Tag Archives: gun control

Gun manufacturers need to be held accountable for gun crimes

By John Velisek USN (Ret), staff writer

During the October 11 airing of Meet the Press, host Chuck Todd asked Democrat presidential hopeful Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) where he stands on allowing shooting victims to sue gun manufacturers. Sanders made it clear that he is opposed to holding gun store owners liable, but he believes there is room to hold   

Bernie Sanders
Bernie Sanders

manufacturers liable to some degree.
Todd’s question was based on the fact that Sanders voted for the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA), which President George W. Bush signed into law in 2005.”

Holding gun manufacturers liable because a crime has been committed with a weapon made at their place of business? Thankfully, the PLCAA was written and passed to protect manufacturers and retail sellers of firearms from lawsuits anticipated by liberal politicians for the obvious purpose of ending the sale of guns and ammunition throughout the nation. 

Bernie Sanders, the only admitted Marxist in the 2016 race for the White House, has decided that filing suit against the little   GUN CONTROL 3 guy–owners of small gun stores–isn’t “fair.” Interesting how Bernie and other members of the far left have come to decide what the American people may do, say, believe and even how they should be permitted to earn a living based upon the definition these celestial beings apply to the word “fair!”

In any event, it appears that gun manufacturers should bear the cost and responsibility connected with any misuse of their products. It’s only fair.  But Bernie failed to mention whether Sears may be sued because one of its hammers has been used to bludgeon someone.

And Hillary Clinton is even more determined than Sanders to pursue the backdoor decimation of 2nd Amendment rights via the “legal” liability lawsuit. She would encourage victims of gun crime to sue everybody and anybody, including the owner, the seller, the  GUN CONTROL HILLARY HYPOCRISY guy who provides the bullets, the manufacturer and the importer of these evil weapons. “What is wrong with us that we can’t stand up to the NRA and the gun lobby and the gun manufacturers they represent,” screeched Hillary.

When it comes to the liability of those who actually do the shooting, Mrs. Clinton was silent. It would undoubtedly depend upon the shooter’s race, religion, sexual orientation, political persuasion and whether they have contributed to the Clinton Foundation.

Longtime writer, firearm enthusiast and 2nd Amendment supporter AWR Hawkins observed that Clinton “…did not mention any support of suing the politicians, municipal leaders and school boards that render Americans of all walks of life defenseless via  GUN FREE ZONES  gun free zones.” It’s possible that Ms. Clinton missed an important email on the subject.

Will this particular approach succeed in ending 2nd Amendment rights? Well liberals will have judges that are “progressive” enough to permit this unconstitutional nonsense; leftist members of the Supreme Court will eagerly follow the same, socialist line and remember there is always Obama’s pen. He has ignored the law and the Constitution so far; why would he change now!

Lock and load.



By John Porter, guest writer

Many years ago we heard a lot about a silent majority. What is it? It is an unspecified, large number of people in our country who do not express their opinions publicly and do not take part in public discourse. Richard Nixon first popularized the phrase in presidential politics because he, along with others, saw this group of middle Americans and common people being overshadowed by the biased news media and more vocal, liberal minority with their paid for political leaders.

I believe we are witnessing a major bipartisan revolt and uprising of the American people in progress. It sure appears to me that the rank and file, ordinary Americans, are expressing a resounding “NO MORE” to the media and the Washington insiders who are a part of and who promote the status quo. Many poll results are a reflection of the large silent majority, no longer willing to remain silent when it comes to China, Mexico, Japan and others taking American jobs from men and women of this country.

They reflect Americans fed up with people of foreign nations entering our country illegally and being allowed to stay and feed off the American taxpayer; fed up with attempts to take our guns; fed up with attempts to dictate what may be said because it is politically correct; fed up with downgrading and weakening our military defenses in the face of a Muslim world which is trying to destroy us; fed up with treating war veterans as 3rd class citizens; fed up with the IRS run amok; fed up with our government financially bankrupting us; fed up with the Federal government supporting those who attack our local police and most importantly, fed up with the Federal Government controlling our lives and destroying Individual Liberty. I’m certain you could add a great many more issues to these.

The American people have grown sick and tired of the political insiders who play by their own rules and reap the benefits of their corruption. Yes, we elect people to public office. But because the political and media establishments are so hopelessly corrupt, we no longer have a representative government as our founding fathers intended. Our elected officials are so indebted to their financial donors they don’t dare represent you and me for fear of offending those who provide the money train.

Enter Donald Trump, the flamboyant, glitzy, arrogant, political correctness be damned, real-estate billionaire who is not indebted to any big money donor. He frightens to death the biased media and DC, Republican and Democrat big shots with his, “I’m after your playhouse” attitude, “whether you like it or not.” The explosion of this populist revolt is creating an enormous enthusiasm and support for this strong and confident man of the people, rather than man of the powerful. I have no doubt that he speaks the words the silent majority yearn to speak and have waited a long time to hear.

I here share the frustration of Lawrence Sellin, a US Army Col (Ret) and Green Beret: “We are fed up with both political parties, who represent only themselves and are identical in their practice of crony capitalism, political expediency and lying: all used to solely increase their own personal power and profit and that of their wealthy donors at the expense of the American people and well-being of the country. We are fed up with main stream media outlets that are nothing more than propaganda machines for the Democrat Party and the Republican establishment using disinformation and manipulation in a fashion comparable with Soviet-run journalism, collaborators in perpetuating a corrupt status quo.”

The establishment is beside itself, dumbfounded, mouth agape trying to decipher the appeal of Donald Trump to the masses of American people. I submit to you it is because they are completely separated from the people and divorced from the real America. Why do you suppose the establishment is trying to destroy Donald Trump? It is precisely because that which the establishment fears and doesn’t understand, it seeks to destroy. Again I quote Mr. Sellin, “Like Lexington and Concord, Donald Trump has provided a spark and a rally point for the American people to regain control of their government. If Donald Trump didn’t exist, he would have to be invented.”

Make America Great Again. Several could do it, but………. He will do it!

“Obama: Many more in US die from gun-related incidents than from terrorism”

By Robert Spencer of Jihad Watch                                                       Commentary by John Velisek USN (Ret), CIR staff writer

Robert Spencer has been revealing the truth about Islam and its murderous minions for many years. The article below, taken by Spencer from the Blaze, reviews Barack Obama’s extraordinary reaction to the murder of reporter Alison Parker and photojournalist Adam Ward by a “disgruntled” former work mate.

“Watch What Obama Says About Gun Violence and Terrorism When Asked About WDBJ Shooting,”

by Oliver Darcy, The Blaze, August 26, 2015:

an excerpt

“…In an interview with WPVI-TV, the president reacted to the killing of 24-year-old reporter Alison Parker and 27-year-old photojournalist Adam Ward.
“It breaks my heart every time you read or hear about these kinds of incidents,” Obama said.
“What we know is that the number of people who die from gun-related incidents around this country dwarfs any deaths that happen through terrorism,” the president added.”

My Opinion: Can the President explain how the number of people killed in this country by firearms, mostly black on black, should be the sudden focus of his concern when there have been 20,000 terrorist attacks worldwide since 9/11? Perhaps his cronies over at Evergreen can massage the numbers, but it would take a total lack of ethics to even make an argument hailing terrorists as somehow suddenly less dangerous, less worthy of our efforts than gang bangers on Chicago’s South side.

One half of firearm deaths in the United States are suicides. Anti-gun liberals are always pleased to suggest that suicide and murder are somehow one and the same. Is the Muslim in Chief claiming that the innocents murdered by his fellow Islamists are actually suicides, given that they are often victims of Islamic suicide merchants? Should we believe the murder of defenseless people at Ft. Hood by a Muslim terrorist are really examples of domestic, “workplace violence” as the president claimed immediately after they occurred? Mr. President, please try another tack. This one is worn out and a lie.

Perhaps the UN can help. After all, Kerry signed the Arms Trade Treaty, didn’t he? But tell the truth now, Mr. President; should you actually attempt to employ United Nations “peacekeepers” for the forcible confiscation of firearms from the American people—you know, as recommended in the Treaty–will you direct the blue-helmeted troops to the South Side of Chicago, or demand they break through the doors of the law abiding, as gun grabbers are so used to doing? You’ve made it clear that al Qaeda will be off limits, not being a dangerous enough group in your opinion.

Criminals are responsible for the overwhelming majority of gun killings in the US, Mr. Obama, not simple gun owners. And yes, they are as dangerous as it gets. But don’t insult the American people with the claim that the dangers posed by gun owners dwarf those posed by Islamic terrorists. You have made phony, anti-gun rights claims since you were first thrust into politics by your Chicago handlers. The American people are no longer buying.

Supreme Court has made confiscation of firearms a breeze

By Doug Book, editor

Last year, Democrat Senator Ed Markey (NY) and Democrat Rep. Carolyn Maloney (Mass) introduced legislation suggesting Barack Obama’s Centers for Disease Control (CDC) be paid $10 million/year to fund “…research on gun violence prevention and firearm safety.” According to the far left Markey, “it is time we study the issue of gun violence like the public health crisis that it is. If we want to prevent injury and deaths from guns, we need to know what can be done to prevent it.”

Truth be told, Markey and Maloney believe the best way to prevent gun violence is by making it illegal or at the very least, impossible, to own a gun. Maloney recently introduced legislation which would require all gun owners purchase liability insurance for their firearms and pay a $10,000 fine should they be discovered without it. Naturally, members of law enforcement would be exempt.

“An insurance requirement would allow the free market to encourage cautious behavior and help save lives,” said Maloney. “Adequate liability coverage would also ensure that the victims of gun violence are fairly compensated when crimes or accidents occur.” Only a leftist would claim that liability insurance is necessary to make gun owners exercise appropriate caution with their firearms.

Each year, about 60% of gun deaths are the result of suicide. Would Maloney demand insurance companies pay off in cases of suicide? Would a suicide “victim’s” estate be charged the $10,000 fine if he was found to have been uninsured?

As to “fair compensation” in the event of a crime or accident, it is rumored that the overwhelming majority of gun crimes are committed by criminals. The odds against thieves, killers or rapists carrying liability insurance on their stolen firearm would be astronomical. Will Maloney recommend Progressive or The General provide “no fault” gun insurance, just in case? And would that absolve the criminal of guilt for having committed the crime, or just for having used a gun?

Perhaps the real question is why Representative Maloney believed it necessary to introduce this legislation in the first place. The nation’s hoplophobes have already been given the ultimate, winning hand against gun owners.

In 2012, Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts ruled that the federal government may demand the American people purchase a required item and tax anyone who refuses. Last month, Roberts and 5 other justices decided that the president, the Internal Revenue Service, even the Court itself may write, re-write and implement legislation. An act of Congress is no longer necessary, conflicting claims in the Constitution of the United States notwithstanding.

Given these recent rulings by the Roberts Court–the first on ObamaCare, the second in King v Burwell–Barack Obama’s Department of Justice will have the authority to create legislation demanding the purchase of a $1 million liability policy by every gun owner, for every gun owned. Those who refuse could be taxed the sum of, say,  $100,000 for each uninsured firearm. Simple and legal, at least according to the Court. And for those unwilling to either pay up or relinquish their weapons, Barack and the Supremes will confiscate their house!

Though such abuse of the American people may not happen over night, rest assured that it WILL happen.


Lies and Gun Grabbers, Part 2

By John Velisek USN (Ret), staff writer

Why is it that those who demand tolerance for every sexual perversion and every abomination inspired by a “religion” have an hysterical reaction to firearms? I would bet most individuals hyper-critical of guns have never fired one and wouldn’t wish to if given the chance. Their aversion to even rationally discussing the subject of firearms borders on the pathological.

A true standout of the hoplophobe community is sfgate blogger, Mark Morford. Mr. Morford has gun owners all figured out and is eager to share his insights with the rest of the world.

I laughed loudly after reading what this smug, self-important, anti-gun zealot said about gun owners. See how many of Morford’s descriptions of the average gun owner apply to you. Be honest now:

You are a scared white male; you don’t live near a university or large city; you have never traveled, you don’t read books, you don’t like change; you think Obama is a “scary black president,” (scary because he’s Black, not because he is a power-hungry, America-hating Marxist).

This is how Morford views gun owners. I assume that he will be highly disappointed when he discovers the fastest growing segment of the gun owning public is young, urban females. Equally crushing will be the results of a 2014 Gallup Poll revealing 54% of gun owners to be Black or otherwise non-White. Back to the drawing board for Mr. Morford.

Although gun rights are expanding in a majority of the 50 states, the administration is still working to implement gun control legislation incrementally. Obama, along with hoplophobe alarmists like Bloomberg, Blumenthal and Feinstein, to name a few, is attempting to have the State Department implement new rules Published in the June 3rd Federal Register, making it a crime to discuss firearms or ammo on the internet. My first question is, what does this have to do with the State Department? And secondly, what makes this administration think that the patriots who own guns in this country will allow them to so blithely trample our First Amendment rights?

The intent of the Second Amendment and the Bill of Rights is to protect the citizenry from the government. When the Constitution was ratified, it was assumed that a militia involved all those who were able to bear arms. In addition to defending towns and the nation, the duty of a militia was to help defend citizens from a tyrant. If the government became tyrannical, it was up to the militia to make things right.

This is why progressives want a “living” Constitution and Bill of Rights. For “living” means changeable and NOT according to the methods set down in the Constitution. The left prefer to make uncomplicated, wholesale changes to any portion of our liberties as enumerated. They don’t want the American people to know that the right to keep and bear arms is a God given right of the people, not of the states and certainly not of the federal government.