Out of Control Gun Control

Several gun manufacturers are getting fed up with some of the new legislation being passed into law on gun control. They are refusing to sell guns to any buyers in New York, for example, because of the harsh new laws being put into play. Even the police departments will not be able to purchase guns from these manufacturers. 

Gun control advocates claim that stronger gun control will lead to fewer gun-related murders, but the facts don't prove that liberal theorizing. In fact, most of the time, facts run contrary to liberal thinking. So what are some of the facts? The facts in this article were compiled from JustFacts.com, which I believe are accurate and unbiased. You can judge for yourself or go to other resources that offer hard data. 

In 1976 the Washington DC City Council passed a law prohibiting residents from possessing handguns and requiring all firearms in private homes be a) unloaded, and b) rendered temporarily inoperable with either a trigger guard or by disassembly. During the time this law went into effect, until the time it was deemed unconstitutional, the murder rate in DC went up 73% higher than previous, where the US murder rate decreased 11%. This fact is something most conservatives might predict while most liberals would hide.

In the UK, gun control went into effect in 1968 and by 1997 all guns were confiscated from the public. The homicide rate has shot up (forgive the pun) 52% higher after the gun control law first went into effect.

Chicago (Obamaville) passed gun control legislation in 1982 where there was a ban on handguns that prevented the possession of such weapons except those registered with the city government prior to the law. The law required those who possessed handguns to register them every two years or stand to lose their guns, and in 1994 the registration was required annually. In 2005, 96% of all firearm murders were committed with handguns. Good job.

When Florida allowed concealed carry permits (Oct. 1987), the murder rate dropped 30% while the US rate overall dropped only 15%. When criminals wonder whether or not their intended victim is "carrying," it may give him a reason to go hunting for victims in, say, New York or Chicago.

There are anywhere from 2000 to 5200 gun shows a year in the US. In a 1997 survey of 14,285 inmates who used firearms in their crime, about 0.7% got their gun at a gun show, 1% at a flea market, 3.8% at a pawn shop, 8.3% at a retail store, 39.2% from an illegal street source, and 39.6% from family or friends. These statistics are somewhat old and do not reflect how some illegal guns were provided by our Department of Justice--but that's another story and does not get much air time in the left wing mainstream media.

It amazes me how facts can be readily disregarded when they don't fit into the liberal mindset. It almost seems obvious what the real problems are with gun violence in this country. We glorify violence in our movies, and in our video games. Our cultures is programmed to accept violence as a way of solving problems. Then we have mental health issues that, if screened, are disregarded because we don't want to impinge on anyone's rights--unless, of course, if it has to do with the first two Amendments. In states where involuntary mental health institutionalization is easier to obtain, there is a significantly smaller propensity for mass shootings to occur. 

But liberals, having their own mental health issues, will always blame the tools of violence rather than the actor of the violence.

Tweet

Obama's State of the Schism Address Part Deaux

This is the second installment of the speech Obama gave to the country on February 12th. As before, I am including what I believe to be Obama's secret thoughts (unspoken enclosed in parentheses and written in italics). I have not included the speech in its entirety, but if that bothers you, all you need to do is refer to any other of Obama's speeches and will see the same thing. There is a rumor that he lip-synched this speech, but that is unsubstantiated. To view the first part of this historical speech, go here    

In summary, I believe the real State of the Union can be compared to the Carnival Cruise Ship that is being towed into port due to power failures, broken toilets, and low on food and water.

Here goes:

Check out this smile, baby

In 2011, Congress passed a law saying that if both parties couldn't agree on a plan to reach our deficit goal, about a trillion dollars' worth of budget cuts would automatically go into effect this year. These sudden, harsh, arbitrary cuts would jeopardize our military readiness. (And you idiots don't even know this sequestration was my idea--thank you mainstream media for watching my back). They'd devastate priorities like education, energy, and medical research . . . .

. . . . Most Americans--Democrats, Republicans, and Independents--understand that we can't just cut our way to prosperity (we have to spend our way there). They know that broad-based economic growth requires a balanced approach to deficit reduction, with spending cuts and revenue, and with everybody doing their fair share (which will be determined by ME) . . . .

. . . . Now is our best chance for bipartisan (hahahahahahahahaha) comprehensive tax reform that encourages job creation and helps bring down the deficit. . . .

. . . . None of us will get 100 percent of what we want ( except me, suckas). . . . So let's set party interests aside, and work to pass a budget that replaces reckless cuts with smart savings and wise investments in our future (and if you think I'm going to actually write another budget myself that you jerks are all planning to vote against, you can kiss my royal butt). . . .The (26th) greatest nation on Earth cannot keep conducting its business by drifting from one manufactured crisis to the next. Let's agree, right here, right now, to keep the people's government open, pay our bills on time, and always uphold the full faith and credit of the United States of America. (I believe Nancy P just wet her pants). The American people have worked too hard, for too long, rebuilding from one crisis to see their elected officials (excluding me, of course--stop looking at me like that, Boehner), cause another. . . .

. . . . Our first priority is making America a magnet for new jobs and manufacturing (which will be in solar panels and electric cars--nothing can go wrong again). . . . Caterpillar is bringing jobs back from Japan (while GE is bringing jobs to China, but that's on the DL).

(So, in summary, I want to tell you, my fellow Americans, that if you want more jobs, a better economy, a richer future for your children, and your grandchildren, do everything I tell you to do--it will go easier on you if you just listen and stop whining. Sure, I'm going to increase your taxes, but you like me, so it doesn't really matter to you what I do. See--I'm smiling . . . don't I look cute when I smile? Aren't I the cutest president you've ever known? Remember, big government is what we need, for only with a powerful government can we really get the job done. You can depend on us for your total needs, your total protection. You can put away those silly, dangerous guns and allow our military to defend and protect you. And finally, if you will only allow me to have it my way, as they say at Burger King, those people who say things you don't like to hear, those conservatives who don't know how to think large, will not be able to spout their anti-American nonsense anymore. Finally we will grow. Finally we can rid ourselves of that useless and antiquated document the conservatives pray to like it was their Bible; the Constitution. Who needs it? Who needs the Bible too, when you think about it? The new wave of the future is already here.)

(Allahu Akbar).

It's obvious that I took a great deal of liberty delving into the darkest recesses of Obama's mind. I doubt that what I came out with is totally accurate, but I equally doubt that it was totally off the mark. I see our president as a narcissistic socialist whose intentions are to change America into what he believes is best for us. For him, that is a noble cause; for us, it would be our downfall and the end of our way of living forever.

The reason he has gotten away with as much as he has, is due to the way our society has already deteriorated to the "gimme, gimme" nanny state. We, as a nation, have become incredibly lazy--not all of us, but many of our latest generation. The Occupy Wall Street Movement exemplifies this in detail and my novel, Scent of a Movement illustrates this in detail as well--it's coming out in a few more months as it's in final rewrite.

If you have any comments, good or bad, please feel free to share them in the comment section below.

My Web Site


Tweet

Obama's 2013 State of the Schism Address

Last night President Barack Hussein Obama gave his fourth State of the Schism Address on live TV, in front of his fans and coal-generated electrical lights. He spoke for about an hour and seemed to dazzle the left as he baffled the right with his fairy dust solutions to America's woes. He said a lot of stuff; he always says a lot of stuff, and let's face it, he says nothing better than anyone else, except perhaps, Nancy Pelosi. (She is currently being measured for her straight jacket and Biden is her tailor).

I have pulled out the transcript of the entire diatribe and have decided that instead of directly commenting on the content, I would be inside Obama's head and speak the words he actually might have thought but didn't say. Now I understand that I cannot  possibly know what was in our fearless leader's mind, but I am allowing myself artistic license. If you believe you have a better take on a particular statement, please feel free to comment on it. 

For mercy sake, I will not transcribe all of the speech as I saw it, but only some of the more obvious verbal diaperage, (my new made up word of the day). I will italicize and encase in parenthesis my take while leaving Obama's words untouched.

Fifty-one years ago, John F. Kennedy declared to this Chamber that "the Constitution makes us not rivals for power but partners for progress . . . " (I already have the power and Kennedy is already dead.)  "It is my task," he said, "to report the State of the Union--to improve it is the task of us all." (And you conservative slobs are gonna pay up the wazzoo before I'm done here.)

Tonight, thanks to the grit and determination of the American people, there is much progress to report. (You might call it a debt crisis but it's only a crisis if that wasn't my plan in the first place.) After a decade of grinding war, our brave men and women in uniform are coming home (whether we're done there or not and tough break for the poor folks who didn't make it--they will have died for a good cause--mine). After years of grueling recession, our businesses have created over six million new jobs (if you disregard what FactCheck.org says to the contrary). We buy more American cars than we have in five years, (screw Bush) and less foreign oil than we have in twenty (because my damned regulations couldn`t keep the private market out) . . . .

Together, we have cleared away the rubble of crisis (not counting the rubble from Benghazi, but so what-those guys were expendable) and can say with renewed confidence that the state of our union is stronger (like Cuba under Fidel) . . . . 

 It is our unfinished task to restore the basic bargain that built this country--the idea that if you work hard and meet your responsibilities, you can get ahead, no matter where you come from, what you look like, (or who or what you choose to have sex with).

It is our unfinished task to make sure that this government works on behalf of the many (who pay nothing into the government) and not just the few (who I don`t care a fiddlers fart about); that it encourages free enterprise (just as long as it's free for my donors and supporters) reward individual initiative (because that gets them to do my heavy lifting and taking the fall--oh, thanks Eric, Susan, Hillary and Leon, if I forgot to mention it)--and for the rest of you, you know who you are) and opens the doors for opportunity to every child across this great nation ( and soon to be Caliphate) . . . . 

The American people don't expect government to solve every problem (but dammit, I do). They don't expect those of us in this chamber to agree on every issue. But they do expect us to put the nations's interests before party (and America's interests are what I say they are, mother#@*!s) They do expect us to forge reasonable compromise where we can (just look at my zombies, they're eating this garbage up like pigs at the troth. Nancy is looking at me like she wants to carry my baby--she can't even carry my water). For they know that America moves forward only when we do so together, and that the responsibility of improving this union remains the task of us all . . . . 

Over the last few years, both parties have worked together (on the planet Zolar) to reduce the deficit by more than $2.5 trillion (and if you believe that, you would probably also believe that snakes have hips) --mostly through spending cuts, but also raising tax rates on the wealthiest (enemies of socialism) 1 percent of Americans. As a result, we are more than halfway towards the goal of $4 trillion in deficit reduction (and should be there by the time all the blondes die out and the dinosaurs return to Brooklyn) that economists say we need to stabilize our finances. (Listen to those idiot liberals applauding this crap--I'm on a roll, baby--Leno tonight) . . . .

Now we need to finish the job. And the question is how? (The answer is obvious peons--allow me to remain as your leader until such time that I deem myself no longer capable of handling my leadership. I say, screw term limits--if that Jew, Bloomberg can do it, why not me?) . . . .
    
                                                              * * * * *

I'll stop here to protect the G rating of my blog thus far. Suffice it to say, Obama talks pretty, but his insides are darker than a black hole in the far reaches of the Crab Nebula. I will continue with more of my take on his give, but it too will not be pretty.




Tweet

Marcobama State of the Union

I've been sick this week, sicker than a liberal during the 2010 midterm elections, sicker than the Iranian space monkey when he discovered he wasn't really leaving Iran and it was all a hoax. But I'm getting well and I will be going to work today. 

I'm lucky to have a job, unlike many people who voted for Obama. He practically monopolized the black vote but blacks are making less money than before and have a higher unemployment rate than they had when he first was elected. But minorities overwhelmingly vote for Democrats because they believe that somehow the liberals will help them rather than keep them down. They still haven't learned from history.

President Obama will be addressing the nation tonight in his State of the Union and I suspect he will tell us how we are going in the right direction and the economy is finally going in the right direction. If you believe that, I believe your meds must be low. Marco Rubio will be rebutting the president's speech. He will do it in both English and Spanish and it is said that if Joe Biden were to rebut Rubio, he would do so in both English and Pig Latin.

Rubio needs to contrast the Republican position regarding such issues as immigration, the economy and defense, but let's face it, somehow the liberal news media is going to depict him as pandering to the Latin community when he speaks to them. Conservatives can never win with the media and I think it's about time we do what Dr. Benjamin Carson did when Obama was part of his audience at the prayer breakfast--tell the truth, don't pull back, and say it clearly without apology. (Did you see Obama's face when he spoke? Priceless).

So the State of the Union Address is at 9:00 PM ET tonight and unfortunately, I finish work at 10:00 PM ET. I hope to be home in time to hear Rubio's response.

Let me know what you thought of the president and Rubio in the comments section.

Peace.

Tweet

Christopher Dorner: Liberal Terrorist

Christopher Dorner, former LAPD officer and ex-Navy veteran, is still on the loose as I write this. He is armed with assault weapons with magazines that hold 30 rounds of ammunition, and is somewhere in California or Mexico, or at CNN headquarters. The guy loves Anderson Cooper, Piers Morgan, and Obama. What do you want to bet that he also loves Chris Matthews and Saul Alinsky? You may have noticed that none of these TV personalities mentioned this on the air.

The state of California, the state of rigid gun control, is offering a million dollars for this guy`s capture. He has already killed three people comprised of a young engaged couple, and a police officer, and he vows to kill as many cops as he can. He believes that people on the LAPD are all racists and seeks revenge since being terminated from the police force after what was determined to be false testimony against another officer who was alleged by Dorner, to have used excessive force.

Armed with assault weapons, one can only wonder how the people in the area of his disappearance feel about having their own protection from this mentally ill man. I know many liberals who speak out against guns and for gun control have their own protection--Michael Moore, Gabby Giffords, and half of Hollywood have armed bodyguards, or carry their own weapon. Hypocrisy.

Let us hope that nobody else is hurt or killed by this man. Let us hope that if he comes across a home that he believes he can break into and injure the inhabitants, that they are well-armed with assault weapons or guns with enough rounds in the magazine to do the job. More is better.

Tweet

The Debate Drones On

The Obama administration is now saying that the United States has the right to kill a US citizen, with an unmanned drone, if it is believed that this person is a threat to the safety of the country. An example of this occurred when Anwar al Awlaki was killed by one of our drones along with his 16 year old son. There should be no doubt that Alwlaki was a threat to our society but there remains some doubt about the kid. Sure, he might have grown into a terrorist, following in his father's footsteps, but when he was killed he was just a teenager who probably worried more about his zits and little Asfida Ali down the block just a stones throw (forgive the pun) from the mosque, than about killing infidels.

There is a lot to debate about this issue--whether it's okay to kill American citizens based on evidence but lack of due process. There are clearly no clear answers. The Awlaki kid is an example of the dilemma.

The thing is, drones don't make surgical strikes that only kill bad guys. They often kill innocent (until proven guilty) bystanders. And how are decisions made as to who really poses a threat to our safety, and who doesn't. Does Obama decide this? Doesn't his administration have too much power already?

There must be more discussion on both sides of the issue and the solution will not be easy. We, as a nation, cannot allow Islamic terrorism to threaten us, and the only thing jihadists understand is strength, not a sit-down to discuss things like Obama hoped to do with Iran. Predictably, Iran refuses to have a sit-down with our ruler. 

Maybe we should "drone" Ahamdinejad--he isn't a US citizen. I know one thing Obama would like to "drone." 

Tweet

Coming and Going

February 1st was Hillary Clinton's last day as Secretary of State and John-I-Wrote-My-Own-Combat-Medal-Kerry's first day. We all wish Kerry luck because to do the job successfully, he's going to need more than what he was given genetically. I do give him credit for getting as far as he's gotten politically, and convincing two excessively wealthy women to marry him. Maybe they were into hair over looks.

But was Hillary (don't you love it that she is so well known that only her first name is needed to know who I am talking about) any better at Secretary of State?

Newsweek Magazine is saying that Hillary is the most powerful woman in the United States and women everywhere look up to her as their role model when they need to make tough life decisions such as whether or not to abort their unborn child, or get their hands on free birth control to prevent that aforementioned child from happening in the first place. (One would think that if you have the chance of receiving free birth control and still get pregnant, you shouldn't have the right to then kill the baby because you either didn't use birth control or used it incorrectly. In either case, it seems to me that God, or fate for you more secular types, is trying to tell you something about that child). 

But what about Benghazi and her royal screw up allowing four Americans to die because her office didn't answer the calls for help weeks before the consulate was attacked? Is this an example of being an effective Secretary of State?

What about Israel and how we've turned our back on them, our one important ally in the Middle East?

Iran laughs at us and sees us as weak and full of crap with our empty threats. Obama has created an image of the USA of a weak nation.

Tweet

Benghazi Revisited

The next round of hearings on Benghazi, the Libyan terrorist attack that took the lives of four Americans, is about to begin. Hillary did a marvelous job of saying nothing of substance during her testimony, and walked away from her position as Secretary of State with the left fawning over her as if she made Henry Kissinger, Condoleeza Rice, and Thomas Jefferson look like the Keystone Kops. Hillary is being replaced by John-Swift-Boat-Kerry, or Lurch, if you prefer, and I suspect  that he will do as formidable a job as his woman who would be king predecessor. I know Tyrelle Woods' and Glen Dougherty's parents are looking forward to answers on what really happened in Benghazi, but I'm quite certain that they will, instead, get speeches that take up the time limit of the politicians who ask them.

The panel has to ask questions that get direct "yes" or "no" answers. They cannot ask open-ended ones because they will only get filler rather than facts. The Democrats on the panel will likely ask softball questions and the RINOs will follow suit, but if the GOP wants answers, they need to ask the right questions, which I believe is as likely to happen as Chris Matthews voting for Marco Rubio in 2016. 

As I write this, Leon Panetta is speaking. He says that there wasn't enough time for the US to respond to the attack in Benghazi. (Lindsey Graham later asked him how he knew that at the time of the attack since he had no idea how long it was going to last--this just added after the Panetta speech). Panetta says that we weren't dealing with a continuous assault. Time, distance, and lack of adequate warning prevented an immediate response. But the US government spared nothing to assist in the defense of the consulate and save the lives of the four patriots who died. Panetta says that we are doing all we can to bring those who killed our people to justice--said with the same commitment as OJ said at his trial. All in all, Panetta is making a speech. I cannot wait for the questions. I anticipate the Democrats will fawn over him like they did with Hillary, and the GOP will ask open-ended questions that will result in fact-less answers, just like we received with Hillary.

Panetta, in his infinite wisdom, has decided to add 35 marine guards to embassy security. Brilliant idea--this is why he makes the big bucks. As Panetta drones on, (forgive the expression), I believe his strategy is to lull us to sleep, hoping we will not hear the rest of the inquiry. He has become repetitious, and is addressing the issue of sequestration, as if that's relevant to the discussion. 

We need to have the brass orbs to drop our PC bs and go for their jugulars. We need to challenge all the leftist excuses, just as we need to attack Obama's policies and call it what it is--socialism. We need to call out this administration about their support of the Muslim Brotherhood, just as we need to illustrate how Obama's words of his Muslim sentiments describe his true feelings. And finally, we need to ask Panetta why is his hindsight so much better than his planning.

Tweet