This is a placeholder for now because I have not had ads on this blog for years. In case I ever start up again, this will be the policy in effect:
The FTC has some fool nonsense rules about ads on blogs or some such and presumes authority over the First Amendment to compel the unfunded mandate that we who earn ad revenues make some kind of disclosure so you don't think we're getting paid to say nice things about people or God knows what, meaning they must think you're stupid, too. I have had a few ads on this site in the past and may do so again if I think it's worth a try. Combined, I probably couldn't buy a box of good cigars each year, let alone a bottle of George T. Stagg, and that is somehow supposed to compromise my morality to force me to say nice things about products and services I don't mean simply in exchange for filthy lucre. If you believe that, leave now--you're not smart enough to be here. Bottom line, aside from welcoming a sponsor, I will do no posts related to their products or services, or reviews of what they offer.
About "The Only Ones"
The purpose of this feature has never been to bash cops. The only reason I do this is to amass a credible body of evidence to present when those who would deny our right to keep and bear arms use the argument that only government enforcers are professional and trained enough to do so safely and responsibly. And it's also used to illustrate when those of official status, rank or privilege, both in law enforcement and in some other government position, get special breaks not available to we commoners, particularly (but not exclusively) when they're involved in gun-related incidents.
Comment House Rules
Keep them on topic. No spam. No threats against anyone except me. Do not feed trolls--I'll take out the trash. Try to keep it clean. I'm the final arbiter. If you don't like the rules, start your own damn blog.
Link Policy
WarOnGuns reciprocates links with liberty-oriented sites promoting the right to keep and bear arms for all peaceable individuals. If you have linked to me and don't see your site below, it's probably just because I haven't noticed it yet. Shoot me an email via the "Contact Form" (see above in this sidebar) if you want to fix that.
As a general rule I remove links for blogs that have been inactive for over one year.
So, her main argument is that because some criminals are better armed than police, so she needs to restrict non-police possession of weapons? Her secondary argument is that both in the shooting of her husband on the Long Island Railroad and the shooting of Representative Giffords in Arizona the shooter was tackled while reloading, so that is desirable to require non-police to reload more often by prohibiting sales of magazines greater than ten round capacity? What about the concept of each individual taking ultimate responsibility for their own safety and for their families by being armed and proficient in the use of the weapons and immediately taking these shooters down without tackling them. This is a murderer, not an opposing player in a football game. Cowering in fear while your friends and family are butchered, waiting for someone else to do something, anything, is nonsensical.
I am beginning to think that as soon as someone says "common sense" that their argument be immediately shut off and rejected, as it basically attempts to insult the intelligence of all opposed to the argument and rejects all counter-arguments. A gross violation of 1st Amendment rights? Well, to protect our 2nd Amendment rights, I think that action makes "common sense".
First of all, Colin Ferguson purchased a firearms on the west coast, despite having a police record, flew across America, ticket purchased by persons unindicted, boarded the train in order to kill white people; killing McCarthy's EX-husband and injuring her son and the others.
It's still amazing that her sole reason for being in congress remains this incident that was successful because New York makes it so difficult for the law abiding to be armed at all times.
Despite all of that, we must impress upon Mrs. McCarthy that we're NOT going to tolerate her interference with our exercise of our intrinsic rights...
They took it down. I searched for the text and can't find it elsewhere. I could copy and paste it here but it has a copyright on it and after what Righthaven has done to other bloggers I'm not willing to have a $75K judgment filed against me.
4 comments:
So, her main argument is that because some criminals are better armed than police, so she needs to restrict non-police possession of weapons? Her secondary argument is that both in the shooting of her husband on the Long Island Railroad and the shooting of Representative Giffords in Arizona the shooter was tackled while reloading, so that is desirable to require non-police to reload more often by prohibiting sales of magazines greater than ten round capacity? What about the concept of each individual taking ultimate responsibility for their own safety and for their families by being armed and proficient in the use of the weapons and immediately taking these shooters down without tackling them. This is a murderer, not an opposing player in a football game. Cowering in fear while your friends and family are butchered, waiting for someone else to do something, anything, is nonsensical.
I am beginning to think that as soon as someone says "common sense" that their argument be immediately shut off and rejected, as it basically attempts to insult the intelligence of all opposed to the argument and rejects all counter-arguments. A gross violation of 1st Amendment rights? Well, to protect our 2nd Amendment rights, I think that action makes "common sense".
First of all, Colin Ferguson purchased a firearms on the west coast, despite having a police record, flew across America, ticket purchased by persons unindicted, boarded the train in order to kill white people; killing McCarthy's EX-husband and injuring her son and the others.
It's still amazing that her sole reason for being in congress remains this incident that was successful because New York makes it so difficult for the law abiding to be armed at all times.
Despite all of that, we must impress upon Mrs. McCarthy that we're NOT going to tolerate her interference with our exercise of our intrinsic rights...
EVER AGAIN.
Link doesn't work for me. Can you upload it to scribd or something similar?
They took it down. I searched for the text and can't find it elsewhere. I could copy and paste it here but it has a copyright on it and after what Righthaven has done to other bloggers I'm not willing to have a $75K judgment filed against me.
Post a Comment