, “Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined. The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able may have a gun.”

Thomas Paine said also in 1775, “The supposed quietude of a good man allures the ruffian; while on the other hand, arms like laws discourage and keep the invader and the plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property. The balance of power is the scale of peace. The same balance would be preserved were all the world destitute of arms, for all would be alike; but since some will not, others dare not lay them aside. Horrid mischief would ensue were one half the world deprived of the use of them; the weak would become a prey to the strong.”

Which is another way of saying that if you don’t want to be a victim of a criminal thug or an even worse criminal thug government, exercise your right to keep and bear arms.  And anybody who tries to take away our guns is trying to take away our freedom and our security.

Samuel Adams said, “Among the natural rights of the colonists are these: first, a right to life, secondly to liberty, thirdly to property; together with the right to defend them in the best manner they can.”  We have seen how much Democrats value human life given the fact that they have butchered more than 55 million human beings conceived in America in their abortion mills.  And we have now seen that they don’t value the right to liberty, the right to property or the right to self-defense any more than these murderers value the right to life.

And which is to therefore to say that Obama and his ilk are precisely why the founding fathers enumerated the right to keep and bear arms in the first place.  Democrats are bad people who want to take away your ability to protect yourself so they can dominate and crush you with their totalitarian government system.  Period.  And they are the worst kind of liars who deliberately distort and fabricate history to get what they want.

There have been more than a hundred million human beings who could have told you that their governments first took away their guns and then took away their lives.  But alas, their governments murdered them and their voices are forever silent until Judgment Day.  But their silent testimonies scream to every non-fascist who yearns to be free from tyranny.  And to the extent that liberals give a damn about what Hitler did to the millions of disarmed Jews he murdered, to the extent that they care about the millions of disarmed Ukranians that Stalin starved to death, to the extent they understand how many tens of millions of disarmed Chinese Chairman Mao murdered with his incompentence and malevolence in his Great Leap Forward, well, one can only conclude that they want all that to happen here, too.  Because what liberals most cherish is the ideal of the American people being cowed and defenseless against giant government.

The founding fathers framed the right to keep and bear arms as a moral issue: you have a God-given right to defend yourself, your family, your home and your place of business.  Anybody who would try to take that right from you is an immoral person.  Liberals also frame gun control as a moral issue; but on their “morality” government is God, and if your god wants to deprive you and your family of liberty and life, you are an immoral person for wanting to have any means to protect yourselves from the State.  But they dishonestly bait-and-switch that their real moral argument with a different pseudo-argument: that guns kill people and if we take away the guns people won’t kill people.

It’s a lie no matter how you slice it.  Did you know that, “With just one single exception, the attack on congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords in Tucson in 2011, every public shooting since at least 1950 in the U.S. in which more than three people have been killed has taken place where citizens are not allowed to carry guns”?????  Did you know that the Aurora, Colorado psycho who went to town in the movie theater chose the only movie theater among the seven that were close to him (he actually drove by movie theaters to get to his target!) that had been designated as a gun free zone???  Did you know that the states and the cities with the tightest gun control laws  lead the nation in gun crime???   Go to Obama’s and Rahm Emanuel’s Chicago and tell me what life is like there.  Why on earth do you think taking away guns from law-abiding people would do anything other than embolden the criminals and murderers to prey on the helpless victims???

The day that Obama succeeds in taking away your right to guns is the day that you declare that you, your spouse and your children do not deserve to live.  Because it will be the day that you agree with Obama that rather than being a human being with the God-given right of self-defense, you are nothing more than a farm animal – and if the government decides it is time to cull the herd, then off to the slaughter house you will meekly go.

Obama believes that only he and his family merit protection with guns.  The rest of you herd animals don’t deserve it.  The Journal News that published the names and addresses of gun owners along with a map showing how to get to their homes afterward decided that while the rest of the meat animals don’t have a right to be defended with guns, they do.  And they hired armed security like the hypocrite fascists that they as liberals are.

I made the point that liberals (a.k.a. fascists) have been playing fast and loose with the Constitution before they abolish it entirely.  Consider the recent liberal law professor from liberal Georgetown University who called on America to scrap its “archaic, idiosyncratic and downright evil” Constitution.  Consider the Obama judge who ruled that the Constitution doesn’t give Americans the right to bear guns even though the 2nd Amendment very definitely says “keep and bear.”  The Constitution is merely an inconvenient document that needs to be thrown aside for the left to exalt in the power it seeks over the people.  Consider the incredible attitude that liberal justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg has toward the Constitution.  Consider the cynical and manipulative attitude the collectivist Supreme Court liberals have displayed toward the Constitution.  Consider the mocking attitude that Democrats repeatedly displayed toward the Constitution in their ramming ObamaCare down the now-collectivist American throat.  Consider that Democrats don’t believe that their right to power by regulating the people has ANY constitutional limits.  Consider the Democrats who went on record boycotting the U.S. Constitution.  Consider how Democrats demand that government grow larger and more powerful and that religion grow smaller and more marginal when our founding fathers demanded the exact opposite.  Consider the abject dishonesty and hypocrisy of Democrats for refusing to allow ANY ID checks for voting so illegals can vote Democrat but demand restrictions up the whazoo for those who wish to exercise their 2nd Amendment rights.  Consider that whereas our Declaration of Independence clearly says that all of our rights and liberties are based on GOD, Democrats actually took God out of their party’s platform last year.  Which is to state that Democrats declared that God has nothing whatsoever to do with the rights they want to take away from the American people or the new “rights” they want to impose on the American people.  Consider that similarly, Obama demands the government-forced redistribution of wealth whereas our founding fathers had said, “Over our dead bodies!”  And consider Obama’s dismissive attitude toward the Constitution as a flawed document by deeply flawed people.  And realize that our Constitution is headed for the dung pile of history as Democrats who have already largely killed the tree of liberty by a death of a thousand cuts are now increasingly demanding that the dead husk of that tree be chopped down once and for all.

If Obama really wanted to deal with gun violence, he would come clean on what happened in Benghazi, Libya where the first American ambassador since Jimmy Carter was screwing up the planet was murdered along with the three other Americans who died trying to keep him alive.  If Obama really wanted to deal with gun violence, he would finally explain why his government ordered thousands of the very assault weapons he most demonizes to be placed in the hands of drug cartel killers in Mexico.  The fact of the matter is that Obama doesn’t give a damn about gun violence; he just wants to finally end the ability of the American people to protect and defend themselves against his next wave of fascist abrogation of the Constitution and the American way of life.

Democrats’ goal is to make certain that you are powerless and helpless against the coming Antichrist.  Obama’s most cherished goal is, to put it in Orwellian terms, “a government boot stomping on a human face forever.”

Second Victim Pushed To Death Under Train This Month. We Must Crimalize All Trains NOW! Oh, We Only Treat Guns That Way???

I know the left has been pushing trains as a “green” form of transportation, but trains kill people and clearly they’re another thing that’s just too dangerous for society to be allowed to have.

December 27, 2012
Man Is Pushed to His Death Under Train in Queens
By THE NEW YORK TIMES

A young woman pushed a man to his death under an oncoming train at the 40th Street-Lowery Street subway station in Queens on Thursday evening, law enforcement authorities said.

The woman walked behind the man along the platform, mumbling to herself, witnesses told the police, before shoving him into the path of a northbound No. 7 train just after 8 p.m. Witnesses said the victim did not appear to notice her. The woman, whom the police described as Hispanic, in her early 20s and heavyset, fled and was being sought by all police officers in the area.

She was wearing a blue, white and gray ski jacket, the police said, and gray Nike sneakers. The man, who had not been identified, remained underneath the subway train late Thursday evening, spokesmen for the Police and Fire Departments said.

It is the second time this month that a man has been killed after being pushed onto the subway tracks. Ki-Suck Han, 58, of Elmhurst, Queens, died under the Q train at the 49th Street and Seventh Avenue station in early December. Naeem Davis, 30, has been charged with second-degree murder in that case. A lawyer for Mr. Davis said that his client had been trying to push Mr. Han away after an altercation.

If liberals were honest, they’d say, “Of course guns don’t kill people; that’s asinine and anybody who thinks anything that stupid is asinine.  People kill people with pretty much whatever is convenient – including the damn oncoming train.  And of course the Constitution clearly guarantees that no cockroach shall infringe upon your individual right as a citizen to keep and bear your guns.  You’ve got to be a complete dumbass to try to argue otherwise.  And we need to come to an agreement on those two facts as a nation so we can come together and maintain our constitutional freedoms while doing something to keep dangerous weapons of ANY kind out of the hands of psychos.”

But they’re not honest.  So we have the political equivalent of World War I-style trench warfare on guns and pretty much everything else.

So let’s apply their “logic” and start banning all passenger trains because they can be used by psychopaths to commit murders.  Starting with Amtrack and the New York subway system.

Oh, we might start banning racial minorities, too.  The first “train-waving murderer” was a black man and the second one was Hispanic.  The same argument used to demonize guns actually works equally well with both of these groups, too.  And if you talk about the Nazis – which stood for “National Socialist German Workers Party” (hint: which party is the “National Socialist American Workers Party” again????) – let’s remember they did both and first took away all the guns and then rounded up all the Jews who suddenly discovered they were absolutely defenseless.

Yesterday the Democrat governor of New York (Cuomo) used the word “confiscate” to describe his position on guns.

You want to know what true liberals have had to say about guns?

Regarding disarming a nation as the Democrat Party wants to do:

“Among the many misdeeds of British rule in India, history will look upon the Act depriving a whole nation of arms as the blackest.” – Mahatma Mohandas K. Gandhi, Autobiography, page 446

Regarding the individual right to defend yourself against violence with a gun:

“If someone has a gun and is trying to kill you, it would be reasonable to shoot back with your own gun.” – Dalai Lama, Seattle, May 15th, 2001

I suppose you can pardon their attitudes as two great men who spent their lives watching an oppressive force systemically crush their people after said oppressive force took their guns away from them.

Here’s a third for the heck of it:

“As we have seen, the first public expression of disenchantment with nonviolence arose around the question of “self-defense.” In a sense this is a false issue, for the right to defend one’s home and one’s person when attacked has been guaranteed through the ages by common law.” – “Where Do We Go From Here:Chaos or Community?” by MLK Jr.

Said Dr. King, registered gun owner and registered Republican in addition to being a man who would have had his address published for public shame as if he were some kind of criminal if he’d lived in New York this week.  That of course was back in those good old days when “the right to defend one’s home and one’s person when attacked was guaranteed through the ages by common law.”  Goof times, those ages past.  Missing them already since Obama fundamentally transformed America.

Oh, that’s right.  Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was another one of those guys who took about a hundred beatings too many from an oppressive system that had the guns to go along with all the other force it had.

True liberals understand that the society that comes after your guns is going to be able to come after you and you won’t be able to do a damn thing about it when they do.

Which is to say that  Gov. Andrew Cuomo – who has the virtue only of being more honest about his intentions than Obama is – is a fascist rather than any true liberal in any historically accurate sense of the term.

Obama’s Newtown Speech, Or Why Americans Won’t Have Guns To Protect Themselves From The Government Of The Coming Antichrist

The president who is responsible for the 55 million innocent babies in America butchered by abortion is exploiting the murder of twenty more to justify the goal that liberals have sought for America just as they sought it in Stalin’s Russia, Hitler’s Germany, Mao’s China, Pol Pot’s Cambodia, Kim’s North Korea, Castro’s Cuba, etc. etc.

I heard Obama’s Newtown speech yesterday evening.  He made it crystal clear he’s going to exploit the tragedy in Newtown, Connecticut to go after the Constitution, the 2nd Amendment, your guns and your ability to protect yourselves.

Obama basically blathered religious platitudes for the first third of the speech, then offered a transition that went from “we all want to protect our kids” to “but parents can’t do it alone” to “we need a Big Brother state to confiscate all the guns so children will be safe.”  Those aren’t quotes, but that was the logic of the speech.

A transcript of the speech will show what I am saying: Obama began by quoting 2 Corinthians 4:16-18.   And who can’t see how obviously that passage logically transitions to the statement, ”so we’re coming after you’re guns now.”  Which is why Obama said this:

It comes as a shock at a certain point where you realize no matter how much you love these kids, you can’t do it by yourself, that this job of keeping our children safe and teaching them well is something we can only do together, with the help of friends and neighbors, the help of a community and the help of a nation.

And in that way we come to realize that we bear responsibility for every child, because we’re counting on everybody else to help look after ours, that we’re all parents, that they are all our children.

This is our first task, caring for our children. It’s our first job. If we don’t get that right, we don’t get anything right. That’s how, as a society, we will be judged.

And by that measure, can we truly say, as a nation, that we’re meeting our obligations?

Can we honestly say that we’re doing enough to keep our children, all of them, safe from harm?

Can we claim, as a nation, that we’re all together there, letting them know they are loved and teaching them to love in return?

Can we say that we’re truly doing enough to give all the children of this country the chance they deserve to live out their lives in happiness and with purpose?

I’ve been reflecting on this the last few days, and if we’re honest with ourselves, the answer’s no. We’re not doing enough. And we will have to change. Since I’ve been president, this is the fourth time we have come together to comfort a grieving community torn apart by mass shootings, fourth time we’ve hugged survivors, the fourth time we’ve consoled the families of victims.

And in between, there have been an endless series of deadly shootings across the country, almost daily reports of victims, many of them children, in small towns and in big cities all across America, victims whose — much of the time their only fault was being at the wrong place at the wrong time.

We can’t tolerate this anymore. These tragedies must end. And to end them, we must change. [...]

In the coming weeks, I’ll use whatever power this office holds to engage my fellow citizens, from law enforcement, to mental health professionals, to parents and educators, in an effort aimed at preventing more tragedies like
this, because what choice do we have? We can’t accept events like this as routine.

You can’t keep your kids safe on your own.  You need your families and your neighbors.  And that means you need your Obama Big Brother State, too.  And the only way you can protect your children is to completely disarm yourselves and trust completely in Obama for your safety.  That’s the logic of Obama’s rhetoric.

Obama says America has to change to protect her children.

This is the thing: any fool can quote the Bible.  Obama and Satan both have this in common.  So let me quote it to so I can describe the real problem that is plaguing America.  And no, it isn’t our guns or our 2nd Amendment:

“But mark this: There will be terrible times in the last days.  People will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boastful, proud, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy, without love, unforgiving, slanderous, without self-control, brutal, not lovers of the good, treacherous, rash, conceited, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God–having a form of godliness but denying its power. Have nothing to do with them.” — 2 Timothy 3:1-5

That’s the reason we are suffering a plague of evil.  It isn’t guns; we’ve always had guns.  It’s last-days end-times evil that is metastasizing like the most aggressive form of stage 4 cancer under this president of God damn America.  But mark this: evil always exploits evil in order to perpetuate still more evil.

You want to change America, Obama?  How about if you have the moral wisdom to understand what John Adams told you:

“Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”

How about if you had the moral wisdom to understand what George Washington told you:

“Of all the habits and dispositions which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports.”

How about if you truly respect morality and religion and stop warring on them?  That would be a change, too, you know.  And unlike what you propose, it would actually fix the problem and like icing on a delicious cake, it would not mean creating a police state to crush the people’s constitutional guarantees.

Liberals have given us a Holocaust nine times larger than Hitler’s with more than 55 million innocent human beings murdered since Roe v. Wade in 1973.  Obama said on December 14:

“The majority of those who died today were children — beautiful, little kids between the ages of 5 and 10 years old. They had their entire lives ahead of them — birthdays, graduations, weddings, kids of their own.”

Let me ask you, liberal: how in the hell did the 55 million babies you murdered NOT have their entire lives ahead of them before you snuffed them out as if human life meant nothing at all?

And you have the moral idiocy to wonder how in the world a culture that has brutally murdered one-sixth of its entire population could produce someone who wouldn’t value the lives of children???

Liberals and Democrats and socialists have purged the Ten Commandments from our culture.  Their demonic judges have ruled that we cannot tolerate the Ten Commandments in public schools because:

“If the posted copies of the Ten Commandments are to have any effect at all, it will be to induce the schoolchildren to read, meditate upon, perhaps to venerate and obey, the Commandments”

We can only speculate what would have happened had liberals allowed the Ten Commandments to be posted so that gunman  Adam Lanza could have had a chance to “venerate and obey the Ten Commandments.”  It is frankly beyond amazing that liberals would rather have the “terrible times” of murderous children than allow America’s kids to reflect on the sacred dignity of human life represented in the Commandment, “Thou shalt not murder.”

Democrats have perverted and poisoned culture to the point that the soul of America is as dead as the 55 million babies they’ve butchered.  They have redefined marriage and redefined the family.  They have pumped atheism and random-change evolution into the minds of children while dredging any scintilla of the knowledge of God out of those same minds.

I’ve written about this before.  But this is different.  When I wrote about it before, Obama was merely posturing; now he has his second term and can ignore the Constitution and impose whatever tyranny he wants without fear of having to face a reelection - that according to his most ardent supporters.   Even as other of his most ardent supporters are publicly calling for Obama to act like the fascist third-world dictator he is and jail the GOP and everyone who disagrees with his “fundamental transformation” of America.

In this shooting in a public school, the government just proved that it can’t even protect people in its very own buildings in its very own system even in a state that has the toughest gun control laws in the entire nation like Connecticut.  And the obvious question is, “If they can’t protect your child in a government school, how are you supposed to protect them in your homes without guns when the police are few and far away?  Do you think your harsh language or your Kung fu is that good, do you?  And yet Democrats are now saying, “Disarm yourselves so you have no possible chance to protect yourselves.  Let Obama protect you.  And if Obama doesn’t protect you, you and your children should die.”

If home invasion terrorists break down the door of my house, I have something that Obama absolutely visceral despises: I have the means to protect my family and my property.  Obama despises that because he wants me powerless, helpless, dependent and weak so that I have to turn to him and to his tyrant State.

Bill O’Reilly put it simply in one of his programs recently: “If somebody is trying to kill me, I want to have the ability to defend myself.”  Liberals don’t want you to have that freedom or that ability.  Just as Stalin didn’t want Russians to have it; Hitler didn’t want Germans to have it; Mao didn’t want Chinese to have it; Pol Pot didn’t want Cambodians to have it, and the dictators of North Korea don’t want their people to have it.

President Obama is surrounded by guns.  If he really wants to take away guns, he should announce that he is starting with his own security rather than remove that security from millions of Americans.  I’m guessing that won’t be his big announcement notifying us about how he’s going to change America.  That’s because he knows that taking away his own security would be foolish; but he’s no more foolish than the cunning mass-murdering dictator Stalin to take away the security from everyone else.

What is happening all around us right now in this nation?  We are letting out dangerous criminals out of prisons by the truckload because our government and our very system are breaking down.  Obama has so massively loaded up the welfare system with debt that he now has to let out hundreds of thousands of criminal predators across the nation.  The logic is: “Don’t worry; Obama will save you from all the violent convicts he just freed from the jails.”  The American people are in a war, only in this war instead of being allowed to fight to defend ourselves and our families Obama is calling upon us to disarm and surrender to the violence that his political philosophy has bequeathed America these last fifty years.

A haunting passage in the Book of Revelation depicts this not-faraway state of affairs:

“Anyone who is destined for prison will be taken to prison. Anyone destined to die by the sword will die by the sword. This means that God’s holy people must endure persecution patiently and remain faithful.”–Revelation 13:10

When the Antichrist comes, there will be no power left on earth that can stop him.  And the reason there will be no power on earth that can stop him will be because liberals will have already taken any power capable of stopping him out of the hands of the people before he comes.

But mark this: There will be terrible times in the God damn America of the last days.  And the same slanderous enemies of God who gave us those terrible times will exploit them to set themselves up for the real horrors that are to come.

The beast is coming, and no, you won’t have any way to protect yourself or your family from the raw tyrant power of his government.

The very things that we’re doing right now is why the beast is coming.

Which is why in other news Iran has under the Obama administration developed the capability to manufacture 24 plutonium bombs – so far.  After the same principles that now compose the Obama administration openly mocked the possibility of Iran developing nuclear weapons when George Bush was president and tried to warn America.  And Armageddon, here we come.

I don’t want to end this on an angry note.  So I’ll say this: after Obama’s reelection, I strongly considered buying a so-called “assault weapon” before Obama and the Democrats take my rights away.  But I have decided not to.  That’s my right as an American: to decide whether I and my family need more security or not.  In our case, we have placed our trust in Jesus Christ and believe that He is coming to take us with Him in the Rapture.  Were it not for that faith, I’d be getting ready for the Antichrist to come and I would believe I needed that assault weapon so when his government came to my door to drag me away, I could at least resist my own execution.  And my question to you is this: what’s YOUR plan to be ready?