NEVER TOLERATE TYRANNY!....Conservative voices from the GRASSROOTS.
______________________________________________________________________________
n late January, 64-year old Clare Niederhauser was arrested for shooting at burglars fleeing from his property. At a plea deal hearing, he apologized for firing the shots, agreed to pay a $700 fine, take a weapons class, and forfeit the weapon he used.
Fellow residents of Layton, UT are coming to the aid of the elderly man, who was arrested after firing a shot at a burglar’s vehicle and a fleeing accomplice after they attempted to break in to his property with a crowbar.
He was charged with two counts of reckless endangerment because the individuals he was aiming at were off his property and had dropped the crowbar; as a result, the shots were said to have possibly endangered someone’s life.
Layton Police Lt. Shawn Horton stood by the arrest, stating, “You’re not authorized to shoot a firearm at a car just because you don’t want it to get away, or to scare them, or disable a tire.”
Post Continues on www.breitbart.com
You should have common sense enough not to endanger others when you are firing at a criminal.
If a liberal would of done it it would if been over looked because no one was hurt. In fact no crime was really committed and its about time we stuck up for the innocent people
This is just one more example of political correctness gone sour. Every person in this country should have the God-given right to defend his property and his family. However this man is probably lucky that he didn’t want one of these criminals because some stinking lawyer would come to the assistance of these lowlife criminals and the man would’ve lost his home all of his savings and more than likely spend a long time in jail. The laws are bad what is bad are the lawyers and judges who see nothing more than paychecks when dealing out their form of justice.
apparently politicans and criminals can do what they want…..we have to follow the rules?
_______________________________________________________________________
By Girls Just Wanna Have Guns / 13 February 2013
Summary: The gun ban lobby includes not just a few groups like the Brady Center but also the mainstream media as a whole. Its preferred tactics are to use misleading terms and to ignore the actual facts of gun control’s failure.
The massacre at Sandy Hook elementary school in Newtown, Connecticut, this past December hit home like few other tragedies. Yet again a lunatic commits mass murder, this time slaughtering our most vulnerable and most cherished: our children. Words cannot express the bottomless grief one feels at the mere thought of such loss. Sandy Hook rightfully shook our sensibilities and forced us to reassess what we believe about ourselves and America. Why is this happening? we ask.
As usual, before police cordoned off the crime scene, the Left had its answer ready: not enough gun control. Left-wingers repeated their old refrain: America can no longer defend its “gun culture,” which is responsible for this tragedy, and we must have a national “dialogue” on guns.
In fact, we have been having a “dialogue” about guns for decades, and it has been very one-sided. The Left has often received what it asked for, starting with the 1968 Gun Control Act, the 1993 Brady Law (until the courts found parts of it unconstitutional), and a so-called federal “assault weapons” ban on semi-automatic rifles and high capacity magazines from 1994 to 2004. Yet none of this has affected gun crime or prevented any massacres. The Centers for Disease Control, a federal agency widely seen as favoring gun control, produced a major study in 2003 that admitted, “The Task Force found insufficient evidence to determine the effectiveness of any of the firearms laws or combinations of laws reviewed on violent outcomes.”
Prior to the 1968 Gun Control Act, few controls existed on privately owned firearms, with the exception of machine guns—that is, guns that keep firing as long as you hold the trigger—which have been strictly regulated since 1934 under the National Firearms Act. Even children could order rifles through the mail with parental permission. Yet firearms crimes were less frequent, as were the mass shootings that seem to be a regular feature in the news these days.
Activists on the Left don’t really want a dialogue. They want a total ban on guns in private hands, but they rarely admit that. Instead, they mask the issue with misleading language, selective statistics, and a campaign to vilify their political opponents.
Major Players
On the gun control issue, only a few small activist groups dedicate their work to banning guns. Here is the list, with the most recent available annual revenues shown on their IRS tax returns:
American Hunters and Shooters Association (2011 revenues $5,000)
Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence (2010 revenues $3 million) and its 501(c)(4) affiliate, the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence (2010 revenues $2.9 million)
Educational Fund to Stop Gun Violence (2010 revenues $309,000)
Coalition to Stop Gun Violence (2010 revenues $249,000)
Legal Community Against Violence (a.k.a Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence; 2010 revenues $978,000)
Mayors Against Illegal Guns Action Fund (2010 revenues $2.7 million)
Stop Handgun Violence (co-founded the American Hunters and Shooters Association in 2005; 2012 revenues $143,000)
Third Way (formerly Americans for Gun Safety Foundation; 2010 revenues $7.5 million)
Violence Policy Center (2010 revenues $832,000)
United Against Illegal Guns Support Fund (affiliated with Mayors Against Illegal Guns; 2010 revenues $1.3 million)
The best known gun control groups are the Brady Center and the Violence Policy Center (VPC). VPC receives most of its funding from the Joyce Foundation ($6.3 million since 1998) on whose board Obama used to serve; George Soros’ Open Society Institute ($800,000 since 1999); and the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation ($575,000 since 1999). The Brady Center receives much of its funding from small donors. FoundationSearch only reveals modest payments from foundations. From 2008 to 2011 the largest donation, $34,000, came from the Ladner Family Foundation. By contrast, the Brady Center’s last tax return says $2.7 million of its $3 million revenues were raised with the help of a professional consultant that specializes in online and direct mail fundraising (the Brady Center paid the consultant $96,000). In the same year, the group’s (c)(4) affiliate, the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, paid the same consultant $99,000 to bring in $2.8 million of its $2.9 million revenues.
Altogether these 10 groups provided less than $20 million to the gun control cause in 2010, a trifle compared with the National Rifle Association (NRA), which lists 2010 revenues of $228 million. To the uninformed this appears to be a David versus Goliath struggle, the little good guys versus the big, bad old NRA, and that’s the way the Left likes it. Nothing could be further from the truth.
Conservative groups often focus on one or a few issues like abortion, taxes, excessive regulations, immigration, or guns, and rarely unite behind other causes. Conversely, the Left should be understood as a single amorphous organism. Like a giant amoeba, one segment may move one way and a second another, but the whole organism moves slowly forward as one. While leftist groups may identify themselves with one issue, most work together on…
READ MORE AT CAPITALRESEARCH.ORG
__________________________________________________________________________
My friends, there is hope. Law enforcement officers at the local level are making their stand and they want you to be a part of that. While I’ve written on various sheriffs that have made their own stance to protect their citizens from anyone attempting to confiscate guns, I recently ran across Police Chief Mark Kessler of the Gilberton Borough Police Department in Pennsylvania. He wants citizens to join with his police department in building a “reserve force” that will aid his police force should the need arise to resist Federal authorities when it comes to the Second Amendment.
Comment
By: briansikma (Diary) | February 15th, 2013 at 06:00 PM
http://www.redstate.com/briansikma/2013/02/15/democrats-see-to-ban-...
A Democratic state senator and three Democratic state representatives have circulated draft legislation that would ban civilian possession of hollow point or frangible ammunition in Wisconsin. According to existing Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources regulations, sportsmen and women in Wisconsin must use such ammunition when hunting deer or bear. The Democratic lawmakers, two of whom are freshman, all hail from urban districts in the City of Milwaukee.
The reasoning behind the legislation is somewhat muddled. The impact, however, is quite clear. According to a legislative counsel review of the legislation, it would essentially make it impossible for civilians to hunt deer or bear in Wisconsin.
“The provision in the bill draft that provides whoever intentionally sells, transports or possesses any bullet that expands or flattens easily in the human body is guilty of a Class H felony conflicts with current DNR hunting rules. Under s. NR 10.09 (1)(c)2., ‘no person shall hunt any deer or bear with any air rifle, rim-fire rifle, any center-fire rifle less than .22 caliber, any .410 bore or less shotgun or handgun loaded with .410 shotgun shell ammunition or with ammunition loaded with nonexpanding type bullets or ammunition loaded with shot other than a single slug or projectile.’ The bill draft does not provide an exception to the prohibition on possessing expanding bullets for deer or bear hunting.” (Emphasis added)
The draft legislation was circulated by Sen. Nikiya Harris (D), Rep. Mandela Barnes, (D), Rep. Evan Goyke (D), and Rep. Fred Kessler (D). Mandela and Goyke are freshman lawmakers elected just last November. A phone call around 3:00 pm to Rep. Goyke’s office went unanswered, as did phone calls to Rep. Kessler’s office and Sen. Harris’s office.
When asked about the contradiction between the bill draft and DNR rules, an intern (who did not identify himself as such) for Rep. Barnes said that Barnes wasn’t interested in banning deer hunting and indicated that the lawmakers had no clue that their legislation – if formally introduced and passed – would have done just that. However, a staff member later followed up that comment saying it did not reflect the official position of the office.
A spokesperson for Rep. Peter Barca, the leader of the Assembly Democrats, was not available to comment on the proposal.
Just how familiar the Democratic lawmakers are with hollow point ammunition is open to question. In their e-mail circulating the draft to fellow legislators, the quartet claimed that the military uses hollow point ammunition. “While used by the military for decades – in part because they inflict massive wounds – hollowpoint bullets have little, if any, practical use for self-defense or hunting in everyday society. Tragically, they are essentially human-killing bullets.”
That statement is false.
The U.S. military does not use hollow point ammunition in combat because of the Hague Declaration of 1899. Some experts have argued, however, that the military should start using hollow point ammunition because it minimizes collateral damage and would thus be safer and more humane than so-called “ball” ammunition.
Rep. Dave Craig, a Republican and former staffer for U.S. Rep. Paul Ryan (R), who is an avid Wisconsin hunter, drew attention to the draft legislation in a press release late Friday. Craig declared, “This assault on our state’s rich hunting tradition is appalling. While I’m rarely surprised by the degree some will go to attack our 2nd Amendment Rights, these Democrats have demonstrated just how far they will go to achieve their goal of suppressing the rich traditions so many in Wisconsin hold dearly.”
In addition to being required for hunting deer and bear in Wisconsin, hollow point and frangible ammunition is widely used by state and federal law enforcement agencies because of its precision and power. Unlike other types of ammunition, these rounds break apart or expand on impact, reducing the likelihood of going through a target and hurting innocent bystanders.
Many civilians also use such ammunition because in both hunting and personal protection situations it is far safer than using full metal jacket rounds. Fully jacketed rounds often run the risk of over penetration, moving behind the target and potentially striking or damaging people and property beyond the target.
posted on February 16, 2013 byPhilip Hodges
http://godfatherpolitics.com/9477/l-a-county-gives-gun-permits-to-b...
It’s next to impossible to get a concealed carry permit in L.A. County. Out of a population of about 10 million, only 341 permits were issued as of May 2012. Compare that with Kern County, which has a population of about 800,000 and which has 3,564 permit holders. They say you have to have a legitimate death threat against you in order to obtain a permit, and that “self-defense” is not a good enough reason. As a result, 123 L.A. County residents were refused permits last year even though many of them probably had their lives threatened.
L.A. County Sheriff Lee Baca is apparently really stingy with handing out those gun permits. He must be really concerned about public safety. That is, unless you’re a buddy of his or have made donations to his campaign in the form of gifts or money. While most gun permits are handed out to judges and reserve deputies, they’re not the only lucky recipients:
“[T]here is another group that seems to have better luck than most in obtaining permits: friends of Lee Baca. Those who’ve given the sheriff gifts or donated to his campaign are disproportionately represented on the roster of permit holders. …LA Weekly filed a public records request for all 341 active concealed-weapons permits granted by the Sheriff’s Department — as well as a list of the 123 people who applied for concealed weapons over an 18-month period but were denied. …Those lists contain many of the same names that appear on Baca’s gift reports and contribution records.”
More than 2 dozen people who contributed to Baca also have gun permits, and about 1 out of every 10 civilians that were issued permits were also on Baca’s contribution records. Out of all the 123 applications that were denied, only 1 applicant contributed to Baca’s campaign. In fact, he gave $1,000. But he says he’s not one of Baca’s friends, and the more the sheriff displays favoritism and cronyism, the harder it is to support him:
”I don’t have Lee Baca on my speed dial. The more he gives to his friends without good cause, the harder it is for people like me. A couple months ago, I had a death threat. It would be nice to have the security of having a weapon handy. But I can’t because people abuse it.”
And the sheriff is the one abusing his power to issue permits to people to carry a concealed weapon. He wants his employees and his buddies to be safe, but no one else.
This shows that if your county or city issues restrictions such that you can’t obtain a CCW, just buddy up to your sheriff, give him some gifts, maybe some money, and maybe he’ll come around. Then again, the very thought of giving money to an anti-gun politician can make you vomit in your own mouth.
|
|
|||||||||||
|
from W. Mercier:
Posted by Michael Boldin
Podcast: Play in new window | Download (Duration: 13:10 — 12.1MB)
Imagine this nightmare scenario.
In the not-too-distant future, Congress passes a draconian, UK-style ban on all weapons. Or, maybe the Senate does it through an international treaty. Or, instead of Congress, maybe the president follows in the footsteps of FDR, who whipped up an executive order requiring people to turn in their gold.
The method wouldn’t really matter. The end result would easily be one of the greatest attacks on liberty in American history.
STATES NULLIFY FEDERAL GUN BAN
Now imagine a response to such unconstitutional federal acts in this nightmare scenario. Your state legislator proposes a bill for your state that reads somethin...:
A. This legislature declares that all federal acts, laws, orders, rules or regulations regarding firearms and ammunition are a violation of the 2nd Amendment
B. This legislature declares that all such acts are hereby declared to be invalid in this state, shall not be recognized by this state, are specifically rejected by this state, and shall be considered null and void and of no effect in this state.
C. It shall be the duty of the legislature of this State to adopt and enact any and all measures as may be necessary to prevent the enforcement of any federal acts, laws, orders, rules, or regulations in violation of the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
OBJECTIONS
In response, you’d certainly hear things like this:
–A state can’t nullify a federal act!
–The Constitution says that all federal laws are supreme
–Even James Madison opposed nullification.
Each of these objections, and others, could easily take a full article – or two – to dismantle. So, I’ll be brief before moving on the main goal here.
Article VI of the Constitution only says that federal laws are “supreme” when made “in pursuance of” the Constitu..., not any old law as the lovers of power would like you to believe.
As far as the Supreme Court goes? Let me say this clearly, those nine justices aren’t infallible gods. And they certainly aren’t the final arbiter of what the Constitution means.
The bottom line is straightforward, and my main point, too – the Constitution means what the Founders and Ratifiers told us it means, no matter what the Congress, the President or the Supreme Court happen to say or do.
UNCONSTITUTIONAL
When FDR ordered you to turn in your gold, it was unconstitutional the moment he signed it.
When Bill Clinton signed the Assault Weapons Ban, that was unconstitutional as well.
George Bush violated the Constitution the moment he signed the PATRIOT Act and expanded federal control over health care with Medicare Part D.
Barack Obama violated the Constitution with an undeclared war on Libya, the Affordable Care Act, NDAA “indefinite detention,” and more.
The sad fact is this, every congress and every president has violated the Constitution. As the years go by, those violations get worse and more frequent.
WHAT TO DO?
Back to our nightmare scenario. Your state legislator gets massive support for the bill nullifying federal gun laws. It passes by a wide margin and is signed into law. It creates a ripple effect. Soon, another state follows, passing a similar law. And then another. In no time, the number reaches as high as 14.
In those states, gun shops stay open, people continue to keep and bear arms. A vast majority of them do so without any trouble.
Federal officials make threats. The DOJ issues a warning: states “cannot nullify an act of congress.” DHS threatens to shut down air travel in states that refuse to comply. The President says he could designate gun shop and firearms owners as agents providing material support for terrorism and subject them to indefinite detention under the NDAA.
Mostly just tough talk.
Sadly, the ATF conducts some high-profile raids. They shut down a small number of businesses; some people lose their liberty. But the feds lack the manpower to handle it all.
So, when one city alone reaches a point where over 1000 shops are conducting business, selling guns in open defiance to the federal ban, people start to realize that mass resistance leads to the desired end result: a nullification of the unconstitutional federal act.
HAPPENING TODAY
While that particular nightmare scenario isn’t just happening yet, we’ve certainly been in a nightmare scenario in this country for a long, long time.
We have a federal government that hates the constitution. It hates your liberty and no matter what political party is in power, or what person occupies the white house, their power always grows and your liberty is always less.
We have a government that claims the power to tell you what size toilet you can have, and what kind of light bulb you can buy. It claims the power to throw you in jail for growing a plant in your backyard and it will tax you for – doing nothing. On top of it all, they claim the power to arrest and detain you – forever – without due process. That’s kidnapping.
But, that hypothetical response – legislation to ban and nullify federal gun laws – it’s not hypothetical at all. Currently, there are more than 15 states considering legislation to nullify federal atta....
Take this excerpt from Missouri’s HB436, for example:
All federal acts, laws, orders, rules, and regulations, whether past, present, or future, which infringe on the people’s right to keep and bear arms as guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution and Article I, Section 23 of the Missouri Constitution shall be invalid in this state, shall not be recognized by this state, are specifically rejected by this state, and shall be considered null and void and of no effect in this state.
Or this, from Utah’s HB114:
An official, agent, or employee of the federal government may not enforce or attempt to enforce any act, law, order, rule, or regulation of the federal government upon a personal firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition owned or manufactured commercially or privately in this state while it remains exclusively within this state. Violation of this Subsection (2) is a third degree felony.
Or, on another issue, there’s HB2161 in Kansas, which would charge federal agents who attempt “indefinite detention” with kidnapping. This could mean 20 years in prison and $300,000 fines.
NAMES, NAMES!
In 1798, Thomas Jefferson called this “Nullification,” and James Madison called it “Interposition.”
Madison supported these views in his “Report of 1800.” Later, he flip-flopped. For a while, he was even saying that Jefferson never used the word nullification. But, when a copy of the original Kentucky Resolutions in Jefferson’s own handwriting turned up, complete with the word “nullification,”Madison was forced to retreat.
And, even when Madison changed his mind on nullification in response to South Carolina’s version of it in the 1830s, he didn’t reject the notion of nullification as our story’s heroic state legislator has carried it out.
In fact, Madison advised it.
He told us that when attempts to stop “usurpations of power” failed through the courts, the elective process, and even amending the Constitution, it would be a natural right for a single state to “rally to its reserved rights…and to decide between acquiescence & resistance.”
Today, people are using these principles right now on a wide range ..., and their successes are growing by the year.
CALL IT WHAT YOU WILL
The fact is this: the federal government doesn’t have the manpower to stop us. When enough people stand up and say NO to the federal government – and enough states and local communities pass laws backing them up, there’s not much that the federal government can do to force their unconstitutional laws, regulations…or mandates…down our throats.
Me? I call that kind of resistance “nullification.” But, I don’t care if you do too. You can call it defiance, civil disobedience or anything else you want. You can call the state acts Personal Liberty Laws or 2nd Amendment Preservation Acts. Refer to them as a reserved right, like Madison did, or nullification like Jefferson did.
It doesn’t really matter what words you use. What matters is what you do. Like Sam Adams leading the charge to nullify the Stamp Act, or states who pushed back against unconstitutional slave-catching laws, what matters most is what we do with our short time on earth.
For me, I’ll stand with liberty. I hope you’ll join me.
Michael Boldin [send him email] is the founder of the Tenth Amendment Center. He was raised in Milwaukee, WI, and currently resides in Los Angeles, CA. Follow him on twitter - @michaelboldin, on LinkedIn, and on Facebook.
http://teapartyorg.ning.com/forum/topic/show?id=4301673%3ATopic%3A1...
by: Mac Slavo
President Barack Obama is, arguably, the best gun salesman ever. Over 65 million guns have been purchased since the President took office in 2009. FBI background check statistics indicate that, over the last twelve months, Americans purchased a new gun every 1.5 seconds, a figure which suggests there is much more to the recent panic buying than people just stocking up to go hunting or sports shooting.
The following guns and ammo industry report indicates that every major gun and ammunition manufacturer in the country is running at 100% capacity, with many so far behind that they’ve stopped taking new orders altogether.
Smith & Wesson-is running at Full capacity making 300+ guns/day-mainly M&P pistols. They are unable to produce any more guns to help with the shortages.
RUGER: Plans to increase from 75% to 100% in the next 90 days.
FNH: Moving from 50% production to 75% by Feb 1st and 100% by March 1. Remington-Maxed out!
Armalite: Maxed out.
DPMS: Can’t get enough parts to produce any more product.
COLT: Production runs increasing weekly…bottle necked by Bolt carrier’s.
LWRC:Making only black guns, running at full capacity…can’t get enough gun quality steel to make barrels.
Springfield Armory: Only company who can meet demand but are running 30-45 days behind.
AMMO: Every caliber is now Allocated! We are looking at a nation wide shortage of all calibers over the next 9 months. All plants are producing as much ammo as possible w/ of 1 BILLION rounds produced weekly. Most is military followed by L.E. and civilians are third in line.
MAGPUL is behind 1 MILLION mags, do not expect any large quantities of magpul anytime soon.
RELOADERS… ALL Remington, Winchester, CCI & Federal primers are going to ammo FIRST. There are no extra’s for reloading purposes… it could be 6-9 months before things get caught up. Sorry for the bleak news, but now we know what to expect in the coming months. Stay tuned, we’ll keep you posted…
Many who have exercised their Second Amendment protections are first time buyers concerned with Federal and State gun grabs being spearheaded by politicians who are using the Sandy Hook school shooting as a pretext to restrict access to personal defense rifles, larger capacity magazines, and even ammunition.
read more:
http://www.shtfplan.com/headline-news/guns-and-ammo-production-maxe...
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/feb/13/the-state-of-the-un...
By Emily Miller
The Washington Times
Wednesday, February 13, 2013
President Obama’s State of the Union speech Tuesday was carefully staged to promote his gun-grabbing second-term agenda. Arrangements were made so TV cameras would pan to the faces of victims of gun violence in the House galleries. Emotional drama, as opposed to reasoned argument, is the primary weapon in the administration’s campaign to undermine a fundamental constitutional right.
Mayors Against Illegal Guns, the outfit funded by New York City Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg, worked with Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California, Rep. James R. Langevin of Rhode Island, Rep. Carolyn McCarthy of New York and others to pack the chamber with victims.
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi invited activists, including a fourth-grader from Newtown, Conn., who started a petition, Maryland Gov. Martin O'Malley and anti-gun crooner Tony Bennett. Former Rep. Gabrielle Giffords and her husband, Mark Kelly, were invited as part of their new organization’s push to nullify the Second Amendment.
First lady Michelle Obama asked a first-grade teacher from Sandy Hook Elementary School and the parents of a Chicago teenager who was shot in Chicago to sit in her box.
National Rifle Association President David Keene saw the effort to stack the audience as a way to distract the public from real issues, such as the revolving door on our criminal justice system. “The willingness of the president and his allies to so brazenly exploit the victims of violence to achieve their ideological and political goals strikes me as both over the top and, shall I say it, tasteless,” he told The Washington Times.
The victims from Chicago called for gun control as part of a tearful news conference with a hundred others, even though the Windy City already enacted every law on the gun-grabbers’ wish list. As Mr. Keene noted, that’s the problem. “These are not firearms victims, but the victims of criminals and irresponsible politicians so obsessed with stripping honest citizens of their rights that they forget about the monsters they could keep off the streets if they wanted to,” he said.
Pro-gun members didn’t set up an organized effort to counterbalance the show, but Rep. Steve Stockman, Texas Republican, did invite rock ‘n’ roll legend Ted Nugent to the speech. “I am a concerned U.S. citizen and wish to represent the side of logic and honesty at the State of the Union,” Mr. Nugent told The Washington Times.
Mr. Nugent, a member of the NRA board of directors, added the use of victims in the speech was “a typical manipulation by the Chicago ACORN community scammer-in-chief and outright despicable.”
A Quinnipiac University poll released Monday found 55 percent of voters wanted the president to focus his address on the economy and deficit, while only 15 percent wanted to hear more about gun policy. The White House follows polls closely, so it confined Mr. Obama’s obsession with gun control to a smaller section of the speech.
However, his anti-gun allies made up for the lack of words from the dais with drama in the galleries. A nation’s laws should not be written based on feelings, but on facts based on research and experience. We don’t need any more gun laws from Washington.
Emily Miller is a senior editor for the Opinion pages at The Washington Times.
© Copyright 2013 The Washington Times, LLC.
Posted by National Director, Dee on February 14, 2013 at 3:09pm
(Info Wars) – Perhaps next school year they’ll have an armed guard at every door and all students will be required to pass a psychological test and register their combination locks. Shielding himself once again behind the victims of Aurora, Colo., and Sandy Hook Elementary, and this time adding congresswoman Gabby Giffords to the recipe of guilt and terror he’s trying to create, President Obama called for Congress to act on all of his gun control proposals during Tuesday night’s State of the Union address.
But the assault that occurred at Withrow High School last week proves once again that if a deranged lunatic wants to attack someone, he’s going to use any weapon at his disposal, even if it’s something as crude and readily-available as a simple combination lock. Precious Allen, 31, is charged with felonious assault and aggravated criminal trespass in an assault that seriously injured one student and left one teacher with a black eye.
The assault occurred inside a classroom at Withrow High School in Cincinnati, Ohio. Precious Allen was assisted in the assault by her daughter and another adult female. The weapon of choice? Fists… and a combination lock. At around 2 p.m. on Thursday, February 22, Allen, accompanied by her 14-year-old daughter and 28-year-old Dawn Brunner of Covington, Ky, entered the school, burst into the classroom and began beating a 15-year-old student with their fists and a combination lock. At one point, Allen even held the victim down and instructed her daughter to strike the girl in the face with the lock.
Although juvenile court records are not available, the police report states that Allen’s daughter was arrested on charges of felonious assault, assault, and criminal trespass. According to court records, Brunner was also charged with criminal trespass. The victim of the brutal attack, a 15-year-old girl, suffered cuts and bruises all over her face and body, and a teacher who tried to stop the assault ended up with a black eye.
No mention is made of how the women were able to enter the school and barge into a classroom, nor is there anything to indicate who owned the lock or whether the weapon was legally registered. Police and Cincinnati Public School officials are will be analyzing the situation and plan to institute measures so that nothing like this will ever happen again.
Perhaps next school year they’ll have an armed guard at every door and all students will be required to pass a psychological test and register their combination locks.
http://www.infowars.com/further-proof-that-tighter-gun-control-laws...
Give Gun Owners 90 Days to Turn in Weapons
Dana Loesch Radio reported on the new legislation being pushed by Missouri Democrats:
Any person who, prior to the effective date of this law, was legally in possession of an assault weapon or large capacity magazine shall have ninety days from such effective date to do any of the following without being subject to prosecution.
Here’s part of the Democratic proposal in Missouri:
4. Any person who, prior to the effective date of this law, was legally in possession of an assault weapon or large capacity magazine shall have ninety days from such effective date to do any of the following without being subject to prosecution:
(1) Remove the assault weapon or large capacity magazine from the state of Missouri;
(2) Render the assault weapon permanently inoperable; or
(3) Surrender the assault weapon or large capacity magazine to the appropriate law enforcement agency for destruction, subject to specific agency regulations.
5. Unlawful manufacture, import, possession, purchase, sale, or transfer of an assault weapon or a large capacity magazine is a class C felony.
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2013/02/missouri-democrats-intruduc...
.
SUPPORT
REAL CONSERVATIVES
Order our book!
$ 9.95
INSTANT DOWNLOAD
TO ORDER
CLICK HERE:
http://www.lulu.com/shop/raymond-athens/right-side-up/ebook/product-17358205.html
TO ORDER
CLICK HERE:
http://www.lulu.com/shop/raymond-athens/right-side-up/ebook/product-17358205.html
The book RIGHT SIDE UP is a compilation of choice content from this web site...reflecting sometimes forgotten, purely Traditional American Values...
*********************
The Unborn
...let them BE !
TO ORDER
CLICK HERE:
http://tpartyus2010.ning.com/forum/topics/save-a-life-and-maybe-a-soul
*****************
.
.
RICHARD
ALLAN
JENNI'S
THE
DANNY MALONE TRILOGY
CLICK HERE:
http://www.amazon.com/Danny-Malone-Trilogy-Mohammeds-Daughter/dp/1432724932
"The Fox, Golden Gate and Mohammed's Daughter"
Paperback
*************************
© 2024 Created by Your Uncle Sam. Powered by
You need to be a member of REAL CONSERVATIVES to add comments!
Join REAL CONSERVATIVES