Posts Tagged ‘gun-free zones’

Who Is Most Responsible For Knife-Wielding Laquan McDonald’s Death In Chicago? The Answer Shouldn’t Be Surprising

December 28, 2015

Now, previously, I had the pure factual evidence that the vast majority of even barely legitimate cases of police officer “executions” had occurred in cities DOMINATED BY LIBERALS.  Which is to say that in case after case of police “death squads” – as the left wants to frame them – it was LIBERAL police officers following LIBERAL guidelines in LIBERAL cities with LIBERAL police bureaucracies commanded by LIBERAL city officials who ran the whole “death squad” from start to finish.

Democrats Run The Highest Crime Cities in America
“Great job voting for one-party rule all you unions and inner-city residents. How’s that working out for you?”

Gun Crime Soaring in These Democrat-Run Cities

Gun Violence is Not a Republican Problem, It’s a Democratic Problem
Obama’s America is broken, the rest of the country isn’t.

Democrats’ Excuses for Black Crime Leads to Rise in Violence

Virtually every mass gun shooting has occurred in a Democrat GUN-FREE ZONE where the murderers know their victims will be sheep-like and utterly defenseless.  And the same phenomenon is equally true of cities with the strictest gun laws where every gun-wielding criminal has that confidence that his victim almost certainly will not have a gun because Democrats took guns away from every law-abiding citizen leaving only those who don’t follow laws to have firearms.

There are ALL KINDS of crises that DEMOCRATS have imposed on our nation’s police: cops are TERRIFIED to be proactive, to do their jobs. As a result, it is the COPS who are fearful while the CRIMINALS are emboldened.  This is in the very least a “deeply disturbing situation” because it will only be resolved by a fed-up nation finally hunting down every single liberal with dogs and burning them alive.

So when Democrats are in power, law-abiding citizens can only cower in their homes and hope the police show up.  But the police are just as scared because they now have the assurance that they will be arrested and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law if they dare to do their jobs.

And they’ve got this crap to deal with as mobs mob them if they dare get out of their squad cars.

The result because of Democrat thug tactics is summed up in this US News & World Report title:

Outrage at Police Could Bring Return of Dark Ages of Crime

I want you to note that that article was PROPHETIC because it was written LAST YEAR, ONE YEAR AGO.  And look at what’s happened to our streets as a result of these morally depraved Democrat policies that have declared war on law enforcement as liberals in crisis after crisis sided with their core special interest groups over the police.  And we live in an age of coward Democrat to the degree that Democrats CAN NOT SAY that “All Lives Matter.”  They HAVE to ONLY say “Black Lives Matter.”

But the problem is that if “all lives don’t matter,” “Black Lives” aren’t worth roach poop, either.  So pop your popcorn and watch the killings explode BECAUSE of the Democrat Party and their leftist political thug organizations like Black Lives Matter.

A couple of snippets from that above article:

  • Some see the current mood of hardened positions and distrust as reminiscent of a dark era of crime 20-30 years ago in cities like New York, when police barricaded themselves in squad cars or stations out of concern for their own safety. The neighborhoods, meanwhile, crumbled.
  • Without a shift in the national dialogue, the NYPD, as well as other departments across the U.S., may back away from the current approach of policing with a focus on keeping communities safe and free of even petty infractions, which many believe serves as the key to ending widespread crime.
  • The subsequent backlash, particularly those from within minority communities who feel police departments don’t represent their interests, has forced some officers within the NYPD to reconsider whether such risks are worth it.“Without the support of the community, the average police officer is not going to go out of his way,” says Pete Segreti, a former NYPD officer who retired last year after 28 years, serving in a variety of assignments from beat patrols up to the Joint Terrorism Task Force. “He’s going to have a hands-off style of policing. He’s not going to go and be a proactive officer, which is what these communities need.”
  • The tense of fear created by the recent Brooklyn shooting is compounded by concerns that proactive attitudes could lead to a grand jury and subsequent accusations. There’s also a belief among some in the police community that politicians no longer stand with them in unison, an issue that flared recently with charges from police unions and leaders such as former Commissioner Ray Kelly that New York Mayor Bill DeBlasio actively campaigned for election on a so-called anti-police platform.“The backlash is going to be where officers are just going to drive around in the car, and when the radio tells you to go somewhere, that’s where they’re going to go,” Segreti says, offering an old cop joke: “‘Blue Flower Pots.’ They stand on a corner, they were out there, basically, and they just stood there. They’d take a report, and that was it.”

Black Lives don’t matter one flying DAMN to any Democrat.  If black lives actually DID matter to Democrats and liberals, they would get off demonizing the police who PROTECT black lives and fixating their attention and demands for reform on the 93 percent of black victims were killed by blacks according to Politifact.

The US News & World Report article ends with this sober indictment of the Democrat Party demagogue machine and the Obama administration:

“They use force. That is the core function of the police. That’s why police get called, is to deal with something that isn’t supposed to be happening, and police can take care of the situation because they can tell someone what to do, or use force on them,” he says. “That is inherently controversial and problematic.”

“Given the nature of police [officers’] occupation, it’s just very difficult to do on a sustained basis.”

This harsh truth has been exacerbated by the mandate passed down from the federal government to city police forces to help protect America against further terrorist attacks. Police funding has now been dedicated to militarizing the force, and prioritizing quick-response training, causing fear among communities – like Ferguson – who don’t feel they understand who police officers are truly targeting.

The Brown and Garner deaths, compounded by the shooting in Brooklyn, has created a “one-two punch” that will damage police officers’ faith in the merits of engaging the community, he says.

And it could create permanent damage.

“When you get a general sense in the community that nobody cares,” warns Gosselin, “watch out. Because that’s when the real serious crimes are about to occur.”

Because of Democrat Party demagoguery, police are the ones who are scared and the criminals are the ones who feel emboldened and safe.

All that said and all that being completely true, it turns out that there is another, more direct connection between liberal Democrats and the outrageous shooting of Laquan McDonald.

I just came across something that amounts to direct evidence of the left being to blame in this egregious case of Laquan McDonald.  I came across an article from the Los Angeles Times that I shall reprint in its entirety to showcase one question that I want you to ask yourself as you look it over: why didn’t the Chicago police officers have Tasers?

Chicago police were seeking Taser when officer shot Laquan McDonald, recording shows
By Megan Crepeau and Grace Wong
December 25, 2015, 6:31 PM |REPORTING FROM CHICAGO|REPORTING FROM CHICAGO

On an October night in 2014, a Chicago police officer calmly radioed:

“Can someone get us a Taser? We’re at 40th and Keeler. This guy, ah, kind of walking away, he has a knife in his hand.”

Four minutes later, 17-year-old Laquan McDonald lay dying two blocks away, shot 16 times by an officer as the teenager held a knife and walked down the middle of the road.

Until this week, the public had seen only a silent video of Officer Jason Van Dyke shooting McDonald. On Wednesday, the city provided some of the sounds from that night, releasing redacted radio traffic between a dispatcher and officers at the scene.

Two officers had been trailing McDonald for nearly half a mile, from a trucking yard where he was allegedly breaking into vehicles and then through a Burger King parking lot. Officers called for a Taser as McDonald headed east on Pulaski Road.

“Anybody have a Taser?” the dispatcher called out. “Looking for a Taser; armed offender.”

A minute and a half passes as the officers follow McDonald. “Walking towards Pulaski from Keeler, eastbound on 40th Street. Again, armed with knife,” an officer says.

A minute later, the dispatcher repeats the call for a Taser. “Anybody close yet?” she asks. “Asking for a Taser for armed offender with a knife.”

Within seconds, an officer radios: “Popped our tire on our car, squad.” Police have said McDonald used his knife to slash the front tire of a squad car trying to block his path.

What follows is about a minute of other squad cars radioing that they are on their way to the scene. “Let me know when he’s in custody, guys,” the dispatcher says.

Eight seconds later, an officer yells out over his radio, “Shots fired by the police! It’s shots fired by the police, squad. Get the ambulance over here.”

“You guys OK?” the dispatcher asks.

“Ten-four, everything’s fine,” an officer radios back. “Roll the ambulance over here.”

The teen was alive when paramedics arrived but died on the way to the hospital, authorities have said.

According to the video, Van Dyke and his partner arrived 10 minutes after the first call. Their weapons were drawn as they stepped from their Chevrolet Tahoe. Within six seconds of exiting the police car, Van Dyke opened fire. Fifteen seconds later, he had emptied his 16-round handgun, authorities said. His partner asked him to hold his fire as Van Dyke reloaded, authorities said.

Van Dyke was charged with first-degree murder last month hours before the city finally released the video.

The city also released a copy of a 911 call earlier that night reporting that McDonald was stealing radios from trucks in a parking lot.

“Hi, I need a cop over here on 41st and Kildare,” the caller says. “I have a parking lot full of trucks, and I have a guy right here who stole the radios.”

“Are you holding this person?” a dispatcher asks.

“Yeah, he’s here,” the caller says.

After asking for directions, the dispatcher says, “OK, we’ll send the police. We will send the police.”

McDonald fled the parking lot, and responding officers saw him walking with a knife, according to police.

In releasing the audio files, the city’s Office of Emergency Management and Communications said it had redacted “private” portions of the radio traffic. That could include names, telephone numbers, home addresses and license plate numbers, the agency explained.

Crepeau and Wong are reporters for the Chicago Tribune.

In the famous words of Porky Pig, “That’s all, folks.”  That’s the whole article.

I just want you to understand how I read: I see a title that says police were seeking a Taser.  I read the story about the police dispatch looking all over the city for a damn Taser.  I read the criminal suspect is gunned down while they are still frantically looking for a Taser.  But the reporters who wrote the article inexplicably never bother to mention just why it is that the Chicago Police Department did not have Tasers for their officers who would otherwise be forced to use deadly force.

So why didn’t the offices have Tasers?  The left is completely silent.

I can show you the demand of Black Lives Matter activists in another recent case involving a black woman named Dontay Ivy:

The resolution also called for the end of Tasers used by Albany officers. Council members said the Tasing policy is something they can look into.

I can show you other cities where leftist activists called for bans on Tasers:

Police: Activists call on council for Taser controls
By Marty Levine

Outcry over whether police are using Taser stun-guns appropriately — or whether they ought to use them at all — continues to fuel calls for greater police transparency and accountability.

Local activists are calling on the police to make changes to internal rules that govern how and when Tasers may be used. They also question the recent Allegheny County medical examiner’s report that found no involvement of Tasers in the death of Andre Thomas. The Swissvale resident was hit with the Taser’s immobilizing electrical current three times during an encounter with borough police on Aug. 5. On Sept. 24, his cause of death was determined to relate only to cocaine intoxication. […]

The leftist perspective money-quote is near the end of the story:

“The most serious problem with Tasers,” Meieran concludes, “is that they are being used for pain compliance, which is nothing but a euphemism for torture.”

I can show you the leftist organization Amnesty International decrying the use of Tasers by law enforcement.  That had been an ongoing Amnesty International campaign going back years.

I can show you the attitude toward Tasers from the Chicago left back in 2010:

“The Chicago Police Department is dramatically expanding its use of Tasers, adding several hundred more and putting them in the hands of patrol officers for the first time, officials said Wednesday.

“The ‘stun guns’ will go in every squad car to give front-line beat officers a more effective way to protect themselves and calm a disturbance.

“But the electrical devices have caused controversy nationwide, with debates about their safety and lawsuits filed on behalf of dozens of people, some in the Chicago area, who have died after being ‘Tased.’

“Chicago police laid out their plans just hours after a 31-year-old south suburban man was pronounced dead after Midlothian police used a Taser to subdue him. Jaesun Ingles, of Riverdale, who was on parole, was stunned with the Taser after he tried to swallow a plastic bag that police believed contained drugs, resisted arrest and ran from officers, Midlothian police said. An autopsy by the Cook County medical examiner’s office Wednesday was inconclusive, pending further investigation.”

So just what the hell happened to all of those Tasers???  Why didn’t the police have any when they clearly needed them to avoid the very shooting that happened that the left is so batpoop about???

So I’m simply going to go ahead and call out what appears to be the rather obvious truth: the Chicago Police Department officer shot that suspect – who was CLEARLY a criminal and had already USED his knife in a violent way against police cruisers – because the left had previously removed their ability to respond with non-lethal force.

And I have a feeling that the officer who finally emptied his magazine into Laquan McDonald was watching this thug-punk walking freely down the street with cops POWERLESS to respond to him due to the “mystery of lawlessness” being unleashed by Democrats and something snapped and he said, “F#%@ this, I’ve had enough.”

And now we’re seeing the consequences.

Or let me put it another way from the left: “We’re going to take away you evil cops ability to use anything other than lethal force against hard-core criminals; THEN we’re going to demonize you for using the lethal force we left you with no choice but to use.

I would love to be allowed to perform the following experiment with a liberal.  For the record, I am a big, tall, powerful weightlifter (like many “superfelon” perps from prison weight training as we’ve long known).  Here’s the experiment: I get to come at you with a knife and the complete freedom to use it to KILL you.  You have your liberal PC words and your gun.  You frankly shouldn’t be allowed to have a gun, really, given your attitude toward guns, but you get one armed with blanks.  And ALL you have to do for me to stop my act of stabbing and slashing you to death is to draw that weapon, aim it at me, and start pulling the trigger.  Because otherwise the exercise is for keeps and I’m going to do a “snow-angel” in your blood and entrails right next to your hacked-to-death corpse.

Mind you, you COULD have possibly had an alternative to using that gun on me, BUT YOUR FELLOW DAMN LIBERALS TOOK IT AWAY FROM YOU.

Now, I’m going to bet that the vast majority of you liberals, as stupid and as foolish as you are, would draw that weapon and point it at me and start pulling the trigger to save your lives.

Too bad you vile roaches won’t let police do the same thing.

I have to mock the left again as a liberal online outfit runs an article titled, “This Is How UK Police Stop Someone With A Knife.”  The United Kingdom’s secret is to use TASERS.  You  know, the kind that the very same anti-gun left won’t let OUR police use.  While they scream at them for every single shooting.

And so the American political left literally is cynically and wickedly creating more police shootings so they can demagogue them, just as Obama is allowing terrorist attacks in the United States so he can demagogue guns and the good American people who own them.

Black Lives Matter was born out of a pure liberal lie.  It was born out of what we now have DOCUMENTED to have been a fabricated story of a white police officer shooting a black suspect who tried to surrender and said, “Hands up, don’t shoot.” It was an absolute, morally depraved lie from the left.

There are more than 900,000 sworn police officers in the U.S.  They do an incredibly dangerous job and are forced to enter tense and frantic situations where people – who may or may not be armed with deadly weapons – are acting at their very worst.  They are forced to make snap decisions which could end with one of them dead or an innocent dead as well as a criminal dead.  With that many police officers in the MILLIONS of situations they face, there will ALWAYS be some situation where the left can demonize a police officer somewhere for possibly doing something wrong in that split second that he has to react in the very worst situations any imperfect human being can face.

And like roaches, Democrat activists are swarming all over every single one of them.

And like a terrorist attack where the terrorists only have to succeed once to make a giant impact, it only takes ONE situation with ONE cop for Democrat activists to demonize and delegitimize the ENTIRETY of law enforcement.

On its face, it is seemingly bizarre that Democrats would attack the police who represent government law and order.  But here’s the thing: the police don’t represent “government” at a high enough level for Democrats.  Democrats hate our Constitution, hate the states that are the basis for our constitutional representative republic, and therefore hate the fact that states, counties and cities have any right whatsoever to be allowed to do ANYTHING they don’t like.  What they want is an Obama police force that an Obama can exploit to his political ideology; they want a “People’s Commissariat for Internal Affairs” like the Soviet Union had.  And they won’t stop for anything less.

What we are watching here is nothing short of last-days “mystery of lawlessness” overtaking the United States of America and being used as a political war tactic against the American people.  We now have a Democrat Party that has officially turned against police and sided with the most lawless members of society in order to gin up the hate and fear of their political base so they will vote.  We now have a President who is openly exploiting every terrorist attack in the United States – which are all actually examples of his failure to keep us safe and protect us – as a political weapon against the 2nd Amendment of the Constitution and the American people who rely on our Constitution to be safe from crime and from the tyrants who right now inhabit our government.

 

 

Advertisements

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

February 2, 2013

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:

Edward Scissorhands

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

January 28, 2013

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.