Today I am particularly inflamed over a Daily KOS link I found on the Pro-Gun Rights section of Reddit, which if you did not know, is a link aggregation site holding itself out to be the “front page of the internet” that is divided into thousands of categories called “subreddits.” I do not frequent Daily
On 22 May 2013 two men beheaded a British soldier in public in the middle of a London neighborhood named Woolwich. If you follow this link you can see a video of one of these men post-murder covered in blood and holding two edged weapons while he rants about how him and his partner are
Another Public Shooting In America Over the weekend there was another tragic public shooting in America, this time in New Orleans during a Mother’s Day parade. Thankfully nobody was killed when three gunmen opened fire on the crowd at the parade, although seventeen people were injured, including two children. I could never truly imagine being
L.A. Times Describes Copious Intelligence Failings Before Boston Bombing, Still Asks You To Forfeit Liberty For Security
From the L.A. Times on May 9, 2013: Intro: This Is How The L.A. Times Tricks You I am very glad that today we will examine a specimen from the L.A. Times, a national newspaper written thirty miles away from my home, but it might as well be written on another planet. Titled “Intelligence Report
Today we have a story from Glenn Beck’s The Blaze carried by the left-leaning Yahoo News on May 6 2013, which is surprising in itself – but even more surprising is that I was able to read a pro-gun piece on Yahoo News. This story confirms through the study of government data a number of
I hope that you had a chance to see this picture of Mr. Obama on Father’s Day playing toy guns with his family, because it could not have come at a more opportune time with American children being conditioned to fear guns and be unsafe with them. No Pro-2A Speech For Public Schoolchildren If you
The last few months of enduring the Obama Administration’s War on the Constitution has been as tumultuous as I can recall any month of President O to-date. It seems like we have been and still are experiencing a maelstrom of scandals that overwhelm the American people while numbing us with each additional betrayal of our
If this doesn’t prove to you that people who design magazine capacity laws are sick and wish to endanger the lives of law-abiding citizens, I don’t know what will. Having 8 rounds in your magazine as opposed to 7 does not make you more of an evil person, it just allows you to be more
The last few months of enduring the Obama Administration’s War on the Constitution has been as tumultuous as I can recall any month of President O to-date. It seems like we have been and still are experiencing a maelstrom of scandals that overwhelm the American people while numbing us with each additional betrayal of our confidences.
Let us summarize these most recent scandals with bulleted points:
- United States Attorney General Eric Holder is under investigation for perjury, and will be investigating the Internal Revenue Service for an operation that specifically targeted conservative groups for audit, including groups with the words “patriot” in their names, those that wanted to promote “a better place to live,” and those that educate people about the U.S. Constitution (talk about evil, disgusting groups right?);
- Congressional testimony revealed that jets and special forces teams could have been deployed to save the Americans who perished in the premeditated, symbolic September 11, 2012 terrorist attack on the American consulate in Libya that the U.S. government knew about in advance, and that Mr. Obama repeatedly blamed a YouTube video for, but these teams were prevented from responding. On a side note, what difference does it make that American citizens could have been prevented from being murdered, and that the murderers’ figurehead accomplice/enabler gets off Scot-free?
- The Justice Department leaked documents targeted to smear Operation Fast and Furious whistleblowers, a botched BATFE operation under Obama that resulted in hundreds of dead Mexican and American citizens;
- The White House confirmed that they intentionally killed four (4) Americans abroad without charges or a trial (4 for now);
- The Justice Department illegally and surreptitiously collected two months of phone records from the Associated Press as well as records from Fox News (“F— the journalistic privilege” said Eric Holder once, rumor has it); and finally,
- A former National Security Agency (“NSA”) employee named Edward Snowden leaked details to the UK’s Guardian newspaper that the American government invades the privacy of its citizens along with companies such as Google, Microsoft, Facebook, and Verizon in a way that understates George Orwell’s writings, such as through people’s dishwashers.
Whew! Talk About A Lot To Swallow
Not really if you recall that President Richard Nixon resigned rather than face impeachment only because he and his administration were implicated in the burglarizing of Democratic National Committee headquarters, and for ordering the FBI, CIA, and IRS to harass opposing political groups. That last one sounds familiar right?
What if the President was implicated in wiretapping the entire country, not just political opponents? What if the National Security Agency had a spy tool so powerful it was called “Boundless Informant” and can gather “97 billion pieces of intelligence from computer networks worldwide”? What if a NSA program called “PRISM” granted the NSA access to American records such as emails, chat conversations, voice calls, and documents without warrant supported by probable cause? What if U.S. companies like Google, Facebook, AOL, Skype, YouTube and Apple participated in this program and lied about it?
“I have nothing to hide, so neither do you,” or in the alternative, “They can’t learn anything from the data they collect.”
By now you’ve surely heard from some authoritarian types who rely on members of the public to worship authority so that one day we can all exist under an elite class of overseers like in New York. These people talk about how they have nothing to hide, so it follows that invasive searches of your communications or personal data is no problem for you too. These people also say that the information collected “cannot reveal that much about you,” so don’t worry about it. Here are four retorts:
1. “If you have no information that you’d wish to hide, please reveal to me your social security number and tell me what I need to know to access your bank accounts.” If they balk then there is at least some information that they’d wish to keep to themselves. Consider this a jumping-off point.
2. If the information collected cannot reveal that much about me or anyone, then for what purpose is it being collected?
There is zero evidence … that this program of collecting everybody’s phone records as opposed to just the terrorists’ in any way keeps us safer or is necessary to stop terrorist plots.
4. If the data gleamed by the NSA’s PRISM program is inconsequential, an applied mathematician from M.I.T. and others disagree in kind:
You can infer a lot [from PRISM data], such as where people work and where people live…You don’t need information about the content [of the call].” From there, connecting such movements with a person’s real identity would be a relatively simple matter of cross-referencing the records with other sources of data. The NSA may be able to do this using credit card transactions or e-mail communications…or simply by knowing who has the phone number. These techniques could reveal sensitive activity such as attendance at a particular church or a visit to an abortion clinic. Analysts could even surmise where and when two individuals are meeting face to face…or construct a diagram of complex relationships among far-flung communities.
The argument of “oh it’s not that bad, they can know if I go to the store” is used by someone who voted for Obama in his second term, 99 times out of 100. What I mean by that is that these are people who think that they’re on the winning team, Team Establishment (“TE”), and that TE will never be used against them, despite everything I’ve written about above. You will find that most if not all of these people have never suffered police abuse or unlawful intrusion in their lives too. Finally, you will detect how they are certain that their personal experiences will be the same as others’.
While I don’t have a proper source for this 99/100 statistic, try it with people you know and comment below if you find otherwise.
Snowden Is A Hero
With Snowden indefinitely fleeing America to China and Russia in the face of multiple charges under the Espionage Act, it’s good to know that the White House has been successfully petitioned to pardon Snowden. What this likely means, however, is that White House Press Secretary Jay Carney will slither out to issue a long-winded sidestep about how prosecuting someone who stood up for the privacy of all Americans in the face of tyrannical programs with unproven results is in our best interests.
Just in time to justify charging Snowden, though, ABC News reports on June 19 2013 that the FBI was able to use our country’s necessarily invasive domestic security program to foil a recent plot to detonate an X-Ray weapon in New York, but it is curious how the FBI was intimately involved in that operation, as usual:
Ultimately, with help from the undercover agents, Crawford and Feight acquired the necessary parts and even tested the device that would remotely detonate the weapon, according to the FBI.
New rule: the FBI boffed catching the Boston Bombers, so let’s only give them credit for capturing “terrorists” that they aren’t meeting with for months beforehand.
The Obama Administration Wants You To Snitch, Unless It’s On Them
Let’s recall the “See Something, Say Something” campaign brought to you by the Department of Homeland Security, where Americans are encouraged to be paranoid and spy on everyone around them. It seems that Edward Snowden saw something and said something, but not what the Obama Administration wanted to see or hear.
In fact, the Obama Administration has charged more people with leaking information under the Espionage Act than all presidents before, standing at eight (8) accused and counting. They are so worried about leaked information that exposes their corruption that the Secret Service just raided the home of a Obama Twitter critic with 11,000 followers, because Twitter.
If I disappear or get into a car accident after writing about the NSA, like writers are doing nowadays, I hope at least someone smells something fishy going on.
To be fair, though, Twitter didn’t exist when the First Amendment was drafted, so it should not be afforded First Amendment protection. Same with my site here. Likewise with automatic machine guns. (This paragraph is best interpreted under /s, which indicates the presence of sarcasm). So come and arrest me for criticizing Obama now, you know where I am and what I am doing.
At Least I Still Have A Right To Remain Silent, Right?
Eh, not exactly. As of Salinas v. Texas, decided this month by the United States Supreme Court, a potential defendant’s silence can be used against them during police interviews prior to arrest and reading of Miranda rights (emphasis added). Your right to remain silent, once solidified by Miranda v. Arizona, that a Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination requires a law enforcement official (“LEO”) to advise a suspect interrogated in custody of his rights to remain silent, is now only the case after a LEO tells you so.
How Do I Even Attempt To Privately Communicate Over the Internet, Nowadays?
If you follow this link you can find a helpful list of operating systems, web browsers, and apps that you can use to attempt to opt-out of the surveillance grid. While this is merely a beginning step you can take to avoid having your online activity fully tracked and monitored, it is still a step in the right direction, and many little steps take us a long journey don’t they? I myself like www.startpage.com for a search engine. I also like cellphones with removable batteries not because I fear signal triangulation over a switched off iPhone, but I like the personal choice to fear triangulation over a switched off iPhone. I also don’t like when employers force their employees to sign “I won’t commit suicide” notes, but that’s a different story.
Do you like the political direction in which America is headed?
Have you liked the shocking strides towards an Orwellian security state that we’ve taken since 9-11?
Do you like how it only became worse under Barack H. Obama?
How can Mr. Obama survive so many scandals when Nixon resigned after being accused of one?
Do you think that our Founding Fathers killed people over the principles of our Constitution because they were practices that we should care about less than watching professional sports or American Idol?
Are you going to stand with Snowden or stand against him?
I hope that you had a chance to see this picture of Mr. Obama on Father’s Day playing toy guns with his family, because it could not have come at a more opportune time with American children being conditioned to fear guns and be unsafe with them.
No Pro-2A Speech For Public Schoolchildren
If you have yet to hear, a West Virginian eighth-grader was suspended and is facing jailtime because he refused to take off a NRA t-shirt while attending a school that does not prohibit 2nd Amendment speech. This student was speaking to a peace officer, and the poor officer was unable to carry out his duties due to the speech being made, so he had no choice but to charge the student with obstructing an officer.
This happens at a time when a California elementary school held a toy gun buyback, because there’s nothing like subliminally teaching children to accept a forfeiture of their constitutional rights before they come of consenting age.
If you think that a child being suspended for the NRA t-shirt was an issue (and if you don’t like the NRA then imagine a child being suspended for wearing a t-shirt of a group you like), then how do you feel about a child being suspended for eating a pop-tart into the shape of a gun? How about for saying “gun” on a school bus? How about being suspended for bringing a Nerf gun to school, even with the teacher’s permission?
Barack, You’re Supposed To Be A Leader
I’m not saying that Mr. Obama is giving the direct orders to crack down on children across the nation showing any interest in firearms, but he has to be aware of some of these stories, and I hold him accountable as a leader to always make statements about injustices that occur under his purview. I am not saying that he should make a federal edict to overturn state actions, but the President should be able to muster up some backbone and comment on what’s going on at the state level – if he cared about 2nd Amendment rights at all, that is.
We can deduce from the picture above that a toy gun does not plant the seeds of future mass murder in the Obama children, so why does it plant those seeds for the children of anyone else? A curious sidestep by the gun control lobby is how can citizens of Arizona or Texas be allowed to possess standard capacity magazines (30-rounds) for Armalite-rifle platforms (also known as “ARs”) without most of them becoming school-shooting mass murderers? Is it something in California’s water?
Perhaps. But regardless, if I were the President, and I had a picture taken of me this weekend playing with toy guns with my family, and I had all these instances of public school students having their education disrupted under my watch, I would say something about it.
A Proper Analogy
You see, if we consistently teach children that firearms are scary, dangerous, and for criminals, then they will be prevented from learning about them through a realistic lens, such as how children develop fears of spiders and rodents from observing a parent react that way to them.
Watch this video of someone picking up an emperor scorpion, for example. Now, most of us consider scorpions to be dangerous, poisonous, not safe to hold, etc., but there are an astonishing number of people who enjoy keeping scorpions as pets, and who play with them in their hand. If you approach a scorpion with a shaky hand from the front, you are going to get stung quite quickly. If you learn that the safe approach is calmly from behind the scorpion, backing it into your hand, you will have a little friend crawling on you in no time, sting-free, and you will enjoy an experience in life that most people are too afraid to even attempt.
Likewise with firearms. If we let children grow up completely ignorant of all the programs that exist to train young marksmen, how even six-year-olds can shoot 3-gun competitions, and we only discuss firearms with a tone of fear in our voices, then these children will turn into a generation of gun-fearing adults with intellectual impediments to exercising (what’s left of) their constitutional rights.
Let’s keep approaching the topic of firearms in the sense that they are tools, that they have proper and improper uses like all other tools, and that safety is the bottom line. The underlying problem, of course, is that we need to get people outside of our choir to hear our song.
Today I am particularly inflamed over a Daily KOS link I found on the Pro-Gun Rights section of Reddit, which if you did not know, is a link aggregation site holding itself out to be the “front page of the internet” that is divided into thousands of categories called “subreddits.”
I do not frequent Daily KOS, a shameful attempt at web journalism built on driving “left”-leaning hysterical individuals to view sensational and misleading titles predicated on mistruths, but one of its articles horribly punctuated as ““Disprove this,” says the gun nut. “Okay!” say I.”” was being discussed in r/progun.
What caught my eye immediately was the amount of smug in the title of the KOS article, which prepared me for the blinding smug coming from the copy by author “KCC.”
KCC is smug because of a “facebook shaming” she (I presume it’s a “she”) made of a relative, her niece’s husband, who posted an image macro in favor of gun rights, that she felt she “beat him” on because he did not reply to her facebook post. Victories as large as this of course should definitely grace the pages of Daily KOS, because there is nothing more important to the fight for gun control than an unsourced esoteric one-off between two people we’ve never heard of before, especially one based on smirking nonsense that you could hear any day on Ms. Rachel Maddow’s show.
Here is the macro that KCC’s pro-gun relative posted:
And what better way to start a serious rebuttal to a serious issue (infringing the 2nd Amendment) than with a professional, respect-generating rage comic used by internet teenagers? From KCC, we begin with (yes, including those words):
This is how KCC wants to begin her attack on the 2nd Amendment through her relative before she launches into a “quickly banged out” (her words again) numbered reply without any sources. I will quote her points below and then shatter them with objectivity, accordingly.
1. You do know the government has planes, right? And they can drop bombs from those planes? How is a gun going to save you if the government wants you dead?
Do you know that the government has over 400,000 active, civilian, or reserve personnel in its division required to operate those bomb-dropping planes and drones? Do you know that there are many active duty and retired military personnel who openly state that they will not support any such would-be attack on the American people, such as the group Oath Keepers? Do you know that planes aren’t bulletproof? Same with humans?
You should talk to people you know in the military about this concept, whether they would stay in the military if there ever was a forcible disarming of the American people, or whether they would defect. At least some of them have certainly trained for it.
And regarding how is a gun going to save you if the government wants you dead, why don’t you ask the Taliban in Afghanistan how successful they’ve been fighting off our planes and bombs with only their guns?
2. First off, that point shows a fundamental misunderstanding of Swiss gun law, but that’s a whole other post. But anyway: That post suggests that the US is vulnerable to ground invasion. Who’s going to invade that has a military capable of it? Mexico? Canada? Because if you look at a map, you’ll see that we’re not all that vulnerable to ground invasions otherwise. Or do you think your gun can shoot down long-range missiles? Because if — IF — another government wanted to launch a ground invasion of the continental U.S., they’d attack from the air first in an attempt to beat us into submission. (By the way, Iraqis are heavily armed. It didn’t protect them from foreign invasions — OR their own government, come to think of it.)
KCC begins by saying that Hitler didn’t invade Switzerland in WW2 because it had nothing to do with the fact that all Swiss men aged twenty get conscripted into military service and then get to keep select-fire rifles and handguns in their homes. Interestingly enough, rather than a national army, Switzerland opts for a people’s militia. Wow, I wonder why that works out for them. But KCC just wants to smirk and say that her niece’s husband doesn’t understand Swiss law, without making any effort to disprove that she doesn’t either. It’s a “whole other post,” and I look forward to that sourceless lecture from international law professor KCC.
Next KCC demonstrates her fundamental lack of knowledge regarding anything to do with the topic of “ground invasions.” She says “look at a map,” because that should tell us that nobody has ever crossed the border from Mexico to kill American citizens. On top of that, since we have Canada and Mexico to our respective North and South, and that no foreign armies can ever attack from their lands, it follows that no armies could ever attempt a ground invasion from any coasts.
KCC also said that if another country wants to attack the US, they would attack from the air first. Maybe with a bomb to disable our electronic systems, but they would never fly in and stand toe-to-toe with our Air Force. KCC must have no faith in the capabilities of US air defense systems, or no knowledge of them to think otherwise.
3. Mobs of angry people? Why, don’t they have cops where you live? And why do you plan on making yourself the target of a mob? (And where were these Katrina “riots”? Also: are you suggesting that people angry in Katrina’s aftermath deserved to be shot? Do you know WHY they were angry? Because they were treated like shit in the aftermath of the storm. A lot of the country was angry right along with them. Do you know what kind of harsh judgment was passed on the people who suffered the most? And I’ll tell you right now, you and your family would be JUST AS IGNORED and treated just as shabbily if that kind of storm hits you. Would you deserve to be shot?) [Note: He's Hispanic, my niece is Hispanic-Italian descent, and their daughter is an adorable combination of her dad and mom. They're also broke. The sad reality is that being poor minorities, had they been in NOLA during Katrina, they wouldn't have been very high on the list of people to help.]
But anyway — your one gun is going to protect you from a mob of angry rioters? Why do you even think they’d know your house exists?
They have cops in Chicago, yet six people were shot dead and eleven others were wounded over the Memorial Day weekend there. Statements like this show complete ignorance of national average police response times (9 minutes, but can be a lot longer, such as 20 minutes for Sandy Hook) as well as callous disregard for the immediate need to defend your life, exemplified recently by this woman who would likely have been beaten or raped by the three intruders if she did not shoot at them. But KCC would prefer that this woman waits the reasonable nine minutes for the police to show up.
KCC again displays her lack of a grasp on reality by saying “when do you plan to make yourself the target of an angry mob?” First of all, you don’t make yourself the target in most cases, they target you, but because some questions are so stupid that they deserve a similar response, DUHHHH, HOW ABOUT THIS GUY FROM THE LA RIOTS?
Then KCC patronizes her family member and asks “your one gun is going to protect you,” potentially ridiculing his socioeconomic status in that he can only afford one gun (ignoring the gun-grabbing price inflation for now) and then his capabilities with it. KCC has forgotten that one gun can fire tens of thousands of rounds, or that you can carry extra fifty-round magazines, or any of that. Regardless, we should listen to KCC because she knows that one gun is only useful against one or two people maximum.
4. Statistics have repeatedly shown that the people who live in a home with a gun are a lot more likely to be shot than people who don’t live in a home with a gun. Nobody in a house with a gun is more protected — in fact, they’re less protected. You know what else repels home invasions? A sticker on a couple of windows saying you’re protected by so-and-so alarm company. Or a large dog.
Statistics, of course, that KCC does not want to link anyone to, since they do not exist, nor do they back up her poorly formed sentence. You see, KCC wants you to think that people who have a gun in their home are more likely to be shot ________ than people who don’t have a gun in their home. The reason for the blank space is because it represents the only important part of that sentence, and coincidentally is missing.
What KCC is attempting to say is that people who have guns in their home are more likely to be shot with their own gun, by accident or negligent discharge, than are people who do not own guns in their home. The brilliance of KCC translates to this:
- If you own X in your home, and there is a chance to misuse X, then you will misuse X more than anyone who does not have X in their home.
Substitute “spoons” for X, “basketballs” for X, or whatever you want, and KCC’s flawed logic quickly becomes apparent. If you practice the 4 Rules of Firearms Safety, like most gun owners do and the NRA recommends, you will never misuse your gun, nor shoot anything other than what is intended.
Then KCC literally says that stickers on your window and a dog can repel home invaders, which further proves that KCC does not live in reality, and is someone who should be committed. I don’t need to go and list every instance of a home invasions where the dog is shot but here is one from 17 May 2013. As far as stickers, this gentleman seemed to have a home security system, but had to take things into his own hands against four armed attackers. Thankfully he had a standard capacity magazine (30-rounds).
5. You know what else protects you from muggers and rapists outside your home (again, WTF kind of neighborhood do you live in? Between the muggers, the rapists and the rioters — what’s next, zombie hordes)? Self defense classes. Keeping your head up and walking like you know where you’re going. Staying in well-lit areas at night. A whistle around your neck. A can of mace.
KCC exemplifies the modern sheltered American ignoramus who says “I don’t live in a dangerous neighborhood, so they must not exist elsewhere, and even in safe neighborhoods, crime could never happen.” Right, because Christopher Dorner didn’t drive into Irvine, California and shoot two people dead.
The fact that KCC says to avoid muggings/rapes you just have to stay in well lit areas and keep a whistle should take away all credibility left from KCC, and then Daily KOS for allowing such a stupid individual to write for them.
Honestly, no ad hominem, this is like when the University of Colorado told its women that to avoid rape they should vomit and urinate on themselves rather than carry a firearm or when Democrat Jessie Ulibarri suggested that women fight off rapists with a ballpoint pen. It also marginalizes every rape of men and women that happened in well lit areas or not, whether they yelled/whistled for help or not. But let’s just put that aside for now.
6. Funny enough, it’s also a person’s right to speak his or her mind — but you would still get a visit from the Secret Service if you said things that threatened the President. Or the cops might come after you if you incited violence. So maybe it’s your right to have a gun, but it’s perfectly reasonable to regulate how that right is exercised.
The United States Supreme Court says that the right to keep and bear arms for traditionally lawful purposes shall not be infringed, and that the “well regulated militia” part is not the primary part of the 2nd Amendment, but ancillary to it, as the 2A is to guarantee the right of the People to keep and bear arms, because the People are the true government of our country. There is no militia without the People consenting to one being there.
I don’t see how either KCC’s niece’s husband threatened the President, or otherwise would require a Secret Service visit. I don’t see how he incited violence either, or would be reasonably suspected of committing a crime, so I don’t know why the police would have to come speak with him. Likewise, I don’t see how any of this connects with a right to keep and bear arms, or the regulation thereof.
It’s just more non-sequitur, unsourced nonsense from KCC.
Done. That was easy!
It was easy because you, KCC, did not use any intelligence whatsoever to craft your post. You crafted it with the skill of a monkey “quickly banging out” nonsense on a keyboard, except that your nonsense might convince some other monkeys to forfeit their constitutional rights. Stop posting about adult issues and stick to rage comics.
Daily KOS, never let this hack write for you again. As Christian Bale says, it’s just amateur.
On 22 May 2013 two men beheaded a British soldier in public in the middle of a London neighborhood named Woolwich. If you follow this link you can see a video of one of these men post-murder covered in blood and holding two edged weapons while he rants about how him and his partner are merely demonstrating a routine act of violence carried out in their home country. This was a terrorist act because it was politically motivated violence.
There are many alarming things about this incident, at the forefront of course is that two men beheaded another in public. But for a moment, however, let’s think about some things that could be more alarming than the killing or the content of the aforementioned rant:
- You can see a woman calmly pulling a shopping cart towards the blood soaked ranting man (“Terrorist 1″ for convenience) as if he is filming another annoying wanna-be reality TV show on the street corner;
- Nobody tackled, hurt, or apprehended the terrorists, or ran them over with their cars;
- People were talking with the terrorists after the act (i.e. not incapacitating them); or
- It took twenty minutes for armed police to show up to save the poor soldier.
If you ask me, people seemed a bit too calm in reaction to what just happened. I also think that the UK’s public might be better served by faster armed police response times, such as allowing first response officers to carry firearms, in case criminals who can and will obtain weapons attack defenseless civilians in public (yes, I realize the deceased was a soldier). I am focusing on the police here because the UK’s government does not like it when its citizens can adequately arm themselves, so we focus on who is allowed to be armed aside from criminals or terrorists.
Shame On You, People Who Just Stood Around At The Scene
I am passing a general judgment, which may be wrong, but I cannot believe that there were so many people standing around not attacking or apprehending these terrorists after their conspicuous act of violence. To stand around and wait for the police to handle it, and then even to talk and rationalize with the terrorists in the interim, seems so repugnant to the capabilities of human beings that I feel like these Britons at the scene were from a different species.
It’s not that relying on police makes you less of a people, it’s that I feel like if this incident happened in Texas or Alabama that these terrorists would not have survived until the police showed up. That these Britons would be talking to these criminals after they killed someone in public, and not slamming their teeth into the pavement to hold them down until police handcuffed them, is beyond me.
The fact that Americans (supposedly) have the right to keep and bear arms to respond to criminals in public is just one reason why crime in America is at all time lows for the last twenty years. An armed populace is also a nice psychological deterrent to crime, as criminals cannot know who will draw on them from behind and put a short end to their aberrant behavior.
I wonder if anyone in the UK thinks it would be a good idea if their citizens are allowed to carry concealed firearms in public? Terrorist 2 was standing there in the middle of public with a handgun in his hand. What if a citizen could have approached them from behind and taken a good shot well before twenty minutes’ time passed? Is it possible this slain soldier could still be alive? Why does the UK still insist on only allowing special teams of police to be armed? Do they like to prolong the suffering of crime victims? It would make sense to let someone first on the scene besides the criminals to be armed, since the UK is the most violent country in the EU, even more so than South Africa and the USA even. Oh yeah, let’s not forget that gun crime soared in England after guns were banned. It’s great to have a nation of victims, right?
Wrong. It’s great to have a nation of people so righteous and fierce that criminals would not be able to identify victims any more, or that they would fear citizen justice more than they would fear police catching them. It’s unfortunate that we have reports of foreign students being afraid to come study in America because of our gun culture (and because they come from hoplophobic cultures themselves), when we don’t have as many reports of criminals being afraid to operate in America because of the same. However, this is not a fault of the gun culture, but a fault of the anti-gun culture that successfully scares certain people into thinking that inanimate objects are anything but.
As many of us know by now, there was a tornado in Moore, Oklahoma on 20 May 2013 that left tens of Americans dead, the devastation of which was greater than the nuclear devastation wreaked on Hiroshima during World War 2.
In times of national tragedy, we usually look to our leaders for words of assurance, for words of unification, and for words of strength. Let’s see what one of our leaders has said so far this week.
Democrat Senator Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island provided us with an excited, spittle-projecting rant on how Republicans are responsible for the tornado because of climate politics or something and they will lead us into a post-apocalyptic natural disaster scenario, which as the author at Human Events notes, occurred while bodies were still being pulled from the rubble:
So, you may have a question for me: Why do you care? Why do you, Sheldon Whitehouse, Democrat of Rhode Island, care if we Republicans run off the climate cliff like a bunch of proverbial lemmings and disgrace ourselves? I’ll tell you why. We’re stuck in this together. We are stuck in this together. When cyclones tear up Oklahoma and hurricanes swamp Alabama and wildfires scorch Texas, you come to us, the rest of the country, for billions of dollars to recover. And the damage that your polluters and deniers are doing doesn’t just hit Oklahoma and Alabama and Texas. It hits Rhode Island with floods and storms. It hits Oregon with acidified seas, it hits Montana with dying forests. So, like it or not, we’re in this together.
You drag America with you to your fate. So, I want this future: I want a Republican Party that has returned to its senses and is strong and a worthy adversary in a strong America that has done right by its people and the world. That’s what I want. I don’t want this future. I don’t want a Republican Party disgraced, that let its extremists run off the cliff, and an America suffering from grave economic and environmental and diplomatic damage because we failed, because we didn’t wake up and do our duty to our people, and because we didn’t lead the world. I do not want that future. But that’s where we’re headed. So I will keep reaching out and calling out, ever hopeful that you will wake up before it is too late.
Next we have co-creator of the Daily Show Lizz Winstead who made this very sensitive comment on Twitter before not owning up to it and deleting it:
This tornado is in Oklahoma so clearly it has been ordered to only target conservatives.
I don’t know which is more offensive:
- Her callous disregard for the loss of life in Oklahoma, including at least seven children;
- That such loss of life was “ordered” or fabricated, or otherwise wasn’t naturally occurring;
- Her implication that the IRS did not target conservative groups such as Tea Partiers or those named “Patriots”; or
- That only conservatives live in Oklahoma, and therefore their lives are not worth as much as non-conservatives.
All I know is that Jon Stewart is a shill for Obama and his show has been consistently about gun control for the last year or more (that’s just one example of millions of him spreading gun control mistruths), so I really didn’t need another reason not to like him or his show.
See you next time.
It’s not that I get excited when criminals are shot by their victims, but I wish that all criminals received Twitter updates when these things happen, so perhaps they’ll think twice about doing this to someone else.
If you follow this link you’ll find an account of how a Texan civilian was home invaded by three criminals that threw him into a closet while they raided his house. Unfortunately for these criminals, they didn’t know that this man was thrown into his gun closet.
What happened next was that this American set another example for human beings in general, as we all have a right to defend our lives wherever we are, especially in our homes:
When the homeowner thought the burglars had left, he went downstairs, carrying his gun in case the suspects were still around, the Houston Chronicle reported.
On the first floor, the man confronted one of his assailant and the two exchanged gunfire, according to police.
The resident, who shares the house with his parents, escaped unharmed, but the armed suspect was much the worse for wear after being struck in the shoulder and leg.
He fled on foot down the street, but did not get far before he collapsed. His two suspected accomplices took off from the scene in a Chevrolet Tahoe.
The wounded man, believed to be in his 20s, was heard crying out in pain as he lay bleeding on the pavement. He was taken to Ben Taub Hospital for treatment.
I nominate whomever he is for American Hero of the Half Year because of his actions. AHotHY’s neighbor Craig Gaddis leaves us with an appropriate closing quote:
‘What happened today is exactly what guns are supposed to do – to protect your home and defend your life and your family.’