It looks like the current administration is attempting to leverage problems with the drug gangs in Mexico as a reason to step on our 2A rights. Apparently, BHO and crew believe that all of Mexico's drug gang killings are a result of illegal firearms being sent across the border into Mexico from the U.S. As a result, the feds are looking at additional laws to curtail this mysterious southerly migration of firearms.
Mexico has a serious problem with these drug gangs who use military style weapons including grenade launchers, TOW missiles and a host of full-auto weapons to claim their territory in the lucrative drug trade. BHO and team feel that these weapons are coming from the U.S and therefore more laws need to be passed to prevent this.
Let's examine some facts. Mexico already has some very strict gun laws in place. Not to mention, the illegality of smuggling drugs across the border into the U.S. These drugs typically from Central America and Mexico is just a way point into the U.S.
Now since Mexico already bans both the weapons and drugs, it would appear that this problem has been solved by legislation. However, the so-called border wars continue to rage.
The majority of the weapons being used by these gangs are truly military weapons, grenades, grenade launchers and fully automatic weapons are all hard to come by here in the U.S. However, BHO doesn't realize that there are already laws on the books on both sides of the border that prohibit possession of both the guns and the drugs. Additional laws will be ignored by these gangs just as the current ones are.
If indeed there is a risk of this violence spreading across the border from Mexico, there it is one more reason that we need to get the barriers in place to limit border crossings. In addition, if I were one of the residents near the border, you can bet that I would be armed at all times in order to protect myself and my property from these gangs. BHO would prefer that you become an unarmed victim instead.
Our government has failed to secure our southern border from the daily incursions from unarmed illegals. How the hell are they going to respond to an armed gang with nefarious attempt that wishes to use the same methods of entry?
A word to BHO and crew, lock down the border. Plain and simple. Stop the illegals from crossing the border heading north and you will stop any weapons heading south as well. Securing our border will keep the illegals out that are not only taking jobs from U.S. citizens but also will prevent the flow of drugs into this country, weapons (if there are any) that are heading south and keep the currency that the illegals are sending home here in the country.
Damn that seems like a simple solution to a whole host of problems.
Tuesday, March 24, 2009
Oakland Cop Shooting
The recent killing of four police officers in Oakland seems to have brought the gun grabbers out of the woodwork. I reading through the "news" papers from the area, there is a call to further restrict 2A rights in Kalifornia due to this tragedy.
One thing that I notice missing from the ruckus is any mention of culpability for Lovelle Mixon, the shooter or for the Kalifonia parole board that put him back on the streets and threatened the well being of all citizens.
A bit of background for those who do not follow the news from the left coast; Lovelle Mixon was a convicted felon. He served 5 years of a 6 year sentence for assault with a firearm. Mixon gained parole in October of 2007 only to be considered possible suspect in a homicide in Alameda County in February 2008. This status caused Mixon to spend another 9 months in prison before being released again on November 1, 2008 because no charges were filed in the murder case.
Between his last release and February 18, 2009, Mixon apparently performed as a parolee should and reported on a regular basis. Come the middle of February, Mixon had disappeared from the control of his parole officer and was considered a parolee-at-large and a warrant is issued for his arrest.
Attempts were made to locate Mixon and return him to prison before the March 21st events that led to the killing of three officers.
Let's examine where this system broke down; First, Mixon was apparently a repeat offender at the time he was returned to prison during a murder investigation. He was subsequently released again from prison only to disappear from radar three months later. As a convicted felon, he was already prohibited from even touching a firearm under current laws.
As a parolee, Mixon became the responsibility of the state Board of Parole who is responsible for making sure he behaves himself. This process failed as he managed to disappear from their control within three months of his release.
It is apparent that Mixon should not have been on the streets to begin with. The Parole Board should not have released him after he was arrested under suspicion of murder. He should have served the remainder of his time of the original sentence. Both times that Mixon was released on parole, he was in trouble within three months, the first time as a suspect in a murder, the second as a parole violator. Apparently, the parole system in Kalifornia does not work and should be revisited.
Finally, let us not forget that current laws prohibited Mixon from having any guns in his possession. Laws that he chose to ignore and in the process managed to take the life of four officers. Additional laws would not have kept Mixon on the straight and narrow. He was a criminal and, as such, had a history of disobeying the laws currently in existence. Disarming law abiding citizens would not have prevented this tragedy in any form. Mixon would have procured a gun by whatever means were available to him.
One thing that I notice missing from the ruckus is any mention of culpability for Lovelle Mixon, the shooter or for the Kalifonia parole board that put him back on the streets and threatened the well being of all citizens.
A bit of background for those who do not follow the news from the left coast; Lovelle Mixon was a convicted felon. He served 5 years of a 6 year sentence for assault with a firearm. Mixon gained parole in October of 2007 only to be considered possible suspect in a homicide in Alameda County in February 2008. This status caused Mixon to spend another 9 months in prison before being released again on November 1, 2008 because no charges were filed in the murder case.
Between his last release and February 18, 2009, Mixon apparently performed as a parolee should and reported on a regular basis. Come the middle of February, Mixon had disappeared from the control of his parole officer and was considered a parolee-at-large and a warrant is issued for his arrest.
Attempts were made to locate Mixon and return him to prison before the March 21st events that led to the killing of three officers.
Let's examine where this system broke down; First, Mixon was apparently a repeat offender at the time he was returned to prison during a murder investigation. He was subsequently released again from prison only to disappear from radar three months later. As a convicted felon, he was already prohibited from even touching a firearm under current laws.
As a parolee, Mixon became the responsibility of the state Board of Parole who is responsible for making sure he behaves himself. This process failed as he managed to disappear from their control within three months of his release.
It is apparent that Mixon should not have been on the streets to begin with. The Parole Board should not have released him after he was arrested under suspicion of murder. He should have served the remainder of his time of the original sentence. Both times that Mixon was released on parole, he was in trouble within three months, the first time as a suspect in a murder, the second as a parole violator. Apparently, the parole system in Kalifornia does not work and should be revisited.
Finally, let us not forget that current laws prohibited Mixon from having any guns in his possession. Laws that he chose to ignore and in the process managed to take the life of four officers. Additional laws would not have kept Mixon on the straight and narrow. He was a criminal and, as such, had a history of disobeying the laws currently in existence. Disarming law abiding citizens would not have prevented this tragedy in any form. Mixon would have procured a gun by whatever means were available to him.
It has been awhile....
I have been a bit neglectful of keeping this blog up to date. Real life has interfered with this process and I apologize.
Although I haven't been writing to vent, I do keep abreast of the news regarding gun laws and other assaults on my personal freedoms. There have been a number of items int he news recently about further assaults on my 2A rights so I will make a few comments:
Kirsten Gillibrand is a sellout!
What first appeared to be a shining light within the NY state political scene has turned into another case of bowing to pressure rather than standing up for what one believes in.
After being appoint to replace Hillary Clinton as the senator from NY, it came to light that Gillibrand was a proponent of gun control rights and actually owned guns. Unfortunately, she has since bowed to pressure to change how she stores the gun in her household by keeping them unloaded, with trigger locks and with the ammo stored separately. All of this to appease some critics and help to gain a few more votes when it comes to election time.
I personally, keep a couple of loaded guns handy in my house and within easy reach to ensure that I can defend me and mine in the event someone enters the house illegally. Locking up my means of protection and hindering my ability to readily access a weapon should the need arises goes against the very core of my belief.
Although I was unable to find a direct quote, it also appears that Gillibrand has made a statement that 2A was about hunters rights. How naive can one person be?
Although I haven't been writing to vent, I do keep abreast of the news regarding gun laws and other assaults on my personal freedoms. There have been a number of items int he news recently about further assaults on my 2A rights so I will make a few comments:
Kirsten Gillibrand is a sellout!
What first appeared to be a shining light within the NY state political scene has turned into another case of bowing to pressure rather than standing up for what one believes in.
After being appoint to replace Hillary Clinton as the senator from NY, it came to light that Gillibrand was a proponent of gun control rights and actually owned guns. Unfortunately, she has since bowed to pressure to change how she stores the gun in her household by keeping them unloaded, with trigger locks and with the ammo stored separately. All of this to appease some critics and help to gain a few more votes when it comes to election time.
I personally, keep a couple of loaded guns handy in my house and within easy reach to ensure that I can defend me and mine in the event someone enters the house illegally. Locking up my means of protection and hindering my ability to readily access a weapon should the need arises goes against the very core of my belief.
Although I was unable to find a direct quote, it also appears that Gillibrand has made a statement that 2A was about hunters rights. How naive can one person be?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
