Even the scant details released by the government should chill parents. They are telling you next to nothing about this guard who was supposed to be the barrier between your precious child and ….
Right now. Pass legislation permitting teachers and staff who already hold handgun carry permits, to carry on the job, on the premises.
If you just must, impose additional training requirements. If you must, have some expert check the equipment. Those two items are essentially BS. If you are really serious about school safety, let “the militia” do its job.
But, do not let that hold up expanding HCP authority to carry on school property right now.
This is not even to mention that my county’s expensive, elaborate security systems are in utter disarray after discovery of ineptitude and corruption. And, the School Board (the citizens) were kept in the dark about it.
If you object, then how concerned about school safety are you, really? Are you more concerned about giving up your political position supportive of your overall philosophy and your party?
You have to search and listen to find it. But, even the BBC—a formerly fervent forecaster of concocted climate catastrophe—is telling the truth, now.
I comment mostly because for about 15 years now, those skeptical of Chicken Little global warmists have been called rude names. Mostly, I was skeptical because of:
–the lack of reliably measured long-term data to support the claims of long-term change;
–a pseudo-scientific method fueled by government grant money and the academic compulsion to publish;
–a charlatan substitution for science, comprised of computer modeling, rather than actual research;
–the same resulted in results not statistically valid;
–the leap from a bold preliminary hypothesis to dogmatic insistence that the UN take over the world to keep the sky from falling;
–all just after claims by the same groups during the 70s and 80s that atmospheric carbon would cause a new ice-age.
I always figured they might be right, but nothing authentically scientific was saying so.
I find it hilarious that some people entrenched in the global warming hypothesis cannot give it up. Plainly “climate scientists” whored with international socialist politics and produced a convenient (for them) but truly ugly offspring. The fornication by science with socialist politics is now out here for all to see—and laugh at.
Even BBC won’t travel with Al Gore and Attenborough, anymore.
The same self-proclaimed brilliant people who laughed at the deniers are sullen and silent now. Attenborough made international news claiming his 3.something degrees of temperature rise before. Now, you have to scour the back pages to find that it was all a big lie and the BBC won’t repeat it for him anymore.
The ever-forgettable Michael Dukakis, 1988 Democrat presidential candidate, speaking in 1986: ”I don’t believe in people owning guns,…
(Now, readers, pause here and notice how Dukakis contradicted himself with his next phrase.)
…only the police and military.”
The last time I checked, uniformed law enforcement officers and military personnel were people, too.
Then, his next sentence: “I am going to do everything I can to disarm this state.” (speaking of Massachusetts)
Again, his contradiction and lie: He did not intend to disarm his state. Dukakis meant to grant the state a monopoly on armament, denying the non- government citizenry the same right, despite the language of the Constitution.
This is the man the Democrat Party ran for president in 1986. You may logically infer that the predominant portion of that party has not changed the Dukakis philosophy of disarming the non-government citizens.
Why am I writing about a man of such insipid leadership? Why now? Take his belief, and superimpose them on our modern times: Only the police and military [should have guns]. Click on those links.
I have great respect for both law enforcement officers, and members of our country’s uniformed services. I have worn the uniform of my country, received a government paycheck, and carried the government’s M-16. Both police and military forces are comprised of people, no worse nor better than the rest of us. Their stint in government service confers on them no sainthood.
We live in a dangerous time in which powerful leaders claim a monopoly on firearms in government’s favor, to the exclusion of the citizen out of uniform, with no badge. To you law enforcement officers who might be prone to agree with them: They do not revere you; they see themselves as your masters, too. You in your uniforms with issue weapons: you are seen by them as their servants, to be crushed or dismissed if you step out of line.
And, what will you be when you retire?
Like the rest of us.
So, will you be disarmed?
Cast your lot with the people you joined up to serve. Understand: the Dukakis philosophy—predominant now in top Democrat leadership—holds nothing for you. It’s for them. Those who intend to hold the reins of power.
Thanks to the Second Amendment Foundation for catching the quote that Dukakis later denied.
1988 is not that far in the past. 1984 is right around the corner.
….you can purchase a life membership in the NRA. $300. Call 1-888-678-7894 or (855) 672-2013. You have to call. The representative informed me that these special offers are not available on the regular web site: phone calls only. She confirmed the price.
The price of ammo is not so “mere” anymore, but if you want to be able to buy 5.56mm and keep and bear anything to shoot it from, please sign up and bring along some of your friends. You could give your kids a life membership.
(At least my sponsor has 5.56. Right now. I am told it “vaporizes” from the shelves as soon as it is offered. In the time I see a few boxes up for sale at LuckyGunner.com, and figure out how to embed this video, it could be gone. It’s so bad out there in the ammo retailing world, well, how bad is it? It’s this bad.)
This YouTube video is making the rounds, I just don’t want you to miss it. It is hilarious. It is revealing. It is irony and the perfect revenge against those harassing lawful citizens who own guns. It shows their houses, tells their names, and outs them as gross hypocrites who won’t own guns; they just hire others with guns.
“Put a sign on your lawn that says, ‘No guns here!’”
Reporters who thought it was so clever to publish handgun permit holders’ names; a police officer caught on tape violating the constitutional right of others; armed guards protecting those against the right to keep and bear arms; Eric Holder (represented by a police officer—with a gun). Quite a cast of characters.
The line I laughed at the most, though, was this one. One anti-gun guy, more open and honest than the rest, quoted a progressive friend of his who called him a fool for wanting to ban guns. The progressive friend’s rationale is that there is going to be a revolution, and if the progressives keep making guns objects of horror to be avoided, then only the “right wing” will have guns. So, the left wing needs guns, too. To kill the right wing. Wow.
I would at least agree with him on one point: It is desirable that free law-abiding citizens universally be equipped with the best weapons. Right. Left. Whatever. I for one do not begrudge the progressives the right to keep and bear arms. I request the same consideration.
Well, what are they? Are we to believe that minions have only now been busily drafting? Who was consulted? How long have these measures been sitting, written and waiting? Who wrote them? Who on this task force has any experience with firearms? Who with experience are you consulting with?
What are the proposals? Rather than leak hints about the number, why don’t you just tell us what you are considering?
The most open administration in history is, instead, opaque.
They are obtuse in their understanding of all things gun-related, continuing to purvey lies and half-truths (for example, the so-called gun show loophole leaving the general public to believe that anyone can walk onto the floor and come out with an assault rifle, no questions asked.)
They obfuscate over Benghazi, spending, and taxes.
But, President Obama is ready to issue orders, to impose order, to demand obeisance.
“O” for Obama. Use the name as a memory device to remind you of the other “O” words that characterize the administration. Words other than “open.”
To the many Democrats who value the liberty to arm: Write Congress. To the many Democrats who loathe firearms and those who “cling” to them: Consider that your president plots to seize a liberty. Perhaps the right to keep and bear arms is not a liberty you choose today to exercise, or that you value highly. Perhaps, you mock the notion that some day, armed citizens may be needed to expel an enemy, or to put a tyrannical government in its place again. Regardless, you are about to lose the freedom, in favor of an ever-increasing government monopoly on money and firearms.
Power. Money and firearms are power. And, they want it. They want it all. They want it for themselves. They are grabbing it. Are you really okay with that?
What if manufacturers had to limit magazine capacity to 6 in this state, 8 in that one, and 10 over there? The cost of manufacturing goes up. Fewer manufacture. Retail prices rise, to beyond prohibitive for many. All because of arbitrary, unreasonable limitations. Article 1, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution (the Commerce Clause) was made for just this kind of state-to-state rough treatment of people trying to do commerce outside their state.
Maybe the Republican House of Representatives needs to advance a bill that says magazine capacity shall not be limited by any state. Authority: Commerce Clause. It might start out something like this:
The right to keep and bear arms being a natural and recognized constitutional right, this Congress also recognizes that the right encompasses the citizenry’s access to the personal accoutrements of weaponry and warfare. Imposition of arbitrary restrictions, bans, limits, seizures, and other artificial interference with the manufacture and sale of such weaponry and accoutrements is heinous to liberty, enmical to the Constitution, and shall be void. Further, any citizen so aggrieved by such ordinance or legislation imposed by any state, a sub-unit thereof, or by the federal government, shall be entitled to attorney fees, litigation costs, court costs, lunch, and a new FS2000 carbine in the color of his choice, complete with 20, 30-round magazines (MILSPEC) and a lifetime supply of ammunition (brass-cased, purchased at defendant governmental entity’s expense from LuckyGunner.com).
Republicans: Will you sponsor it?
Seriously, they will try every trick possible to so erode the practical exercise of the right to keep and bear arms, that the right becomes meaningless. It’s happening. Don’t think so? Try to find an AR-15 to buy. Try to find some 9mm to shoot.
This post is for people who are for more gun control. Specifically, let ‘s talk ammo. My sponsor sells ammo, right? They appreciate it when I talk ammo. Today’s the day.
The government should limit how much ammunition a person can buy right?
Why should anyone be able to buy hundreds or thousands of bullets? (“rounds of ammunition” actually, but let’s not quibble)
Now, really, you wonder why anyone other than police and military should own guns at all, right? But, for now, you reluctantly accept that the ordinary person may own a gun in some fashion. Your politicians might try to ban that, too, tomorrow, but for today, we accept that people have guns. That means, if they want to shoot them, they have to have ammunition.
How much ammunition “should we allow them to buy?” Understand, that question pisses me off, but let’s stay on point, and play with that question for now. Here is some reality for you to consider.