Fighting the 2nd

One of our basic rights as citizens of America is the right to keep and bear arms, the 2^nd Amendment is supposed to guarantee that the Government will not prohibit the citizenry from being able to defend itself with the force of arms. It is one of the most attacked rights by the Left in this country and is so misunderstood by both the left and the right.

It is plain to me what the framers of the Amendment wanted in passing the Bill. They had only recently fought a war against a tyrannical government and they were living in a wild country. The musket was carried by every able bodied male in this country at that time. This was what was meant by bearing arms, it was to protect them in the main but also to throw off another tyrannical government if one were to emerge.

The Left's contention is that Guns kill people and that if we outlaw them we will have peace. Now they feel this way even though there is no evidence this will happen, in fact the opposite is true. There is plenty of evidence that banning guns disarms the citizenry leaving them vulnerable to those who ignore all the laws including the taking of life. Just look at Washington DC until the Heller ruling overturned the laws in the country's most restricted anti-gun city. And at that time the city that had the most homicides as well.

Today that honor is held by the city of Chicago. And they too have the mantel of the most restricted anti-gun city in America. Well until we sort out this week's Supreme Court ruling that basically ruled that States and Cities have to abide by the 2^nd Amendment as well as the Federal.

The point of this for me is that it is time for Republican Senators to strap on some balls and stand firm on Supreme Court nominees.

When nominee Sonia Sotomayor was being questioned in her confirmation hearing she answered the question about the 2^nd amendment this way: "I understand the individual right fully that the Supreme Court recognized in Heller." And "I understand how important the right to bear arms is to many, many Americans."

Leaving little wiggle room for interpretation she recognized that the 2^nd amendment was an individual right. Now look at her position NOW as a full member of the Supreme Court and not just a nominee, as a member of the dissenting opinion she sided with the following statement: "the Framers did not write the Second Amendment in order to protect a private right of armed self defense."

This is called a two faced lie. Saying one thing to win the nomination and gain confirmation and doing exactly what she wants' politically when she is on the bench.

And now we have Elena Kagan doing the same thing. That is, saying one thing to win the confirmation. Claiming as "settled law and Heller has decided that the Second Amendment confers such an individual right to keep and bear arms," in the discussion on the 2^nd Amendment posed to her during her nomination hearings. Elena Kagan has a long history of fighting against the 2^nd Amendment. She has helped to develop several bans on weapons the most notable being the Clinton Administrations 1998 weapons ban.

She is yet another radical that is fully vested in the mutation of this country to a Socialist Democratic state similar in nature to many in Europe. She must be stopped.

There will be many cases of import brought to the Supreme Court over the course of her tenure if she were to win confirmation. Do you think she would be sympatric to a constitutional challenge to the Obamacare health care bill, I do. When asked if the congress has the constitutional authority to dictate what people eat, she stammered for many seconds before she started her response. And unfortunately the Republican who posed the question answered it for her cutting her off in the process. But the many seconds in delay in answering spoke volumes.

Republican Senators need to filibuster this nominee or voter her down outright. She is being disingenuous when she answers questions put to her by the Republicans. She will be a willing participant in the demise of what had once been a proud country.

BT: Jimmy T sends.

Guns and Such

Interesting data in the below widget:


I am surprised by the one sided nature of the number of Guns used in self defense. I guess the News broadcasts are geared to bring the horrific, but not the everyday.

Also, the number of suicides by gun is surprisingly very high as well. Watch the Compares with items that cycles.

BT: Jimmy T sends.

An Armed Citizenry

"Researchers both public and private have estimated total defensive gun uses at between 800,000 and 2.5 million times per year." This from the cover story of November's copy of "America's 1^st Freedom" magazine put out by the National Rifle Association.

Amazing numbers even at the low end. Yet the article goes on to say you never hear these stories because the Media is so liberal and that their agenda is that of a disarmed America that you never hear of these incidents. And they are right.

I live in a fairly gun pro state (well for one on the east coast), lots of people here legally own guns, but they all live in the suburbs or the country. The cities I would guess not so much. You see the cities, where incidentally most of the violent crime is at, write their own gun ownership rules above and beyond the state rules. The result the normal city folk that could take advantage of the self protection gun ownership provides you, have so many roadblocks to legal ownership they simply don't buy them. They don't own them and as a result they are always the victim of violent crime.

A new Blog, Civilian Gun Defense, has started to document the many incidents of the Defensive Gun Use and give light to the fact that we are safer with guns than without.

Will the left ever learn?

Also from this same issue, a story about Britain and its draconian gun laws. Well actually about the extension of their gun laws. Seems way back when the good people of the parliament over there outlawed guns. All guns except for those engaged in the Gentlemanly pursuit of sport hunting, you know grouse, quail and the like. So pretty much shotguns are all you can get over there. And those are pretty good at protecting your property and home however they are a bit large, kind of hard to slip one into your waist band and head into the City. I am sure it works but you will look funny out and about.

Anyhow, just a few years ago (2005 in fact) the British Medical Journal called for the ban on pointed kitchen knives throughout the empire, such as it is these days. Yeah, I guess when you disarm the citizenry and they take up arms with what is left well, you have to stop them. Can't have them packng some sharp iron you know, wouldn't be safe out there.

Now comes this, and you knew it had to move in this direction, the British Home Office has commissioned the development of a new "safer" glass mug from which to drink beer from. Yep, the traditional pint glass will go the way of the handgun over there, with the introduction of a new vessel that is a shatterproof plastic composite. Yeah, in the not too distance future only outlaws will drink their stout from glass!!

The nanny state writ large. When will the madness end!!

BT: Jimmy T sends.