Of course we knew this was coming, But the Senator from Tennessee was going to have none of it with Piers Morgan. Tenn. Senator Asks Piers Morgan When He’s Moving Back To England.
A Tennessee state senator is being slammed for insensitivity to the Boston Marathon bombing victims after posting an illustration of a pressure cooker – like the ones used in last week’s deadly attack – to mock gun control advocates.
“Here comes Feinstein again” he titled the post in a reference to Sen. Dianne Feinstein, who authored an assault weapons ban in the wake of the massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School.
CNN host Piers Morgan more than met his match in Tennessee Sen. Stacey Campfield Wednesday night. At the close of the interview, the state lawmaker asked Morgan, “Now that gun control has failed, Piers, I’m wondering when are you going to move back to England?”
Here is a feel good story for a Friday. The ladies out on the range. What could be better? Here we go:
What’s unique on this range is that all the gun owners are members of A Girl and A Gun Women’s Shooting League—and they’re all firing AR-15 semiautomatic rifles.
“I think there is a small bit of status for a gal that says she owns an AR-15,” said Juliana Crowder, president and co-founder of A Girl and a Gun. “Especially right now, since they’re so hard to get a hold of.” ( Read more: Aurora Shooting Survivor: ‘People Kill, Not Guns’)
Recent attempts to pass stricter gun laws are having an unintended effect: AR-15s are flying off store shelves. The rifles and their accessories account for roughly a billion dollars of the $4 Billion U.S. Gun Industry.
“The AR-15 is becoming extremely popular among women,” said Crowder. “Some women are very gadgety or want to be personalized, they’re painting them, getting these different grips and colors, and stylizing it. It’s very popular because they can build it to their own specifications– use it for fun, and feel pride of ownership in it.”
Crowder’s own AR-15 is purple—the same color as her former dance studio. An ex-dance teacher, Crowder now focuses her time on her all-female shooting league. In just two years it’s grown to 28 chapters in eleven states. (Read more:New York’s Assault Weapon Registration Begins)
“My favorite thing about my AR-15 rifle is the confidence I feel when I shoot it at the range,” said Girl and a Gun member Jennifer Galle. “It gives me a sense that I can defend myself, that I can do this, and it brings me peace of mind knowing that this is a weapon that I can use for my own personal protection.” (Read More: Newtown Mom Makes Heart-Wrenching Plea on U.S. Gun Laws)
“We know we can be safe,” Crowder agrees. “We can be efficient. We can be effective to defend ourselves with that particular tool as our husbands and our fathers can.”
Peril from ‘patriots’ reads the headline from the LA Times. They claim more dangerous than International terrorists..The survey going on at the link now is reading “Should we worry about patriot groups”? is reading 95 percent no, 5 percent yes. Wander over if you care to share your opinion. In what has to be the most absurd piece of writing, the “Neanderthal” patriots love their guns is really the gist of it. So if the government grabs them, we will be so much better for it. Keep in mind, there were no illegal guns at Waco.
The U.S. needs to keep a close watch on the growing threat of home-grown extremist groups
Patriot groups first began surfacing after the massacre of a bizarre sect by federal agents in Waco, Texas, in the early 1990s.
Just a reminder below:
There are, in increasingly frightening numbers, cells of angry men in the United States preparing for combat with the U.S. government. They are usually heavily armed, blinded by an intractable hatred, often motivated by religious zeal.They’re not jihadists. They are white, right-wing Americans, nearly all with an obsessive attachment to guns, who may represent a greater danger to the lives of American civilians than international terrorists.The Southern Poverty Law Center, which has been tracking hate groups for 30 years, released its latest report on the growth of these organizations this week. Its findings were, to say the least, alarming.
Patriot groups are motivated by a host of anti-government attitudes, but their primary focus is guns. They are convinced that the government is out to seize their weapons, even though most legislation is focused on keeping guns out of the hands of criminals or restricting the types of weapons that can be sold. Many are also united by belief in an outlandish one-world government conspiracy theory positing that the United Nations is poised to strip away American property rights and impose socialism on us all.
The typical patriot acts within his free-speech and 2nd Amendment rights, and in fact most patriot activity consists of venting steam by meeting with like-minded Neanderthals and firing off blog posts threatening civil war. (So now they tell us).
This video compares the use of AR-15 to a shotgun by the little lady! After Biden explains the advantage of using a shotgun, a demonstration is given. Which one would you prefer? Keep in mind there are plenty of women who know how to shoot and have been given proper training.
I found the essay and video that follows over at Adriennes’s blog. Matt Bracken: Democidethe elimination of a despised group by a government. It is a long essay, but one to save for the historical record. There is no better explanation for the 2nd amendment, and what can go wrong when we lose this right. But first, a short clip from Orwell, and then a clip from the post.
From the 2003 Television docudrama: George Orwell – A Life in Pictures
Please share the essay and video as widely as possible on RKBA and other freedomista blogs and websites. Copy it all, save it all, I expect a serious effort by the commie rat bastards to squelch this message, especially the video.
Matt Bracken: Democidethe elimination of a despised group by a government.
Democide is the elimination of a despised group by a government. It includes genocide, politicide, and other forms of state-sponsored mass murder. The hated minority headed for extermination may be defined by religious, racial, political, class, cultural or other attributes. Between 200 and 260 million people were the victims of democide in the 20th century, several times more than were killed in international wars during that period.
The first widely studied modern democide occurred in Turkey between 1915 and 1923, when the Turkish government decided to eliminate the country’s Christian minority, primarily ethnic Armenians and Greeks who had Turkish roots extending back to before the Islamic conquest. Two million Christians were murdered on forced marches into deserts without water or food. This democide occurred in view of Western reporters, who took photographs and posted contemporary wire reports. The fact that the democide was known outside Turkey did not deter the Turkish leaders.
The Armenian Genocide, as it has become known, was also widely known inside Turkey, where the majority Muslim population either supported or at least passively tolerated the democide. It was impossible to miss the sight of thousands of Christians at a time being rounded up and force-marched through towns and into the burning deserts on one-way trips.
Stalin and Hitler both noticed the lack of world reaction to the democide of Turkish Christians and planned accordingly. In the Soviet Union, Stalin’s henchmen purged millions of “kulaks” (farmers deemed to have too much wealth), intellectuals, businessmen, and anyone who had ever traveled outside the USSR or even had had contact with foreigners.
In Germany and Nazi-occupied Europe, Hitler proceeded with his own “final solution to the Jewish problem.” Where the German nationalsocialists simply eliminated Jews as quickly as possible in mass graves and gas chambers, Stalin’s international socialists deported their “class enemies” to Siberia, where they were put to work in Gulag slave-labor camps, with years of torture through cold, malnutrition and brutal working conditions preceding the release of eventual death.
Stalin also devised another means of democide when he ordered the forced starvation of the Ukrainians, and five million more innocent victims were added to his totals. In Communist China seventy million people were the victims of democide, murdered by overwork in slave-labor camps, by direct execution, and by regional forced starvation. Millions more were victims of democide in Pakistan, Cambodia, Rwanda, North Korea, and many other countries.
Democide, as the name implies, does not happen in the dark of night without any awareness of it in the country where it occurs. The Turks knew the Christians were being mass murdered. Average Germans were fully aware of what was happening to the Jews between 1938 and 1945, and a large majority either actively supported or at least tolerated it. (I strongly recommend reading Hitler’s Willing Executioners: Ordinary Germans and the Holocaust, by Daniel Goldhagen, to fully appreciate the wholehearted German support for the Jewish democide.)
Today, we sometimes hear that the Second Amendment has outlived its usefulness, that it is a relic of our barbaric past and is no longer needed in the modern era. Horrific mass shootings by deranged individuals are cited as the primary reason for Americans to surrender their most effective firearms and rely solely on a state monopoly of force for their protection. This government-dependent attitude is shortsighted, historically ignorant, and extremely dangerous.
In each of the cases cited above, a necessary preliminary step on the road to democide was the confiscation of privately owned firearms. In Turkey, “reasonable” gun control laws enacted in 1911 permitted the democide of two million Turkish Christians a few years later. In Germany, the “commonsense” 1928 gun control laws of the Weimar Republic preceded Hitler’s Holocaust by a decade.
The Weimar politicians did not intend for their gun control laws to lead to the slaughter of millions of people, but it is an historical fact that those gun control laws permitted the Nazis to carry out their Holocaust. How? By making it economically and militarily feasible to round up and mass murder entire towns without any significant resistance.
In fact, the Nazis quickly learned that they needed only a hundred ordinary military policemen to exterminate towns of a thousand Polish Jews in a single day. Contrast that fact with the Warsaw Ghetto uprising. If the Jews had not first been disarmed, using previous gun registration lists as a map for confiscation, the Holocaust would not have been possible.
Likewise in the Soviet Union and in every other case, democide was preceded by “reasonable and commonsense” firearms registration, followed eventually by gun confiscation and then by the extermination of a despised minority population.
During the past two centuries, while America has avoided tyranny, Turkey, Germany, Russia and the other nations mentioned above have spasmodically lurched between monarchs, democratically elected leaders, and often quite popular dictators, allowing them frequent opportunities to commit democide against their unwanted minorities.
The situation is fundamentally different in America, because we have a centuries-old tradition of private firearms ownership guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the Constitution. The Second Amendment does not “grant” us this right; it puts into writing our God-given natural right to effective self-defense, including armed defense against tyranny.
“Pure democracy” has been described as two wolves and a sheep voting on their dinner plans. The two wolves might see this election as an expression of their highest democratic values, but for the outnumbered sheep, pure democracy is highly problematic. On the other hand, a republic has been described as two wolves and a well-armed sheep voting on dinner plans. The well-armed sheep can veto the outcome of the dinner election simply by brandishing its firearm. The sheep has inherent rights as a sovereign individual, including the right to self-defense, a right that cannot be stripped away by a simple majority vote.
So, when a democratically elected American president speaks of “fundamentally transforming” his country, and of his need to act outside the constitutional framework, the population should be on guard. When that leader begins to push for strict new “commonsense and reasonable” gun control laws, including national firearms registration in the name of “public safety,” the citizenry should be on high alert.
Can any glib politician, pundit or ivory tower academic give us an ironclad guarantee that tyranny will never arise in the United States? Not even a popular tyranny, like those of Ataturk, Stalin, Hitler or Mao? Can anyone assure us that today’s “commonsense” gun registration lists will not be used for future gun confiscation? Of course not.
The future may be unknowable, but history is well understood, and American gun owners know and understand the history of democide in the 20th century. That is why they will never accede to what is currently portrayed in the predominantly left-wing mainstream media as “commonsense and reasonable” new gun control laws.
While American gun owners lament and regret the inescapable fact that deranged individuals in a free country may on rare occasions murder a dozen or a score of unarmed victims, they also understand that government democide murders by the million. And in every case, tyrants can conduct these democides only after disarming their unwanted minorities, rendering them helpless to resist murderous government pogroms.
American gun owners will never permit this historical pattern to be repeated in their country, because they understand that the government’s heavy hand will be kept in check only as long as they are armed. Ask yourself: Were the Armenians, the Jews or the kulaks treated better, or worse, after they were disarmed and rendered helpless by their oppressors, who thereafter held an absolute government monopoly on armed violence? The answer is too obvious to require elaboration.
Naive utopians and other “low-information voters” might not understand the historical pattern, and we don’t expect them to bother to learn it. Cynical and dishonest “progressives” who do understand the historical pattern cannot yet reveal their ultimate goal of creating a disarmed and helpless American citizenry. Nevertheless, millions of Americans understand their hidden aim with crystal clarity, seeing through the false sincerity of power-hungry leftist politicians who are actually Marxist wolves dressed in Democrat sheep’s clothing—for now.
But unless and until these secret Stalinists and sundry other “progressives” can figure out a way to disarm Americans, they cannot execute their historically standard final solution to the “reactionaries-standing-in-the-way-of-utopia” problem. And this is a thorny problem for them, because tens of millions of Americans, disbelieving their deceitful bromides, will stick to their guns no matter what.
Unlike the Armenians, Jews, kulaks and other exterminated peoples, Americans who support the Second Amendment will never be disarmed quietly by government edict prior to meekly boarding a train to a socialist “reeducation” camp. They will not be taken at government gunpoint on a one-way forced march into a desert or a Zyklon-B “delousing shower,” simply because they foolishly agreed to be disarmed by their future oppressors in the dubious name of “public safety.”
If American “progressives” truly intend to disarm the American people, they will have to do it the hard way, by taking their bullets first, one at a time. As the 300 Spartans announced to the vastly larger Persian army at Thermopylae, “Molon Labe!”
Under the guise of curbing the “radicalization” of U.S. citizens and identifying and purging potentially violent persons from the Internet, the White House has initiated the creation of a new interagency working group to address what it calls a growing problem.
When I read this, I thought now, just who is it they want to purge? Now that Obama and crowd are purging or reassigning the military leadership themselves- The dissapearing Generals- of those who disagree with our “Emperor”, it makes sense. It reminded me of the post West Point Think Tank warns of dangerous “Conservatives”
The report issued this week by the Combating Terrorism Center at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, N.Y., is titled “Challengers from the Sidelines: Understanding America’s Violent Far-Right.” And just who are these “Violent Far-Right” folks?
It says anti-federalists “espouse strong convictions regarding the federal government, believing it to be corrupt and tyrannical, with a natural tendency to intrude on individuals’ civil and constitutional rights. Finally, they support civil activism, individual freedoms, and self government. Extremists in the anti-federalist movement direct most their violence against the federal government and its proxies in law enforcement.”
Now that we have this point cleared up, let’s get on to the story.
The White House issued a fact sheet delineating the broad objectives of the plan.
The interagency group will be headed by Quintan Wiktorowicz, the current White House senior director for community partnerships on the national security staff. The new group will be called The Interagency Working Group to Counter Online Radicalization and will be charged with the implementation of an Internet safety program to address online violent extremism.
Wiktorowiczs stated,
Violent extremist groups ─ like Al Qaeda and its affiliates and adherents, violent supremacist groups, and violent “sovereign citizens” ─ are leveraging online tools and resources to propagate messages of violence and division. These groups use the Internet to disseminate propaganda, identify and groom potential recruits, and supplement their real-world recruitment efforts. Some members and supporters of these groups visit mainstream fora to see whether individuals might be recruited or encouraged to commit acts of violence, look for opportunities to draw targets into private exchanges, and exploit popular media like music videos and online video games. Although the Internet offers countless opportunities for Americans to connect, it has also provided violent extremists with access to new audiences and instruments for radicalization.”
The Obama Administration has already caused the alarm bells to ring on several occasions as the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) released several internal memos referring to conservative Christians who believe the Bible, pro-life citizens who are against abortion, Tea Party activists, and political conservatives who believe in a strict adherence to the U.S. Constitution as “potential homegrown terrorists.”
And in the current gun rights debate, sovereign citizens have gone on the record to oppose the Obama administration’s all-out assault on the Second Amendment, vowing to disobey any law that would violate their unfettered rights to keep and bear firearms.. More at Examiner
Just a reminder for old times sake about defining a “Terrorist”. By the way, Paul’s amendment was defeated.
Sure, the Police will always be on our side, and never turn on us. The same with the Military. Oopsie.. anyone remembers the Kent State massacre? First the video of the Police Chief, then Kent State video.Students unarmed, shot down by the military Just a reminder for the youngins.
San Diego Police Chief William Lansdowne is fully supportive of the Obama/Feinstein gun grab, and says if lawmakers play it right Americans can be completely disarmed within “a generation.”
Lansdowne has gone on record saying: “I could not be more supportive of the president for taking the position he has. I think it’s courageous with the politics involved in this process. [And] I think it’s going to eventually make the country safer.”
He made it clear that it may take “a generation,” but new laws could eventually take all guns off the streets.
Here is a video of the Chief’s interview on the local PBS station, during which he stresses his support for the President’s position on gun control.
San Diego Police Chief William Lansdowne talks to KPBS about his support of gun laws. “I could not be more supportive of the president for taking the position he has,” Lansdowne says. Read more: KPBS
Sometimes when the night seems the darkest, a ray of light may be on the horizon. Obama’s crowd is getting so insulated, so full of themselves, that this gun control issue may be a gift to us. As we await to hear the numerous Executive Orders that are to be bestowed upon us, I came across this article. Indeed, if ever there was an issue that will rally the troops around the flag, this is it. So let them have at it. And let these new Marxist’s to be, run on taking our guns and ammo. 2016 will be a very good year. 2014 as well. Rahm Emanuel warned about it. But our arrogant petty little man thinks he can have his way. With Andrew Cuomo and Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley going full tilt on guns, they misjudge the mood across the vast reaches of middle America. You might want to check out my previous post to see what Rand Paul has to say about our “King”.
The gun lobby is just too strong, and the popular resistance to major new firearms restrictions just too ingrained, for reform to happen. At the same time, though, several high-profile Democrats who’ve been mentioned as 2016 presidential contenders are betting on a different read of the situation. As they see it, Newtown has truly changed things, making it not just politically feasible to broach new constraints, but perhaps even politically imperative.
If one needs further proof that the landscape has shifted and become far more complex, consider Rahm Emanuel, who as much as any other leading Democratic warned the party away from the gun control issue after 2000. He proudly recruited pro-gun rights House candidates in 2006, and strongly discouraged Attorney General Eric Holder and others in the Obama administration from pressing gun control in the president’s firm term (“shut the fuck up” on the issue, he reportedly declared).
..There was precious little persuasion of that sort from Emanuel and others in recent years — in fact, the opposite. Now, it’s coming from the likes of Cuomo, O’Malley, and Hickenlooper — none of them political dummies or lost-cause radicals. For once, there actually is a national conversation.. MoreThe New Republic
I tortured myself to watch the whole Presser of our Leader in Chief. Of course, I was waiting to hear his new adventure with our guns and ammo and he didn’t disappoint. If you want to read the whole miserable experience Full Transcript here
So here is a clip by this arrogant man. By the way, it is a bonus day. And boy do we cling to our God and Guns now don’t you say!! Another comment:
“But it seems as if what’s motivating and propelling at this point some of the House Republicans is more than simply deficit reduction. They have a particular vision about what government should and should not do, so they are suspicious about government’s commitments, for example, to make sure that seniors have decent health care as they get older. They have suspicions about Social Security. They have suspicions about whether government should make sure that kids in poverty are getting enough to eat or whether we should be spending money on medical research.”
Government cannot control and confiscate our weapons, the next step is controlling ammo. I read where a congressman said, ok, we can’t ban guns, but the Second amendment didn’t say anything about ammo. That rang a bell, so I went to my “way back”machine and got this post from August 2010. It didn’t go anywhere, but you bet this will be back on the front burner.
A gun without a shell is useless.. Bring it on EPA. Just in time for the November Election.
Remember this is a no-win situation for us, because bullets made of materials other than lead are often considered armor piercing by law. Copper is your basic material, and copper is expensive, and has much poorer performance properties than lead.
You can read the petition in favor of banning ammunition here, and if you can leave a public comment on it here. The EPA will be taking comments on this through October 31 to coincide nicely with the November 2 election. After health care and immigration, apparently the White House doesn’t feel it has sufficiently irked voters enough. Bringing the NRA and upset gun owners into the mix should really do wonders for Democrats at the ballot box. And we sure told them in 2010 didn’t we!
Bonus time. Two posts today! A list of the newspaper folk’s location that posted gun owners locations.
