Monthly Archives: July 2013

Legality aside, why would Docs need to know if there’s a gun in your house?

Standard
Legality aside, why would Docs need to know if there’s a gun in your house?

The Heritage Foundation did a great write up about the legality of barring doctors from snooping into the non-medical related business of their patients, but I wanted to put the legality of the issue aside for the moment.

My real question is, Why?  Why would a doctor need to know whether you have a gun in the house?  And also, why is Obamacare encouraging doctors to ask about gun ownership?  Considering that patient information will be privy to the government in the new Obamacare database, I can understand why the Obama Administration (enemy to the 2nd Amendment) would want that information.

I’m still wondering though, what  the rationale that doctors hide behind in order to ask the question in the first place.  I don’t think a doctor of mine ever asked what kind of car I drove or whether I have a Ginzu knife set or a sawzall.  Those are dangerous tools as well and could be used to hurt myself or others if misused.  Yet they never asked about those things.

And let’s not fool ourselves into thinking that NOT answering the question is good enough.  If you are a gun owner you can either lie to your doctor (and if you have a negligent discharge and shoot yourself in the foot, face the possibility that your insurance won’t cover the costs), you can forgo your right to privacy and say yes (an infringement in its own way) or you can tell your doctor to pound sand, which will be like admitting it anyways.

What if you have kids?  We teach our children not to talk to strangers but we introduce our doctors as people who will help them and are to be trusted.  We do put our children’s lives in these people’s hands after all.  Are we really going to try and tell our children which questions to be honest about and which to evade?

I don’t like when government passes any law to restrict a right.  But I cannot legally yell fire in a crowded theatre when there isn’t one, I cannot legally threaten to kill a person, I can’t legally lie under oath at a trial…these infringements on my First Amendment rights are in place to protect other people.

And before any of you gun grabbing antis start squawking about gun control…the equivalent of gun control to the above scenario’s is to pass a law cutting out everyone’s tongues.  Of course the criminals just won’t have theirs cut out.

Anyways, back to the point.  A doctor has no medical reason to inquire about firearms in the home and people should be protected from both doctors, who would abuse their position, and a government who has knocked down the wall of doctor/patient confidentiality.

Unless a doctor is going to prescribe a pill that stops bullets and will prescribe them only to gun owners, the question itself is beyond the scope of a doctors purview and just shouldn’t be asked.

 

As an ironic twist, as often as Obama likes to tout polls saying a majority of Law Enforcement back gun control and using that as a platform to push for it…he is oddly silent in the face of this poll:

A survey released last year (2012) by the non-partisan Doctor Patient Medical Association painted an even bleaker picture, revealing that 83 percent of physicians have thought about leaving their practices because of Obamacare.

Advertisements

The danger of Chris Christie’s big fat stupid ideas on the Constitution and 2nd Amendment

Standard
The danger of Chris Christie’s big fat stupid ideas on the Constitution and 2nd Amendment

It seems nowadays, with the end of one presidential election, we move right into the next presidential cycle.  There is talk that New Jersey Governor Chris Christie is a popular choice to be the candidate for the Republican nomination.

If that is true, why doesn’t the Republican party save us all the trouble and just nominate whoever the democrats nominate because it’ll pretty much the same.

Chris Christie is no friend to the 2nd Amendment.  Yes, I know he is the Governor of New Jersey but he doesn’t even attempt to take a stand for the rights of his citizens. He has not voiced any dissent on the further restrictions to the rights of New Jerseyians to keep and bear arms being rammed through the legislature.  There will be no veto, even if symbolic.  Christie is just not pro rights.

Notice how i didn’t say pro gun rights.  No, Christie is one of those statists who believes that  Constitutional rights are malleable to the whims of the government.  His latest diatribe against Rand Paul and Libertarians in general lend credence to that truth.

“This strain of libertarianism that’s going through parties right now and making big headlines I think is a very dangerous thought.”

He thinks the discussion of civil rights, privacy, freedom and the like are “esoteric” thoughts and those who have them are cowardly.  No really…here’s his quote about lawmakers  who are questioning government surveillance programs:

“These esoteric, intellectual debates — I want them to come to New Jersey and sit across from the widows and the orphans and have that conversation. And they won’t, because that’s a much tougher conversation to have,”

Chris Christie takes the opposite approach from another portly Statesmen from neighboring Pennsylvania, guy by the name of Ben Franklin who once said:

They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.

To Chris Christie, the notions of liberty and freedom are just esoteric ideas that fade away when they are difficult to deal with.

Just like any gun grabber who utters some nonsense about “if gun control can save just one life”, if we lose all our freedoms then what is life actually worth.

The country can eliminate almost all motor vehicle deaths by mandatory installation of governors on their cars that limit the speed to 5mph.  But then, what’s the point of driving?

And to answer Mr. Christie’s challenge, if he wants to fly me out to New Jersey I’ll be more than happy to sit down and have a real honest discussion with the widows and orphans of 9/11.  I’m sure they would appreciate that a little more than the pandering and exploiting that he and others have been doing over the past decade.

Because the bottom line is, this is America.  Carved out of a wilderness and wild land.  We are a nation founded by pilgrims, criminals, radicals, slaves, Indians, pirates, debtors, adventurers, prospectors, homesteaders, speculators, aristocrats and immigrants.

To quote a fictionalized Ben Franklin from the film/musical 1776, “We’ve spawned a new race here. Rougher, simpler; more violent, more enterprising; less refined. We’re a new nationality.”

A new nationality that understands that freedom and liberty come with danger and risk.  Yet the rewards for the former far outweigh the losses of the latter.

If Republicans choose to nominate someone like Chris Christie who believes the opposite, then they might as well not nominate anyone at all.

*In case you weren’t sold on Chris Christie and gun control:

NJ Gov. Chris Christie Unveils Sweeping Gun Control Measures

Chris Christie Proposes Measures to Curb Gun violence

http://www.ontheissues.org/governor/Chris_Christie_Gun_Control.htm

Do you think he would fight for your right to keep and bear arms as President?  I don’t.  But Republicans…by all means nominate another North East RINO…see how it works out for ya.

PA Attorney General Kathleen Kane proves she gets her marching orders from Herr Bloomberg

Standard
PA Attorney General Kathleen Kane proves she gets her marching orders from Herr Bloomberg

What do you get when you elect a rabid anti gun Bloomberg backed stooge?  One need look no further than Pennsylvania to see what such a choice can reap.

Kathleen Kane, who didn’t really hide the fact that she was a gun grabbing automaton of Billionaire Bloomberg has gone and proven that she is willing to follow Bloomberg’s directives and goosestep all over the 2nd Amendment.

Following her unlawful evisceration of the Pennsylvania’s reciprocity agreement with Florida to close the boogeyman “loophole” that she campaigned on, she has just now eliminated the reciprocity agreement with Idaho.

What was Idaho’s transgression that forced AG Kane to act and dissolve the agreement?

IDAHO INCREASED THE SCRUTINY OF GETTING A CONCEALED WEAPONS PERMIT

You read that right.  Idaho made it MORE arduous to get a permit to carry concealed.  It is now more difficult to get a CCW in Idaho than it is to get a LTCF (the PA equivalent) in Pennsylvania.

But because Idaho changed the requirements in getting their permits, ironically so it would be accepted in more states, Kane used the opportunity to re-evaluate the reciprocity agreement in order to destroy it…which she has.

Robert Mulle, Pennsylvania’s chief deputy attorney general, wrote,

“Upon review of Idaho’s relevant statutory provisions, we have determined that mutual reciprocity will no longer be extended to the state of Idaho.”

They are not even trying to hide what they are doing.  I cannot impress this point enough.  Idaho raised the scrutiny for getting a CCW to a point HIGHER than Pennsylvania and Kane took the opportunity to end the reciprocity.

There can be no greater proof that Kathleen Kane, puppet of Mayor Bloomberg who financed her campaign, is out to utterly destroy every Pennsylvania reciprocity agreement she can.

She created a political boogeyman with the Florida “loophole” nonsense but here she decided that she didn’t even have to make the effort.  Kane is on a mission to make the PA LTCF useless in any other state.  And i’ve no doubt that if she had the power she would somehow geld the LTCF in Pennsylvania as well.

This is what happens when you elect a foot soldier in Bloomberg’s Army of gun control zealots.  They do what their master tells them to do…and Bloomberg tells them to destroy the 2nd Amendment in any way they can.

Kathleen Kane is a good little soldier and is following his orders the best she can.

If none stand to oppose her, in the next 3 years she will accomplish all she wants to, making the PA LTCF worthless.

If you are a Pennsylvanian, I would suggest you contact your state Reps and demand action to curtail her ability to gut Pennsylvanians right to keep and bear arms.  Let the battle be joined.

 

 

Note: Idaho recognizes the permits of all 50 states and as of this publishing still recognizes Pennsylvania’s LTCF.

When does your gun collection become an “arsenal”? When the media wants to grab headlines

Standard
When does your gun collection become an “arsenal”? When the media wants to grab headlines

In the Little Havana district of Miami, Luis Bianchi was running late for work while waiting for his 3 year old daughter’s mother to come and take her.  He made the inadvisable choice to leave Analis in front of the television when her mother told Luis that she was on her way and would be there shortly.  Luis, blocked access to his bedroom with a couch (the reason will become apparent) and locked the front door when he left.

Analis was found wandering the halls some time later and a neighbor called police at 6:30pm.

When the police came and escorted the little girl back to her home they investigated the apartment, moved the couch and entered the fathers bedroom to find…AN ARSENAL OF AMMUNITION AND ASSAULT RIFLES….oooooo scary.

Almost every news outlet and paper included the word arsenal.  Most even went on to say the house had a grenade in it.  The grenade was inert thus rendering it a paperweight but instead of doing some actual research they just reported that a grenade was present and making Luis Bianchi sound like Che Guevara.  Actually the liberal press loves Che so maybe not.  Regardless, even after the press found out that the grenade was not active they reported it as a dud and not as inert.

The difference of course is that a dud grenade is one that is still supposed to explode and failed to while an inert grenade is one that had its explosive capabilities removed.  It’s a small difference in reporting that has a huge impact on perception.

Luis Bianchi sees all this on the 11 o’clock news and goes to the police station to sort it all out.  He is arrested…for CHILD NEGLECT.

I suppose that is the correct charge for leaving a 3 year old home alone, though one wonders where the mother, who was “on her way”, ended up.

But my point is that they didn’t charge Mr. Bianchi with ANY gun violations.  This “arsenal”, even if it constituted the word, was still perfectly legal.

Mr. Bianchi made several mistakes; leaving his daughter alone, trusting his ex to be on time (when minutes count your ex is just…well who knows), and not securing the front door well enough to keep his daughter in the apartment.

Yet what the media is crucifying him for is being a gun owner.  I’m not sure how big the couch was that blocked his door (and as such his “arsenal”) from the other room, but if it was big and heavy enough to stop a 3 year old girl from moving it then his weapons were secure from her and as such the whole aspect of the weapons is a non issue.

Which makes this case one about a father who made a ill advised choice believing his ex would be at the apartment shortly and leaving his daughter alone to wait.  If the court rules to take custody away from Luis Bianchi it should be based off of this alone and not because he believes in the 2nd Amendment.

But since he is a gun owner the media will rake him over the coals and try to demonize him in order to sensationalize the entire matter and up their ratings.

Another lesson to gun owners…on top of being safe you have to be smart.  Give the press any opportunity and they will toss you on the pyre in order to make their ratings rise.  Don’t give them the opportunity…and don’t leave a 3 year old at home alone.

School Shooting? Check. Exploitative gun control? Check. Rampant crime as a result? Welcome to Stockton

Standard
School Shooting? Check. Exploitative gun control? Check. Rampant crime as a result? Welcome to Stockton

With all the exploitation of dead children that Obama, Bloomberg and other gun grabbing controllers were doing after Sandy Hook, in their push to forward their anti-gun agenda, I did some research to see what happens if they win.

Tragically, this was not the first time that a elementary school shooting happened.  Nor was it the first time that anti gun politicians exploited the tragedy of dead children to push for the banning of firearms.

One need only look back to 1989 in Stockton California at the Cleveland School where Patrick Purdy opened fired and killed 5 school children ages 6-8 and injuring another 29 plus one teacher.

The political ghouls descended upon this tragedy as they have for Sandy Hook and such pejorative terms as “assault weapons” became part of the vernacular.  It was with loaded terms and preying off the grief and sadness of the tragedy that Stockton and California passed restrictive and oppressive gun control measures.

Before I get to far into this, I would like to point out a few things about Patrick Purdy.

Purdy had a long criminal history, which began during early adolescence.  In June 1980, Purdy was first arrested at age 15 for a court-order violation. He was arrested in the same month for underage drinking. He was later arrested for prostitution in August 1980, possession of marijuana and drug dealing in 1982, and in 1983 for possession of an illegal weapon and receipt of stolen property. On October 11, 1984, he was arrested for being an accomplice in an armed robbery at a service station, for which he spent 32 days in the Yolo County Jail. In 1986 his mother called police after he vandalized her car for refusing to give him money for narcotics.

In April 1987, he and his half-brother Albert were arrested for firing a semi-automatic pistol at trees in the Eldorado National Forest. At the time, he was carrying a book about the white supremacist group Aryan Nations, and told the County Sheriff that it was his “duty to help the suppressed and overthrow the suppressor.” Later in prison he attempted suicide twice, once by hanging himself with a rope made out of strips of his shirt, and a second time by cutting his wrists with his fingernails. A subsequent psychiatric assessment found him to suffer from very mild mental retardation, and to be a danger to himself and others.

California and its gun grabbing control meisters, in all its “wisdom” decide to attack the gun and subjugate law abiding citizens (thereby forwarding the gun control agenda) rather than take a hard look at the abject failure of the legal system in California.  I mean, WHY was this guy on the streets?!?!  How many times do we have to be soft on criminals because they “had it tough growing up” and then act surprised when they rape or murder or rob again?

Instead of looking to its own failures in order to prevent criminals from committing more crimes, California took the politically expedient route and used good ole Nazi Propaganda scare tactics by creating a boogeyman to scare people into following their lead.  In Berlin that boogeyman was a fabricated Jewish conspiracy…in this case it was black guns that looked scary because the propaganda machine said they looked scary.

So with California failing to stop a career criminal from shooting up a school, the politicians go after law abiding citizens instead.  Because according to gun controllers it is better to FEEL safe than BE safe.

Let’s fast forward 24 years and see what all this gun control has wrought for good ole Stockton California.  Stockton ranks 10th on the 25 most dangerous cities in America.  They are second in California behind only Oakland.  Their county, San Joaquin, is ranked the 5th most dangerous metropolitan area in the country.

Stockton reported 1,408 violent crimes per 100,000 people

The city also reported 448.3 robberies per 100,000 people. The national average is 113.7 robberies per 100,000 people.

To compare it to a place of similar size, we can look to my city of Pittsburgh.  We have about 13,000 more people (and strong gun rights) yet we have less Violent Crime, Rape, Murder, Car Theft, Larceny, Robbery and Aggravated Assault by an average of up to 4 to 1.

That is what the overreaction and agenda driven exploitation of a school shooting tragedy has given Stockton California.  A top 10 most dangerous city ranking.  California failed those children because its judicial system didn’t have the stones to lock up a career criminal and dangerous man.  It has failed everyone else in the years since by systematically disarming the innocent to be laid in the trough for the animals who walk on two legs.

That is the lesson we need to remember today.  Disarming the innocent because of Sandy Hook will reap the same benefits today as it did in Stockton 24 years ago.

A city where only the criminals are safer.

The rats are scurrying off of Bloomberg’s sinking ship

Standard
The rats are scurrying off of Bloomberg’s sinking ship

How do you know when to worry while on a ocean liner?

The rats start fleeing the ship first.

Amusingly, that is what is befallen the “Mayor who would be King” and his band of seafaring rodents.

Mayors are fleeing Bloomberg’s Mayors Against “Illegal” Guns en masse.  50 mayors have recently cut ties with the organization.

Now, these aren’t the same mayors who have left long ago because they were bamboozled into believing that his majesty’s organization was actually about ILLEGAL guns.  There is something to be said for realizing you’ve been duped and leaving an organization when the truth of it is revealed.

No, the mayors who are leaving now are doing so because the would be King has overreached and now has become a political liability for them.  Or they are leaving to serve jail sentances because they put the Illegal in MAIG.

They still believe in what Bloomberg, in all his gun grabbing despotic glory, stands for.  They are just realizing that the “90% of Americans” statistic that has been thrown around without actually being backed up was all smoke and mirrors.  It was a LIE.

The truth is, supporters of Mayors Against “Illegal” Guns are a fringe outlier of the American populace.  The only reason they received any traction is due to Bloomberg peddling milllions of dollars of his own money to prop it up.

Not to mention the millions more taxpayer dollars he and other mayors illegally use to push their agenda.

For one reason or another, the majority of America has finally awoken to this New York madman’s desire to constrain it’s liberty under the yoke of his ideology.

The sleeping giant has been roused.

Bloomberg’s ship is beginning to list.

And the rats are scurrying for the door.

meet-the-mayors

 

 

 

 

The false safety blanket of a home security unit

Standard
The false safety blanket of a home security unit

Now, don’t get me wrong, a home security unit like ADT is a great little additional line of protection, especially while you are out of the house. But ADT has taken to selling a false bill of goods with this ad:

http://ispot.tv/a/7LzI (sorry it doesn’t embed)

But in the first 5 seconds the scene shows a woman and her daughter walking into their house while the burglar is ransacking the place.  Her voiceover tells the audience that the reason they got ADT is because she walked into a burglary once.

While that is all well and good, in the acted scene, the burglar looks at this woman and simply turns and saunters off.  Maybe that really happens in real life, or maybe this guy turns to her and her daughter and silences them, or does something much much worse.  One would think that after walking in on a burglary that you might value the accessibility of a firearm to stop the burglary from becoming a rape and murder.

But wait, you say that she didn’t have ADT and that would somehow have protected her?  Ok…take a look at this commercial:

You only have to listen until the 22 second mark to hear ADT admit what gun owners have used as a mantra for years.

The narrator says the home invaders broke in at 12:06am and the police arrested them at 12:29am.  When seconds count the police are just minutes away.

That is 23 MINUTES with dangerous men who are a threat to you and your young son just buzzing around your house.  And what if they got to you before ADT called and had you give the ok phrase?  Then you have no cavalry coming to save you.

ADT and other security systems aren’t going to actively protect you.  They are a passive system that will alert the police, who will eventually show up and sort things out.  Remember, the majority of the time, police don’t stop crimes, they investigate them after they’ve been committed.

So by all means have your ADT system.  It’s good when you are not home, it’s good to get emergency services to your home in case of fire.  But you better get something for those 23 minutes you are waiting for the police to show up because a bad guy can make those 23 minutes an eternity.

Food for thought.