What is a responsible adult?

Richard Daley's response to the McDonald ruling:


King Richard says, "We'll work even harder to make sure only responsible adults can have access to guns across the nation." We all saw how that worked in Chicago. They just deemed every person in the city not responsible enough to have access to a handgun.

And notice that at no point did he mention any legislative action that actually addresses the "gun and drug thugs" that he claims to want to stand up to. Everything he said was about guns. Nothing about criminals. That is why despite the McDonald ruling, Chicago will continue to bleed. The Chicago bureaucracy will continue it's idiotic attack on guns while completely ignoring the criminals.

As i've said in a previous post, it is too soon to celebrate. McDonald is just a first step.

The ultimate solution to Chicago's crime problem is to get rid of Richard Daley and his entire corrupt political machine and replace them with competent politicians who realize that further eroding the rights of those who have committed no crime is not standing up to the "gun and drug thugs".

Language is everything.

Taken from Dennis Henigan's reaction to the McDonald ruling:

Of course, there will be, as Justice Stevens predicts, an "avalanche" of legal challenges to gun laws in the wake of McDonald, some by the gun lobby, but most by criminal defendants seeking to overturn indictments and convictions for violating those laws.

Now who would those criminal defendants be? This is one of those moments where language is everything and sadly, the gun controllers have defined the language.

Most people when they hear the word "criminal" think of gang members, bank robbers, murderers, thieves, etc. Essentially, people who have committed crimes against person or property. So when the uninitiated hear Dennis Henigan speak of criminals using the McDonald ruling to overturn indictments and convictions, they're going to think, "OMG! This is going to put horrible people back on the streets and they're going to have guns! ZOMG!"

And don't think for a moment that this reaction isn't what the Brady Campaign wants. Gun controllers have never been above using carefully-crafted, intentionally vague language to confuse and alarm the masses into supporting their agenda. "Assault Weapons" and the "Terror Gap" being two examples.

So who are the criminals that Dennis Henigan speaks of? The criminals are people like this and people like this; People who are only criminals because they dared to defy the draconian legislation prohibiting anyone from owning a handgun. Draconian legislation that he has helped create and defend to the bitter end.

Now that you know what a "criminal defendant" really is do you see the reason for Dennis Henigan's concern? I personally hope that his concern is valid and that the "criminals" that he and his movement helped create will finally get justice at the feet of the McDonald ruling.

Not even 24 hours later, the Brady Campaign lies...

The ink is barely dry on the McDonald ruling and the Brady Campaign is already spinning for donations. And it appears the only way they can spin is to completely falsify the position of their opposition:

"We are reassured that the Court has rejected, once again, the gun lobby argument that its ‘any gun, for anybody, anywhere’ agenda is protected by the Constitution."

That was never the argument. Not in McDonald. Not in Heller. Not in any case. The "‘any gun, for anybody, anywhere’" meme is nothing more than a Brady-manufactured bogeyman. I'd dare the Brady Campaign to find any occurrence of the "gun lobby" arguing for "‘any gun, for anybody, anywhere’", but we all know they can't.

So why lie, Paul Helmke?

McDonald is in, but it's too early to celebrate.

There are still two major hurdles:

1. Post-Heller DC style obstructionism is on the way. That is where the hard fight will be.

2. There is still no right to carry. A gun at home can only protect you so much. Hopefully the next fight will be to allow Chicagoans to protect themselves outside the home as well.

Some people shouldn't have guns.

Brought to us by one of the members of the ever-so-tolerant bastion of neo-liberalism known as Pandagon:

Yeah, I have fantasies about shooting that dumbass teabagger who was swaggering around in a Starbucks showing everyone his SECOND AMENDMENT RIGHT!!!
After all it was a display to intimidate, I have the right to defend myself. But I actually think about the big picture like collateral damage and all the fall out from a gun battle in a public place and leave it purely in my head.

Hanging on till the bitter end.

It appears Richard Daley is going to go down kicking and screaming. As the McDonald ruling approaches, his words and actions become more and more erratic, if not completely nonsensical:

"Look at all the guns that shot people this weekend. Where did they come from? That is the issue," Daley said at a South Side high school Tuesday.

It's not guns that shot those people. It's criminals that shot those people. Where the guns come from is irrelevant. If you eliminate one source, the criminals will just find another source. Eliminating guns is pointless if you do not also eliminate the criminals that use them.

Daley also recently proposed legislation for the entire state that would require semiautomatic pistols manufactured or delivered for sale in Illinois to be capable of "micro-stamping." The technology helps law enforcement link spent ammunition with the gun used to fire it.

Micro-stamping is a useless technology that is easily defeated with basic hand tools. Luckily there is a breath of sanity in Illinois:

Gov. Pat Quinn told reporters at a separate news conference in Chicago on Tuesday that Illinois needs tough laws punishing people who commit gun crimes.

"Those who commit gun violence need to go to jail and stay there," he said.

Finally, someone is standing against the catch-n-release justice system that has literally turned certain parts of Chicago into a war zone.

Maddow gets it completely backwards.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Apparently, she has completely ignored the fact that while one group fought for prohibition, the other fights against it. If she wanted to be accurate in her analogy, she should have picked a gun prohibition group like the VPC that has made a case for banning a good majority of the firearms that are currently on the market.

Of course she brings up a slew of half-truths and lies:

1. "People on terrorist watch lists..." - Yes. Believe it or not, American citizens who are guilty of no crime other than being arbitrarily placed on a secret government list have both the right to keep and bear arms and the right to due process.

2. "Felons to have gun rights..." - Only at the discretion of the court who determines if the felon is a risk for violence or not, can a felon have their rights restored.

3. "Crazy people to have gun rights..." - Wrong. The so-called "crazy people" she refers to are people who have voluntarily sought mental health care and have not been adjudicated as “mental defective”. In other words, simply seeking out counseling for PTSD or a cigarette addiction will not result in a loss of your rights.

4. "Assault rifle..." - Old and debunked. More than likely she meant the manufactured term "assault weapon" that's arbitrarily applied to anything from pump action shot guns to .22 caliber Olympic pistols, depending on your state of residence.

5. ".50 caliber" - Aside from the fact a .50 caliber bullet is not the size of a carrot (unless it's a baby carrot), crimes commited with .50 caliber rifles are statistically irrelevant. In the nearly 30 years .50 caliber rifles have been on the market, you can count the number of criminal misuses on one hand. And no, you can't shoot down an aircraft with one.

Etc, etc.

Hopefully this type of spin job isn't becoming typical of MSspiNBC.

It's really not news anymore.

52 shot, 7 dead in Chicago.

Gangster Government: It's not just a Chicago thing.

From Knife Rights:

June 17, 2010: The New York County (Manhattan) District Attorney's office appears to be engaged in a shakedown of local businesses, forcing them to pay six-figure so-called "contributions" or risk unwarranted criminal penalties, in a move more like that of organized crime than the agency charged with protecting citizens, said a national group representing the rights of Americans who own and use pocket knives. Knife Rights Chairman, Doug Ritter, said, "the New York County District Attorney, Cyrus Vance, Jr. appears to have targeted legitimate, honest knife dealers, accused them of selling illegal 'gravity knives,' and threatening criminal prosecution if they don't pay up. The so-called "gravity knives" in question appear to be conventional one-handed and assisted-opening knives, which represent 80 percent of the pocket knives sold in the U.S. today." Some of the major retailers have reported agreed to six-figure settlements and have netted the DA millions of dollars.

Keep in mind that the same bureaucratic gangster who would ban such a basic tool as a knife would have no problem banning guns if they haven't already.

Being that both knives and guns are "arms", gun rights are intrinsically linked to knife rights. So if you're a member of a gun rights groups, it wouldn't hurt to join Knife Rights or at least stay up to date with the latest knife issues.

Why do they even have police?

What purpose is served by disarming those who are supposed to protect the disarmed?

via The Daily Express:

CRAZED gunman Derrick Bird was cornered by police after killing three people but pointed his firearm at the ­officers and escaped to murder nine more, it emerged yesterday.
...
The unarmed officers finally caught up with Bird’s grey Citroen Picasso but were forced to dive for cover when he pulled into a driveway and aimed his gun at them.
...
They were forced to dive for cover under their dashboard, allowing Bird to drive off and claim nine more victims.

In the US, when an active shooter kills a dozen people, it's usually because the police have yet to respond. Yet in the UK, the police respond, confront the shooter, and being unarmed, allow the shooter to continue killing at his leisure.

Keep in mind that this insanity is not without American approval:

To gun banners, there is no such thing as a good gun. They want them all. When Tom Diaz, of the Violence Policy Center, was on Gun Talk, I forced him to admit that he would like to ban all guns. What about the police, I asked. Once we get all the other guns, he said, the police won't need their guns, either.

The 25 Most Dangerous Neighborhoods.

I'm not going to reprint the whole list, but here are the top and botton 5:

25. Winchester Ave./60th St., Chicago IL

24. Wallace St./58th St., Chicago IL

23. Mount Elliott St./Palmer Ave, Detroit MI

22. East-West Expy/Orange Blossom Trl., Orlando FL

21. Cedar Ave./55th St., Cleveland OH

...

5. North Ave./Belair Rd., Baltimore MD

4. Beaver St./Broad St., Jacksonville FL.

3. 7th Ave./North River Dr., Miami, Fla.

2. State St./Garfield Blvd., Chicago IL

1. Central Pky./Liberty St., Cincinnati OH

The places on the list rank from relatively gun owner friendly to downright antagonistic to gun ownership. You could give the entire country Chicago's gun control laws and those same neighborhoods will still be more dangerous than others. That's because gun control is not crime control.

Violence in America is not a gun problem. It is a culture problem. Specifically the gang/thug culture that thrives so well in urban areas and takes the majority of lives. Handgun bans, bans on open carry, and bans on concealed carry do nothing to address the underlying emotional, intellectual and psychological deficiencies that promote gang/thug culture.

Shooting "Rampage" in Gun Control Paradise.

Twelve people have been killed and 25 injured by a gunman who opened fire in west Cumbria.

Any bets on what knee jerk reaction will be taken? The UK already has some of the most oppressive gun control legislation in the western world. You'd have to live in communist China to have more restrictive gun laws.

More importantly, what kind of gun was used? Surely, you'd have to have a rapid-fire, "assault weapon" with a "high capacity" magazine to kill that many people. Oh wait, considering the entire nation of the UK has been rendered defenseless by the prohibition of the right to carry, I imagine you could take your time picking people off with even the most sporting of arms without worrying about anyone fighting back.

And lastly, will American gun control groups use this event to advocate further erosion of our Second Amendment rights?

Sometimes good people have to break bad laws.

Cop's Murder Has Some Thinking Of Carrying A Gun

In that neighborhood, many residents have told CS 2 News off camera that they are willing to begin carrying a gun to protect themselves, even if it means breaking the ban on handguns.

Now let's see if Mayor Daley "understands" that.

My message to Chicagoans: Do whatever you have to do to protect yourselves. Freedom was pioneered by those willing to do the right thing in defiance of the law.