rSydDc

Kriss Vector and firearm enthusiast

[dude-dude-dude-dude-dude-2]

Courtesy of @mike-two-delta

[koffeebitch]

How many more things don’t we know about at this point in time?

[sgt-rock53]

Very interesting theory on Trump's Success

The mayor of Livermore California explains Trump’s popularity and success.   This is perhaps the best explanation for Trump’s popularity.

Marshall Kamena is a registered Democrat and was elected mayor of Livermore, CA.. He ran on the democratic ticket as he knew a Bay Area city would never vote for a Republican. He is as conservative as they come. He wrote the following:

Trump’s ‘lack of decorum, dignity, and statesmanship’ By Marshall Kamena, Mayor of Livermore, CA.

My Leftist friends (as well as many ardent #NeverTrumpers) constantly ask me if I’m not bothered by Donald Trump’s lack of decorum. They ask if I don’t think his tweets are “beneath the dignity of the office.”

Here’s my answer: We Right-thinking people have tried dignity. There could not have been a man of more quiet dignity than George W. Bush as he suffered the outrageous lies and politically motivated hatreds that undermined his presidency. We tried statesmanship.

Could there be another human being on this earth who so desperately prized “collegiality” as John McCain? We tried propriety – has there been a nicer human being ever than Mitt Romney?

And the results were always the same. This is because, while we were playing by the rules of dignity, collegiality and propriety, the Left has been, for the past 60 years, engaged in a knife fight where the only rules are those of Saul Alinsky and the Chicago mob.

I don’t find anything “dignified,” “collegial” or “proper” about Barack Obama’s lying about what went down on the streets of Ferguson in order to ramp up racial hatreds because racial hatreds serve the Democratic Party.

I don’t see anything “dignified” in lying about the deaths of four Americans in Benghazi and imprisoning an innocent filmmaker to cover your tracks.

I don’t see anything “statesman-like” in weaponizing the IRS to be used to destroy your political opponents and any dissent.

Yes, Obama was “articulate” and “polished” but in no way was he in the least bit “dignified,” “collegial” or “proper.”

The Left has been engaged in a war against America since the rise of the Children of the ‘60s. To them, it has been an all-out war where nothing is held sacred and nothing is seen as beyond the pale.. It has been a war they’ve fought with violence, the threat of violence, demagoguery and lies from day one – the violent take-over of the universities – till today.

The problem is that, through these years, the Left has been the only side fighting this war. While the Left has been taking a knife to anyone who stands in their way, the Right has continued to act with dignity, collegiality and propriety. With Donald Trump, this all has come to an end. Donald Trump is America ’s first wartime president in the Culture War.

During wartime, things like “dignity” and “collegiality” simply aren’t the most essential qualities one looks for in their warriors. Ulysses Grant was a drunk whose behavior in peacetime might well have seen him drummed out of the Army for conduct unbecoming.

Had Abraham Lincoln applied the peacetime rules of propriety and booted Grant, the Democrats might well still be holding their slaves today. Lincoln rightly recognized that, “I cannot spare this man. He fights.”

General George Patton was a vulgar-talking.. In peacetime, this might have seen him stripped of rank. But, had Franklin Roosevelt applied the normal rules of decorum then, Hitler and the Socialists would barely be five decades into their thousand-year Reich.

Trump is fighting And what’s particularly delicious is that, like Patton standing over the battlefield as his tanks obliterated Rommel’s, he’s shouting, “You magnificent bastards, I read your book!”

That is just the icing on the cake, but it’s wonderful to see that not only is Trump fighting, he’s defeating the Left using their own tactics. That book is Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals – a book so essential to the Liberals’ war against America that it is and was the playbook for the entire Obama administration and the subject of Hillary Clinton’s senior thesis.

It is a book of such pure evil, that, just as the rest of us would dedicate our book to those we most love or those to whom we are most indebted, Alinsky dedicated his book to Lucifer.

Trump’s tweets may seem rash and unconsidered but, in reality, he is doing exactly what Alinsky suggested his followers do. First, instead of going after “the fake media” — and they are so fake that they have literally gotten every single significant story of the past 60 years not just wrong, but diametrically opposed to the truth, from the Tet Offensive to Benghazi, to what really happened on the streets of Ferguson, Missouri — Trump isolated CNN. He made it personal.

Then, just as Alinsky suggests, he employs ridicule which Alinsky described as “the most powerful weapon of all.”… Most importantly, Trump’s tweets have put CNN in an untenable and unwinnable position. … They need to respond.

This leaves them with only two choices. They can either “go high” (as Hillary would disingenuously declare of herself and the fake news would disingenuously report as the truth) and begin to honestly and accurately report the news or they can double-down on their usual tactics and hope to defeat Trump with twice their usual hysteria and demagoguery. The problem for CNN (et al.) with the former is that, if they were to start honestly reporting the news, that would be the end of the Democratic Party they serve. It is nothing but the incessant use of fake news (read: propaganda) that keeps the Left alive.

Imagine, for example, if CNN had honestly and accurately reported then-candidate Barack Obama’s close ties to foreign terrorists (Rashid Khalidi), domestic terrorists (William Ayers & Bernardine Dohrn), the mafia (Tony Rezko) or the true evils of his spiritual mentor, Jeremiah Wright’s church.

Imagine if they had honestly and accurately conveyed the evils of the Obama administration’s weaponizing of the IRS to be used against their political opponents or his running of guns to the Mexican cartels or the truth about the murder of Ambassador Christopher Stevens and the Obama administration’s cover-up.

So, to my friends on the Left — and the #NeverTrumpers as well — do I wish we lived in a time when our president could be “collegial” and “dignified” and “proper”? Of course I do.

These aren’t those times. This is war. And it’s a war that the Left has been fighting without opposition for the past 50 years.

So, say anything you want about this president - I get it - he can be vulgar, he can be crude, he can be undignified at times. I don’t care. I can’t spare this man. He fights for America!

[tomfromdenver]

Beautiful article! Love it!

[beinglibertarian]

The Case For The Second Amendment

1. Gun ownership, support of the Second Amendment, or “gun culture” do not lead to higher murder rates

There are three major things to compare when addressing a correlation between guns and loss of life: statistics across US states, statistics across countries and statistics over time, and I intend to address all three. First, let’s agree to use the homicide rate, not the gun death rate, for two reasons: gun death rate includes suicides, which, while equally tragic, aren’t related to the topic of guns and domestic violence, seeing that suicide has existed since the beginning of time and it doesn’t include murders by non-firearms. If a city banned guns outright and gun murders went down by 1000 but knife murders went up by 2000, why would we consider that gun control law a success even if the firearm related death rate went down?

First, let’s start by comparing time periods. From 1993-2013 the gun homicide rate has plummeted by 49%, while the number of privately owned firearms went up by 56%. The two problematic issues I find with these numbers is it doesn’t adjust for population change and it only counts gun murders, not homicides as a whole. When counting for population change, homicide rate plummeted by a staggering 52.63% while guns per capita increased by 28.22%, so after improving the data, the notion that more guns equates to less crime still isn’t less true.

Unfortunately, not every country has been as lucky as America in this regard. In 1997, the United Kingdom implemented a handgun ban throughout the county, and from 1996 to 2002 alone, when crime in the US and most countries was plummeting, the homicide rate skyrocketed 51.4%. Sadly, the Washington Post article I referenced to cite the UK handgun ban failed to mention that minor detail involving a historic hike in crime, and when the author mentioned the Cumbria rampage in 2010 when 13 people were killed in Britain, it didn’t blame the laws of the land, it just said it could’ve been worse if the gun laws didn’t exist.

If we were to look nationally, there really isn’t firm evidence either way. States like Wyoming, North Dakota and Idaho have some of the highest gun ownership rates in the country and all have a murder rate lower than 2 according to the CDC, while Delaware has the lowest gun ownership rate in the country at around 5.2% and a homicide rate of 7, higher than the national average. Gun control advocates can cherry pick too and point to states like Arkansas and Louisiana as violent gun environments or to New Hampshire as a gun free utopia.

Internationally, there seems to be a much more obvious conclusion: well-armed civilian populations generally have low crime, and vice versa. Look at the numbers and you’ll find that Russia and nearby states, Sub-Saharan Africa and most of Latin-America are evidence of gun-free countries with uncontrollable crime, while Central Europe, the Gulf states and North America represent gun-loving countries with limited domestic crime. However, the best representation of 178 countries can be seen in the image I provided with facts from the UN.

2. Gun rights are a women’s rights issue

The trend of the past few decades is a spike in female gun ownership and a decline in male gun ownership. In 1980, the gender gap calculated by male gun ownership minus female gun ownership was 40.2%, which has fallen to a mere 23.4% in 2014. In 1990, that number was 42.8%, which is also the first year I can find statistics for the forcible rape rate, which was 41.2 until falling to 26.6 in 2014. (This is per 100,000 people) There’s no questioning the correlation here: a 41.8% drop in the gender gun ownership gap matches a 37.9% drop in the forcible rape rate. Correlation doesn’t mean causation, but there are a few indicators that would encourage us to assume causation.

First, are female purchases of firearms for personal protection? Women certainly think so, as female gun owners are over three times more likely than male owners to say protection is the only reason they have a gun. The same source finds that 58% of female owners never go hunting compared to 35% of men. There are many instances of this, including the case of Catherine Latta, who was raped and assaulted by her ex-boyfriend in 1990. She illegally purchased a handgun after being informed a permit would take a week to obtain, and she fatally shot her ex-boyfriend that day when he attacker her outside her home.  Amanda Collins was raped when she was a senior in college, and while she had a concealed carry permit, it is illegal to carry a firearm on campus in most states across America.

If one were to stipulate leftist and feminist talking points that a rape culture persists in America, what would the solution be to combat this? Getting liberal sexual predators like Harvey Weinstein, Louis C.K., John Conyers, Kevin Spacey and Al Franken out of power, fired or exposed brings justice. However, is this the best form of deterrence and does it prevent the vast majority of sex offenders that aren’t sitting senators or Hollywood actors from committing horrible acts? My immediate answer is no.

As much as I think it would be wonderful to snap my fingers and change the behavior of every sexual predator along with every murderer and thief, it’s unrealistic to think we can dramatically change this centuries-old phenomenon overnight. The police response time isn’t nearly quick enough to prevent most rapes and much of the far-left distrusts the police anyways. If altering the behavior of the perpetrators is unrealistic and using a third party (law enforcement) to help with prevention is just as idealistic, the objectively best solution is to help the possible victims, which is usually women. Biologically, men on average have 40% more pounds of upper body mass than women, meaning they are at a disadvantage for defending themselves with handheld melee weapons, leaving the great equalizer to be guns, not safety pins, to help prevent rape.

3. Rifles aren’t normally used in murders

I would express confusion and bewilderment to the Democratic Party’s calls for bans on assault rifles or rifles in general if I wasn’t fully aware that liberals and left-wingers from Vox to Piers Morgan were excellent at cherry-picking or just blatantly ignoring data. In 2016, over 11 million firearms were produced in the United States, 48.5% were pistols or revolvers (“handguns”), 36.87% were rifles, 7.38% were shotguns, 7.25% were miscellaneous firearms. Because I don’t like to fabricate numbers, I subtracted the weapons exported and added those imported so we only count in weapons sold domestically, changing the numbers to 55.67%, 31.47%, 9.6% and 3.26% respectively. These numbers have been fairly consistent across the years and reflect the national amount.

Now, out of all the gun murders in 2016, how many were because of those awful children-killing rifles like the AR-15 that the left hates? After rounding up, 3.4%, compared to 64.57% for handguns and 2.38% for shotguns. So why are liberal politicians and organizations like “March for our lives” spreading false propaganda about rifles? I do not know. All I can tell you is that this misbelief can be added to the long list of lies from the gun control activists.

4. The Australia buyback program wasn’t successful

First off, the notion that the Australian buy-back program was respectful of any freedom that gun owners should have is ridiculous. The gun owners didn’t consent to have their 640,000 firearms taken away from them and didn’t have a role in the money given to them as compensation. In addition, to pay for this, the Australian government levied a 0.2% hike in the Medicare tax to pay for this, raising an expected $500M. (If you count for the Australian inflation rate, this would cost $833.4M today, or $1302 per firearm) Keep in mind, this only took away one third of all firearms in the country. If this were tried in the United States where there are 1.01 firearms per person based on the 2009 numbers, and a 2017 population of 324 million, and then adjusting for the US CPI of 249.62 compared to 112.1 for Australia, would cost just shy of $318B, roughly equal to the GDP of Colombia ($322B). Obviously, I don’t expect the left to care about the fiscal repercussions, but the reality is it would be a strain on the economy if that was ever adopted here.

Australia also hasn’t had a remarkably low homicide rate because there aren’t many guns. In a 2007 study taken after major buy backs, the nation ranked 42nd in the world out of 187 countries for guns per capita. Not only that, but it really didn’t prevent homicides, even though there were few homicides in Australia to begin with. In 1996 when the buyback program began, there were only 354 homicides in the country total. There would be 364 in 1997, 334 in 1998 and 385 in 1999. Did I miss the part where homicides plummeted?

5. Do these specific gun control proposals even work?

One of the biggest reductions in crime nationally in the United States occurred in the 1990s, and the authors of Freakonomics (Stephen Dubner and Steve Levitt) concluded that the data doesn’t support the claim that tougher gun laws had anything to do with it. The Brady Bill and Federal Assault Weapons Ban were the two major pieces of gun control laws from the Clinton era.

Let’s paint a picture of a country with remarkably similar gun control laws as the ones that many of these “March for our lives” protestors are calling for. This country has no right in their constitution that guarantees private firearm ownership, citizens are required to have licenses that come with automatic background checks, they are prohibited from having automatic weapons, homemade firearms, armor-piercing ammunition and long guns with shortened barrels. Owners are limited to only purchase five firearms, open carry is illegal, the country has seized at least 2000 firearms every year since 2012 and it only has 6.2 guns per 100,000 people, which is 14 times less than the United States. The country I’m thinking of? Honduras, the country with the highest homicide rate in the world at a whopping 91.6, according to the United Nations. To put that in perspective, if the US had that homicide rate in 2011 when that number was taken, an additional 270,167 people would’ve been killed that year.

6. Most perpetrators of gun crimes aren’t committed by the legal owner

This is not a controversial fact. The University of Pittsburgh found that in the 893 firearms uncovered from crime scenes, only 18% were used by the lawful owner. In a University of Chicago study, less than 2.9% of inmates that possessed a firearm purchased the weapon at a gun store, you know, the place where peaceful gun owners go to buy their firearms. Why are all of these gun control activists focusing on the marginal cases of homicide and trying to pry away guns form the owners that are disproportionately less likely to commit crimes with it?

David Hogg and Emma Gonzalez have all the passion in the world to march across the country and call for ludicrous gun control measures, yet none of the facts. Emma went on a podium to say “They say tougher guns laws do not decrease gun violence. We call BS.” Every bone in my body hopes she reads this article or really anything for that matter, and I genuinely hope she references something resembling a statistic, fact or academic journal in her future rants. I would print something from 17 year old David Hogg, but I don’t want to publish a poorly articulated collection of word vomit littered with profanity, but I’ll post the link to the data-free eye sore here. The problem is that the facts don’t support the claims or any policy proposal I’ve heard thus far. I didn’t make a natural rights argument and I don’t believe the Constitution or Bill of Rights are impeccable or sacred documents, otherwise the 7th Amendment wouldn’t have ignored the concept of inflation and the issue of slavery would’ve been dealt with. I look at the facts as objectively as I can, and I print it. I challenge David and Emma to a debate on the issue as long as it’s civil, and I warn everyone a final time: rights aside, most of these gun control measures will cause more destruction than prosperity.

Want to write for Being Libertarian? Click Here.

The post The Case For The Second Amendment appeared first on Being Libertarian.

from WordPress https://ift.tt/2E2yvOs via IFTTT

[haikushogun]

“The Second Amendment was misinterpreted so people could say their gun rights were protected but it was just to protect the rights to militia!” I say into the mic.

the crowd boos. i begin to walk off in shame, when a voice speaks and commands silence from the room.

“he’s right!” they say. i look for the owners of the voices. there in the 5th row stands: Literally all of the founding fathers themselves.

[chadchadington-deactivated20240]

“A free people ought not only to be armed, but disciplined…”

- George Washington, First Annual Address, to both House of Congress, January 8, 1790

“No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms.”

- Thomas Jefferson, Virginia Constitution, Draft 1, 1776

“I prefer dangerous freedom over peaceful slavery.”

- Thomas Jefferson, letter to James Madison, January 30, 1787

“What country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance. Let them take arms.”

- Thomas Jefferson, letter to James Madison, December 20, 1787

“The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes…. Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.”

- Thomas Jefferson, Commonplace Book (quoting 18th century criminologist Cesare Beccaria), 1774-1776

“A strong body makes the mind strong. As to the species of exercises, I advise the gun. While this gives moderate exercise to the body, it gives boldness, enterprise and independence to the mind. Games played with the ball, and others of that nature, are too violent for the body and stamp no character on the mind. Let your gun therefore be your constant companion of your walks.“ 

- Thomas Jefferson, letter to Peter Carr, August 19, 1785

“The Constitution of most of our states (and of the United States) assert that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed.”

- Thomas Jefferson, letter to to John Cartwright, 5 June 1824

“On every occasion [of Constitutional interpretation] let us carry ourselves back to the time when the Constitution was adopted, recollect the spirit manifested in the debates, and instead of trying [to force] what meaning may be squeezed out of the text, or invented against it, [instead let us] conform to the probable one in which it was passed.”

- Thomas Jefferson, letter to William Johnson, 12 June 1823

“I enclose you a list of the killed, wounded, and captives of the enemy from the commencement of hostilities at Lexington in April, 1775, until November, 1777, since which there has been no event of any consequence … I think that upon the whole it has been about one half the number lost by them, in some instances more, but in others less. This difference is ascribed to our superiority in taking aim when we fire; every soldier in our army having been intimate with his gun from his infancy.”

- Thomas Jefferson, letter to Giovanni Fabbroni, June 8, 1778

“They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.“

- Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759

“To disarm the people…[i]s the most effectual way to enslave them.”

- George Mason, referencing advice given to the British Parliament by Pennsylvania governor Sir William Keith, The Debates in the Several State Conventions on the Adooption of the Federal Constitution, June 14, 1788

“I ask who are the militia? They consist now of the whole people, except a few public officers.”

- George Mason, Address to the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 4, 1788

“Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed, as they are in almost every country in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops.”

- Noah Webster, An Examination of the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution, October 10, 1787

“Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate governments, to which the people are attached, and by which the militia officers are appointed, forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition, more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of.”

- James Madison, Federalist No. 46, January 29, 1788

“The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. A well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the best and most natural defense of a free country.”

- James Madison, I Annals of Congress 434, June 8, 1789

“…the ultimate authority, wherever the derivative may be found, resides in the people alone…”

- James Madison, Federalist No. 46, January 29, 1788

“Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.”

- William Pitt (the Younger), Speech in the House of Commons, November 18, 1783

“A militia when properly formed are in fact the people themselves…and include, according to the past and general usuage of the states, all men capable of bearing arms… “To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them.”

- Richard Henry Lee, Federal Farmer No. 18, January 25, 1788

“Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined…. The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able might have a gun.”

- Patrick Henry, Speech to the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 5, 1778

“This may be considered as the true palladium of liberty…. The right of self defense is the first law of nature: in most governments it has been the study of rulers to confine this right within the narrowest limits possible. Wherever standing armies are kept up, and the right of the people to keep and bear arms is, under any color or pretext whatsoever, prohibited, liberty, if not already annihilated, is on the brink of destruction.”

- St. George Tucker, Blackstone’s Commentaries on the Laws of England, 1803

“The supposed quietude of a good man allures the ruffian; while on the other hand, arms, like law, discourage and keep the invader and the plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property. The balance of power is the scale of peace. The same balance would be preserved were all the world destitute of arms, for all would be alike; but since some will not, others dare not lay them aside. And while a single nation refuses to lay them down, it is proper that all should keep them up. Horrid mischief would ensue were one-half the world deprived of the use of them; for while avarice and ambition have a place in the heart of man, the weak will become a prey to the strong. The history of every age and nation establishes these truths, and facts need but little arguments when they prove themselves.”

- Thomas Paine, “Thoughts on Defensive War” in Pennsylvania Magazine, July 1775

“The Constitution shall never be construed to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms.”

- Samuel Adams, Massachusetts Ratifying Convention, 1788

“The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them.”

- Joseph Story, Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States, 1833

“What, Sir, is the use of a militia? It is to prevent the establishment of a standing army, the bane of liberty …. Whenever Governments mean to invade the rights and liberties of the people, they always attempt to destroy the militia, in order to raise an army upon their ruins.”

- Rep. Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts, I Annals of Congress 750, August 17, 1789

“For it is a truth, which the experience of ages has attested, that the people are always most in danger when the means of injuring their rights are in the possession of those of whom they entertain the least suspicion.”

- Alexander Hamilton, Federalist No. 25, December 21, 1787

“If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is then no resource left but in the exertion of that original right of self-defense which is paramount to all positive forms of government, and which against the usurpations of the national rulers, may be exerted with infinitely better prospect of success than against those of the rulers of an individual state. In a single state, if the persons intrusted with supreme power become usurpers, the different parcels, subdivisions, or districts of which it consists, having no distinct government in each, can take no regular measures for defense. The citizens must rush tumultuously to arms, without concert, without system, without resource; except in their courage and despair.”

- Alexander Hamilton, Federalist No. 28

“[I]f circumstances should at any time oblige the government to form an army of any magnitude that army can never be formidable to the liberties of the people while there is a large body of citizens, little, if at all, inferior to them in discipline and the use of arms, who stand ready to defend their own rights and those of their fellow-citizens. This appears to me the only substitute that can be devised for a standing army, and the best possible security against it, if it should exist.”

- Alexander Hamilton, Federalist No. 28, January 10, 1788

“As civil rulers, not having their duty to the people before them, may attempt to tyrannize, and as the military forces which must be occasionally raised to defend our country, might pervert their power to the injury of their fellow citizens, the people are confirmed by the article in their right to keep and bear their private arms.”

- Tench Coxe, Philadelphia Federal Gazette, June 18, 1789

(All quotes cited and provided by Buckeye Firearms Association)

[sgt-rock53]

YOU SAID NOTHING!

A letter to CNN, NBC, ABC, CBS, NYT, Wash Post, USA Today:

   1. You said nothing when Obama used drone strikes to execute people abroad.

2. You said nothing about Russia for 25 years until Trump was inaugurated. 

3. You said nothing about Hillary’s campaign manager’s brother being paid $175,000 to lift U.S. sanctions on Russia. 4. You said nothing, when Obama engaged in military interventionism in Libya without Congressional approval. 5. You said nothing when Obama greatly expanded presidential power through the use of Executive Orders. 6. You said nothing when Obama filled his White House with lobbyists after he said he wouldn’t. 7. You said nothing when Obama gave 47 of his fundraisers Administration jobs. 8. You said nothing about the murders and rapes at the hands of illegal immigrants. 9. You said nothing when Hillary’s net worth rose over $100 million as Secretary of State, in part, because her husband took money from foreign governments. 10. You said nothing after Obama’s net worth rose over $10 million as President. 11. You said nothing when Obama’s Justice Dept. wiretapped/surveilled reporters such as James Rosen and the AP. 12 You said nothing when Obama restricted immigration 6 times with Executive Orders. 13. You said nothing when Obama set a record for deportations. 14. You said nothing when Bill Clinton met Loretta Lynch on the airport tarmac during the Clinton investigation. 15. You said nothing when Hillary was fed debate questions. 16. You said nothing when Obama and Hillary lied about a video and Benghazi when 4 American diplomats were slaughtered by Libyan  riots. 17. You said nothing when Obama’s IRS abused the rights of taxpayers. 18. You said nothing when Obama’s White House held meetings with lobbyists in coffee shops near White House to avoid disclosure requirements 19. You said nothing when Eric Holder sold the guns, you hate, to criminals and some were used to kill Americans. 20. You said nothing when the Clintons’ took White House property. 21. You said nothing when Hillary laughed off defending a child-rapist. 22. You said nothing when Hillary lied about her private use of a private email server as Secretary of State. 23. You said nothing when Janet Reno, under Bill Clinton, used a tank to kill the Branch Davidians. 24. You said nothing when, on May 13, 1985, a bomb was dropped on a row house in Philadelphia to uproot the black liberation group known as Move, resulting in a fire that eventually burned down 61 houses, killed 11 people (including five children) and injured dozens. 25. You said nothing when child Eliah Gonzales was forcibly deported, using guns to Cuba. 26. You said nothing when George Soros paid protesters to burn parts of Ferguson. 27. You said nothing about states’ rights until Trump’s Executive orders on immigration. 28. You said nothing about Obama’s smoking. 29. You said nothing about the record numbers of people on government assistance. 30. You said nothing about the number of part time and low paying jobs under the Obama recovery. 31. You said nothing when Obama had SWAT teams raid a Gibson guitar factory and seize property, on the purported basis that Gibson had broken India’s environmental laws - but no charges were filed. 32. You said nothing when Obama claimed that the Fort Hood shooting was “workplace violence” rather than terrorism. 33. You said nothing when Obama ended some terror asylum restrictions, by allowing asylum for people, who provided only “insignificant” or “limited” material support of terrorists. 34. You said nothing when the national debt doubled under Obama. 35. You said nothing when 9 times the Supreme Court unanimously overturned Obama’s expansive use of Executive Power. 36. You said nothing when Obama dismissed charges, filed by the Bush Administration against New Black Panther Party members, who were videotaped, intimidating voters at a Philadelphia polling station during the 2008 election. 37. You said nothing when Obama released Guantanamo detainees, who then went back to kill Americans. 38. You said nothing when Obama unilaterally changed Congressional law by Executive Order. 39. You said nothing when Obama fired an inspector general after investigating an $850,000 AmeriCorps grant, received by a nonprofit, run by former NBA star and Obama supporter Kevin Johnson. 40. You said nothing about the 36 Obama’s executive office staffers that owed $833,970 in back taxes 41. You said nothing when Obama Killed four Americans overseas in counter-terrorism operations without a judicial process. 42. You said nothing when Obama sent millions in cash in ransom to Iran So NOW, you are voicing your objections about 12 months of Trump, I’m sorry… we can’t hear you, because you said NOTHING before!!!

[aslowparadeoffears-deactivated2]

[bubbathegreat-1]

[gunsngear]

Rules For A Gunfight by Drill Instructor Joe B. Fricks, USMC

1. Forget about knives, bats and fists. Bring a gun. Preferably, bring at least two guns. Bring all of your friends who have guns. Bring four times the ammunition you think you could ever need.

2. Anything worth shooting is worth shooting twice. Ammunition is cheap – life is expensive. If you shoot inside, buckshot is your friend. A new wall is cheap – funerals are expensive.

3. Only hits count. The only thing worse than a miss is a slow miss.

4. If your shooting stance is good, you’re probably not moving fast enough or using cover correctly.

5. Move away from your attacker and go to cover. Distance is your friend. (Bulletproof cover and diagonal or lateral movement are preferred.)

6. If you can choose what to bring to a gunfight, bring a semi or full-automatic long gun and a friend with a long gun.

7. In ten years nobody will remember the details of caliber, stance, or tactics. They will only remember who lived.

8. If you are not shooting, you should be communicating, reloading, and running. Yell “Fire!” Why “Fire”? Cops will come with the Fire Department, sirens often scare off the bad guys, or at least cause then to lose concentration and will…. and who is going to summon help if you yell ”Intruder,” “Glock” or “Winchester?”

9. Accuracy is relative: most combat shooting standards will be more dependent on “pucker factor” than the inherent accuracy of the gun.

10. Someday someone may kill you with your own gun, but they should have to beat you to death with it because it is empty.

11. Always cheat, always win. The only unfair fight is the one you lose.

12. Have a plan.

13. Have a back-up plan, because the first one won’t work. “No battle plan ever survives 10 seconds past first contact with an enemy.”

14. Use cover or concealment as much as possible, but remember, sheetrock walls and the like stop nothing but your pulse when bullets tear through them.

15. Flank your adversary when possible. Protect yours.

16. Don’t drop your guard.

17. Always tactical load and threat scan 360 degrees. Practice reloading one-handed and off-hand shooting. That’s how you live if hit in your “good” side.

18. Watch their hands. Hands kill. Smiles, frowns and other facial expressions don’t (In God we trust. Everyone else keep your hands where I can see them.)

19. Decide NOW to always be aggressive ENOUGH, quickly ENOUGH.

20. The faster you finish the fight, the less shot you will get.

21. Be polite. Be professional. But, have a plan to kill everyone you meet if necessary, because they may want to kill you.

22. Be courteous to everyone, overly friendly to no one.

23. Your number one option for personal security is a lifelong commitment to avoidance, deterrence, and de-escalation.

24. Do not attend a gunfight with a handgun, the caliber of which does not start with anything smaller than ”4″.

25. Use a gun that works EVERY TIME. “All skill is in vain when an Angel blows the powder from the flintlock of your musket.” At a practice session, throw your gun into the mud, then make sure it still works. You can clean it later.

26. Practice shooting in the dark, with someone shouting at you, when out of breath, etc.

27. Regardless of whether justified or not, you will feel sad about killing another human being. It is better to be sad than to be room temperature.

28. The only thing you EVER say afterwards is, “He said he was going to kill me. I believed him. I’m sorry, Officer, but I’m very upset now. I can’t say anything more. Please speak with my attorney.”

Finally, Drill Instructor Frick’s Rules For Un-armed Combat.

1: Never be unarmed.

[hold-fast-1790]

Nuff said

[totalharmonycycle]

Yes that Pretty much covers it.

[explainguncontrolandsafespaces]

@wolvez23 You are lying. 

[abysmalhonesty]

At this point, gun control is unrealistic and impossible. Only the most law-abiding citizens would turn their guns in, leaving them the most vulnerable while criminals continue to possess firearms.

[triggeredmedia]

The guy that made this post is awesome.

[conniedc5]

What the hell, are women getting dumber. What The Hell.

[tokenjack-blog]

Molon Labe Girls !!!!! We are ready and waiting

[dude-dude-dude-dude-dude-2]

Label me outlaw

[redbloodedamerica]

[ridelikeafatkid]

Gun control

“Just a Shotgun

You’re sound asleep when you hear a thump outside your bedroom door.

Half-awake, and nearly paralyzed with fear, you hear muffled whispers.

At least two people have broken into your house and are moving your way.

With your heart pumping, you reach down beside your bed and pick up your shotgun.

You rack a shell into the chamber, then inch toward the door and open it.

In the darkness, you make out two shadows.

One holds something that looks like a crowbar.

When the intruder brandishes it as if to strike, you raise the shotgun and fire.

The blast knocks both thugs to the floor.

One writhes and screams while the second man crawls to the front door and lurches outside.

As you pick up the telephone to call police, you know you’re in trouble.

In your country, most guns were outlawed years before, and the few that are privately owned are so stringently regulated as to make them useless..

Yours was never registered.

Police arrive and inform you that the second burglar has died.

They arrest you for First Degree Murder and Illegal Possession of a Firearm.

When you talk to your attorney, he tells you not to worry: authorities will probably plea the case down to manslaughter.

“What kind of sentence will I get?” you ask.

“Only ten-to-twelve years,” he replies, as if that’s nothing.

“Behave yourself, and you’ll be out in seven.”

The next day, the shooting is the lead story in the local newspaper. Somehow, you’re portrayed as an eccentric vigilante while the two men you shot are represented as choirboys.

Their friends and relatives can’t find an unkind word to say about them..

Buried deep down in the article, authorities acknowledge that both “victims” have been arrested numerous times.

But the next day’s headline says it all:

“Lovable Rogue Son Didn’t Deserve to Die.”

The thieves have been transformed from career criminals into Robin Hood-type pranksters..

As the days wear on, the story takes wings.

The national media picks it up, then the international media.

The surviving burglar has become a folk hero.

Your attorney says the thief is preparing to sue you, and he’ll probably win.

The media publishes reports that your home has been burglarized several times in the past and that you’ve been critical of local police for their lack of effort in apprehending the suspects.

After the last break-in, you told your neighbor that you would be prepared next time.

The District Attorney uses this to allege that you were lying in wait for the burglars.

A few months later, you go to trial.

The charges haven’t been reduced, as your lawyer had so confidently predicted.

When you take the stand, your anger at the injustice of it all works against you..

Prosecutors paint a picture of you as a mean, vengeful man.

It doesn’t take long for the jury to convict you of all charges.

The judge sentences you to life in prison.

This case really happened.

On August 22, 1999, Tony Martin of Emneth, Norfolk , England , killed one burglar and wounded a second.

In April, 2000, he was convicted and is now serving a life term…

How did it become a crime to defend one’s own life in the once great British Empire ?

It started with the Pistols Act of 1903.

This seemingly reasonable law forbade selling pistols to minors or felons and established that handgun sales were to be made only to those who had a license.

The Firearms Act of 1920 expanded licensing to include not only handguns but all firearms except shotguns..

Later laws passed in 1953 and 1967 outlawed the carrying of any weapon by private citizens and mandated the registration of all shotguns.

Momentum for total handgun confiscation began in earnest after the Hungerford mass shooting in 1987.

Michael Ryan, a mentally disturbed man with a Kalashnikov rifle, walked down the streets shooting everyone he saw.

When the smoke cleared, 17 people were dead.

The British public, already de-sensitized by eighty years of “gun control”, demanded even tougher restrictions.

(The seizure of all privately owned handguns was the objective even though Ryan used a rifle.)

Nine years later, at Dunblane , Scotland , Thomas Hamilton used a semi-automatic weapon to murder 16 children and a teacher at a public school.

For many years, the media had portrayed all gun owners as mentally unstable, or worse, criminals.

Now the press had a real kook with which to beat up law-abiding gun owners.

Day after day, week after week, the media gave up all pretense of objectivity and demanded a total ban on all handguns.

The Dunblane Inquiry, a few months later, sealed the fate of the few sidearms still owned by private citizens.

During the years in which the British government incrementally took away most gun rights, the notion that a citizen had the right to armed self-defense came to be seen as vigilantism.

Authorities refused to grant gun licenses to people who were threatened, claiming that self-defense was no longer considered a reason to own a gun.

Citizens who shot burglars or robbers or rapists were charged while the real criminals were released.

Indeed, after the Martin shooting, a police spokesman was quoted as saying,

“We cannot have people take the law into their own hands.”

All of Martin’s neighbors had been robbed numerous times,

and several elderly people were severely injured in beatings by young thugs who had no fear of the consequences.

Martin himself, a collector of antiques, had seen most of his collection trashed or stolen by burglars.

When the Dunblane Inquiry ended, citizens who owned handguns were given three months to turn them over to local authorities.

Being good British subjects, most people obeyed the law.

The few who didn’t were visited by police and threatened with ten-year prison sentences if they didn’t comply.

Police later bragged that they’d taken nearly 200,000 handguns from private citizens.

How did the authorities know who had handguns?

The guns had been registered and licensed.

Kind of like cars. Sound familiar?

WAKE UP AMERICA ; THIS IS WHY OUR FOUNDING FATHERS PUT THE SECOND AMENDMENT IN OUR CONSTITUTION.

“…It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people’s minds..”

–Samuel Adams

If you think this is important, please forward to everyone you know.

You had better wake up, because Obama is doing this very same thing, over here, if he can get it done

The UN Small Arms Treaty that Hilary is negotiating would take away our 2nd Amendment rights.“

Stolen from face space

[double-barrel-dude-deactivated2]

Very well written.

[americas-liberty]

A little dated at the end, but still a very valid point.

[loudlytransparenttrash]

10 Leftist Myths That Shouldn’t Be Repeated

1. WE ARE A NATION OF IMMIGRANTS

No, we’re not. We’re a nation of citizens. This country was built on legal immigration, and the ones who made it through learned the language and assimilated. Many didn’t get in. Today’s scenario is 15 million illegals ridiculing those who played by the rules. Legal immigrants wait 15 years to get green cards and many bring a ton of jobs with them. The Statue of Liberty doesn’t say “Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, and all their relatives.” Learn the difference between legal and illegal.

Oh, and don’t give me that old “They’re doing jobs Americans won’t do” line. They’re doing jobs Americans won’t do - for that price. In Canada, there are no Mexicans and the landscaping still gets done. They use teenagers.

2. THIS COUNTRY WAS BUILT ON SLAVERY

This old trope. A few rich Southerners had slaves. Then there was a civil war and America’s bank account dropped to zero. After that the country was rebuilt from scratch without slavery. As Pat Buchanan put it, we didn’t start slavery. We ended it. 

3. WE STOLE THE COUNTRY FROM PEACEFUL INDIANS

We fought them for 400 years. They fought against us, alongside us, and behind us. Fighting for land has always been part of the human race, long before we landed here. Asia, Africa, Europe, we’ve all done it but only one country is told to feel guilty for it. Today we would call this “stealing”. But for a long time, this was considered acceptable behaviour. 

Before we got here the Indians were fighting each other, and yes, it was savage. War Before Civilization: The Myth of the Peaceful Savage describes horrific mass graves from way before we got here. Indians used to shoot arrows into their victims for hours after the guy died so he’d be stuffed in the afterlife. Oh and the smallpox blankets is a myth.

4. AMERICA IS RACIST

Studies show that white people are actually the least racist group. Getting rid of all the racists would mean America would be almost all white. Therefore, fighting racism is racist.

5. BLACK YOUTH ARE TARGETED BY WHITE MEN

Fact time. Black youth are in danger but it’s not white men killing them. Over 1,400 more black Americans murdered other blacks between 2010-2011 than were lynched from 1882 to 1968. Despite making up just 13% of the population, blacks committed half of homicides in the United States for nearly 30 years. In 2012, black people - at just a fifth of the size - committed almost 1,000 more murders than their white counterparts. It would take cops 40 years to kill as many black men as have died at the hands of others black men in 2012 alone. Black and Hispanic police officers are more likely to fire a gun at blacks than white officers. Blacks are 18.5 times more likely to kill cops than be killed by cops. Let’s not forget the black on white rape. 

6. PRO-LIFERS ARE SEXIST

Most women are pro-life. To ignore their rights while touting abortion is sexist. Also, gender-based abortion is becoming more popular. We’ve seen how that goes for women in China. It ain’t pretty. So stop using abortion rights as some kind of proof there’s a war on women when the opposite is true.

7. WE NEED FREE HEALTH CARE

Not so fast. Have you seen the way this administration handles money? We’re 17 trillion in the hole. That’s a lot. Seventeen trillion seconds ago we were cavemen trying to figure out fire. This country is rife with severe obesity and millions upon millions of illegals. We don’t have the cohesion and health that other free health care countries have, so this perfectly reasonable idea is actually impossible until we sort our shit out.

8. AMERICA IS GETTING WORSE

The air has never been cleaner. We’ve never lived longer. Crime is at an all-time low. By virtually every possible metric, life has never been better. Traveling, eating, sex, fighting - all safer than ever. The list goes on and on. I saw a homeless man today checking his iPhone while he asked for change. If you think things were so much better back then or in another country, get in either a time machine or plane and go there and let’s see how long you survive.

9. DIVERSITY IS OUR STRENGTH

When it comes to restaurants this is true, and that is why people always use restaurants to prove it. By any other standard, it tends to go pretty badly. We should be encouraging everyone to err towards the same values. Assimilation leads to a sense of fraternity and that means a cohesive society. Why do you think Japan is so successful and get along so well? They are packed in there like sardines but they don’t mind because they’re all the same. When integration is discouraged you get Balkanization.

10. WE’RE ALL EQUAL

You realize the children of geniuses tend to be smarter than the children of stupid people, yeah? This is why they ask sperm donors questions. That’s what happens when idealists have to practice what they preach. They scoff at eugenics until it’s time to make a baby. They love the gay lifestyle until their son brings home a tranny. They love diversity until it’s time to choose a place to live or a school for their children. They pretend we’re all equal but they insist the government enforce this because they secretly know it isn’t true and in fact see themselves as superior to everyone else. They’re free to think that, but before going on a rant about it, maybe they should look up some basic facts first. 

[arizonagunguy-deactivated201805]

This is the best Tumblr post I’ve seen ever.

[h8muhsheen]

Not sure about best ever but definitely in the top 10!!!

[rsyddc]

[therightagendablog-blog]

Liberals can’t ever keep their stories straight.

[lily-orchard]

[kineticpenguin]

The frustrating thing is that I’ve been saying for years that colleges and universities aren’t these leftist indoctrination centers people make them out to be, but twitter rants like this aren’t exactly helping because this guy’s only having himself a smug ego wank.

“Let’s dispense with the myth that there is no place for conservatives in academia because universities are ideologically intolerant, okay? The problem is that if your religion is creationism, your news is infowars, and your economics are magical thinking, than academia isn’t for you.”

Part of the problem here is that he immediately contradicts himself by going for the lowest-hanging fruit, which doesn’t exactly speak to ideological tolerance. There is much more to the right than the lunatic fringe. But the real problem is that, actually, that should mean academia is exactly for you! It should be where that nonsense goes to die. It’s about learning, not getting together to affirm your beliefs, left or right. It requires challenging what is taken for granted. Which brings me to the next bit.

“It’s not academia’s fault that the chief intellectuals of the right these days are Newt Gingrich and Charles Krauthammer, for fuck’s sake. It’s not academia’s fault that social progress has become so mainstream that all that’s left to the right is the frothing, lunatic fringe.”

Isn’t it? Newt Gingrich has a PhD in history from Tulane and Krauthammer is a Harvard MD. These are the monsters “you” created, and evidently failed to provide students with adequate defenses against them. It’s also rather blatant that you’re cherrypicking infamous figures here rather than respected ones.

“And the simple fact is that THE CONSPIRACY THEORIES OF 4CHAN INCELS (which is what RW “thought” is today) ARE NOT WORTHY OF ACADEMIC DEBATE. I mean, the right makes fun of gender theory, but believes pizzagate is a clear and present threat to the nation. GET. OUT. OF. CLASS.”

If you seriously think this is what modern right-wing thought is, take a sabbatical until you learn to draw from sources besides Mic.Com, BuzzFeed, and Huffington Post op-eds, you hack.

“I am HAPPY to debate the merits of mysticism vs scholasticism any day. I am NOT happy debating people who think Jesus rode on dinosaurs.”

Have you ever met someone like that in academia? Seriously, have you? Because Young Earth Creationism is not a mainstream right-wing belief by any stretch of the imagination.

“Dear conservatives: you cannot create the most rabidly anti-intellectual movement in Western history, and then demand a voice in academia.”

Apparently you can, however, shut them out of academia and then crow about how anti-intellectual and ignorant they are. Are you starting to get it?

“If 99% of scientists tell you that climate change is real, and Trump says it isn’t, then the only intolerant ideology in the room is YOURS.”

Climate change denial did not begin with Trump. It’s not persistently popular because people are imbeciles, it’s because millions of livelihoods are at stake. When your job isn’t redundant because of economic forces, but can be shut down through environmental regulation, the holes anyone pokes in hastily-published, slipshod studies are a godsend. Maybe if academics did their job right, they’d be able to avoid coming across as sneering ivory tower dwellers, determined to destroy the lives of anyone they deem inferior.

You could attempt to debate those people but you’ve written them all off; they’re too stupid to come around. And when that bites you on the ass politically, all you can do is wail and gnash your teeth on Twitter.

“You can’t deny objective reality, historical facts, and social consensus, and then cry foul if the places teaching those things shun you.”

You can’t argue that academia has a responsible commitment to objective reality rather than a political agenda, and then say that its job is to dictate social consensus and shut out anyone who doesn’t conform. For fuck’s sake, how do you get so far up your own ass?

“So republicans, until you learn to accept OBJECTIVE FACTS, the only academic field that will show any interest in you is psychology.”

Cute. But until you remember that your job is to educate rather than pontificate, you will continue to have a hand in the problem you blame on conspiracy websites.

“I’m an academic. And we don’t owe ignorant, benighted fools time, debate, empathy, or consideration. You want debate? Up your fucking game.”

Up yours. Or don’t. I’m sure the Trevor Noah and John Oliver will win it for you after Ruth Bader Ginsburg croaks.

“You dislike gender theory? Feel free to debate it. But don’t bring Toby Keith to a Judith Butler fight. THEY ARE NOT INTELLECTUAL EQUALS.”

Do you really think that’s who you’re in a fight against? A country singer who hasn’t been relevant for over a decade? Are you that determined to reduce all your political opponents to insane caricatures?

“That’s the whole fucking issue. You are trying to fight phallogocentrism with ‘not Adam & Steve’. Fine. But do so in the 3rd grade, not college.”

I really doubt anyone who says “not Adam & Steve” even believes phallogocentrism is a thing, much less has any interest in fighting it.

“Here’s an idea: I don’t show up at a NASCAR race with a ‘01 Prius, and you don’t show up to an academic debate with Alex Jones. Deal?”

Much as you can’t win a race you don’t actually show up for, you can’t win a debate you refuse to have. You can’t convince anyone you don’t talk to. Thinking you’re too good for it is exactly what cost the Hillary campaign the election. It’s why we’re in this political hellscape where Donald Trump- Jesus, DONALD FUCKING TRUMP holds the highest office in the most powerful nation on the planet! 

And you refuse to learn! You and so many other ostensibly intelligent, educated people just double down, spitting your outrage that people can be so stupid, while simultaneously asserting that it’s not your responsibility to educate, even when you’re a fucking educator! What fuck does anyone pay you for? Did you think that grading tests and papers is the height of academic responsibility? Is this professional cowardice the only thing standing between the world and ignorant disaster?

What are you afraid of if they’re so stupid? If they’re at the race in an ’01 Prius, if they bring Toby Keith to debate gender theory, shouldn’t you be able to destroy their arguments completely? Was it shameful for Bill Nye to debate Ken Ham? 

You can try insist that everything is settled, that you’ve won, and only obstinate stupidity remains. But as Mattis said: “No war is over until the enemy says it’s over. We may think it over, we may declare it over, but in fact, the enemy gets a vote.”

[rsyddc]

[theamericanpatriotpage]

~Anne