"Too many illegal guns are in circulation, from handguns to military assault rifles. These guns are powerful enough not only to shoot up churches and schools but to bring down airplanes."
Hey, I didn't know there were legal anti-aircraft guns in Chicago. Where can I get one?
19 comments:
I started to read it, but decided I don't need theme music.
Notice the asides the "Reverend" Jackson throws in. Shorter sentences for non-violent drug dealers ( the black ones) increase job hiring ( how? by magic?) raise the minimum wage (ask Wal-Mart how that's going) and ad nauseum, ad infinitum on and on, the same old tired shit about gun show loop holes, background checks, interstate gun transfers, yadda, yadda, yadda. Laws that are already on the books, and things that already are verboten. He'd like to bamboozle the gun rights people the same way he does his own people, bait and switch, lie your ass off, and do a lot of things once he gets the chance, that he couldn't do otherwise. If he turned his attention to Chicago, and Illinois, with their impending bankruptcy, he might be doing some good. But oh, no, it's the guns, not his Dem. buddies spending the city and state into penury.
Does anyone really care what this extortionist has to say?
Bob
III
There's no such thing as an "illegal gun."
I spent many years shooting at things from helicopters in the Marine Corps.
You really get a good look at just how ineffective most weapons are at any range when you are at twilight and using tracers. In general you would never be much closer than 1000 meters your target unless you are planning on landing there.
5.56 just wonders with the wind and is really pretty ineffective within any distance a helicopter would like to get close to full auto or not.
308 is a little better and you could possibly hit something by accident.
50BMG can be effective on full auto but generally is best at hitting buildings or vehicles. It isn't very effective at hitting people but it is quite effective at keeping the enemy in his hole and refraining from shooting at you.
If small arms were as effective as these yoyo's like to make them out as it would be impossible to operate any light aircraft or helicopters within any warzone. They would drop like flies.
Anyhow. This is the reason we have developed all sorts of missile and cannon systems to use against aircraft and ground targets.
Maybe we could work out a deal for a "fleet purchase".
MikeH.
A Geriatric Threeper
The anti-gun lobby can be defeated too. Need I say how?
Until that lying, racist huckster wants to address the real problem of black-on-black crime he should just shut the fuck up.
Thank you for the link, Mike. It was very informative and enlightening.
Full disclosure: Seeing who wrote the article, I didn't waste my time reading it. I just read the comments. :-)
Understanding The Purpose Of the Militia, And Their “Muskets”
The Founders feared that a federal army would be used as a tool of tyrants to oppose the citizenry.
That was a smart take, for if we look at world history, federal militaries have been the weapon of bloody butchery far more against their own citizens than they have been deployed to fight in the defense of their citizens in foreign wars.
As we’ve often noted here in recent months, governments of the 20th century murdered 262 million of their own people in domestic purges called democides, far more than they did in combat between nations during that bloody century.
In every instance, the population to be slaughtered was disarmed “for the common good” first.
The Founding Fathers, having just won a war against a powerful Army that was oppressing its own citizens in the service of a tyrant, was clearly against centralized control of military units. They stated a clear preference for local militia.
When you read the exact words of the Founding Fathers, they make it very, very clear that they wanted the citizenry armed with weapons of contemporary military utility, in order to pose a credible threat to the government. Today, that means AR-15s, AKMs, and similar “assault weapons” with magazines that would be militarily useful, including the standard 20- and 30-round magazines common to most of these weapon systems.
Put bluntly, any law that bans so-called “assault weapons” and other militarily-useful arms and magazines is blatantly and flagrantly unconstitutional, regardless of the opinion of any elected official or appointed judge.
http://bearingarms.com/modern-american-militia-musket/
This gun safety bill improves firearm rights
A Republican lawmaker in the House wants to make it easier for American sportsmen to protect their hearing by eliminating a costly government barrier to suppressor ownership
http://personalliberty.com/this-gun-safety-bill-improves-firearm-rights/
Isn't this the guy with untold numbers of illegitimate children by women other than his wife? Isn't this the guy whose son and daughter-in-law now sit in prison for gross campaign violations?
The lobby? Perhaps.
The American gun owners? NEVER.
We fight back.
After Rev. Jackson gets done stroking his way through the rest of the rack we get to the "money ball":
"Change will meet fierce resistance. Reform may be blocked and sabotaged again and again. But that is only reason to keep pushing. Make the case for fundamental reform at the local, state and national level. Lay out a comprehensive strategy. Challenge citizens to demand the changes that we need. No civilized country can allow this level of violence to continue without mobilizing in response."
He wants armed men to go into people's homes and take guns by force. Starting at the "local level". And the example he used is the violence on Chicago's South Side. So he's asking the South Side's residents to demand house to house searches and confiscation of something called "illegal guns". Apparently he thinks it's past time for Chicago PD to step up to the plate and forcibly remove the guns from Chicago's South Side.
Or did I read something wrong?
Sounds like its past time for the Rev to pay Mayor Emanuel a visit. I'd love to be a bug on the wall for that one.
Are we yet at the point where everyone realizes the ONLY way we are going to stop this insanity and the constant violation of our rights and freedom is to kill these idiots? Are we there yet? Do we realize that these collectivist authoritarians are like rust and the will never stop eroding our rights and the quality of our lives? That the only time these people will let free Americans be free is when these people are dead? Are we there yet? Why the fuck are we still talking to these people? Is it that we are going to wait just a little longer and let them go a little further? How much of this life and this country are we going to let them destroy before we stop them? I'm just wondering? Because I really do not understand why we are still letting these people get away with this crap? Maybe we all really do understand what must happen and its just too horrible to face? I just wonder how much more damage we can sustain before it's too late? Is November 2016 the time when we decide? And what happens when through fraud and deceit Hillary is elected? We gonna' sit around for another eight years wringing our hands?
These guns are powerful enough not only to shoot up pastors and fools but to bring down dark angels.
There that is more like it!
III
You can not police violent people with kindness - Jackson, Obama, Holder, and all their fellow progressive socialists have now made it not only politically incorrect, but downright illegal for police to "police" black people! Specifically in the inner city! Now it is more than an increase in shootings and deaths - ALL HELL IS BREAKING LOOSE! I know it is politically incorrect to say - BY DESIGN - but in case nobody noticed - SOME PEOPLE NEED TO BE AGGRESSIVELY "POLICED"! You can not work as a police officer, in an inner city war zone, controlling violent well armed drug gangs, armed with kindness and introduction cards.
Progressives answer to this ENGINEERED problem is "GUN CONTROL" - GO FIGURE! This article was is full of the socialist reinterpretations working to give us "Change we can't believe we are being forced to believe in". "The Department of Homeland Security should be there, detailing the threat posed by the spread of guns designed for the military, not for hunters." BECAUSE THE SECOND AMENDMENT GIVES US THE RIGHT TO HUNT WITH LIMITED SPORTING ARMS THAT PROGRESSIVE SOCIALIST POLITICIANS ARE COMFORTABLE "ALLOWING" US! ASK ANDREW CUOMO - NO ONE NEEDS 10 ROUNDS TO HUNT A DEER!!! So now citizens are left BY LAW with 7 bullets against a four man home invasion team. (Unless you are an active or retired law enforcement officer and exempt from gun control restrictions)
THE PROBLEM IS THAT AFTER REINTERPRETATION THAT EFFECTIVELY REPEALS THE SECOND AMENDMENT IS PUT UNCONSTITUTIONALLY INTO LAW - 3 COURT DECISIONS HAVE SO FAR SAID - NO PROBLEM!
THESE REINTERPRETATIONS AND MISINTERPRETATIONS ARE EVERYWHERE AND PUT TO THE PUBLIC AS FACT - LAWS ARE PUSHED THROUGH AND IT WILL TAKE A LIFETIME IF AT ALL TO UNDO THEM!
Jesse sat down with Barack to produce this propaganda! The thrust is if "Chicago style gun control" is nationwide - there would be no guns and the inner city ghetto will be a paradise of peace and harmony. Heroin is illegal everywhere and can not be cooked in a kitchen like meth - it must be smuggled in from other countries. WE HAVE A HEROIN EPIDEMIC AND GUNS WILL BE AS AVAILABLE AS HEROIN IN A POST CONSTITUTIONAL AMERICA!
They fear dictating to an armed citizenry - they do not fear armed criminals - armed criminals avoid government contact and pose no threat to their power - armed criminals create fear to warrant an always growing police state - and this is all designed to disarm US!
PS - The non-racist truth is, Jesse, to be marketable for employment the best thing you can do for yourself is SPEAK WELL IN A MANNER TO MAKE YOURSELF SEEM INTELLIGENT!
In a manner to have someone want YOU to represent their business! If you feel you must speak, dress, and act like you are in a real life rap video - you limit your marketability for employment. Non PCBS truth.
Yes, the gun lobby can be defeated. Then what? They can pass all the laws they want. Laws are just words on paper. Words on paper do not affect behavior. People only obey a law/rule if/when it is convenient (or perhaps, not overly inconvenient) to do so. For some people the mere fact that the government has proscribed private firearm ownership and established harsh penalties for non-compliance will make said ownership sufficiently inconvenient. For some. For others (a significant minority if not, perhaps, a majority) it will not. What will the confiscators do then. Gallons of ink has been spilled (and many coulombs of electrons inconvenienced) of late mentioning the experience in Australia. That is fine with me. As I (and I suspect many of you) have read, the Aussie experiment in general disarmament was, in fact, a dismal failure. The guns turned in were mostly small caliber and non or semi-functional. Most Aussies did NOT turn in anything of value - either for hunting or self-defense. They most emphatically were NOT "disarmed". And that was from a people without our own sense of history and without anything like our 2nd Amendment.
So I end as I began. Yes, the gun lobby can be defeated. Then what?
The "Gun Lobby" has been defeated. And we know what happened as a result.
We know that there were two primary purposes for the "Assault Weapon" ban as first proposed by Josh Sugarman of the VPC. By now you have read the policy paper I'm referring to, or you simply haven't been doing your homework. It's OK if you stop reading this while you go find it and bring yourself up to speed.
Those two purposes were:
A) To show that a small class of relatively unpopular and not very commonly owned weapons could be successfully banned by the U S Government in direct contrast to the anti-gun forces' repeated failures to ban handguns.
B) To show congress that "The Gun Lobby" could be defeated on a gun control law proposed by congress and that there would be little or no effective blowback if such a law was in fact passed.
And we also now know what would happen if the anti-gun forces got their wish. The 1994 AWB was passed. The blowback, in part, caused the Democratic Party to lose control of the House of Representatives for the first time in 40 years. And the AR-15 platform became arguably the most popular weapon platform in the USA.
Unintended consequences indeed!
Post a Comment