Thursday, January 3, 2013

Why does anyone even take these fiends seriously?

FBI: More People Killed with Hammers, Clubs Each Year Than Rifles

Via III Percent Patriots

 
VERBATIM

According to the FBI annual crime statistics, the number of murders committed annually with hammers and clubs far outnumbers the number of murders committed with a rifle.

This is an interesting fact, particularly amid the Democrats' feverish push to ban many different rifles, ostensibly to keep us safe of course.

However, it appears the zeal of Sens. like Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) and Joe Manchin (D-WV) is misdirected. For in looking at the FBI numbers from 2005 to 2011, the number of murders by hammers and clubs consistently exceeds the number of murders committed with a rifle.

Think about it: In 2005, the number of murders committed with a rifle was 445, while the number of murders committed with hammers and clubs was 605. In 2006, the number of murders committed with a rifle was 438, while the number of murders committed with hammers and clubs was 618.

And so the list goes, with the actual numbers changing somewhat from year to year, yet the fact that more people are killed with blunt objects each year remains constant.

For example, in 2011, there was 323 murders committed with a rifle but 496 murders committed with hammers and clubs.

While the FBI makes is clear that some of the "murder by rifle" numbers could be adjusted up slightly, when you take into account murders with non-categorized types of guns, it does not change the fact that their annual reports consistently show more lives are taken each year with these blunt objects than are taken with Feinstein's dreaded rifle.

Another interesting fact: According to the FBI, nearly twice as many people are killed by hands and fists each year than are killed by murderers who use rifles.

The bottom line: A rifle ban is as illogical as it is unconstitutional. We face far greater danger from individuals armed with carpenters' tools and a caveman's stick.

And it seems fairly obvious that if more people had a gun, less people would be inclined to try to hit them in the head with a hammer.

.223 and more in stock

Via Bonnie Gadsden

.223 Rifle Rounds
1000 Bulk case
55 grain FMJ Hornady bullets


This Is Good: Choose Your Own Crime Stats

Via Blue



Gun Control Tramples On The Certain Virtues Of A Heavily Armed Citizenry

Via Knuckledraggin' My Life Away

United States Constitution 

It is time the critics of the Second Amendment put up and repeal it, or shut up about violating it.  Their efforts to disarm and short-arm Americans violate the U.S. Constitution in Merriam Webster’s first sense of the term—to “disregard” it.

Hard cases make bad law, which is why they are reserved for the Constitution, not left to the caprice of legislatures, the sophistry and casuistry of judges or the despotic rule making of the chief executive and his bureaucracy.  And make no mistake, guns pose one of the hardest cases a free people confronts in the 21st century, a test of whether that people cherishes liberty above tyranny, values individual sovereignty above dependency on the state, and whether they dare any longer to live free.

A people cannot simultaneously live free and be bound to any human master or man-made institution, especially to politicians, judges, bureaucrats and faceless government agencies.  The Second Amendment along with the other nine amendments of the Bill of Rights was designed to prevent individuals’ enslavement to government, not just to guarantee people the right to hunt squirrels or sport shoot at targets, nor was it included in the Bill of Rights just to guarantee individuals the right to defend themselves against robbers, rapers and lunatics, or to make sure the states could raise a militia quick, on the cheap to defend against a foreign invader or domestic unrest.

The Second Amendment was designed to ensure that individuals retained the right and means to defend themselves against any illegitimate attempt to do them harm, be it an attempt by a private outlaw or government agents violating their trust under the color of law.  The Second Amendment was meant to guarantee individuals the right to protect themselves against government as much as against private bad guys and gangs.

More @ Forbes

George Washington on guns and ammo

Via The Lonely Libertarian

Boston Dem Mayor Says Biden “Guaranteed” Him Obama Will Pass Major Gun Control Reforms By “End Of January”…

Via Don

The commenters aren't very happy, needless to say.  An EO = Playing with fire. 

Weasel Zippers
VERBATIM
No way Obama’s ramming through major legislation by the end of the month, which leaves only one other option, executive orders.



Via Boston Herald:
Vice President Joe Biden “guaranteed” Mayor Thomas M. Menino — a leading national gun control advocate — that President Obama will pass sweeping firearms reforms by the end of the month, the mayor said today.
“He said, ‘Tommy, I guarantee you, we’ll get it done by the end of January,’” Menino said at City Hall today. “They’re going to get it done.”
The mayor, who has been recovering from a host of ailments for the past two months, said Biden called him several times while he was in the hospital, including a call after the Newtown school massacre to discuss gun control.
Menino and New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg co-chair the 500-mayor-strong Mayors Against Illegal Guns and have called for a national gun reforms in the wake of last month’s Sandy Hook school killings.
“I understand the second amendment, the right to bear arms. But I don’t understand how young kids should be able to get guns,” he said.
Menino added that the president has “no excuse not to pass strong (gun reform) legislation,” since he is in his last term and doesn’t have to worry about angering pro-gun voters or the National Rifle Association.

Daughters of American Revolution Removes All References to God & Jesus Christ From Official Literature

Tea Party Promises Primary Challenge to Chambliss

 

The Tea Party — furious that Sen. Saxby Chambliss voted in favor of the fiscal cliff bill this week — says the Georgia Republican can expect a vigorous primary challenge in 2014 in a bid to kick him out of office.

“I can tell you I live in the state of Georgia and Saxby Chambliss is going to be primaried. Our own senator,’’ Tea Party Express Chairwoman Amy Kremer told CNN.

“It's unacceptable to have somebody who votes with the Democrats more than they do with the conservatives, and he has proven time and time again he's all about the spending.

“We're a red state, we deserve a conservative senator, a conservative senator that would stand with Marco Rubio and Rand Paul and Mike Lee who all voted 'no' for this bill.’’

Chambliss has roiled tea party members for his bipartisan work on issues from immigration to reducing the debt, according to The Hill.

Kremer’s vow comes on the heels of conservative blogger Erick Erickson’s threat to mount a primary challenge against Chambliss.

More @ Newsmax

Judge Napolitano: Republicans Did Opposite Of What They Were Elected For With Fiscal Cliff Bill