Fast, furious and wrong: Obama administration faces outrage over guns in Mexico

Our Founding Fathers included the 2nd Amendment in the Bill of Rights for sound historical reasons as well as to ensure that the God-given, thus unalienable, right of self-defense was clearly protected. Without the Bill of Rights, the Constitution would never have been ratified and our nation would have quickly devolved to tyranny. Despite the protections set forth in that the basis of all our laws, there have been those who disagreed with those protections and who since its ratification have been bent on the destruction of the Constitution as envisioned by the Founders. Through history they have been called by different names and now they use the sobriquet of "Progressive" even though the policies they support are entirely regressive in nature. We must always be watchful of their actions for while their words drip with sweet concern for mankind, the sweetness conceals poisons intended to destroy our liberty.

In this case we have a perfect example of such words. The president speaks of wanting to ensure that criminals in Mexico do not have access to weapons from America but it is not the criminals that are restricted or punished with increased bureaucratic red tape but the law-abiding citizen. That this Regime could see fit to send guns illegally to Mexico then use the fact that those guns were used in crimes in Mexico to justify additional gun control measures to limit the right of Americans to keep and bear arms is an unconscionable assault on our Constitution and our liberty. We must call for the removal, and if necessary the impeachment, of those involved in the act and in the cover-up that is ongoing. 

History shows us that tyranny begins with movements to disarm the citizenry for its own good. We are told time and again that the central government only wants what is best for all and to ensure that all are protected we must surrender our right to self defense and rely on the state for protection. The truth of the matter is that there is no safety in the state. It cannot be relied upon to be there when we are in personal danger for when seconds count, help is truly minutes away. The truth is that only law abiding citizens comply with such laws which gives the criminal class complete freedom to exercise its depredations with impunity. The truth is that the primary distinction between a free man and a slave is the right to bear arms yet there are those who choose slavery thinking that it will make them free.

Follow the title link for more. It won't appear in the NY Times, the Washington Post or the any of the major networks other than Fox because those are the promoters of progressive thought and lapdogs of the political elite currently in power.

Fast and Furious: With 'Gunrunner' Obama Moves Forward on Gun Control

When I first heard about this I asked myself what was the goal of "Fast and Furious?"  Having worked international law enforcement for over a decade I knew that without the other country being "on-board" and cooperating you were just pissing into the wind and were likely to get wet.  It is clear now that the goal was not to arrest the drug lords--Mexico had no idea what was going on and only they can arrest people in Mexico--but to ensure that there were statistics available to fan the outrage in the media as a way of smoothing the path for more onerous gun control laws.  Laws that we know affect only lawful owners and which criminals will ignore just as they ignore the plethora of gun laws on the books today. 

Now we have an announcement that the UN will be meeting this week on the gun control treaty that they plan to use to disarm all but the ruling elite in all countries.  (See: http://bit.ly/jUf6so)  This is the same treaty that Hillary Clinton and Obama have already said that they will support and sign and is clearly part of the "under the radar" moves that Obama let slip during a meeting with gun-control advocates a few weeks ago.  

Late last week Obama's spokesman told us that we can expect an announcement soon on "reasonable measures" to ensure gun safety which in all likelihood will have less to do with gun safety than to impinge on legitimate gun ownership.  It would appear that Obama, et al., are using two-pronged approach to get America looking one way at one hand while they stab us in the back with the other hand.  We must keep our eyes and ears open and ensure that we contact our Senators and Representatives and tell them "No!" when it comes to the UN treaty and Obama's anticipated Executive Order.  

Blaming the Right for the Giffords Attack Is Pure McCarthyism

George Will is always an excellent read and this one is spot on.

In the wake of the shooting the immediate move of the liberal left was not concern for the victims but positioning for political advantage.  The Democrat leadership and the left-wing blogosphere and the Left Stream Media, aided by the clearly addled Sheriff of Pima County, began an immediate attack on Sarah Palin, the TEA Party, talk radio (obviously conservative talk radio as liberal talk radio has been an abysmal failure) and Fox News.  They attacked Sarah Palin and the TEA Party because they fear her and them.  They attacked talk radio because it airs ideas that oppose their leftist meme.  They attack Fox News because it hasn't fallen in line with the slavish adoration of Barack Obama as best demonstrated by MSNBC.  (There are no more ardent or slavish sycophants of Barack Obama on the airwaves unless, of course, you want to count CNN as a whole.)

The script is now plain for all to see.  They will continue to point fingers at the political right in hopes of at least demonizing them and at best causing them to hesitate or pull punches in their political arguments out of a fantasy-land-fear that their debate has caused an individual to take violent action.  While doing this they will trot out the tried and worn-out arguments for gun control, restrictions on political speech and additional spending for security for the members of Congress.  (That will come in handy at future Town Hall meetings when they want to keep TEA Party members out and have only compliant crowds.)  Their end goal, of course, is domination rather than clear political discourse.

To be sure, the political discourse in America is loud and, at times, raucous.  It is supposed to be because when it is completely controlled by either side the result is not for the good of We the People.  I've often said that the 1st Amendment is a beautiful thing because it helps us to more easily identify who the idiots are and that has never been more true than today.  We have an aged Sheriff, clearly in his dotage, who instead of being the Law Enforcement Officer with 50 years of experience calming the community and assuring them that the evidence is being gathered properly and they are safe, launches into an unsupported, and unsupportable, diatribe against the political right thus shifting the blame from the defendant.

We have a New York Times that just over a year ago when a Muslim Army Officer shouted, "Allah akhbar!" as he began shooting and killing fellow soldiers at Ft. Hood, counseled that we shouldn't jump to conclusions about his motivation but should wait for the facts, now immediately jumping to conclusions in the absence of any supporting facts.  (As did all those on the left, including our dear leader.  Pity they never bothered to say, "Oops, you were right.  He is a Muslim terrorist acting in concert with other terrorists.)

We have Democrat politicians who have yet to shake a medieval mind-set that imparts motive and action to inanimate objects again trotting out tried and failed gun-control policies thinking, I suppose, that We the People are so stupid as to not remember that they just didn't work the last time they were tried and won't work this time.  (Of course, they've always opposed the 2nd Amendment and aren't about to change just because of a little ole' Supreme Court decision.  Remember, these are the same Democrat politicians who urge collective guilt for an individual's crimes because it's society's fault that the individual was forced to kill somebody.)

We have Democrat and liberal-left strategists working feverishly and overtime to fulfill the dictum of Rahm Emanuel that one should "never let a crisis go to waste."

Fortunately, I don't believe the American people are as dumb or sheepish as the liberal-left believes.

Follow the link for an excellent read from George Will.

Obama Eyeing Internet ID for Americans

"I know who you are now and what you wrote.  Now I'm gonna show you how we take care of the enemy in Chicago."  

American's have long objected to a Federal Government-controlled centralized data base for firearms because of concerns that an overreaching politician in the not-necessarily-so-far-distant future would use it to confiscate the arms of private citizens in violation of the 2nd Amendment.  Now we have an overreaching politician who is moving to seize control of the internet through innocuous sounding programs like "Net Neutrality" and now "Internet ID."  It's all being proposed by his "Czars" of course and we can count on him to blandly assure us that he won't allow anyone to interfere with our right to communicate our political ideas via the internet.  He may even issue a nice sounding Executive Order forbidding the use of the information to identify his political opposition which he refers to as "the enemy."

We have to ask ourselves:  Are we willing to trust a man who has lied constantly since elected with our 1st Amendment rights?  Well, are we?

I think not.  We're not ready for a Statist Regime that controls every aspect of our lives and tells us what to think and eat.  It's not 1984...and never will be.

Follow the link for the story.

Omission Watch: Obama Nominated Chicago Agent for ATF Chief, Drawing Opposition from NRA

Because it's not really about the guns.  It's about control.

Omission Watch: Obama Nominated Chicago Agent for ATF Chief, Drawing Opposition from NRA

Normally these type of nominations sail through Congress with little or no opposition. In this case, however, the proposed Director of the BATF has demonstrated a strong antipathy towards the 2nd Amendment and this cannot be tolerated. We cannot give bureaucrats, even if they are professional law enforcement personnel, authority which they are wont to abuse. In the case of Andrew Traver, there is no doubt that he is not interested in just enforcing the law. He is clearly in favor of disarming all citizens and has assisted the liberal media--is there any other kind other than Fox?--in the demonization of guns.

Write your Senators now and oppose his confirmation. This man should not be given the reins of power.

Follow the link for the story.

Washington Times EDITORIAL: NRA mans up to Harry Reid

The REAL Harry Reid.

Harry Reid might pass for a somewhat senile senior citizen if it weren't for the fact that he is the epitome of a political liar who believes that he is not accountable for anything said in support of a political position.  And if you try to hold him accountable it is akin to trying to hold on to a slippery eel and he will shamelessly redefine his words to mean the exact opposite of what he said and claim that he was only taking a position that would contribute to the national good.  He's doing that right now in his campaign for re-election as he redefines his infamous "This war is lost!" statement that gave succor to the enemy on the battlefields of Iraq to being the impetus that created the surge which he was unsuccessfully opposing.  The man clearly has no moral scruples when it comes to politics and political power; but he is, unfortunately, also not alone in that damning moral low-ground.

The NRA is, thankfully, holding him accountable for his actions, as opposed to his words, in supporting two, unquestionably anti-2nd Amendment, Obama Supreme Court nominees.  Reid is typical of Neo-Lib Democrats who say one thing then do another.  He has always said he supports the 2nd Amendment because that is politically popular in Nevada; but he helped put two über-liberal Supreme Court Justices with demonstrated antipathy to the 2nd Amendment through the confirmation process and they now sit on that Court with lifetime appointments.  If he truly supported the 2nd Amendment there is no way he would have voted for their confirmations.

So kudos to the NRA.  They should endorse Sharon Angle, of course, but at least they aren't endorsing one of the most despicable Senators in modern history.

Follow the link for more.

EPA Rejects Calls to Ban Lead in Ammo, Fishing Tackle

Clearly, getting involved works.

Whew!  That was quick!

Surprising, actually, that they went from a stated comment period to deciding that they had no authority to act.  Clearly someone managed to point out to the people at the EPA that they were wrong to even consider such a ban as it was beyond their purview.  They probably also realized that We the People were not going to sit still for such an idiotic move even if the man in the White House approves.

Follow the link for the story.

Environmental Protection Agency considering a ban on lead ammunition | Washington Examiner

Environmental Protection Agency considering a ban on lead ammunition | Washington Examiner

Reason #1,997 for disbanding the EPA. The Obama Regime is working overtime to disarm the nation and they're planning to do it through the back door.

Let's remember this on November 2. And among the marching orders given to those who we elect will be: cut the funding of the over-reaching EPA back to the point that the entire agency can fit in a double-wide trailer house located right next to the Arizona-Mexico border. But not enough that they can afford air-conditioning or telephone service.

Follow the link for more.

Kagan: Unfit for the Supreme Court

An ideologically compatible couple.

Kagan: Unfit for the Supreme Court

I had serious doubts about Sonia Sotomayor–which were confirmed in the recent 2nd Amendment case–but she was seated on the Supreme Court by the Neo-Lib Democrats and some RINOs. My concerns about Elena Kagan are even greater. This is someone who should not be a Supreme Court Justice not because she has never been a judge but because her core beliefs which she as heretofore kept concealed in her testimony are a direct antithesis to a belief that the Constitution means what it says and not what a judge decides he or she wants it to say. She may be charming and but her political instincts are too finely honed for her to not make decisions based on her personal politics as opposed to the law and the Constitution. Never was this clearer than when she was at Harvard and kicked military recruiters off-campus in violation of the Solomon Amendment or in her use of lies to twist the abortion debate so that partial birth abortions would be allowed.

This is not a person who should be a Supreme Court Justice. The 41 Republicans should stand together and filibuster her nomination.

Follow the link for more.

Rumors Abound that the NRA Might Support Harry Reid

There are rumors going around that the NRA plans to endorse Harry Reid in the Nevada race.  Clearly this is another case where the NRA is looking at the politics of the situation as opposed to the principles that are involved.  The political reason is clear:  Harry Reid has been a vocal proponent of the 2nd Amendment and should he not be elected he will likely be succeeded by Sen. Charles "Chuck You" Schumer, a very vocal opponent of the 2nd Amendment.  That is, if the Democrats can hold onto the majority in the Senate which, at the moment, is not guaranteed.

If they were to do that this would be the second time in this political season that the NRA placed politics over principle.  The first, of course, being accepting an exempt status in the DISCLOSE legislation that, having passed the House, is going before the Senate.  Many NRA members, me included, objected to that as we have always believed that the 1st Amendment was vitally important to protecting the 2nd Amendment and the DISCLOSE Act is definitely an assault on the 1st Amendment.  It's only purpose is to be in effect for the coming election so as to affect that election on behalf of Neo-Lib Democrats because it is sure to make its way to the Supreme Court where it will be thrown out before the 2012 election.  It is clear that the NRA accepted the exemption along with Neo-Lib friendly unions for political reasons rather than on principle.

Being wise to the political landscape is generally a good idea for any organization that lobbies and the NRA certainly does lobby.  But hedging bets in a struggle that, if lost, will definitely adversely affect the Constitutional rights of all Americans, is an egregious violation of principle.  And while the NRA may fair well as an organizational entity, Americans as a whole may not.

For my part, as a Life Member of the NRA, I sent the NRA the following message:

I am concerned about rumors flying around relative to the possibility that the NRA might endorse Sen. Harry Reid over Conservative nominee Sharron Angle in the Nevada Senate race.  I understand the political strategy that is being considered looks at who might be Harry Reid's successor should he not win if the Democrats retain control of the Senate and can agree that Chuck Schumer would be bad as he is not a 2nd Amendment supporter.  But we will always have to fight Schumer and his ilk over the 2nd Amendment and as long as we have Neo-Lib Democrats in office the fight will go on.

More important, however, is the overall composition of the Senate and the standing of the NRA as a proponent and protector of the 2nd Amendment and, indeed, the entire Constitution.  If we do not stand for the Constitution as a whole then we are sure to lose all our rights.  Harry Reid has shown himself to be a proponent of a socialist agenda that will eventually lead to an abrogation of the entire Bill of Rights or, even worse, a "redefining" of what is written in the Constitution.  He clearly showed that with his support of Justice Sotomayor who has already proven that she is firmly anti-2nd Amendment.  It’s no surprise, therefore, that he also supports Kagan who believes that the 2nd Amendment is outdated and wants to define it out of existence from the bench. 

That Reid says he supports the 2nd Amendment and the goals of the NRA is completely belied by his actions.  Better to have a vocal opponent who is battling us to our faces than one who puts his arm around us and hugs us while handing someone else the knife to stick in our backs.  

I urge the NRA not to endorse Harry Reid.  Endorse Sharron Angle.  She will stand up for us.  Besides, wouldn't it be a shame if the NRA's endorsement of Reid and his subsequent victory resulted in the Democrats retaining control of the Senate by a single member?

Stay principled.  Endorse the conservative candidate.

Sincerely,

I'll post the reply if and when it comes.

The Liberal Wing of the Supreme Court Clearly Favors a Disarmed Citizenry Subject to the Whims and Rules of the Government

Rush's title is "Gun Ruling Should Have Been 9-0" and that is true.  But those on the left have no place in their agenda for an armed, free people.  They firmly believe that the subjects of government rule must be disarmed if the government is to rule effectively.

That is why it is a mistake to ever put a Neo-Lib Democrat into power.  They are not there for We the People.  They are there to advance the agenda of their own political ruling class.

Follow the link for an excellent read.

Free Press and the Left Have Had At Least 30 ‘Behind Closed Door’ ‘Sellout’ Meetings with the FCC since January

Free Press and the Left Have Had At Least 30 ‘Behind Closed Door’ ‘Sellout’ Meetings with the FCC since January

There is no doubt that the FCC, led by radical leftist Julius Genachowski, plans an assault on all free speech that conflicts with their own world view. The proposed law to control unfavorable political speech by imposing extensive reporting requirements is key to the strategy of Barack Obama and will go hand-in-hand with the DISCLOSE Act that narrowly passed the House and is now before the Senate. DISCLOSE can only be described as a law by which the Neo-Lib Democrats plan to issue permits for political free speech to their own supporters (the Unions which are exempt from the Act) while regulating free political speech through comprehensive arcane and odious reporting requirements by small businesses and other groups less likely to support the Neo-Lib Democrat agenda. In other words, you can still say it but you had better have detailed data on hand going back over 5 years because you'll have to report it all to the government or be subject to fines. Can anyone say censorship?

What is disturbing to me, and to a great many on the radical left (I must admit it is an odd feeling to be partially aligned with those whose political position I abhor), is that a last minute add-on lumped the National Rifle Administration in with the Unions thus giving the NRA a free pass on political speech as well. The bill is being driven by the ultra-left of the Neo-Lib Democrats and I can't imagine any Democrat who wants to be re-elected wanting to support such a blatantly unconstitutional bill especially as it is crafted so that it will only affect one election–the next one–because it is sure to be declared unconstitutional by the 2012 election cycle. As a Life Member of the NRA I am appalled that the organization would willingly participate in a move that clearly puts politics over principle. The NRA has said many times that the 1st and 2nd Amendments are inextricably entwined so their willing participation in an assault on the 1st Amendment is troubling, to say the least.

Unless, of course, their presence there is an excuse for Neo-Lib Senate Democrats to vote no on a bill that will wreck their careers if they vote "Yea." Could there have been a behind the scenes deal worked out? Possibly. But the NRA has lost some of my respect if it was involved in such a shenanigan and it is clear that the NRA membership needs to start watching who they vote for during the annual election cycle. You can be sure I shall.

Follow the link for more.

Pajamas Media » History Justifies Supreme Court Overturning Chicago Gun Ban

Pajamas Media » History Justifies Supreme Court Overturning Chicago Gun Ban

An excellent post from Pajamas Media on the racism of gun control. Despite the histrionics of Chicago's Mayor Daley, history absolutely does justify the overturning of Chicago's gun ban. To deny men and women the right to keep and bear arms is to deny them status as free people for absent that right they are merely slaves.

Follow the link for more.

Supreme Court Rules that 2nd Amendment Applies to the States!

The Supreme Court issued its long awaited but expected ruling on McDonald and ruled that cities and states are bound by the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution.

For more information follow the link.

Stossel Argues Gun Control Increases Crime, 'I Was Once as Clueless as Senator Schumer' | NewsBusters.org

Would you buy a used car from this man?

Stossel Argues Gun Control Increases Crime, 'I Was Once as Clueless as Senator Schumer' | NewsBusters.org

And we all know that Sen. "Chuck-you" Schumer is totally clueless except when it comes to shaking down Wall Street. The Neo-Lib Democrats are very good at accusing the Republican Party of being a friend of Wall Street but the truth is that it's the Democrats who profit from a cozy relationship with the Wall Street barons. When Schumer was head of the Democrat Party's Senate Campaign Committee in 1984 and 1986 he raised millions from Wall Street which played a key role in powering the party to control of the Senate.

And we can't forget that this is the same, ever-loyal-to-the-troops "Chuck-you" Schumer that said of the success of the surge in Iraq: “This is a policy of last resort! This is a policy of desperation! And let me be clear: the violence in Anbar has gone down despite the surge, not because of the surge! The lack of protection for these tribes from al Qaeda made it clear to these tribes, ‘We have to fight al-Qaeda ourselves’. It wasn’t that the surge brought peace here. It was that the warlords had to create a temporary peace here on their own.” Of course, despite his efforts to rewrite history with total histrionics, we all know that the surge worked and the war was won and not lost. (Of course, the Neo-Libs are still trying to turn the win into a loss even at this late date. They continue trying to re-write history and say that the win never was. They're really stupid that way.)

On the 2nd Amendment and the right of the people to keep and bear arms, Schumer is stupidly British in his views. In Schumer's view you have an absolute right to not work and collect welfare from the state but you don't have the right to protect yourself in your home. There are others in public office who rise to Schumer's level of idiocy but none that surpass him. From his self-serving actions it is clear that he is one that would gladly abrogate the U.S. Constitution if that were in his power for he prefers the regulatory maze that makes up socialism and fascism to true freedom. Thank God it isn't in his power, and never will be.

Follow the link for more.

Schumer is clueless when it comes to Gun Control and many other Constitutional issues but stays in power because of a well-honed ability to get money from just about anybody.  And he doesn't care how they got it in the first place.  

EDITORIAL: The U.N. gun grabber - Washington Times

EDITORIAL: The U.N. gun grabber - Washington Times

Everyone, and I mean everyone both left and right, knows that Barack Obama lied during the campaign. The Right side of the aisle points it out with great consistency and the Left side ignores the lies because while he is a liar, he is their liar.  He lied often and well and with the help of a worshipping Neo-Lib Left Stream Media was elected to the Presidency.  It wasn't a long shot win because of the press' demonization of President Bush and the Republicans for 8 solid years (some of which was well deserved by the Republicans who started to act like Democrats).  A Democrat was bound to be elected absent the resurrection of Ronald Reagan himself and despite the breath of fresh air that was Sarah Palin, John McCain, patriot though he is, was not Ronald Reagan.  Unfortunately we didn't get a Democrat in the John Kennedy sense of the party but a Neo-Lib Democrat:  One who melds the liberal-progressive-socialist-Marxist ideal into a cohesive plan of action and, public sentiment be damned, pushes it down the throats of We the People.

One of the Obama's lies that was repeated on more than one occasion–and even echoed by Joe "The-Village-Idiot" Biden–was the one where he said in clarion voice, "I won't be going after your shotgun or hunting rifle!"  Right.  And if you believe that I've got a bridge you can buy in Brooklyn that will go well with the oil-covered swampland you already own the Gulf Coast.  The U.N. treaty that is discussed in the linked editorial from the Washington Times is the tool that Obama and his regime will use in an attempt to disarm America.  That he would authorize moving forward on that treaty is proof of his lie about "your shotgun or hunting rifle."  He want's America disarmed because only then can his Socialist-Marxist dream be safe for Obama realizes that the primary difference between a free man and a slave is the right to bear arms and his intent is to make us all slaves to a central government.

Follow the link for more on how Obama plans to violate the Constitution and abrogate the 2nd Amendment of the Bill of Rights.

The Audacity of Hypocrisy

Presidente Felipe Calderon would do well remember that the liberals will not be in power forever and we Conservatives will long remember the insults he has hurled at our country.  I am sure that he was at least indirectly coached by the Obama Regime and given assurances that a verbal attack on the Arizona law would be well received.  He must have, for his highly hypocritical remarks followed the Arizona talking points of the Regime and its acolytes:  the Neo-Libs.  It is appalling that he is ignorant enough to believe, however, that like Mexico, in the United States the political class is perpetual or that the American people will meekly accept criticism from a Third World leader who is more concerned with protecting the status quo (i.e. ensuring the rich get richer and the poor stay that way) than with solving the problems of his own country.  Calderon has been described as "honest" in comparison to his predecessor, Vicente Fox, but that is arguable and I'm sure that his successor will be described as "honest" in comparison to Calderon.

There is, of course, a baser motive behind the his bald lie of a statement.  The remittances sent by both legal and illegal Mexicans back to Mexico are in the $22 Billion--yes that's with a "B"--a year range.  That means that the export of Mexican citizens to the United States is the second largest legal money earner for Mexico after their oil.  I stress legal because the illegal drug and human smuggling trades bring in even more money but, unlike remittances, that money is harder for the Mexican upper class to get control of an add to their own bank accounts.  And that it precisely the reason that Calderon is in power: to ensure that the upper class continues to get richer at the expense of the underclass.  (The underclass is a continual problem because they can't let the underclass become a middle class or they'd lose their primary source of maids, drivers and expendable pistoleros.)

Speaking of pistoleros, the crass appeal for American gun control to the Neo-Libs sitting in Congress brought an enthusiastic and obligatory standing ovation from the Democrats (it seemed to be so well-scripted that I wondered if all the Democrats met before hand and practiced) and was also from President Obama's political talking points.  We all know that Obama would like nothing better than to abrogate the 2nd Amendment and is continually trying to set up a way to do it without appearing to do so.  The truth of the matter is that the fully automatic weapons and assault weapons that are favored by the drug traffickers in Mexico don't come from the U.S.  They come from the Mexican Army and other sources in both Latin America and the Far East.  Calderon knows that but it's more of a "you scratch my back by condemning the gun trade and I'll scratch yours by condemning Arizona" from his friend Barack.  Besides, his inability to address the violence in Mexico is causing him internal headaches so it is good he can appear macho on Mexican TV by criticizing the gringo Norte Americanos in their own house.  

The Alamo, which led to the Battle of San Jacinto and settled the question of the Mexican control over Texas or any other part of the United States.  Do you remember this from your studies, Felipe?

Calderon would do well to clean up the mess in Mexico before criticizing the United States.  Unfortunately he still is unable to read the map properly--probably a result of the reconquista lessons that are taught in Mexican schools.  But for his edification I'll once again post a map for him to study.

Now please pay attention, Felipe.  Study the map below.  It is not difficult to understand and if you look at it long enough maybe you'll actually learn something.

Kagan Opposes Second Amendment Gun Rights

Kagan Opposes Second Amendment Gun Rights

More than enough reason to oppose Elena Kagan and to stop her nomination.

No one who respects the Bill of Rights should vote in favor of her nomination. She's for limiting the 1st Amendment and doesn't believe the 2nd Amendment applies to American citizens. We can't have Justices who are for only "some" of the Bill of Rights.

Follow the link for more.

A terrifying reality: Father featured on TV show kills one of three who tried to invade his home

If Scott Knight had lived in Chicago or New York or any number of cities that have under the control of liberal-progressives for a long period of time he, his wife and children would probably be dead and the crime reported as a tragedy that the police were investigating.  Instead, he was able to exercise a true right (that's as opposed to one that has been "discovered" by Democrats such as the right to welfare), that of self defense, and prevent harm to his family and himself.

At least one, and possibly a second who is in the hospital, of the criminals who attempted the home invasion weren't so lucky.  That's why the liberal-progressive-socialists dislike self defense and the 2nd Amendment:  It's harmful to their voter base.

A person should always be ready and able to defend themselves and their family because the police, unless the person is extremely lucky, will only be able to investigate what happened after the fact.  They almost never are able to respond quick enough to stop a crime of violence even though that is something they would love to do at least once in their career.  Unfortunately once an armed assault starts it's usually over in 30 seconds or less.  As much as they would love to, the police just can't get there in time.

Just buying a firearm, however, isn't the answer.  If you are going to be armed in your house you need to think the entire issue through using logic and not emotion.  Emotion is great for liberals when they go out to save the snail darter but it doesn't do well when you're planning self-defense.  Storing the firearm can be a significant issue if you have children or if you live in a high crime area like Washington, DC, and you can't carry the weapon with you when you leave your house.  It is an issue that is easily solved, however, with some thought, common sense and a good gun safe.

And regardless of how old you are, actually using a firearm effectively does take practice.  If you haven't gone to a good range and practiced, hopefully under the watchful eye of a certified instructor, and you attempt to defend yourself you might make just a lot of noise and be more dangerous to the people passing by than to the bad guys.  Contrary to popular belief, watching a lot of action movies then practicing looking menacing in front of a mirror doesn't work to well.  Shooting is a learned skill and shooting well requires practice.

My belief is that a person should always be prepared and ready to defend themselves.  Criminals do not like to take the chance that their next victim might be armed and usually look for their victims in areas where gun ownership is most restricted.  Why is that, you ask?  Simple.  First, they are criminals so carrying a weapon illegally is not a big deal.  Second, they may be criminals but they aren't that stupid and they don't want to be the one who gets hurt.  It's much easier, not to mention safer, to rob or terrorize victims who are sure to be unarmed than to take a chance that the potential victim is armed and ready to defend him or her self.

Follow the link for more information.

By way of disclosure, in addition to being retired from law enforcement I am a Life Member of the NRA.

LAPD lobbying to end gun rights

Remember when Obama said that he wouldn't try to take away the guns of honest, law-abiding Americans?  When you see the bill that was introduced by his party it is clear that was just another lie that he used to get elected.

This is a bill that should not be passed.  It is a direct assault on the Constitution on both the Due Process and 2nd Amendment grounds.  Worse yet, it doesn't address the problem because it's not meant to address the problem.  It's meant to be a tool that the liberal-progressive-socialist Democrats can use to abrogate the 2nd Amendment and, like the thieves of Tammany Hall, ensure that only the ruling elite and their supporters have that right.

Imagine, your name is put on a list of suspected terrorists by someone you don't even know because maybe, just maybe, you wrote a harsh letter to a newspaper, a Senator or a Congressman.  Or maybe you belong to the NRA or write a blog like this one.  Then you go down to buy a new shotgun to hunt with and, WHAMMO!, your purchase is denied.  You ask why and the dealer says he doesn't know.  All he has is a rejection on the instant check through the State Police.

You ask the State Police and they say they don't know anything and all they have is that it's "Federal."  You go to the FBI, ATF and the Justice Department and are met with blank stares and shrugged shoulders.  Now you know that in order for you to buy a shotgun to hunt with you will have to hire a lawyer and file a suit in Federal Court.  So you have the money and you do so.

All your attorney is given is a heavily redacted document that makes no sense.  The judge can't even see the full file.  The government's position is that it can't be revealed.  You can't face your accuser because the government won't identify the accuser.  You can't call witnesses because the government won't show you the full accusation.  You are in a system that would make Joseph Stalin smile with pleasure.

And they plan on doing it in the name of making us safer.  These Senators, liberal-progressive-socialist Democrats all, along with enablers like Mike Bloomberg and Chief Kelly and the Chief of the LAPD, absolutely plan to take away the guns of honest, law abiding citizens.

I guarantee you that Barack H. Obama will sign the bill if it gets to his desk.  He knows he lied but that was to get elected.  Now he has to consolidate his power as fast and far as he can so he can retain that power.  And if not him, the next socialist president.

S. 1317, titled "Denying Firearms and Explosives to Dangerous Terrorists Act of 2009" should actually be titled "Denying Any American a Firearm Just Because We Say So Act of 2009."  It gives Eric Holder, the worst, most incompetent Attorney General in history, the discretion to deny anyone the right to purchase and own a firearm not based on Probably Cause but only on mere "suspicion" and "belief." It is a direct affront to the Constitution and a slap in the face of all law-abiding Americans.

To make matters worse, there is a companion bill, S.2820 that is titled "Preserving Records of Terrorist & Criminal Transactions Act of 2009" which is in fact a national gun registration bill.  No gun sale is exempted even if the person isn't on the nebulous "Terrorist Watch List" so it's clear that all Americans are considered "Terrorists & Criminals" if they buy a firearm.

Contact your Senators and Representatives now.  This is something that must be stopped.

And make sure you donate to whoever is running against Senators Lautenberg, Schumer, Levin, Reed, Feinstein and Whitehouse.  These people need to become unemployed as soon as possible.

Finally, if I were a New Yorker, I'd start thinking about what Mike Bloomberg, who got into office as a closet liberal-progressive-socialist in RINO clothing and now acts more like a petty dictator who wants to tell everyone else how to live their lives, has really done for New York City.  Are your taxes lower?  Is business better?  Do you enjoy life more?  If not, then you should fire him next election.  New York would be better off as New York, New York, rather than as New York, just-like-California.  (Broke, over-regulated and over-taxed.)

Follow the link to read more details about the bills.