Liberal newspapers love Kasich


…because he’s one of them, in many ways. These papers practically fawn over Kasich, while slandering conservatives. For starters, the Boston Globe:

He has a record of pragmatic Midwestern conservatism, and has demonstrated an aptitude for the horse-trading and coalition-building that’s so lacking in today’s Washington. (It’s no small irony that one of Kasich’s finest accomplishments as a congressman — joining the bipartisan deal to impose a 10-year ban on assault weapons — is one that he barely mentions now.)

Well, how ’bout that. Then, of course, we have the infamous New York Times:

…he has been capable of compromise and believes in the ability of government to improve lives. He favors a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants, and he speaks of government’s duty to protect the poor, the mentally ill and others “in the shadows.” While Republicans in Congress tried more than 60 times to kill Obamacare, Mr. Kasich did an end-run around Ohio’s Republican Legislature to secure a $13 billion Medicaid expansion to cover more people in his state.

Lovely… and telling. Moving on to Iowa, here’s the Quad City Times:

John Kasich is the poster-child for all thinking Republicans left behind by a party overrun by an irrational, seething fringe. The Ohio governor is the antithesis of the shrill, bigoted screaming heads dominating the Republican Party field. He should carry the GOP standard heading into November’s presidential election, if re-injecting reason into GOP rhetoric is of any concern.
Kasich won’t wage the dehumanizing ground war against immigrants looking for work. Kasich sees immigrants as human beings, supports bolstering U.S.-Mexico border security, while providing a much-needed pathway to legal status for the 11.5 million people already illegally in the U.S.

And in New Hampshire, the Keene Sentinel:

While in Congress, he voted for an assault weapons ban and favored background checks at gun shows.
In Ohio, he stood out as a Republican governor willing to implement the expansion of Medicaid services through the Affordable Care Act. Criticized by his former tea party supporters for the move, Kasich said two things that are indicative of his leadership style. He noted the program would be paid for mainly by the federal government, including with money Ohioans had sent to Washington and deserved to see return to the state. More to the point, he noted it was simply the right thing to do to help those most in need in his state. While opposing the ACA, he acknowledges that any reworking or replacing of that law needs to include continuing to care for those Americans who have gained coverage through the program.

…and the list goes on. In nearly every editorial supporting him, they laud his ‘pragmatism’ (read: selling out to the left) and trash conservatives at every turn. As I explained a couple of months ago, Kasich is no conservative, as evidenced by his demeanor, debate performances, and rhetoric. The betrayal on the 1993 Clinton ‘assault weapons’ ban is enough to exile him from consideration from the Presidency, no matter what good works he’s done as Governor. His (at best) checkered record on federal mandates, his failure to press for right-to-work legislation, his support for amnesty for illegal aliens (made exponentially worse by how he demonizes anyone interested in enforcing immigration law) and his embrace of Medicaid expansion all make him an absolute non-starter for conservatives. Let’s hope he’s out of the race after New Hampshire, the state he’s placing all his chips on.

Originally posted at The Bull Elephant.

Didn’t we go through this once already?


The gun grabbing idiots in Washington just won’t give up. They seem to be stuck on stupid. Again.

This time, they’re once again trying to hold innocent people responsible for violence. Again.

They soiled themselves when Congress passed the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act – with support from both Democrats and Republicans – because they claimed that the firearms industry was somehow getting unfair advantages that “no other industry” has by being legally protected from lawsuits.

Of course, that claim is a bunch of crap, and we all know it.

The law does not protect gun manufacturers from suits if their product is faulty or misfires in some way. But much like you can’t “hold a hammer company responsible if somebody beat somebody over the head with a hammer,” (that little bit is a quote by non other than Bernie Sanders, who has been competing with the other gun grabbers vying for the Democratic candidate for President for biggest enemy of Second Amendment rights), you shouldn’t be able to sue any other manufacturer of any other tool for its misuse.

Crazy Eyes Schiff

Crazy Eyes Schiff

Adam Schiff (D-ouchebag, CA), who has already tried to introduce a bill repealing the PLCAA, is behind this latest effort to do so. Again.

“If you’re a carmaker and your airbags kill someone, you’re potentially liable,” continued Schiff, one of the lawmakers behind the gun control bill. “If you’re a pharmaceutical company and sell faulty drugs, you can be held liable. If you’re a liquor store and sell alcohol to minors, you can be held liable.”

What Schiff doesn’t tell you is that he wants people to be able to sue the gun industry for their product functioning exactly the way it was manufactured to do while being misused by the criminal/crazy element. This bill would allow gun manufacturers to be sued for the criminal misuse of their products – and there’s no other industry that “enjoys” that particular distinction.

Democrats claim that their bill would only target gun dealers and manufacturers who sell to straw purchasers. But knowingly doing so is already illegal, and it can ruin businesses, livelihoods, and lives.  An illegal firearm purchase can bring a felony conviction sentence of ten years in jail and a fine of up to $250,000. If a gun dealer or manufacturer knew about the false statements that allowed the gun purchase, they are also in violation of federal law, and last year a lawsuit against a dealer who did just that, and the jury awarded the plaintiffs – two police officers, Bryan Norberg and Graham Kunisch – who were shot by an 18-year-old thug who got his gun through a straw purchase – $5.1 million in damages. Why? Because the PLCAA doesn’t protect dealers and manufacturers against illegal behavior, and the jury ruled that the store that sold the straw purchaser the gun ignored signs that he was a straw buyer.

The law allows tort claims based on “negligent entrustment”—i.e., “the supplying of [firearms] by a seller for use by another person when the seller knows, or reasonably should know, the person to whom the product is supplied is likely to, and does, use the product in a manner involving unreasonable risk of physical injury to the person or others.” It also allows claims based on “an action in which a manufacturer or seller…knowingly violated a State or Federal statute applicable to the sale or marketing of the product.”

So unsurprisingly, Schiff and the Democrats are lying. Again. They know that the Second Amendment means what it says, and that only an amendment repealing the Second Amendment can change that, so they are doing everything in their power to destroy it in other, creative ways.

Luckily, there’s slim chance of this odious bill passing. Schiff is teaming up with Richard Blumenthal (D-ickwad, CT) to push this agenda.

It’s wholly unsurprising that Blumenthal would sign on to a pack of lies about guns, given his exaggerations about his military record. Once a liar, always a liar.

Protesting freedom


You ever wonder why is it that gun grabbers are so desperate to push their odious agenda that they will do practically anything, including accuse law-abiding citizens of facilitating the deaths of children, hysterically vilify innocent people, and use their power to destroy lives and livelihoods? A few months ago, I blogged about the noxious hag that represents us in Richmond Barbara Favola and her abhorrent, corrupt buddies trying to sabotage the livelihood of a local military veteran who had the unmitigated gall to want to open a firearms store in our area.

JB Gates, the owner of NoVA Firearms originally intended to open a store in Arlington County, but thanks to bullying, manufactured outrage, and outright abuse by sniveling hoplophobes in the area – the same morally corrupt band of gun-grabbing invertebrates who are now politicizing Mr. Gates’ livelihood in order to gain election traction – the landlord of the store’s original location canceled the lease and forced Gates to move elsewhere.

That elsewhere was McLean, VA – near Franklin Sherman Elementary School.

Virginia blog Bearing Drift obtained information under the Freedom of Information Act, confirming without doubt that the nasty gargoyle and her gun grabbing buddies conspired to harass and bully Mr. Gates out of his business and used his livelihood as a means to get themselves elected by the whining cowards of Fairfax County.

And now Favola is at it again. She, along with her braindead minions of the McLean Citizens Association (MCA) and another leftist member of the House of Delegates, is out to destroy Mr. Gates’ livelihood. Again. The MCA is protesting, which is fine. They certainly have the right to do so – even Mr. Gates acknowledges this.

But Favola… no, she’s trying to push legislation that would prohibit legitimate businesses such as NOVA Firearms from opening near schools. Oh… I’m sorry. She’s pledging “discussion” on the issue, which in gun grabber speak can be translated into, “trying to stop a law-abiding citizen from doing legitimate business,” even though this man is an upstanding member of the community, who plans to use the expanded space to do exactly what the gun grabbing lunatics claim to stand for: GUN SAFETY. Gates said at the opening of his store that he would use the space to offer gun safety classes.

But the hysterical MCA loons don’t care about that, because CHILDREN. Even though Gates is a legitimate business owner, who performs background checks on his customers, and who will offer gun safety courses to those in the area, the MCA has already begun its histrionics in front of the store.

“We just don’t want the gun shop behind our school, what’s the problem?!” said one protester.

“Because it’s a civil right!” responded a gun-rights supporter.

Owning firearms is a civil right.

Owning a legitimate business is a civil right.

Making a livelihood and supporting your family is a civil right.

But the monkeys at the MCA don’t care about that, because their imaginary right not to shit themselves at the idea of a gun store apparently trumps the very real right of JB Gates to run a legitimate business.

They want to throw a valuable, law-abiding, active member of their community under the bus.

And they’re willing to reinforce their hysterical paranoia with government force. Mike Stollenwerk at the Examiner reports that Delegate Kathleen Murphy – yes, the same Kathleen Murphy who emailed Favola asking for advice on how to best screw Mr. Gates and shut down his business, and who is pushing a bill to ban firearms stores and ranges from operating near schools – was among the protesters.

This is how Northern Virginia legislators treat small business owners in their communities.

This is how they treat law-abiding members of their community.

They work to destroy their business. They try to ruin them. They try to blame them for violence. They vilify them. They try to interfere with legitimate commerce.

And for what?

For something that JB Gates cannot morally or legally be held responsible for. Violence committed by criminals and derelicts.

nova firearmsBy all accounts, the protest was small. VCDL calculates there were about 40 gun grabber protesters and about 50 counter protesters. Mike Stollenwerk calculates the numbers were about even. A friend of mine who attended the protest and took the opportunity to take her family gun shopping said the pro-rights advocates far outnumbered the gun grabbing cowards, and that by the time she and her family exited the shop, there was only a handful of gun grabbers left.

Whatever the truth is about the numbers of protesters present, I hope this gives NOVA Firearms some good publicity and support.


Weaponizing Tragedy


Every time a violent deviant takes innocent lives with a firearm, the first reaction of the friends and family of the victims is to punish those of us who didn’t do it. We’ve seen it time and time again, from the late Sarah Brady, to Gabrielle Giffords and her hypocrite husband‘s efforts to disarm those who have committed no crime, to the latest frothing troll in the gun grabber movement Andy Parker – the father of Alison Parker, who was murdered by a disgruntled, deranged cretin last year – these people are using their own tragedies as weapons against law-abiding citizens.

I’ll be honest, it is difficult to feel sorry for people like Mark Kelly, who is using his wife’s shooting to pad his career ladder. It becomes even more difficult to feel sorry for this jerk Parker, who actually threatened a state senator for refusing to be clubbed over the head with Parker’s tragedy, and who is using his daughter’s death to screw Virginians out of their rights.

It strikes me as opportunistic, given the fact that there’s not a single law that would have stopped his daughter’s murder. Vester Lee Flanagan did not have a criminal record of any kind. He had no history of mental illness. He was black and gay – certainly not disqualifying factors when purchasing a firearm. And he was an entitled social justice warrior douche nugget, who was in the habit of filing grievances against his employers. Should he somehow been prevented from buying guns, because he was a jerk?

Any sane person would answer “no.”

Well, Parker won’t take “no” for an answer, so he has once again decided to use his tragedy to beat the rest of us over the head – to guilt us into bowing to his political agenda.


Well, that act is getting stale.

Oh, hell, what am I saying? That act IS stale, and has been stale for decades! And yet, here’s Parker, first threatening those who disagree with his political agenda, and then trying to passively aggressively shame them with a newspaper editorial.

It is a parent’s worst nightmare to get that call that your child has been killed. Barbara and I, our son Drew, and Alison’s boyfriend Chris Hurst are members of a club no one ever wants to join. You never imagine something like this could happen to you, or to someone you love – but it can and it did. Not a single day goes by that we don’t feel the devastation and void in our souls. Our lives will never be the same.

Translation: I experienced a tragedy. I experienced pain. Therefore you must bow to my demands and give up your rights.

It happened not quite five months ago. First we were numb. Then we grieved. And as we grieved, we got angry. While my emotions were still raw, I vowed on national television to do “whatever it takes” to end gun violence. Little did I know when I uttered those words it would become a national rallying cry.

Don’t kid yourself, Parker. You’re just a Johnny Come Lately to a long and undistinguished (bowel) movement of opportunistic swine who dance in the blood of their loved ones to push their political agenda. You’re a slightly less crazy Cindy Sheehan, although given your physical threat to a state legislator, you just may be in the team photo of Sheehan’s nuttery. Maybe you’re the one who should be prevented from purchasing a firearm…

So what does it mean? It means speaking out for sensible gun laws. It also means standing up for political leaders willing to do the right thing, like our governor Terry McAuliffe, and calling out the ones that don’t. Americans are standing up and demanding that their leaders take action to reduce gun violence. We are going to continue speaking out across the country and we’re not going away.

Actually, Americans (save for the fruitcakes in California) do not support new gun control laws, and they certainly don’t trust the federal government to fairly enforce them! And no amount of screeching you do is going to change that.

This issue is finally a part of the national conversation, and change is happening. Barbara and I were honored this week to be at the White House with other survivors and victims to hear the president announce his executive actions to reduce gun violence. And it was exciting to be in the audience for CNN’s exclusive town hall meeting with President Obama, the first time a sitting president has engaged on the issue of gun violence in this way. You know that real change is happening when even Fox News’ Bill O’Reilly calls out the NRA.

Actually O’Reilly has been a statist creep for years when it comes to guns. That’s nothing new and different about that. And the fact that you were invited to the White House along with other survivors and loved ones simply means that you are being used as propaganda tools for the White House’s political agenda. The White House is using you, just like you’re using your dead daughter.

The NRA, however, continues their message that gun sense advocates want to assault the Second Amendment. How many times does it take to say, “no one is coming to take your guns away, and if you can pass a background check, you can buy a firearm”?

How many times? Until you realize that repeating a lie will not make it true, especially when the list of statist swamp donkeys who do advocate taking away our guns is long and growing.

We already have background checks. The derelict shitbag who killed your daughter passed one. How did that work out?

I think Mark Kelly, astronaut and husband of former Representative Gabby Giffords, who was shot five years ago at her town hall meeting in Tucson, Arizona, hit the nail on the head with his question of all at the town hall. He asked the president, how, with the 350 million guns in circulation at more than 65 million locations from Alaska to Hawaii, could the government possibly take all of these guns away? A rhetorical question of course, but it underscores the absurdity of the gun lobby’s argument.

It’s not the “ability” of the government to take guns away from law-abiding citizens. It’s the civil war this act would undoubtedly cause. It’s the rights it would violate by attempting to do so. It’s the immediate transformation of law-abiding citizens into criminals merely by owning a firearm and the felony record if caught trying to sell their own property to another human being. It’s the prosecution of peaceable citizens for accidentally exercising their rights at the wrong time and place.

But I wouldn’t expect someone who has so little respect for his murdered child, that he would use her blood and his own suffering to deprive others of their fundamental rights to even understand what he is advocating.

We also continue to hear, “nothing could have saved your daughter.” Perhaps that’s true. But is that a reason to do nothing to prevent the next child from being killed? We don’t think so, and that’s why we will continue to fight to save lives.

Name one law that would have prevented Newtown. Name one law that could have prevented San Bernardino. Name one law that prevents criminals from committing crimes! You can’t, because by the very nature of a criminal, there’s no law they will obey. Even if you impose the strictest background checks on every gun purchase possible, how are you going to prevent the criminals from getting their guns from black market dealers, or friends, or family, or simply stealing them?


BJSSo whom do you hope to prevent from purchasing firearms, Parker?

How are you planning to close nonexistent “loopholes” that do not prevent any criminals from getting their hands on firearms? Oh, by pressuring legislators? Or by threatening yet another politician with violence?

Now we turn to all of our political leaders – particularly those in our state legislatures – to take action to close the loopholes that make it easy for dangerous people to get guns. It’s time for them to step up to the plate to help save lives.

In other words, Parker will shove his suffering into people’s faces. Parker will demand ineffective legislation that will do nothing to save lives, but will make it more costly and cumbersome for law-abiding citizens to exercise their rights.

And he will do all this by shamelessly dancing in his daughter’s blood. He will scream about his tragedy. He will cry and threaten. He will make demands as if he’s the only one who has suffered from senseless violence. He will club us across our faces with his anguish, as if it is we – the law abiding, peaceable citizens – who are responsible for the death of his daughter, because we treasure and want to preserve our fundamental rights. He will lash out at us with his misery and demand that we surrender our rights and our personal safety to his tragedy as sacrifices – as payment to him for his loss. As if we’re responsible for his pain.

Wrong. Answer.

I refuse to be held accountable for the actions of relatively few derelicts.

I refuse to be relieved of my rights, because a criminal abused his.

And I refuse to bow down to opportunistic swine who expect me to genuflect before their anguish.

Their pain is not a claim check to my rights.

Fascist opens yap, proves she’s a fascist


bal-tricia-bishopJust when I think gun grabbing, fascist cowards can’t get any more ridiculous, along comes a sniveling twatmold to prove that there’s no low to which totalitarian shitbrains won’t sink. Witness this deplorable excuse for a human being writing for the Baltimore Sun. This harpy is a gutless authoritarian turd who uses the First Amendment to launch a despicable assault on the Second and the Fourth, while vainly painting herself to be reasonable, caring, and not at all bigoted!

It’s amazing that any paper would publish this dreck, but the Baltimore Sun did, and they hired this contemptible creature to be the Editorial Page editor – a sad halfwit who has a hard time understanding the meaning of rights and freedoms, even as she writes an editorial advocating their destruction.

So without further ado, I present to you the twisted, cowardly queef that passes for writing at the Baltimore Sun.

It’s inevitable when my husband and I visit family these days that the subject of violence in Baltimore comes up. Often, I’m the one who raises it.

Oh, this shrew must be fun at family gatherings! As soon as her maw spews forth the first sentence, the rest of the family at the dinner table must roll their eyes in exasperation. “Oh, here we go, Patsy is going to lecture us again. Where the hell is that whiskey bottle?” She must be like Pajama Boy with tits – sniffy, overbearing, and smug, with a voice that could peel the paint off the walls once she starts sanctimoniously humping her hobby horse.

But when it came up last week on a trip to see my parents in Georgia, I got my back up. I thought of the 11-hour drive south and the billboards we passed along I-81 boasting guns for sale (“A Glock for Christmas”!), and of the story my brother-in-law, who lives in Florida, told of a neighbor stopping by to shoot the breeze in his suburban driveway, a handgun holstered at the man’s waist as their kids played nearby.

I can’t even imagine the dissonant screeching that spewed from the orifice in her unctuous grimace! If I were her husband, I’d toss that shrieking harpy out of the car – after I removed my testicles from her purse.

I’m less afraid of the criminals wielding guns in Baltimore, I declared as we discussed the issue, than I am by those permitted gun owners. I know how to stay out of the line of Baltimore’s illegal gunfire; I have the luxury of being white and middle class in a largely segregated city that reserves most of its shootings for poor, black neighborhoods overtaken by “the game.” The closest I typically get to the action is feeling the chest-thumping vibrations of the Foxtrot police helicopter flying overhead in pursuit of someone who might be a few streets over, but might as well be a world away.

Note the patronizing, racist rhetoric. It’s perfectly OK for those poor, black savages in the ghetto to shoot one another. She’s far removed from that, and don’t besmirch her lily white world with that nasty violence!

But I don’t know where the legal gun owners are or how to ensure that their children, no matter how well versed in respecting firearms, won’t one day introduce that weapon to my daughter.

Well, she could just ask the parents of any perspective playmate, or she could keep her kid at home. I mean, who the hell would want their children to play with the kid of that spindly, spineless, uptight harridan?

And so, as President Barack Obama announced plans this week to tighten background checks for gun buyers and increase gun tracking and research, I thought, that’s all well and good, but how about adding something immediately useful: a gun owner registry available to the public online — something like those for sex offenders. I’m not equating gun owners with predatory perverts, but the model is helpful here; I want a searchable database I can consult to find out whether my kid can have a play date at your house.

Well, I’d like a searchable database of panty-shitting snatches I can consult to find out whether or not my kid can have a play date at the house of someone whose idea of home defense is a cell phone, and who exhibits such a stunning lack of self awareness that she literally denies equating law-abiding citizens who dare to exercise their rights to predatory perverts, while doing exactly that! And what about that impressive lack of comprehension about the Fourth Amendment?

Before the 33 percent of U.S. households containing a gun (half of which don’t secure them) gets too worked up, they should know that it would likely include many of my relatives and their friends.

Note how proud this fascist sow is about the fact that she would gladly violate the privacy of her friends and family to allay her irrational fears.

My parents grew up in small town Minnesota, and hunting was a regular part of their lives before they left for other states, and it still is for many they know. My folks were taught how to handle guns and use them safely. But that doesn’t do much to allay my fears; it’s the simple presence of the weapon in the home and the possibilities it presents that terrify me.

Oh, here we go. This is the equivalent of “I can’t be a racist. I have black friends!” She somehow thinks growing up with a tradition of hunting somehow gives her credibility. “See? I’m not a raging, pusillanimous shit wad! My family knows how to handle guns!” She has an irrational fear, so it’s the government’s responsibility to make her labia stop quivering, and the only way that can be done is to violate the rights of her fellow Americans. Well, hell… as long as she’s not in a black neighborhood, right?

U.S. toddlers were accidentally shooting people — including themselves — at the rate of one per week last year. More than 21,000 Americans committed suicide with a firearm in 2014 (nearly twice the number of gun homicides), while 586 people were accidentally killed with guns (10 percent of them age 15 and younger). And most of the guns used in the last 15 unpredictable mass shootings — including San Bernardino; Umpqua, Ore.; and Marysville, Wash., where a 15-year-old used his father’s Beretta to kill four fellow high school students — were purchased legally. The mother of the Umpqua shooter, who killed nine people at a local community college, had even bragged online a decade ago about her son’s “knowledge in this field” of firearms. So much for safety training.

Of course in 2014, U.S. toddlers were drowning at an alarming rate of six per week, but I don’t see Tricia sniffily asking parents if they exercise positive control of their bathtubs and pools. More than one toddler per week died in a residential fire that year, and yet Tricia doesn’t seem to be concerned about easy access to matches.

WISQARSTricia also seems quite concerned about the high number of suicides committed with firearms in 2014. What she doesn’t tell you is that 21,439 Americans also committed suicide that year without using a gun. But to someone with a statist agenda, those tragedies don’t matter.

Additionally, I fail to see how putting her friends, neighbors, and family members in a government database for daring to exercise their rights would have stopped even one of the shootings she listed, particularly since the San Bernardino shootings were an act of terrorism. But I don’t see Tricia advocating a Muslim database, unless she’s secretly a Trump supporter.

My only exposure to guns has been to legal ones. I remember as a teenager spending an afternoon with a couple of boys who were showing off after school, firing a family gun in the backyard and play aiming at one another. And I fired a .22 caliber pistol several years ago as a reporter covering handgun-carry regulations in Maryland; I still have the paper target practice sheet taped to my cubicle to flaunt my bullseye. There was a definite rush to handling the weapon, and I could see the attraction of target practice as a hobby. But the risk to owning the gun isn’t worth it to me.

Note the transparent, pathetic attempt to gain street cred.

Guns in the home are far more likely to be used accidentally, in suicides or family disputes than in self defense, according to studies based on anecdotal evidence.

Except, of course, that is a bald faced lie. A CDC study commissioned by the Obama Administration several years ago showed defensive uses of firearms to be an important deterrent to crime.

The NCVS has estimated 60,000 to 120,000 defensive uses of guns per year. On the basis of data from 1992 and 1994, the NCVS found 116,000 incidents. Another body of research estimated annual gun use for self-defense to be much higher, up to 2.5 million incidents, suggesting that self-defense can be an important crime deterrent. 

Even at the very low end of the spectrum, defensive gun uses, according to the National Crime Victimization Survey, exceed homicides and suicides… by a lot.

And I’m pretty certain that if I’d had a gun the one time I was the victim of a violent crime (in upstate New York), the outcome would have been a lot worse than it was, with the firearm turned against me in short order. Instead, I was able to scream and break away from a mugger with a dull knife trying to force me into a vacant lot between rowhouses.

Perhaps in the hands of a gutless, quivering turd, without the skill or intestinal fortitude to defend herself, that firearm would perhaps be used against her. But research does not support this contention in cases of normal human beings, who don’t soil themselves at the thought of having to take responsibility for their own lives. The CDC continues “Some studies on the association between self-defensive gun use and injury or loss to the victim have found less loss and injury when a firearm is used.”

Three years ago, a New York newspaper published a map online showing who owned guns in two counties outside of New York City. The backlash was swift and wide, with the most legitimate complaints being a fear of theft, which the paper said never materialized, and concerns about identifying where law enforcement lived. (I’m willing to compromise by including the officer’s name, but not address, in my database.)

Well, isn’t that generous! She’s willing to “compromise” by not including the police officers’ addresses in her little fascist black book. I’m willing to compromise by only including bigoted media whores in mine. Uber twat here will top the list. What this screeching hag doesn’t mention is 1) a number of journalists were fired after publicizing the names of gun owners and 2) the online database was removed a couple of weeks after it was published.

Gun owners may feel picked on, but they are not a persecuted class. They are individuals who have chosen to keep in their homes an object whose chief purpose is to injure or kill, whether in self defense or otherwise. The rest of us should have a right to know it’s there before we — or our children — enter.

They are individuals who have chosen to exercise their Constitutional rights. They have done nothing illegal. They have chosen to take responsibility for their and their families’ safety. And you have chosen to advocate that they be treated like the lowest form of scum – sex offenders, who violate the bodies and self worth of others by forcing them to submit to the ultimate degradation. So, if you want to know, grow some balls and ask. We will continue exercising our fundamental rights, regardless of whether or not you allow your precious snowflakes to enter our abodes. The rest of you gutless, racist worms can huddle together in a warm little cluster of spineless fuckery and leave the rest of us alone.

Well… here it is. The dumbest thing I’ve seen all day.


The following bit of retardery comes to you from a Facebook page called “Occupy Democrats.” This horde of simpleminded halfwits is composed of unwashed hippie imbeciles who strive to create the unholy spawn of the Occupy (bowel) Movement and the Obama Administration. In other words, these dolts are so far left, they lick the desiccated taint of Marx, while pushing the progtard agenda through ignorant memes.

Witness the stooopid.


At first, I was speechless. I couldn’t believe anyone would take this meme seriously.

Then I thought this HAD to be a troll post, and then I read the comments, which were nearly as stupid as the meme itself.

Then I wondered where this text was to be found in the Bill of Rights: A well fed populace being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear refrigerators shall not be infringed.

Maybe I missed it somewhere, but no… that ain’t it. It’s just not in there.

So apparently, refrigerator ownership is not a constitutionally protected right. Go figure.

Then I read the Refrigerator Safety Act. Yes, there really is such a thing.

Household refrigerators shall be equipped with a device enabling the doors thereof to be opened easily from the inside, either by the application of an outwardly directed force to the inside of the door or by the rotation of a knob similar to a conventional doorknob. The device shall not render the refrigerator unsatisfactory for the preservation of food under any or all normal conditions of use.

Well, gosh! There’s nothing in the Refrigerator Safety Act about limiting who is allowed to purchase a refrigerator, doing background checks on a refrigerator purchase, buying a refrigerator from a licensed refrigerator dealer, trying to ban extra large and cold refrigerators, banning automatic ice makers unless you have a license from the government to own one, or limiting the capacity and functionality of the refrigerator. If that was the case, I’m sure the National Refrigerator Association would have screamed bloody murder!

Most guns already have a device that ensures they can’t be fired when engaged. For the Glock and a few others, it’s your booger hook, but many have what’s called a safety. And Glocks do have an internal safety that makes them drop safe and only fire if the actual trigger is pulled. It does not render the gun unsatisfactory for its normal conditions of use, which a ban or the so-called “smart technology” would.

In 1985 a study published in Public Health Reports looked at the data from California about how many children between 0 and 9 years old died from suffocation in a fridge or freezer. The researchers found that between 1960 and 1981, such deaths fell by half, from just over 1 child per million to less than 0.5 children per million. That’s a little over 20 years of data.

According to the CDC, between 1999 and 2014 (the furthest back I could access that data), accidental firearm deaths of children between 0 and 9 years old were .9 per million. That’s less than one child per million of the same age.

But hey… if you want to pass a law that would require consumers to safely dispose of their guns, go right ahead.

Just leave the rest of my rights alone, filthy hippies!

Meet the new gun control – same as the old gun control, but with more dumb


For those of you worried about new White House Executive Orders on gun control, I have news for you: they’re just as useless, redundant, and ignorant as the gun control regulations already on the books, but the Kabuki is useful for the gun grabbers who are trying to claim that they’re implementing “commonsense” regulations on “gun safety.”

Let me assure you that the new EOs have nothing to do with gun safety. They will do nothing to make you safer. They will do nothing to reduce “gun violence” (as if that specific form of violence is somehow worse than any other form of violence). They will do nothing to keep guns out of the hands of criminals.

spn_baboon-e1283142065853As a matter of fact, I’m pretty sure that whoever wrote these EOs, has the reading comprehension skills of a stoned baboon.

The White House uses tough language (and by that, I mean bold text) to tell us that “it doesn’t matter where you conduct your business—from a store, at gun shows, or over the Internet: If you’re in the business of selling firearms, you must get a license and conduct background checks.”

Let’s remember that if you’re in the “business of selling firearms,” you need to have a Federal Firearms License or an FFL. If you’re an FFL, you have to run a background check on anyone wishing to purchase a firearm, regardless of where you sell your wares, including gun shows or stores.

And speaking of which…

Let’s talk about the burning stupid of emphasizing your obligations to do so if you’re selling guns on the Internet. Maybe the White House isn’t aware of this, but one can’t simply buy a gun on the Internet. There’s no from which you can purchase a firearm. An online purchase from an FFL has to be sent to an FFL in your area, where you will fill out paperwork and receive the prerequisite anal probe to prove that you’re not a criminal or reprobate, and if your background check comes back clean, you will get your gun.

Mike explains further.

Exempt from the “only through a dealer” or “only via common carrier for handgun” are certain collectibles known as Curios and Relics, which ATF keeps a list of, or, are 50 years old an IN THEIR ORIGINAL CONFIGURATION (not with a different stock, shorter barrel, etc).  Any mods reset the 50 year clock for purpose of being a C&R only. There is an FFL, the Type 03, for C&R collectors. If you don’t have a C&R FFL and receive one, you can do as you wish within the law. If you have a C&R FFL, you can receive such items directly by mail or carrier to your home of record, and must keep a log.  If you have logged the weapon as a C&R you MAY NOT modify it with aftermarket stocks, etc, that change its format.

See what I mean when I say “redundant?”

Let’s be honest here. What they really want is to ban private sales. They want to control how you dispose of your property.

Now, I won’t even address the “Dear daddy government – can I please have permission to exercise my basic right? Pretty please? Look, I’ve submitted all my paperwork!” lunacy. I’ve addressed it many times before. Suffice it to say that asking the state permission to exercise a right demeans and destroys the fundamental meaning of that word, but this douchery in the name of “making our communities safe” is so superfluous and transparently lacking any common sense, that it’s tough not to ridicule it.

Speaking of ridicule…

Throwing more money at the ATF to help enforce our voluminous gun laws is laughable, considering this is the same agency that tossed illegally purchased guns over the Mexican border to violent drug cartels. But hey, we need to look like we’re doing something. That’s the important thing!

I do want to address the directive instructing the Departments of Defense, Justice, and Homeland Security to promote the use of so-called “smart gun” technology, because I think it could be an extremely dangerous idea. Imagine, if you would, the following scenario:

You’re a law enforcement officer engaged in a shootout with a drug cartel. Your buddy gets hit, but you’re still in the thick of the fight. You run out of ammo, and your spare mags are empty too, so you reach for your buddy’s gun in order to continue shooting…


Nothing happens, because your buddy’s gun is only coded to his biometrics.

Now, imagine you’re a Soldier deployed to the Middle East, and you’re engaged in a gun battle with some Islamic terrorist combatants. Same scenario.


Nothing happens, because you’re buddy’s rifle is coded to accept his fingerprints only.

I assess this is part of the reason why law enforcement agencies have told those pushing “smart guns” to pound sand. Reliability is another issue.

Sensors and fingerprint readers need to work even when covered in sweat, dirt, or blood — and once the weapon is picked up and ready to be fired, it needs to work no matter the situation.

“In a combat situation, a shooting situation, there’s real confusion and chaos. It’s not like TV,” Pasco said. “Often times they’re very close quarters. We want a police officer to be able to take any gun, his partner’s gun, a criminal’s gun, any gun, and use that gun to his advantage. If he is in a scuffle, and he gets a criminal’s weapon and it’s useless to him, we’ve got a safety problem.”

In other words, this isn’t and shouldn’t be a political issue. Petty tyrants in three-piece suits protected by armed men willing to take a bullet for them have no business dictating to the very people who are on the front lines, who risk their lives every day, and who have made a commitment to defend the very Constitution on which said petty tyrants now are dropping an enormous, steaming turd, what tools they should use to do those jobs.

Dana Loesch does a yeoman’s job of fisking the entire pile of droppings here. I won’t duplicate those efforts.

I am, however, predicting an increase in the sales of guns and ammunition coming in 3… 2… 1…

Older Entries

%d bloggers like this: