Proof: Biased liberal media misleading you (intentionally?)

How many times have you heard, “Why would anyone need an AR-15 or a 30 round magazine to go hunting?”

In reality, you should have never heard this.  Every journalist and politician knows the Second Amendment is not a quick word about hunting in between nine other rights that limit and balance federal governmental power.  When politicians say this, and the liberal media fails to question it, they are intentionally manipulating you.  Often, pro-Second Amendment speakers are not even allowed to respond and explain that the Second Amendment is about human nature, man’s eternal greed for power, designed to stop tyranny, and necessary to the security of a “free” state.

How many times have you heard the media and politicians use phrase get guns “off the streets” when they want to pass laws that affect firearms safely stored in the homes of law-abiding citizens?

How many times have you heard “these weapons belong on the battlefield” – ignoring the fact that the purposes of the Second Amendment include protection from our own government’s military if ever under the control of a tyrant, and foreign invading militaries.

You failed to cover that the recent Oregon shooter was approached by a citizen with a gun, which may have stopped that shooting.

You have failed to cover the recent theater shooting in San Antonio that was stopped by an off-duty police woman with a firearm.

Since the shooting, news media has pointed to a poll purporting to show support for banning assault weapons, yet ignores that nobody can define what an assault weapon is.  Scary looking black rifles is what everyone imagines.  However, in reality, the vagueness is an attempt by some to ban all semi-automatic weapons, which are 90% of the guns in the country, while most others still do not even understand the difference between semi-automatic and automatic.

The same media uses terminology intended to confuse.  They want to ban “guns that can shoot many bullets very fast.”  Well, pretty much any gun can do that.  The media has avoided all analysis of how assault weapons bans address cosmetic features, how guns look, not how they function, because almost all guns function rather similarly, and almost all guns can shoot fast in the right hands.

The media has paraded people who say they are gun owners, and others who say they respect the Secon Amendment, while entirely avoiding discussion of the purpose of the Second Amendment, which is a logical key to all analysis of what is reasonable under the Second Amendment.  Such actions make it increasingly more difficult to accept that this is based on unintended ignorance.

You failed to cover the high rates of violent crime and “hot burglaries” in England.  Do not decide for us that being beaten and raped is better than shooting an attacker – let society decide.

You also failed to cover statistics that show that among countries, gun ownership and crime rates do not correlate.

You failed to cover that in the democratic movements in Iran, Libya, Syria, and Egypt, people were in the streets pleading for guns, so to not be helplessly slaughtered by their governments.

You failed to cover that Dianne Feinstein herself carried a gun, and most politicians pushing for gun control and most news studios have armed guards.

You failed to disclose your own experience or lack thereof with firearms.  Please get educated before pushing a viewpoint.

You failed to allow people who understand the Second Amendment to have a proper change to speak to your audience.

You use terms like “assault weapon” without analyzing why an inanimate object has a crime, assault, in its name.

You use terms like “gunman,” which suggests that any man with a gun is an active shooter.  This misleads to forgetting that millions of armed people walk the streets of this nation every day without incident, or even preventing crime.

Be an honest and good journalist, not one with an agenda, certainly not that comes from someone else’s borrowed viewpoint or direction.

Look at the crime in Chicago, D.C., and Mexico.   Do we really want our whole nation that way?

Look at the Holocaust, Bosnia, Rwanda, Sudan, and Syria.  Do we believe that history’s horrors will no longer repeat themselves, and that evil has been wiped from the hearts of men?

If we are wrong, America has 11,000 gun murders per year.  But if you are wrong, governments killed 250,000,000 of their own people this past century, and those who do not learn from history are condemned to repeat it.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Demand a plan and take action on gun violence

Demand a plan:

This article outlines a significant danger that loomes over our nation, and the people’s of the world, and addresses what can be done to prevent it.

Those who study history are well aware of World War I, and more recently, World War II, in which millions of people in Europe were conquered by Hitler, and send to gas chambers to be exterminated.

This type of dictatorship, genocide, and mass extermination of people by their own governments is potentially on the rise in the world, and a threat to each of us and our families.  Just in the past couple of decades, we have seen increasing numbers of such mass exterminations of innocent people by their own governments and dictators, including the Rwandan genocide, the Bosnian genocide, the genocide in Sudan, and the mass killing of people yearning for freedom in places like Libya, Syria, Iran, Egypt by their own governments and chosen leaders.

While the last century saw approximately 250 million people die from such horrors, much evidence suggests the 21st century will see even more such holocausts, genocides, and mass exterminations of innocent people.

We would love to think this cannot happen, but we watch it happen all over the world.  These events are the result of human nature.  Such horrors fill our past with the Armenian genocide, Mao’s genocide, Pol Pot’s genocide, and the genocide in Communist Russia, and as human nature does not change, these horrors also foreshadow our future.

Now, technology allows such dictators and tyrants to have even more control, by allowing despots to be able to monitor every coomunication made by citizens who communicate about freedom.  Computer databases will allow every piece of information about someone’s life to be collected and assembled for use by such tyrants.  All of this suggests the horrors to be encountered in this next century will be even greater than the last.

What can be done?

The solution is actually a 200-year old wisdom about human nature written about by founding fathers Thomas Jefferson, George Washington, John Adams, Alexander Hamilton, and Benjamin Franklin, among many others, who founded the once most free nation on earth.

What this wisdom understands is that power always and naturally corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.  It understands that we must not be misguided into letting our guard down when we experience relative periods of calm, because the ugly side of human nature is always looming.

This solution was also supported by John F. Kennedy and Mahatma Gandi, and not surprisingly opposed by mass murderes like Hitler and Stalin.

So what is this secret that must be spread to help the peoples of the world, in America and abroad, stop these future coming power grabs, holocausts, genocides, exterminations, dictatorships, and wars?

It is a brilliant idea of balancing government’s power with the peoples’, not just on paper with prmises that have always been broken by such genocidal governments in the past.  The idea is to balance real power, the only true power that exists with the majority of the people of the world who have good hearts.  If we balance the same power that has historically been the tool of these holocausts, genocides, exterminations, dictatorships when monopolized, and prevent that monopoly on use of force by spreading the power amongs entire populations, those who would abuse this power face a counter-force if they try.

Because dictators and tyrants would use guns to kill hundred of millions of men, women and children in this century, just as they have in the last century, I beg you, please, let us use this brillant wisdom to deter, and once started, stop such atrocities.  Please do not let history look back on us as being as powerless to prevent holocausts and genocides as the people of last century were. Help stop the next genocide by spreading this wisdom, by spreading the tools by which people can defend themselves against the armed killing squads that would come and take them to exterination camps.  Please let us use this wisdom to balance the power such killers have, millions of guns, by distributing this power among the population.  If this doesn’t sound ideal, the only other option would be to concentrate this power with the very governments that have historically always become corrupt.  This is necessary to the security of all the people of any state that is not tyrannical, but free.  The people must retain the tools to stop such horrors separate from governmental control of these tools.  Because governments become dictatorships in slow and clever steps, the right to possess such effective arms must not ever even be infringed.

Be very careful, because the evil leaders of the past did not get to their positions without being very clever, and deceptive.  They will wait until you are fat, and at peace, and try to convince you that you do not need arms anymore.  They will try to convince you that such weapons are for hunting.  They would convince you that a tyrant would be so well armed, that you should not even bother to try to defend your freedom.  They will slowly try and try again until they finaly reduce the weapons you can have, and then again, and again.  They will tell you you can have only ten bullets, and then seven, and then two, and then none.  They will exploit tragedies to try to get your focus away from the hundreds of millions who would die without this wisdom.  They will even use children.  Yes, men in history have killed tems of millions of people, and men in history past and future will also use children to get what thy want.  Also beware that many of the people helping them will be good-hearted people doing so unknowingly.  They will genuinely be misled into trying to save twenty so passionately, that they will not realize they are paving the way for the extermination of twenty million.

Most of those supporting this will genuinely believe it, and think they are acting for your safety, as they shift power to the government, and away from the people.  And one day, they will put you to the test.  They will ask you if are you willing to die and give up your freedom and your life to maintain this balance of power.  Not just whether you are willing to speak up for it, but whether you would really give your life and freedom for it.  What they are really saying is, just give us the power to exterminate you, and we promise we will not use it for any purpose other than to keep you safe.  When they tell you this – you are already dead anyway.  The only choice then is, do you die for your children, or with them.

Share this page, link to this page, repost this page.  Do it like you’ll be on line at a gas chamber one day, wondering if your kids are ahead of you or behind you.

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment

Why do we have the Second Amendment?

The Second Amendment is not a quick word about hunting in between nine other rights that limit government powers.  The Second Amendment is about human nature.  Power naturally corrupts, and to remedy that, instead of concentrating power with the few in government, it distributes power to all the people.  It is “necessary to the security of a ‘free’ state.”

The founders understood this about human nature, and knew that the only thing that balances one man’s greed for power, is another man’s need for power.

The  three branches of the federal government balance have a balance of power.  The legislative, executive, and judicial all have different strengths and weaknesses that keep the other from being too powerful.

The states and the federal government have a balance of power called federalism, as described in the 10th Amendment.  The federal government only has those limited powers enumerated to it, and all others are reserved to the states and the people via the 10th Amendment.

And, there is balance of power between the federal government, and the people, including via 2nd Amendment – where neither has a military advantage over the other.

As horrific as the occasional rare tragedy is, a well-armed society deters the holocausts, genocides and dictatorships in which millions die, that the rest of the world experiences every few decades, but America does not.  The Second Amendment is the reason.

I hope those with open minds will understand.  Taking away effective weapons, that the media calls “assault weapons” will fundamentally shift power away from the people, and to the federal government, permanently.  This is the American people’s last line of defense for democracy, our safety net, our only parachute in case of tyranny, and it makes one wonder why the government is after it.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

What is the purpose of the Second Amendment?

“The Second Amendment is a doomsday provision, one designed for those exceptionally rare circumstances where all other rights have failed — where the government refuses to stand for reelection and silences those who protest; where courts have lost the courage to oppose, or can find no one to enforce their decrees. However improbable these contingencies may seem today, facing them unprepared is a mistake a free people get to make only once.” — Chief Justice Alex Kozinski, US 9th Circuit Court, 2003

“Perhaps most importantly, the Second Amendment’s purposes strongly support the theory of an individual right to “keep and bear” arms. The Second Amendment serves at least the following two key purposes: (1) to protect against external threats of invasion; and (2) to guard against the internal threat that our republic could degenerate to tyranny. n7 The purpose of militia to oppose external threat and preserve the national security is apparent from the face of the Second Amendment. The purpose of militia to check potential tyranny of a national government is implicit and is documented by contemporaneous parallel provisions of state constitutions.”  Nordyke v. King, No. 99-17551, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, GOULD, Circuit Judge, Specially Concurring.

The_End_Result_Children

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

What is the logic of the gun control position?

Basically, the pro gun control position is:

It did not work in Chicago, or Detroit, or Washington D.C., or Mexico, …or the Holocaust, but let’s try it across the whole United States without even a good debate anyway.  Even if we cannot get rid of most guys, let’s just start with disarming the law-abiding citizens.  Let’s forget history, and the Constitution, let’s not even discuss its purpose, and let’s try to squeeze this through before people have a chance to really debate the issue.  Let’s look at these rare dramatic incidents that happen in gun-free zones, and let’s base our whole national policy based on 20 deaths, which occur in an average Chicago weekend, where gun control is already the strictest.  And, if after we ban assault weapons, someone shoots up a school with a handgun, let’s ban those also.  And after that, if someone goes on a knife stabbing spree in a school like they have had in China, let’s register and ban kitchen knives as well.  Forget the fact that the balance of power in the Constitution between the federal government and the people is about man’s eternal greed for power.  Forget the fact that the most evil of men, Hitler, started the Holocaust by banning Jews from owning guns, knives, or any “dangerous” objects with which they could defend themselves against government.  Forget that the U.S., with the Second Amendment, is the bastion of freedom that keeps saving the “disarmed” world from world wars, and genocides and dictatorships every few decades.  Let’s also forget that all of the most influential men of recent history, from Jefferson, Washington, to Adams, to Hamilton, to Franklin, and even people like Hitler, Mao, and Gandi agree that the way to stop dictatorship, guns should not be concentrated with government, but distributed amongst the people to balance government power.  Let’s forget the fact that all of our politicians are sworn to uphold the Constitution, including the Second Amendment, the purpose of which is this crystal clear to democracy, as necessary to the security of a “free” state.  Let’s also forget that the Constitution reads, “shall not be infringed”, and let’s pass laws that will weaken our nation’s ability to defend itself against crime, terrorism, dictatorship, and tyranny.  Let’s ignore the fact that some of our founding fathers may have considered it treason to upset the balance of power between the people and government.  Let’s also forget the fact that such laws will turn millions of law-abiding citizens into criminals, that many in the military are sworn to uphold the Constitution and will not enforce these laws, and that it may move this Country towards civil war to demand we move this free country in the direction of absolute government monopoly on effective force.  Let’s also forget that such laws will probably make crime worse.  Let’s forget that polls are being conducted by the same media that fails to cover shootings that are stopped by armed law-abiding citizens.

How do we get people to forget all this history, wisdom, and logic?  With emotion, and using that emotion before this debate can be heard, this wisdom can be understood, and these points can properly be looked at.

Good idea?

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

“gun control statistics” liberal media bias explained

Subject: How you are being mislead by media and politicians on gun control

Dear Democratic and Liberal friends,

I understand that the Newtown tragedy was horrific, and everyone feels compelled to try and stop this from happening again.

However, you must be alerted to when you are being manipulated by the news media and politicians.  You should at least hear the other side of the argument being kept hidden from you, so you can make an informed decision.

Here is what you’re hearing, and what you’re not hearing:

You may have noticed how there are numerous politicians and journalists, including many who claim to be gun owners, being interviewed at length about how nobody needs an assault weapon or a 30-round magazine for hunting.  Makes sense, right?

But rarely, if ever, will the media mention that the Second Amendment is not a quick word about hunting in between nine other rights that balance and limit governmental power.  Never will you hear that the Constitution balances power between the people and the government via the Second Amendment, just as the Constitution balances power between the thee branches of the federal government, and between the federal government and the states.  You will never hear that the founding fathers wrote the Second Amendment with an understanding of human nature, that greed will always exist in the hearts of men, and that the only way historically to control that is to balance it with another man’s need for power.  When the government regulates firearms, they shift this balance of power to themselves, and away from you.  It is you, your neighbor, your neighborhood, who will have relatively less power, while gang members, criminals, rapists, terrorists, mob, and government have more power.  You will never hear that in history, supporters of gun control include Hitler, Stalin, Lenin, Mao, and Kim Jong Ill.  Meanwhile, supporters of gun rights include George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Ben Franklin, John Adams, Alexander Hamilton, Martin Luther King Jr., Gandi, and the Dalai lama.  The media would never bring up these points so you could question which side of history you’re on.

The media avoids points that they cannot argue against.  When a rare point on this is heard, it is quickly dismissed, and the debate is stopped immediately.

Why are they trying to keep the historical perspective from you?

Because if you consider history, you will understand the horrors that governments have imposed on their own people, and you will realize that gun control always precedes these democides.

Why not ban large-capacity magazines?

Magazines are simples part of a gun.  They are only a metal box with a spring.  To think criminals would not be able to get access is absurd because they can easily be made in any garage.   So, every such dialogue must start from the understanding that the people who do wrong will not be affected by this.  Banning large capacity magazines will only put law-abiding citizens at the disadvantage of those the Second Amendment is designed to protect them against, including criminals, terrorists, drug dealers, gang members, and a tyrannical government or foreign invader.

The media avoids such logic and facts, but dramatizes these twenty children, parading their faces across the screen with sad music, interviewing parents, to make you emotional.  Only when you are emotional about these twenty lives, will you lose the logical perspective, that over two hundred million people were disarmed and killed by their own governments in the last century.

The media has covered this issue long enough to now be able to define what an “assault weapon” is.  Yet, they cannot.  Scary looking black rifles is what everyone imagines.  However, in reality, the vagueness is an attempt by some to ban all semi-automatic weapons, which are 90% of the guns in the country, while most others still do not even understand the difference between semi-automatic and automatic.

The same media uses terminology intended to confuse.  Piers Morgan wants to ban “guns that can shoot many bullets very fast.”  Well, pretty much any gun can do that.  The media has avoided all analysis of how assault weapons bans address cosmetic features, how guns look, not how they function, because almost all guns function rather similarly, and almost all guns can shoot fast in the right hands.

The media, and politicians, use phrases like getting firearms “off the streets” which misleads the public regarding weapons safely stored by law-abiding citizens.

Politicians say things like, “these weapons belong on the battlefield” – ignoring the fact that the purposes of the Second Amendment include protection from our own government’s military, and foreign invading militaries.

The media covered the Oregon mall shooting, but immediately stopped covering this when it was determined that a law-abiding citizen permit holder approached the shooter and took aim at him, which may have led to the shooter only shooting a couple of people before shooting himself.

The media failed to cover the recent theater shooting in San Antonio that was stopped by an off-duty police woman with a firearm.  Anderson Cooper covered it only days later after popular uproar.  He dismissed the story as not helping the pro-gun side because the shooter was stopped by an off-duty police officer, but never discussed how a properly or similarly trained citizen could have done the same thing.  Either way, should it have been over a week before the story was mentioned during daily discussion of gun control?

The media never mentions how people who support gun control would never put up a sign in front of their home that says “gun free zone.”

The media failed to cover statistics that show that among countries, gun ownership and crime rates do not correlate.

The media never covers the democratic movements in Iran, Libya, Syria, and Egypt, in the context of the Second Amendment, even though people were in the streets pleading for guns so to not be helplessly slaughtered by their governments.

The media  failed to cover that Dianne Feinstein herself carried a gun, and most politicians pushing for gun control and most news studios have armed guards.

The media failed to disclose your own experience or lack thereof with firearms.

The media uses terms like “assault weapon” without analyzing why an inanimate object has a crime, “assault”, in its name.

The media uses terms like “gunman,” which suggests that any man with a gun is an active shooter.  This misleads to forgetting that millions of armed people walk the streets of this nation every day without incident, or even preventing crime.

The media rarely mentions how the places with the strictest gun control, Chicago, D.C., Medico, have the highest crime rates.

The media fails to cover how, if after a proposed gun ban, if gun crime rates went up, how it would only support their argument for more gun laws.  The media failed to cover the high rates of violent crime and “hot burglaries” in England, or how their violent crime rate after banning guns is the highest in europe, much higher than the U.S., and now they are talking about banning knives because gangs of people are attacking people on the streets with knives and pipes, who are now defenseless.

The media failed to cover the high rates of violent crime and “hot burglaries” in England.

The mass Pro-Second Amendment rallies in 49 states were barely covered.

The President said 40% avoid a background check, but the media never questioned where he got that statistic.  That number was from over 20 years ago, and most of it is transfers between family members.

The media never covers that more than 40 states now are shall issue concealed carry permits, and with 8.5 million Americans with permits, crime in those states is no higher. Thus, there is no effect from carrying of concealed handguns.

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Gun-control advocates are misleading people about firearms and their agenda

President Obama said the following regarding the Aurora Colorado shooting:

“I also believe that a lot of gun owners would agree that AK-47s belong in the hands of soldiers, not in the hands of criminals — that they belong on the battlefield of war, not on the streets of our cities. I believe the majority of gun owners would agree that we should do everything possible to prevent criminals and fugitives from purchasing weapons; that we should check someone’s criminal record before they can check out a gun seller; that a mentally unbalanced individual should not be able to get his hands on a gun so easily. These steps shouldn’t be controversial. They should be common sense.” http://www.businessinsider.com/obama-guns-romney-assault-weapons-ban-aurora-shooting-2012-7

Let’s examine, point by point, his argument for new gun laws.

I also believe that a lot of gun owners would agree that AK-47s belong in the hands of soldiers, not in the hands of criminals [It is already the law that criminals cannot own guns, and misleading to use this as an argument for new laws that affect law-abiding citizens.]

— that they belong on the battlefield of war, not on the streets of our cities. [“On the streets of our cities” is a misleading phrase used to blur the line between guns in the secure possession of law-abiding citizens, and criminals’ possession of guns – which is already illegal.  “Ak-47s” is manipulative terminology used to scare people who are not knowledgeable about guns, because Ak-47s sound scary.

Since the purpose of the Second Amendment is to prevent tyranny, and balance governmental power by distributing arms throughout society instead of concentrating arms with government, it necessitates that capable and effective arms, not just hunting rifles, be in the hands of the people.  The Second Amendment is not a quick word about hunting in between nine other rights that limit government powers.  Thus, the only people who would agree are people who do not understand the purpose of the Second Amendment.  Thus, this is again misleading, and taking advantage of those who do not understand the purpose of the Second Amendment.  Obama, as a Constitutional law professor, should know this.]

I believe the majority of gun owners would agree that we should do everything possible to prevent criminals and fugitives from purchasing weapons; that we should check someone’s criminal record before they can check out a gun seller; that a mentally unbalanced individual should not be able to get his hands on a gun so easily. These steps shouldn’t be controversial. They should be common sense. [These steps are already the law.  Saying this to advocate for new laws further limiting the rights of sane, law-abiding citizens, and giving government the ability to heavily tax and confiscate firearms changes the Constitutional balance of power between the government and the people.  Claiming to want one thing and seeking something else is intentionally misleading]

So the question is, why are misleading arguments being made, and why isn’t the media being as critical as this blog?

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment