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…

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.”

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.

Boy wets pants after being interrogated, suspended for cap gun: Inmates run the asylum

The inmates are running the asylum. And the scary thing is, the sane people are the ones who are labeled “extreme” these days.

Behold, The Washington Post reports on a story out of Maryland (my home for at least another year):

A kindergartner who brought a cowboy-style cap gun onto his Calvert County school bus was suspended for 10 days after showing a friend the orange-tipped toy, which he had tucked inside his backpack on his way to school, according to his family and a lawyer.

The child was questioned for more than two hours before his mother was called, she said, adding that he uncharacteristically wet his pants during the episode. The boy is 5 — “all bugs and frogs and cowboys,” his mother said. …

The case comes at a time of heightened sensitivity about guns in schools across the country. Locally, children in first and second grade have been disciplined for pointing their fingers like guns and for chewing a Pop-Tart-like pastry into the shape of a gun. In Pennsylvania, a 5-year-old was suspended for talking about shooting a Hello Kitty bubble gun that blows soap bubbles. …

Isolated case, right? Wrong. My favorite came out of Colorado this past February:

A second-grader in Colorado has been suspended from his elementary school for “throwing” an imaginary grenade during a harmless make-believe game he was playing called “rescue the world.”

The innocent 7-year-old claimed he was, in fact, simply trying to rescue the world, but officials at Mary Blair Elementary School, in Loveland, Colo., said playing with a weapon, the pretend grenade in this case, whether imaginary or real, is unacceptable on school grounds.

“I was trying to save people and I just can’t believe I got dispended,” said Alex Evans, the little boy, who can’t even pronounce his punishment, let alone understand why it happened.

Evans told KDVR-TV that he was merely playing a game during recess at the school, which is about an hour north of Denver, when he threw an imaginary grenade into a box that contained make-believe evil forces.

Got that? He was trying to destroy evil. A little boy was “trying to save the world” during recess and was suspended. The administrators and faculty members who would consider calling the police over a cap gun (used by a 5-year-old little boy) or suspend another boy who pulled an imaginary pin on an imaginary grenade to kill the evil inside his imaginary box, are sick. These are the people who are shaping the minds of your children, and they are the most in need of supervision.

In the minds of these “educators,” the little boy who lives out his fantasies of becoming a cowboy or a soldier must be watched. There is something wrong with him. Rambunctious boys who make bazooka noises or pretend lasers can shoot out of their trigger finger must be stopped. Perhaps there might even be some prescription drugs we could pump into them to curb such unacceptable behavior…

Warning: If you are under 18, do not attempt to make this food rifle. You will be suspended, and school counselors will be called in for an emergency evaluation.
Warning: If you are under 18, do not attempt to make this food rifle. You will be suspended, and school counselors will be called in for an emergency evaluation.

If I ever become a father and my little boy or girl is suspended for pretending to be a soldier, I will take the week off and treat them to ice cream every single day. We’ll talk and we’ll laugh and we’ll take that time to learn all sorts of valuable lessons — one of which will be that there is nothing wrong with vanquishing evil.

Who is that man holding a guitar like a weapon? Is he in school? Suspend him! Expel him! Pump him full of drugs!
Who is that man holding a guitar like a weapon? Poor guy probably wasn’t suspended or pumped full of drugs as a kid. If those impulses aren’t curbed early on you might get a responsible law-abiding citizen. What were his parents thinking?

Communism survivor to clueless gun-grabbers: ‘You don’t know what freedom is because you’ve never lost it’

Manuel Martinez
Mr. Manuel Martinez will never be on certain cable networks known for their liberal word view. He will not be on the cover of left-leaning news magazines. His name will not trend on Twitter with people who seek strict gun control measures after every high profile shooting, and he will not be invited to swanky parties in Washington, D.C. with Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y. But Martinez’s story is important.

Daylight Disinfectant writes on YouTube:

Mr. Martinez escaped the brutal Communist regime in Cuba in 1954. His testimony included how citizens under Castro were first disarmed by legislation similar to that being shepherded along by Gun-Grabber in Chief Floyd Prozanski. Defenseless, many Cuban Citizens were later summarily slaughtered.

Having been present at the testimony, I can assure you even the liberal hacks in the press pool were visibly shaken. The expressions on the Senators faces … well they spoke for themselves (you can see them at the end of the video). I’d wager no one in room did not feel a chill up their spine, or a tear in the corner of their eye, as Martinez described scenes of sons being torn from their mothers arms, and shot dead in the street, because they lacked the means to protect themselves. He spoke from the heart: no notes or teleprompter required.

Here is a small portion of Mr. Martinez’s testimony. I invite you to watch it in its entirety.

“In 1959 a revolution of malicious individuals, masquerading as Democrats,.. established a regime, … a dictatorial regime in my nation called Communism, Socialism, Stalinism, Marxism, and whatever other named “ism” you want to put on it. The reason why it was done was to take away the guns from the people. … [The right to bear arms] is a God-given right. It’s not given by anybody. It’s not given by any group. … Absolutely nobody has the authority to take it away. … I’ve been through it. I’ve been there. You people don’t know what freedom is because you’ve never lost it.

You haven’t been tortured. You haven’t seen assassinations. You haven’t seen mothers begging for the life of there son because the only reason they want is to be free. And they killed the mothers and they killed the son… If we keep tumbling with the Second Amendment we are open the same way Cuba was open for Communism, China, Poland, Hungary, Czechoslovakia, Venezuela — on and on. A tortuous regime will destroy this country in the same way they destroyed those I mentioned to you. … I came here for freedom. At the time, this country was different. This country opened its arms for me. … If they had not opened their arms for me I probably would not be here today. I hope that I’m clear with you and you understand my point of view.”

Please watch the video. It is incredibly powerful in ways the text could never capture.

I have no words. It brings a tear to your eye and a lump in your throat. Mr. Martinez is more of an American than many, many, many other Americans that were born and raised in the U.S. If I ever met this guy I think I’d give him the longest hug I’ve given anyone in years because he gets what’s at stake.

God bless you, Mr. Martinez. You’re a true patriot.

Push your fingers up against your nose, you moron.
Push your fingers up against your nose to try and hide your shame, you moron.  Read from your script like an android and call for the next witness with your “smart” glasses pushed up tight, you twit. You’ve just been hit with an intellectual sledgehammer by a Cuban immigrant who is more American than you’ll ever be.

A Good day to defend the Constitution: Bruce Willis sticks to his guns on the Second Amendment

Bruce Willis A Good Day to Die Hard
Thank God John McClane (i.e., Bruce Willis) can be counted on to defend gun rights. Besides the politics, who wants to live in a world where ‘Die Hard’ movies are banned from using high capacity magazines?

‘A Good Die to Die Hard’ will be out on Valentine’s Day, which means that Bruce Willis will be promoting it heavily for the next two weeks. It also means that that, like Sylvester Stallone, he’s going to get a slew of questions pertaining about gun violence. Given his celebrity status, they’ll be teed up for him in such a way as to allow him to hit the ball in whatever direction he chooses — but they’ll still be asked.

The Associated Press was the first to get a hold of him, and he didn’t disappoint:

Bruce Willis says he’s against new gun control laws that could infringe on Second Amendment rights. The “Die Hard” star also dismisses any link between Hollywood shootouts and real-life gun violence.

“I think that you can’t start to pick apart anything out of the Bill of Rights without thinking that it’s all going to become undone,” Willis told The Associated Press in a recent interview while promoting his latest film, “A Good Day To Die Hard.” ”If you take one out or change one law, then why wouldn’t they take all your rights away from you?” …

“It’s a difficult thing and I really feel bad for those families,” he said. “I’m a father and it’s just a tragedy. But I don’t know how you legislate insanity. I don’t know what you do about it. I don’t even know how you begin to stop that.”

Compare Willis’ answer to Stallone’s recent musing on the Second Amendment while promoting ‘Bullet to the Head’:

“I know people get (upset) and go, ‘They’re going to take away the assault weapon.’ Who … needs an assault weapon? Like really, unless you’re carrying out an assault. … You can’t hunt with it. … Who’s going to attack your house, a (expletive) army?”

The 66-year-old actor, writer and director said he also hopes for an additional focus on mental health to prevent future mass shootings.

“It’s unbelievably horrible, what’s happened. I think the biggest problem, seriously, is not so much guns. It’s that every one of these people that have done these things in the past 30 years are friggin’ crazy.

Notice the difference? In actuality, both answers are only off by degrees — but Bruce Willis comes down on the side of individual freedom and liberty, and Stallone does not. Stallone seems to want to curry favor with the politically correct hob-knobbers in Hollywood, but Willis doesn’t care; he’s just Willis.

It is a rare instance indeed when a Hollywood star realizes that the public do-gooders will never be appeased. There will always be wrongs for them to right, and so they will never stop chipping away at the God-given natural rights of the individual. The same people who believe that they should be able to regulate how much sodium and fat and sugar you consume would not think twice about confiscating all guns if they thought they could get away with it (politically or with their lives). The people who believe they can force you to engage in commerce so that they could regulate that commerce will have no qualms coming for firearms as soon as history provides them with a window of time to act.

There are cameras on every block. There are domestic drones overhead. Your property rights (an essential pillar of any free society) have been eroded like a sandcastle wiped away by the rising tide (e.g., Kelo v New London). Your text messages and email messages are fair game. The federal government is so big and so bloated and so convoluted that every day you break federal regulations without even knowing it. We have a president — who demonized President George W. Bush — who has “Terror Tuesday” kill lists and rules for killing American citizens overseas.

In short: the stage is set for the United States to devolve very quickly one day into a bizarro United States of hopelessness and despair and tyranny. And one of the bulwarks against such a reality from ever taking place is the Second Amendment.

Bruce Willis might not be a constitutional expert, but his instincts are sound (which may explain why he’s been a star for so long). On this day, on this issue, he deserves a pat on the back for his willingness to stand up for gun rights. Bravo, Bruce. You just solidified my decision to see ‘A Good Day to Die Hard.’ I was on the fence after the previous installment (let us not go into detail about how ridiculous the fighter jet scene was, even by ‘Die Hard’ standards), but you’ve gained enough good will to get a few more bucks out of me. I’ll see you opening weekend.

Bruce Willis will also be starring in 'Red 2' in the near future, which will mean more dumb questions for him on gun control. Hopefully, he doesn't back down and continues to stand up for the rights enshrined in our Constitution.
Bruce Willis will also be starring in ‘Red 2’ in the near future, which will mean more dumb questions for him on gun control. Hopefully, he doesn’t back down and continues to stand up for the rights enshrined in our Constitution.

Related: All balding men should pledge allegiance to Bruce Willis
Related: Yippie Ki-yay … Steve Doocy. Bruce Willis is Sheer Awesome

Prediction: Statists will try to limit your use of 3-D printing technology

President Obama doesn’t seem to be a fan of technology. He once even lamented its deleterious effect on the economy, telling the “Today” show: “You see it when you go to a bank and you use an ATM; you don’t go to a bank teller. Or you go to the airport and you’re using a kiosk instead of checking in at the gate.” Given that, it’s a good bet he won’t be a fan of 3-D printing. Thanks to this technology, people will eventually be able to make the high capacity magazines and AR-15s that he hopes to ban — right from the comfort of their own homes.

It’s already happening. Extreme Tech reports:

“The first 3D-printed gun was created by AR15.com forum member HaveBlue. It was a pistol, and consisted of a 3D-printed receiver, with a fully metal upper area, such as the barrel. The receiver is actually what legally constitutes a firearm, so in the eyes of the law, that’s a ‘real’ gun.”

Statist politicians will have a tough time regulating weapons when gun enthusiasts will have the power to print their weapons, magazines and ammunition from a favorite armchair. But they will try.

President Obama and Vice President Joe Biden have claimed that “if it only saves one life,” their infringements of the Second Amendment will be justified. Using that logic, it isn’t hard to imagine a time when politicians will seek to limit access of 3-D printing tech to a select few (i.e., their friends and the “friends” who donate to their campaigns), despite the infinite ways it could positively impact our everyday lives.

Just as the United Nations seeks to wrestle control over the Internet in an effort to control freedom of speech, 3-D printing will be targeted for its ability to safeguard life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

Politicians will eventually realize this technology’s potential, and it will be given greater scrutiny. Bureaucrats in Washington have shown no problem with attempting to curtail a right enshrined in the Constitution. They will certainly have no qualms attempting to withhold emerging 3-D technology from the general public.