Welcome
Welcome to SuiJurisForum.com --- You are currently viewing our boards as a guest. Members of this FREE Community are able to gain access to write capabilities, private messaging, a chat room, extra forums, and more!

***If you decide to Join our FREE Community... then DON'T FORGET to PASS/SKIP the multiple ADVERTISEMENTS during Registration that ask for Phone Numbers!! ***

GUN GRABBERS SAY THE DAMNEDEST THINGS!

Discuss anything about life situation.

GUN GRABBERS SAY THE DAMNEDEST THINGS!

Postby Shuftin » Sun Apr 24, 2011 3:18 pm

Image
by Nicki Fellenzer

In the wake of a deadly shooting in Wisconsin that claimed the lives of six hunters, the gun grabbers have begun their ritual dance in the blood of innocents and “Ban Assault Weapons” chant. Like a band of savage troglodytes, they worship at the altar of tragedy as a means of pushing their odious agenda, while the gun rights advocates scurry to defend what’s left of the Second Amendment.

“This tragedy demonstrates,” shrieked Jeri Bonavia of the Wisconsin Anti-Violence Effort, “the urgent need for an effective federal ban on military style assault weapons.”

Well Good Googly Moogly, Myrtle! All we needed was an effective ban on one of the most commonly used hunting rifles in the country, and this whole tragedy could have been avoided! Why didn’t we think of this before? Heck! We know that the old “assault” weapons ban did nothing to reduce crime - even the CDC says so! We know that gun bans in the UK and Washington, DC did nothing but increase crime and render victims helpless. We know the old “assault” weapons ban did not prevent two distorted losers from shooting up their school in Littleton, Colorado. But all THOSE bans just really sucked! What we need is a new, improved ban. Because we all know that a criminal who is willing to take a human life will have oodles of respect for a new law barring them from the tools to accomplish that odious goal.

Forgive my sarcasm, but gun grabbers say the damnedest things! Consider this little gem from the same press release I cited above.

“SKS military style, semi-automatic assault rifles, like the one used in [that] tragic shooting, are the most common assault rifles used to kill law enforcement offices in the United States, according to the Violence Policy Center, a Washington, D.C. based think tank.”

Funny the VPC (the gun banners’ version of the National Enquirer) should make this misleading claim, which actually leads an uninformed reader to believe that SKS rifles are the scourge of police departments everywhere, because it has been thoroughly debunked first by the FBI, whose LEOKA statistics indicate that about 1 percent of police officers were killed using “assault” weapons, and by Deputy Chief of Police Joseph Constance of Trenton NJ, who in a testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee in August, 1993 asserted "Assault rifles have never been an issue in law enforcement. I have been on this job for 25 years and I haven't seen a drug dealer carry one. They are not used in crimes; they are not used against police officers."

Deputy Chief Constance continues, “Since police started keeping statistics, we now know that assault weapons are/were used in an underwhelming 0.026 of 1% of crimes in New Jersey. This means that my officers are more likely to confront an escaped tiger from the local zoo than to confront an assault rifle in the hands of a drug-crazed killer on the streets."

Now granted, these statistics are a bit dated. But consider also this fact: This testimony was presented prior to the enactment of the Clinton gun ban. If there was any increase at all in the number of officers killed by so-called “assault” rifles, this would provide further proof about the ineffectiveness of the ban. But there has not been any significant increase in the killings of police officers. Rather, according to the Bureau of Justice Statistics the trend varies from year to year, regardless of the ban.

The Brady Center, of course, jumped on the bloody bandwagon with its own press release, detailing every horror story its drooling Neanderthal staffers could unearth that involved scary guns.

“Since President Bush and Congress did nothing to renew the assault weapons ban,” Brady crows in a recent press release, “America's neighborhoods are seeing the inevitable results:

* A band of Texas thugs has battled police and been captured on video that became "must-see TV."
* An Arizona man's plot to slaughter workers with an assault weapon at an Intel plant was thwarted.
* In West Palm Beach, Florida, police are investigating a series of eight murders, most committed with an apparent assault weapon.”

OK, Sarah, I gotta ask. What the living, breathing, breeding heck is an “apparent” assault weapon? The first article refers to an automatic weapon - that is to say, a machine gun. It states, “The robbers saw that, thought they were being followed by that officer and began to fire on the vehicle with automatic AK-47 style weapons..." Now, Sarah -- are you, or are you not aware that fully automatic weapons remain illegal for civilians to own without special clearance by the United States Department of Justice. Are you or are you not aware that these weapons were not even addressed in the “Assault” Weapons Ban you worship? Ergo, to use this story as proof of the need for renewal of this worthless ban is misleading at best, and a downright attempt to frighten the public into submission to your anti-freedom whims.

The Arizona story, David Dugan apparently did purchase an AK-47 from an Arizona store. However, according to the manager of Bear Arms, “... the store does the required background check when it sells guns and does not release a weapon until the FBI has given its approval.” And Dugan was stopped and arrested. The good news is that no actual carnage was committed. Or maybe it’s bad news for you, Sarah, since this piece’s value as a weapon in your war on freedom has been severely limited by the prevention of bloodshed.

What about the Florida story? The nearly 15 stories I perused on the subject mention an “assault rifle,” but give no other clue to what kind of weapon this actually is, whether it is correctly classified as an “assault rifle” or whether it was previously outlawed under the 1994 “Assault” Weapons Ban. Ergo, unless Sarah knows something I don’t, the use of this story to promote the ban is premature at this point.

But hey, don’t let facts stand in your way, Sarah!

I recently got involved in a gun rights debate with a somewhat paranoid Canadian, who attempted to dazzle me with histrionics and overwhelm me with vast amounts of BE (Bovine Excrement).

“Somebody has a gun in his house for ‘protection.’ If a crook breaks in, the gun and bullets are easily accessible. So now, the victim can enjoy the feeling of killing another human (to prove that we are still in the animal stage of evolution.)” -- Spoken like a true sociopath projecting his deep-seated desires onto others. The taking of a human life is never to be taken lightly. Anyone who has read my essay entitled “Who Would Do Such a Thing?” would realize how thoroughly a decent human being can be affected by what he is forced to do. For one man - a pilot who had to kill a teenage monster who was holding a plane full of people hostage - it was a traumatic, life-altering event.

...What kind of man would shoot a teenager – an obviously troubled youth barely older than his own son?

Bill Bonnell was so deeply affected by this tragedy, he never fired that gun again. He was an expert marksman, but he never again picked up a firearm. The overwhelming decision he had to make that day saved lives, but had a profound effect on his own emotional well-being.

Bill Bonnell was the only pilot available to make the scheduled flight that day, so even though he was obviously shaken by the earlier events, he was forced to make the return flight from Cleveland to Fort Worth.

Upon learning that Kuchenmeister died en route to the hospital, Bill Bonnell returned to Cleveland and contacted the teenager’s family. No funeral service was planned by the family of Raymond Kuchenmeister, and William Bonnell – a father himself, a pilot, and a hero who was forced to do the unthinkable – paid for a funeral service and the burial for a disturbed youth who nearly killed him, his crew, and the men, women and children aboard his plane.

Sure, that sounds like the victim enjoyed this particular encounter, doesn’t it?

“If they have children, the child can easily get ahold of the weapon and either accidentally kills themselves or someone else. This again means that there is less competition in society.” -- Spelling and syntax errors aside, this warped version of social Darwinism comes to you courtesy of a heartless, self-aggrandizing alleged “humanist,” who believes that the life of a criminal thug is worth no more or less than the lives of innocents one would protect with a firearm. “Being a human being,” he opines, “means that you are no better and no worse than any other human being on the planet.” The socialist implication here is that all lives are equal, regardless of the choices you make, or the life you choose to lead, and that self-defense is nothing but a way to remove competition from the common pool.

Sick? You betcha! Common thinking for many gun grabbers? Unfortunately yes.

“Guns and bullets are made to kill. If you like them, then you like killing and the idea of someone killing you or a loved one made easy in society”. No, of course it has nothing to do with protecting a loved one from a violent thug. It has nothing to do with defending the lives of innocents. It has to be about liking killing, and the alleged joy of taking a life (a concept only a psychopath would understand) but NEVER about loving and cherishing your own life enough to defend it with the most effective weapon on the market.

“Something else to think about. It is said, that when you hold a gun you feel more powerful. Does this mean that you don't have enough self-esteem to feel powerful as yourself?” -- Oh look! A variation on the old “Your penis must be too small, and that’s why you like guns” adage! Shall we give this guy credit for being original? Or shall we simply remind him that physical power is the only thing violent criminals understand? Shall we remind him that a 125 lb. woman generally has much less physical prowess than a 200 lb. rapist? Shall we remind him that a gun in her hand is the great equalizer? And shall we remind him that this is not an issue of “self esteem” but a matter of physical science?

I told you gun grabbers say the damnedest things!

http://www.armedfemalesofamerica.com/ta ... abbers.htm
The more corrupt the state, the more numerous the laws. - Tacitus, Roman senator and historian (A.D. c.56-c.115)

The Government is the People, by the People, just not ---- YOU People. - Unknown

When neither their property nor their honor is touched, the majority of men live content. - Niccolo Machiavelli

The old police motto of TOprotect and servehas been replaced with YOU "comply or die.”

Better ten innocent Sheeple in jail than one guilty Person on the street! Blue Wall Of Modus Operandi
User avatar
Shuftin
Out of Commerce
 
Posts: 3852
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2011 3:06 am
Has thanked: 187 time
Have thanks: 373 time

 

Re: GUN GRABBERS SAY THE DAMNEDEST THINGS!

Postby lostandfound » Sun Apr 24, 2011 11:39 pm

"None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free. The truth has been kept from the depth of their minds by masters who rule them with lies. They feed them on falsehoods till wrongs look like right in their eyes." ~ Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face, forever.

lostandfound has been thanked by:
User avatar
lostandfound
King of my Own Domain
 
Posts: 2176
Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2011 2:40 am
Location: Out peering in
Has thanked: 327 time
Have thanks: 186 time

Re: GUN GRABBERS SAY THE DAMNEDEST THINGS!

Postby BOBT12 » Mon Apr 25, 2011 8:25 pm

Thanks for finding this again. Gun control is merely victim disarmament.
"Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add 'within the limits of the law' because law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the rights of the individual."-- Thomas Jefferson

”The principles contained in the Declaration of Independence are saving principles. Stand by those principles; be true to them on all occasions, in all places, against all foes, and at whatever cost.” –Frederick Douglass.

"The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able may have a gun."- Patrick Henry

"Rebellion to tyrants is obedience to God."- William Penn;Thomas Jefferson's personal seal, attributed to the judges who executed King Charles I for crimes against the people.

inforwars.com
User avatar
BOBT12
Out of Commerce
 
Posts: 3630
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2011 10:34 pm
Has thanked: 459 time
Have thanks: 168 time

Re: GUN GRABBERS SAY THE DAMNEDEST THINGS!

Postby Steve_Lujack » Tue Apr 26, 2011 1:52 am

what a POS Schumer is ....
User avatar
Steve_Lujack
Sovereign Dei Gratia
 
Posts: 3204
Joined: Tue Apr 12, 2011 12:59 pm
Location: Florida
Has thanked: 650 time
Have thanks: 228 time

Re: GUN GRABBERS SAY THE DAMNEDEST THINGS!

Postby Shuftin » Thu Apr 28, 2011 1:54 am

Image
The more corrupt the state, the more numerous the laws. - Tacitus, Roman senator and historian (A.D. c.56-c.115)

The Government is the People, by the People, just not ---- YOU People. - Unknown

When neither their property nor their honor is touched, the majority of men live content. - Niccolo Machiavelli

The old police motto of TOprotect and servehas been replaced with YOU "comply or die.”

Better ten innocent Sheeple in jail than one guilty Person on the street! Blue Wall Of Modus Operandi

Shuftin has been thanked by:
User avatar
Shuftin
Out of Commerce
 
Posts: 3852
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2011 3:06 am
Has thanked: 187 time
Have thanks: 373 time

Re: GUN GRABBERS SAY THE DAMNEDEST THINGS!

Postby grndslm » Thu Apr 28, 2011 3:35 pm

NICE!!

I love how ALL of them drop to their knees...

That's good stuff.
A lawyer cannot claim that you have rights. -- U.S. v. Johnson, 76 F. Supp. 538

"When Tyranny becomes Law, Rebellion becomes Duty." -- Someone from the Confederacy, circa 1860
User avatar
grndslm
Out of the State
 
Posts: 2763
Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2011 10:55 pm
Location: A Rebel Fort
Has thanked: 375 time
Have thanks: 205 time

Re: GUN GRABBERS SAY THE DAMNEDEST THINGS!

Postby lostandfound » Tue May 03, 2011 8:30 pm

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hhO0QkVp5Qk



Chain the Killer
by William Norman Grigg

http://www.zeios.com/OurRepublic/Author/114
Death by Government, by R.J. Rummel, London: Transaction Publishers, 1994, 496 pages, hardcover, $50.00.

In his 1992 Time magazine essay "The Birth of the Global Nation," Deputy Secretary of State Strobe Talbott declared that "it has taken the events in our own wondrous and terrible century to clinch the case for world government." As R.J. Rummel documents in Death by Government, the case for global government rests entirely upon an essentially superstitious belief in the benevolence of government as an institution.

John Locke warned centuries ago that "he that thinks absolute power purifies men's blood, and corrects the baseness of human nature, need read the history of this, or any other age, to be convinced to the contrary." The history of this spectacularly bloody century offers a definitive rebuke to those who believe that a world government would be a blessing.

Rummel, a professor of political science at the University of Hawaii, is perhaps the world's foremost authority on the phenomenon of "democide" — the systematic murder of human beings by governments. "Democide is committed by absolute Power; its agency is government," Rummel declares, and the death toll of democide is nearly incomprehensible: "In total, during the first eighty-eight years of this century, almost 170 million men, women, and children have been shot, beaten, tortured, knifed, burned, starved, frozen, crushed, or worked to death; buried alive, drowned, hung, bombed, or killed in any other of the myriad ways governments have inflicted deaths on unarmed, helpless citizens and foreigners. The dead could conceivably be nearly 360 million people."


Lethal Peace

Although "the common and fundamental justification for government [is] that it exists to protect citizens against the anarchic jungle that would otherwise threaten their lives and property," in this century of the total state, "government has been truly a cold-blooded mass murderer, a global plague of man' s own making." The standard academic depiction of government as a benign institution, Rum-mel concludes, ignores a "preeminent fact about government" — namely, "that some of them murder millions in cold blood. This is where absolute power reigns."

One of the most important insights offered by Rummel is that peace under a tyrannical government is actually more lethal than war. "Putting the human cost of war and democide together, Power has killed over 203 million people in this century," Rummel points out. However, "Even if all to be said about absolute Power was that it causes war and the attendant slaughter of the young and most capable ... this would be enough. But much worse [is the fact that] even without the excuse of combat, Power also massacres in cold blood those helpless people it controls — in fact, several times more of them."

The century's "megamurderers" — 15 states which killed at least one million people during "peacetime" -- slaughtered over 151 million victims, "almost four times the almost 38,500,000 battle dead from all this century's international and civil wars up to 1987." One hundred twenty eight million were liquidated by the most absolute tyrannies in history — Soviet Russia, Communist China, Khmer Rouge-dominated Cambodia, Vietnam, Titoite Yugoslavia, and Nazi Germany.

Dogmatic globalists of Strobe Talbott's ilk contend that the advent of nuclear weaponry presents humanity with two stark alternatives: World government, or universal nuclear annihilation. Rummel neatly dispenses with this set of false alternatives. Although "library stacks have been written on the possible nature and consequences of nuclear war and how it might be avoided," there is little recognition of the fact that "in the life of some still living we have already experienced in the toll from democide (and related destruction and misery among the survivors) the equivalent of a nuclear war...."

As John Locke reminds us, govern-ment-sponsored barbarism is hardly a recent development. Rummel does offer a repellently fascinating account of "Pre-Twentieth Century Democide," which describes the demonic achievements of such ancient warlords as King Sargon of Assyria and the depredations of pagan societies like that of the Aztecs. But even the most energetic tyrants of antiquity cannot compare with the collectivist despots of our age.


"Power Without Limit"

Rummel observes that the Bolshevik coup of 1917, which inaugurated the totalitarian era, "was not just a seizure of power and change of leadership but a revolutionary transformation in the very nature and worldview of governance. It was the creation of a unique reason-of-state and the institution of an utterly cold-blooded social engineering view of the state's power over its people."

Rummel quotes Lenin's description of the theoretical foundation of his terror state: "The scientific concept of dictatorship means nothing else but this — Power without limit, resting directly upon force, restrained by no laws, absolutely unrestrained by rules." It was in Soviet Russia and its kindred despotisms that democide was perfected. Irving Louis Horowitz points out in his foreword to Death by Government that "of the two supreme systemic horrors of the century, the communist regimes hold a measurable edge over the fascist regimes in their life-taking propensities." This is something to bear in mind as "ex-communists" are rehabilitated as "peace partners" with the West in a UN-supervised new world order.

In light of the reality of democide, Rummel contends, "What is needed is a reconceptualization of government .... New concepts have to be invented, old ones realigned...." Actually, what is desperately needed is a rediscovery of the wisdom which guided the framers of the Constitution. America's Founders created institutions designed to abate the destructive potential of political power, and render it subservient to law. The rehabilitation of America's institutions of limited government must be the immediate priority of those who understand the realities of this bloody century.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/grigg/grigg-w187.html
Last edited by lostandfound on Sun Jan 06, 2013 11:31 am, edited 1 time in total.
"None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free. The truth has been kept from the depth of their minds by masters who rule them with lies. They feed them on falsehoods till wrongs look like right in their eyes." ~ Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face, forever.
User avatar
lostandfound
King of my Own Domain
 
Posts: 2176
Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2011 2:40 am
Location: Out peering in
Has thanked: 327 time
Have thanks: 186 time

Re: GUN GRABBERS SAY THE DAMNEDEST THINGS!

Postby lostandfound » Tue May 03, 2011 9:09 pm

Firing on U.S. Citizens? 29 palms survey> http://jpfo.org/articles-assd/29palms-mcmanus.htm

While all of the questions in this survey should have stimulated concern, the survey's final question has generated an enormous amount of attention:

The U.S. government declares a ban on the possession, sale, transportation, and transfer of all non-sporting firearms. A thirty (30) day amnesty period is permitted for these firearms to be turned over to the local authorities. At the end of this period, a number of citizen groups refuse to turn over their firearms. Consider the following statement: I would fire upon U.S. citizens who refuse or resist confiscation of firearms banned by the U.S. government.

The survey results: 42.3 percent strongly disagreed with this statement; 19.3 percent disagreed; 18.6 percent agreed; 7.6 percent strongly agreed; and 12.0 percent had no opinion. In one of the footnotes appearing in his thesis, Cunningham quotes comments placed by some of the Marines next to their answers to this question: "What about the damn Second Amendment? .... I feel this is a first in communism! .... Read the book None Dare Call It Conspiracy by Gary Allen." "I would not even consider it. The reason we have guns is so that the people can overthrow the gov't when or if the people think the gov't is too powerful." "Freedom to bear arms is our Second Amendment. If you take our Amendments away then you can take this job and stick it where the sun don't shine! .... It is a right to own firearms for defense (2nd Amendment); I would fight for that right!"

http://jpfo.org/articles-assd/grigg-question-46.htm
"None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free. The truth has been kept from the depth of their minds by masters who rule them with lies. They feed them on falsehoods till wrongs look like right in their eyes." ~ Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face, forever.
User avatar
lostandfound
King of my Own Domain
 
Posts: 2176
Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2011 2:40 am
Location: Out peering in
Has thanked: 327 time
Have thanks: 186 time

Re: GUN GRABBERS SAY THE DAMNEDEST THINGS!

Postby Shikamaru » Wed May 04, 2011 7:55 am

You guys need to read some of the treatises and writings of certain professors and essayists such as:

Dr. Franz Oppenheimer
Dr. Ludwig Gumplowicz
Albert Jay Nock

Shikamaru has been thanked by:
Shikamaru
Out of Commerce
 
Posts: 3789
Joined: Sat Feb 05, 2011 10:56 am
Has thanked: 326 time
Have thanks: 283 time

Re: GUN GRABBERS SAY THE DAMNEDEST THINGS!

Postby lostandfound » Wed May 04, 2011 9:50 am

Shikamaru wrote:You guys need to read some of the treatises and writings of certain professors and essayists such as:

Dr. Franz Oppenheimer
Dr. Ludwig Gumplowicz
Albert Jay Nock

:angel: What is your top two from each author?

http://mises.org/books/
[And The People must MAINTAIN their ABILITY to do such altering, abolishing and instituting]: "The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." -- A popular Americanism of unknown origin, sometimes attributed to Jefferson, although no one I know of has proven his authorship. Nomatter, it's true, it's popular, and I won't let it die. You may as well attribute it to yourself if any control freak demands attribution of you. Whatever, you CAN easily find the source for this one: "The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of the republic; since it offers a strong moral check against usurpation and arbitrary power of the rulers." -- Supreme Court Justice Joseph Storyy, Commentaries on the Constitution, 1891

"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms. . . disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. . . Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man." -- Jefferson's "Commonplace Book," 1774-1776, quoting from On Crimes and Punishment, by criminologist Cesare Beccaria, 1764
"None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free. The truth has been kept from the depth of their minds by masters who rule them with lies. They feed them on falsehoods till wrongs look like right in their eyes." ~ Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face, forever.
User avatar
lostandfound
King of my Own Domain
 
Posts: 2176
Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2011 2:40 am
Location: Out peering in
Has thanked: 327 time
Have thanks: 186 time

Next

Return to Living and Survival

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

suspicion-preferred