Tuesday, February 20, 2018

Who is to blame the gun or the mentally ill shooters...?

Does it matter if it is a semi-auto or bolt action rifle? Depends on the shooters ability....however it is never the guns fault....just a fact Jack


Aug 1 1966

Charles Whitman, The Texas Bell Tower Sniper, Kills 14 

[His choice of weapon a bolt action high powered hunting rifle]  

From his suicide note:

"I do not really understand myself these days. I am supposed to be an average reasonable and intelligent young man. However, lately (I cannot recall when it started) I have been a victim of many unusual and irrational thoughts.”
— Charles Whitman 

Charles Joseph Whitman was a student at the University of Texas at Austin and a former Marine who killed 14 people and wounded 32 others (a total of 47 victims including himself) during a shooting rampage on and around the university's campus on August 1, 1966. He had earlier that morning stabbed to death his wife and mother, making the total he killed 16 and 49 victims.
Whitman killed three of his victims inside the university's tower, and 10 others from the 28th floor observation deck of the University's 307-foot (94 m) administrative building; one, Karen Griffith, died from her wounds a week after the shooting.
The tower massacre happened shortly after Whitman murdered his wife and mother at their homes. He was shot and killed by Austin Police Officer Houston McCoy, assisted by Austin Police Officer Ramiro Martinez.

From his suicide note:

"After my death I wish that an autopsy would be performed on me to see if there is any visible physical disorder.”
— Charles Whitman 

"I talked with a Doctor once for about two hours and tried to convey to him my fears that I felt come [sic, probably meant "some"] overwhelming violent impulses. After one visit, I never saw the Doctor again, and since then have been fighting my mental turmoil alone, and seemingly to no avail.”
— Charles Whitman  

Texas Man Shows Why We Need AR-15s When Car Full of Thugs Rolls up

Had one Houston homeowner not been in legal possession of an AR-15 when a group of thugs opened fired at him during a late-night drive-by last spring, he’d likely very well be dead today.
As previously reported by the Conservative Tribune, the drama began to unfold about 2:15 am on May 6, 2017, when the man was outside his home and three thugs in a Nissan sedan rolled up “with the intention of shooting a man in his yard,” according to Houston station KPRC.
Apparently unbeknownst to the thugs, that man was the legal owner of an an AR-15. Moreover, according to the unnamed man’s family, he enjoyed taking part in target practice at a local shooting range.
Given this information, what do you suppose happened? If you guessed that the unnamed man completely annihilated the thugs, you guessed correctly.
Despite over 40 rounds reportedly being fired at the homeowner, he suffered zero injuries through the whole ordeal. And yet, amazingly enough, his own shots wound up hitting all three suspects and killing two.
“The homeowner struck all three men inside of the car. The driver of the car crashed after the shooting, hitting a car and then running into a yard. One suspect died at the scene. The other two fled on foot but didn’t make it far,” reported station KTRK.

Of the two suspects who were apprehended, one died later at the hospital, while the other “underwent surgery for his gunshot wounds.”
And again, the heroic homeowner suffered zero injuries. None. Nada. Zip. Zero. Nor was he ever charged, since he had merely been protecting himself.

Why are we bringing this up nearly a year after it occurred, and after we’ve already reported on it once? Because ever since a suspect equipped with an AR-15 killed 17 people during a mass shooting at a Florida high school last week, politicians and pundits alike have called for a ban of the AR-15 again.
Even some RINOs have joined the chorus, with Ohio Gov. John Kasich suggesting last week that he would favor “outlawing assault weapons like the AR-15 that was reportedly used in the Florida massacre,” according to Mother Jones.

Anti-gun zealots such as Kasich seem to be under the delusion that a ban on AR-15s would somehow stop criminals from obtaining them. That’s simply naive.
A ban on AR-15s would only affect law-abiding Americans like the homeowner in Houston who, incidentally enough, used such a weapon to save himself from what would have otherwise likely been a bloody and painful death.
If liberals and fake Republicans want to keep pushing for a ban on AR-15s nevertheless, fine. Just please be honest about what you’re really suggesting, which is that you want to rob the American people of their ability to protect themselves.

In other words, you want to make it so that guys like the homeowner can’t fire back with equal firepower if and when someone (or a group of people, in this case) tries to kill them.
Please share this story on Facebook and Twitter and let us know what you think about the ongoing push by some politicians and pundits to ban AR-15s.
What do you think about how this guy's AR-15 potentially saved his life? Scroll down to comment below!

Monday, February 19, 2018

We Don’t Have a Gun Problem in America, We Have a Heart Problem

oped: We not only have a heart problem we have a mentally ill problem...It began when the Progressive Party [CPUSA] took over the DNC as well as our school system nationwide from elementary through the University level.
They took God out of schools and began the dumbing down... making our children useful idiots of the Progressive agenda...Here let me educate you :
That being said if you want to see what would happen if our 2nd Amendment was removed from the constitution as well as the 1st which is protected by the 2A {not hunting rifles only}you need look no further than North Korea...only the government has guns....need I really say more?

by: Keely Sharp 

Dear Americans,
Any time there is a shooting, there is probably cause for people to be upset. It is heartbreaking and senseless for innocent lives to be taken. I will be the first person to admit that we need a solution. Creating stricter gun laws, and trying to take guns away, is not that solution.
We do not have a gun problem in our beloved country. We do, however, have a heart problem. Allow me to explain myself.

Guns do not kill people anymore than fork make people fat. See where I am going with this? A gun is an inanimate object that is used. It does not have a brain and cannot move on its own. Guns do not kill people, people do.
Why is it that we blame the driver when there is a DUI, and we blame the bomber when there is a bomb, but we  blame the gun when there is a shooter? It does not make sense.

The left is pushing for more gun control. However, taking guns away from law abiding citizens does not create a solution. Newsflash, criminals DO NOT OBEY the law! They are called criminals for a reason! They will still find a way to obtain these weapons. Taking guns away only ensures that good people do not have them to protect themselves.
I will fight for my second amendment rights, and you should too!

Sunday, February 18, 2018

Nancy Pelosi will be FIRED, says top Dem (very soon!)

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi has been the leader of the Democratic Party for years — but that’s all coming to an end soon.
She’s going to be fired, Rep. Bill Pascrell — a top Democratic lawmaker — says.
And it will happen by the end of the year.
Not even a big win for the Democrats in the 2018 mid-term elections can save her, Pascrell told The Atlantic.
There have been increasingly loud calls by liberal lawmakers to replace Pelosi’s ineffective leadership since the 2016 election. But none have been as deafeningly harsh as this.

“While some of the Democrats who are critical of Pelosi have been consistently against her leadership, Pascrell’s prediction is notable because he has been both for and against the California congresswoman over the years,”  The Washingon Free Beacon noted. “He also hails from a heavily Democratic district and therefore has no risk of blowback for supporting the unpopular leader.”
What do you think?

Should Pelosi be fired, or should she stay as the Democrat’s leader?