November 12, 2008
Random Shots
Armed with a single-shot .22-caliber rifle, an eight-year old in Arizona ambushed his father, shooting him in head and chest, pausing to reload between each shot. He then methodically killed a second man who lived at the home, again with shots to the head and chest, again pausing to reload between each shot. Despite blind and immediate media speculation of child abuse, there is nothing to indicate the father was anything other than a loving father and hunter who taught his son to shoot so that they could share his love of the outdoors. The moral of the story? Love your kids. Teach them to shoot if you want. But always lock up your firearms.
In Alaska, Gov. Sarah Palin's controversial helicopter-borne culling of wolf packs has proven to be life-saving for an Alaskan caribou herd in danger of extinction. At times, shooting even beautiful wild things is a better option than doing nothing. Her pragmatic approach to wildlife management offers a caribou herd a second chance. Don't look for the animal rights groups that attacked Palin for the culling program to congratulate her on it succeeding.
Advocating the shooting of people, however, especially the President-Elect, isn't a good idea, as some N.C. State students are no doubt learning.
State has what it calls the Free Expression Tunnel where students are encouraged to communicate controversial ideas and thoughts without criticism as an exercise in free speech. That free expression stops when racial slurs are spray painted, along with the graffiti "Shoot Obama." The NAACP is now involved, pushing for the students involved to be punished by the University since criminal charges will not be filed. The right to free speech is not a freedom from responsibility.
But what about shooting some friends of the President-Elect? Is that permissible?
Someone pointed out that Bill Ayers, Bernadine Dohrn, and others in the domestic terror group called the Weather Underground formally declared war against the United States, but that they were not aware that the WU ever signed a formal peace treaty. If someone decided to take a shot at members, could they argue they were targeting known enemy combatants?
I strongly suspect that defense would utterly fail in court, so I'd advise not testing it. Besides, if someone was successful in terminating them as they planned to do to 25 million of us, what would President Obama do? He'd no longer be The Fresh Prince of Bill Ayers.
And speaking even more of Obama and guns, it appears that his campaign and election have done wonders for gun and ammunition sales, even as his policies seem ripe to wreck the rest of the economy.
Gun shops across America are seeing a massive increase in sales of both guns and ammunition as a result of Obama's historic victory. His record of supporting bans on all semi-automatic firearms and all handguns, his stated desire to reinstate the ineffectual Clinton-era ban on assault weapons, and fears that a Democratic Congress may attempt to raise prohibitive taxes on firearms has led to a shortage of certain kinds of firearms and ammunition across the country. In particular, semi-automatic rifles that would potentially be affected by such a ban are difficult to keep in stock, and many retailers are back-ordered.
I only how much more sales will increase when Americans learn that Obama actively sought to undermine the Second Amendment as a director of the rabidly anti-gun Joyce Foundation.
Quite by accident, Barack Obama seems poised to do more to increase gun ownership by American citizens than any President in history.
If I wasn't so bitter and clingy, I'd be thrilled.
The gun blowback is a good example of the dialectic and another dollop of evidence for the wisdom of equanimity these days. If you believe in this conservatism stuff you have to also believe that there is NO way Barrytopia can in any sense succeed. Sorry Barack, American Presidents do not "rule". The American spirit and apparatus are hostile to the notion. Try it and you will find them hostile to you. Our experience tells us that Thesis will always bring Anti-Thesis so it should be no surprise that Compassionate Conservatism should leave in its wake Merciless Liberalism. Equally unsurprising will be the peals objecting to the Commier facets of Obamerica and that those beloved policies from the Iowa Caucuses will find themselves under the bus. With Ayers and Wright's rehabilitation in motion there is more room anyhow.
Posted by: megapotamus at November 12, 2008 11:16 AM"Fresh Prince of Bill Ayers"? Perfect!
Posted by: Toni at November 12, 2008 11:39 AMMeg
You have the pendulum right.
As for Obama actually "ruling", I think that the natural division of power between our three branches of government will make any POTUS ruling a difficult thing. Imagine Pelosi and Reid giving up lots of power--heh, not so much.
Not to mention that the Presidency is a LOT larger than Obama--expect complete meltdowns on a regular basis as his cabinet and advisors repeatedly piss off friends as well as appease our enemies.
The press will cover for him quite a bit, but the MSM always needs some political blood to drink. With no Republicans or conservatives around that leaves---guess who? Not that it will change their blatant bias in the next election, but it will make it hard for Obama and the Democrats to get away with murder until the mid-term elections.
Has everyone forgotten last June's SCOTUS decision on our right to bear arms? Not the President...not Congress can over rule that...DON'T PANIC!
as a side note. Does anyone really have a problem with a law mandating trigger locks on all guns kept in our homes? Yes I know many of us already do, however too many do not.
Nogo, what you don't know could fill volumes.
Heller Vs DC does not in any way block Congress from attempting to ban handguns or semi-automatic firearms (two things Obama has supported in the past that are popular on the left) or his current stance in favor of re-instituting some sort of "assault weapons" ban. Heller was narrow and focused in scope; obviously, it hasn't overturned a very similar handgun ban in Chicago, or similar bans in other metro areas. It only directly affects Washington DC.
As for mandating trigger locks on firearms in the home, I'm strongly opposed. As someone who sold firearms I strongly advise using a safe or trigger lock when conditions warrant, but they are not needed in every home, nor warranted in many conditions.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at November 12, 2008 02:56 PMNogo just knows what the talking heads on MS-National-Barack-Channel tell him.
Posted by: ConservativeWanderer (formerly C-C-G) at November 12, 2008 05:41 PMWhat part of this decision leaves a loophole..
Specifics please..
Google the response to this important decision from gun owners and the NRA on yer own..
Can you cite ANYTHING that this important decision does not provide me and my family our rights to own my handguns/hunting rifles in Denver or where you live?
Yes..helmet laws save lives and brain injuries..yes seat belt laws save lives...
Yes lock laws just might prevent children from accidentally/or on immature kids killing themselves or others..
Not every law put in place to protect idiots from harming themselves and/others is a bad thing.
Love yer guns without checks?
http://www.gunguys.com/?p=3240
I am a gun owner..when we had our children back in the '80's we locked our guns.
When you sold/sell guns..was/is your real concern children in the house..or the sale?
When you sold/sell guns. Do you provide locks at no cost? If not..why not..
do you at least provide this info?
http://www.ci.mtnview.ca.us/city_hall/police/services_n_education/free_gun_locks.asp
Since when are gun dealers responsible for gun safety in someone's home?
Bloody hell, liberals have no clue how the real world works.
Posted by: DIAF at November 12, 2008 07:23 PMWhat part of "Heller only specifically applied to the District of Columbia" is too difficult for your synapses to process, nogo? It was not a broad decision, but a narrow one, weakly decided 5-4. The City of Denver could pass a law tomorrow banning semi-automatic rifles and pistol or "X" gun that you own, and Heller would not apply nor help you in the least. The Hellerdecision gave you nothing.
Obviously, you haven't read it.
And what, pray tell, is your brilliant point in citing the Gun Guys post about the shooting in Sumter? That a convicted felon who was not allowed to own a firearm, and who was more than likely a drug dealer, would not have killed that little boy, because of that the one extra law you attempt to impose on him, that he would ignore? When will you, and people like you, ever learn that passing more laws never stops criminals from ignoring them?
As for your comment about whether I was more interested in safety or sales, I'll simply reply that I'd wager I know far more about the safe storage, carrying, deployment, discharge, and cleaning of firearms that I suspect you can even process, and I always erred on the side of safety, even turning down FBI NICS-approved transfers when I didn't think the customer would be sufficiently responsible.
Bite me, troll.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at November 12, 2008 07:31 PMI don't have a lock on the revolver in my nightstand, since putting a gun lock on a loaded pistol is a really bad idea. And having a locked and unloaded pistol is useless for anything more than throwing at an intruder.
If and when I sell that pistol the purchaser will have to purchase their own lock.
All that said, the risks for accidental death for children 0-14 are remarkably low--75 in 2005. Kids visiting my house which is near the water are more in danger of drowning that getting into my firearms and hurting themselves.
Posted by: iconoclast at November 12, 2008 07:32 PM"guns without checks"
So, nogo, here's a question for you — if that drug dealer with the AK is so dangerous...why in the bloody hell is he not still in jail? I mean, I can't help but get the idea that you anti-gunners don't have any problem with dangerous people walking the streets as long as they allegedly can't get a gun.
Posted by: the pistolero at November 12, 2008 07:49 PMYep, gun shows and stores are doing a booming business (pun intended) all right. Taxes on guns, ammo and the "makins" of ammo are all something to get paranoid about. And there may be laws in the works to be passed by an anti-gun congress to outlaw certain guns. Some lawmakers MAY have clues about resisting too much of that or face a "recall". The midterm elections should have some running scared as the present congress has an approval rating in the single digits. The last straw, and the subsequent loss of their office, could well be connected to overbearing gun laws. Lots of people have been talking about Australia lately, and not in positive terms. Too many bad guys out there, and they carry whatever they want. You don't need a gun to kill anyway. Just get a ninja comic book and there's a dozen ways demonstrated for you there. I'm still at the "wait and see" position. I really think Obamasiah is going to make LOTS of boo-boos. He really isn't the sharpest crayola in the box anyhow. Look, he already has!
Posted by: Tonto (USA) at November 12, 2008 08:24 PMTime to educate myself on guns and go get one.
http://rightklik.blogspot.com/
Time to educate myself on guns and go get one.
http://rightklik.blogspot.com/
I see Nogo made himself unwelcome at another blog.
Posted by: ConservativeWanderer (formerly C-C-G) at November 13, 2008 07:28 PMPresidents govern, they do not rule.
Pres. Obama and his supporters would be advised to remember that else Congress - no matter what party holds it - remind him of it.
Posted by: Mikey NTH at November 13, 2008 08:12 PMI dunno, Mikey, it might be fun to watch Pelosi and Reid schooling Obama on who really holds the power.
It'd also be the first time I'd be cheering those two on. -LOL-
Posted by: ConservativeWanderer (formerly C-C-G) at November 13, 2008 10:30 PM"Teach your children to shoot." Looks like pops might have taught them a little too well. You're never too young to exercise your 2nd amendment rights.
And by the way, Ayers and Dohrn took on the FBI and the US Government and came out just fine. Don't think they have too much to worry about from the intrepid followers of the Confederate Yankee.
Posted by: mrlizard at November 13, 2008 10:32 PM"And by the way, Ayers and Dohrn took on the FBI and the US Government and came out just fine."
Oh yeah. Way to cheerlead for those murdering scum, mrslizard. Will you be having Ayers' babies now?
BTW some of his retard followers didn't do so well, however. Remember the planned attack that backfired when thier bomb exploded prematurely, killing themselves instead.
Posted by: Todd at November 14, 2008 08:44 PMNo one is worried about Ayer's past. It's his future involvement with Hussein O, and the lies Hussein O has told which were immediately absorbed by the mental retards on the left that should be of concern. The left already has buyers remorse but won't admit it. Q: Who is taken out in the first wave when a dictator takes over? A: The Elitest who claim to be educated. It might be worth losing the constitution to see that happen.
http://www.9neesan.com/massgraves/ Future of the liberals who are by nature traitors to their country and government and will not be allowed to survive.
Posted by: Scrapiron at November 16, 2008 12:13 PM
