The Second Amendment Saved These Gun Owners’ Lives in April


Firearms saving lives is something the drive-by media will avoid telling the public.

From Dean Weingarten. May 15th, 2019
Original Source

The right to keep and bear arms is based on the natural, immutable right to defend oneself and one’s liberties from crime and tyranny.

Unfortunately, too many well-intentioned people today advocate severely restricting the ability of law-abiding Americans to defend themselves and others with the most effective firearms.

Their desire for strict gun control laws is based largely on misperceptions. They believe that Americans rarely use firearms to protect their rights and liberties, and they think commonly proposed gun control laws will meaningfully address gun-related violence.

But the reality is quite different.

Measures like universal background checks, depriving young adults of their Second Amendment rights, and banning commonly owned semi-automatic firearms or magazines impose huge burdens on law-abiding gun owners, and they fail to address the underlying realities of suicidal and criminal behavior.

Moreover, it is undeniable that Americans use guns in self-defense on far more occasions than criminals use them to commit crimes. Yet those defensive gun uses rarely receive the amount of attention given to criminal gun uses.

Every month so far this year, we’ve highlighted just a few of the tens of thousands of Americans who exercised their right to keep and bear arms for self-defense purposes. As with January, February, and March, April was full of underreportedabout good guys using a gun.

April 1, Mullan, Idaho. A domestic violence incident ended badly for the male attacker after his female victim defended herself by shooting him in the face. The man survived and is facing charges of domestic battery and attempted strangulation. The woman was hospitalized with her own injuries from the altercation, but escaped with her life.

April 3, Duquesne, Pennsylvania. An elderly taxi driver picked up a passenger who, during the ride, proceeded to pull out a gun and demand money from him. The passenger didn’t know that the driver had a concealed carry permit and was armed with his own handgun. The driver shot and killed the passenger in self-defense.

April 5, Tallahassee. Police responded to calls about a shooting, but arrived to find that the injured man was actually a would-be armed robber who had demanded money from his two victims while threatening to shoot them and their dog. One of the victims, fearing for his life, used his own gun to shoot the man in self-defense. The man was treated for his injuries, then charged with several felonies, including armed robbery and being a felon in possession of a firearm.

April 7, Largo, Florida. Two good Samaritans stopped to help the victim of an apparent hit-and-run driver, only to have the man pull out a box cutter and threaten them. One of the good Samaritans was a concealed carry permit holder and shot the man in the leg in defense of himself and the other individual with him. Incredibly, the armed good Samaritan then used his belt as a tourniquet to treat the man’s wounds until medical personnel arrived. Local police said the good Samaritan acted in lawful self-defense.

April 8, Chicago. A 78-year-old homeowner found three men using a crowbar to break into his house. When one of the robbers raised the crowbar to smash the glass door, the homeowner—who has a valid Illinois firearms permits—shot him, sending all three scattering. The homeowner told reporters that shooting another human being was a hard decision: “I didn’t feel good about doing that, but he would have gotten me with the crowbar. If I get hit with something like a baseball bat, or a crowbar, [I] ain’t gonna make it.”

April 10, Shasta County, California. After his brother brandished a firearm and threatened their mother by firing a round into the air, Jeffrey Snyder confronted him in their garage. When the brother advanced toward Jeffrey and pointed the gun at him, Jeffrey drew his own gun and fired several rounds, striking and wounding his brother. Deputies interviewed several family members and determined that Jeffrey acted in lawful self-defense, indicating that the brother will face criminal charges.

April 14, Louisville, Kentucky. Tina Burton’s neighbor broke into her home, entered her 12-year-old daughter’s room, and stripped down to his underwear. Burton alerted her boyfriend, who then yelled at the man to leave and began hitting him with a broom. The man was undaunted and reportedly growled at the boyfriend before getting into a physical altercation. At that point, Burton handed her boyfriend a firearm, and he shot the nearly-naked intruder, who fled and was later arrested by police.

April 16, Hampton, South Carolina. Despite living less than a block away from the local police department, a homeowner was forced to rely on his Second Amendment rights to defend himself against a home invasion after two men broke into his house. The homeowner shot both of his attackers, one of whom died at the scene while the second was captured by police a mile away.

April 22, White Center, Washington. A homeowner shot and killed a man who broke into his house in the early morning hours. Police released the 911 recording, in which the terrified homeowner whispers information to the dispatcher while the intruder can be heard smashing items in the background. The dispatcher—later praised for her calm demeanor and precise instructions—talked the homeowner through a harrowing 12-minute call. After shooting one intruder who attacked him, the homeowner hid in the closet for another 7 minutes until police arrived because he heard other intruders and feared he was outnumbered.

April 26, Chicago. A 41-year-old concealed carry permit holder shot and killed an armed carjacker. The carjacker intentionally rear-ended the permit holder, then threatened him with a gun and demanded his keys when the permit holder got out of his car to check the damage. That’s when the permit holder used his own firearm in self-defense.

April 28, Ashwaubenon, Wisconsin. After store security systems alerted a small business owner that someone was inside the building after hours, the owner and an employee—a concealed carry permit holder who happened to be armed that night—went to investigate. The armed employee, using his handgun, was able to successfully detain the would-be thief until law enforcement arrived.

April 30, Bradenton, Florida. A young homeowner saw two men walk onto his property, and then split to approach his front and back door at the same time. As the two would-be burglars attempted to use screwdrivers to break into the home, the homeowner saw that one of them was armed. He then procured his own firearm and fired several rounds at the men, who immediately took off running.

Like the Chicago homeowner referenced above, most lawful gun owners understand the gravity of taking another human life, even in lawful self-defense. They pray the day never comes when they must rely on their Second Amendment rights to protect themselves or others, because it will likely be the hardest moment of their lives.

But those hard moments come, and they come often. We do law-abiding citizens no favors by advocating statutes that make the right to keep and bear arms in self-defense more difficult to exercise. We simply tie one hand behind their backs and insist that they are safer for it.

The Second Amendment Saved These Gun Owners’ Lives in April

Posted by jonjayray on 5/15/2019


Venezuela’s Disarmament Law Has Made Its People the Defenseless Sport of Tyrants

H/T The Lid.

A quote from Thomas Jefferson comes to mind after reading this headline.

When the government fears the people, there is liberty.

When the people fear the government, there is tyranny.



[Venezuela] gun reform policy of the government was about social control.  As the citizenry got more desperate and hungry and angry with the political situation, they [the government] did not want them [the citizenry] to be able to defend themselves.  It was not about security; it was about a monopoly on violence and social control.”  —Vanessa Neumann, Venezuelan-American president and founder of Asymmetrica, speaking out about Hugo Chávez’s confiscation of private arms in Venezuela

“Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin, Mao, Idi Amin, Castro, Pol Pot.  All these monsters began by confiscating private arms, then literally soaking the earth with the blood of tens and tens of millions of their people.  Ah, the joys of gun control!”  —Charlton Heston, addressing the importance to the people of the right to bear arms and the glee despots feel in its absence

“Gun Control” Means “People Control

In a free republic, the people control the government—not the other way around.  Any state where the government is the sole owner and bearer of weaponry is, by definition, a police state.  And there has never been a police state anywhere in the world where the people have been able to remain free.  It was Thomas Jefferson who once said, “When government fears the people, there is liberty.  When the people fear the government, there is tyranny.”  Charlton Heston, the patriotic actor who served as president of the National Rifle Association—while speaking about Americans’ Constitutional right, under the Second Amendment, to keep and bear arms—made the following statement:

“I say that the Second Amendment is, in order of importance, the first amendment.  It is America’s First Freedom, the one right that protects all the others.  Among freedom of speech, of the press, of religion, of assembly, of redress of grievances, it is the first among equals.  It alone offers the absolute capacity to live without fear.  The right to keep and bear arms is the one right that allows ‘rights’ to exist at all.”

Venezuelans Lose Their Right to Live Without Fear

In 2012, under the direction of President Hugo Chávez, the Venezuelan National Assembly authorized the “Control of Arms, Munitions, and Disarmament Law,” for the express purpose of disarming the citizenry.  Venezuela’s victim-disarmament law went into effect in 2013, banning the commercial sale of firearms to private citizens.  The only two non-military groups who would retain their arms would be the outlaws and the police, with law-abiding citizens caught in between.

Joseph Albanese, writing for Range365, describes the situation succinctly and accurately: “In 2012, then-President Hugo Chávez banned firearm ownership by private citizens in Venezuela, leaving the unarmed populace unable to defend themselves from criminals and corrupt government officials alike.  In the years following, the crime rate and government abuses increased at an unprecedented rate.”   In fact, in 2015, Venezuela had the highest murder rate in the world, with almost 28,000 people murdered out of a population of a little more than 31 million. This means that about one out of every 1,100 citizens was a homicide that year.  During 2001, only 6,500 homicides had been committed in Venezuela.  Although Venezuela has stopped keeping records of its homicide rate in recent years, Amnesty International reported, in September 2018, that Venezuela still suffers from a murder rate of about 89 people per 100,000, making the disarmed country worse than some war zones.

The slaughter of Venezuela’s populace by gun-toting street criminals, as well as government bad-actors, has been a catastrophe for the human rights of the people of Venezuela.   Javier Vanegas, a Venezuelan teacher of English, now living in exile in Ecuador, commented on the ragtag uprising of unarmed Venezuelans against murderous government forces in recent weeks: “Guns would have served as a vital pillar to remaining a free people, or at least able to put up a fight.  The government security forces, at the beginning of this debacle, knew they had no real opposition to their force.  Once things were this bad, it was a clear declaration of war against an unarmed population.”

Of course, in the United States socialist Democrats, such as Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Bernie Sanders, refused to denounce the continuing abuses of the people’s natural rights and the relentless onslaught of government butchery under the Maduro regime. Also here in America, the people have wisely chosen to retain their ability to keep the power of the government in check by maintaining their God-given right to keep and bear arms.  Despite all of the socialist indoctrination carried out by Marxists in America’s deeply-infiltrated and now-corrupt university system, there are still enough Americans who understand that, once America gives up its Second Amendment right to self-defense, the United States will cease to be a free country.

The Worst Humanitarian Crisis in the History of the Americas

“Venezuela’s socialist dictator Nicolás Maduro has triggered the ‘worst humanitarian crisis in the history of the Americas’ with the help of Cuba, Russia, China, and terrorist groups,” according to the executive director of the Foundation for Human Rights in Cuba, as reported by Breitbart News.  And Venezuelans are only seven years out from having lost their right to self-defense.   This is the same situation in which America might find itself if Americans voted for Kamala Harris for president.  Harris has promised that, if she were elected chief executive, she would take dictatorial “executive action” to ban gun rights within the first 100 days of her administration, unless the representatives of the people legislated according to her desires.  According to Breitbart, Harris has actually said, “Upon being elected, I will give the United States Congress 100 days to get their act together and have the courage to pass reasonable gun safety laws, and if they fail to do it, then I will take executive action.”  However, votes by the Congress to infringe the Second Amendment are illegal, according to the language of the Constitution, just as executive actions to modify any of the rights of people also are illegal.  Obviously, breaking the law is not a problem for an oath-breaker like Kamala Harris.

Hitler Too Was a Democratically-Elected Socialist Who Disrespected Individual Rights

Never forget that Hitler was a socialist (of the National Socialist German Workers’ Party), the same as Harris.  Socialism is all about canceling individual and minority rights, in favor of giving the majority of the moment the power to approve who is permitted to do what—effectively eliminating God-given rights in favor of an ethic of government-granted privileges.  If a socialist majority goes too far in changing the government to its advantage, the political pendulum may never be allowed the opportunity to swing back in the direction of individual rights, and liberty may be lost forever, due to the anti-freedom enabling acts of what otherwise would have been a temporary majority.  This is why democracy is dangerous, and republicanism is not; democracy is government by the whim of the majority, even a temporary majority, rather than government by the rule of law.  John Adams’ famous statement about the rule of law, concerning the Constitution for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, was

“In the government of this commonwealth, the legislative department shall never exercise the executive and judicial powers, or either of them: the executive shall never exercise the legislative and judicial powers, or either of them: the judicial shall never exercise the legislative and executive powers, or either of them: to the end it may be a government of laws and not of men.”

In a free republic, once the essential rights and rules have been decided upon, and put into place, no temporary majority, nor any political leader, may change them.  Thus, a constitutional republic, on a practical level, offers permanent safety to all individuals and a deliberative process by which other matters are considered and legislated by means of competing, co-equal branches of government that are designed to slow down and block all but the most unimportant issues from getting attention.  Fewer laws being passed means more freedom for the people.

Thus, a republic is about the rule of law under a Constitution that fences off individual rights as unalienable and, therefore, not up for a democratic vote.  If the Constitution is adhered to, then no majority vote anywhere in the republic can remove the rights of any individual person or minority group.  In America’s republic, three-fourths of the states (or 38 out of 50) are needed to remove or amend any right of the people. Although it would seem that socialist Democrat leaders, such as Kamala Harris, might simply choose to by-pass the Constitution altogether, by acting as a dictator and packing the Supreme Court with extra justices appointed by herself, to ensure her success.  This would, of course, mean that Harris would be controlling “the legislative and judicial powers” in addition to her powers as president.  Liberty would be lost to the people, as a result.

Venezuela’s Ragtag Revolution

As the people of Venezuela seek to oust the despotic Maduro, the question remains as to whether or not the Venezuelan people will regain the right to own firearms.  If a change in leadership, possibly from Maduro to Guaidó, occurs in Venezuela, will the new leader—a member of the centrist social-democratic Popular Will party—see his way to restoring gun rights, or will he too choose to keep the people disarmed and defenseless?  It is a question no one can really answer for sure.  The only certain thing is this: Once individual rights have been lost or surrendered to socialism, the chances of regaining any of those rights are doubtful at best.  What is happening in Venezuela is an essential lesson for all who love freedom.  Hopefully, the lesson will not be lost on the vast majority of Americans.  So, even as Americans’ thoughts and prayers are with the people of Venezuela in coming weeks, it might also be appropriate for Americans to spend some time praying for their own country as well, that it may continue as one nation, under God, with liberty and justice for all.

Florida Gov. Signs Bill Allowing Armed Teachers for Classroom Defense

H/T Breitbart.

Bravo to Governor Ron De Santis(R-FL)for turning Floridas teachers from sheep to sheepdogs to help protect students.

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) signed legislation Wednesday that will allow teachers to be armed for classroom defense.

Fox News reports that the bill was an expansion of the state’s “Guardian” program and opens the door for any teacher “to carry a weapon if his or her school district approves.” Teachers wishing to carry a weapon will have to complete “at least 144 hours of police-style training, psychiatric evaluation and drug screening.”

Breitbart News reported that Florida’s House and Senate passed the legislation in response to the findings of the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School Public Safety Commission. That investigatory commission found armed teachers could have made a difference in the February 14, 2018, Parkland shooting.

Pinellas County Sheriff Bob Gualtieri headed the commission and spoke out in favor of arming teachers as the investigation concluded. The Associated Press quoted Gualtieri saying, “People need to keep an open mind to it as the reality is that if someone else in that school had a gun it could have saved kids’ lives.”

The Parkland attacker paused to reload five times. Each pause represented an opportunity in which an armed teacher could have taken the gunman out.

Jews and Christians Must Stop Murders in Their Places of Worship by Taking Up Arms

H/T Godfather Politics.

It has been said before and I will say it again, “It takes a good guy with a gun to stop a bad guy with a gun!”

By Paul Dowling“In a truly moral and civilized society, people exclusively interact through persuasion.  Force has no place as a valid method of social interaction, and the only thing that removes force from the menu is the personal firearm, as paradoxical as it may sound to some.  When I carry a gun, you cannot deal with me by force.  You have to use reason and try to persuade me, because I have a way to negate your threat or employment of force.  The gun is the only personal weapon that puts a 100-pound woman on equal footing with a 220-pound mugger, a 75-year old retiree on equal footing with a 19-year old gangbanger, and a single gay guy on equal footing with a carload of drunk guys with baseball bats.  The gun removes the disparity in physical strength, size, or numbers between a potential attacker and a defender.”  —Marko Kloos

A Synagogue Shooting in Poway
When a shooting attack commenced at the Chabad Passover services in Poway, California, according to Breitbart News, an armed congregant gave his firearm to an off-duty Border Patrol agent, in the belief that his gun in the right hands might save many lives.  And apparently he was right.  The Border Patrol agent not only shot back but pursued the villain out of the synagogue.  There is a lesson here to be had: Armed Jews shooting back definitely minimize casualties and likely discourage future attacks on their communities.  Perhaps a warning sign might be in order, to be posted at the entryways of places of worship: “This worship community values the protection of innocent life and is, therefore, protected by armed defenders.”  To add value to the sign’s verbiage, it could be issued by an organization like the National Rifle Association or the Jews for the Preservation of Firearm Ownership.

Civilized People Carry Guns to Banish Violence & Promote Peace
Mark Kloos has pointed out that only two ways exist for individuals to convince others to do what they want; the first way is by reason and the second is by force: “Every human interaction falls into one of these two categories, without exception.  Reason or force, that’s it.”

Because the use of any physical force is an illegitimate act in places of worship, and because its use is, therefore, so unexpected in the context of worship services, the faithful often do not anticipate the possible need for the employment of justifiable violence in defense of the innocent lives of their fellow congregants.  Unfortunately, there is always the risk that a criminal invader may seek to employ deadly force against what he likely suspects to be a disarmed community of worshipers.

But there was a time when most worship communities in America were heavily armed, thus safe from attack in most cases.  In fact, the disarmament of America’s worship communities, mainly by infringement of their rights under the Second Amendment, along with the loss of life that has resulted, is immoral.  It is not only immoral on the part of an attacker to launch a bloodthirsty attack upon innocents; it is also immoral on the part of every leader who has worked to disarm a potential community of victims from taking up arms in the face of a known danger—especially with the rise of Jew- and Christian-hatred that has been encouraged by America’s political Left in recent years.

The Anti-Semitic, Anti-Christian Left
The truth is that Progressive Democrats nowadays vote, on the international stage, for anti-Semitic, anti-Christian treaties (such as the Iran Deal) to empower murderous jihadist states to build nukes, while also supporting Sharia-finance-embracing trade deals (like the Trans-Pacific Partnership) which could usher anti-Constitutional Sharia Law into the US Constitution by treaty, thus granting the anti-Semitic and Christian-hating Koran and Sunna special protections.  Democrats also have unanimously supported the Udall Amendment, which would alter the Bill of Rights in the arenas of speech and religion by amending the First Amendment to allow government to decide what kind of “political” speech is acceptable; but, of course, since any and all speech can be defined as political, in the world of the Left, this really means all speech would be rendered subject to government regulation and control.

What should also not go unnoticed is the relentless assault by the Democrat Party on the Second Amendment, despite the fact that prominent Democrats themselves own guns for their own personal protection, such as Kamala Harris, who has said, “I am a gun owner, and I own a gun for probably the reason a lot of people do—for personal safety.”  It is also true that California State Senator Leland Yee, a Democrat, smuggled guns from the Philippines to criminal gangs in America, while supporting the immoral agenda of victim-disarmament.  With all the corruption afoot among members of the political class, it probably makes sense that politicians would want to empower criminals by disarming the law-abiding, since this would serve to facilitate many of their illegal pursuits to enrich themselves—such as drug running, gun smuggling, and human sex-trafficking.  It is why Democrats—and some Republicans—have, in the past, almost universally opposed securing the border against the Mexican cartels.

Trump Appears on the Scene to Fight Corruption & Preserve the Constitution & Bill of Rights
Thank God for President Donald J. Trump, who has acted to protect Jews and Christians, since taking office, by standing up to the Democrats and their libelous fake-news media, which Trump refers to, accurately, as “the enemy of the people.”  Only days before the recent anti-Semitic assault on Hassidic Jews, during Passover worship services in Poway, California, the Leftist New York Timespublished what has been characterized as a “brutally anti-Semitic cartoon” depicting a blind President Donald Trump sporting a yarmulke and walking a dog that wears the face of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.  Facebook’s anti-Semitism is evident in its promotion of the imagery of the brutal murder of a Jewish baby on its “F*ck Israel” page.  This is the kind of thing which has created an environment that is so welcoming to anti-Semitic violence.  The author of this article is not arguing that anti-Semitic free speech should be banned, but is merely suggesting that it is immoral for The Gray Ladyand Facebook to promote anti-Semitic speech, while, at the same time, banning the religious speech of those political conservatives who are philo-Semitic and pro-Christian.  In a sense, by not being even-handed, the Leftist media have been working on a consistent basis to silence philo-Semitic and pro-Christian voices, so they are unable to fight back against their haters.  (This writer has already been shadow-banned by Facebook and blocked from trying to post Shay Charka’s cartoon poking fun at the Jew-hating New York Times.  As a Constitutional Conservative and a Jew, censorship of this writer’s posts is perhaps doubly to be expected from the virtual book burners at Facebook, yet it is a civil rights violation—especially since Facebook’s business model depends on the selfsame Internet which everyone’s taxes helped pay to develop—including the tax dollars of Conservatives and Jews.)

Ensuring Morality: An Armed Society Is a Polite Society
In a moral civil society, people always choose persuasion to get what they want.  Physical coercion or violence has no place.  Robert A. Heinlein once famously said, “An armed society is a polite society.  Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life.”  When temple members carry guns, it becomes risky indeed for armed terrorists to invade their sanctuary.  Not every member of a worship community needs to be armed.  Indeed, the world recently saw the effectiveness of just one effective good guy with a gun in Poway.  When the evildoer’s gunfire was returned, he departed in flight from his armed pursuer. The only argument against being fired upon is to be heard in the report of a firearm returning fire.  Shooting back is a moral act, since armed defense protects the lives of good people in worship communities against the aggressions of anti-Semites and Christian-haters.

Of course, there will be calls for victim-disarmament in the Leftist media.  This stands to reason, since those who control the media—mainly the Democrat Party and the Left—are anti-Semitic and anti-Christian in every aspect of their politics, even to the extent that they promote the murder of babies after birth as a form of fourth-trimester abortion.  There is absolutely no sanctity of life on the Left. How can a Democrat Party, that believes the lives of babies should not be defended, be expected to support self-defense rights for any living soul?  Not only is this the same Democrat Party that voted against the bill to protect the lives of babies after they are born; it is also the same Democrat Party which, only a while ago, cheered The Death of Klinghoffer, the cruelly anti-Semitic musical play about a Jew shot by terrorist members of the Palestinian Liberation Front aboard the passenger liner Achille Lauro and dumped from his wheelchair into the Mediterranean.  Klinghoffer was murdered for being Jewish.

Guns Make Worshipers Safer
If a preacher in South Carolina had not forbidden defensive gun use in his worship community, Dylan Roof never would have been able to murder nine congregants in Charleston on June 17th, 2015. Guns are the great equalizer.  They make weak old women who know how to shoot just as lethal as strong young men.  It is said that “God created men and Sam Colt made them equal.”

Obviously, Rabbi Yisroel Goldstein of Poway, California, knew it would be unwise to prohibit guns in his synagogue, lest any possible shooting turn into a massacre.  It would seem that this wise man knew that California’s stringent victim-disarmament laws put his worship community more at risk, rather than making it safer.  It is interesting to note that, despite California’s ban on so-called “assault rifles,” the attacker of the Poway synagogue used an “AR-type assault weapon” anyway.  (It should be noted, for the sake of accuracy, that AR-15 rifles were made for civilian use, not for the military, and that the A and R do not stand for “assault rifle” but are merely the first two letters in ARMALITE, the company that originally manufactured the weapon; an AR-15 is, with regard to its functionality, just a common semi-automatic rifle.)

Guns, when they are easily obtained and in common currency among the populace, act as a check against evil interference by criminal or government bad actors, since the large majority of the people using them are good people.  It is only when gun bans are put in place—which are obeyed solely by the law-abiding—that the equation changes in favor of the bad guys, for it is only then that the gun-wielding evildoers outnumber armed good guys.  Marko Kloos has observed the following: “People who argue for the banning of arms ask for automatic rule by the young, the strong, and the many, and that’s the exact opposite of a civilized society.  A mugger, even an armed one, can only make a successful living in a society where the state has granted him a force monopoly.”  But while such a monopoly may exist in California and other victim-disarmament states, this is not the reality in the State of Texas and many other states that believe in freedom and the rule of law.  In free states, the equation does not so easily balance in favor of the wicked.

Guns Save Lives
It is time to fight back against Leftist plans for victim-disarmament.  A worldview that would sacrifice the innocent to the guilty, by disarming the very people who did not commit any crimes, flies in the face of the ethic of Equal Protection and the Rule of Law in America’s free republic.  And it is high time that Jews and Christians alike take advantage of their civil right, under the Second Amendment, to arm their worship communities against those who would murder their congregants.  No worship community should be a gun-free zone.  To disallow defensive gun use by armed congregants against evil aggressors would be an immoral policy that could potentially cost innocent lives.

When the moral citizens of a free republic bear arms in greater numbers than the evildoers, the very presence of firearms everywhere there are people saves innocent lives.

How AOC Joins Choir Of Anti-Gunners Calling For Things In Ignorance

H/T Bearing Arms.

Alexandria Occasional-Cortex running off at the mouth about things she knows nothing about.

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez isn’t exactly setting the stage for her elevation to the ranks of elder statesmen. If there’s anything most folks expect from her, including many Democrats, it’s stupid comments.

The aftermath of the shooting at a California synagogue is, of course, no different as radio host Michael Knowles points out that AOC joins the ranks of anti-gunner stupidity.

So [Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez] tweets out, right after this happens, quote “heartbroken to hear of the San Diego synagogue shooting particularly so on this final day of Passover. We have a responsibility to love and protect our neighbors. The longer the Senate delays holding a vote on H.R. 8 the more we put Americans at risk.”

“Heartbroken to hear about this. We should protect our neighbors.” If you don’t vote for the very specific gun control legislation that I want you to vote for, you are basically responsible for shooting up a synagogue — that’s an inappropriate way to respond to a tragedy — inappropriate way to respond to a shooting in part because it’s just not true.

H.R. 8 is some more gun control legislation to expand background checks. No evidence whatsoever that this would have prevented this shooter from getting a gun. No evidence whatsoever that this would have prevented any of the other mass shootings that we have seen in recent years.

So, we ask ourselves, “How could we have prevented this shooting? How could we have stopped this, more gun control?” No. There is no evidence that any major gun control law that’s been proposed would have stopped any of these things. How about if law enforcement had somehow caught this guy earlier? I guess that would have stopped it, but how would they have caught the guy? The guy who did it had no prior contact with law enforcement…Maybe if we were able to catch mental illnesses earlier. Again, there’s no evidence this guy has a mental illness.

The killer in Poway, California had a plethora of gun control laws that did nothing to prevent him from obtaining a firearm, nor did it stop him from using that firearm in service to an evil cause. Claiming that federally-mandated universal background checks would have somehow prevented the senseless slaughter in the name of bigotry is only slightly less ignorant than the ideology that drove the murders in the first place.

California already requires background checks on every purchase.

Further, so far nothing in the killer’s background has shown any reason why he would have failed such a background check. Something might be there, but I haven’t seen it so far, which suggests there isn’t. In other words, he’d have passed any background check given.

Ocasio-Cortez–or Occasional Cortex, as she’s known amongst my crowd–is spouting stupidity in the name of advancing an agenda. Hardly surprising.

Venezuela’s Issues Illustrate Gun Debate In U.S.

H/T Bearing Arms.

The Second Amendment in America will help provide a barrier between the oppressor and the oppressed.

Right now, things are dicey for Venezuelan strongman Nicolás Maduro. It seems he’s not particularly popular with the people. They’re protesting something fierce, which is leading to the socialist dictator cracking down on dissent.

In the process, it’s illustrating one very important thing. If you have to deal with a tyrant, you need an armed populace.

Guaidó declared that “the moment is now” for citizens and the military to turn on Maduro and remove him from power.

But at least some citizens say that would be easier if the government hadn’t banned guns.

“Guns would have served as a vital pillar to remaining a free people, or at least able to put up a fight,” exiled English teacher Javier Vanegas told Fox News. “The government security forces, at the beginning of this debacle, knew they had no real opposition to their force. Once things were this bad, it was a clear declaration of war against an unarmed population.”

Citizens in Venezuela have been unable to own private firearms since the country enacted a ban in 2012 under previous leader Hugo Chávez. The law only allows the military, police, and specific groups, i.e. security groups, are allowed to purchase firearms from state-controlled manufacturers. Those in violation could face up to 10 years in prison if in possession of a “weapon of war.”

The ban was originally meant to curtail the high murder rate in the country, which saw over 18,000 homicides in 2011. After a low surrender rate, the government invested heavily in seizing weapons from citizens instead.

Of course, that’s the Washington Examiner, which tends to be saner when it comes to guns, thankfully.

However, even the typical anti-gun media is seeing the truth of this. I mean, when even MSNBC is stating this, you know it’s serious.

How long have I lived? Long enough to see a mainstream media outlet other than Fox News make a core Second Amendment argument. And guess who it is?

All right, all right, MSNBC didn’t know they were making a core Second Amendment argument. They were just reporting on the captivity of Venezuelans by a socialist regime that made sure to ban gun ownership. Six of one, half-dozen of another, says the Free Beacon:

MSNBC reporter Kerry Sanders unwittingly made the American case for the Second Amendment during a report Tuesday on the political upheaval in Venezuela.

Anchor Andrea Mitchell introduced Sanders for his report by commenting on the surprising ability of Venezuelan dictator Nicolás Maduro to stay in power, despite the pressure on him to step down.

“Not only hanging on but he appears to still control the military,” Sanders said. “You have to understand, in Venezuela gun ownership is not something that’s open to everybody. So if the military have the guns, they have the power and as long as Nicolás Maduro controls the military, he controls the country.”

And that, ladies and gentlemen, is why I will support the Second Amendment to my dying breath.

For better or worse, guns equal power far more often than any of us would prefer. It’s like the old saying; God created all men, Sam Colt made them equal. The evil in this world will obtain guns (and power) in any way it can, so it’s imperative that the good people of the world not be barred from doing so themselves, especially since laws meant to impact the evil almost never do.

It’s interesting that even MSNBC has stumbled onto the truth, though I suspect it’ll view that as completely different. Which is also hilarious when you think about how many times President Donald Trump has been called some variation of “dictator,” “Hitler,” or something similar. The Left doesn’t trust him, but they still want him to have all the guns.

It would be nice if the Left would look at what’s happening in Venezuela, remember that they think our president is a dictator, and then realize that they want to make it even more difficult to fight a dictator on American soil.

Unfortunately for all of us, they’re not that self-aware.

CONFIRMED: Off-Duty Border Agent Prevents Synagogue Shooting From Becoming A Massacre

H/T Flag And Cross.

A classic example of a good guy with a gun stopping a bad guy with a gun and saving lives.


On Saturday morning, a shooting took place at a San Diego synagogue.

Three people were injured. Unfortunately, one was killed during the Jewish holiday.

Here’s the scoop…

From AP News:

A 19-year-old man opened fire inside a synagogue near San Diego as worshippers celebrated the last day of a major Jewish holiday, killing a woman and wounding three others Saturday, authorities said.

President Donald Trump and other elected officials decried what they called an anti-Semitic attack exactly six months since 11 people were killed at a Pittsburgh synagogue in the deadliest assault on Jews in U.S. history.

The man, whose name was not released, used an AR-type assault weapon to shoot worshippers at Chabad of Poway, San Diego County Sheriff William Gore told reporters.




It was then learned that an off-duty border patrol agent jumped into action:

BREAKING: NBC San Diego reports that an off-duty U.S. Border Patrol agent who was in the Poway synagogue opened fire on the suspect and prevented the attack from being significantly worse.

Ryan Saavedra


BREAKING: NBC San Diego reports that an off-duty U.S. Border Patrol agent who was in the Poway synagogue opened fire on the suspect and prevented the attack from being significantly worse.

6,568 people are talking about this

Enter President Trump with the shout out:

Sincerest THANK YOU to our great Border Patrol Agent who stopped the shooter at the Synagogue in Poway, California. He may have been off duty but his talents for Law Enforcement weren’t!

Donald J. Trump


Sincerest THANK YOU to our great Border Patrol Agent who stopped the shooter at the Synagogue in Poway, California. He may have been off duty but his talents for Law Enforcement weren’t!

35.5K people are talking about this

Brandon Judd is the president of the National Border Patrol Council.

According to him, the United States has never faced a border crisis quite like the one we’re witnessing today.

And yet, Democrats continue to insist there is no problem at the border.


From Daily Wire:

In a radio interview on Tuesday, National Border Patrol Council President Brandon Judd said that U.S. Border Patrol agents are facing the “worst crisis” the agency has ever seen since its formation in 1924.

When asked about the 20,000 migrants that Mexico warned are presently approaching the border, Judd said there is not much Border Patrol can do.

Judd noted, “We ultimately end up letting them go. They cross the border illegally and then we give them what we call a ‘notice to appear,’ and we release them on their own recognizance and what that means is they promise us that they will return for all of their proceedings, but we know that they never do…They know this, that’s why the numbers are so large.

He added, “This is the worst crisis we have ever faced in the history of the Border Patrol, and we’re going back to 1924. In my twenty-one year career as a Border Patrol agent, I’ve never seen it like this.

Judd concluded, “It’s never been like this before this is the worst it’s ever been and if we don’t do something, it’s going to continue to get worse.

President Trump has had it up to here with Mexico when it comes to immigration.

He’s tired of seeing America’s southern neighbor allow migrants from Central America to stroll through Mexico and into the United States.

Obviously, Trump is not alone.

However, 45 has the authority to do something about it.

POTUS is now warning that he may shut down the southern border entirely.

His tweet:

Mexico is doing NOTHING to help stop the flow of illegal immigrants to our Country. They are all talk and no action. Likewise, Honduras, Guatemala and El Salvador have taken our money for years, and do Nothing. The Dems don’t care, such BAD laws. May close the Southern Border!

Donald J. Trump


Mexico is doing NOTHING to help stop the flow of illegal immigrants to our Country. They are all talk and no action. Likewise, Honduras, Guatemala and El Salvador have taken our money for years, and do Nothing. The Dems don’t care, such BAD laws. May close the Southern Border!

55.3K people are talking about this