Category Archives: Hypocrisy

Only in California: Private party gun transfers illegal while backalley abortions just signed into law

Standard
Only in California: Private party gun transfers illegal while backalley abortions just signed into law

I really wonder about California sometimes.

The militant liberal left, the one that welcomes all voices so long as they agree with them, the one that is the most vicious and violent to those who disagree with them, the one who unabashedly infringe on everyone’s rights except those that narrowly fit into their ideology, has done it again.

Gov. Jerry Brown signed AB 154 on Wednesday allowing for non-physicians to perform abortions.  It would be one thing if that meant only handing out medication like the day after pill but the bill actually allows for non-physicians to perform invasive medical procedures in order to kill the unborn child.

Now, I have the knowledge and the steady hand to remove a person’s appendix but I doubt my zero years in medical school would cause a lineup of people at my door looking for appendectomies.

I don’t care what your stance on abortion is, outside of the most ardent pro-abortion mouth foamer out there, this can’t be considered a good idea.  The people performing these procedures aren’t even going to be trained by doctors and while the bill says the abortions will be performed under a doctor’s “supervision” there is nothing in the legislation requiring a physician to be present or on-site during an abortion.

It is not only the ridiculous decision by Gov. Brown and the CA legislature that boggles my mind but their abject hypocrisy.  They will push their agenda, regardless of how extreme yet have no problem with the complete oppression of others.

It is now LEGAL for a person who is not a physician to perform an invasive medical procedure.

It is completely ILLEGAL to sell a gun to someone else without going through a licensed dealer.

From  the Office of the California Attorney General:

Firearm sales must be conducted through a fully licensed California firearms dealer. Failure to do so is a violation of California law. The buyer (and seller, in the event that the; buyer is denied), must meet the normal firearm purchase and delivery requirements.

Yet California does not have any of the major types of abortion restrictions—such as waiting periods, mandated parental involvement or limitations on publicly funded abortions—often found in other states.

If I’m a Californian and I want to sell my over under rifle I use for skeet shooting I can’t just go to my buddy and exchange it for cash, I need to go to someone who is licensed by the state of California and have them oversee the transaction.  I have to deal with background checks, waiting periods and other infringements.

Yet if you want to undergo invasive medical procedures that will rip out and end a life/potential life (depending on your beliefs) then all you need to do is head over to the nearest abortion clinic and anyone who has taken the equivalent to watching a Grey’s Anatomy marathon can hook you up immediately.

Just a look at the numbers:

Total Number of Abortions in CA (2008): 214,190

Approx. number of murders via firearm in US (2008): 12,000

Abortions are nearly 20 times more prevalent in California than murders by firearm are in the ENTIRE United States yet California cracks down and infringes on the rights on the law abiding to keep and bear arms while streamlining the process of aborting babies by not even requiring someone with a medical degree to be involved.

Apparently the inmates have taken over the asylum in Sacramento.

 

Advertisements

Hypocrisy Continues…Lawful Eagle Murder Being Pushed Forward

Standard
Hypocrisy Continues…Lawful Eagle Murder Being Pushed Forward

An object in California is criticized by some and heralded by others.  On one hand it promotes liberty yet on the other it can cause tragedy and bloodshed.  Used properly it can be a great safety net to the people of California while improper or criminal use will result in bloodshed.  Some find them disturbing while others appreciate the benefit they provide.

Of course I am speaking of Wind Turbines.

Thought I was talking about guns?  Gimme a minute.

The murder machines that are wind turbines, while providing alternative energy and helping liberate us from foreign oil are still responsible for the declination of the Golden Eagle.

This is AVIARY GENOCIDE.

Now, if the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service follows precedent on how California handles things when it comes to the 2nd Amendment, they will no doubt sensationalize the deaths and over look the positives.  They will start a smear campaign against anyone who supports wind turbines and cheap power as hating children.  Anti-winders will say outlandish things like hoping the pro-wind people’s pets are chopped up and killed.

Yet, oddly enough, hypocrisy trumps precedent and instead of denouncing the wind turbines for the feather hating murderers that they are the US Fish and Wildlife Service are looking to ALLOW giving Wind Turbine owners an acceptable amount of “mistakes” and “tragedies”.

5 per year to be exact and 25 over a five year period.

Yet when the ban on firearms in National Parks was lifted the US Fish and Wildlife Service investigated for three months trying to derail it by saying that lead ammo was bad for the animals.

So, these turbines can kill indiscriminately any bird they want and up to 5 Golden Eagles because “accidents happen” yet my Constitutional Right does not extend into California because the actions of some lunatic somehow cause to limit my rights?

The point is, as elaborate as I made this article, that wind turbines and firearms are the same thing…tools.

Tools can be used properly or improperly.  Yet while California is banning lead ammo under the false flag of protecting animals like the Golden Eagle the deafening silence to ban Eagle Pureeing Wind Turbines is overwhelming.  Well, that’s about as hypocritical as it gets.

And yes, while I don’t disagree with hunting, I think the decimation of the Golden Eagle is a tragedy.

Gun owners act with class…the hateful left acts with crass

Standard
Gun owners act with class…the hateful left acts with crass

Depending on where you live, the chances are you have come across those who disagree with your choice to exercise your right to keep and bear arms.  There is also a chance you have found businesses that do not recognize your 2nd Amendment rights.

There are plenty of those of the “tolerant” left who have causes they believe in as well.

The difference between in how gun owners react to rejection and the way those of the hateful left is quite telling.

If a business is anti-gun, we as gun owners will most likely avoid it in order to support another company that believes in the 2nd Amendment.  We’ll let others in our community know that a certain business is anti-gun and may even reach out to that business to let them know that they are losing business but it doesn’t extend further than that.

Then you have the hateful left, and I’m not talking about those stooges who impotently try to boycott Starbucks

boycottstarbucks

but rather those hate mongering “tolerant” intellectuals.  Those that wish those who disagree with them to die, or their families to die are are threatening them directly with murder.

nra-threat

This kind of hateful rhetoric is not limited to the anti-gun zealots but rather to any person who dares disagree with an opinion of a hateful left member.

The most recent example of this is the vicious and continued attack by the hateful left against “Sweet Cakes By Melissa”.  What did the owners of the cake shop, Aaron and Melissa Klein, do that was so reprehensible to the hateful left?

They chose to not bake a cake for a lesbian wedding since, on religious grounds, they do not agree morally with a homosexual marriage.

While every gun owner I know and anyone who is not a member of the hateful left would have just found another place to have their cake baked and been content to know that Sweet Cakes lost business, the lesbian couple decided to sue in order to force the Klein’s to betray their own beliefs.

The courts in Oregon, being one of the west coast havens for the hateful left, ruled that the Klein’s had to invalidate their 1st Amendment right of freedom of religion and betray their religious belief in order to placate this lesbian couple.

I can only imagine if I went to a Muslim Bakery and demanded they put bacon into a cake.  Somehow I doubt the court would back me up on that in the same manner.

But on top of forcing a business owner to betray their own religious rights, the hateful left wanted to also punish the owners by threatening them until they decided to close their shop.

Threatening calls, letters promising violence and hateful posts on social media flooded the Kleins.  From proclamations that Aaron should be shot to one apparent threat that he be raped, the hate and angst being thrown the Klein family’s way is certainly serious in nature. Some have even wished for the couple’s five children to be stricken with illness.

One of the tamer ones:

“You stupid bible-thumping, hypocritical b**ch. I hope your kids get really, really, sick and you go out of business,”

That is the tolerance of the hateful left.  You are free to believe in anything you want…so long as you completely agree with them or else they will threaten you and your family.

The Klein’s, refusing to betray their values decided to close the doors to their business and move the operation to a home-based business.  That is called conviction and I salute them for it.  I wish them all the luck and congratulate them on staying true to their beliefs in the face of the ugly and hateful response by the hateful left.

As a vocal gun owner, I have been all too familiar with death threats and just vicious hateful trash being spewed at me from the sewers the hateful left calls mouths.

It is important as a gun owner, or as any rational and reasonable human being to avoid the violence and vitriol of the hateful left and in doing so showing the contrast to an outside party of what we stand for and what the hateful left stand for.

We stand for freedom…they stand for hate mongering and groupthink.

Obama only cares if you get shot BEFORE you can beat a man to death.

Standard

While some of the circumstances are different in regards to the Trayvon Martin attempted murder of George Zimmerman and the actual murder of Delbert Belton at the hands of Demitrius Glenn and Kenan Kenard, I find some things rather telling in their respective fallouts.

Most notably, the deafening silence by those who were so outraged by Trayvon Martin being stopped before he killed Zimmerman.  If it wasn’t for the internet reporting on the death of Delbert Belton I doubt many would ever have heard about it.  It’s not like the “mainstream” media is covering it with circus-like aplomb.

And heaven forbid if anyone even hinted at the idea that two black street thugs killed an 88 year old white man based in part because of racism.

Also, did you even know the names of Demitrius Glenn and Kenan Kinard before you read this?  I recall Martin and Zimmerman being household names for the past 2 years.

Then we have the president,  Mr. Obama.  A while back he went on the air and recounted how if he had a son, he would look just like Trayvon.  First of all, big friggin deal, what does that matter other than to incite some racial overtones on the situation.

Guess what, there are probably MILLIONS of people who have grandfathers and fathers who look like Delbert Belton.  President Obama being one of them.

obama-maternal-grandparents2

But no.  Because Delbert Belton was the wrong color his murderers won’t get the added scrutiny of being racists.  In fact, as I wrote yesterday, people such as the Spokane Chief of Police will even try to mitigate their crimes by saying they weren’t hugged enough as children.

The more I think about it the less doubt I have that if Delbert Belton shot and killed his attackers the race baiting machine would have ratcheted up full force against him and President Obama would have found himself with 2 more imaginary sons.

obamaboyz

Being Gay trumps being a Gun Owner in New Mexico

Standard
Being Gay trumps being a Gun Owner in New Mexico

The Supreme Court of New Mexico has ruled that, by refusing to photograph a gay wedding, a photography studio violated the law.

Long story short, private business owners, Jonathan and Elaine Huguenin don’t agree with gay marriage and chose not to provide photography services to a lesbian couple.

According to the New Mexico Supreme Court,the case

“teaches that at some point in our lives all of us must compromise, if only a little, to accommodate the contrasting values of others. A multicultural, pluralistic society, one of our nation’s strengths, demands no less.”

Compromise.  Funny, this doesn’t seem like a compromise but rather forcing a someone to do something they are diametrically opposed to.

The court goes on to say:

The owners of Elane Photography, Jonathan and Elaine Huguenin, “are free to think, to say, to believe, as they wish, yet in the world of the marketplace, of commerce, of public accommodation, the Huguenins have to channel their conduct, not their beliefs, so as to leave space for other Americans who believe something different.”

Doing so, Bosson said, is “the price of citizenship.”

Ok.  So the price of citizenship is being forced to run your private business in a manner you disagree with on a religious level.  Plus, the court has the hubris to actually geld the 1st Amendment by stating “you are free to say what you believe but it doesn’t matter as you have to still do as we say.”

And to liken this to Blacks being refused service in the south is a false analogy.  It would be more akin to the Ku Klux Klan hiring an all black photography studio to film a cross burning and having the courts force the studio to do it.

(and before you start with the “why would the Klan hire blacks?” talk, i don’t know what goes on in the minds of racists, maybe they’d like forcing blacks to serve them, whatever.  I mean, why didn’t the lesbian couple just find another photography studio instead of suing Elane?)

But speaking of refusing service to blacks in the south, there are civil rights abuses going on in New Mexico that line up more closely to it.

Every day over 22,000 New Mexicans have their civil rights violated by being refused service at businesses around the state by statute*.  They simply exercise their right to keep and bear arms yet are discriminated against by these businesses.  Peaceful refusal to accept this bigoted stance results in the civil rights activist facing a 4th Degree felony which carries an 18-month prison sentence and a $5000 fine.

I believe in the rights of a private business to refuse service if they so choose.  I believe they have a right to allow smoking in their establishment, to serve trans-fats and salt and wash it down with oversized beverages and in general dictate how their business is to be run.

BUT…

If the New Mexico Supreme Court is ruling that, as a business owner, “the price of citizenship” is to “compromise your beliefs” and “leave space for other Americans who believe something different” then the statute allowing the banning of firearms in private businesses must be struck down.

And the 2nd Amendment is not a choice.  I was born this way, with the right to defend myself by use of martial arms and as such it is my civil right as an American to have that protected from bigoted anti-gun business owners.

Regrettably, I can’t help but feel that the New Mexico Supreme Court picks and chooses who they believe deserve to have their civil rights protected.  But who knows, maybe this is the verdict that brings down the state backed bigotry toward gun owners in New Mexico.

 

 

*NMSA 29-19-12 C. C.   provision of authority for a private property owner to disallow the carrying of a concealed handgun on the owner’s property;

 

 

Anti-gun cities, where the rich pay for protection while the poor pay with their lives

Standard
Anti-gun cities, where the rich pay for protection while the poor pay with their lives

The story in New York City is one often told.  While about 8 million souls reside in the city only a scant proportion  (.00375%) are allowed to carry a gun for their own protection.  And with the steep, non-refundable application fee many people just cannot afford to even try for the likelihood of getting turned down and losing nearly $500.

But the rich, famous, and connected have no issues footing that bill and getting a CCW issued to them.  Yet for every Jon Lennon there are THOUSANDS of John Q Publics murdered because they have had their constitutional rights denied them,  not to mention the tens of thousands raped, robbed or beaten.

Even if the privileged few didn’t feel like getting a gun and CCW, like say hypocrite Rosie O’Donnell, you can just pay armed guards to protect you and your family.

It’s a nice option, but one the vast majority of American’s cannot afford.

But New York City is not the only place where the infringement of the 2nd Amendment finds the well to do buying armed security while the less well off are forced to fend off the wolves unarmed.

In Oakland California, where crime rages in the gun control environment forced upon the state by the brain trust in Sacramento, people are also paying for armed security. That is nice if you are rich enough to afford it, or live in a neighborhood affluent enough to have the disposable income in order to share the bill.

For the people who live in a neighborhood that cannot or just won’t pay for private armed security the options are limited due to the fact that getting a ccw in Oakland is almost as difficult as getting one in New York.

In Baltimore, Maryland, they even have separate neighborhoods that pay higher tax rates in order to pay for Private Security.  Though I can assure you those higher tax neighborhoods aren’t in poor neighborhoods.  Once again, the people with money pay for security while the right to defend oneself is denied to those who cannot afford it.

To put it succinctly, the right to defend yourself should NOT be dependent on how much money you have.  

Yet in places where the issuing body has discretion on which citizens can carry a firearm which cannot you end up with 2 America’s.

“May Issue” is more arbitrary than Jim Crow era voting laws ever were.  At least Jim Crow put obstacles that could be overcome (literacy test, poll tax, etc.).  “May Issue” is just simply saying “no, you cannot exercise that right because I say so”.

Rights that can be denied on a whim is not what the founders fought for.  This country is one of liberty and liberty should never be stripped due to one persons discretion.

The Disenfranchisement of the American Gun Owner

Standard
The Disenfranchisement of the American Gun Owner

Unbeknownst to me as an American, showing ID in order to exercise a right is apparently unconstitutional.  I say unbeknownst because as a gun owner it seems like I’m forced to show ID all the time to exercise my rights.

Yet, for the THIRD time, the courts have ruled in Pennsylvania that the voter ID law that would require a voter to prove they were who they said they were before they could cast a ballot, has been blocked.

Apparently, according to the judge and those seeking to abolish the voter ID law, requiring identification somehow is racist, ageist, and a plot to disenfranchise voters.  All it takes is a little bit of time to get a FREE identification card and then you would be able to vote easy peasy, somehow that is too great a burden to bear.

According to those who oppose voter ID laws, the young are too stupid to get IDs, minorities are too lazy and the old are too feeble.  Hmmm…who are the bigoted ones again?

While attacks on voter ID laws are being waged in a number of states including Texas and North Carolina, lets focus on Pennsylvania.

The Senior US Senator from Pennsylvania, Bob Casey,  issued a statement saying that the strike down is a victory and hopes that it leads to a permanent ban of the law.

Very interesting.  Bob Casey initially ran as a pro gun blue dog democrat yet as of late he seems to embrace the gun control zeal of his party’s leader.  As such I doubt he would but…

Will he also defend gun owners who are subject to even MORE disenfranchising hurdles in order to exercise their rights?

In his very own state not only are we required to show ID in order to purchase a handgun if we want to carry that handgun concealed we also have to PAY for an additional form of identification.

That right there is twice as much disenfranchisement.  Not to mention the invasive background check and the rights violations in Philadelphia via segregation, police brutality of gun owners, among other things.

Sen Casey, in all honest decency, if he cannot tolerate voters needing an ID card that is provided to them for free then he MUST also stand against the Jim Crow style poll tax and disenfranchisement of the American Gun Owner both in Pennsylvania and the country at large.

Why must we show ID to exercise our 2nd Amendment right when that is too much of an infringement in exercising our 14th, 15th, or 19th Amendment rights?

Why must we pay for a CCW (or even need one at all) when poll taxes that disenfranchise the poor were outlawed with the 24th Amendment?

I doubt I can expect Sen. Casey’s support the next time I go to a firearms dealer to buy a handgun and refuse to provide ID and then sue the gun dealer for violating my rights.

When they say they need it for NICS I can again find the presence of Casey to support my suit against the federal government for background checks wanting as well.

I doubt Sen Casey and others who are against Voter ID laws will be too willing to protect our (gun owners) rights and as such we will continue to have financial hardships and unconstitutional requirements levied upon us in hopes to disenfranchise us.

Let us continue to dash their hopes and carry on.