Posts Tagged ‘Second Amendment’

Which is More Effective?

December 30, 09

The Second Amendment: Because criminals and psycho killer don’t obey NO GUNS ALLOWED rules, only law-abiding citizens (aka victims) do.

Rape Deterrence:


Which Would Best Protect Your Daughter’s Health?:

By Chuck Assay:


Via Moonbattery:

From here via Ann Coulter’s links:

Via Moonbattery: – A collection of new stories where gun-carrying civilians stop criminals dead in their tracks (pun intended).

More guns, less crime in 2009.

Even MSNDC has to admit it:

Via Moonbattery:

Which Would Best Protect Your Daughter’s Health?

April 15, 09

I am liking this statement from Moonbattery:

Recall also Rape Deterrence:


And also Gun Wielding Maniac Attack: Conservative vs Liberal Result and Mumbai Terrorist Attacks – An Argument for Citizen Concealed-Carry of Personal Firearms? and Jewish Ghettos and the Holocaust: An Argument for the Second Ammendment.

PS. See also this pic.

Way Cool Video – Rent and Fire Heavy Guns!

March 13, 09

Woah! Only in America baby! It’s O.F.A.S.T.S. – the Oklahoma Full Auto Shoot and Trade Show (more pics there)!

Check out the clearer video hosted at

Or go direct to the link at!

Screenshot excerpts of the vid:

Oklahoma Full Auto Shoot and Trade Show

Oklahoma Full Auto Shoot and Trade Show

Oklahoma Full Auto Shoot and Trade Show

Oklahoma Full Auto Shoot and Trade Show

Oklahoma Full Auto Shoot and Trade Show

Oklahoma Full Auto Shoot and Trade Show

Oklahoma Full Auto Shoot and Trade Show

Oklahoma Full Auto Shoot and Trade Show

Oklahoma Full Auto Shoot and Trade Show

Oklahoma Full Auto Shoot and Trade Show

Oklahoma Full Auto Shoot and Trade Show

Oklahoma Full Auto Shoot and Trade Show

Oklahoma Full Auto Shoot and Trade Show

Oklahoma Full Auto Shoot and Trade Show

Now don’t you wish you could be doing that instead of just playing Left 4 Dead?

Mumbai Terrorist Attacks – An Argument for Citizen Concealed-Carry of Personal Firearms?

December 3, 08

From Scott Wieser via Big Head Press:


So would the knowledge that any number of civilians might be carrying concealed guns and be trained to shoot deter potential attackers?

John R. Lott at FOX Forum seems to think so:


The Life-and-Death Cost of Gun Control

Banning guns is in the news. India practically bans guns, but that didn’t stop the horrific Muslim terrorist attacks this last week.

Given that the terrorists smuggled their machine guns in with them, would anyone argue that India’s extremely strict gun licensing and artificially high prices for guns helped prevent the terrorist attacks? In fact, the reverse is more likely the case.

In India, victims watched as armed police cowered and didn’t fire back at the terrorists. A photographer at the scene described his frustration: “There were armed policemen hiding all around the station but none of them did anything. At one point, I ran up to them and told them to use their weapons. I said, ‘Shoot them, they’re sitting ducks!’ but they just didn’t shoot back.”

Meanwhile, according to the hotel company’s chairman, P.R.S. Oberoi, security at “the hotel had metal detectors, but none of its security personnel carried weapons because of the difficulties in obtaining gun permits from the Indian government.”

India has extremely strict gun control laws, but who did it succeed in disarming?

The terrorist attack showed how difficult it is to disarm serious terrorists. Strict licensing rules meant that it was the victims who obeyed the regulations, not the terrorists.

The attack also illustrates what Israelis learned decades ago. — Putting more soldiers or police on the street didn’t stop terrorist’s machine gun attacks. Terrorists would either wait for the armed soldiers or police to leave the area or kill them first. Likewise, in India, the Muslim terrorists’ first targets were those in uniform (whether police or security guards).

Terrorists only stopped using machine guns to attack Israelis once citizens were allowed to carry concealed handguns. In large public gatherings, a significant number of citizens will be able to shoot at terrorists during an attack — and the terrorists don’t know who has them.

With mass shootings becoming more difficult, terrorists were forced to switch to a less effective strategy: bombs. Bombings are more difficult for armed citizens to stop because they can’t respond after the bomb blows up.

Still, even though handguns can only kill would-be bombers before they set off their bombs, during waves of terror attacks, Israel’s national police chief will call on all citizens who are allowed to carry guns to make sure they carry their firearms at all times, and Israelis have many examples where citizens with concealed handguns have saved lives.


Indian businesses are demanding gun rights:

Bangalore: The war on Mumbai has left the India Inc angry and vulnerable sectors want much more than a constable with a lathi.

“We’re losing faith in the political leadership of this country. There’s no doubt about that,” T V Mohandas Pai, director (HR), Infosys, adding, “To take care of the political class, they have Z-plus security. They have arms. What about us? Isn’t our life important? We’re citizens. The government is unable to protect us, then amend the law. Let us bear arms, we’ll protect ourselves to whatever extent we can”.

A worried Bangalore Inc said they’d rather have machine guns than be sitting ducks to a torrent of bullets.

While government installations have forces who can combat an emergency, the private sector has to make do with metal detectors, frisking and CCTV security.

The latest addition are sniffer dogs, which some organizations have opted for, but nothing that can combat an AK-47.

“We’ll not be in a position to answer these kinds of AK-47s and grenades. We need much stronger help from the government. And we’ll need military intervention. May be we could start some military patrolling at least, then there can be confidence that help can come at short notice,” chairman and MD, Biocon, Kiran Mazumdar-Shaw.



See also my post on the Mumbai massacres and the morons who defend or close their eyes to the perpetrators.

See also earlier posts on gun ownership and gun control:






For the record, I was anti-guns until around the time that I learnt – up close and personal – more about what a selfish, apathetic and evil world it is out there.

Nuns With Guns 72 Virgins

Here’s hoping, terrorist scumbags!

Jewish Ghettos and the Holocaust: An Argument for the Second Ammendment

June 20, 08

At the risk of fulfilling Godwin’s Law, those who oppose gun rights are like Nazis: They want it us to be unarmed in order to make it easier for the State to eventually control every aspect of our lives.

I was watching the excellent film Schindler’s List, as the Nazis rounded up 15,000 Jews into the tiny Kraków Ghetto.

The Jews were not allowed to own businesses. They were not allowed to earn wages. They were not allowed to leave the ghetto. If they were not deemed essential to help the Nazi war effort (such as teachers and rabbis), they were bundled off to the concentration camps. They had no rights.

And then finally, the Nazis ‘liquidated’ the entire Jewish population there. Those fit for hard labour were taken to work as slaves. Those who were not were executed on the spot.

This was portrayed in Schindler’s List. As I watched six grown Jewish men lined up in a row, then four of them shot and killed by a single bullet fired by a Nazi soldier, I wondered:

Why couldn’t all 15,000 Jews rise up and overthrow the handful of Nazi soldiers?

The answer, of course, is because the Nazis had guns. Automatic rifles. And the Jews had none.

Now imagine if the Jews had been avid gun nuts. If every one of the 15,000 had even a revolver, that would be intimidating odds for a few hundred Nazi soldiers.

Or let’s be more realistic, and apply modern American gun ownership rates to the Kraków Jews. 39% of American households own at least one gun. That translates to 5850 angry Jews with ranged weapons in their hands.

The Nazis would think twice if that were the case. Especially in hindsight of the ability of well-armed Jews to massively kick butt.

“If a few hundred Jewish fighters in the Warsaw Ghetto could hold off the Wehrmacht for almost a month with only a handful of weapons, six million Jews armed with rifles could not so easily have been herded into cattle cars.” – Judge Kozinski

And via Allergic to Bull:

This article addresses German firearms laws and Nazi policies and practices to disarm German citizens, particularly political opponents and Jews. It begins with an account of post-World War I chaos, which led to the enactment in 1928 by the liberal Weimar republic of Germany’s first comprehensive gun control law. Next, the Nazi seizure of power in 1933 was consolidated by massive searches and seizures of firearms from political opponents, who were invariably described as “communists.” After five years of repression and eradication of dissidents, Hitler signed a new gun control law in 1938, which benefitted Nazi party members and entities, but denied firearm ownership to enemies of the state. Later that year, in Kristallnacht (the Night of the Broken Glass), in one fell swoop, the Nazi regime disarmed Germany’s Jews. Without any ability to defend themselves, the Jewish population could easily be sent to concentration camps for the Final Solution. After World War II began, Nazi authorities continued to register and mistrust civilian firearm owners, and German resistence to the Nazi regime was unsuccessful.

And thus it is with Americans who cling to their guns and the Second Amendment.

They don’t cling to their guns because they’re bitter, Mr. Snob-bama. They cling to them because history has taught them not to entrust their freedom, their protection and their lives to Socialist Big Brother Control Freaks like you.

%d bloggers like this: