I grew up on or around military bases. My father proudly served in the Air Force for 22 years. As a result, I grew up with an awareness of the "Red Menace" of the time. I can recall alerts being held on the base where my father grabbed a suitcase and headed off to work to protect this country from that threat. I also vividly remember the days when we were taught to "Duck and Cover" because an attack by the Communists was imminent.
A week after my graduation from high school in 1979, I joined the Navy. The oath I took that day, stated clearly that I swore to "support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same". This same oath has been in use since 1962. There is not a clause in that oath that limits me from defending the Constitution after my discharge from the service. It is time for every American to accept that same responsibility.
My first duty station was Midway Island. At the time, Midway was part of the SOSUS net that was used in an attempt to track Russian submarines. My next duty station was the USS Brooke (FFG-1). Our primary mission was anti-submarine warfare against those same Communists.
From the end of World War II, our government was intent on preventing the spread of Communism. We fought a war in Vietnam to aid them in warding off this menace, we sent aid in a number of forms to other countries in an effort to help them. Our own congressmen held witch hunts to rid our country of this threat. Apparently, at one point, the thought of a Socialist country scared the hell out of most Americans. What has changed?
According to Wikipedia, "Socialism refers to various theories of economic organization advocating public or direct worker ownership and administration of the means of production and allocation of resources, and a society characterized by equal access to resources for all individuals with a method of compensation based on the amount of labor expended"
The reason I bring all this up is there is an alarming trend in Washington right now. Our government is trying to shove a socialist agenda down our throats. First we have the feds taking over private industry. The second agenda item is the attempt to bypass the Constitution and legislate that a citizen is required to purchase health care.
From early on in the campaign, BHO has pushed this Socialist agenda. In his now infamous discussion with "Joe the Plumber", BHO stated "I think when you spread the wealth around, it’s good for everybody". Now I may not be the brightest bulb in the hallway, but that statement alone reeks of a Socialist view. Just what "wealth" was BHO planning on spreading around? Simply put, the wealth of those who have worked hard to achieve success.
To achieve this goal, BHO has managed to populate the inner circle with Socialists and Communists. Some of his closest advisers have been quoted as stating the admiration that they have for Mao Tse-Tung. Remember chairman Mao? He murdered millions of his own countrymen. Such a great person to admire. Remember, he was also arming the North Vietnamese to fight against us in Vietnam.
Among those professing their love for Mao is Anita Dunn, the now former White House Communication Director. She so admires that fine humanitarian Mao, that she explained that love in a speech to high school students. She touted the fact that he siezed control of the country without the backing of the military and against all odds. She went on to state that she often turns to the teachings of Mao as one of her "favorite political philosophers". Hmm...let's see if I understand some of this "great" philosophy...implement a regime that provides a communist/socialist agenda, kill those who oppose you, treat women as second-class citizens, eliminate the rights of the people, close the borders and prohibit your people from leaving the oppression...I think that about sums up some of the key points.
Apparently Mao is so revered in our government that a Christmas ornament bearing his picture adorns one of the Christmas trees in the White House. Kind of ironic, here is the likeness of a Communist on a tree in Washington. Last I read about the Communists, they are atheists, to have Mao's picture on a tree that celebrates the birth of Christ is ludicrous to say the least. Add to it that Christmas is typically considered a time of peace and goodwill toward your fellow humans and it becomes even more ridiculous.
To put this gently, the Commies are in the wire...they are walking among us. To use a quote from BHO himself right before the election, "five days from now we will fundamentally change America". WOW...this administration (maybe that should be regime), is trying to do just that, turn us into a nation of Socialists where the government is there to take care of you from cradle to grave. Uncle Barack will be there to take the hard-earned wealth from others and give it to those with the entitlement mentality because "when you spread the wealth around, it’s good for everybody".
Wake up America! We don't need to be "fundamentally changed". The Constitution that our founding fathers built here has worked damned well for 220 years. It affirms our freedoms and liberties while limiting where the line is that the government need not cross in our personal lives. We successfully built a world power and a lifestyle that is the envy of others around the world. What needs to be changed?
The elections in 2010 cannot come soon enough in my opinion. Remember Lincoln's statement "government for the people by the people". Those in Washington work for us, and it is time to remind them of that fact or put them back on the streets.
Wednesday, December 30, 2009
Tuesday, December 29, 2009
ILLEGAL Immigrants
OK, let me throw my cards on the table here. I am not politically correct...I speak my mind and tend not to worry all that much about offending others. Now that the cards are out there, let me clarify the oft misused term of "undocumented workers". While that is a PC way of stating that someone is in this country ILLEGALLY, it also glosses over the fact that these people are criminals. They are beginning their quest for citizenship by breaking our laws.
And while we are on the subject of ILLEGAL immigrants, let's take a look at some numbers and how they are impacting our collapsing economy. According to an April 15, 2009 news story in the Washington Post, the number of ILLEGAL immigrants is estimated to be "10.4 million adults and 1.5 million foreign-born children". Add to this number the estimated 4 million offspring of these ILLEGALS that have been born here and now can enjoy citizenship and we have a whopping 15.9 million people in this country that do not belong here.
Let's take the number of adults, many of whom are employed in some fashion here in the U.S. (BTW, it is also ILLEGAL to hire the ILLEGAL immigrants). According the the Bureau of Labor statistics, there are 14.4 million unemployed Americans as of November 2009.
Let's do a bit of simple math here...14.4 million unemployed minus the 10.4 million jobs that the ILLEGALS are holding down equals 4.4 million total people that would remain unemployed if the ILLEGALS weren't here stealing jobs. Wow...even with my poor math skills, that looks like a simple way to drop the unemployment rate by about 2/3rds.
Now let's factor in a few other items that are impacting our economy by the ILLEGALS. Many of these CRIMINALS earn money here in the U.S. and then promptly ship it out to family and friends in their home country. Therefore, simple deductive reasoning would indicate that money that is earned here and then shipped out of the country is lost to the economy here and benefits the foreign economy and not ours.
According to an article on gallup.com (9/22/2009) , "According to the World Bank, Mexico received more than $25 billion in remittances in 2007; a great deal of this money came from the U.S.". So first we have the impact of the loss of jobs for the citizens of this country combined with the loss of $25 billion that is shipped to Mexico alone.
None of the above takes into consideration the ancillary costs that these ILLEGALS are costing each and every one of the taxpayers in this country through the social services these ILLEGALS are using every day...food stamps, housing, medical care, ad infinitum. All of these services are costly to those of us forced to pay for them. In many cases, the ILLEGALS are in line at the emergency room or for other services that delay the ability of a citizen to receive the services that their tax dollars are paying for.
Before I get a barrage of angry messages about my lack of compassion for immigrants, let me clarify a few items. I am the product of immigrants. According to the best information that I have discovered in years of genealogy research, my ancestors came here legally. The earliest settlers that bear the same name I do and from whom I have descended were here in 1775 according to census records. The other branches of my family arrived from that time until the early part of the 20th century. The most recent immigrant was from Ireland and went through Ellis Island.
I understand that, in spite of the views from the Socialists currently running our government, what we have here is the envy of the world. There are many that would love to have the standard of living that we (at least used to) enjoy. However, if we continue to allow this influx of those that steal our jobs and then send that money back home, we will continue to see a dilution of our way of life.
References
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/04/14/AR2009041401433.html
ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/suppl/empsit.cpseea35.txt
http://www.gallup.com/poll/123140/half-new-latino-immigrants-send-money-abroad.aspx
And while we are on the subject of ILLEGAL immigrants, let's take a look at some numbers and how they are impacting our collapsing economy. According to an April 15, 2009 news story in the Washington Post, the number of ILLEGAL immigrants is estimated to be "10.4 million adults and 1.5 million foreign-born children". Add to this number the estimated 4 million offspring of these ILLEGALS that have been born here and now can enjoy citizenship and we have a whopping 15.9 million people in this country that do not belong here.
Let's take the number of adults, many of whom are employed in some fashion here in the U.S. (BTW, it is also ILLEGAL to hire the ILLEGAL immigrants). According the the Bureau of Labor statistics, there are 14.4 million unemployed Americans as of November 2009.
Let's do a bit of simple math here...14.4 million unemployed minus the 10.4 million jobs that the ILLEGALS are holding down equals 4.4 million total people that would remain unemployed if the ILLEGALS weren't here stealing jobs. Wow...even with my poor math skills, that looks like a simple way to drop the unemployment rate by about 2/3rds.
Now let's factor in a few other items that are impacting our economy by the ILLEGALS. Many of these CRIMINALS earn money here in the U.S. and then promptly ship it out to family and friends in their home country. Therefore, simple deductive reasoning would indicate that money that is earned here and then shipped out of the country is lost to the economy here and benefits the foreign economy and not ours.
According to an article on gallup.com (9/22/2009) , "According to the World Bank, Mexico received more than $25 billion in remittances in 2007; a great deal of this money came from the U.S.". So first we have the impact of the loss of jobs for the citizens of this country combined with the loss of $25 billion that is shipped to Mexico alone.
None of the above takes into consideration the ancillary costs that these ILLEGALS are costing each and every one of the taxpayers in this country through the social services these ILLEGALS are using every day...food stamps, housing, medical care, ad infinitum. All of these services are costly to those of us forced to pay for them. In many cases, the ILLEGALS are in line at the emergency room or for other services that delay the ability of a citizen to receive the services that their tax dollars are paying for.
Before I get a barrage of angry messages about my lack of compassion for immigrants, let me clarify a few items. I am the product of immigrants. According to the best information that I have discovered in years of genealogy research, my ancestors came here legally. The earliest settlers that bear the same name I do and from whom I have descended were here in 1775 according to census records. The other branches of my family arrived from that time until the early part of the 20th century. The most recent immigrant was from Ireland and went through Ellis Island.
I understand that, in spite of the views from the Socialists currently running our government, what we have here is the envy of the world. There are many that would love to have the standard of living that we (at least used to) enjoy. However, if we continue to allow this influx of those that steal our jobs and then send that money back home, we will continue to see a dilution of our way of life.
References
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/04/14/AR2009041401433.html
ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/suppl/empsit.cpseea35.txt
http://www.gallup.com/poll/123140/half-new-latino-immigrants-send-money-abroad.aspx
Kalifornia Wackjobs
I cannot believe the idiocy of some people...even the folks from Kalifornia have to be shaking their heads about this.
Apparently Ricardo Dominguez, an associate professor of visual arts at UC San Diego has decided to not only help the ILLEGAL aliens that are invading this country by building a GPS enabled application to help the criminals cross the border successfully and will even pipe them inspirational poetry to encourage them while breaking the law.
Now let's see if I can draw a good parallel here....I build an application that explains how to circumvent the security system of a bank to allow others to steal from said bank. The application also includes poetry to encourage the criminals during the heist. Am I not an accessory to the crime?
Why is this moron still collecting a paycheck from the state? And better yet, why is he not in jail??
Apparently Ricardo Dominguez, an associate professor of visual arts at UC San Diego has decided to not only help the ILLEGAL aliens that are invading this country by building a GPS enabled application to help the criminals cross the border successfully and will even pipe them inspirational poetry to encourage them while breaking the law.
Now let's see if I can draw a good parallel here....I build an application that explains how to circumvent the security system of a bank to allow others to steal from said bank. The application also includes poetry to encourage the criminals during the heist. Am I not an accessory to the crime?
Why is this moron still collecting a paycheck from the state? And better yet, why is he not in jail??
Thursday, June 4, 2009
World's Smallest Political Quiz
This is a very interesting project. Check out the quiz here
Update 1/5/2009 - I neglected to add my results in this quiz. My views are right in the middle of the Libertarian area of the scale.
Update 1/5/2009 - I neglected to add my results in this quiz. My views are right in the middle of the Libertarian area of the scale.
Sunday, May 31, 2009
BHO's Date Night
Oh please!!!
The Obamas made a recent trip to NYC for "date night" all at the taxpayers expense for dinner and a show. Now assuming the Obamas picked up the tab for the dinner and show, the U.S. taxpayers are still out the $40,000 per hour it takes to operate Air Force One not to mention the costs of security, staff transportation, press transportation and a host of other expenses associated with this little jaunt.
I find it amazing that the president that promised "change" would take this step. Especially when there are Americans that are having trouble purchasing basic necessities like food and shelter. Hell, I know I can't afford to take anyone's wife to NYC for date night even if I fly there using frequent flier miles. I'm lucky if I can squeeze in a pizza once a week or so.
And what about the nasty "carbon footprint" this little trip created? Now, now Mr. President, I thought that green was the way to go. Surely a flight to NYC on a 747 for a date night is not a responsible use of this country's resources.
The Obamas made a recent trip to NYC for "date night" all at the taxpayers expense for dinner and a show. Now assuming the Obamas picked up the tab for the dinner and show, the U.S. taxpayers are still out the $40,000 per hour it takes to operate Air Force One not to mention the costs of security, staff transportation, press transportation and a host of other expenses associated with this little jaunt.
I find it amazing that the president that promised "change" would take this step. Especially when there are Americans that are having trouble purchasing basic necessities like food and shelter. Hell, I know I can't afford to take anyone's wife to NYC for date night even if I fly there using frequent flier miles. I'm lucky if I can squeeze in a pizza once a week or so.
And what about the nasty "carbon footprint" this little trip created? Now, now Mr. President, I thought that green was the way to go. Surely a flight to NYC on a 747 for a date night is not a responsible use of this country's resources.
Sotomayor, a Racist on SCOTUS
Let's begin the entry by allowing me to state that I am white. My ancestors came from England, Ireland, Wales and Germany. So, I am a true Euro-mix of nationalities. I have one line of my family that I have traced back to 1775 in the then colony of New York. My most recent immigrant is my great-grandfather who arrived at the turn of the 20th century from Ireland.
Being white, I am proud of my heritage. However, I cannot express said pride without being labeled as a racist. Should I make a public statement that a white male is smarter than someone from another race, I am labeled a bigot.
Now we have our newest nominee to the SCOTUS who happens to be Hispanic and has gone on record as stating "I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life."
Now I must ask, why does this double standard exist? If I were to make a statement that a wise WHITE male would reach a better conclusion than a Latina, I am racist. If I start an organization name National Society for the Advancement of Caucasions or the Caucasion College Fund, I am racist. Even the POTUS spent more time in his campaign focusing on being half black and not half white.
To me, it is apparent that Sotomayor is not suited to sit on the bench of our highest court or any other court for that matter. There should not be a white view, a black view, or any other partisan view from the bench. The job of the SCOTUS is to review the laws and eliminate those that do not abide by our Constitution. Nothing more, nothing less.
Being white, I am proud of my heritage. However, I cannot express said pride without being labeled as a racist. Should I make a public statement that a white male is smarter than someone from another race, I am labeled a bigot.
Now we have our newest nominee to the SCOTUS who happens to be Hispanic and has gone on record as stating "I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life."
Now I must ask, why does this double standard exist? If I were to make a statement that a wise WHITE male would reach a better conclusion than a Latina, I am racist. If I start an organization name National Society for the Advancement of Caucasions or the Caucasion College Fund, I am racist. Even the POTUS spent more time in his campaign focusing on being half black and not half white.
To me, it is apparent that Sotomayor is not suited to sit on the bench of our highest court or any other court for that matter. There should not be a white view, a black view, or any other partisan view from the bench. The job of the SCOTUS is to review the laws and eliminate those that do not abide by our Constitution. Nothing more, nothing less.
Thursday, May 21, 2009
40 Reasons to Support Gun Control | Gather
40 Reasons to Support Gun Control
1. Banning guns works, which is why New York, DC, and Chicago cops need guns.
2. Washington DC's low murder rate of 80.6 per 100,000 is due to strict gun control, and Arlington, VA's high murder rate of 1.6 per 100,000 is due to the lack of gun control.
3. Statistics showing high murder rates justify gun control but statistics showing increasing murder rates after gun control are "just statistics."
4. The Brady Bill and the Assault Weapons Ban, both of which went into effect in 1994, are responsible for the decrease in violent crime rates, which have been declining since 1991.
5. We must get rid of guns because a deranged lunatic may go on a shooting spree at any time and anyone who would own a gun out of fear of such a lunatic is paranoid.
6. The more helpless you are the safer you are from criminals.
7. An intruder will be incapacitated by tear gas or oven spray, but if shot with a .357 Magnum will get angry and kill you.
8. A woman raped and strangled is morally superior to a woman with a smoking gun and a dead rapist at her feet.
9. When confronted by violent criminals, you should "put up no defense ? give them what they want, or run" (Handgun Control Inc. Chairman Pete Shields, Guns Don't Die - People Do, 1981, p. 125).
10. The New England Journal of Medicine is filled with expert advice about guns; just like Guns and Ammo has some excellent treatises on heart surgery.
11. One should consult an automotive engineer for safer seatbelts, a civil engineer for a better bridge, a surgeon for spinal paralysis, a computer programmer for Y2K problems, and Sarah Brady [or Sheena Duncan, Adele Kirsten, Peter Storey, etc.] for firearms expertise.
12. The 2nd Amendment, ratified in 1791, refers to the National Guard, which was created by an act of Congress in 1903.
13. The National Guard, funded by the federal government, occupying property leased to the federal government, using weapons owned by the federal government, punishing trespassers under federal law, is a state militia.
14. These phrases," right of the people peaceably to assemble," "right of the people to be secure in their homes," "enumeration's herein of certain rights shall not be construed to disparage others retained by the people," and "The powers not delegated herein are reserved to the states respectively, and to the people," all refer to individuals, but "the right of the people to keep and bear arms" refers to the state.
15. We don't need guns against an oppressive government, because the Constitution has internal safeguards, but we should ban and seize all guns, thereby violating the 2nd, 4th, and 5th amendments to that Constitution.
16. Rifles and handguns aren't necessary to national defense, which is why the army has millions of them.
17. Private citizens shouldn't have handguns, because they serve no military purpose, and private citizens shouldn't have "assault rifles," because they are military weapons.
18. The ready availability of guns today, with waiting periods, background checks, fingerprinting, government forms, et cetera, is responsible for recent school shootings,compared to the lack of school shootings in the 40's, 50's and 60's, which resulted from the availability of guns at hardware stores, surplus stores, gas stations, variety stores, mail order, et cetera.
19. The NRA's attempt to run a "don't touch" campaign about kids handling guns is propaganda, and the anti-gun lobby's attempt to run a "don't touch" campaign is responsible social activity.
20. Guns are so complex that special training is necessary to use them properly, and so simple to use that they make murder easy.
21. A handgun, with up to 4 controls, is far too complex for the typical adult to learn to use, as opposed to an automobile that only has 20.
22. Women are just as intelligent and capable as men but a woman with a gun is "an accident waiting to happen" and gun makers' advertisements aimed at women are "preying on their fears."
23. Ordinary people in the presence of guns turn into slaughtering butchers but revert to normal when the weapon is removed.
24. Guns cause violence, which is why there are so many mass killings at gun shows.
25. A majority of the population supports gun control, just like a majority of the population supported owning slaves.
26. A self-loading small arm can legitimately be considered to be a "weapon of mass destruction" or an "assault weapon."
27. Most people can't be trusted, so we should have laws against guns, which most people will abide by because they can be trusted.
28. The right of online pornographers to exist cannot be questioned because it is constitutionally protected by the Bill of Rights, but the use of handguns for self defense is not really protected by the Bill of Rights.
29. Free speech entitles one to own newspapers, transmitters, computers, and typewriters, but self-defense only justifies bare hands.
30. The ACLU is good because it uncompromisingly defends certain parts of the Constitution, and the NRA is bad, because it defends other parts of the Constitution.
31. Charlton Heston as president of the NRA is a shill who should be ignored, but Michael Douglas as a representative of Handgun Control, Inc. is an ambassador for peace who is entitled to an audience at the UN arms control summit.
32. Police operate with backup within groups, which is why they need larger capacity pistol magazines than do "civilians" who must face criminals alone and therefore need less ammunition.
33. We should ban "Saturday Night Specials" and other inexpensive guns because it's not fair that poor people have access to guns too.
34. Police officers, who qualify with their duty weapons once or twice a year, have some special Jedi-like mastery over handguns that private citizens can never hope to obtain.
35. Private citizens don't need a gun for self-protection because the police are there to protect them even though the Supreme Court says the police are not responsible for their protection.
36. Citizens don't need to carry a gun for personal protection but police chiefs, who are desk-bound administrators who work in a building filled with cops, need a gun.
37. "Assault weapons" have no purpose other than to kill large numbers of people, which is why the police need them but "civilians" do not.
38. When Microsoft pressures its distributors to give Microsoft preferential promotion, that's bad; but when the Federal government pressures cities to buy guns only from Smith & Wesson, that's good.
39. Trigger locks do not interfere with the ability to use a gun for defensive purposes, which is why you see police officers with one on their duty weapon.
40. When Handgun Control, Inc., says they want to "keep guns out of the wrong hands," they don't mean you. Really.
1. Banning guns works, which is why New York, DC, and Chicago cops need guns.
2. Washington DC's low murder rate of 80.6 per 100,000 is due to strict gun control, and Arlington, VA's high murder rate of 1.6 per 100,000 is due to the lack of gun control.
3. Statistics showing high murder rates justify gun control but statistics showing increasing murder rates after gun control are "just statistics."
4. The Brady Bill and the Assault Weapons Ban, both of which went into effect in 1994, are responsible for the decrease in violent crime rates, which have been declining since 1991.
5. We must get rid of guns because a deranged lunatic may go on a shooting spree at any time and anyone who would own a gun out of fear of such a lunatic is paranoid.
6. The more helpless you are the safer you are from criminals.
7. An intruder will be incapacitated by tear gas or oven spray, but if shot with a .357 Magnum will get angry and kill you.
8. A woman raped and strangled is morally superior to a woman with a smoking gun and a dead rapist at her feet.
9. When confronted by violent criminals, you should "put up no defense ? give them what they want, or run" (Handgun Control Inc. Chairman Pete Shields, Guns Don't Die - People Do, 1981, p. 125).
10. The New England Journal of Medicine is filled with expert advice about guns; just like Guns and Ammo has some excellent treatises on heart surgery.
11. One should consult an automotive engineer for safer seatbelts, a civil engineer for a better bridge, a surgeon for spinal paralysis, a computer programmer for Y2K problems, and Sarah Brady [or Sheena Duncan, Adele Kirsten, Peter Storey, etc.] for firearms expertise.
12. The 2nd Amendment, ratified in 1791, refers to the National Guard, which was created by an act of Congress in 1903.
13. The National Guard, funded by the federal government, occupying property leased to the federal government, using weapons owned by the federal government, punishing trespassers under federal law, is a state militia.
14. These phrases," right of the people peaceably to assemble," "right of the people to be secure in their homes," "enumeration's herein of certain rights shall not be construed to disparage others retained by the people," and "The powers not delegated herein are reserved to the states respectively, and to the people," all refer to individuals, but "the right of the people to keep and bear arms" refers to the state.
15. We don't need guns against an oppressive government, because the Constitution has internal safeguards, but we should ban and seize all guns, thereby violating the 2nd, 4th, and 5th amendments to that Constitution.
16. Rifles and handguns aren't necessary to national defense, which is why the army has millions of them.
17. Private citizens shouldn't have handguns, because they serve no military purpose, and private citizens shouldn't have "assault rifles," because they are military weapons.
18. The ready availability of guns today, with waiting periods, background checks, fingerprinting, government forms, et cetera, is responsible for recent school shootings,compared to the lack of school shootings in the 40's, 50's and 60's, which resulted from the availability of guns at hardware stores, surplus stores, gas stations, variety stores, mail order, et cetera.
19. The NRA's attempt to run a "don't touch" campaign about kids handling guns is propaganda, and the anti-gun lobby's attempt to run a "don't touch" campaign is responsible social activity.
20. Guns are so complex that special training is necessary to use them properly, and so simple to use that they make murder easy.
21. A handgun, with up to 4 controls, is far too complex for the typical adult to learn to use, as opposed to an automobile that only has 20.
22. Women are just as intelligent and capable as men but a woman with a gun is "an accident waiting to happen" and gun makers' advertisements aimed at women are "preying on their fears."
23. Ordinary people in the presence of guns turn into slaughtering butchers but revert to normal when the weapon is removed.
24. Guns cause violence, which is why there are so many mass killings at gun shows.
25. A majority of the population supports gun control, just like a majority of the population supported owning slaves.
26. A self-loading small arm can legitimately be considered to be a "weapon of mass destruction" or an "assault weapon."
27. Most people can't be trusted, so we should have laws against guns, which most people will abide by because they can be trusted.
28. The right of online pornographers to exist cannot be questioned because it is constitutionally protected by the Bill of Rights, but the use of handguns for self defense is not really protected by the Bill of Rights.
29. Free speech entitles one to own newspapers, transmitters, computers, and typewriters, but self-defense only justifies bare hands.
30. The ACLU is good because it uncompromisingly defends certain parts of the Constitution, and the NRA is bad, because it defends other parts of the Constitution.
31. Charlton Heston as president of the NRA is a shill who should be ignored, but Michael Douglas as a representative of Handgun Control, Inc. is an ambassador for peace who is entitled to an audience at the UN arms control summit.
32. Police operate with backup within groups, which is why they need larger capacity pistol magazines than do "civilians" who must face criminals alone and therefore need less ammunition.
33. We should ban "Saturday Night Specials" and other inexpensive guns because it's not fair that poor people have access to guns too.
34. Police officers, who qualify with their duty weapons once or twice a year, have some special Jedi-like mastery over handguns that private citizens can never hope to obtain.
35. Private citizens don't need a gun for self-protection because the police are there to protect them even though the Supreme Court says the police are not responsible for their protection.
36. Citizens don't need to carry a gun for personal protection but police chiefs, who are desk-bound administrators who work in a building filled with cops, need a gun.
37. "Assault weapons" have no purpose other than to kill large numbers of people, which is why the police need them but "civilians" do not.
38. When Microsoft pressures its distributors to give Microsoft preferential promotion, that's bad; but when the Federal government pressures cities to buy guns only from Smith & Wesson, that's good.
39. Trigger locks do not interfere with the ability to use a gun for defensive purposes, which is why you see police officers with one on their duty weapon.
40. When Handgun Control, Inc., says they want to "keep guns out of the wrong hands," they don't mean you. Really.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
