This blog consists mostly of common sense responses to happenings (news articles, political events, etc) that just cry out for someone to say "WHOA! Hang on a second, here!" Too many people get away with just inventing their own facts as they bull-rush their way through an argument.

Unless you're dodging a taxicab or sidestepping a falling gargoyle, it's usually wise to take what time is available to evaluate and apply actual common sense. Good, old wisdom. It is, of course, my opinion, but I'll try to show why I think it's factual.
Thomas Paine said, "To argue with someone who has renounced the use of reason is like administering medicine to the dead." ... but I argue with drunks, egomaniacs, anti-gun Statists, Socialist/Keynesians and climate-fraud peddlers, too.

**PLEASE share this around. I didn't research, consider, write and post this junk just to have it hidden.
And feel free to comment.**

CONTACT SophosArchaeus: eMail at sophosarchaeus@hushmail.com
NOTE: this page does not endorse violence, racism or threats, nor permit such abuse in any direction.
Though Americans are fully able to end a fight, that is a last-resort, defense-only option.
If you're here for such crap, get the hell off my page!]

Monday, April 2, 2012

An initial note on "the Shooter"...

Late Monday morning, a gunman entered the Oikos Christian University in Oakland. A possible suspect was arrested in Alameda, a few miles away. There were a few fatalities and several injuries. The investigation continues; little further is known.

One certainty is that the Leftist Obamedia and the D.N.C./Progressive Socialists will immediately set about trying to convince everyone of two things: that is was a 'conservative gun nut' and that the only rational response is more gun laws, preferably the banning of all privately owned guns.

Stand by. Let's back up and look at the known facts while we wait for investigative data to be released. FACT: California's gun laws already violate the 2nd Amendment* ("the Right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed"), in that otherwise lawful Citizens are not permitted to carry arms (an operable [loaded] firearm), even openly, on public streets or in public places. They are always trying to increase the restrictions, i.e. limiting/outlawing ammunition, piling on the delays and registration of purchases, limiting types of weapons and accessories that are permitted, etc.

What the above really means, is that lawful Citizens are not permitted to defend themselves against those willing violate gun laws as they also victimize those they know to be unarmed. Since criminals, by definition, ignore inconvenient laws, and they see a "fair fight" as a greater chance of being thwarted or caught, restrictive gun laws only serve as an inducement for criminals to go armed, and do it where the Citizenry is forced into a disadvantage. Where the law supposes that all are innocent until proven guilty, including gun owners; and crooks are not sure whether their intended victim or some bystander might be equally (or better) armed, they have no such immunity or confidence. Street crimes are much lower in States (and foreign jurisdictions)that obey the Second Amendment.

FACT: the Bay area (San Francisco, Oakland, Alameda, etc) are among the most strictly anti-gun areas of the State, and constantly try to add on their own restrictions to the unconstitutional State laws.

FACT: the shooter in this case (and in every case) was aware but undeterred by all the laws, especially the specific ones of not carrying one into a school and not shooting people.

FACT: the only persons who were prohibited by law from being armed and able to defend themselves in this case (and in every case) were the law-abiding Citizens and other innocent targets.

FACT: guns have been around for 700 years, and are ubiquitous. If not bought legally (or ordered released illegally by the Obama/Holder Justice Dept), they are stolen, traded, smuggled or improvised. There are armies' worth of guns in warehouses or being traded around the world. They have been used for 700 years to suppress and oppress civilian populations everywhere except the free, Constitutional United States.

FACT: historically, and directly opposite of the propaganda that Socialists will tell you, where guns (or even edged weapons in feudal Japan and China) are restricted or banned crime and/or oppression increase - - the Criminals and Statist/oppressors know that they will not be resisted or threatened. Where guns are kept and born (carried) by a large percentage of the People, the oppressors and criminals cannot be sure that they will not be resisted and thwarted. This is so common that it is almost universal.

Look back at the Ft. Hood shooter: an AL Qaida connected murderer who waited until our troops were disarmed at home, then murdered 13 of them. This incident has been deemed "workplace violence" by DHS and the Progressives, ignoring the international terrorist aspect and adding the insult of denying Purple Heart Medals to those troops injured or killed by this opposing, armed force.

Look at our Southern border: armed narco-terrorists (some carrying the assault weapons issued to them by Holder/Obama) regularly cross ranchers' private land, threatening their families. At least two U.S. Officers, one civilian rancher and countless Mexican civilians (south of the border) have been murdered. The unarmed still invade the U.S. carrying drugs and diseases. When an American Citizen rancher detained a band of these criminals on his land, with no injury or even contact, the invaders were allowed to sue and collect damages because being detained was "traumatic".

Let's wait for the actual facts of the Oakland shooting to be released. Like Tucson, where an insane Leftist was the only armed person present and shot 19 before capture, the media frenzy will need to be actively countered. Doubtless, there are 10,000 Progressive writers summing up their calls for disarmament and re-election as I write this.

Stand up. Speak truth. Oppose lies. Spread the word.

[*The first string of words of each Amendment constitute a "preamble". A preamble is intended to give at least one, but not the only, reason for the actual law that follows. It does not become part of the actual law, which in this case reads, "the Right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed". Very simple. The People have a right to keep (possess) and bear (carry with them) arms (functional {loaded} firearms).

By the way, the preamble to the II-A says "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state...". It is well documented by the Founders that 'the militia' was the entire population (especially men and older boys) of the state, possessing arms (for hunting or defense) willing to defend their neighborhoods. Even Liberals acknowledge this, when (improperly) trying to justify forcing the People to buy things, in the Militia Act of 1792. 'Well regulated' means "practiced", not organized or licensed by Government; they can't use the arms effectively unless they have them to shoot. The 'security of a free state' means against pirates, invaders, Indian raiders, criminals, or tyrannical leaders.]

- - - -

No comments:

Post a Comment

Please be reasonably polite, but especially be as accurate as you can. Provide sources if you have them. We might as well learn something. [Wikipedia and blogs are usually 'pointers', not authoritative sources; they indicate data that might be confirmed elsewhere (that's how I use them here)].