The Stupid....it burns.....

While ironically reporting on former President GW Bush talking about "chaos in the middle east, and the current Administration's policies", 'Outnumbered' intellectual luminary Stacey Dash said the following:

“When George W. Bush was president, the most important thing to him was not to be liked, but to be respected; And you better believe no one would have been beheaded when he was president.”

Perhaps Ms. Dash would be well served to remember the large number of foreign citizens who were beheaded in Iraq...a practice catalyzed by the beheading of Daniel Pearl in 2002. All during the Administration of GW Bush.


Speaking of flaming stupid....

Fox & Friends attacks Miami’s history-making black woman cop because she could be a flag-hating Muslim

Yep...I could watch this forever

h/t Knuckledraggin My Life Away

USMC v. Army......Epic rap battle

Children on the Internet

It was only a matter of time. I lasted longer than others, in keeping an open comment blog. But as any can see, the pathetic nature of some....who not only cannot conduct mature discourse with an opposing view......but when told to go elsewhere.....flail about in a petulant tantrum [evidence is in the comments section of the post below].

I have been forced to require comment moderation, since I don't have the time some basement dwellers do, to police this site from folks who need validation from being intellectually dishonest. Many of you who stop by here, already know the vermin of which I speak.......and you warned me to be sure.

Anyway.....those of you who proffer mature dialogue [which as been everybody expect the offending party] I will approve those comments as quickly as I can.

Gun Rights and "Compromise"?

There's an oft repeated line that comes from the gun control camp....aside from the emotional framing and illogical narratives. The gun control camp asks "why won't the gun rights camp just 'compromise' on this issue?" This is typically accompanied by immeasurable euphemisms such as "reasonable" and "common sense", but those are designed to appeal to the uninformed.

My issue is with the core question of "compromise". Every time I have asked what is to follow below, I either haven't received any answer, or have received simply more of the same issued script.

The 2nd Amendment [to highlight the context, one of the enumerated Constitutional rights guaranteed to the People] is, and has historically been the most infringed upon, restricted and regulated Constitutional right of the bunch. The 2nd Amendment has had limitations imposed upon the People, to an extent unfathomable to the very same critics were they to be likewise imposed upon any other Constitutional right.

So, let's remember the purpose and intent on the 2nd Amendment, that the right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms, shall not be infringed. Yes, I know someone will invariably come along [again] and proffer the Militia = National Guard = collective right canard; they can't help it, its part of the script. But let's dispense for a moment with the history of such infringement to date and use the Amendment as it is realistically protected and restricted currently.

Now, let's consider the gun control position. It does vary, publicly. I have my doubts that anyone who employs the gun control narrative really supports the 2nd Amendment, though many make a point of saying so. It typically goes like this: "I support the 2nd Amendment, but.....". To be generous, let's presume that there are those who would disarm the citizen body wholly and completely; and there are those who would see the citizen able to own a fowling piece, or perhaps a target rifle locked at a State sanctioned shooting club. Perhaps there are even a few who merely think that licensing and taxing private transactions between citizens [again incompatible with any other right], and the registration of firearms is a good idea...though we've seen the result of that happening in other nations.

So...taking both positions into consideration...my question is two-part but simple: 1. What is the "compromise" sought by the gun control camp? Not the nickel and dime legislation designed to merely set precedence for further restriction, but the end state?

And 2. What "compromise has the gun control camp shown to date? Remember where the positions started and are currently, along the philosophical X Axis.

All rational and mature comments are welcome, but I've been waiting for so long, for anyone from the gun control camp to offer up a cogent answer.

This week in the ongoing oppression of Christians

Yes, that was sarcasm. Todd Starnes, where are you?

Cochran City Manager Richard Newbern said the city council voted to wave the Christian Flag over city hall. 

Councilman Gary Ates said he made the motion for the flag to stay up. He said the council voted to keep it up 5 to 1. "The city manager took the flag down because an attorney said we could have a problem," said Ates. 

Ates said, "The people of Cochran came to a city council meeting and said 'let's put the flag back up'," said Ates. 

Ates said about 75 to 100 people requested it to be put up again. 

"It was the right thing to do," said Ates. 

We reached out to other Cochran city officials; none of them could be reached for comment.

Link

This flag has no more place above a government building than a rainbow flag or a Confederate battle flag. But it will be defending by those seeking victim status or claiming that we're a "Christian nation".

It takes two groups of fools to fight a 'culture war'.

Friday Follies.....Things my Recruiter never told me......

The Navy Chief I work with here sent me this.....just to rub it in a bit.

Justice and the Race Card

Justice is supposed to be blind, but throughout our history it has not always been so.

Gregory Wallace and another man burst into the Kentucky home of Jordan and Tommy Gray and robbed them and their three-year-old daughter at gunpoint. But at Wallace's sentencing hearing Judge Olu Stevens singled out the Grays, not Wallace, for criticism. Wallace and his partner are black, and the Grays noted in their impact statement their daughter still reacts in fear to black men. Stevens said those remarks offended him and accused the parents of fostering racist behavior in their daughter. He sentenced Wallace to five years probation.

Reason

The judge stated that his remarks regarding race played no role in his sentencing decision, but were the roles reversed, would that argument have traction in the public eye?

Another week.....another laughable gun control proposal

Gun control proponents couldn't buy a clue if the NRA gave them a stipend to do so. The Hill reports that noted firearms and hunting expert*, Rep. Rosa DeLauro proposed the following legislation:

Gun owners would receive tax breaks for voluntarily turning in high-powered assault rifles under new legislation proposed Monday. 

The Support Assault Firearm Elimination and Education of our (SAFER) Streets Act expected to be reintroduced next week by Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.) would provide gun owners with an incentive to turn in their firearms to local police departments. 

“Assault weapons are not about hunting, or even self-defense,” DeLauro said. “There is no reason on earth, other than to kill as many people as possible in as short a time as possible, that anyone needs a gun designed for a battlefield.” 

Though DeLauro is in favor of stronger guns laws that would completely ban assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition, she emphasized this bill would not force gun owners to turn in their firearms. 

The legislation would provide up to $2,000 in tax credits for gun owners who voluntarily hand over assault weapons to their local police departments.

* Obvious sarcasm at the expense of a rather clueless politician. 

This proposal is so rife with absurdity, I'm not really sure where to begin. Why is the gun control camp comprised of not a single member who has a clue about firearms? Sadly, every politician should be an expert on the Constitution, but we know that few of them are.

Aside from the obvious and enduring fact, that the gun control camp cannot define what they feel an "assault weapon" is....at least beyond some apparently scary looking cosmetic features.....the rifles that they refer to are commonly used in both hunting and self defense. She lies. Worse, she knows she lies.

She then claims that these rifles in question were "designed for the battlefield", and that nobody needs this type of rifle. Again, aside from the fact that the 2nd Amendment resides within the Bill of Rights, not a 'Bill of Needs', she is either perfidious or ignorant that every class of firearm was 'designed for the battlefield' [that is where firearm innovation occurs] - and - that our law enforcement officers at all levels [who are NOT military nor on a battlefield] are routinely equipped with this class of rifles.

I really have no idea what "high capacity ammunition" is, beyond a string of words she relied on as an appeal to emotion.

As for the tax credit scheme, she is apparently unaware of dismal track record of "gun buy-backs", where law enforcement usually nets a crateful of inoperable or low grade 'junk guns', at a rather hefty bill for the taxpayer - and - the fact that she is again setting up LEO's to be taken advantage of, at the expense of tax payers. I'd seriously consider trading in a low end Colt or DPMS in return for the $2000 tax credit. It would allow me to obtain the items needed to build my own, or purchase a better quality rifle [or optics and furniture for my current.]

As usual, I'm left believing that there are only two viable options here.....either Rep DeLauro is stupid, or she thinks that gun control proponents are. I'd actually have more respect for them if they simply came out publicly and proposed a repeal of the 2nd Amendment. That's what they really want; but they haven't the courage nor the integrity to do so.

Gun Safety and children.....OMG think of the children!

It's been a long week, and this made me laugh. So I'll just leave this right here.