Another positive gun story. Shhhhhhhhh

Yesterday, much to the delight of certain types of businesses that profit off of school shooting tragedies (read media), there was another school shooting, this one occurring in Atlanta. As of today the two victims were said to be a student who was shot in the back of the neck and teacher who had minor injuries from being trampled during the melee. The student, a 14 year-old, was not seriously injured and was remarkably released from the hospital the same day.

Now, there appears to be a motive regarding the shooter and the victim as there was said to be a dispute. So the likelihood of this becoming a massacre was unlikely. With that said, there were steps taken into consideration by the school beforehand to keep these things from escalating. First, they had metal detectors, obviously they weren't affective here but a barrier nonetheless. Secondly and most important, there was an off-duty Atlanta police officer stationed at the school as a resource officer; something I have advocated before. 


According to ABC, Atlanta PD Chief George Turner stated that an armed off-duty Atlanta officer was able to disarm the suspect MOMENTS after the shooting. Without even using his gun to do so. Kind of makes the point of a trained officer vs a kid with a gun, statistically speaking, its overwhelmingly in the officers favor. What if there is no officer there? We can assume because this was targeted it wouldn't have gotten worse but if he wasn't there... does this 14 year old kid walk up and "finish" off a obviously defenseless classmate?

Now, where is the coverage of this? Where is the ABC special edition where they cancel programming to fit it on-air in a timely fashion? Now obviously these are rhetorical questions, because there will be no extended coverage. There will be no interviews with family and neighbors nor will there be any candlelight vigils. All because tragedy was avoided. 

Seems backwards but the reality is we often celebrate tragedy and push to the back burner or simply just ignore situations when tragedy is averted. This isn't some "agenda" by the media, it's simply an indictment of what put's eye balls on the tube. Its a clear indicator of the average Americans tabloid love affair with sentimentalization, drama and tragedy. And to top it off, the likelihood of your child becoming a victim (0.00003% probability) of such an attack is about as likely as Jim Cook puts it:

As earth being hit by asteroid 2012 VE77 between the years 2033-2035.

 

As you can see, the homicide rate is actually falling considerably while school shooting's stay relatively the same and have never reached over 40 per year (with no disrespect to those effected of course). Yet here we sit, a large portion of the public using this terrible, yet extremely remote possibility as a pretext to start restricting gun ownership while ignoring the benefits of a gun in a school that just yesterday possibly prevented a massacre. I understand the American public for the most part is dumbed down and distracted but we are reaching all time lows for common sense collectively and the media is right there out in front like the Pied Piper.

Amerikan Stasi has a vital mission but whos the threat?

Has any weapon garnered as much attention in memory as the AR-15 has the last month? I can’t think of any weapon more demonized and we are talking about a weapon that only fires .22 caliber bullets. Well, the Ar-15 is in the news again this week and no, I’m not talking about the daily jib-jab about banning it. What I am talking about is the Department of Homeland Security’s recent request for 7,000 of these “assault rifles” that are supposed to be so dangerous.

Now let’s get one thing straight before we continue. Any gun in the wrong hands is dangerous but the gun isn’t what makes it dangerous per se, it’s the person holding it. An AR-15 is no more dangerous then a bottle of whiskey unattended; the whiskey isn’t going to consume itself and the gun isn’t going to shoot itself. So the common denominator… ah yes, humans are. Imperfect, emotional, crazy and often foolish humans are the problem not the inanimate object.  

So, the Department of Homeland Security puts in a large order for guns that are not fit for public use (personal defense weapons suitable for personal defense use in close quarters) or at least that is what those advocating #guncontrol would lead you to believe. My question or comment on this piece of news isn’t the hypocrisy because it’s rather obvious. No, my question is what exactly is the Department of Homeland Security up to? Let’s take a look at their mission statement taken right off their website:

The Department of Homeland Security has a vital mission: to secure the nation from the many threats we face. This requires the dedication of more than 240,000 employees in jobs that range from aviation and border security to emergency response, from cybersecurity analyst to chemical facility inspector. Our duties are wide-ranging, but our goal is clear - keeping America safe.

Seems rather ambiguous to me does it not to you? So they want to keep us safe from the many threats we face, presumably here in the homeland. Sounds about as clear a statement as the Navy’s slogan they been pumping out for the last few years:

“A global force for good”

Words like “good, safe many threats” all these are pretty loose terms and for good reason, what these agencies are doing is being as broad as possible. Why you say? To keep their options open. Who is an enemy and keep “us” safe from whom is about ambiguous as it is chilling. Now strap on your tin foil hats for a second, I don’t do this often but lets just look at a few more things regarding the DHS and play connect the dots.

Last year the DHS ordered 450 Million rounds of .40 caliber ammunition. Just a few months later there was an order placed for 750 million additional rounds but then after questioning it was deemed to be classified information. We also have Tim Brown from Freedomoutpost.com who reported last year about the DHS buying 700 pounds of High Density Ammonium Nitrate and 700 pounds of A-5 Flake RDX used to create “dirty” bombs. If that wasn’t enough even the Social Security Office is stalking up, buying 174,000 hollow point rounds. Hollow point rounds are made for maximum damage, expanding in the body thus no exit wound. Not exactly what you expect granny to see when going to get her check now is it?

Mass purchases of AR-15’s, billions of rounds, explosives… one has to ask himself what is Homeland Security getting ready for because it appears they are stock piling to wage war not just protect the border. Remember DHS’s slogan opening line: “to secure the nation from the many threats we face” With illegal immigration actually trending down whom is left to pose a threat? Now that you got your tin foil hat on nice and tight the answer is clear is it not? It’s you.

Rights are being infringed upon in the name of security. Entire sectors in business are being shipped overseas. College students are now going to school taking on debt and having no place to work to obtain money to pay back said debt. Income inequality like we have today hasn’t been seen since the 1920’s. 

Corporations are getting richer while wages continue to fall. The poorest live like the middle class without lifting a finger (to keep them occupied with their Obama phones and free housing and not in the streets rioting). The richest live like kings siphoning off obscene profits that would make Rockefeller blush. And who makes it happen for both?

The middle class. They just keep running on the hamster wheel afraid to become poor wanting to become rich while the poor are content and not too rowdy to cause a disturbance in the matrix. To top it off, while all this is going on... Inflation is building in reserves waiting to unleash like a tsunami as purchasing power is erodes with every dollar we flush into the system to prop up this pig economy that is nothing short of a mirage.
 

Call it what you will, class warfare. Crony capitalism. Tell me its not real and you looked outside and the sky isn't falling. Say what you will, but remember one thing. Civil unrest is the biggest threat to any power structure and this isnt going unnoticed by our government.

We are seeing the inevitable happen. It’s a game of musical chairs and the music is coming to an end. How soon it ends depends on how fast we lose confidence in that filthy dollar. I would love to quote Marilyn Manson here and end it with the line: “get your gun’ but it appears someone has beat me to the punch. But don't worry... their goal is clear "to keep America safe".

‘Now is the Time’

This is the the President's "plan to protect our children and our communities by reducing gun violence”. This "plan" is what spawned the 23 executive orders on Jan 16, 2013. This has also been called the most comprehensive gun control legislation passed since 1968, eclipsing the "assault weapon ban" so often referred to now that was signed into law in the 1994 under Bill Clinton.

If we remember anything politically speaking about 1968 it would have to be the assassinations of Dr Martin Luther King & Robert Kennedy. The tightest gun control ever to that point was introduced before the deaths of both men but was quickly fast-tracked and passed after their murders. Reading a piece written about 1968 this week in regards to gun control reminded me of something I read in 2008 from then chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel who was “advising” the newly elected President on crisis management:

"You never want a serious crisis to go to waste. Things that we had postponed for too long, that were long-term, are now immediate and must be dealt with. This crisis provides the opportunity for us to do things that you could not do before."

As the President walked up on the stage this week and signed his executive orders into place all I could think about was at what ends will this lead to? Actually, it wasn’t soon after that initial thought before I came to the conclusion of not “what” ends, but “when” those ends will come. When will we see the end of the legal ownership of any firearm?

The right to own guns keeps man free. Free from the state or free from foreign invaders. It says so right in the 2^nd Amendment. I would find this humorous if it wasn’t so damn offensive.

The state piles up guns and then turns them on you and forces you to do as they say or they punish you with the threat of taking away your freedom which infringes on your liberty and pursuit of happiness. Seems like a conflict of interest regarding rights, no? Then, the state, despite all the guns and all the money, also does a piss poor job of keeping foreign invaders out of the country. From “terrorists” to illegal aliens the borders remain wide open.

If that wasn’t enough of a kick in the groin, the state also looks down upon militias, essentially blowing the 2^nd amendment out of the water on those grounds alone. The part about “a well regulated militia” isn’t time sensitive, regardless what anyone wants to say otherwise. There is no expiration on the meaning of the amendment, constitutional scholars be damned. These examples and the latest push executive order(s) are all attacks on not only our right to own firearms but it’s also an affront on our collective common sense.

 

When it comes to bureaucrats and the 2^nd amendment there seems to be a major disconnect. The 2^nd amendment is pretty direct, it’s pretty plain English. Thus, there is no reason to “read into” anything. Yet the federal government shows no respect for something so straightforward. Is this a coincidence? Not a chance.  
 

Semantics, are some of the firsts arrow pulled out of the quiver of control. Using wordplay and rearranging definitions to justify the means to an end – that is the ultimate goal of those in power. They also use situations and crisis to manipulate the public trading in freedom for security. Hitler did it, Stalin did it, Bush did it, Clinton before him etc etc… this isn’t something new but I find it pretty interesting for a president who promised "transparency". Who ran on "change". It is what it is. Call it Machiavellian or call it just being a politician. Whatever the definition you  come up, see it for what it is.

The executive orders signed into place this week are centered on ‘assault rifles’. Now, ask anyone for a definition of what an assault rifle is and you are sure to get something different from everyone. So, what happens when banning ‘assault rifles’ or reducing magazines doesn’t stop school violence or mall shootings or movie theater shootings? Well, naturally the handguns will be next, just like they came for them in NY and Chicago. Then maybe we will see the call to ban “assault weapons”. And the assault weapons definition is about as ambiguous as you can imagine.

Here is a list of “mass stabbings, hammer attacks, and cleaver attacks” in China from 2010-2012. China already has strict gun ownership laws, thus the truly dedicated to killing innocent will use any means necessary, as you can see. England (who else) has actually seen a push to eliminate “long pointed kitchen knives" to "reduce deaths from stabbing”. So again I ask: when does it end?

It ends when the anointed and "elected" say it ends. It ends when the calamities of life cease to exist. They won’t and that is the whole point. Let me leave you with this; and this will be the most important thing I will ever say on this topic.

The rush to get your gun, chipping away at your rights with one piece of legislation at a time is no accident. The state fears you. When it’s no longer able to control you with its debt mechanism and money manipulations… when it all comes tumbling down through hyperinflation or a spiral of irreversible deflation; the state will have to protect itself be any means necessary. The more the state can force dependency (SSI, welfare, food stamps, unemployment, low income housing, universal health care etc etc) the less important freedoms become or at least the dependency to live trumps freedom. The more divided we become, the easier it is to quell resistance. A people not divided and instead unified not to mention well armed is the ultimate threat to that power. 

The state fears you and me... and for good reason.

Piers Morgan: dont let the door hit you in the ass on the way out.

I was going do something on our out of control debt and the "looming" fiscal "cliff" but I was distracted reading this piece written by Piers Morgan of CNN published 12-29. The heading states he may deport himself if "America won't change its crazy gun laws". Now given such a heading filled with hyperbole you can expect the rest of his viewpoint will be littered with more attention whoring exaggerations and boy does he not disappoint. 

He starts out with his experience with guns. This, being a singular event, was a trip to Prague where he and some friends shot targets for a few hours and he said afterwards that the experience "quite demonstrably guns are killing machines".

I find that rather meaningless. For I, have never owned or shot a gun at any point in my life. I grew up in a single parent house with my mother and three sisters. Hunting is something I have never done either. But I don't have to hunt nor own a gun or to even have shot one to know guns are killing machines. After all, I have watched thousands of movies and played call of duty until the wee hours of the night (I’m just sticking with the meme). 

After setting up his "experience" he then proceeds to name drop his relatives who are employed in England with exposure to weapons as some type of twisted street cred:

"Well, I do know a bit about guns, actually. My brother’s a lieutenant colonel in the British Army and has served tours of duty in Northern Ireland, the Balkans, Iraq and Afghanistan. My sister married a colonel who trained Princes William and Harry at Sandhurst. My uncle was a major in the Green Howards."

I find this rather humorous. I have an Aunt & Uncle who both work in one of the biggest state universities in Pennsylvania in science. Both have their PHD's. I have three other Aunts who are teachers. I have a grandmother who retired with an MBA in accounting and a step father who has worked in a foundry for 35 years. I have a brother in law that is a barber. Do you know what i know about what they do?? Jack-shit. I would also find it disrespectful to assume that i know about what they do, in what, conversations over Sunday dinner at Nana & Papa's house? Please. 

 Mr Morgan demonstrates his arrogance and obvious agenda to make the world England when he uses the reasoning for owning the AR-15 Bushmaster (used in Newtown)  

"The only apparent reason anyone seems to offer up is that using such weapons is ‘fun’. One gun-rights guy I interviewed last week even said admiringly that the AR-15 was ‘the Ferrari of guns’."

When you see someone cite "One guy I interviewed" as backing you know to take that not with a grain of salt; but probably a quarry. Because the bullshit meter is broken. And if you say the "only apparent" reason "anyone" seems to offer up is 'fun' without any evidence, it just compounds the fact that you are basically making it up. What’s next, an "anonymous quote" from a “high ranking official” in the NRA doesn't “really like guns”? Wasn’t  'ol Piers an editor at a newspaper one time in England? 

Well, that doesn't surprise me. Have you ever read a newspaper from England? Look at the link for his piece; it’s plastered in 'tabloid-celebrity' nonsense. Hard news does not exist over there. How do I know? The paper 'has ads for other story's'. It 'apparently' must be devoid of hard news because I cant find a paper in England that doesn't cater to 'tabloid-celebrity' nonsense... see this subjective, make it up as see fit game can be fun and effective!

So, we have established Mr. Morgan's experience and his relatives with guns are bunk or meaningless to the discussion and probably just a cheap way to fill a word count commitment. We also know he has no reasons why people own guns, other than he says, they said: 'its fun'. So there is no opposite side in this piece with relative viewpoints, just his opinions.

Pictured in this article is a picture of a gun show. It also has statistics with gun sales exploding after these last few instances. It has a picture of a man at a gun show holding an AR-15. There is also the statistics that Americans own more guns per person than anywhere in the world outside of Yemen. Do you see the link? These gun sales are going to create more crime. But is that really true? 

According to the 1997 Survey of State Prison Inmates, among those possessing a gun, the source of the gun was from -

• a flea market or gun show for fewer than 2%
• a retail store or pawnshop for about 12%
• family, friends, a street buy, or an illegal source for 80%     

During the offense that brought those offenders to prison, 15% of State inmates and 13% of Federal inmates carried a handgun, and about 2%, a military-style semiautomatic gun.

This whole piece written by Mr. Morgan is centered on the use of semi-automatic weapons. So we are talking about 2% of felons using these types of guns. Two must be the magic number because only 2% of felons using a gun - get said gun, at a flea market or gun show. Talk about living on the margins? Maybe Mr. Morgan should spend some time in Switzerland where households pack fully automatic rifles and experience less crime than England, where he says there are only 35 deaths per year due to handguns.

Which I find odd considering this article written in the Wall Street Journal the day after Christmas by Joyce Lee Malcolm, a professor of law at George Mason University Law School - who has written several books on the subject including: "Guns and Violence: The English Experience" 

In this article Ms Joyce points out that: 

"Within a decade of the handgun ban and the confiscation of handguns from registered owners, crime with handguns had doubled according to British government crime reports. Gun crime, not a serious problem in the past, now is. Armed street gangs have some British police carrying guns for the first time. Moreover, another massacre occurred in June 2010. Derrick Bird, a taxi driver in Cumbria, shot his brother and a colleague then drove off through rural villages killing 12 people and injuring 11 more before killing himself."

 

If that wasn't enough Mr. Morgan points to a recent Gallup poll showing that: "58 per cent of Americans now support new gun-control laws, up from 43 per cent in 2011" He then says "that's a big jump"? 

You think? Does he even understand that his network is one of many that help perpetuate these acts by these deranged nut jobs and fears of the public by sensationalizing them at every waking minute to push their filthy ads? Mr. Morgan even takes aim at video games and movies... does he have no culpability in this? No of course not, because you're on television, dummy. Sixty million people watch you every night of the week, Monday through Friday. You make the news. You're God. 

Now allow me to weave this all together all nice and tight for you, using Mr. Morgan’s own words:

"This gun debate is an ongoing war of verbal attrition in America – and I’m just the latest target, the advantage to the gun lobbyists being that I’m British, a breed of human being who burned down the White House in 1814 and had to be forcefully deported en masse, as no American will ever be allowed to forget – Special Relationship notwithstanding. It’s no exaggeration to say that America’s unique fondness for guns pretty much got cemented by hatred of us Brits and the War of Independence. But the main reason the more fervent gun-rights activists give is a fear of their own US federal government using its army to impinge on their freedom"

Americans don't hate British citizens or look at them with disdain nor reject them simply because of their birthrights. We do have a problem thou with someone from another country telling us how we should change our laws and be more like the country that we fought from our independence from some 200+ years ago. Americans had to use guns to fight off tyranny in the form of the British government. Now you supported using guns to fight tyranny before:

" I’m not a pacifist. Guns win necessary wars and defeat tyrannical regimes like the Nazis"

I find it ironic you do not see the British government circa 1770 a "tyrannical" government. We agree the Nazi regime was just that. This, being the same Nazi regime that took the US and her (gun loving) involvement to keep England from being bombed into oblivion? You know what they say about history don't you, Mr Morgan? If its written by the victors and while we know who won WW2 and the Revolutionary War; maybe you're in need of a history lesson, chap?

Now i saved the best for last:

"Obama should follow up by launching a Government buy-back for all existing assault weapons in circulation (as worked successfully in Los Angeles last week). I would go further, confiscating the rest and enforcing tough prison sentences on those who still insist on keeping one. He should also significantly increase federal funding for mental health treatment for all Americans who need it."

Piers... lets scrap the history lesson, instead lets do a real quick American Civics primer. "He" is just a President, nothing more than a mouth piece for the corporate elite, like the guy before him and the guy before him and the guy after him and so on and so forth. We may elect lackeys and "yes men" but we don't elect Kings. Here all men are created equal; we don't value one person’s blood more than another.

You claim to "love" this country, despite the fact that it’s obvious you don't understand our financial situation as you are directing for "King Obama" to start "buy backs" and additional spending of revenue via mental health (has he not heard of Obama Care), when we are facing two trillion dollar deficits annually. You don't respect our history or even understand it. You want prisons sentences for people wanting to uphold their Bill of Rights. Your views are based on fringe ideas and failed data from England, the country you left - to obviously pursue something better for you and your family. 


 Let me offer you some parting advice courtesy of one, Mahatma Gandhi:

"Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the act depriving a whole nation of arms as the blackest."(Gandhi, An Autobiography, p. 446 Beacon Press paperback edition)