|
|
AN AMERICAN WARNING
Because you should know!
August 2007 - Posts
-
|
A few days ago, I told you about the tragic case of Liquarry Jefferson, an 8-year-old boy who was accidentally killed by his 7-year-old cousin in a Boston neighborhood. Mayor Thomas Menino was quick to try to blame the NRA for this tragedy.
But as I pointed out, this family had been under constant supervision from social workers and the police, and the 15-year-old family member who illegally possessed that gun had not been removed from the home despite his extensive juvenile record and gang ties.
Well, now there's even more proof that Mayor Menino is more concerned with eradicating legal gun ownership than going after violent criminals who illegally possess firearms.
Massachusetts has some of the most restrictive gun laws in the nation and, as a result, legal gun ownership in the state has declined by 25 percent over the past few years. In Boston, that figure is closer to 40 percent. But Mayor Menino told the Boston Globe, "We're pleased that the number of gun owners has decreased in our city."
Unless you think law-abiding gun owners are somehow responsible for the actions of violent criminals, you shouldn't be pleased by this news. But Menino is happy as a clam about the fact that more Bostonians are now defenseless against violent criminals, and that tells me he's not interested in reducing crime.
Like the rest of these gun-banning political hypocrites, he's only interested in making gun owners the bad guys.
|
-
|
I can't believe Sarah Brady can make some of her statements with a straight face. She actually had the nerve to try to claim the Brady Campaign isn't really anti-gun at all. In a new book called Why We'll Win (in which I also have an essay), she writes:
"The fact is that this debate isn't about guns at all. It's about how we as a society relate to guns. It's about how we buy them, sell them, store them and use them. When we talk about gun control, what we're really talking about are ways to encourage people to behave differently around guns."
How we relate to guns? Ways of "encouraging" people? Baloney.
The Brady Campaign has never met a gun-control law it doesn't like. It has supported every gun ban, restriction, waiting period, registration or licensing requirement, tax, fee and condemnation imaginable. It won't even go on the record as being opposed to a blanket ban on firearm ownership, like the D.C. gun ban.
At the end of the day, the Brady Campaign "wins" by taking away your rights. The NRA "wins" by protecting them. And ultimately, I believe that's why we'll win more battles than we lose.
Let us hope that those who strive to preserve our freedoms have more fire in their bellies than those working to take them away.
|
-
|
The drumbeat is beginning again. Can you hear it? Every day, we're seeing more and more columnists and politicians trying to blame violent crime on us, the law-abiding gun owners.
In New Jersey, where an illegal alien who was out on bail for child rape and assault allegedly killed three people and injured another, writers like Bob Braun are pointing the finger not at the criminals who commit these heinous acts, but at you and me.
He recently wrote in the Newark Star-Ledger:
"We still debate about whether cheap handguns-the only purpose of which is to help people kill each other-should be manufactured and sold, as if the Framers of the Constitution meant the Second Amendment to assist gang warfare in city streets. Hey, Mr. Charlton Heston, want to talk about cold dead hands now? Three pairs of them in a Newark school yard the other night."
Mr. Braun, the Framers knew exactly what they were doing in drafting the Second Amendment as a protection of our right to keep and bear arms. The Second Amendment isn't designed to "assist gang warfare." It's designed to make sure "We the People" can protect ourselves against these thugs.
New Jersey's gun laws, which include getting permission from the local police before being able to purchase a firearm, didn't do a thing to stop the alleged murderer.
How many Right-to-Carry holders are there in Newark, New Jersey? Not too many, I'm guessing. Your politicians have made it crystal clear that they don't like guns or gun owners. Sadly, those who commit violent crimes hate to see law-abiding gun owners as well.
You might ask yourself if it's a good thing that your elected leaders and your violent criminals share the same anti-Second Amendment ideology.
|
-
|
I've been following the events at the Huffington Post over the past couple of days, and I have to say it's pretty funny. I love to see anti-gunners turn on each other, and that's exactly what's happened with Josh Sugarmann from the Violence Policy Center and anti-gun Rep. Carolyn McCarthy.
It all started out when Sugarmann wrote about my blogs, "It's Not a Gun Control Bill" parts one and two, from back in June. Sugarmann believes me when I say the new NICS improvement bill isn't a gun-control bill, and that makes him upset. He wants military veterans who've never been adjudicated as mental defectives to be forever banned from owning a gun. He wants a lifetime ban on firearms ownership for those who've worked to clear their name and restore their rights. He hates it, because it takes steps to cut through the bureaucratic red tape that has plagued the NICS system.
But Carolyn McCarthy's upset because Sugarmann's a big name in the anti-gun movement, and she's responded to his criticisms with an article of her own in the Huffington Post. In it, she says that no bill dealing with firearms can clear Congress without the approval of the NRA. That's because of you. You are the NRA, and with your voice being heard loud and clear, we'll continue to block any anti-gun legislation that gets introduced.
In the meantime, it's kind of fun to watch these anti-gunners argue with each other over a bill that's not about gun control.
|
-
|
As most gun owners know, residents of Washington, D.C., have been barred from owning a firearm in their home for thirty years. You may have heard about recent efforts to overturn that ban, including a potential hearing by the U.S. Supreme Court. But I'll bet you haven't heard about the public hearing on the issue, where a congressional delegate lectured a pro-gun audience to "pipe down!"
The anti-gun media in our nation's capital city didn't want to tell the whole story, but I will. Because, when it comes to freedom, Americans should never pipe down!
Washington, D.C.'s congressional delegate, Eleanor Norton, has been a longtime gun-control supporter. Frankly, she hasn't met a gun ban she didn't like.
So Norton attended a hearing on the D.C. gun ban intent on lecturing the crowd about the need to keep the gun ban in place. She was more than surprised to find that her district is full of NRA members and citizens who want their Second Amendment rights restored.
She was surprised and flabbergasted.
She said, "Wherever a resident may stand on guns … and there are a few residents in the District of Columbia who would see our gun laws repealed and make common cause with the NRA," Norton began. At her mention of the NRA, the crowd erupted in applause, much to Norton's shock and horror.
She continued, stunned, "... I've been in Congress 15 years, and most of you look real strange to me … I don't know where you came from. All right. PIPE DOWN!"
It reminds me of Jack Nicholson in the movie, A Few Good Men. Delegate Norton JUST CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH!
And the truth is, the result of D.C.'s gun ban is a violent crime-infested city.
And the truth is, NRA members and law-abiding citizens live everywhere, including in Washington, D.C. And they, like all Americans, value all of their rights... including the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
And we absolutely will not-ever-pipe down.
|
-
|
They call themselves People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, but the media doesn't tell you that this multi-national organization has no ethics when it comes to family values.
These animal rights extremists have shown their anti-family core by a gross effort to indoctrinate our schoolchildren with the comic book, Your Mommy Kills Animals.
They want to end all hunting, fishing, animal research, drug testing, circuses and rodeos. They are well financed and highly organized. And they're out to brainwash our kids.
PETA fliers even go so far as to warn children to "... keep your doggie or kitty friends away from Mommy - She's an animal killer."
That's outrageous. And it's sick.
Dr. Carolyn Newberger, a noted child psychologist, was right when she said, "It's using children in the worst possible way... targeting children and making them feel their mothers are murderers is absolutely unconscionable."
But where is the media outrage over PETA's disgusting effort to pit children against their own mothers? Reporters too bent on maintaining their political correctness remain cowardly silent.
The real truth the media ignores is that, when it comes to ethics, PETA comes up short.
|
-
|
A few weeks ago, I told you about Boston Mayor Tom Menino trying to blame the NRA for the tragic death of 8-year-old Liquarry Jefferson. Jefferson was shot by his 7-year-old cousin, who found the gun in Jefferson's home. When police arrived, the family originally tried to claim Jefferson was shot by a home invader before they finally came clean a day later.
Poor Liquarry never stood much of a chance. As the Boston Globe recently reported, his father was in prison on the day Liquarry was born. He had four other siblings from three men, all of them gang members, all currently in prison. Even his mother has a criminal record.
Into this life of violence and crime, young Liquarry was born. Who knows how much of his innocence had been stripped away by his own family members, much less the violent criminals his father, mother, and brothers associated with?
Police believe the gun in Liquarry's home, for example, came from Liquarry's 15-year-old stepbrother. That 15-year-old stepbrother was also a gang member with a long record.
Still, all these signs of violence weren't enough for social workers to remove Liquarry from the home. Instead they tried a new school and intensive counseling.
When will these folks understand that knowing your ABC's doesn't matter much if you don't know right from wrong? And yet Mayor Menino would rather blame the millions of law abiding gun owners than take a hard look at this family and the justice system in Boston.
There's much more to talk about with this story, so stay tuned in the days ahead.
|
-
|
They call Philadelphia the birthplace of freedom, but its residents aren't very free any more. Because the city is being crippled by violence. And what they aren't telling you is that the most violent murderers, rapists and attackers are among the most free... because Philadelphia's given up.
Over the last five years, the homicide rate in Philadelphia rose 36 percent, while the national rate increased only two percent. In 2005, the city witnessed 377 murders. There were 406 in 2006 and, this year, the city is averaging more than one murder every day. They're on pace for the highest body count in a decade.
At the present rate, this year in Philadelphia, more than 400 citizens will be murdered... 1,000 women will be raped... and at least 10,000 citizens will be victims of aggravated assault.
But here's the dirty secret no one—including the media—will admit.
Half of those violent murderers, rapists and attackers won't even be arrested. And the ones that are arrested are usually slapped on the wrist and given probation.
According to U.S. Attorney Michael Stiles, "There is no real risk attached to the conduct of a criminal deciding he is going to put a gun in his pocket before he goes out."
No real risk of being caught. And no real risk of being prosecuted even if he is caught.
The Philadelphia district attorney, Lynn Abraham, is on the front lines trying to fight crime in her city. And she squarely blames Philadelphia judges for the problem. "We wouldn't need federal dollars if our local judges would be true to their oaths and convict felons of what they are charged with and proven guilty of, and if they would give them the proper long-term state prison sentence that they are deserving of... we are saddened because our judges have failed to do the right thing."
While anti-gun politicians and the media use Philadelphia's violence to hype gun control, they fail to tell the truth about the city's failure to arrest, prosecute and sentence the murderers and rapists who roam free of risk. But that dirty secret is getting people killed at a record pace.
|
-
|
More and more towns in California seem hell-bent on passing laws that turn law-abiding gun owners into criminals if they don't report lost or stolen firearms to the police within a certain time period.
The media's been falling all over themselves to quote some political police chiefs who say such a law will actually do something to reduce crime. But nobody has quoted Sacramento City Councilwoman Lauren Hammond. A few months ago, as Sacramento was debating this same legislation, Councilwoman Hammond said:
"We've had an opportunity to see what it's done in other jurisdictions, and it hasn't done a darned thing. And so as supportive as I am of the concept of requiring people to report the loss of firearms, I'm really in a quandary right now about why we should ask the city attorney to bother to write an ordinance that no one uses and has had no effect in the jurisdictions that have it."
Got that? A California politician admits that the law is a complete failure, yet because the Brady Campaign keeps pushing it, more and more cities in California are passing it.
It's pretty sad when local politicians cave in for "gun control" instead using their own common sense. If I were a California voter, I'd show up at the polls to make sure these anti-gun council members need to look for a new job.
|
-
|
For a city that's supposedly so big on "tolerance" and "acceptance of others," San Francisco politicians have shown themselves to be incredibly bigoted towards one group of Americans: gun owners.
While the "San Fran Gun Ban" was struck down by a judge (the city's currently appealing that decision), supervisors and Mayor Gavin Newsom just approved new ordinances that they say make San Francisco the city with the most restrictive gun laws in the country.
These laws aren't designed to stop criminals. They're designed to go after legal gun owners. Restrictions and requirements on gun storage, sale and possession on firearms will make it virtually impossible for someone to defend themselves against an armed attack, even within the sanctity of their own home.
I don't get how these "open-minded" politicians can be so closed-minded when it comes to the Second Amendment, but I do know one thing: The NRA isn't just going to sit by while these San Francisco politicians trample on your constitutional rights.
|
-
|
It's time to ask Philadelphia politicians some tough questions. While they continue to scream and shout about the need for more gun-control laws, they're doing nothing to make sure that the criminals in Philly are getting what they deserve.
Take the case of Vondell Roundtree, a 27-year-old Philly man who's been charged with three counts of homicide and attempted murder. Roundtree, who goes by the street name of "Pooh," is no stranger to police, prosecutors or judges. In fact, he's been arrested on drug and guns charges three different times. Back in 2002, Roundtree pled guilty to carrying a firearm without a license and was sentenced to three years. Not three years in prison, three years of probation.
Sentences like that don't do anything to deter crime. And the politicians in Philly who allow "punishments" like that to take place every single day in the courts should be ashamed. Vondell Roundtree obviously didn't learn his lesson from his previous sentence. Do you think the city leaders will learn theirs?
|
-
|
For almost 90 years, students and faculty have been using the shooting range at the University of Toronto. But that tradition will soon be ending, all because of a few politically correct college administrators.
See, these academics say that the range symbolizes the "sinister" purposes of firearms. So they're shutting it down, despite the fact that there's never been a safety problem at the range. These administrators are so anti-gun that they can't see the hundreds of shooters who use the range for what they are: peaceful, law-abiding gun owners.
I thought college was supposed to be an open-minded place where students and faculty can challenge themselves intellectually. Instead of giving in to their knee-jerk, anti-gun impulses, maybe these administrators should have gone down to the range and tried shooting for themselves.
Instead, we get more of the same irrational behavior we've come to expect from the anti-gunners around the world. It doesn't matter if it's the United States or Canada; these gun banners are cut from the same intolerant cloth. And if they get their way, a sanctuary for sport shooters will be shut down, all in the name of political correctness.
|
|
|
|