Posts tagged ‘2nd’

1 April, 2012

This Woman and Others Like Her Want to Disarm You

Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Texas)

Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Texas)

I know she looks like a clown and to some people clowns are funny, to other people clowns are scary.  Well, this clown is scary as Hell.  I know there are plenty of clowns in Congress… on both sides of the isle, but this is ridiculous.  I mean, really?  Could she try a little harder not to look like a damned Pop Tart?  Anyway, it’s not her clown costume that irritates me, so much as it is her reactionary attempt to disarm the American public along with her friends in the Congressional Black Caucus and other liberal Democrats.

Studies have shown, time and time again, that gun control and strict gun laws lead to more violence.  Why?  Because the law abiding public gives up their guns and the criminals don’t.  The criminals know this and become emboldened.

Now, Ms. Jackson Lee and her buddies want to end laws that allow you to defend yourself from a violent attacker.  Why? So the police can get there minutes after you’ve been shot?  For the love of God, what part of this do they not understand?  Do they not know the history of gun control in the US?  Lets get a little history lesson, shall we?

No guns for the Negroes…

In the late 1790s through about 1810,states really began to prohibit blacks from carrying firearms.  The white population was afraid of what would happen if blacks had weapons.  Blacks were even barred from learning fencing!  I mean with swords, not putting up fences.  Not even free blacks were allowed to carry firearms and were prohibited from doing jobs that required them to carry, such as law enforcement.  Even if in the military!

Restrictions against blacks carrying firearms was intensified in 1831 after Nat Turner’s Rebellion.  Blacks, in some parts of the country, were even prohibited from owning dogs without a license, as the whites thought the dogs could be used as a weapon.

Now tell me why it is that any black person would want to see gun control?  And these things happened all over the US, not just in the South.

Statically speaking…

Statistically speaking, you are more likely to be robbed, assaulted, killed, and so on by a black man.  Especially, if you are black, too.  I know this sounds like a racist statement to make, but stay with me here.  The point I’m trying to make is that law abiding blacks should be for less gun control.  All law abiding citizens should be for less gun control.  Hell, the only gun control they should support is a steady hand.

All kidding aside, for any black readers I may have, don’t fall into this BS trap that was started as a racist way to keep you in line, so to speak.  It angers me to no end to see someone as successful as Ms. Jackson Lee make such idiotic remarks.

Know guns, know rights; no guns, no rights

If we are disarmed as a people, regardless of what town, city, state, part of town, or whatever we live; we have just allowed the government to take away our rights.  People who give up their rights for security, have neither.

Lets say that all guns are just erased from our country.  No one, not even the criminals, can get them.  Guess what, they’ll get us with knives and bats.  Are we going to ban them too?  No more cut meat or baseball?  what about your car?  cars have been used as weapons for decades.  Are we to ban them?

To put it bluntly, you’re not getting my guns.  I will fight to the death to defend the rights of the American people.  You can’t let a tragedy like Tayvon Martin’s death divide us.  Especially when there are so many questions unanswered.  For all we know, Zimmerman may have been assaulted.  Maybe he is the victim and the media and the left are working to divide this country more.  We don’t know the story yet.  It could have gone either way.  There are witnesses attesting to both sides.  If Zimmerman is guilty of killing Martin in cold blood, I hope he rots in prison.  If Martin attacked Zimmerman, then he took that chance and got his just desserts.

How this plays into your prepping…

Keep a firearm handy.  You never know when you’ll need to defend yourself.  Vote for and support all Pro-2nd Amendment bills and organizations.  Make sure you know how to use your weapon to defend yourself and your family.  I do.  Do not let the enemies of liberty make you think you are wrong for standing up and demanding your rights.  This is America.  Act like it.

God gave you rights, don’t let man take them away.

If you have a tip on a story of violations of any part of the Bill of Rights, email me.  We’ll get it published once we get all the info needed.

I’d rather die on my feet, than live on my knees.

III% Forever.

Remember to check out Freedom Fighter Radio for other news.

Advertisements
21 March, 2012

Civil or Uncivil Discourse

Democratic State Senator Wendy Davis’ office was attacked by someone throwing molotov cocktails.  While she wasn’t there, herself, two of her staffers were.  Generally, when you have someone become violent toward a politician, it is politically motivated.  Obviously, that’s not always the case, but generally, I’d say it’s the case.  No one was hurt in the attack, but I’m pretty sure they had the crap scared out of them.

You normally have two types of people who commit these attacks.  They tend to be either left wing nutjobs or right wing nutjobs.  You tend to see more violence ffrom the left than the right, but you do get the occaion that some right winger gets too wound up and snaps.

Today, we’re going to discuss when to use civil discourse or when to use uncivil discourse.

Civil Discourse

Generally, civil discoursde is the way to go.  You can get up and protest something, have a sit-in and get arrested for non-compliance.  If civil dicourse is done correctly, you’ll see results in a lot of cases.

One problem you have in civil discourse is that what may be civil to one group, may not be considered civil to another.  You know, as well as I do, that politics is a heated debate and a lot of people become very passionate about it.

Primarily, you see civil discourse in the Tea Party, Sons of Liberty Riders, parts of the Occupy movement.  Civil discourse tends to get bad publicity as trouble makers and such.  You know, the left calls the Tea Party names like Tea Baggers.  Occupy called Flea Baggers.  The names go on and on.  You’ll notice that the two conservative groups I listed have not become violent, but the one liberal group has.

Uncivil Discourse

Uncivil or Noncivil discourse has a place in our society.  However, you must be careful about how and when you use it.  That’s the big problem in today goings-on.  People are resulting to violence too quickly and its not necessary.  You find a lot of this kind of behavior from the Occupy Wall St people as they have a history of attacking small businesses, assaulting passersby in nice cars, deficating in public, etc.  This isn’t the first time the left has become violent and destroyed property that doesn’t belong to them.

Now, like I said, uncivil discourse does have a place in our society.  That place is when all other forms of discourse breakdown.  In order to be a break down, there are certain things that have to happen.

1) Your civil discourse has been met with violent counter attacks,

2) The authorities have squashed all attempts at civil discourse,

or 3) the rights have been simple taken away.

At that point, I’d suggest its time to follow in the words of our forefathers and the original intent of the 2nd Amendment.

%d bloggers like this: