Category Archives: despotism

Not a dimes woth of difference

Posted on by

It has long been said that when it comes to republicans and democrats at the national level there is not a dimes worth of difference between the two. It would appear now that that is also true at the State level.

While all eyes were on Virginia some things have been happening here in Florida. In Virginia the democrats have control of the Legislative and Executive branches of government, and one would kind of expect that they would pursue an anti-gun, anti-liberty and anti-freedom agenda. Here in Florida the republicans have control of the Legislative and Executive branches of government and one would kind of expect them not to pursue an anti-gun, anti-liberty and anti-freedom agenda, but they have.

Our republican controlled State Senate is reportedly working on a series of gun control bills. It was also reported that there was a rather sizeable political contribution from a gun control group. Which brings me to wonder which a politician will respond to, a letter or phone call from a constituent or a sizeable contribution? I think the sizeable political contribution will win every time. Do you really think that you have the politicians ear?

Looks like Virginia has a problem with democrats and their gun control agenda, and Florida has a problem with republicans and their gun control agenda.

By the way, the last round of gun control legislation passed after the mass murder in Parkland here in Florida was with a republican Legislature and a republican Governor. And let us not forget, before all this impeachment nonsense kicked off the President said something about having an “appetite” for some gun control measures. Also some republicans had sided with democrats on gun control measures, and some republican Senators had “instantly” put together national “red flag” proposals with incentives for states that would enact their own red flag laws.

It would seem that the two parties are heading in the same direction when it come to the Second Amendment. The only difference between the two is the speed at which they move.

Living in interesting times

Posted on by

No surprise the democrats voted to impeach the President. Now on to the Senate, provided the Speaker sends the Articles of Impeachment forward.

This post is about another matter, Second Amendment sanctuaries. At last check 85 Counties, 10 Cities and 16 Towns in the Commonwealth of Virginia have declared themselves Second Amendment sanctuaries. This is being done as some democrats in the soon to be democrat controlled government in Virginia have pre-filed some onerous gun control legislation that will come up for a vote once the democrats take control in January 2020. The democrats in Richmond have pretty much painted themselves into a corner with this gun control journey, much the same as the democrats in the US House did with impeachment, they once started could not turn back. Not to mention that a lot of money poured into Virginia from the gun control groups to help elect the democrats. These gun control groups fully expect a return on their expenditures. And just for the record, I do know that the pro-gun groups do the same things. There is a big difference between the two. The anti-gun groups are demanding that the right to keep and bear arms should be severely limited or outright eliminated while the pro-gun groups simply want the right to keep and bear arms left alone. There is another difference the anti-gun groups are more than willing to have the government use force to accomplish their agenda, the pro-gun groups are not demanding the government use force to maintain the right to keep and bear arms.

It would appear that many in Virginia are fed up and these brave citizens are pretty much telling the government in Virginia to “stick it”. The legal and lawful gun owners are sick and tired of being the “whipping boy”, being blamed for the actions of a minute few that do not and will not obey the laws already on the books.

What is the government and indeed the Governor of Virginia going to do? No matter what is done, America will be watching.

They could abandon this course they are planning to embark on. No, they will not do that, no turning back now. They feel as though they were elected on a gun control agenda and as much they believe the must follow through.

They could pass the legislation and sign it into law while knowing full well that that law would not be enforced in the vast majority of the Commonwealth. No they can not do that either. If a law is to be simply ignored and not enforced what good would it be to have laws?

Side road. The latest mantra of the democrats is, “No one is above the law”. How many times have we heard that one used against the President during the impeachment process. They also like to say, “We are a nation of laws” and “The rule of law”. They say this while allowing the recreational use of marijuana is lawful in some leftist sates while their is a federal prohibition against the possession and use of marijuana. Some jurisdictions even profit from the use and sale of marijuana by taxation. Imagine that, profiting and taxing an illegal activity. The left also offers sanctuary in some states and cities for persons in this country illegally. Some allow them to get a drivers license, allow them to vote in local elections, provide welfare and so on. Being in this country without authorization is against federal law, yet they defy federal law and shelter criminals. So much for being a nation of laws and the rule of law. You get no “moral high ground” in this case, even if there were any available which there ain’t.
Just to note, the Federal Government has not “fallen” on the States allowing the use of recreational marijuana and harboring illegal aliens using governmental force to bring them into compliance.

Back to the post. They could pass the legislation, sign it into law and fire(remove from office)any local government official who refused to comply with and enforce the law. Firing a government employee is one thing(though they would be forced to deal with the government employee unions), removing a duly and constitutionally elected government official is quite another. The residents of the counties, cities and towns effected might just get pissed off. Who would be installed in those vacant offices? Seems to me the criminals would be the biggest supporters of this move and benefit the most. I have heard of legislation coming that says refusal to enforce the gun control legislation would be effectively self-terminating from the office which they hold, quitting. They could withhold funds from the locales that refuse to comply. This move would bring about a whole series of calamities.

They could use the Virginia National Guard, as one suggested, to force compliance. How can they be sure that the men and women in the Guard would descend on their fellow Virginians? Are there enough Guardsmen to cover such a large area?

Are they actually contemplating using force, government force, to disarm the citizens of Virginia? Will Lexington and Concord be repeated?

January is closing in.

The Second Amendment sanctuary idea is catching on, perhaps it will spread across the land.

We are living in interesting times.

By choice or force?

Posted on by

The leftists are going all out with their plan to disarm the peaceful law-abiding citizens of this Republic. Quite sure by now everyone, not living under a rock, has seen the clip of the 2020 presidential hopeful saying “Hell yes, we are going to take your AR-15, your AK-47”. Some in his political party have tried to distance themselves from his statement. I do have to wonder if it is the message they are against or the delivery. Did he say openly what most leftists talk/dream about privately? They might not be able to get the toothpaste back in the tube.

When he used the word “We” he meant the government. So what he actually said was, “Hell yes, the government is going to take your AR-15, your AK-47.

The following comes from the Patrick Henry speech “Give Me Liberty or Give Me Death” 23March1775.
I have but one lamp by which my feet are guided; and that is the lamp of experience. I know of no way of judging of the future but by the past.

The following excerpt comes from The Declaration of Arms also known as the Declaration of the Causes and Necessity of Taking Up Arms, 06July1775
The inhabitants of Boston being confined within that town by the General, their Governor, and having, in order to procure their dismission, entered into a treaty with him, it was stipulated that the said inhabitants, having deposited their arms with their own magistrates, should have liberty to depart, taking with them their other effects. They accordingly delivered up their arms, but in open violation of honor, in defiance of the obligation of treaties, which even savage nations esteemed sacred, the Governor ordered the arms deposited as aforesaid, that they might be preserved for their owners, to be seized by a body of soldiers; detained the greatest part of the inhabitants in the town, and compelled the few who were permitted to retire to leave their most valuable effects behind.

There is something to note from the excerpt above The word arms is used twice, the word muskets is nowhere to be found.

The citizens of Boston trusted that the General, their Governor, would honor his word(treaty). They were sadly mistaken. Once disarmed they had no means to resist what was coming.

They could have, I suppose, asked or even begged for the return of their arms so they could defend themselves or at least force the General, their Governor, to honor his word. Do you think that a population that had been disarmed would be rearmed?

What happened in Boston that day in April 1775 was perhaps the first recorded example of a voluntary buy-back scheme. The price the government would pay for the voluntary surrender of arms by the citizens was the freedom to depart Boston and with them take the remainder of their possessions.

They traded one thing to gain another and wound up with neither and nothing. Seems like Benjamin Franklin had a quote on that matter. He had another, “Make yourselves sheep and the wolves will eat you”.

There was a quote attributed to Edmond Burke, “Those who don’t know history are destined to repeat it”(the word doomed is sometimes used in place of destined). There is another old adage that fits, “History is a guide post not a hitching post”. History is chock full of examples of what has happened in countries where and when the population, the peaceful law-abiding population, is disarmed. Roundups and exterminations.

It was once said that one man with a gun can control one hundred without guns. If that is true then you just have to do simple math to figure out where this leads, if one can control one hundred, than ten can control a thousand, one hundred can control ten thousand and so on.

The gun control debate is just a part of the overall control issue. Gun control is not about the elimination of arms, it is about controlling who is armed.

Some in government and some wanting to be in government are more than willing to use the force of government to disarm the peaceful law-abiding citizens. Some politicians, the various gun control groups and their allies in the media tell us how much safer we will be if we disarm.

There are only two ways that an armed civilian population can be disarmed.
Choice.
Force.

Can peaceful law-abiding citizens(civilians)trust the government if only the government is armed.

History says no.

A possible solution

Posted on by

There is some common ground on mass shootings, both sides want them to end. Unfortunately that is all the two sides have in common.

I have a possible solution, but it is going to take cooperation, a lot of cooperation, from both sides of the gun issue, and indeed their allies. Both sides will actually have to sit down and have a civil debate. I know this is asking a lot.

First, a little background on how I came up with this. As I was looking through my news feed I came across something that was a very bad idea, but it did open some interesting ideas for a solution. Actually solutions for many things.

I will sum up the article, you can find it on your own and read the whole thing.

The leader of a large labor union is threatening to boycott the largest retailer in the country, the boycott centers around two demands.
1. Stop selling guns.
2. Stop making political contributions to politicians who oppose gun control.
The union leader claims to have 1.7 million members. The “leader” also has a few other suggestions for the retailer in a letter written to the CEO, in this letter the “leader” calls on the company to do its part to help build a future with fewer guns and safer communities and also urges the retailer to fund buyback programs and for the CEO to create a summit with other CEOs to discuss ways corporate America can address rising gun violence.

My first thought as I was reading this article was here is yet another leftist threating to boycott a retailer because of what they sell, they sell guns and ammunition and just about everything a person could use or want. Worse using her position as the leader of a large labor union to do it, a loss or potential loss of 1.7 million customers could be catastrophic. But would the loss of 1.7 million out of perhaps 100 million be all that much of a loss? The retailer would just adjust for the loss of revenue by reducing the workforce. Then I reread the article and thought wait a minute this lady might be onto something and came up with many solutions for many problems.

Campaign contributions. The meat and potatoes of politicians, but a lot of that money is wasted as only one is going to win election or reelection. That means that the money given to and then used by the loser just goes up in smoke. The money left over(not spent/wasted)win or lose goes into their “war chest”. On a side note I watched all four of the democrat debates and many of them said that they needed to get the “dark” money out of politics. Here is a sure way that none of that money is wasted and has the side benefit of proving that you believe in your position.

For the gun control groups rather than wasting that money on politicians take that money and partner with law-enforcement and institute a voluntary buyback program. Actually buyback is impossible since they never bought it from you to begin with, it would be a turn in program, a turn in for cash. People could turn in(sell)magazines, parts, accessories and even complete firearms of their own free will. Do make sure that the people in your group can pass a background check before they take constructive possession of the firearms being turned in for cash, would not want any one to break the law. And please, please take a safety course for your safety and the safety of others.

For the pro gun groups do not waste that money on politicians(and possibly end up being disappointed)instead set up firearms safety courses, hunters safety courses, weapons training, open ranges and encourage shooting sports. Your services would be needed as the ones operating the turn in sites would need training and a safety class or two.

A little bonus in this section. For the labor unions that have taken a stance one way or the other on the issue of guns, stop wasting your money on politicians. Chip in with your dollars and support one of the above listed causes. Take away those labor union donations and you will see how much the politicians really care about you or your union. For the Hollywood types that have made millions on shoot’em up movies but are in the gun control camp, take the money you have made on those movies and put it, all of it, in the turn in pile. Stop being a hypocrite. For the politicians that support the buyback scheme put some of your fortune in that pile as well. I could go on with this but I reckon you get the picture.

If a politician wants to seek higher office he/she should pay their own way.

If you take away the donations to campaigns from the gun control and gun rights groups you would then find out the true position of your particular politician or political party when it comes to guns or any other issue. Some of you might be quite surprised.

You see this one act can bring about positive results.
First it will get all of the “dark” money out of politics. This may bring about other positives as well. If the politicians no longer receive special interest money they will have no need to subsidize those special interests. The lobbyists would leave town.
Second a “buyback” program that is not tax-payer funded.

Keeping firearms out of the wrong hands. By using the term “the wrong hands” I suppose they mean the criminal element. Again a simple solution. Congress could pass a law and send it to the president to sign. The law should simply say: Effective this very second, all gang leaders and members, drug dealers and convicted felons will surrender all fire arms to law-enforcement without compensation. Failure to comply with this law will result in legal penalty(prison and/or fine).

You can here them now, running to surrender their firearms.

Came across another article where a mental health professional of some importance in that article he noted “there is little correlation between mental illness and violent killings”. Study after study shows that this is not the case. More often the reverse is true, they are victims not perpetrators.

Also in the article is this; Racism, Hate and White Supremacy are not diagnosable mental illnesses.

Find the full article, read it.

Wait, Hold the phone, the latest reports are that the republicans are coming to the table to talk, talk gun control. Looks like there is an “appetite” for some of your schemes and demands but you will have to wait until September to find out how much appetite they have. You might even hook them like a hungry catfish.

The American tragedy

Posted on by

“As nations can not be rewarded or punished in the next world they must be in this. By an inevitable chain of causes and effects providence punishes national sins, by national calamities”. Colonel Mason.

The murder of the unborn, abortion(legalized murder). Day by day the leftist governors, law makers and indeed leftist states are trying to out do the other when it comes to the murder of the unborn. Some states are now at the point of sanctioning abortion up to and including the delivery date, some are even okay with this murder to the point of dilation. At what point will the leftists be okay with this continuing spree of murder including the point where the child was born alive and then murdered?

I might point out that those cheering on this murder spree were actually born. Absolute hypocrisy, but that is one thing the left is good at. Another thing they are good at is choosing the language of the argument.

They call it abortion, so we call it abortion. No it is murder, premeditated with malice in the heart. They divide the pregnancy into trimesters, we dutifully use their language in the argument. Their language does no more than to dehumanize a human being. And just why do we buy into words like viability when it comes to a child, already born or not. We need to change our language.

I have yet to ask and expectant mother how far along she is and have her to answer which trimester she is in, she will instead answer with how many weeks or months along she is. The same when I ask an expectant mother when her due date is she will answer in how many days, weeks or months, never have I had an expectant mother to answer when the third trimester is over.

They call it pro-choice, a woman’s right to choose. They say that a woman should have control over her reproductive organs. It has nothing to do with choice or control of reproductive organs it instead has everything to do with legalized murder. Murder sanctioned and allowed by government, performed by supposed health care professionals and in some cases sadly supported by the church(small c)

We need to call it what it is, it is pro-murder. If one does want to get pregnant then she should not engage in activities where she is likely to get pregnant. There is more than just the woman’s choice to consider, there is also the child’s choice, but the child is never asked or consulted in the matter.

The left is about providing safe spaces, where one can feel safe. The Good Lord provided the safest place possible, the mother’s womb. Yet it is in the womb where a child faces the greatest danger. Some have estimated that upwards of 60,000,000 children in America alone have been murdered in the womb. Do you realize that number is 6 times the number of murders the Third Reich reportedly committed?

It is this very same crowd that comes out with their gun control rhetoric when ever there is a mass shooting(murder), especially when it is a school shooting. What language do they use? They say these measures must be undertaken to protect the most vulnerable in our society. It appears to me that the most vulnerable in our society is the unborn. They have no place where they can hide, no closet to hide in, no door to get behind and lock. The unborn has nowhere to run to avoid the forceps coming to crush the life out of them, or what ever implement the murderer, abortion provider they call them, chooses to use in the murder. Does the mother or the murderer hear the child scream as the murder is taking place? Can the mother feel the child as he or she struggles to stay alive? Can the mother feel the life leaving her still unborn child? Can the women in the waiting rooms at the murder mills hear the screams of the children being murdered in the womb while they await their turn to go in and have their child murdered? Would a child in the womb, if he or she had the means, fight off the attack or the attacker? The current thinking lists the following actions when attacked, Run, Hide, Fight, the child in the womb can do none of these. You see the child in the womb really is the most vulnerable, they count on the mother to protect them. Little does the child know that the mother is part of a conspiracy to murder.

It is this very same crowd that seeks to eliminate the death penalty. I guess it is, in their minds, being too much of a hypocrite to take the life of one who did the same thing as they do. They are unwilling to carry out the sentence, death sentence, of one found guilty of a crime, a capital crime mind you. At the same time they invoke and carry out the death penalty on one which has committed no crime, capital or otherwise. Has being conceived now become a crime, a capital crime? They call the death penalty inhumane while at the same time consider abortion(murder)humane treatment of a child. They worry themselves that a criminal condemned to death may experience some pain or discomfort as the sentence is carried out, They do not consider the pain or discomfort the victim may have experienced. Nor do they consider the pain or discomfort of a child experiences while being murdered in the womb.

Now we have a democrat congressman claiming that the right to be safe trumps the right to bear arms. He claims that the new congress is putting the right to be safe over any other rights possessed by Americans. https://thedaleygator.com/2019/02/02/rep-eric-swalwell-d-marxifornia-your-marxist-moron-of-the-day/

I see no democrat proposing legislation guaranteeing the safety of a child still in womb, they instead focus on depriving citizens of their rights.

I do have to wonder which will be the first state to release those convicted of murder under the premise that they were only late-term abortion providers. The left trying to out left the left.

God help us.

DEO VINDICE

It would appear…..

Posted on by

It would appear that the social media outlets, the tech giants and the mainstream media have appointed themselves the ministry of truth.
They alone get to decide what is truth at least for today. They alone get to decide who or what gets heard. They are for free speech as long as it fits in with their agenda, depending on what their agenda is for today. That which or who they feel goes against what they call the truth gets thrown down the memory hole.

It would appear that the deep state, including the politicians and their political party, has appointed itself the ministry of love.
What they do to or for us, depending entirely on your perspective, they do out of love.

Despots and tyrants.

Welcome to 1984 everybody.

The race is on.

DEO VINDICE

History shows what happens

Posted on by

The greatest teacher of all is history, full of examples of what is successful(what works)and what is a failure(does not work). Several old sayings, quotes and writings from the past illustrate the importance of history.

I have but one lamp by which my feet are guided, and that is the lamp of experience. I know of no way of judging of the future but by the past. Patrick Henry.
Those who forget history are condemned to repeat it. George Santayana.
Wise men learn from their mistakes, the wisest of men learn from the mistakes of others. Unknown

There are countless historical documents and books but the greatest historical book in existence is the Holy Bible. The Holy bible tells of the past and the future.

They bring the judgement of Heaven on a Country. As nations can not be rewarded or punished in the next world they must be in this. By an inevitable chain of causes and effects Providence punishes national sins, by national calamities. Colonel Mason.

The left and some on the right see the election of President Trump as a national calamity, if that be true they need to figure out what “national sin” brought about that “calamity”. They have blamed everything and everybody but themselves. Scare tactics were even thrown out. They claimed he would destroy the economy, yet the economy is doing well, very well. Unemployment is at or near to record lows. They claimed that he would get us into unending and unwinnable wars, yet the opposite is true. Their forecast of doom and gloom was just an attempt to play on the emotions of the electorate, the emotion of fear. They still to this day and will continue playing on emotions.

Had the establishment, swamp, deep sate or whatever the latest term is had not mucked up everything so badly President Trump would not have ever felt the need to enter the political arena. I believe his answer to a question was, Only if things got so bad he had to. Obviously things got just that bad.

Many see the election of President Trump as a chance to save this Republic, I am of that view.

Now we have the “social media” giants deciding what information is available to the people. So-called “conspiracy theory” sites and individuals are being banned from social media outlets. Terms like “hate speech” are being bandied about. Some so-called conservatives are asking why any conservative would stand up and speak out for Alex Jones and InfoWars. The answer is simple. When they came for me there was no one left to speak out. How long will it be before any opposing view is stifled? History shows what happens when only one view is the acceptable view. History shows what happens when those who propose differing views or theories become enemies of the state. It seems that hate speech and fake news are exclusive and the need of censorship is also exclusive to the right. The left obviously does not have any hate speech or fake news problems, nothing but love and truth abounding within their ranks.

We should be looking at what gave rise to the so-called “conspiracy theory” sites. Could it be the secrecy that shrouds our government? Could it be all of the closed-door hearings? Could it be the cover-ups? Could it be the never-ending leaks? Could it be the abuses of power? The lack of transparency and accountability? Why is it that our government feel the need to conduct business in private? They hide themselves, in darkness, from us the people but there is One they can never hide from. Do they fear the light? There is an interesting story from the Holy Bible about trying to hide ones sins in darkness and secrecy. You will find that in the Book of Joshua, having to do with a sin bringing about a national calamity.

The race is on.

DEO VINDICE

This is going to get ugly

Posted on by

The left is unhinged and is rapidly becoming totally unhinged. Where has the civility gone? The left has no idea of how to conduct themselves in a civilized manner. Many thought they were just “blowing off steam” after Donald J. Trump was elected President, and they would finally just accept that fact and move on. They are never going to accept that fact and they get can not get past the fact that HRC is not president. It is already ugly and is only going to get uglier.

A so-called comedienne who referred to the daughter of the president as a “feckless cunt”, many thought that funny. A washed-up actor referred to a female cabinet member as a “gash”, and again many thought that funny. In years past the democrats were claiming that the republicans were waging a “war against/on women”. I guess now we know who has the least amount of respect for women.

The President’s Press Secretary was denied service and asked to leave because the owner of the restaurant has differing political views. So now are we expected to believe it has become appropriate to deny service based on political views? The Secretary of DHS was forced to leave a restaurant because of protesters. Has it now become appropriate to protest a person trying to have a quite dinner with their family?

I might point out that both the Press Secretary and the Secretary of DHS are both women and it was the left that showed once again they can not be civil. Again tell me just who is against women.

One of the protesters at the eatery chosen by the Secretary of DHS was identified as a current employee of the DOJ. Are there no standards of conduct for government employees?

The antifascist left made their way to the scene after the election of President Trump, claiming the president to be a fascist. They set about rioting in the streets, destroying property and creating all sorts of mayhem. They claim to be antifascist yet they act in the most fascist manner. They have attacked both verbally and physically those who have a different political view. They have shut down many free speech events because of a differing view.

A political has-been(political hack)from a previous administration has come right and said that the Cabinet should turn against the President. He may as well have called for a mutiny against the President.

A leftist talking head(political hack)has come out and said that if the voters support President Trump, they are the problem, not Trump but his supporters. He as much as said that the ones who support and vote for President Trump are Nazis.

Yet another political has-been(political hack)from a previous administration came out with a tweet showing a picture of the entrance to a Nazi concentration camp. Saying something to the effect, there was another country that had separated children from their mothers. Again a comparison to Nazis.

A sitting member of Congress from the House of Representatives has come out in support of the events at the eateries above and says more like those need to be happening. From my interpretation of what she was saying she was actually encouraging these acts, even saying more like them should happen. Saying as much as when ever a member of the Trump administration is encountered they should be heckled and driven away from eateries, gas stations and where ever they are encountered. Some, if not most, on the left are going to see this as their “call to action”, their license if you will.

This will at some point get out of control.

We need not be wasting our time with challenges as to what would have happen if the right had acted like this towards the previous administration. We on the right manage to conduct ourselves in a civil manner, something they are incapable of doing. We do need to come to the realization that the left operates on hatred. They hate President Trump and will transfer that hatred to his supporters.

DEO VINDICE

Just too far apart

Posted on by

Liberals and Conservatives can work things out through compromise(negotiation), truth is they have much in common. Their differences are not all that far apart. They just have to hammer out the finer details. The same is not true of the Left and the Right, they have nothing in common. There are no finer details to hammer out. When it comes to compromise(give and take)with the left they are willing to give nothing and are only interested in how much the right is willing to give them. That is their idea of give and take, taking anything the right is willing to give. The Right and the Left have nothing in common on any issue.

As stated above the Right and Left have nothing in common, no common ground. They, the Left, cant be negotiated with, they seek no compromise. Yet many on the right believe, and wrongly so, that they can work out the differences between the Right and the Left. Here is how the Left negotiates with the Right. We(the Left)are going to cut off one of your arms. Here is what the right does. They present the left or right arm to be cut off and then claim that at least they(the Right)saved the other arm, or say at least we(the Right)did not lose both arms. You simply cant negotiate like that, the correct response would have been “No you(the Left)are not, You(the Left)will cut neither arm off”. No negotiation. No compromise.

Look at what happened in Broward County as a direct result of the PROMISE program. Criminal behavior and acivity were decriminalized because of a supposed school to prison pipeline. There is no direct path from school to prison. To get to prison one must be convicted of a crime serious enough to be sent to prison, that means that law-enforcement was involved. Crimes were overlooked and as such there was no punishment for criminal acts or behavior, no law-enforcement involvement. It seems that too many school children were having run-ins with law-enforcement in Broward County, making the school district look bad. In other words some if not many students were not conducting themselves in a legal and lawful manner so the school district intervened. Because laws were not being enforced one POS was able to legally acquire a firearm, one which he would later use to do exactly what he threatened to do. So in this instance it was the Left that had a program that decriminalized criminal activities and then demanded that non-criminal activities be criminalized. Lost yet? Had the laws already in place been enforced the shooter would have in most likelihood been denied the purchase of a firearm. But sadly we will never know for sure. What we do know for sure is that each and every 18, 19 and 20 year-old(unless in the military or law-enforcement)in the State of Florida is being penalized for the actions of one, just one, 19 year-old. The Left demanded more gun control and the Right offered up the less that 21 year-olds, they can no longer purchase long guns without meeting certain criteria. In fact all Floridians were offered up, as now there is a waiting period to purchase long-guns(unless the customer holds a CCW license). The laws on the books were not being enforced and yet more laws were demanded and enacted. Great, just great.

How are these laws going to effect the elections here in Florida? The gun control legislation in Florida was enacted with the support of the republicans, here the republicans control both Houses and the Governors office. The republicans running for re-election are going to have some explaining to do. They were elected to serve the State, not to vote away the rights of its citizens. States that have enacted onerous gun control laws that are firmly in the hands of the leftist democrats have little to worry about. But Florida? Nationally?

One thing that happened as a direct result of the shooting at MSD in Parkland was that the gun control cult has finally been unmasked, and they did it themselves(though most of us have long suspected). They have come right out and said it is time for the Second Amendment to be repealed. So all of their talk about “common sense reforms” when it come to firearms in the hands of normal citizens was and is just that, talk. They do not seek anything less than total disarmament of the general population. The Left wants the population disarmed, the Right wants to keep and bear arms. There is no middle ground here, but again the Right believes they can negotiate and compromise.

One thing the Left always screams for a more background checks. We already submit to background checks to purchase a firearm from a licensed firearms dealer. They claim it is to keep guns out of the hands of criminals. But how good is a background check if the information is missing or inaccurate? If the young chap in Parkland had been arrested for his many episodes would he have been able to pass a background check? Would his butt have been sitting in jail or prison instead of taking those innocent lives?

So let us stick with background checks for just a moment. As far as legal immigration is concerned a person legally entering this country must pass a background check including a health screening and submit to several interviews. The same cant be said of illegals entering this country, there is no background check, no interview, no health screening, no nothing. When anybody and everybody is let in you have no idea who or what is among us. So the left does not really give a tinker’s damn about background checks.

The Left likes to promote and throw their idea of gun control(gun confiscation)in the country’s collective face, using the UK and Australia as an example.. The UK has some pretty restrictive gun laws. I am sure that by now most everyone has seen the video of the man with a knife keeping a large body of law-enforcement at bay. Even chasing them, first one then another. It looked a bit like an old Keystone Cops episode. Thing is the Keystone Cops were meant to be funny, you know poking fun. I was actually embarrassed for the UK police force, humiliating video. But even with the strict gun laws in the UK there are still reports of people getting shot. But in addition to people still getting shot they now have new threats, knives and acid. People being stabbed and most often being killed and acid attacks leaving the victims horribly disfigured. Not to mention the occasional motor vehicle being used as weapon. The city of London surpassed New York City in murders for two straight months. What is the Mayor of London concerned about? Fat food ads. Seems like not all that long ago NY city had a Mayor with similar concerns. Recently Australia, also having restrictive gun laws, suffered the first mass shooting in over two decades. Clever wording the report said first mass shooting not first shooting.

Back to America and the Leftist enclaves. If your so-called gun control laws worked the cities and states with the strictest gun laws would be the safest. The opposite is true, the cities with the strictest gun laws are the most violent and dangerous cities in this land. They are also the most crime infested. It is the law-abiding citizens who are the losers, while the criminal element enjoys the upper hand. Law-enforcement just cant keep up. I could not imagine being afraid to sit on my front porch at night because I might become the victim of a drive-by shooting. Nor could I imagine sitting in my house behind locked doors out of fear even in broad daylight. Criminals do tend to operate most effectively in areas where they will face the least resistance. The opposite is true, they tend to avoid areas where they don’t have the upper hand, facing resistance and possibly(most likely)armed resistance at that.

The Right can no longer foolishly believe that the Left can be reasoned with, negotiated with or compromised with. The time has come to say “No more”. Perhaps it is time to tell them to go piss up a rope. The left has renounced reason.

DEO VINDICE

The liberals in a nut shell

Posted on by

They are for the death penalty as long as the condemned is still in the womb. Other wise they are totally against putting a person to death. Kind of seems backwards to me, willing to condemn the innocent but protecting the life of the guilty.

They fight tooth and nail against voter ID laws, claiming it imposes undue hardships on the poor. I guess that the poor can not afford a picture ID. Yet they have never proposed legislation that would provide a photo ID at taxpayer expense for the poorest. I can not understand why they never propose such legislation especially when they believe that government is always the solution. I also wonder why the republicans never propose this.

They are for religious expression as long as Christianity is not the religion being expressed. They are for free speech as long as everyone is saying what they are saying or what they want to hear. If it goes against what they say, think or believe then they call it hate speech. They demand to be heard while demanding others be silent. They don’t really have to worry about the press, the press is in their corner. They would rather have the First Amendment repealed than have to contend with differing view points.

They support the Second Amendment as it pertains to hunting, except for those that have come right and said the Second Amendment should be repealed. Problem with that cupcake is that the Second Amendment was not written to allow hunting. You can read the Second Amendment forwards, backwards and even upside down and you will not find the words hunting, target practice or sports shooting. The Second Amendment was written for a specific purpose and reason.

They only want to ban scary looking rifles and high-capacity magazines. They even come up with new words, their new one is military grade. The old one was assault weapon. They say no one should be allowed to have military grade weapons but the military and law-enforcement. I believe the correct term would be Mil-Spec(Military Specification). But you could not call the AR-15 a Mil-Spec weapon could you? The AR-15 is not made to Military Specifications, it is a modern sporting rifle made for civilian use.

But then that is what you do you use words, more accurately use a play on words. You cant really come out and say you are pro-abortion, can you? That would equate to being pro-death. So you use the phrase pro-choice, by using the word choice it gives the impression that what happens was the choice of all. The truth of the matter is that the one directly effected by the “choice” had no “choice” in the matter. So lets look at some of your other plays on words.

When it comes to gun-control you use phrases like;
End gun-violence. Why do you never speak of ending violence? The U.K. banned guns and that did not end or stop crimes committed with a firearm, they still happen. They may have lees crimes committed with a firearm than here in the U.S., but for two straight months this year(Feb and Mar)the murder rate in London surpassed the murder rate in N.Y. City. The residents of London now have to contend with knife-crimes and acid-crimes(violent acts committed with a knife or acid). So the U.K. stopped the mass shootings, sort of, and now they face the possibility of mass stabbings and acid attacks. Now London lawmakers are having to come up with laws to control knives and acid. They now have to end knife-violence and acid-violence. Our northern neighbors had an act of violence that involved a man driving a van on a sidewalk and mowing down pedestrians, 10 dead and 15 injured. He used neither a gun, knife or acid his weapon of choice was a motor vehicle. A person intent on killing or maiming will use whatever tool is available. Neither the gun, the knife, the acid nor the motor vehicle is violent on its own in each case it takes a human to use those items in a violent manner. For you it is not about ending violence, it is about ending guns in the hands of the citizens(law-abiding citizens). If your gun-control measures worked the most violent cities in this land would be the safest, but it is the exact opposite.

We have to do it for the children. You really expect me to believe that you care about children when far more are murdered by abortion. Enough said on this one.

If it saves just one life it is worth it. My question is worth what? You and I both know that there is no way to prove that even one life was saved. This simply can not be measured. Besides some in your camp(cult)have come out and said that no legislation could have prevented______(fill in the blank).

And then there is everyone’s favorite. We just did not go far enough.

Now that the gun-control cult has been outed, your far enough in that matter is the repeal of the Second Amendment and banning all firearms from the public. You are okay with the military and law-enforcement having all of the guns, well all of them but what the criminals have. The criminals will still have guns. Maybe you should look back in history, not that far back either, and see what happens to the civilian population when they are deprived of the tools to defend themselves. There was a reason that the Founders and Framers included a Bill of Rights, in particular the right of the people to keep and bear arms. Read about Boston, Lexington Green and Concord. Read the Declaration of Independence. Read the Constitution, there was a reason the Founders and Framers did not want a full-time standing army, if they did not want a full-time army they certainly had no intention of giving them all of the guns. Since law-enforcement is part of the government local, state and federal they certainly never meant for government to have all of the guns either. They also never meant for the people to be deprived of arms, if they had they would have said so.

Speaking of the Constitution you use it to your advantage when it suits your agenda. Take the Electoral College for instance, when your guy wins the Electoral vote you shout to the world that the system works, you do not mention the popular vote unless you by chance get both. When your guy, or in this case gal, loses the Electoral vote but wins the popular vote you scream that the election was illegitimate the Electoral College is outdated and does not represent America. When it comes to the Second Amendment you say the Founding Fathers never intended for us to have _____(fill in the blank). You use the equal protection clause for every group but Christians and gun owners.

They want every person in this country to vote in the elections regardless of citizenship. I guess not enough legal citizens supported your candidate, you need some illegal support. Win any way you can, right? You really are an obstructionist when it comes to securing the border. Would you act the same if those coming here illegally were apt to vote republican? While on this subject, you are having a “kitten” over the citizenship question being talked about when the new census comes out. You want to count heads not citizens. Why? Seats in the house are based on population, the number of citizens not heads. You could stand to lose some House seats, reports have it that there has been an exodus of citizens from your liberal leftist states. Not to mention the money that flows to states is also based on population. If it was the way it was you would have to send money to D.C. based on the census, you would kick the illegals out so fast and hard they would bounce three times before coming to a rest on the other side of the border and build a wall a hundred feet tall and ten feet thick with a minefield to keep them out.

What is going to happen on your march to go far enough? This question sets up another post.

DEO VINDICE