Zero tolerance, zero sense.

I wish I could say this happened in New Jersey, New York, California, Chicago, or some other anti-gun stronghold, but this happened in good ol' Nebraska:

A deaf preschooler in Grand Island, Nebraska, has been prohibited from signing his own name because school administrators believe the gesture he uses looks too much like a gun.

"He's deaf, and his name sign, they say, is a violation of their weapons policy," Hunter Spanjer's father Brian told Channel 10/11.

Hunter uses Signing Exact English or SEE — a form of manual communication that uses modified ASL handshapes in an effort to better mimic the spoken English language.
"Anybody that I have talked to thinks this is absolutely ridiculous," Hunter's grandmother told the news outlet. "This is not threatening in any way."

The preschool, which has a strict zero-tolerance policy toward "any instrument...that looks like a weapon," would not discuss the matter, but said they were working with the parents on a compromise.

Working on a compromise? There should be no compromise. The policy is stupid and it should be a scrapped. Guns are guns. Fingers are not guns. Drawings of guns are not guns. Sticks are not guns. If something can't come out of the end of it and hurt someone, it's not a gun. It's that simple. That should be the new policy.

Where Chicago's problem begins.

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

Gun controllers/banners aren't just a threat to gun owners.

Even if you don't own a gun, if their beliefs become mainstream and accepted by the government, you can still be subjected to their idiocy and hoplophobia:



That is the problem with the gun controller/banner mentality. It is ultimately rooted in Authoritarianism. Therefore, it is a threat to all rights: Your right to privacy. Your right to free spech. Your right of due process.

Let this incident be a warning to those who are apathetic towards the 2nd Amendment. You can't afford to sit this fight out. It doesn't matter whether you own a gun or not. It will eventually affect you. We're seeing the genesis of this with our own Zero Tolerance policies. (In New Jersey, unsurprisingly)

The irony of Gun Free Zones knows no borders.

As many as 20 pupils are feared dead after a gunman opened fire in a primary school in western Rio de Janeiro.

"There is blood on the walls, blood on the chairs. There are 15 to 20 dead I think," said De Macedo, who was covered in blood. "I've never seen anything like this. It's like something in the United States."

Yes. It is like something in the United States where we also have the dreaded "Gun Free Zone". I wonder if like the United States, Rio also has those little signs with the gun crossed out, declaring that the rule of law is used to enforce defenselessness within their schools?

Blood in the Streets: Campus Carry Edition.

When right-to-carry laws were first passed, the gun-controller/banner movement wailed about how every day situations would somehow turn into gun fights. Fender benders, arguments over parking spaces, and arguments at little league games were supposed to turn into blood baths if a firearm were legally present. Blood would run in the streets. That falls in line with the gun-controller/banner belief that firearms have some sort of influence over the thoughts of the person who holds it, much like a drug or magic talisman.

However, the past 25 years of right-to-carry has proven their belief wrong. Not a single state or municipality can link right-to-carry to an increase in criminal shootings. People who legally carry a gun are more law-abiding on average than the population at large. As a result, not a single state has moved to repeal it's right-to-carry laws. In fact, some states are moving to expand right-to-carry to more places, such as college campuses. And with that expansion comes more warnings of "Blood in the Streets".

The new belief is that if legally carried guns are allowed on college campuses, there will be shootouts over broken romances, bad grades, binge drinking, and coke parties; That a person who is sane and law-abiding enough to carry a gun in movie theaters, restaurants, and stores will turn into a drunken, drug riddled, psychopath waiting to shoot at the slightest provocation upon crossing an arbitray line.

Of course that is complete and utter nonsense. As campus carry is passed in more places, we will see that the rate of criminal shootings on college campuses will either decrease, or at the worst, remain unchanged. And much like right-to-carry off campus, right-to-carry on campus will spread across the nation as more people realize that the gun-controller/banner fears of "Blood in the Streets" are unfounded.

But the greatest, potential long-term benefit of campus carry is one of the darkest fears of the gun-controllers/banners: More people will buy more guns at a younger age, resulting in more gun owners who will resist their future efforts.

Lots of gun friendly laws being proposed in Oklahoma.

All sorts of gunny goodness:

HB 1291 Firearms Freedom Act
HB 1400 Open Carry Act
HB 1796 Another Open Carry Act
HB 553 Expands concealed carry to some currently prohibited places
SB 896 Campus Carry

And the Jerome Ersland Act:

OKLAHOMA CITY -- A state senator is proposing a new law that would be known as the "Jerome Ersland Act." Senator Ralph Shortey (R-Oklahoma City) says the bill would presume that a business owner was acting in self-defense if that owner shoots and kills an armed robber.

If any of these make their way to Governor Fallin's desk, they should be signed. After all, she has a reputation to uphold.

There oughta be a law!

via HuffPo:

MURFREESBORO, Tenn. — A 20-year-old student pulled out a revolver and shot another man in the thumb during an argument on the campus of Middle Tennessee State University, authorities said Monday.

...

Police said Macklin has been charged with carrying a weapon on school grounds, aggravated assault and reckless engdangerment.

Well, I guess there is a law. Are the gun-controllers/banners right about guns on campus? That allowing students to carry will result in more campus shootings? Or is it more likely that those who are inclined to break the law are already carrying and using guns on campus and that allowing law-abiding to students to carry on campus won't result in an increase of on-campus gun violence?

ADDENDUM: No surprise it's drug related. A good number of shootings are.

This is not an overreaction at all.

This is a completely rational response:

View more videos at: http://www.nbcphiladelphia.com.

I can remember a time when bringing a NERF gun to school would just mean you wouldn't get the NERF gun back until the end of the day. Apparently in New Jersey, it is now a crime.

Police charged the 7-year-old with possessing an imitation firearm in or on an education institution – a misdemeanor and a minor juvenile offense in New Jersey.

I used to be quite the NERF connoisseur back in the day. I can't recall any of them that look like an imitation firearm nor are NERF guns marketed as imitation firearms. I guess Zero Tolerance really is Zero Sense.

This is just one more case of if you value your happiness and freedom, stay far away from New Jersey.

This is why you lock them up. Part V

Known violent criminal brings gun into a Gun Free Zone; Commits more violence. Luckily someone with a gun was there to stop him:

PANAMA CITY, Fla. – A gunman calmly walked up to a podium, spray painted a red "V" with a circle around it on a wall and opened fire at school board members Tuesday, sending people scrambling and diving for cover. A security guard soon ran in, exchanged shots with and wounded the man who then killed himself, police said.

Here is the non-shocker:

State prison records show Duke was charged in October 1999 with aggravated stalking, shooting or throwing a missile into a building or vehicle and obstructing justice. He was convicted and sentenced in January 2000 to five years in prison but was released in January 2004.

My opinion is that if you can't be trusted to own a gun, you can't be trusted to live in free society. To some, that may sound extreme. But if the price of letting violent people walk free is further erosion my 2nd Amendment Rights, then by all means keep violent people locked up. And if were not going to keep violent criminals locked up for our safety, let's do it for their safety. Because more often than not, violent criminals have their lives violently ended.

More examples of people who should have stayed locked up:
This is why you lock them up. Part IV
This is why you lock them up. Part III
This is why you lock them up. Part II
This is why you lock them up.

Quote Ghostbusters? Lose your rights. Go on an anti-Israel rant? Win an award!

If you quote movies or dress up for Halloween, you are obviously a dangerous person who should never have a gun. But if you're a crazy old bat who goes on an anti-Israel rant, then the Brady Campaign will give you an award:


That's the Commonsense® of gun control.

Let's not let reality get in the way of a good emotional argument.

Bill Holda, president of Kilgore College:

"…where you have multiple shooters and innocent people were killed by other people who had concealed licensed handguns because they weren’t sure who was the shooter and who was the defender,"

Of course that completely false. There was only one shooter and no one with a concealed, licensed handgun. But let's not let reality get in the way of a good emotional argument.

And the scariest isn't that this man is responsible for the shaping of young minds, but that he qcites the VPC as an explanation for his "gaffe":

"You are correct re: my inaccuracy re: the Killeen shooting. However, I invite you to look at the information on the Violence Policy Center website; you will see a list of innocent individuals who have been killed by the licensed carriers of handguns. http://www.vpc.org/ We often do not hear about this side of the story – that concealed handguns are not only used for protection, but have been used inappropriately on occasion to kill innocent individuals."

Of course the fatal flaw of the VPC's data is that none of their concealed carry killers needed a concealed carry permit to commit their crime and some of the killers didn't even use a concealed firearm to kill. But let's not let reality get in the way of a good emotional argument.

This reminds me of a comment I just left at 3 Boxes:

"With the internet being as available as it is, there is no excuse for the ignorance among the gun control crowd. Thus the only conclusion is that they are being dishonest or intentionally remaining ignorant out of dedication to their ideology."

It's pretty obvious that the VPC falls under the former and it's beginning to look like Bill Holda falls under the latter.

How does a gun free school campus become more dangerous?

When the system that's supposed to warn you about criminals on campus doesn't warn you.

Oklahoma State University sends a campus-wide alert about a gunman near campus, but not everyone got it. The suspect shot a student in the leg then ran away. OSU says it sent an alert to 20,000 students and employees. About 1,000 of them never got the call. The University is not sure if a glitch is to blame, or if some people did not sign up for the alert.

I wonder if the person who was shot was one of those who failed to receive an alert. I must admit though that a failure rate of 5% isn't that bad.

A Great Quote.

I don't know why Joan Peterson continues to reject comments only to post them herself.

Sean via Joan Peterson:

"Colin has a choice today. He can stand up for the next victim, or he can take the side of the next murderer. By working to disarm the next victims, Colin has allied himself with the next murderer. Nothing Colin has suffered can absolve him of the guilt of that choice."

One thing is for sure, Colin Goddard is no Suzanna Gratia-Huppp.

One less Criminal Empowerment Zone.

University of Colorado Concealed Gun Ban Struck Down By Court Of Appeals.

DENVER — The Colorado Court of Appeals has ruled in favor of a group seeking to allow students with concealed gun permits to carry their weapons on campus.

According to Brady/VPC "logic", blood should be soon flowing through the halls of the University of Colorado. Students will be shooting professors over bad grades. Drunken frat boys will be shooting freshmen. Classroom debates will turn into shootouts. Etc, etc.

I guess time will tell. I do know that as long as concealed carry laws have been around, no one has sought to repeal them.


* Note - Be sure to peruse the comments on the HuffPo post. They rank from hilarious to flat out disturbing.

Murder in Gun Free China.

Chinese Doctor Stabs Eight Children To Death:

Eight children have been stabbed to death by a former doctor at a primary school in China.

Five other children were wounded after the medic stormed into the school armed with a large knife.
The attacker - a former community clinic doctor with a history of mental problems - has been arrested.
Six of the children died at the scene and two others in hospital.
The attacker, who is 41 or 42, had resigned from his post at the community clinic, an official said.
The school, located in Fujian province, was closed and students were sent home.
China has witnessed a series of school attacks over the past several years, which are often blamed on personal grudges or people with psychiatric problems.

Considering that there is no right to carry in China, there was absolutely no chance of preventing this event. And sadly, American children aren't much safer from such an event. Gun Free Zones are nothing more than target rich environments.

A peek into the mind of a hoplophobe or clever sarcasm?

Nothing quite sums up the irrationality hoplophobia as the last line of this op-ed:

Doug van Gorder via Boston Globe

But as a progressive, I would sooner lay my child to rest than succumb to the belief that the use of a gun for self-defense is somehow not in itself a gun crime.

Part of me is hoping that this op-ed is just some piece of witty satire, especially after reading lines like this:

An alternative to lockdown is immediate exodus via announcement. Although this removes potential hostages and makes it nearly impossible for the shooter to acquire preselected targets, it unfairly rewards resourceful children who move to safety off-site more shrewdly and efficiently than others.

Schools should level playing fields, not intrinsically reward those more resourceful. A level barrel is fair to all fish.

Forbid we allow people to run from danger, because some people might run faster than others. And I love the reference to fish in a barrel. If this isn't clever satire and this person is indeed serious, this is egalitarianism taken to the most dangerous extreme. If Glenn Beck ever needed evidence for his Progressivism-as-Disease theory, he's found it in this person.

I'm still hoping this is satire. And even if it is satire, you have to remember, there are people out there who aren't to far away from that mentality.

When it comes to respecting the 2nd Amendment, Oklahoma passes with flying colors, but we can do better.

Again, The Brady Campaign gives Oklahoma a score of 2 out of 100.

One thing that surprises me is that the latest and greatest of the Brady Campaign's bogeymen is left out of their scoring criteria: Open carry. With Oklahoma being one of the few states that prohibits open carry, surely The Brady Campaign could give us an extra two points.

There was a movement to legalize open carry in Oklahoma (there was even non-biased television coverage), but it ran into a roadblock: No one cared. This is the same problem efforts to legalize campus carry ran into. Apparently, one of the downsides to living in such a gun friendly state is mass gun owner apathy. A lot of people own guns, but very few are politically active. You just can't get enough people to write, call, and meet with their representatives. As a result, a lot of pro-gun legislation dies in committee.

Fortunately, gun controllers in Oklahoma are even less politically active and even more apathetic, so Oklahoma's score of 2 out of 100 will probably stand for a long time. However, that shouldn't stop us from aiming for a zero.

A good reason to carry on campus...

"I don't feel too safe walking by the woods," said Edwards, a 19-year-old black student from Canton. "There's woods everywhere. And somebody could be out in them, and I don't know."

School officials will be flexible with students who don't feel safe on campus? I wonder if they will be flexible enough to allow those with concealed carry permits to carry on campus?

Of course the school has beefed up "security" by adding more cameras, because no one has ever been killed on camera.

School Shooting.

Of course, no one ever took guns to school, right?



That's a picture that warms your heart. A picture from a better time. A picture that perfectly illustrates "gun culture". Sadly, I came along far too late to enjoy that type of freedom. In my generation, guns at school were limited to playing with GI Joes at recess. However, under our current "zero-tolerance, zero-sense" policy, even that would get you expelled.

Oath Keeping in action.

Taken from the Oath Keepers' "Declaration Of Orders We Will Not Obey".

1. We will NOT obey orders to disarm the American people.

The attempt to disarm the people on April 19, 1775 was the spark of open conflict in the American Revolution. That vile attempt was an act of war, and the American people fought back in justified, righteous self-defense of their natural rights. Any such order today would also be an act of war against the American people, and thus an act of treason. We will not make war on our own people, and we will not commit treason by obeying any such treasonous order.

Nor will we assist, or support any such attempt to disarm the people by other government entities, either state or federal.

Via the St. Louis Gun Rights Examiner, here is an example of Oath Keeping in action.

The Larimer County Sheriff will refuse to help enforce any concealed carry ban at CSU, student government officials said Wednesday, but permit holders packing heat and the Sheriff's office have little to worry about if student government has any say in the matter.

At its weekly Senate meeting, the Associated Students of CSU passed a resolution supporting the school's existing policy allowing concealed weapons on campus by a vote of 21-3, with one senator abstaining.

[ . . . ]

During discussion of the resolution, Sen. David Ambrose, who helped draft the document, read an e-mail statement by Larimer County Sheriff Jim Alderden saying Alderden's office would "not hold or detain a valid permit holder who violates that policy, nor would his department have anything to do with enforcing that policy."

Alderden also said he did not believe unelected university officials have any authority to enact such a ban, which would "directly counter" Colorado law.

Good job, Sheriff Alderden.

Now if the time ever comes when the government, either state or federal, attempts to deny people the right of self-defense, let's hope Sheriff Alderden and other LEOs take that same stand.