Gun Control: Eating Steak With Teaspoons

President Obama told the BBC he’s “stymied” because he’s not gotten his way regarding gun control –yet. So, apparently we should just relinquish our guns during a Second Amendment burning ceremony on the National Lawn.

Obama’s upset more Americans don’t agree with his definition of “common sense” gun control. If Pew Research is correct, a majority of us lean more toward Lt. Col. Allen West’s “index finger” definition whereby individuals should be trusted to call the shots. Pew says the majority of Americans still support gun rights.

Nevertheless, we should submissively fall in line, believing the government will protect us. And crazy people who prey on the innocent in gun free zones like schools, theaters, churches and military facilities will voluntarily lay down their arms, too. Sure.

Of course, we have no reason to protect ourselves from ISIS, although according to the FBI, ISIS-connected young Muslim men are radicalized in all 50 states. Nor would we ever need to protect ourselves against a tyrannical government like those crazy old white men, America’s Founders, wrote about in the Constitution.

Oh, and we’re supposed to believe Obama really wants gun control legislation to be passed the “old-fashioned” way, with Congress making laws, when he’s already cranking out executive orders like a Chinese sweatshop?

Every time there’s a mass shooting, we’re told now is the time to hop on the gun control bandwagon. We’re expected to ditch logic, facts, and common sense — or statistics proving gun control never works. We should overlook irritating facts like how lawlessness prevails in places which already have stringent gun laws like in the president’s hometown of Chicago, Illinois. Or Baltimore, Maryland, which, incidentally, made the “25 Most Violent Places in the World” list in 2013 and 2014, along with Ciudad Juarez, Mexico, Baghdad, Iraq and Mogadishu, Somalia and Muzaffarabad, Pakistan.

I guess we should just chalk it up to coincidence when non-partisan groups like the Institute for Policy Innovation tell us that 16 out of 20 of the U.S. cities with the highest violent crime rates, like Baltimore, are run by Democrats. Must we overlook the possibility that the policies and practices of liberal leaders from the party that booed God during their 2012 convention inspire crazy people of all political leanings to do crazy things? Should we ignore statistics showing despite Maryland’s highly restrictive gun laws, Baltimore’s homicides increased in the first five months of 2015 by 43 percent, and non-fatal shootings by 82.5 percent? When recently asked about the chaotic mess that is Baltimore, White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest says more gun laws should help. Help who? Might it be time to address that more laws won’t fix a spiritual problem? People can’t even keep Ten simple Commandments.

Are we really supposed to believe criminals care about regulations? China’s a perfect example because it’s largely illegal for private citizens to own and sell guns. Possession or sale of them leads to anywhere from a 3-year prison term to the death penalty. The Chinese government values human life like Planned Parenthood values babies, therefore; it’s obvious these gun laws are not devised to protect citizens, but the other way around. Even still, crazy people find a way around the rules. As I’ve written before, the same day the Sandy Hook shootings happened, with no guns available, a crazy, knife-wielding Chinese man stabbed almost two dozen kids at a central China elementary school. He did that despite the fact the government had recently banned knives after a spate of deadly knife and cleaver attacks on school kids that left 20 dead and 50 wounded.

Take away guns and crazy people will use knives. Take away knives and they’ll use something else until everyone’s forced to eat steak with teaspoons.

The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Equipping You With The Truth

Obama Praises Australia’s Gun Ban. Here Are The Actual Results…

In 1996, a massacre in Tasmania left 35 people dead, and caused Australia to establish draconian gun control laws. They literally rounded up, destroyed and banned guns. Now, the rumor goes, they haven’t had any mass shootings since; and crime has decreased as a result. HINT: not quite.

Enter Obama, who said:

When Australia had a mass killing, it was just so shocking to the system, the entire country said, “Well, we’re going to completely change our gun laws,” and they did. And it hasn’t happened since.

Okay, we’ll get to his false quote in a second; but first, watch the video below.

It’s pretty obvious, by the currently measurable barometers we have available, that Australia’s disarmament was a disaster. Maybe they didn’t have any more “mass-shootings.” Great. But what about the rest of the crime?

Well, there’s argument about whether the gun related homicides and other various crimes have actually increased or not. Some places have the homicide rate increasing at 3.2% along with armed robbery at 44%, while some other stats have them remaining about the same. At the very least, we do know that the policies have not significantly decreased crime. That’s not even being debated. Which…considering that the Australian government spent a considerable amount of money on the laws…seems, at the very least, disappointing.

That’s not to address the most important issue at play here: what the Australian government did was an unfettered act of tyranny. Despite how leftists try to sugarcoat it, the Australian gun “buyback” program was mandatory. That makes it effectively a gun ban. When American leftists support Australian policies, they are absolutely, unequivocally supporting an outright ban on firearms. Disarming a populace is, at its very core, the denial of a human right to self-preservation.

I acknowledge that maybe some countries get lucky. Maybe they ban guns and crime decreases. It certainly would seem the exception to the rule, but it’s certainly not outside the realm of possibility.

That doesn’t make it any less tyrannical.

When a woman is facing a psychotic stalker, needing to protect herself from the inevitable attack that will occur, and the government denies her right to protection… that’s a travesty.

When somebody finds themselves on CAIR’s jihadi watch list and knows beyond any shadow of a doubt that protection of his family is imperative, and the government says “nuh uh”… that’s a travesty.

When a woman in Sweden (now the rape capital of the civilized world) faces a religiously-motivated gang-rape, and her only chance at getting out alive–a gun–is removed from her… that’s a travesty.

Yes, evil is and will always be among us. Yes, bad people will do bad things with guns. That does not, and will never, change the fact that it is morally imperative for law-abiding citizens to maintain their right to self-preservation. Period.

The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Equipping You With The Truth

Law Enforcement Agency’s Big Announcement Reveals Obama’s 2nd Amendment Attacks Have Backfired Big Time

Law-abiding gun owners in the U.S. have frequently criticized the Obama administration for its perceived efforts to restrict the scope of the Second Amendment. According to recent data compiled by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, gun-toting Americans have responded to the ostensible slight by purchasing more guns than they did during the previous administration.

While about 4.5 million firearms were manufactured in 2007, the last full year of George W. Bush’s second term, gun sales during the latest year for which figures are available showed a more than three-fold increase. In fact, roughly the same number of handguns was produced in 2013 as all firearms combined during 2007.

In all, about 13.8 million guns were manufactured in 2013. Broken down by types of weapon, handguns made up the largest portion with about 4.4 million new firearms produced. Rifles were close behind, with gunsmiths adding approximately 3.9 million new weapons. About 1.2 million shotguns were also produced during the year.

Eric Pratt, Second Amendment activist and spokesman for Gun Owners of America, analyzed the recent ATF report, concluding it solidifies Obama’s status as “Gun Salesman of the Decade.”

He concluded that concerned gun owners are “rushing to buy firearms because they’re afraid that Obama will take away their Second Amendment rights.”

The National Rifle Association’s Jennifer Baker agreed, noting that “it’s not shocking people are frightened and want to protect themselves.”

Of Obama, she said he will “stop at nothing to strip people of their constitutional rights to self-protection.”

Is an increase in firearms manufacturing a good sign for America? Share your thoughts in the comments section below.

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Equipping You With The Truth

A Tale Of 2 Shootings: Gun Control Is Killing The US

In the wake of the Lafayette, Louisiana, Grand Theater movie theater shooting, the media has made much ado about the President’s “prediction” that less gun control laws would lead to more shootings.

But in reality, it was the strict gun control laws that made the Louisiana shooting possible, according to Erich Pratt of Gun Owners of America, who gives these three reasons:

Number one: The perpetrator chose to commit his crime in a gun free zone. The Grand Theater chain does NOT allow concealed firearms on its premises — even by lawfully permitted concealed carry holders, hindering law-abiding citizens from being able to defend themselves and others.

Number two: The shooter was already a prohibited purchaser because of mental health issues–yet that did not physically prevent him from acquiring firearms.

Number three: The gunman had been denied a concealed carry permit years ago–yet he still managed to illegally carry a gun.

Bottom line: Gun control failed to protect honest civilians in Lafayette, Louisiana.

Contrast the Louisiana theater shooting to one that occurred one year earlier.

On July 24, 2014, a nutcase walked into a Darby, Pennsylvania, hospital, intent on killing as many people as possible.

But the gunman hadn’t counted on the fact that his #1 intended target — his doctor — had defied the hospital’s “no guns allowed” policy and was carrying a gun of his own.

Dr. Lee Silverman is a lawful permit holder who regularly carries a handgun. Having come under fire, he crouched behind a desk and shot back, hitting the perpetrator three times in the mid-section.

Even though the bad guy was able to murder one person, authorities credited Dr. Silverman with halting a mass shooting in progress.

Guns in good people’s hands are saving lives. But the President’s approach — which denies guns to law-abiding citizens — prevents potential victims from bringing mass shootings to an abrupt end.

For more information on guns and gun rights, visit the web site of Gun Owners of America, the nation’s second largest gun organization, representing more than one million gun owners, at:

The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Equipping You With The Truth

VA Declaring Veterans And Social Security Recipients Incompetent, Taking Their Weapons

First, it was returning veterans who received letters from the Veterans’ Administration which stated that they were incompetent and no longer could legally own weapons.

The same plan is now in the works for recipients of Social Security, according to the Los Angeles Times. The veterans have been declared incompetent without any legal hearing, since the declaration has been made for any so-called “disabled” veteran, whether the disability is mental or physical as determined by Obama cronies.

Veterans receiving the letter are given 60 days to prove they are “competent” and able to handle their own affairs. This is a direct violation of the Due Process clause of the Constitution, since the burden of proof in such cases should be on the government. But this is the new ObamaNation.

Many of the veterans have neither been given hearings nor examined by a psychiatrist or psychologist.Then-Attorney General Eric Holder decided that anyone who works for the VA can declare veterans incompetent for any reason, including having their bills paid automatically out of their bank accounts. You heard that right: auto-payments. And veterans who question this ruling are being told that in order to have their Second Amendment right to own a firearm restored, they must sign a form that gives up all VA benefits! This is blackmail in an obvious form. To think this is the way Obama rewards our veterans for serving our country!

To date, the Veteran’s Administration, the FBI, the Department of Defense, the BATF, and the Department of Homeland Security have refused to turn over basic information that would document their actions. The government also seems to be violating medical privacy laws, since they are transferring information about veterans between agencies. Congress recently has begun investigating the issue. We can only hope they will find the courage to do the obvious and right thing: to protect our veterans’ rights to own and carry arms. No one questioned their competency to carry arms in war time when our country needed them; but now, instead of giving them a parade, the Obama administration has the unmitigated gall to pressure our veterans to give up their arms or give up their benefits!

Yet as bad as this is, the Obamanator now has plans to extend these draconian rules to Social Security recipients. In an effort to get around Congress’ refusal to enact legislation banning or restricting guns, Obama has begun to rewrite rules and definitions dealing with firearms. As reported by the Los Angeles Times, targeted Social Security beneficiaries undoubtedly would also include numerous people who may just have a bad memory or difficulty balancing a checkbook. There are over 4 million recipients who have their payments managed by “representative payees.”

And how does the Obama Administration justify such unconscionable attacks against our Veterans? Because of the possibility of returning veterans becoming radicalized by right-wing extremists so as to boost their “violent capabilities.” Obama hasn’t yet come up with a similar lame justification to deprive Social Security recipients of their Second Amendment rights, but you can guarantee he’s working on concocting something.

Please forward a link to this video to friends, relatives and your elected representatives to help get this message out in an effort to help our veterans who were there for us when we needed them. Let’s be there for them now.

For more information on how you can help and for a myriad of information on gun rights, visit the web page of Gun Owners of America at:

The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Equipping You With The Truth