Tag Archives: gun free zones

More firearm stories that will never make the national news

By Doug Book, editor

Each year there are countless defensive firearm uses in the U.S. and few if ANY will be reported by the “mainstream” media. For when an average citizen uses a gun to defend life, liberty or property, the firearm becomes indispensable and its owner, often a hero. And that is not a story which fits the media meme that guns are either useless or dangerous when not in the hands of law enforcement.

But a disapproving media aside, things like these  DO happen:

1.) A week ago, a Fort Wayne, Indiana homeowner answered a knock at the front door only to have five masked criminals (at least 2 of them armed) burst into the house. One ran upstairs, right into the barrel of a waiting pistol held by Chris Torres. Carrying a crowbar, the thug—Nathan Simmerson—managed to barricade himself in a bathroom!

In the meantime, just as Simmerson’s downstairs associates had forced 3 family members to the floor, one of them yelled to Torres, “Get the AR 15!” Upon hearing this, the 4 thugs  bolted through the door and were gone, leaving their comrade in the bathroom to fend for himself. He was soon tackled trying to escape and is in police custody.

So not only are “assault weapons” scary to look at, now it seems they’re even scary to HEAR about! (1) Does anyone believe CNN will congratulate the nation’s AR makers on their weapons’ new-found “versatility?”

How about for having potentially saved 4 lives?

2.) In California, the eldest of four siblings fought off multiple attackers who attempted to break into his home. Though shot a number of times himself, the 22 year old managed to kill one of the criminals and wound another as the remaining assailants sped away. Also home at the time were the victim’s sister and younger brothers who were not injured. The young hero came through surgery  and is on the mend. (2)

3.) Two weeks ago the CEO of Jack in the Box restaurants made the brilliant decision to turn his fast food chain into a nationwide “Gun Free Zone.” 

Intimidated by various claims from the left wing group “Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America,” CEO Leonard Comma began enforcing the long ignored “no firearms” policy of Jack in the Box by posting signs which warn employees and customers to “leave their guns at home” when coming to Jacks. (3)

Since implementation of the new policy—complete with the “No Firearms” sign at each franchise location—Jack in the Box restaurants have been held up 3 times; twice in Houston and once in Nashville. Customers were shot in Houston and Tennessee. A second Houston holdup featured 4 masked individuals who leisurely robbed the restaurant and its customers. (4)

But give Jack in the Box credit for at least getting one thing right. Offering the company’s reasons for implementation of the new, anti-gun  policy, Brian Luscomb, vice president of corporate communications stated: “The presence of guns inside a restaurant could create an uncomfortable situation for our guests and employees and lead to unintended consequences.” 

That was some truly exceptional insight on the part of Mr. Luscomb. For it’s a safe bet that employees and guests–especially those who were shot–had indeed been made “uncomfortable” by the “…presence of guns inside [the] restaurant,” especially as those guns were in the possession of criminals thanks to the new no firearm/no self defense policy implemented for employees and customers. 

And one certainly hopes the restaurant considers the shooting of customers in two cities to be “unintended consequences” of Jack’s new “Gun Free Zone” edict. Unintended yes; unexpected, not so much. Just another example of “common sense” gun control at its finest. (6)

By the way, the principle claim used by the Moms Demand Action group which apparently frightened CEO Comma into immediately yielding to their demands consisted of the groups’ assertion that a number of men carrying rifles had entered one of the restaurant locations and scared employees so badly that they hid in a store freezer. Of course, the NY Times printed this claim just as it had been provided the newspaper by Moms!

A short time later, however, the group Open Carry Texas helped prove the story to be an out and out lie. The Times printed a brief retraction. (5)

Armed private citizens may have prevented as a many as eight killings during the past week or so. Yet concerns of Jack in the Box CEO Comma that self-defense could result in an “uncomfortable situation” may be responsible for the use his own, defenseless customers as clay pigeons. 

Terribly complicated stuff, isn’t it Senator Feinstein.

Sources:
1.) http://www.guns.com/2014/05/24/armed-homeowner-fends-off-five-masked-intruders/   

2.) http://gunssavelives.net/self-defense/video-man-shot-multiple-times-but-wins-gunfight-against-multiple-home-invaders-to-protect-siblings/    

3.) http://weaselzippers.us/187008-jack-in-the-box-robbed-at-gun-point-for-third-time-since-guns-were-banned-from-store-two-weeks-ago/   

4.) http://gunssavelives.net/blog/video-third-armed-robbery-at-jack-in-the-box-after-restaurant-asks-customers-to-leave-guns/ 

5.) http://twitchy.com/2014/05/10/open-carry-texas-helps-debunk-story-that-terrified-jack-in-the-box-employees-locked-themselves-in-freezer/

6.) http://nocera.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/05/09/the-gun-report-may-9-2014/?_php=true&_type=blogs&_php=true&_type=blogs&_php=true&_type=blogs&_r=2

What prompted Hillary to threaten America’s gun owners?

by Doug Book,  editor

On May 7th, an apoplectic CNN attempted to provide cover for Hillary Clinton after her unprovoked assault on 100 million American gun owners. Speaking before the National Council for Behavioral Health, Hillary stated that the nation’s “gun culture” had gotten “way out of balance.” “We’ve got to rein in what has become an almost article of faith that anybody can have a gun anywhere, anytime” added Clinton. “I don’t believe that is in the best interest of the vast majority of people.”

“She’s talking in the context of mental health,” claimed CNN talking head John King in the hope of bailing his fellow liberal out of the ofttimes politically fatal quagmire of anti-gun zealotry.  After all, who could favor arming the mentally unstable?

But Hillary’s nonsensical claims had nothing to do with the acquisition of firearms by the mentally ill.  “At the rate we’re going, we’re going to have so many people with guns everywhere, fully licensed, fully validated,” lamented Clinton. Her concerns obviously revolve around the increasing number of “fully licensed” and “fully validated” gun owners. And that’s a group which certainly doesn’t include the mentally ill!

Not satisfied that she had done enough damage to her chances in 2016,  Clinton then claimed that the proliferation of guns “[is] what happens in the countries I’ve visited where there is no rule of law and no self-control…” This is “…something that we cannot just let go without paying attention,” said Hillary, not only insulting America’s law abiding gun owners but obviously threatening them with a new round of anti-gun legislation from the federal government.

Yet even more mind boggling than her sudden decision to declare war on America’s gun owners was Hillary’s laughable claim that she could say all she had and “…still support the right of people to own guns.” Now that’s funny stuff!

As usual, Hillary made statements which cannot be supported by anything which even resembles a fact. No, Mrs. Clinton, “anybody” cannot “have a gun anywhere, anytime.” The left made certain of that with the manufacture of killing fields they call “gun free” zones. Also, little in the U.S. is more subject to the “rule of law” than the right to keep and bear arms.

As for “self-control,” Concealed Carry license holders are 3 times less likely to commit a domestic murder with a firearm than are police officers! (1)

But the real question here is why? Why would Hillary believe it a good idea to take up publicly declared residence on the losing side of one of the most polarizing subjects in politics?  Trailing Barack Obama in the polls in 2008, Hillary became a sudden convert to the belief that gun ownership was just swell. Speaking of her own experience shooting with her father, Hillary said of gun ownership at the time:  “It’s part of culture. It’s part of a way of life. People enjoy hunting and shooting because it’s an important part of who they are.”

But that tale was no more truthful than her claim to have been named after Sir Edmund Hillary–3 years BEFORE he climbed Mt. Everest.

Of course, little that Hillary Clinton has ever said has not been a lie. She is a cold, calculating, political thug who measures the value of things according to their effect on public opinion. So why would she begin an unnecessary war with gun owners? Why provide the eventual  Republican opponent with golden opportunities for “Here’s what Hillary really thinks about gun owners” commercials?

It doesn’t make much sense to me.

Sources:

(1) http://gunwatch.blogspot.com/2013/10/concealed-carry-permit-holders-are-one.html

http://www.examiner.com/article/hillary-clinton-wants-to-rein-gun-culture-that-is-way-out-of-balance

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/clinton-raise-money-margolies-campaign-23600038

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2014/05/07/CNN-Worries-Hillary-Clinton-May-Have-Jeopardized-Run-With-Gun-Control-Statements

http://aun-tv.com/hillary-clinton-is-coming-to-take-your-guns/

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2014/04/30/bill-clinton-plays-professor-blasts-media-in-georgetown-speech/

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/04/12/hillary-becomes-a-gun-lov_n_96396.html

NFL decides off-duty police a danger at games; on-duty not so much

by Doug Book,  editor

It’s been just over a year since 26, Gun Free Zone-inspired murders were committed in Newtown, Connecticut. And just over a year since gun control zealots demonstrated the consequences of preventing the law-abiding from defending the defenseless.

And now the National Football League has decided that the left’s scheme of disarming the good guys worked SO well at Sandy Hook, the League will ban off-duty police carrying arms at NFL games. Only official stadium security personnel and ON-duty police officers will be armed during the games. 

“We trust these law-enforcement officers when they are on-duty, but somehow we can’t trust them as soon as they are off-duty,” observed John Lott, president of the Crime Prevention Resource Center and author of More Guns, Less Crime.

Though Lott has written extensively on the subjects of gun rights and gun control, it’s possible he doesn’t understand that to the leftist mind, success is determined only by the perpetual implementation of the “cause.” Practicality, common sense, positive results, even the saving of a life make no difference. It was for this reason that, unable to implement new anti-gun legislation months after Newtown, America’s gun control crowd ended by mourning the loss of an opportunity rather than the loss of life.

“The likelihood that there’s a need for the use of force by an off-duty officer is extremely remote,” said NFL Head of Security Jeff Miller. Now that’s a statement to be expected from a representative of the increasing liberal National Football League. Of course, the chances a psychopath would gun down 20 children were also remote; at least until anti-gun forces provided lunatics a safe haven for committing murder by turning the nation’s schools into gun free zones.

The Minnesota Police and Peace Officer’s Association has sued the NFL, claiming its decision, “violates state law, and could put the public and officers in danger.” The NYPD is considering doing the same.

Sources:

http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-Sports/2014/03/11/NFL-Gun-Ban-on-Cops-Called-Crazy

http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-Sports/2014/02/18/Minneapolis-Police-Association-Sue-NFL-For-Disarming-Off-Duty-Officers

Here’s why America is upside down and has left us

by Kevin “Coach” Collins

Some of these points are more painful than others, but they’re all spot on.

Today American citizens are more afraid of the American government than illegal aliens are.

The DoJ doesn’t see criminality in threatening voters with truncheons, but is prosecuting an American citizen for making a video Obama doesn’t like.

The government now decides what will go on top of wedding cakes.

Abortionists are cheered and those who protest abortions are prosecuted.

Year after year “Global warming” conferences are canceled because of cold weather, but those who say it is a fake are mocked.

The guys that call us bigots for demanding photo ID to vote require photo ID to visit their offices.

The guy who is in charge of keeping illegal aliens out of America says they “have earned the right to citizenship.”

“Black Pride or Gay Pride” organizations catering to minorities are celebrated but “White Pride” or “Straight Pride” organizations are immediately labeled racist, bigoted and/or homophobic.

In-state tuition is automatically given to people from a “state” in Mexico but not a neighboring American state.

Cars that don’t work and no one wants are subsidized by the government but American auto manufacturers are collapsed with fake crises.

Criminals and psychos regularly kill people with guns in “Gun free zones”, because no law abiding armed citizens are carrying guns that could have been used to stop them.

We have to look to European media and even Pravda to get honest coverage of things happening in America because our own media won’t provide it. This goes double for things that embarrass the government.

We have record numbers of obese people but are constantly barraged by Public Service Announcements (we pay for of course) about one in seven people going to bed hungry (so pay more in taxes).

Those (especially Blacks) who speak out against the government are audited but the IRS keeps hands off Leftist groups.

The government regularly “pivots” to focus on creating jobs but outsources the construction of Obamacare and more and more Americans fall out of the workforce each month.

We see an idiot who blocked traffic for political reasons gets 40 times more coverage than the murder of 4 Americans in Benghazi.

Gun control advocates deliberately facilitated the murders at Sandy Hook

by Doug Book,  staff writer

Advocates of overturning the right to keep and bear arms have spent years DELIBERATELY turning innocents into victims of slaughter for the purpose of disarming the American people.

“Do as I say, not as I do,” gun-control zealots are predictably out in force after the Sandy Hook killings. For in the perverted mind of confiscation supporters like Michael Bloomberg and Barack Obama, the murder of 20 kindergarten students represents a longed-awaited opportunity to embarrass weak-kneed defenders of the 2nd Amendment into relenting to a nationwide assault against the foremost liberty of the American people.  

On December 19th, New York Mayor Bloomberg favored USA Today readers with a 6 point guide to “stop gun madness.” (1)

And like every previous claim of the hypocritical founder of Mayors Against (Illegal) Guns (Bloomberg enjoys the 24/7 protection of taxpayer funded, armed bodyguards as he denies gun ownership to fellow New Yorkers), the essay by Bloomberg is a study in calculated misdirection. For Bloomberg and other proponents of “common sense gun legislation” know full well that their proposed ban on the sale of “assault rifles” and “high-capacity” magazines will have no effect on gun crime.  (2)

Why craft legislation which purposely disarms only law abiding Americans? Why create and proudly advertise the existence of “gun free zones” which render countless people utterly defenseless against wanton killers?

If plans for gun confiscation are to succeed, the left know it must make firearms a loathsome commodity to an increasingly pro-gun populace. What better way to accomplish such a goal than to facilitate-by-statute the most murderous fantasies of psychopaths intent upon making their names and deeds part of American history?

So legislation was passed which guaranteed an unlimited supply of defenseless victims for prospective mass murderers.  Gun free zones, though represented as safe havens, were knowingly and deliberately fashioned to facilitate leisurely slaughter as they provide only for the security and convenience of armed killers, not their statutorily disarmed victims.  

And it was at Sandy Hook that the fondest wishes of gun-confiscation advocates have been granted. Knowing they will never have a better opportunity of success, Michael Bloomberg and other self-absorbed elitists will press demands for firearm bans and restrictions as never before. After all, only unfeeling monsters could defend 2nd Amendment rights in the face of 20, brutally murdered children.

What sort of perverse, diseased mind is required to deliberately legislate the assured slaughter of innocents in order to advance a political agenda? Perhaps the sort which has been so eagerly involved in promoting the murder of infants for decades.  

Soon the banning of specified firearms will begin. When the next psychopath proves this latest gun control legislation to also be ineffective by design, another even more audacious round of gun bans will ensue. Then another and another until confiscation is deemed the “final solution,” necessary for the protection of the people. From that day forward, self-defense will consist of begging for one’s life rather than defending it on equal terms!!

It is then that the 2nd American Revolution will begin as those who refuse to submit to the left’s long anticipated decree of slavery will resist by every means at their command.

I only hope I’m around to fire the first shot.

 

(1) http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2012/12/18/michael-bloomberg-on-need-to-control-guns/1777889/

(2) http://patriotaction.net/forum/topic/show?id=2600775%3ATopic%3A6035555&xgs=1&xg_source=msg_share_topic