Murderers for Gun Control

Ideally, guns should be eliminated, but I know that won’t happen. There should be stricter checks. Obviously a waiting period would be great. Personally, I only had five days left of school before winter break: school got out on Friday, and I did that on a Monday. If I had a two-week waiting period for the gun, I wouldn’t have done it.

Nicki has the scoop, as well as some dainty and lady-like observations that are trademark Fellenzer :)

Killers for gun control...seems this isn't the first time we've come across this phenomenon...

Boomtown Busted

The following comment was added by "Joe" to yesterday's post about Boomtown disallowing guns at a gun show they'd agreed to host:

A very interesting side note to this, is Boomtown is betting its entire future & survival against Kalifornia's indian casinos on a huge land/development deal with of all people....Cabelas!!!! thats right the huge hunting, camping, and gun dealer...

It's true!

The Nebraska-based company is buying the land from the parent company of Boomtown Hotel Casino.

Now this press release is from two years ago, and the Cabela's site shows the Reno store opening in 2007, so it seems a done deal.

I wonder what Cabela's management would have to say about this, and if they would be willing to publicly chastise Boomtown for taking their money and then dissing their customers?

Let's find out.




Care to join me, anyone?

Faulty Findings

Some violations had been counted twice.

Paperwork errors (assuming they were unintentional mistakes)?

Doesn't BATFU shut dealers down over that?

[More on Red's Trading Post from WarOnGuns]

A Killer on Campus

What brings someone to commit such senseless murders? And how do we put an end to the epidemic of school shootings in our country? Respected investigative journalist Bill Kurtis, will explore this tragic story from every angle, providing context through interviews with students, faculty and witnesses, as well as experts in forensic psychology, criminal profiling, and school shootings profiling, to help place this shattering incident into perspective.

Well, let's see...

Do you think "respected...Bill Kurtis" will highlight how VTech policy prohibits weapons on campus? Do you think he'll bring up how a bill to rectify that died in subcommittee? Do you think he'll report how University spokesleech Larry Hincker lauded the death of that bill, and publicly ridiculed a student who suggested allowing CCWs on campus? And do you think the conclusion will be that insane citizen disarmament policies guarantee a victim rich environment for madmen, and the only solution is to not infringe on the right of the people to keep and bear arms?

How many of these conclusions do you think A&E will arrive at while looking at every "angle" and "perspective"?

Let's find out. It airs tonight at 10:00 pm (9:00 pm Central) and Friday at 2:00 am (1:00 am Central).

[Via Dennis Walker]

A Newly Prohibited Person?

A State University of New York at Cobleskill student, suspended after posting a picture of himself posing with a shotgun on the Internet, said he received a five-day academic suspension.

The student, Tharindu Meepegama, in a Wednesday phone interview from A.O. Fox Hospital in Oneonta, where he was undergoing an evaluation, said he posed no threat. But he received the suspension "pending a psychological evaluation" after posting the picture April 17 on his profile page on the social-networking Web site Facebook.

Hospital? So he's been involuntarily committed for having his picture taken holding a shotgun because the paranoid campus officials and authorities go bonkers even thinking of such things due to recent "threats"--none of which Meepegama apparently had anything to do with? And they think he's nuts?

Seeing as how someone in an official capacity ordered this kid into the hospital for a psych evaluation as a condition of lifting his suspension, does that qualify with being "adjudicated"? Will an involuntary commitment cause his name to kick out if that record is included in the database supplying NICS? Or is this one of those things where it's considered "voluntary" as long as you do exactly as ordered? And you folks taking this week's WarOnGuns poll over in the left margin who are supporting NRA's position: would you still choose one of those options if you thought more Meepgama's might be disqualified than truly dangerous people?

If so, how many cases like this can we expect because officials suffer from hoplophobia--a self-induced mental affliction even I might say ought to disqualify someone from owning a gun--at least until they're cured.

Oh, and one other thing, "sportsmen": You'll notice the kid was posing with a shotgun. One day, some of you who still don't get it might figure out they hate you as much--if not more--than they hate anyone.

And isn't this interesting--a listing of SUNY Cobleskill Faculty Websites.

What? There's a disclaimer at the bottom?

SUNY Cobleskill, as an academic institution, vigorously supports freedom of speech. The content of these home pages are not a reflection of campus philosophy or policy, nor are they endorsed or regulated by the institution.

You can't tell that by Tharindu Meepegama.

Looking around for a few minutes, I don't really see a way of communicating electronically with "the right people" via their website, and don't have time to continue looking. But the thought strikes: a campaign to send pictures of gun owners holding their guns to these administration headcases does not seem out of line...

[Via ChareltonHest]

Helmke and the Four-Way Test

Here's Brady Center president Paul Helmke addressing the Fort Wayne Rotarians.

Let's apply the Rotarians' Four-Way Test and see how he did:

1. Is it the TRUTH?
2. Is it FAIR to all concerned?
3. Will it build GOODWILL and BETTER FRIENDSHIPS?
4. Will it be BENEFICIAL to all concerned?

I dunno, Paul. 0 for four is pretty pathetic.

And speaking of pathetic, don't you just love the way the twit who wrote this drivel had to make a point about letting everyone know she got all weak-kneed and orgasmic over a "fetching" British accent? Yeah, her opinion about which of my rights are "reasonable" matters.

Swiss Ms.

Annabelle, a women's magazine, was enlisted in the campaign to ban the gun. "We don't know any women who want a weapon in the house," says Lisa Feldmann, the editor. "Women and the younger generation think this is crazy."

And we all know how much the efforts and sacrifices of creaturettes like Lisa and their younger counterparts, that is, the globalist socialists, have kept Switzerland sovereign and free, right?

We've dealt with these subversive twa...uh...twits from Annabelle before.

Nicki or somebody, give me a hand here--I'm about ready to say something misogynistic, except somehow, I think the real women-haters are the ones who would rather see them brutalized or dead than armed.

I pray for the Swiss that there are enough real men and women there to overcome and survive the cancer within. I have the same prayer for America.

[Via Dan Gifford, who referred to this story as 'William Tell Rolls Over']

Of Primary Importance

Jennifer Freeman of Liberty Belles urges us to do our homework.

A Minor Side Effect

Perhaps some people will indeed go without treatment if the law is enforced. And perhaps some people will be unfairly deprived of firearms when they are actually harmless. But those criticisms prove only that no policy is perfect. Some minor side effects are a small price to pay for reducing the threat posed by the likes of Cho Seung-Hui.

The obvious alternative to upgrading enforcement of the existing law is to repeal it and let people known to suffer from dangerous mental illnesses enjoy free access to firearms. And that, pardon the expression, would be lunacy.

Yeah, Steve, if someone besides you gets killed because they've been rendered defenseless, it's a "small price" and a minor side effect." It must be small, because you're not the one paying it.

How about--falling back on your original premise--if somebody is psychotic and a danger to himself and others, and this has been adjudicated with full legal representation--that he be removed from society? it seems anything else, again using your words, would be lunacy.

But then again, maybe I should watch what I wish for. I suppose for taking a public stand on this issue like I do on a daily basis, I might be considered a danger to myself--or at least inviting danger form those who demand obedience and compliance. And I pray to God when the day comes where I may need to physically defend my rights that I will prove to be a danger to others.

Nuts, huh?

This Day in History: May 3

The sanguinary Zeal of the ministerial Army, to ruin and destroy the Inhabitants of this Colony, in the Opinion of this Congress, hath rendered the Establishment of an Army indispensably necessary. We have accordingly passed an unanimous Resolve for thirteen thousand six hundred Men, to be forth with raised by this Colony; and proposals are made by us to the Congress of New Hampshire, and Governments of Rhode Island and Connecticut Colonies, for furnishing men in the same proportion. The sudden Exigency of our public Affairs, precluded the possibility of waiting for your direction in these important measures; more especially, as a considerable Reinforcement from Great Britain is daily expected in this Colony, and we are now reduced to the sad alternative of defending ourselves by arms, or submitting to be slaughtered.