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.
I wonder how this insulated cud-chewer would do in a fight. [More]
5 comments:
Bad Cyborg
said...
Nothing can protect people from liberal prosecutors who choose to prosecute DESPITE the wording of the law and clear intent of the legislature. Aided and abetted by hoplophobic jurors they are able to manipulate the legal system to serve their own agenda. It's simple "Controllers are gonna control".
Why, to hear Carolie tell it, you might come away with the impression that women get jailed for self-defense more than men do. I’d like to see her prove that, not just imply it in passing.
I suppose Caroline would prefer that the women she names had had no weapon, and been killed by their attackers. Yes, the legal system does unfairly prosecute victims of crime (female AND male) in some jurisdictions. Does that mean surrendering your life is a more reasonable alternative? The women Caroline named may be (unjustly) spending some time in the Big House, but at least they're alive! And, it seems to me that reforming the District Attorney's office in those jurisdictions to end unjust prosecutions is a more reasonable measure than removing the instruments of self-defense from potential victims. But, hoplophobes don't think logically. I was going to leave a comment on The Trace, but they don't accommodate comments - how convenient for them.
If I read correctly, carolyn had a PPO against her ex yet continued to see him, in fact, letting him into the home the night of the homicide.I can see how this could lead to some confusion with the claim of self defense.
At least one of the names that stupid bag listed wasn't charged, a KY woman, I believe. One of the critical details of another case involved the woman going to her car to retrieve her gun. I use this case in my CCW classes. If she got out of the house to her car unmolested, she could have left. She was prosecuted precisely because she couldn't prove she feared for her life when she came back inside the house and started firing. It's easy, if one only hears one side of the story, to accept the details as factual. The author is just another gun hating liar and it shows in the piece of shit she signed her name to.
5 comments:
Nothing can protect people from liberal prosecutors who choose to prosecute DESPITE the wording of the law and clear intent of the legislature. Aided and abetted by hoplophobic jurors they are able to manipulate the legal system to serve their own agenda. It's simple "Controllers are gonna control".
Why, to hear Carolie tell it, you might come away with the impression that women get jailed for self-defense more than men do. I’d like to see her prove that, not just imply it in passing.
I suppose Caroline would prefer that the women she names had had no weapon, and been killed by their attackers. Yes, the legal system does unfairly prosecute victims of crime (female AND male) in some jurisdictions. Does that mean surrendering your life is a more reasonable alternative? The women Caroline named may be (unjustly) spending some time in the Big House, but at least they're alive! And, it seems to me that reforming the District Attorney's office in those jurisdictions to end unjust prosecutions is a more reasonable measure than removing the instruments of self-defense from potential victims. But, hoplophobes don't think logically. I was going to leave a comment on The Trace, but they don't accommodate comments - how convenient for them.
If I read correctly, carolyn had a PPO against her ex yet continued to see him, in fact, letting him into the home the night of the homicide.I can see how this could lead to some confusion with the claim of self defense.
At least one of the names that stupid bag listed wasn't charged, a KY woman, I believe. One of the critical details of another case involved the woman going to her car to retrieve her gun. I use this case in my CCW classes. If she got out of the house to her car unmolested, she could have left. She was prosecuted precisely because she couldn't prove she feared for her life when she came back inside the house and started firing. It's easy, if one only hears one side of the story, to accept the details as factual. The author is just another gun hating liar and it shows in the piece of shit she signed her name to.
Just my .02
HinMO
Post a Comment