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!]

Friday, January 25, 2013

Real 'safety', and 'child protection' vs political games [UPDATED]

Please, just for a moment, let’s deal in reality and drop the Liberal posturing for a moment, in favor of actual safety for Americans and not on failed restriction or confiscation schemes.  The law of the Land is, “A well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a Free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”

The Second Amendment guarantees all law abiding Citizens the right to own and carry effective guns without undue interference.  The Supreme Court has repeatedly affirmed this right (last time was in 2010), with limitations on machine guns and prohibition of impractical WMDs.  Lets face it, there is just no ability to practice or defend one’s self with artillery or bombers.  All of our Founders agreed with the meaning in their writings.  George Mason, co-author of the Amendment, wrote that “the Militia is the whole People”.  But then as now, people had the right to defend as well as to feed themselves.

[Scroll, if you will to the top of this blog page.  See that photo of the peace-loving, faithful, working man, leaving his plow and coat in order to "move to the sound of the guns" with his own musket?  SophosArchaeus went to the Old North Bridge, along the Battle Road near Concord to take his photo. He does not want to lose a days' work to look for trouble.  He does not want to risk his life or health in combat, possibly leaving his family to lose the farm their grandfather cleared.  But he has heard the drums or bells or shots, or been summoned by the rider with news.  UnAmerican troops are approaching to take his family's and neighbor's Liberty, and he will not allow that to happen.  He will stand between the violent, greedy enemy and the country he loves.]

Its important to note that this basic concept has been successful in America for well over 350 years; first as English common law (before the insane "train of abuses" of George III showed the flaw in government not "of the People") and then as a broad, absolute, guaranteed freedom for the last 236 yearsThere have always been and always will be the insane, smugglers, criminals, 'savages' (of any race), tyrants and others that will mis-use arms.  These dangerous miscreants are not an excuse to limit the rights of the Law Abiding, but rather the reason for strengthening their defenses.  Historically, where the People are disarmed, crime and tyranny flourish.

Well regulated” means 'self-disciplined' and ‘practiced for effectiveness', not brass buttons or Government chains of command.  Since it was intended primarily as the People’s defense against Government usurpation of the People’s power, asserting that it must be subject to the government is just senseless.  Sheer revisionism.  Mason also used the unrestrictive term “arms”, rather than ‘musket’ (or the superior, civilian Pennsylvania Rifle) to ensure ongoing parity with the infantry.   TheRight is not primarily for ‘deer hunting’ but “security” or self-defense; and that primarily against governmental tyranny such as America had just thrown off in gaining Independence.  Jefferson wrote that “the beauty of the Second Amendment is that
it will not be needed until they try to take it.”  

Regarding “gun freezones”. What is never mentioned in the mainstream media is that every recent attacker specifically chose the most gun-restrictive venue available to him, in order to avoid resistance.  These include Liberal Statesor cities, “no guns” malls, Army posts (where private guns [especially concealed ones] are prohibited andall weapons are kept in safes, except for the few issued to on-duty security), etc.   They intentionally sought out the only “No Guns” theater out of seven that were showing “Batman” at midnight inAurora; an all-female staffed, posted “Gun Free” School in gun-restrictive Connecticut; and a Liberal rally in Centrist Tucson, in otherwise Conservative Arizona, et al.  It should be obvious that criminals ignore laws by definition, whether gun restrictions or murder.  Each of them surrendered or committed suicide immediately upon hearing sirens or seeing any armed Citizen. For example, the un-sung Colorado mall shopper who drew but never fired his concealed pistol, just before the shooter stopped killing and shot himself.  More Americans are shot in gun-hating Chicagothan Afghanistan. Most of anti-gun, Socialist Europe has higher violent crime andmurder rates than most of the U.S. (the exceptions are the big, anti-gun cities), despite the false “stats” claimed by the Left.

The term “assault weapon” is dishonest; invented for political deceit.  This is what Eric Holder wanted when he advocated “brainwashing” Americans against guns in his 1995 speech for gun control.  There simply is no such gun designation.  Only their bolt-on, military-lookingaccessories define so-called assault weapons; the trigger, the barrel and the bullet remain the sameas a single-shot antique.  The true designation is compact rifle or “carbine”.  Black paint, flashlight holders, pistol grips, etc have no effect on deadliness, but look scary to some.  A carbine is simply more sensible than its longer cousins in confined home defense or for hunting in a thicket.  “Semi-auto” or “Assault Weapon” sounds like a machine gun, but these rifles require one decision and trigger-pull for each bullet, just like a revolver.  One of “Screamer Cuomo’s” ‘deer rifles’ actually has more deadly power and range than a little, black carbine.  These carbines were banned before in the 1990’s, but violent crime actually went up, so the unconstitutional law was scrapped.  The Virginia Tech murderer (largest number of victims of all) used many, ‘low capacity’ pistol magazines, while others used only diesel fuel or box cutters for their mass murders. Since street gangs and Illegal Aliendrug smugglers have fully-automatic MAC-10s and AK-47s (which are already illegal without a very expensive, strict Class III license), why shouldlaw-abiding Americans be the only ones restricted to ‘7 or 10 bullets’, or to ‘bolt-action only’?  What makes us “safer”by being intentionally out-gunned?

Please note that, while gun ownership has risen dramatically in the last few years, violent and gun crimes have dropped over the same period, despite the tragedies (which are mis-represented in the press).  More guns, less crime! They never report the over 5,000 crimes every day (per FBI statistics and university studies) that are thwarted by lawful gun owners; usually without firing a shot.  Some papers choose instead to print the private information of the lawful gun owners, resulting in targeted burglaries for guns.  Sen. Feinstein’s (D) unconstitutional, proposed law would protect the release of this information rather than American lives. 

Obama’s 23 illegal “Executive Orders” and Feinstein’s illegal, confiscatory, hypocritical scheme would have done nothing, NOTHING, to change the outcome of any of the recent (or previous) attacks.  For example, the Sandy Hook shooter was not a gun purchaser or owner.  He murdered his own mother and took her self-defense weapons.  Its obvious that laws against murder were no concern of his, just as "Gun Free" zones weren't. Whether he actually used the rifle is arguable: it was seen to be removed from the trunk of the shooter’s car, in the parking lot, after the shooting was over.  Yet a “coroner” in a white coat (very much like those issued by the White House at Obama’s Health Care press conference) clearly stated (before the bodies were removed, let alone autopsied) that “all”of the wounds were from an Assault Weapon. 

Dead last on Obama’s “to usurp” list is a ‘National dialogue about mental health’.  Perhaps, if Left-Leaning mental health pros did not hide their patients’ increasingly violent status from the authorities (and therefore, gun-licensing procedure) one or two of the obviously insane shooters might have been under detention, or the few that actually bought guns, denied.  But does anyone actually believe that “National dialogue” will result in a universal move to honest reporting of mental illness?  By the way, not one of the guns used in these tragedies was bought at the Progressive’s bane: the evil, non-reporting “Gun Show”.

Meanwhile, Leftists (who care nothing about the Constitutional Rights that make America exceptional, or actually despise and connive against them) rail about their imaginary 'gun show loophole' and demand "universal record checks".  By this, they mean record making: recording every gun-related transaction and the buyer's information.  The Left continues to refuse to report the psychotically dangerous to the existing Federal system, while the N.R.A. devised and suggested - YEARS AGO - an instant background check for gun shows.  Simply run the I.D. of a potential buyer, and get a green light (no felony record and no clinical insanity) or red light (no record or a problem with the record).  No reported sale or type of sale, no invasion of privacy, yet  avoidance of arming someone who should not have access.  But the lie of "NRA opposing background checks" continues.

UPDATE: Please watch this excellent statement by a Sandyhook parent, who considers the "lock down" of children inside a "Gun Free Zone" school that is under attack by ANY armed madman to be a DEATH TRAP.
As to our most precious asset: our children.  While private property owners should have the right to regulate guns on their property (as they do in most pro-gun States), for goodness sake, take down the “Gun Free Zone” targets!  All these signs do is advertize to attackers that the occupants are defenseless against them.  Only the law-abiding will make any effort to honor the signs.  The anti-gun movie stars, rich bankers and Progressive Socialist “representatives” all have their own guns and/or squads of heavily armed guards.  Why not let retired cops and soldiers (or trained volunteer parents and teachers), armed and supervised by Police School Resource Officers, protect our schoolchildren?

Why do Leftists call the concept of defending children (which has been in massacre-free practice for many years in many locales) “more guns on the street”?  Why do they seek to politicize and demonize the Law Abiding, rather than take effective action to protect the innocent?

 - - - - 

- - - -
Further update:
As of 2-6-13, a whacked out, racist, Leftist, anti-gun freak (who was fired from L.A.P.D. in 1995) is terrorizing SoCal.  This insane, anti-American murderer blamed his firing on everyone else in sight.  Then he murdered or attempted to murder many of those involved, but started his spree with the innocent daughter of the officer that tried to defend him, her uninvolved fiance, and unaware officers from uninvolved departments.

Christopher Dorner, Male, Black, 33, 5'11", 270, has military and police training, considered armed and extremely dangerous.
Dorner left a 'manifesto' after murdering three and attempting several more.  He starts out by claiming victim-hood because in first grade, another kid called him a racial name; the other kid got a swat, but Dorner also got a 'completely unjustified, racist, unfair, demeaning swat' for punching and kicking the other kid!  Now he says he only has problems with all "Caucasians", "Blacks" (who treat Caucasians in ways he considers inappropriate), Hispanics, Asians, anyone that gets in his way and those who try to "get along".  By becoming a mass-murderer, he gets his chance to "clear his name".  No issues there.

Dorner is obviously very dangerous and had prepared for years, with dodges and distractions and taunts about his superiority to everyone else with DNA.  He is obviously an extremely narcissistic, disturbed ego-maniac.  He is way too dramatically convinced of his god-like superiority and cut-and-paste skills with nifty Spec-Ops terms (used correctly about 1/3 of the time).  He rants mindlessly against all guns in the hands of civilians, especially mis-described ARs which he imagines were used in all the wrong crimes (like where only pistols with standard magazines were used).  He imagines himself to be a combination of Dr Moriarty, Xerxes, Napoleon and MLK.  Its more like George III, Caligula, Hitler and Jim Jones.

He gets nothing right, yet since he is dedicated to blind obedience to Obama and the confiscation of ARs for self defense while he murders all and sundry with the semi-auto and Class III weapons he claims to have lied to "buy legally".  He ends up being the single best argument for Citizens purchasing an AR (and a shotgun and a pistol) in recent history.

Now effectively and famously defeated by honest, brave, everyday Fish and Game officers and other Oath-Keeping and duty-bound Law Enforcement officers, Dorner has finally "cleared his name".  It is, "rabid, diseased, racist, narcissist murderer".  Despite this reality, too many on the Left actually lionize the monster and excuse or even endorse his monstrosity.

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)].