Americans, Guns and Common Sense

by Jack

The woman is bright, mostly normal acting and well educated.   By all accounts she’s a good, law abiding citizen. But, she has a passion that is endemic within her brand of politics,  she absolutely fears, hates firearms…she even can’t stand to be in the same house where there are firearms!

Every time a new gun bill is proposed she is elated because they limit the number of firearms available to the public. And of course she always supported candidates who sought more gun control, because it plays right to her core politics. Her personal mission as she sees it, is to rid this nation of the scourge of personally owned firearms… for our own good. And these things are all her right to believe, right or wrong, but her’s the kicker…. she is a member of Congress.Nancy-Pelosi

Long ago she had accepted the extreme progressive rationalization that the 2nd amendment was a mistake, but she limited her public statements to saying that our 2nd amendment was created for State organized militias and for hunting purposes. She detests both, but it plays better with the public to say this disinformation as opposed to her deepest beliefs. Regarding the latter, she is vehemently opposed to the black assault rifle. Why their very color and name belie their murderous purpose or so she thinks. And she’s quick to say, “What kind of hunter needs 30 bullets to kill a deer?’ She sounds almost like an authority, even though in reality she wouldn’t know a butt stock from peep sight.

In an interview, she confessed how anxious she felt being in a house with guns, then she launched into a diatribe where ordinary citizens used military style weapons to murder large numbers of innocent children, and she would go down the list starting with the infamous Sandy Hook shootings. She sounds more like someone with a phobia that a federal authority on gun matters and so do many others of her ilk.

Who is this person? Her name doesn’t matter as much as what she believes. But, if you want a name I could cite any number democrats in Congress that would fit her basic profile. Judy Chu, Lois Capps, Maxine Waters, Barbara lee, Michelle Grisham, Doris Matsui, et al. And there are even more like her that exist in State government. And perhaps millions more like her that vote and support her causes. There are many people, men and women, who mirror her feelings,  it’s becoming almost trendy to be an anti-gun snob.   And this thinking is gaining more traction with every passing day.

What these progressives, these rabid gun-grabbers, absolutely refuse to accept is the idea that our 2nd amendment was never about guns for hunting or State sponsored militias. It was guns for protecting citizens from tyranny.   To be able to meet force with at least an equal force.fd45

They also tend to skate past the fact that evil exist among us and it has always been among us.  Gun legislation, no matter how strict, means absolutely nothing to a demented killer.

Gun legislation ONLY disarms the law abiding people.  It has no effect on determined law-breakers and certainly not thrill killers.  As simple and obvious as this may be, gun grabbers won’t accept it!  And it makes me wonder what’s wrong with them?  Why can’t they see what we see?

It’s a proven fact that excessive speed on our highways accounts for the majority of fatalities. 31% or nearly 14,000 men, women and children die every year from just speed related car crashes. In this one area we have thousands more killed than by gun homicides, even if you include all the justifiable homicides by police and self defense by citizens.  And the traffic fatalities are on the rise while gun related deaths are on the decline and approaching numbers not seen for decades. Gun murders are now at 1981 levels.

Despite the compelling number of traffic deaths there’s not one piece of legislation to place governors (speed limiters) on vehicles.   And rightly so, because people do not want them! They don’t want their freedom impacted by government imposing a speed regulator on their personal vehicle.   They demand the right to control their vehicle as they see fit, and if few others recklessly abuse speed laws they should be the ones punished, not the majority of law abiding drivers.    This is quite rational.  So, collectively what we’re saying is, we’re willing to take our chances in order to preserve this small freedom, even though it may mean some will abuse it.  It’s that important.  Well, if cars are that important, imagine how important is a right must be in the Constitution!

Not one person in Congress would propose such an absurd car law, not even our Congress lady who irrationally hates firearms, yet progressives eagerly embrace encroachments on freedom as defined by the 2nd amendment.   They regularly exploit tragedies for the sake of promoting of their gun grabbing agenda.    They will parse words and twist the meaning of the 2nd amendment and do whatever it takes to achieve their goals. No rhetoric is too absurd and no logic too flawed, if it will advance the seizure of firearms in the United States.

You have to ask yourself, why are they so focused on firearms when there are many other areas of our society that pose far greater risk to public safety?  What is this obsession with seizing guns? The answer is simple, it’s about power. No despotic regime in history has ever encouraged their political opponents to own weapons.  If every Syrian had owned an AK47 their revolution would have been decided in a few a days.   Now imagine if the resistance were only armed with shotguns and bolt action hunting rifles with 5 shot clips…. they would be annihilated.

The right to own and bear arms is akin to the canary in the coal mine.   When we loose this right, we’re in serious trouble and folks we are well on our way to serious trouble!


This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

13 Responses to Americans, Guns and Common Sense

  1. Harold says:

    Alan Gottlieb’s Second Amendment Foundation has racked up an enviable string of legal victories, but they’re taking their next battle to the public instead of the courts. They’re promoting the first annual Guns Save Lives Day on December 15th,2013 a day after the anniversary of the Newtown shootings.

    In advance of GSL Day, they’re asking people to call their 800 number ( 1-800-970-0998) and cast their votes. The SAF’s poll may lack a certain methodological: but their question is a valid one.

  2. Tina says:

    Harold they got my affirmative vote! Thanks for passing this along.

  3. Pie Guevara says:

    Thank you Jack.

  4. Libby says:

    “Gun legislation ONLY disarms the law abiding people.”

    There has never been gun legislation passed anywhere in this country that “disarmed” anybody.

    There has been legislation passed that impedes those among us who feel the desire to be armed to the teeth.

    I am sad to be the one to break it to you, but your fellow citizens question your mental health. Having such people living on the block makes us terribly uncomfortable, and we have decided to enact legislation to monitor your activities.

    It’s a bitch … but there it is.

    • Post Scripts says:

      Libby, do you hear yourself, you’re saying you actually want a government police agency to monitor someone because you feel uncomfortable? Sorry Libby, that may work in a dictatorship, but not here. Your freedom ends where mine begins, comfort has nothing to do with it. But, do not lose sight of this, if a government agency could monitor me – they can also monitor you. If they can sieze something of mine – they can seize something of yours…it’s a slippery slope you’re standing on here. I agree that crazy people should not possess firearms and if the government had enforced the laws a number of terrible shootings would have been prevented. But, it seems you would be happy if they went after the easy targets, people that make you feel uncomfortable, but have done nothing else. That’s scary.

  5. Libby says:

    Caveat: I forgot. If you get yourself 5150’d, we do take away your guns. And … um … tough noogies.

  6. Libby says:

    “…they can also monitor you.”

    I’m perfectly happy to register the gun. I really don’t feel the need for an arsenal, and anybody who does worries me, can just register the lot, suffer restrictions on fire power, and endure the added attention that arsenal-owning will attract to them.

    You will, even so, be armed to the teeth. I really don’t see what you’re complaining about.

    In fact, it’s really not in your interest to be making all this fuss. If you want to keep your privileges, you should demonstrate some serious circumspection … and not do all this boyish crabbing cause the government is placing restrictions upon your kills-per-second.

    • Post Scripts says:

      Libby…you said, “If you want to keep your privileges, you should demonstrate some serious circumspection … and not do all this boyish crabbing cause the government is placing restrictions upon your kills-per-second.” M’dear Libs, it’s not a privilege it’s a right. I know you hate that, but it’s true. If you won’t accept what is outlined in the Constitution, I don’t know what else I could say that would make any difference. Next point: I’ve carried a gun for work and while off duty for over 20 years and during that time I’ve had numerous encounters with danger felons, some of them armed, and some were physical fights. In all that time do you know how many people I’ve killed with a firearm? Not one!

      So, when you talk about placing restrictions on my so-called “kills per second” weapons, you’re talking without any proportion of reality, that’s what our liberal representatives do all the time. Maybe you should run for office? But, I digress, the point being is I have no such kills-per-second weapons and I have made no kills with any type of firearm. Now if you want talk dirks, daggers, meat cleavors, garotes, Ice picks, baseball bats, tire irons, Peruvian blow guns, spear-guns, battle axe, cross bows, Roman short sword, tomahawks and… well, on second thought let’s not even go there…not relevant. And as for registering firearms, we’ve accepted this is the law and it has been for many decades, is this supposed to be a big issue? Not with anyone I know, we just think it’s a waste of time and money. Please don’t confuse monitoring with registering, thats apples to oranges. NSA monitors… you like that?

      Okay, your turn…what say you?

  7. Libby says:

    “Please don’t confuse monitoring with registering, ….”

    On the contrary, to register you weapon is to have your weapon ownership monitored. You do know that the “slippery slope” is a logical fallacy? It is perfectly possible to consent to gun registration and restrict the doings of the NSA.

    Conversely, just because you never have gone on a rampage doesn’t mean you never will. You have the means to wreak a lot more death and destruction than the average citizen, and so we will be keeping an eye on you.

    • Post Scripts says:

      Libby, that’s rather flawed thinking. (chuckle) How will you, a mere civilian, keep an eye on all the police with all their guns and all the retired police with all their guns?

      We’re the ones who keep an eye on you sweetie…didn’t you know that?

      We’re the insiders with all the secrets and we’re always watching…you. Sorry to break it to you so bluntly.

      You see, we’re like a close knit family because of what we do. And we’re much more connected than you might imagine. I know law enforcement people around the world and I belong to an organization that is literally global that has access to unimaginable things. Al Qaeda or even your beloved doesn’t have anything on us! They’re small bit players on the world stage.

      Like the internet, we’re everywhere! We’re in every country, state and city. We’re both the shadowy power and the visible power. Those people you call your representatives rely on us for protection…just as you rely on us. They know they only serves as long as “we” allow them to serve, without us they’re nothing. Where would the president be without the Secret Service?

      Some agencies have taken this to the extreme, for instance look at the Gestapo or the KGB, but those types are rare. So your lesson today is that law enforcement, not the military, not Congress, not the President or any polical party is the real glue that holds your society together. They do the monitoring – on you. Law enforcement is the FBI, SS, CIA, DEA, NSA, Coast Guard, State Police, County and Municipal, we’re also called Interpol, the militsiya, the Cabinari, the Mossad, and a thousand other names, but we all have a common bond that wipes away borders and political differences. We fly the black helicopters, we monitor your phones, your emails, even bank records, medical records, and more than you could ever imagine! Even as I type someone is lurking near you, watching, monitoring…waiting for you to make a false move! This is a global power beyond a lay person’s comprehension. You on the other hand… well, it’s basically just you isn’t it? Hope that puts it all in perspective… now hold that thought and have a nice day.

  8. Libby says:

    “Like the internet, we’re everywhere!”

    And if you misbehave with those firearms WE know right where to find YOU.

    P.S.: As a professional matter, shouldn’t cops stay off the internet? I was catching up on the local news, and it seems to me that posting the odd homophobic rant will reflect poorly upon the profession … and that’s not good.

    • Post Scripts says:

      Yes, that was a mistake to post that, however as I understand it this was a private posting not open to just anyone and furthre it was an internal affairs matter that our councilman allowed to become public. He’s in trouble now.

  9. Libby says:

    There’s no such thing as a “private” posting. You all gotta keep the homophobia, misogyny, and the rest of it in the locker room where it belongs.

Comments are closed.