Thread: Gun Control Misfires: A Tale of Four Cities

Gun Control Misfires: A Tale of Four Cities
Filed under Constitution, Gun Control, Politics



Gun control is on every liberal’s lips thanks to the shootings in Aurora, Colo., by an insane gunman wielding an AR-15 rifle, shotgun and a pistol.

(Update: I had originally written AK-47 instead of AR-15 based on news sources that reported it that way and the president’s speech about AK-47s. Thanks to you sharp readers who know the difference!)

New York Mayor and Soda Nazi Michael Bloomberg has urged police officers to go on strike until all privately held handguns are turned in, which sounds like an exceptionally good idea in New York, which has been experiencing a summer rash of shootings.

I’m sure the criminals could use the stress reduction, and residents will feel much safer knowing they won’t have to worry about shooting themselves in the foot while waiting for the police to come deal with a robber in the living room.

Gun control doesn’t work for a lot of reasons that are clear to anybody who is susceptible to logic.

Rather than confuse liberals by resorting to common sense, maybe just examining the cases of four different cities will help clarify things.

First, there’s Anaheim, Calif., home of Disneyland, Knott’s Berry Farm, Medieval Times and a whole slew of other family-oriented destinations.

During the past week, residents of Anaheim have been rioting and protesting following the fatal police shootings of two men. They were probably criminals and probably brought it on themselves by doing stupid things like being in gangs and shooting at police.

But apparently at street level it doesn’t look that way. Residents have been slinging phrases like “cop murder” or “assassination.” Accusations of opening fire on crowds and siccing police dogs on children are flying “fast and furious.”

This is in California, a state that is just chock full of gun control laws. There are a lot of factors involved (like illegal immigration — thanks, King Obama), but two points can be gleaned from this series of events: Gun control didn’t stop at least one known gang member from obtaining a weapon to fire at police (wonder if it came from Eric Holder?); and the residents of Anaheim will not (and possibly should not) ever trust the police to protect them.

Second case to consider: Chicago. Run by the liberal machine under Obama henchman Rahm Emanuel, the town of Chicago has been turned into a shooting gallery.

With gun control laws up the wazoo, Chicago has seen multiple shootings on many days this year, including even when Obama was visiting.

Despite being “outraged” and cooking up various strategies, Emanuel and the Chicago police haven’t been able to stop the bleeding. Just this past Tuesday, six people were shot in the space of an hour. There have been weekends where three dozen or more have been wounded.

Back to California. The city of Simi Valley, which isn’t that far from Anaheim, is consistently ranked as one of the safest large cities in America.

Being in California, the residents of Simi Valley are subject to the exact same state gun control laws as the residents of Anaheim, BUT … the city is known locally to be home to an abnormally large number of resident police officers from a number of local communities.

It’s not the magical badges that keep crime under control. It’s the fact that those off-duty police officer homeowners, along with a lot of non-police residents of the town, are believed by criminals to keep guns in their homes and not be afraid to use them.

Then there’s the case of Kennesaw, Georgia, a city with about one fourth the population of Simi Valley and selected by Family Circle as one of America’s 10 Best Towns for Families. Back in 1982, Kennesaw did the opposite of what most cities do. Not only did it not outlaw or restrict guns, but it passed a law requiring that every head of household in town own a handgun, with exceptions for criminal record, religious objection, handicap, etc.

Contrary to predictions, the town did not see a rise in violence. Crime plunged and has stayed low ever since.

It’s intuitive and obvious. When people are allowed to own guns to defend themselves, crime is low because criminals for some reason don’t like to be shot.

Even “gangster” rapper Ice T gets it. In an interview on the day of the Colorado shootings, he defended the right to own a gun, pointing out that it’s for self-defense, including if necessary, the last line of defense against an out-of-control government.

Liberals operate from fear, and they’ve got an entire routine about people supposedly shooting family members and not being able to stop criminals, ad infinitum.

But people who want to take away your rights under the pretense of safety and security are really just laying the groundwork for tyranny.

In the end, the only form of gun control that works is taking aim before pulling the trigger.

Read more: Gun Control Misfires: A Tale of Four Cities : Political Outcast

posted on July 27, 2012 by Philip Hodges
Media Covering Up Gun Self-Defense Stories


I was talking to a friend recently about the whole Colorado theater massacre. We were lamenting about how our culture is so obsessed with these psychopathic murderers and that we never hear about the heroes, because sadly, in our dying culture, there are no heroes. But maybe we do have heroes; not superheroes, but heroes nonetheless. We just don’t hear about them.

Just recently in Florida, an armed 71-year-old internet cafe patron opened fire with his .380 pistol on two armed thugs attempting to rob the place. Samuel Williams, the aged hero, waited for the right time to shoot. Just as one of the teen bandits’ back was turned, Williams plunged into action, chasing them both out the door with bullets. They were both “beside themselves” as they fell over each other trying desperately to get out the door and away from this crazy old gun-toter (you should see the video; it’s hilarious). The two robbers were hospitalized with gun shot wounds and arrested later on robbery charges.

Critics are saying that these robbers weren’t going to shoot anyone. They were just going to rob the place, so what Mr. Williams did was completely unwarranted and over the line. Well, we don’t know that they weren’t going to shoot anyone. It could have turned into the “Florida internet cafe massacre,” which the media would certainly have gone crazy with. But it didn’t have to even get close to that because there was an armed, law-abiding citizen there willing to put his life on the line for the protection of his neighbors, and no one ended up getting hurt except the bad guys. So why don’t we hear stories like this in the major media?

I’m sure we’re all tired of the media “theater” surrounding the crazed “batman shooter.” I’m not even going to say his name. We all know it. We know what he looks like and what color his hair is. But one other thing we know is that the media love this type of person and what he did. It gives the media something to sensationalize, something on which to fixate and talk about non-stop knowing that fear-addicted Americans will sit and gawk at their TV’s or radios. It’s good for ratings. And when it’s good for ratings, it’s good for money. Yes, the media love a story like this because it makes them money. After all, they are a business, and they’ve got to profit somehow.

And it gets even better when these media people invite “experts” on their shows to talk about guns and how politicians need to just “do something” about them. Of course, that makes the liberal viewers mad because they believe these “experts”; and it outrages us conservatives because we know that “guns don’t kill, people do.” And again, the media sit back and watch the conservatives and liberals duke it out while their ratings go up (and with the media’s current dismal rating, they need all the help they can get). But I think there’s something more than just profit that drives the media.

How about an agenda? It seems we only see the bad news. We see the murder stories, the armed robbery stories, terrorist attack stories, kidnappings, child molestation, rapes, etc. Yeah, we might see some “heart-warming” story about how a cute kitten was rescued from a tree, but in general, we see mostly bad news. And I think that’s for a reason. It’s to elicit fear in the mind of the viewer and to convince us to live in constant fear of our surroundings. The media try to brainwash us into associating guns with bad people. Don’t you love it when the media show images of the “assailant’s” arsenal all sprawled out on a bed maybe next to a stack of cash (as if those things are inherently evil)? And then they show some scruffy, scowling picture of the alleged “bad guy”. It might even turn out that this bad guy was innocent after all, but it doesn’t matter.

The association is already done. If you have a gun, then you’re like that bad guy on TV. The more people are afraid, the more they will willingly give up their rights and even demand that those in power take them away from us in order to protect us from ourselves. The media won’t talk about the myriad cases where law-abiding citizens defend themselves and others from certain death using guns. That might convince viewers that guns can be used to protect people.

We’ve all speculated about the theater shooting and how if there had been just one person in that theater with a gun, he could have prevented all this carnage, and he would certainly have been a hero. But from the media’s perspective, there would be no news story in that. Nothing to sensationalize. More importantly, it wouldn’t be consistent with their agenda. So, like Samuel Williams’ story, no one would end up hearing about it. Just because something isn’t on the news doesn’t mean it didn’t happen. Contrary to what our media won’t tell us, there are heroes among us.

Read more: Media Covering Up Gun Self-Defense Stories : Political Outcast





Media Covering Up Gun Self-Defense Stories : Political Outcast