UT ‘Glock’ protests: Dildorks pretend sex toys, not guns, stop active shooters

UT tweet

A funny thing turned up in my Twitter stream yesterday: Images students from the University of Texas juggling sex toys — sometimes on a unicycle. The “Cocks Not Glocks” protest was underway, which meant that hundreds of dildo-wielding students marched around and pretended that the world would be a safer place if cops carried plastic genitalia in their holsters. At UT, law-abiding students with concealed carry permits are a bigger threat to peace than psychos who always seem to be sane enough to target gun-free zones.

The College Fix reported:

“If you’re uncomfortable with my dildo you cannot imagine how uncomfortable I am with your gun.”

So says Rosie Zander, a College Democrat at the University of Texas who helped lead on Wednesday a “Cocks Not Glocks” protest on the first day of school. Zander made the comments to the Austin American Statesman in explaining that their goal was to “fight absurdity with absurdity” in protesting a new state law that allows people 21 and older with concealed carry permits to bring their weapon on campus.

“Why can we have guns on campus, but we can’t have dildos out in public, that’s absurd,” Zander said, referencing campus and state policies that forbid the public display of dildos.

Protest organizer Jessica Jin then told the New York Times that the point of “Cocks Not Clocks” was to “normalize sex culture the same way [gun-rights advocates are] normalizing gun culture, and see how they feel about it.”

Note to Ms. Jin: “Gun culture” in the U.S. was “normalized” with the ratification of the U.S. Constitution in 1788 (perhaps slightly later if you want to get picky about the adoption of the Bill of Rights).

CN Glocks

Fact: “Sex culture” is normalized in the U.S.

Fergie Milf Money

Turn on television, go to a movie, or surf the Internet for about 30 seconds to see people objectify themselves in weird and grotesque ways. No one bats an eyelash at kids juggling dildos on an American campus in 2016 because “higher education” is mostly a joke. Students meander from safe space to safe space, and as long as they parrot their professors then they can graduate with a useless degree in Gender Studies.

If, God forbid, there is an active-shooter emergency on UT’s campus in the near future, then it is a good bet that every single one of these kids will be praying that someone with a gun — not a sex toy — comes to end the carnage.

UT campus protest

Exit question: How many of these male students are really only pretending to care about “Cocks Not Glocks” protests because they have some sad delusion that female activists will sleep with them? Your friendly neighborhood blogger has witnessed a few conservative/libertarian guys over the years who were happy to put on a liberal mask for a night if they thought it would be worth it…

Advertisements

Dan Slott: ‘Politicize the f–k’ out of tragedy, ignore 5th Amendment to strip innocents of rights

Dan Slott

Marvel writer Dan Slott recently let it be known that he really doesn’t like it when Christians pray after Islamic terror attacks, but this week he made it clear that exploiting raw emotions after a tragedy is good and virtuous — “politicize the f–k” out of such moments were his exact words. He also wants innocent Muslims, Jews, Christians, atheists — all Americans, in fact — to know that it is “crazy” to uphold the 5th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

Due process? Who needs that? Police states are so much more efficient.

Dan Slott no fly list tweet

Men like Dan Slott are political vultures. They swarm around in circles and wait for people to die before tearing at the carcasses. There are millions of Americans who will look at the gruesome spectacle and agree to anything to get it to stop, but luckily there are others who use logic and reason to ensure the blessings of liberty for future generations.

South Carolina Rep. Try Gowdy, for instance, demonstrated after the San Bernardino, California, terrorist attack just how dangerous it would be to deny an innocents their constitutionally protected rights because the government suspects them of a committing a crime.

Mr. Gowdy had the following exchange in December with Kelli Burriesci, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Screening Coordination, Office of Policy of the United States Department of Homeland Security:

Trey Gowdy: Let me ask you a question about the terrorism list. What process is afforded a U.S. citizen — not someone who overstayed a visa, not someone who crossed a border without permission — but an American citizen?  What process is currently afforded an American citizen before they go on that list?

DHS: I’m sorry, there is not a process afforded the citizen prior to getting on the list. There is a process should someone feel they are and unduly placed on the list.

Gowdy: Yes there is. And when I say ‘process,’ I’m actually using half of the term due process, which is a phrase we find in the Constitution — that you cannot deprive people of certain things without due process.

So I understand Mister Goode’s idea, which is wait until you’re right has been taken from you and then you can petition the government to get it back. I understand that that’s his idea. My question is can you name another constitutional right that we have that is chilled until you find out it’s chilled, and then you have to petition the government to get it back? Is that true of the First Amendment?

DHS: Sir, there are strict criteria before anyone gets put on the list.

Trey Gowdy: That’s not my question ma’am. That is not my question. My question is what process is afforded a United States citizen before that person’s constitutional right is infringed? He’s fine when we do it with the Second Amendment. My question is, ‘How about the First?’ How about we not let them set up a website or Google account? How about we not let him join a church until until they can petition the government to get off the list. How about not get a lawyer? How about the Sixth Amendment?

How about you can’t get a lawyer until you petition the government to get off the list? Or my favorite — how about the Eighth amendment? We’re going to subject you to cruel and unusual punishment until you petitioned the government to get off the list.Is there another constitutional right that we treat the same way for American citizens that we do the Second Amendment? Can you think of one? **pause** Can you think of one?

DHS: I don’t have an answer for you, sir.

Ms. Burriesci didn’t have an answer because deep down she knows that Mr. Gowdy is correct.

Do you know who else agrees with Mr. Gowdy and not with comic book writer Dan Slott?

Answer: The American Civil Liberties Union.

“The standards for inclusion on the No Fly List are unconstitutionally vague, and innocent people are blacklisted without a fair process to correct government error,” the ACLU wrote on Dec. 7, 2015. “The government has emphasized that it is making predictive judgments that people like our clients — who have never been charged let alone convicted of a crime — might nevertheless pose a threat. That’s a perilous thing for it to do.”

How would Dan Slott feel if, 50 years from now, Jews in the United States were routinely put on terrorist watch lists because they were merely suspected of crimes? They could not fly, they could not own weapons, and perhaps their 8th Amendment rights were frozen until they could prove they weren’t terrorists.

That sounds pretty scary, right? Not to Dan Slott.

If you think due process is an essential component to living in a free society, then Dan Slott insults you on Twitter. That is because, like I said, he is a political vulture. It may be fitting for a guy who regularly writes about Spider-Man’s villains, but it is not funny.

With that said, I highly suggest listening to Reason’s Remy sing “How to React to a Tragedy,” with Dan Slott in mind. It perfectly lampoons activist-writers like those employed by Marvel.

Editor’s Note: Hat tip to Colossus of Rhodey for bringing attention to Mr. Slott’s tweets.

Omar Mateen unleashes terror in Orlando, Twitter mob blames Christians, NRA

Omar Mateen

Omar Mateen of St. Lucie County, Fla., massacred 50 people and wounded 53 others at a gay nightclub in Orlando on Saturday. The St. Lucie County man had pledged allegiance to the Islamic State group and was previously investigated by the FBI. Those are the kind of details that rightly prompt discussions on homeland security and radical Islamic terrorism in objective circles.

On Twitter, however, the online mobs have directed their rage and anger at other targets: Christians and the National Rifle Association. Seriously.

Chase Strangio Orlando terror tweet

Yes, that’s right, a guy who pledged allegiance to ISIS before unleashing a terror attack like those in Paris or Brussels was somehow driven by “the Christian Right” to slaughter gay people — according to the Twitter mob.

Scott Weiner Orlando terror tweet

Scott Wiener, a member of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors, wants everyone to know that “Radical Christianity more than holds its own” when compared to the Islamic terrorists throwing gay men off tall buildings in Syria or mowing down innocent civilians around the world.

Islamic State gay execution

Finally, the Orlando-terror Twitter stream was filled with individuals like Deni Rosenberg, who want the world to believe that “good guys” with guns would not have saved countless lives inside Pulse Nightclub — despite the fact that it took a S.W.A.T. team (i.e., good guys with guns), to end the bloody standoff.

Deni Rosenberg Orlando tweet

Every time Islamic radicals kill civilians in western countries, the response by politically-correct activists is to proclaim, “this has nothing to do with Islam” — while simultaneously sliming Christians and gun-owners as the catalyst for terror. Oddly enough, these very same activists wonder why presumptive Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump is popular with millions of Americans.

Pulse Attack CNN screenshot

If Donald Trump is elected the 45th president of the United States, then pollsters should ask about this moment in history. Millions of voters’ decision will be galvanized within the next week, and it is my opinion (as a Giant Meteor of Death supporter) that a cacophony of politically-correct platitudes will push them into Mr. Trump’s camp.

Giant Meteor 2016

Editor’s Note:

Regular readers know that this blog has been nominated for a Hugo Award. This morning I saw a trackback in my WordPress stats to one voter’s critique of my writing. I fell into a “No Award” category based on my “weaker” political fare. An example of my “weaker” efforts was a Dec. 12, 2015, post that warned of “Shariah Police” legally patrolling the streets of Germany — and how Christianity differs from Islam. (I’m not sure how my thoughts on Shariah law have anything to do with The Amazing Spider-Man, but I digress.)

“Ernst’s more political/social commentary posts are much weaker but the guy is saddled with having to defend poorly thought out positions,’ the writer said. “Overall, a bit middling with high variability. There are many better writers out there but as there is a danger of political bias on my part leading me to undervalue the rest of his writing I strongly considered putting him above No Award. However, even the best of his writing just isn’t up to award-worthy.”

Here is my “poorly thought out position” from that post: Shariah Law is dangerous (e.g., it allows for the execution of gay people, domestic terrorism, etc.), and 2 million refugees from the Middle East and North Africa will pose significant security problems for German authorities in the years to come.

Let me ask my Magic 8 Ball if “political bias” was at play with that “No Award” vote.

Answer: “As I see it, yes.”

White House: Stripping constitutional rights for gun control ‘common sense’

Trey Gowdy

The San Bernardino terror attack on Dec. 2 has caused gun-control activists to go into hyperdrive. President Obama and his administration have now latched on to using terror watch lists — those same lists once derided by his supporters — to strip Americans of constitutionally-protected rights. Yours truly and others have already mentioned just how dangerous of an idea that is, but it was perfectly illuminated Thursday during a House Oversight Committee hearing.

In one corner we have Kelli Burriesci, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Screening Coordination, Office of Policy of the United States Department of Homeland Security. (Quite a mouthful of a title there, so one would hope she would know her stuff…)

In another corner we have South Carolina Rep. Try Gowdy.

Here is how it all unfolded:

Trey Gowdy: Let me ask you a question about the terrorism list. What process is afforded a U.S. citizen — not someone who overstayed a visa, not someone who crossed a border without permission — but an American citizen?  What process is currently afforded an American citizen before they go on that list?

DHS: I’m sorry, there is not a process afforded the citizen prior to getting on the list. There is a process should someone feel they are and unduly placed on the list.

Gowdy: Yes there is. And when I say ‘process,’ I’m actually using half of the term due process, which is a phrase we find in the Constitution — that you cannot deprive people of certain things without due process.

So I understand Mister Goode’s idea, which is wait until you’re right has been taken from you and then you can petition the government to get it back. I understand that that’s his idea. My question is can you name another constitutional right that we have that is chilled until you find out it’s chilled, and then you have to petition the government to get it back? Is that true of the First Amendment?

DHS: Sir, there are strict criteria before any gets put on the list.

Trey Gowdy:That’s not my question ma’am. That is not my question. My question is what process is afforded a United States citizen before that person’s constitutional right is infringed? He’s fine when do it with the Second Amendment. My question is, ‘How about the First?’ How about we not let them set up a website or Google account? How about we not let him join a church until until they can petition the government to get off the list. How about not get a lawyer? How about the Sixth Amendment?

How about you can’t get a lawyer until you petition the government to get off the list? Or my favorite — how about the Eighth amendment? We’re going to subject you to cruel and unusual punishment until you petitioned the government to get off the list. Is there another constitutional right that we treat the same way for American citizens that we do the Second Amendment? Can you think of one? **pause** Can you think of one?

DHS:I don’t have an answer for you, sir.

She. Doesn’t. Have. An. Answer.

Burriesci

How is it possible for someone at the Department of Homeland Security, who is advocating on behalf of stripping American citizens of constitutionally-protected rights, to not have an answer to those questions?

As Rep. Gowdy points out, the Obama administration’s own logic dictates that if the Second Amendment can be stripped without due process, then there is no reason why any other rights can’t be taken as well.

Listen to White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest’s comments on the issue Friday, and then ask yourself how comfortable you are with giving the federal government a blank check to do whatever it wants under the guise of national security.

Mr Earnest said:

“I think it’s common sense, the president believes it’s common sense and it is in our national security interest to prevent those who are deemed by the government ‘too dangerous to board an airplane’ that we should pass a law that prevents those people from purchasing a gun — until such time as they can resolve the concerns the government has about their  potential links to terrorism. There is a process administered by the Department of Homeland Security for those concerns to be considered and resolved. When it comes to gun safety, that seems like a pretty common sense step.

In response to Sen. Rubio, I guess I would simply say: Is he suggesting we should wait until someone who is on the no-fly list walks into a gun[store], purchases a firearm and kills a whole bunch of Americans before we pass a law preventing it? I don’t think that passes the common sense test either.”

To recap:

  • The Department of Homeland Security does not know how many of your constitutional rights can be stripped without due process.
  • President Obama wants to give women like Kelli “I don’t have an answer for you, sir” Burriesci the ability to deny you constitutionally-protected rights (The Second Amendment…for now.)
  • The Department of Homeland Security officials will “consider” not infringing upon your constitutionally-protected rights if you go through its petition process and it feels like changing its mind.

In the same press briefing where Josh Earnest created a giant Straw Man argument for Sen. Rubio, the White House Press Secretary admitted that none of the recent mass shooters were on the no-fly list. He also stammered and stuttered when a reporter pointed out that none of the current gun-control measures being talked about would have prevented the mass shootings in the first place.

Right now the federal government is asking for power that its own officials don’t know how to justify because they know that what they want to do is unconstitutional.

Whether you are a gun owner or not, it should terrify you that the same argument used in favor of stripping Americans of Second Amendment rights without due process can be applied to any right enshrined in the U.S. Constitution. 

If you cannot see the danger this poses to future generations of Americans, then I weep for your children.

Dan Slott slimes ‘gun owners’; Marvel would fire writer for similar tweet about ‘Muslims’

Dan Slott gun

It was only days ago that Marvel writer Dan Slott talked to Newsarama about internet “dicks.” The comic book “news” site saw nothing ironic about asking the guy who regularly acts like an unprofessional clown on social media to espouse on his critics. That is probably part of the reason he has started up again with political attacks that would get him fired if he switched out subjects like “gun owners” with “Muslims.”

Take the following Dan Slott tweet: “Ever notice how every gun owner who tweets is a responsible gun owner? My theory: All irresponsible ones have shot up their keyboards.”

What would Dan Slott think of someone if he came across a tweet like: “Ever notice how every Muslim is a responsible Muslim? My theory: All irresponsible Muslims have prematurely detonated their suicide vests.”

That would be incredibly mean and uncalled for since the vast majority of American Muslims break no laws — just as millions of American gun owners break no laws. A tweet like that would be a low blow and the hallmark of a very immature man.

Ask yourself this question: Why is Dan Slott a “gregarious” guy when he slimes patriotic Americans who have broken no laws, when in your heart-of-hearts you know The Amazing Spider-Man writer would go off on an epic rant if you took his own tweets about “gun owners” and tweaked them to target “Muslims”?

Who said Mr. Slott was “gregarious,” you ask?

Answer: Newsarama (Jim McLauchlin wouldn’t want to risk losing his access to the writer, now would he?)

When it comes to the Internet and comic books, people can be d**ks. Obsessive d**ks. …

We slap labels on all things Internet. It’s a “virtual” world. But virtual can crash into real in a hurry when he Internet Rage Machine gets cranking. But what is the Machine? Is the Rage misplaced? And what fiefdom do you live in? …

Dan Slott, Marvel’s Amazing Spider-Man writer, muses that “I could write whole books on this,” but gets very itchy, declining to cite specific examples.

“You never want to let that guy know he got under your skin, and you never want to show people examples of bad behavior to emulate,” he says.

Slott is a gregarious, friendly guy who’s always willing to interact with fans on Twitter and the like. It’s where he’s from.

On the whole, Slott tries to measure his online interactions. He recently called the aggregate a “heightened reality,” where the bright spots get brighter, but the dark areas show up so much darker.

Again, Newsarama found nothing ironic at all about the guy who can flip like a switch between opining on social media “dark spaces” and attacking Marvel readers who exercise rights enshrined in the U.S. Constitution.

Dan Slott Second Amendment

The reason why Dan Slott got “itchy” about citing examples of critics who get under his skin is because he knows this blog is one of the few places calling him out on his mean-spirited Twitter feed (it’s okay if he attacks the “right” targets — emphasis on “right”).

And remember: Dan Slott is done “wasting time on hate” — even though it’s obvious to any objective observer that he spends plenty of time dishing it out.

Perhaps it doesn’t count if you don’t agree with him politically. Once you dehumanize a person it’s okay to mock and ridicule them, right Mr. Slott?

Dan Slott Twitter
Now if you’ll excuse me, I have to catch up on the latest Newsarama piece. It’s the one that is quick to call out internet “dicks” without ever asking unprofessional writers to explain their own troubling behavior.

Exit Question:

Consider the following from Newsarama:

The world is full of problems: Ebola, ISIS, potholes, global warming, and more. So you’d think people would spend their time doing something more productive than railing on about Spider-Man.

Newsarama — a site that depends on traffic generated by people who are interested in comic books — will immediately criticize Spider-Man fans who enjoy discussing Spider-Man, but it has nothing to say about Spider-Man’s actual writer for his unprovoked political attacks on entire groups of law-abiding Americans. At what point does Newsarama just admit its role as Marvel’s shameless handmaiden?

Why you can’t ‘control’ guns in one image

50 Round Magazine

You can not control guns. This image pretty much sums it up.

From the ‘The Truth about Guns’:

The concept is solid and well established on Ruger 10/22 magazines: couple a whole bunch of them together at the floorplate and rotate the contraption when the mag runs dry. But FAB Defense took things a step further, gluing five 10-round magazines to a central spoke to create a New York-legal 50-round arrangement. Well, as near as we can tell NY legal.

If your state wants to make laws that arbitrarily max out magazine capacity at seven rounds, then someone will create a magazine hub that circumvents the law. If the regulations get even worse, then just wait it out for a year or two and 3D-printing technology will open the door to all sorts of bipods, buffer tubes, buttstocks and magazine parts currently unthinkable. The point is, with tens-of-millions of firearms in circulation, the effort to control the uncontrollable only erodes individual liberties while simultaneously empowering criminals.

At one point in time we had a civil society that valued life enough that even suicidal psychos generally kept their rampages to a single bullet. High schools had marksmanship and hunting clubs and kids actually brought rifles to school without issues. Somewhere along the line the culture changed, and rampaging idiots realized that taking out innocent civilians translated into cable news coverage long after death. Suicidal narcissists rejoiced and decent law-abiding citizens continue to pay the price.

Worse yet, media has managed to brain wash large swathes of the population into believing inanimate objects, instead of people raised in cultural rotgut, are to blame for gun violence.

Consider the reaction of a family that found an AR-15 semiautomatic rifle in the back of a rental car used by Lauren Tannehill, the wife of Miami Dolphins quarterback Ryan Tannehill:

“Thinking they would just call the owner, they searched for an ID, there was none, [the mother] said. Her daughter unzipped the bag and said, “”Oh my God, it’s a gun.’ I said ‘I think I’m going to throw up.'”

“I think I’m going to throw up”? In saner days, Americans would simply shake their head at the bone-headed move of the previous driver, call the cops and move on. They wouldn’t get nauseous. The United States is in sad shape when its own Second Amendment makes Americans ill.

Lauren Tannehill has a gun...and there are actually Americans who feel like throwing up at the sight. Sad.
Lauren Tannehill has a gun…and there are actually Americans who feel like throwing up at the sight. Welcome to the United Twilight Zone of America.

Woman pulls gun on intruder who asks if she wants to ‘meet God’ — sheeple still beg to be disarmed

Self Defense

Think about men like Michael Bloomberg for a moment, who wake up occasionally in the middle of the night crying tears of joy — the after-effects of dreaming that all Americans are stripped of their Second Amendment rights. Now, think of the Milwaukie, Oregon intruder who kept trying to break into homes until he finally succeeded — at which point he asked a poor woman if she wanted to “meet God.”

KGW Newschannel 8 reports from Portland.

Before trying to get in the home, the man had reportedly walked in two other apartments. In one, he followed Crystal McKinney upstairs and inside.

She knew something wasn’t right.

“I backed up and I said ‘What are you doing?'” McKinney said. “He said, ‘Do you want to meet God?’ I went to my room and got my gun. I said get out or I will shoot you.”

She said the man turned to leave, so she followed him, shut the door, and called 911. Then she heard him in the apartment across the hall before he finally left.

“My adrenaline was really pumping and I broke down in tears,” McKinney said.

She broke down into tears because that’s the sort of thing that happens when your mind realizes all the gruesome things that could have happened to you during a home invasion — if men like Michael Bloomberg had their twisted dreams realized on a national level. Mikey probably lives on the top floor of a penthouse that has 24-hour security manning the entrance to the building. Maybe he even has a panic room, since that’s the sort of thing billionaires sometimes splurge on.

Ms. McKinney? Without her gun she might have a phone, which she could use to call the cops. Maybe they’d come in time, maybe not. When seconds count, the cops are only minutes away.

Hooded Man

Whenever gun debates take control of cable news, it’s always interesting to listen to rich, well-dressed and emasculated men wearing Brooks Brothers suits as they denigrate women like Ms. McKinney. (Did you get the Brooks Brothers Signature Tartan Slim Briefcase for the emasculated gun-control nut in your family? They’re only $448!) The gun debate is one that they will continue to have a tough time on because there will always be nut-jobs threatening innocent people, and innocent people like being able to defend their life, liberty and property.

Oddly enough, I was talking with my brother this morning and told him that if anyone ever stuck a gun to my head that any tears I would shed would be because I’d feel bad for the pain my family would go through — not because I was afraid of dying. On some level I’d laugh at a guy who asked if I wanted to “meet God” because I know I’ll be just fine. I’ve been trying to play long ball with my soul for quite some time; the same can’t be said for the intruder who threatens to murder innocent Americans at gunpoint. Regardless, I still have the right to defend my life — and putting a bullet through the head of those who seek to end it is not up for debate.

If you’ve never seen it, watch as Ted Nugent intellectually destroys a guy who probably owns the Brooks Brothers “Small Foldover Manicure Set” (only $98!)

Editor’s note: In full disclosure, the author does own a number of Brooks Brothers ties. Like the Joker’s poison from Tim Burton’s Batman, men are only emasculated by Brooks Brothers clothing when they mix it with specific behavioral patterns (e.g., buying into the Bloombergian gun control mindset).

Dianne Feinstein, NSA apologist, is more dangerous to America than men with rifles will ever be

Sen. Dianne Feinstein did not even wait until rigor mortis set in on Navy Yard gunman Aaron Alexis before calling for gun control measures on Monday. It makes sense that she would jump at any opportunity to strip Americans of their Second Amendment rights, given that she thinks all of us are potential terrorists who must be under constant surveillance.

Here’s what The New York Times said on June 6 as the extent of the NSA’s spying scandal began to unfold:

Mr. Obama is proving the truism that the executive branch will use any power it is given and very likely abuse it. That is one reason we have long argued that the Patriot Act, enacted in the heat of fear after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks by members of Congress who mostly had not even read it, was reckless in its assignment of unnecessary and overbroad surveillance powers. …

A senior administration official quoted in The Times online Thursday afternoon about the Verizon order offered the lame observation that the information does not include the name of any caller, as though there would be the slightest difficulty in matching numbers to names. …

The defense of this practice offered by Senator Dianne Feinstein of California, who as chairwoman of the Senate Intelligence Committee is supposed to be preventing this sort of overreaching, was absurd. She said on Thursday that the authorities need this information in case someone might become a terrorist in the future.

You. Might. Be. A. Terrorist. In. The. Future. (So Diane Feinstein and the feds should therefore be able to spy on you.)

Now that we have a better idea of what Diane Feinstein thinks of her fellow Americans, her gun control comments are more likely to appear in their proper context:

California Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein is renewing her call for new gun-control laws because of Monday’s deadly Navy Yard shooting.

“When will enough be enough?” Feinstein said in a statement Monday evening.

“Congress must stop shirking its responsibility and resume a thoughtful debate on gun violence in this country,” she said. “We must do more to stop this endless loss of life.” …

“This is one more event to add to the litany of massacres that occur when a deranged person or grievance killer is able to obtain multiple weapons — including a military-style assault rifle — and kill many people in a short amount of time,” Feinstein said.

As it stands, Diane Feinstein advocates ‘Minority Report’ tactics to watch people who might become terrorists … in the future, and she thinks stripping away shotguns, semi-automatic rifles and pistols from the American people will keep “deranged” psychopaths from occasionally committing horrific crimes.

Just to hammer home to how dangerous to the country men and women like Diane Feinstein are, I will again quote The New York Times:Mr. Obama is proving the truism that the executive branch will use any power it is given and very likely abuse it.

There are existential threats to the Constitutional Republic our founders fought and died for, but none of them include random guys with mental problems who snap and go on suicide missions.

The Constitution Center frames the debate nicely:

There is a story, often told, that upon exiting the Constitutional Convention Benjamin Franklin was approached by a group of citizens asking what sort of government the delegates had created. His answer was: “A republic, if you can keep it.” The brevity of that response should not cause us to under-value its essential meaning: democratic republics are not merely founded upon the consent of the people, they are also absolutely dependent upon the active and informed involvement of the people for their continued good health.

Sen. Diane Feinstein doesn’t want you informed (even though she wants access to all of your phone records). She wants you armed solely with emotion and she wants you to channel fear and anger in a way that will put more power into her hands. You generally have a one-way ratchet when it comes to increasing the size and scope of the federal government, and the people who think you might be a terrorist “in the future” know it.

Dianne Feinstein is more dangerous to America than men and women with rifles will ever be. It doesn’t matter what her intentions are if the practical effect of the public policy she supports is that she serves as an architect of tyranny. In the weeks on months ahead she will continue her attempts to erode your Second Amendment rights, and it is your responsibility to intellectually and politically stop her in her tracks.

Sarah Silverman writes racist ‘Black NRA’ skit, thinks it’s hilarious

Sarah Silverman Black NRA

Sarah Silverman is back with a new “Funny or Die” video, but this time around she seems to think inherently racist skits about violent black people are hilarious. What’s more knee-slappingly fun than forwarding the notion that there are enough inherently violent black people out there that white hicks would respond with paranoia while the enlightened Hollywood Progressives would just opt to emulate the gun control measures pushed by men like Michael Bloomberg?

Good comedy brings deeper truths to the surface, but this skit is based on the lie that the NRA would seek to prevent law-abiding black people from owning guns. Nothing could be further from the truth. Perhaps black-on-black crime would be reduced if the guy who has to work the late shift before walking home in a bad area had an easier time acquiring a hand gun. Sarah Silverman doesn’t put her head down at night in Detroit. She puts it down in a community that struggles with real crime: the really long wait for prosciutto at Whole Foods.

If Sarah Silverman did a little research into Trayvon Martin (aka: “@No Limit Nigga”), she’d know that Mr. “I beat the p*ssy up up up up up,” Mr. “Puss ass crackas,” Mr. Bus-driver-beat-down-tweets, was on a life trajectory before he died that was anything but funny. But hey, why does that matter when we can insinuate that the NRA’s white members would freak out if black people ever started owning guns in places like Chicago (where currently only criminals and murderers acquire them with ease).

Trayvon cracka retweet

Here now are excerpts from Sarah Silverman’s bizarrely racist skit.

Sarah Silverman: The NRA considers itself the longest standing civil rights organization.

Ron Funches: They say it’s ever American’s right to bear arms.

Neal Brennan: So they obviously mean every American, right?

David Alan Grier: That’s why the NRA is launching a new organization.

Deon Cole: The Black NRA.

Sarah Silverman: Our guns will put guns into the hands of those who need them most.

Cole, Grier and Silverman: Young … black … males. …

Cast: If some people should have them, then we should all have them. …

Grier: Now that I have a gun, I feel safe doing everyday Normal things.

Funches, Cole and Grier: Like wearing a hoodie, eating Skittle, walking in the rain, or living in Florida. …

Silverman: Thanks NRA, you told me what real realistic peace is all about. Standing your ground, pointing that gun at the bad guy, and having him point it right back and go “hey, I guess we’re not that different after all.”

Funches: So support the Black NRA, and help us arm every … young … black … man … in America. Then freedom will truly ring out.

Silverman: That’s what you mean, right NRA? …

Grier: You don’t have a problem with this, do you?

Actually, no. The NRA doesn’t have a problem with law-abiding citizens owning firearms. In fact, it would be nice if in places like Murder Central (i.e., Chicago), more honorable black people wielded them and took the city back.

We still have a four months to go in 2013, and Chicago already has 301 homicides.

Three murders over the weekend brought the city’s homicide total to 301 for the year. Another 17 people were wounded in shootings since late Friday.

Adrian Sianez, 24, was fatally wounded in a gang-related shooting Sunday morning in the Gage Park neighborhood on the Southwest Side.

Sianez was in the 5500 block of South Mozart about 3:40 a.m. when someone got out of an SUV and started shooting, authorities said. He was shot multiple times in the back and once in the buttocks, police said. Sianez, of the 5700 block of South Rockwell, was pronounced dead at Mount Sinai Hospital at 10:11 a.m., the Cook County Medical Examiner’s office said.

When will Sarah Silverman do a “Funny or Die” sketch about the good people in Gage Park who are surrounded by gang violence? I won’t hold my breath.

Here’s what I wrote in response to Piers Morgan’s knee jerk response to the Sandy Hook shooting. The same applies to Sarah Silverman, who wants you to believe Trayvon Martin was just a modern version of Fred Astaire, singing in the rain with Skittles, as opposed to a kid who likely threw the first punch at George Zimmerman — the first crime committed on the night of his death — before bashing his head into the concrete.

Ideological allies of Piers Morgan act as if it’s a foregone conclusion that America will continue to be the freest nation on the face of the Earth. They fail to take into consideration what role the Second Amendment played in creating such an exceptional country in the first place. They reject the mountain of evidence out there that free, law-abiding citizens exercising their right to determine when, how and if they defend themselves are one of the best bulwarks against tyranny a nation can have. And instead of digging deep down into the cultural changes that have metastasized over the course of decades — cancerous mutations in the national psyche that could produce a man who opens fire on a classroom of children — Piers Morgan blames inanimate objects.

Sarah Silverman’s newest “Funny or Die” sketch isn’t funny — it’s sad.

3D printing drives statists crazy; expect tyrants to double their efforts

Liberator Forbes

3D printing is here. Cody Wilson of Defense Distributed wanted to make the first weapon that was fully printed (except for the firing pin) and he has succeed. The blueprints were released online and the result has been amazing: 100,000 downloads before the feds stepped in to put a stop to it.

Forbes reports:

If gun control advocates hoped to prevent blueprints for the world’s first fully 3D-printable gun from spreading online, that horse has now left the barn about a hundred thousand times.

That’s the number of downloads of the 3D-printable file for the so-called “Liberator” gun that the high-tech gunsmithing group Defense Distributed has seen in just the last two days, a member of the group tells me. The gun’s CAD files have been ten times more popular than any component the group has previously made available, parts that have included the body of an AR-15 and the magazine for an AK-47.

As I said, Uncle Sam is not happy. Since the State Department couldn’t protect Ambassador Stevens from real guns, it is now going after Americans:

On Thursday, Defense Distributed founder Cody Wilson received a letter from the State Department Office of Defense Trade Controls Compliance demanding that he take down the online blueprints for the 3D-printable “Liberator” handgun that his group released Monday, along with nine other 3D-printable firearms components hosted on the group’s website Defcad.org. The government says it wants to review the files for compliance with arms export control laws known as the International Traffic in Arms Regulations, or ITAR. By uploading the weapons files to the Internet and allowing them to be downloaded abroad, the letter implies Wilson’s high-tech gun group may have violated those export controls.

Here’s the deal: technology keeps breaking down barriers faster and faster and faster, and a big bloated federal government simply can not keep up with the speed. The statists are confused because suddenly we’re on the brink of the stuff technological revolutions are made out of and they don’t like it because it will free millions from their regulatory vice grip.

If Williams-Sonoma gets so freaked out by pressure cookers in the wake of the Boston bombing that it pulls them from the shelves, what are the Jr. Sonomas in Congress going to do when faced with a population armed with 3D printers? Time to ban plastic, people!

In all seriousness though, one possible outcome is that faced with a world that is running faster than it can write regulations, the “soft tyranny” Americans have seen in recent decades will be replaced with good old fashioned, boot-on-your-throat tyranny.

Don’t think it could happen? I give you New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg:

“The people who are worried about privacy have a legitimate worry. But we live in a complex world where you’re going to have to have a level of security greater than you did back in the olden days, if you will. And our laws and our interpretation of the Constitution, I think, have to change,” (Michael Bloomberg, April 23, 2013).

He has money. He has power. And he has a mindset that is extremely, extremely dangerous. So much for unalienable rights, eh? That is exactly why I have always said that once you take out rights endowed to us “by the Creator,” you are left with rights “endowed by dangerous megalomaniacs like Michael Bloomberg.”

Still don’t believe me? Take a look at the Boston manhunt.

Nothing like putting an entire city on lock down for one guy, and then dragging women and children from their homes at gunpoint. Question: At what point did local police departments being to need equipment reserved for the national guard?
Nothing like putting an entire city on lock down for one guy, and then dragging women and children from their homes at gunpoint. (Image: Associated Press)

Boston police

Or better yet, I’ll let Bill Maher talk about the whole ordeal. It’s funny how he’s come around on taxes (i.e., “Liberals, you can actually lose me. It’s ridiculous.”), entitlements and now the dangers of a bloated federal government in such a short amount of time.

“This country is becoming a police state and it is very troubling to me,” (Bill Maher).

Get used to it Bill, because it’s only going to get worse before it gets better. It’s just very interesting to have watched you for all these years with your smug delivery suddenly looking a little shaken and unsure of yourself. We tried to tell you that a government that was big enough to give you whatever you wanted was big enough to take it all away, and you called us ‘teabaggers.’ We tried to tell you that power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely, and you called us dumb hicks. And now that your taxes are through the roof and S.W.A.T. guys are only a single terrorist away from landing on your roof you’ve got a quizzical look on your face. Hear that? That’s the sound of your quixotic worldview crashing down around you.

There is hope for Bill yet, and I think the response by power hungry bureaucrats to future advances in technology can make him come around.

How about you?