Rights Under Seige

I get miffed in this gun control fever, even by some 2nd amendment supporters. I suppose it is an insult. Attaching the words common sense to it means nothing to me.

This debate – as they call it – rages on over gun control. But it will never end with the left; and there are no limits.

To be perfectly honest, I’m getting real tired of people or government trying to redefine what our rights are. That is the very heart of the problem.

It cannot be up to the current crop of politicos in office, or the climate in Washington, even who is president, to determine what our rights are.

If it is up to the current political climate, then at one time our rights will be defined one way and under different leadership they will be defined another way. It will go from pandering to our rights to debating how much restrictions or controls they can excerpt over them. I don’t want to live in a country like that. I don’t need a politician sucking up to me about preserving my rights. Or how only he/she will protect my rights.

We hold elections to determine who represents us, not as a referendum on our rights. Those are inalienable rights, so why are some people trying to make them conditional?

I just want them protected, as an obligation of the office they hold. It is not an arbitrary duty but some people make it one. I am not transferring authority over my rights.

On the other hand, I don’t want an endless diatribe on how much you are going to restrict or control my rights — telling us we need a national discussion on my rights. Why should their chief objective be to control, redefine and reinterpret our God-given unalienable rights? I’m sorry, it is beyond insulting and offensive. Don’t do me any favors.

I also don’t want our rights up to redefinition and reinterpretation every couple years. That is usurping them, not preserving and protecting them. It cannot be up to a few people, some politicians, or even a large group like the NRA to solely defend the 2nd amendment. It is ultimately up to the people.

My unalienable rights are not a bargaining chip for elected officials and fundraiser to line their campaign coffers. They swear an oath to protect and defend the Constitution, not to nullify it. It is a Bill of Rights, not a bill of suggestions.

Right Ring | Bullright

The March for lives?

Since yesterday was the students March for our lives and today is Sunday, I thought a scripture might be appropriate for the occasion.

Well, other than it being just another big registration drive for Dems, you know, everyone wants to defer to the expert wisdom of these kids. Who could disagree? That’s the idea.

And just for a reminder that there is really nothing new under the sun.

Isaiah 3 (NASB)
4And I will make mere lads their princes,
And capricious children will rule over them,
5And the people will be oppressed,
Each one by another, and each one by his neighbor;
The youth will storm against the elder
And the inferior against the honorable.

12 O My people! Their oppressors are children,
And women rule over them.
O My people! Those who guide you lead you astray
And confuse the direction of your paths.

 

One girl named Naomi Wadler, who led fellow students on a walkout at her school, said:

“My friends and I might still be 11 and we might still be in elementary school, but we know,” she said. “We know life isn’t equal for everyone and we know what is right and wrong.”

And of course Obama chimed in with an always relevant piece of outhouse wisdom:

 

Nothing can stand in the way. Forget that, unfortunately, nothing stood in the way of this shooter in Parkland to commit this atrocity. Nothing except a coach who tried to intervene to save some students and died.

But no law enforcement officer stood in his way, no social worker, school employee, sheriff deputy, FBI agent, or school resource officer on the scene. Nothing. But they deliberately ignore all those failures on the record. Yet nothing can stop these kids, this anti-gun movement, now.

Obama must be snickering about that. No stopping the shooter, just stop NRA and any legislators in their way.  I get shivers when I hear Obama talking about “change”.

Yet there were some counterprotestors calling to protect the Second Amendment.

“I like talking to people I disagree with so I can get a broader range of views. I’d say there’s a lot of misinformation and I came to talk to people,” Eric Ciabottonia, a 19-year-old engineering major from Penn State University.

Right Ring | Bullright

What’s a little astroturf on gun control?

Why Did It Take Two Weeks To Discover Parkland Students’ Astroturfing?

The Federalist

The Miami Herald credited their success to the school’s stellar debate program. The Wall Street Journal said it was because they were born online, and organizing was instinctive.

On February 28, BuzzFeed came out with the actual story: Rep. Debbie Wassermann Schultz aiding in the lobbying in Tallahassee, a teacher’s union organizing the buses that got the kids there, Michael Bloomberg’s groups and the Women’s March working on the upcoming March For Our Lives, MoveOn.org doing social media promotion and (potentially) march logistics, and training for student activists provided by federally funded Planned Parenthood.

http://thefederalist.com/2018/03/01/take-two-weeks-truth-emerge-parkland-students-astroturfing/

When Dems say grasroots they mean astroturf. Almost made to order. Hmm.

Radical Islamic agenda and gun control

Eric Bolling filled in on the O’Reilly Factor. A former Obama advisor, Nayyera Haq, argued for more gun control laws. Eric laid out the Islamist problem spreading like wild fire. Well, it’s hard to deny, hard as libs try.

The terrorist was “a homophobic who clearly had mental health issues”.

She claimed we are making progress on ISIS, but that as we make gains in the ME, ISIS gets desperate calling for lone wolf attacks. “As you beat back ISIS on the ground in Syria and Iraq, they spread to Europe and US. So that’s a separate problem,” she said.

Then came the revelations of CIA Director Brennan. He tells us the are coming here and scheming to exploit the refugee program and immigration. Nayyera Haq said:

“I think a big part of the answer is: now that it’s coming to America homeland, let’s not make it easy for people to get weapons like AR-15s or any other weapons… now, absolutely.”

Did she make that loud and clear? We have to sacrifice our rights and guns because the terrorists are coming here. That might have been a Freudian slip, but it’s the ugly truth. They must crack down on our rights because of Radical Islamic Terrorists and jihadis — which they can’t even mention — are obsessed with killing. Target guns not terrorists.

Let me flush that out further. Immigrants, real immigrants, typically come here to assimilate into America. Islamic radicals come here to assimilate America to them, Islam. They don’t want any part of assimilation and if we have to sacrifice or lose things because of them coming here, all the better. That is not immigration, that’s an invasion, a hostile takeover. But Islamists already declared war on us, so it’s no surprise.

Incidentally, the Radicals and Muslims are some of the most vocal supporters of gun control, why is that? I’ve read articles by so-called moderate, liberal Muslims for gun control. Stop looking at their Islam faith, blame our gun laws, they say. Absurd.

So now for a message to our Commander and Denier:

Mr. Obama, if you really want Americans to resent Muslims, then take our rights away and demand we sacrifice our guns because the Radical Islamists’ political agenda cannot be controlled or defeated. That will make Americans respect Muslims more, won’t it?

That is not a wise trade off: making new rights and protections for Muslims while you take away our Constitutional rights. Then again, Obama will not enforce the laws there now, and scrubbed regulations for offensive words. What these radicals and terrorists are doing is treason, something like what you’ve been doing. But here is the king of deception himself.

“The reason I am careful about how I describe this threat has nothing to do with political correctness and everything to do with actually defeating extremism,” Obama lectured us after Orlando.

“There’s no magic to the phrase ‘radical Islam. It’s a political talking point, not a strategy.”

“It wouldn’t make us more safe, it would make us less safe, fueling ISIL’s notion that the West hates Muslims.” – NOLA

Even within that rebuttal he could only call it extremism. Obama is an extremist obfuscater of the first degree. Our greatest threat is still sitting in the Oval Office.

RightRing | Bullright

Step right up – rewrites R us

Always be suspicious when a Democrat or progressive tells you that “most Americans want” this or that. I would say run but we can’t afford to and cede that soundbite to them. It is never true when they declare to speak for most people. If most people really knew exactly what these social salesmen were all about then most people would not have anything to do with it all. But Dems have this perception illusion going on.

The latest of these tactics is playing out in the age-old push for gun control. They are always going to be looking to take guns from law abiding people and nothing is going to stop them. Not even the will of the people when it speaks loudly and clearly. It didn’t stop them on Obamacare or a myriad of other things. But when a majority of people disagree with Democrats, it doesn’t matter anyway, even when you point it out. Then, like Obama tells us, people are too stupid or don’t understand.

The Dems’ conversation always starts with “what most Americans want’. That’s the first clue you’re about to be scammed. If you walked down the street and people screamed to you that most people are buying a certain item, would you go buy it? No, but somehow we are supposed to buy their schemes that way. (they are not plans) The only problem is when the people don’t go along with their plans – when they don’t want what Dems are selling. Then what Americans want is irrelevant.

What Americans want doesn’t matter when Americans overwhelmingly don’t want Syrian refugees. Most Americans want accountability in government, especially from the administration, but let’s scratch that off their list. Most Americans wanted accountability on Benghazi but that didn’t matter. Americans by far really want something done about our VA system and people to be held accountable, but that is not at the top of the to-do list for the administration. Most Americans do not want a sniveling, weak-kneed Obama traveling around the world throwing America under the bus, apologizing apparently on their behalf. No, they resent that but it still doesn’t stop Obama from delivering it.

Now they tell us most Americans want gun control. They even say that NRA members want to close this or that “loophole”. Two things are on the rise: gun ownership and purchases; and membership in the NRA. Do we think that both of these are because people want tighter gun control? But that’s what they’d have us believe. Any time Democrats really want something, you can count on them saying it is what “most Americans want.”

In fact Obama has taken a string of unilateral actions because people do not want them. So he does it anyway. Amnesty was very unpopular. Yet Obama comes out and tells us about what most Americans want as if he were reading our subconscious. And you can count on their favorite key word being used, loopholes. I have said before that the second amendment is not a loophole, but that is what Leftists would have you believe.

CBS reports:

After months of legal review, the White House is expected to unveil executive measures aimed at reducing gun violence, as soon as early next week, according to those briefed on the executive branch’s plans.

In early October, shortly after the mass shooting at an Oregon community college, President Obama assigned White House and Department of Justice lawyers to comb the law in search of any unused administrative authority available to him.

What Obama didn’t or couldn’t get for Christmas, he is now looking to indulge himself with by executive actions. President-Selfie has an appetite for gun control and he doesn’t care what is on the House menu. So he will gorge himself on drunken executive power by writing executive orders. He plans a meeting with Loretta Lynch on Monday to pave the way for his smorgasbord feast.

If you think I may be over dramatizing Obama’s actions, then you only have to look at what he is really doing. First thing off Christmas va-K, in the new year, he goes right for gun control even before his final State of the Union Speech. That drops a big clue about what will be in the dictate which is typically a laundry list for executive power — and appetite thereof.

If it is one major accomplishment for Obama, when he leaves office to return from whatever spawned him, it will be to never have found the limits of the Presidential Constitutional authority. Apparently something he never believed existed. So he wanted to be sure to slay any myth to the contrary. The only limitation he accepted was the two-term one, but even to that said if he ran again he would win. He had a backhanded comment for that inconvenience.

People gave up writing his epitaph long ago because they could see reality unfolding. Here he is on the verge of re-writing the second amendment. His record of civil war byproducts wherever he goes, in tow. He’ll avail himself of the power to change Constitutional rights.

http://twitchy.com/2015/12/31/cbs-presidents-proposed-executive-actions-wont-eliminate-gun-show-loophole/
Read about the loophole scam.
2nd Amendment Fight — “there is no online gun-store loophole”
Washington Times — “the gun-show loophole myth”

RightRing | Bullright

Obama’s Rendezvous with Terrorism Speech

Dr. Evil acted the part delivering his post terrorism address. But after assorted tries he finally attempts to nail down a message — a message but not a strategy. 4-Point BS.

First, was his comment he would call the president of France later to express his sentiments on the Paris attack. Then, when in Paris, he had a failed press conference getting hammered by questions on terrorism. Then he went to Manila and made statements on the terrorism attack, refusing as he does to call it Islamic terrorism. Then after San Bernardino was labeled an act of terror, he delivers his Saturday address talking about gun control So third bite at the terrorism apple, he has an address on terrorism. He finally called it terrorism only when he could not deny it.

Obama needed to mute the criticism of not making a formal announcement about it. Alas, still, maybe it is Americans fault for the non-inclusive prejudice against Muslims and our rampant Islamophobia? Hardly, they threw the terrorist couple a baby shower just months before. That’s a sure sign of Islamophobia.

All’s fair in warfare, or maybe not.

Obama has become the problem in the way Islam has become the problem. Complacency has led to being complicit. If he wants to manage this homeland terrorism how he managed ISIS, then we are certainly in for more pain with no gain. Obama’s complacency has brought us to this point. So if Sen. Blumenthal can declare Congress complicit for failing to enact gun control, then he should see the reality that Obama is complicit by his failures.

Islam is complicit by their complacency for years to do anything about it. There is a war within Islam, except there is only one side fighting it. Radical Islam is at war with us and only one side is really fighting it. But Obama is building a Climate Caliphate saying that will prove something to ISIS and Islamists.

The San Bernardino attack proved the fallacy in the administration’s terrorism theology. Remember that one? They claimed terrorists are caused by lack of jobs and poor socioeconomic conditions. Syed Farook was working for the government, with all the perks, as a so-called public servant. Scrap that theory, or label government employment a prerequisite for terrorism too. Nope. Oh, then it was droughts are the cause terrorism. There must have been a drought in San Bernardino. He was a health inspector of restaurants. But if only we could give them good jobs and good economic conditions, and prevent the climate from causing droughts. Then stop them from being victims, too.

Obama spoke from the Oval office:

Tonight, I want to talk with you about this tragedy, the broader threat of terrorism, and how we can keep our country safe.

Again he refers to it as a tragedy. Can we move on to the terrorism it was?

The FBI is still gathering the facts about what happened in San Bernardino, but here is what we know. The victims were brutally murdered and injured by one of their coworkers and his wife. So far, we have no evidence that the killers were directed by a terrorist organization overseas, or that they were part of a broader conspiracy here at home. But it is clear that the two of them had gone down the dark path of radicalization, embracing a perverted interpretation of Islam that calls for war against America and the West. They had stockpiled assault weapons, ammunition, and pipe bombs. So this was an act of terrorism, designed to kill innocent people.

Yes, thank goodness the FBI already determined it was terrorism, so you are a little late informing us of that. Still he emphasizes coworkers, as if that really had anything to do with it, except to provide them an opportunity for a soft target. But there he goes parsing the words that we have no evidence of connection to a wider conspiracy at home. (Disclaimer alert) Tell that to the dead and victims in San Bernardino. We know they were connected to terrorism abroad and she swore allegiance to the Caliphate. Pay no attention to that or his trip to Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. The obvious money connections mean nothing either. Oh, it must have been a lucrative government job to amass that arsenal of supplies by his lonesome, making that socioeconomic cause even more ridiculous. They must have dumped all that income into Islamic radical terrorism. So just lip service calling it radical terrorism.

Then he finally admits it is an act of terrorism, born of a radical religious ideology. The “perverted interpretation” some argue is more common and mainstream than many people accept. So this was cover for Obama’s ass to call it terrorism and implying a radical element to it. They were not just walking along, minding their own business, and fell victim to this perverted radical Islam, as victims themselves. No, there were only those real victims and the shooters were not victims. An ISIS spokesman prayed God would accept them as martyrs. Yep, martyrs that kill 14 and wound others in an ambush attack? Definitions shift like Obama.

Our nation has been at war with terrorists since al Qaeda killed nearly 3,000 Americans on 9/11. In the process, we’ve hardened our defenses — from airports to financial centers, to other critical infrastructure.

Wait, you mean the War On Terror term that you abolished in political correctness and naive strategic failure. A war you tried to undermine by scrubbing any reference to radical Islamism in our strategy, plans, or rules. And your war on the term “terrorism?”

Intelligence and law enforcement agencies have disrupted countless plots here and overseas, and worked around the clock to keep us safe.

Our law enforcement and intelligence agencies have been hampered and crippled by your P/C-fied policies and playing politics with our nations security. Treasonous by nature. If someone would have hindered our response after Pearl Harbor would we have allowed it? You mean those counter-terrorism measures our people carried out in spite of your undermining the central objective to root out Islamic terrorism in and out of the country. Kudos to them for that.

And I know that after so much war, many Americans are asking whether we are confronted by a cancer that has no immediate cure.

No, most of us know that, though it could be called a cancer, there is a cure even a short term one you are unwilling to commit to. And making statements calling it a JV team is not the prescription, nor is the denial about the source of this terrorism and ideology. That even inspires the cancer to grow. Pampering Muslims does little to combat it in the immediate future and makes it harder to confront in the longer term. An effect not lost on the terrorists.

Well, here’s what I want you to know: The threat from terrorism is real, but we will overcome it. We will destroy ISIL and any other organization that tries to harm us. Our success won’t depend on tough talk, or abandoning our values, or giving into fear. That’s what groups like ISIL are hoping for. Instead, we will prevail by being strong and smart, resilient and relentless, and by drawing upon every aspect of American power.

You do not have to tell us the threat is real. That is confirmed in real time. You’ve been in denial about it all along, deceiving, saying things like the world has always been a dangerous place. Seems you have no issue with tough talk when it comes to Republicans or even shutting down the government, or getting your way — any way you can, even abusing the Executive-Order pen. Tell us what groups like ISIS are hoping for. Inaction is what they are hoping for and counting on. We are being smart, then, by denying the severity of the threat, by relentlessly criticizing our own people for calling it a threat? Drawing upon every aspect of American power? Really, that is the height of deception you’ve been engaged in. You have constrained and criticized the use of American power. Instead, you use the bully pulpit to chastise American patriots. You take shots at Congress from foreign shores and play politics with our resources, including our military.

So in that manner we will succeed? This blind faith in you strategy has not been working to date, but still you say just believe and stay the course. (the one that brought us to this point) Strong, smart, resilient, relentless. Being strong and smart is not something we lack. It is you that has buried your head in the sand, as in Benghazi blaming it on a video for political reasons. Being nowhere to be found on the night of the Benghazi attack. Or going into Libya by sidestepping Congress. And look where that has led. Or your support and direct involvement in the Arab Spring from the beginning, and the Muslim Brotherhood. Again, a fruitful exercise.

Here’s how. First, our military will continue to hunt down terrorist plotters in any country where it is necessary.

But it is not just the social planners of terrorism who are a problem. It is the terrorists on the street, in sleeper cells that do the damage, and lone wolves.

In Iraq and Syria, airstrikes are taking out ISIL leaders, heavy weapons, oil tankers, infrastructure. And since the attacks in Paris, our closest allies — including France, Germany, and the United Kingdom — have ramped up their contributions to our military campaign, which will help us accelerate our effort to destroy ISIL.

You mean the lackluster politically correct effort you made so far? But now France and others have stepped in to do something besides return armed bombers. Since now you have finally allowed hitting oil tankers. Wouldn’t it have been achievement if you had done some of that before, when ISIS columns were moving into the neighborhood?

Second, training and equipping to the tune of 500 million that produced four warriors.

Third, working with friends and allies sounds a lot like the first. Wait for others, lead from behind. Works every time.

Fourth, more American leadership from behind in the international community “to focus on the common goal of destroying ISIL — a group that threatens us all.” Let’s hope that proves more productive than the Iran deal. A leadership that you, Obama, have failed to demonstrate so far. I only wish you would show the same passion for that as you have for the global warming agenda.

This is our strategy to destroy ISIL. It is designed and supported by our military commanders and counterterrorism experts, together with 65 countries that have joined an American-led coalition. And we constantly examine our strategy to determine when additional steps are needed to get the job done.

You mean those changes you have been so stubbornly against? Yeah, more of that. Or you mean the job of leaving it for the next president to deal with after you removed the thousands of support troops from Iraq and grew the numbers and support for ISIS?

That’s why I’ve ordered the Departments of State and Homeland Security to review the visa program under which the female terrorist in San Bernardino originally came to this country. And that’s why I will urge high-tech and law enforcement leaders to make it harder for terrorists to use technology to escape from justice.

Finally, after an DHS spokesperson said they stand by that policy, you will now “review”(look at) that visa program. Lets hope you don’t look at it like you did the Keystone Pipeline.

To begin with, Congress should act to make sure no one on a no-fly list is able to buy a gun. What could possibly be the argument for allowing a terrorist suspect to buy a semi-automatic weapon? This is a matter of national security.

It is actually a red herring. A great talking point on the left. We have a program plagued with problems now which you want to use to control gun screening.

Finally, if Congress believes, as I do, that we are at war with ISIL, it should go ahead and vote to authorize the continued use of military force against these terrorists. For over a year, I have ordered our military to take thousands of airstrikes against ISIL targets. I think it’s time for Congress to vote to demonstrate that the American people are united, and committed, to this fight.

Another red herring, the Constitution or anything else has not stopped or prevented you before from acting, such as in Libya.

We should not be drawn once more into a long and costly ground war in Iraq or Syria. That’s what groups like ISIL want. They know they can’t defeat us on the battlefield.

That makes no real sense. If they cannot defeat us on the battlefield, why would they want us there? I get it, you are not interested in a war, even if they have declared one on us. Yet you call on Congress to declare authorization for you to act.

Even in this political season, even as we properly debate what steps I and future Presidents must take to keep our country safe, let’s make sure we never forget what makes us exceptional.

Right never forget what makes us exceptional, while denying we are exceptional. That makes sense. By the way, a good many people wish they could trust you.

Let’s not forget that freedom is more powerful than fear;

Let’s talk about that. We aren’t forgetting and haven’t. Just that we value our freedom and sovereignty more than you do. You want to entangle us and give away our sovereignty. How does that make us free or freer?

Now that you mention fear, you are building a Climate Caliphate based and founded on fear. And it seeks to limit our freedom and economic freedoms. How is that compatible with what you advocate? More specious words meant more to deceive rather than heal a climate of frustration with your use(abuse) of power.

RightRing | Bullright

Obama’s “hateful” rhetoric

Obama worries about people “…falling victim to hateful ideologies.”

In Obama’s Saturday Address:

“It is entirely possible that these two attackers were radicalized to commit this act of terror. And if so, it would underscore a threat we’ve been focused on for years — the danger of people succumbing to violent extremist ideologies.”

“All of us…need to work together to prevent people from falling victim to these hateful ideologies.”

I worry of people falling victim to that hateful ideology coming from the White House.

Are we all feeling like victims yet? The man who doesn’t know widows from terrorists.

Obama is worried about “loopholes” yet the fiancée visa loophole, or other amnesty policy (advocacy), is not a problem. DHS said they stand behind that policy. Let’s close those real giant loopholes in America. The 2nd Amendment is not a loophole!

RightRing | Bullright

Unpopular Prez on Unpopular Issue

Obmaa travels to the Roseburg area to politicize the shooting for his gun control. He’s already pointed to examples of gun control like UK and Australia. Those are examples of banning and confiscation. Is that the control he has in mind? Is that the message he wants to send? It is the message the Lefitist Democrats want to hear — full on gun control.

Is there anything resembling compassion in Obama’s agenda? No. Does he really care about the needs of the people, or their security and defense? Hardly. He totally missed his opportunity to lecture or politicize the one place that embraces all gun control, Chicago.

NY Times reports ahead of Obama’s scheduled Roseburg visit.

NYT: “Common Response After Killings in Oregon: ‘I Want to Have a Gun’

Mr. Obama plans to visit Roseburg on Friday to meet the grieving families of yet another gun rampage, but many people here are bristling at his renewed call for stricter gun laws. In some ways, the rampage at the college by a 26-year-old student, Christopher Harper-Mercer, has actually tightened the embrace of guns in a rural town where shots at rifle ranges echo off the hills and hunters shoot deer and elk through the fall.

Some families touched by the violence and students who fled gunfire said they now feared that the kind of bloodshed seen inside Classroom 15 of Snyder Hall at Umpqua Community College could happen anywhere. Some said they were planning to buy guns. Others said they would seek concealed-weapons permits. Others, echoing gun advocates’ calls for more weapons on campus, said the college should allow its security guards to carry guns. A few said they thought that stricter gun control laws could have averted the massacre.

“That’s why we have guns: We don’t have the government dictating when to get on our knees,” said Ms. Kellim, 86.

Continue reading the main story:  http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/08/us/oregon-roseburg-shooting-umpqua-community-college.html

The majority consensus in Roseburg seems to be Obama should butt out and definitely not politicize the issue. (he’ll do neither) But at the very beginning, before details were known, Obama defiantly said he would politicize the issue that it called for it. He predicted some would accuse him of politicizing the shootings.

“Well, this is something we should politicize,” Obama said. “It is relevant to our common life together, to the body politic.”

Relevant to his body politic, more like. He added:

“I hope and pray that I don’t have to come out again during my tenure as president to offer my condolences to families in these circumstances.”

No, he did not “have to come out again” and was not asked to. However, he does not come out at the many shootings in Chicago, or on Kate’s murder in San Francisco. In fact he could not be coerced to come out then, when asked. He refused to even acknowledge it or the egregious circumstances leading to her murder. And he does not shepherd the current Kate’s law making its way through Congress. (something he could do) So no one said he had to offer anything, including condolences, to the families in Roseburg. It was all his idea, all part of his politicization of the event. (…fundraiser in Seattle)

The arrogant ‘Heartbroken’ bastid-in-chief is back in the Spite House

Oh, right, he never left…

Daily Mail reports:

‘It breaks my heart every time’: Obama reacts to shooting of Virginia TV reporter and cameraman as he says gun-related deaths ‘dwarf those that happen through terrorism’

President Obama has revealed he was heartbroken when he learned a TV news reporter and a cameraman were shot dead during a live broadcast in Virginia.

He also slammed the number of gun-related homicides in the United States, adding that it ‘dwarfs any deaths that happen through terrorism’.

Alison Parker, 24, and Adam Ward, 27, were gunned down by former employee of the CBS affiliate Vester Flanagan while filming an on-air, early morning segment.

The 41-year-old shot and wounded himself several hours later as police pursued him on a Virginia highway. He died later at the hospital, police said.

Speaking to ABC, Obama said: ‘It breaks my heart every time you read or hear about these kinds of incidents.’

Still waiting for word from Obama about the shooting death of a girl in Ferguson  doing her homework on her mothers bed. Not like they haven’t had days now to respond. But he took this one off the teletype to harp on gun control. Shameless.  There have been more car accidents than deaths of terrorism, too. So what is the point of that? There isn’t one.

The gun-runner in chief has problems with gun laws — or lack thereof?

Heartbroken in Waiting

Hillary also chimed in interrupting her server defense road tour.

‘So, yes, I feel just great heartache at what happened and I want to reiterate how important it is we not let yet another terrible instance go by without trying to do something more to prevent this incredible killing that is stalking our country.’

Democratic candidate for president Hillary Clinton also weighed in on the shooting, tweeting to her followers that she was ‘heartbroken and angry.’

‘We must act to stop gun violence, and we cannot wait any longer. Praying for the victims’ families in Virginia,’ the former secretary of state wrote.

More Daily Mail: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3211578/Two-Virginia-television-journalists-fatally-shot-air-attack.html

How long have we been waiting for the Truth about Benghazi to come out? Now she’s the impatient one, having got an ambassador and 3 American patriots killed in Libya, who operated a renegade server as Secretary of State. So she throws out the “war on women” nonsense and she can’t wait any longer. She should be indicted and banned from holding any public office. She won’t even say if she would approve the Keystone XL Pipeline. But she has a “war on the Second Amendment”.

Why Does The NRA Still Support NICS?

Thursday, May 21, 2015

by Mississippi Rebel

The NRA recently re-stated its longstanding support for the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS), a program that was originally mandated by the Brady Bill in 1993.

In a statement directed at the North Carolina Sherriff Association last week, the NRA said:

“[North Carolina’s] antiquated and inefficient system has been in place for nearly a century and was enacted long before the age of computers and computerized records. Unfortunately, the [North Carolina Sherriff’s Association] has determined it would like to continue to use discretion to deny permits to purchase handguns, rather than simply use the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) utilized by the majority of other states.”

The NRA has publicly supported NICS for years, arguing it should be “improved” and  “limited” rather than completely eradicated.

The reasons for this are almost certainly political. As The Truth About Guns pointed out recently, the NRA would take a serious hit with lawmakers and the public if it came out against any and all criminal background checks.

But this “compromise” approach gives the enemy a permanent foundation to expand gun control.

Just yesterday, New York Rep. Carolyn Maloney introduced a bill that would require anyone buying or selling firearms to undergo a NICS background check, and further require that every gun transfer be reported to the United States Attorney General.

Maloney’s bill has no chance of passing, but it won’t be the last. For as long as NICS is around, the anti-gun crowd will keep using it as a foundation for laws that limit our rights.

By continuing to publicly support an unconstitutional system, the NRA is playing with fire.

H/T via Mississippi Rebel