Bear with me while I connect some dots.
Western Rifle Shooters Association analyzes the new federal "assault weapons" ban bill.
Note the Orwellian purpose these liars use: "To reinstate the Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act."
The head liar behind this tyranny is "Republican" Mark Kirk. We've met this piece of...work before.
45superman tells us about bearding the lyin..uh...lion in his den--or at least his apologists.
The chief apologist is your typical obnoxious RINO who calls himself "Team America"--fitting for someone who sounds like a wooden-headed marionette. Per this great patriot:
I myself own a Baretta92 with several high capacity clips. I also support concealed carry - for me - not sure about the rest of the yahoos out there (but that's another debate).
But do I really NEED my Baretta to carry 15 bullets instead of 10? I think I'd be OK without the extra firepower.
Do we NEED guns that can shoot right through a policeman's vest?
Do we NEED .50 caliber rifles that can take down a plane?
Rambo might say yes, but Mark Kirk says no, and I happen to agree with him.
Go read the post and the comments. Get good and mad at these devoid-of-all-principle aparatchiks. Then give 45s some backup and let these weasels know what you think of them.
Here's the thing: If you're a gun owner and live in District 10, you can continue to cede the GOP to the Big Tent Bolsheviks--or you can send a wider message that what worked in District 10 can be applied in every district in the land.
It's amazing what behavior modifications a little judicious human sacrifice can produce--even people who aren't true believers will fall in line if for no other reason than self-preservation.
There is another choice, you know. And for those soulless cowards over at Team Amerika for Gungrabbing Traitors, who say this will just ensure a win for Dan Seals, who will then take all our guns, well--y'all are WarOnGuns regulars. You know what to say to that.
This is the perfect candidate to make an example of--he's just been downgraded from "Lean R" to "Toss Up," so he's vulnerable--and in a close race, it doesn't take much at all to tip the scales.
"But if Mark Kirk loses, you'll lose all your guns, not just the ones we want to ban!" they bleat, like we haven't heard that one before.
What's that Tweety Bird line? "He don't know me vewy well, do he?"
Newsflash: I won't lose any rights unless I surrender them or they are stripped from me by overwhelming force. Besides which, the decision to surrender or not is mine.
Let the Team Amerika comments sink in and ask yourself if you really want to let that gaggle of party hacks dictate the terms under which they will surrender your rights...
Which would you rather see scuttled? Your political voice or tyrant wannabe Mark Kirk's bid for ever more coercive power?
18 comments:
If I feel the NEED for any of those guns or accessories, no pencil-necked desk jockey had better be standing between me and them. The way they feel about your RIGHT to every terrible implement of the soldier is how they feel about your freedom in general.
In loco parentis or loco would-be parents? I AM a guardian; I don't need any.
"Paragraph (1) shall not apply to the possession or transfer of any semiautomatic assault weapon otherwise lawfully possessed under Federal law on the date of the enactment of this subsection."
The grandfather clause. I was kinda disappointed to see it there, but maybe they'll delete it before passage. I guess they realize that that's what keeps the lid on. That's what makes it tolerable. Barely.
California had a grandfather clause too. For a little while.
But as an actual grandfather, I will not hesitate to pass any personal property I choose on to my progeny without government by-your-leave or notification. None of their business.
GOOD debate. Their side says "We FEEL..." and "Get over it; this is the way it's going to be." Our side respectfully asks them to look beyond their feel-good quick-fix criminal-endorsed plan.
I wonder how the Other Siders will FEEL when THEY wind up on the wrong side of a preemptive law. Maybe the federal warrantless wiretap will intrude on THEIR privacy a little too much for comfort. Then they'll start to realize how it feels for "necessity" to be set above liberty.
Their "friends" in government will give them their object lesson. We won't have to.
But we're still not backing up another step.
The legendary gangsters of Chicago are lacking in coordination and tactics, but still wreak havoc. It would be good training to try to take their guns first.
I posted a comment at 2:23 pm that deals with the strategy of electing a left-wing democrat verses a fake "moderate" republican. Basically, we can not allow the republican party to be penetrated by left-wing extremists who pretend to be republicans. One of the most important things we can do is to excise the corruption from the republican party. This will give us firm footing from which to operate. Once this is done, we can then focus on removing the corruption from the democrat party. Any other strategy will likely leave us surrounded and cut off....
Remember the Mariana Islands Campaign and the Great Turkey Shoot.
Fast forward to now.
Same end goal and objectives, different enemies......
Take a look at my comment (around #67) at that site
I sent an e-mail to Mike Duncan, RNC Chairman, stating my displeasure in this bill and demanding the RNC not support the bill at all. and I will be writing emails to Rep. along with a little naster letter to this Mark Kirk
Well, I put my 2 cents in at post #78.
Lotta Tories in that crowd, I must say.
Oldsmoblogger said...
Lotta Tories in that crowd, I must say.
Indeed. Good job helping Kurt clarify things over there.
Red/Blue doesn't matter if they're both tyrannical statists.
I really appreciate everyone's support, and I'm very grateful to David for bringing this to the attention of so many motivated, knowledgeable, and articulate gun rights advocates.
I don't know if we changed any minds over there, but we certainly annoyed some boot-licking tyranny enablers, and that's almost as satisfying.
I posted a comment at 6:48 pm that explains a common logical error that pops up when people try to compare restrictions of free speech with restrictions of the right to keep and bear arms.
I saw that, Anon--great job. I tried to make a similar point, very early on, but you stated the point much better.
Well let's not stop--I'm going to make poking a stick in Mark Kirk's eye and doing what I can to sink his campaign a recurring feature, just to see if we can take advantage of the "toss up."
If Allan Stevo ever replies and proves worthy, I'll do what I can to boost his profile.
You're right about the great comments--but must say I've been hoping for Straightarrow and Mike Vanderboegh to make a guest appearance over there and give the yellow stripers a dose of unvarnished reality as both have proven so capable of doing.
This seems to be working in the big picture. Oboma is not 15 points up on McCain in the national polls. Of course McCain is the leader of the pack of the RINO's and he's going to pay for that this election.
Being said, are we falling into the hands of the back room dealmakers who set the stage giving us Obama and McCain? Is Obama going to be a larger danger to our Constitutional rights over McCain? My feeling are yes but to the degree the difference is, I don't see it as a larger threat that makes much difference.
I'll tell you guys what really bothers me about this whole thing more than anything. The Lib Party hit rock bottom with Bob Barr and we have no way to protest our feelings. We can't vote for Obama or McCain so we have been cheated out of our vote. Which I can't help wondering if that's not the agenda behind this years election. To force decent freedom loving Americans out of the election and rig it for the stupid of the masses to vote in. However we all know very well that its needs to get worse before it will get better.
I emailed all the Federal legislators from my district and state, urging them to reject and dismiss the bill. Anybody's guess where they'll fall when they do. Indeed, Molon Labe!
Here's my two cents ...
Keep writing, keep posting, keep emailing, keep rallying ... but commit yourself also to taking a new shooter to the range every month. Once they are hooked, mentor them in the Rights Debate. We MUST reproduce. The best way to do that is to introduce people to the truth via hands-on experience.
I'm taking two brand new shooters out tomorrow. We'll be shooting dreaded "assault weapons." Next week I am taking a third relatively new shooter to a match. Guess what? They ALL live in Kirk's district ... and they are married. How about you?
In case anyone is curious, I posted another comment at June 22, 2008 2:45 AM. I know that not everyone is interested in argument techniques, but I explained and refuted two very dangerous techniques that are used by manipulators to get their way when they are in the wrong and their opponent is in the right. The techniques are argument by implication and the use of false or unverified accusations to put an opponent on the defensive.
Wild Deuce: Thank you. That is a very good course of action.
Post a Comment