If…

criminals(men and women)will not obey the Law and Word of God, then what could ever possibly make anybody think that they will obey the law and word of mankind? God already said “Thou shall not murder. Another mass shooting(murder)and more calls and demands for gun-control.

The left as well as those who favor gun-control push what they call “common sense” measures. The problem is that those measures will only apply to law-abiding citizens, they will not apply to the criminal element in our midst.

Look at it this way, when permits to carry are denied to law-abiding citizens they simply do not carry. The criminal has no intention of applying for a carry permit, in fact the criminal will carry and would carry no matter what the law says or does. The only thing accomplished here is that a person who could have been “allowed” to have in possession a means to prevent himself from being a victim was instead “allowed” to be come a victim.

It is one thing to have the means and capability to defend oneself or another and choose to not exercise that option. It is quite another when one is denied the means to defend oneself or another leaving them no option.

At this point I am going to have to admit ignorance, I am at least partially ignorant of the laws particular to California as to where a person can carry or can not carry. As a matter of fact on that point I do not know all of the laws of the other 48 states or D.C. either. At this point in time there is no need for me to know the gun laws in or of the other 49 states or D.C. as there is no chance in the foreseeable future of me venturing out of the state of Florida, so I shall remain blissfully ignorant. Even if I were to leave the state of Florida there are some states I would avoid like the plague based on what little I do know of your gun laws.

What I do know are the gun laws that pertain to Florida as well as the Federal Laws. I know where I can carry and where I can not carry. When I do have to visit a place where I can not carry I conduct my business and depart. If a business I visit has a no gun policy, I simply turn and walk away never to revisit. He/she made their choice and I made mine. My point here is that I follow the law, and this is exactly what the criminal element counts on. They count on us to follow the law.

I would venture to say that the vast majority of these mass shootings(murders)are conducted in the shooters(murderers)home state, home town, nearby town or at the very least a state the murderer is very familiar with. If the murderer is in his/her home state then it is very likely that he/or she knows the laws for that state or at least some of them. The same is true if the murderer is in a state they are familiar with. Operating in familiar territory has advantages, for instance these mass murderers want “big numbers”. They will not achieve “big numbers” if they choose a target in which the intended victims have a means to fight back. There is a reason why these mass murders never happen at or are even attempted at a “cop shop”. They want a “soft” target they do not want a “hard” target, they do not even want a target of unknown softness or hardness. They will pass up hard, possibly hard, possibly soft just to focus on a “known soft” target.

The murderers use the law to their benefit(advantage)in racking up numbers. It is not the tool(gun)that gives them the advantage, what gives them the advantage is the lack of opposition.

Now is a good time to bring up few points.

First, the criminal element does not give one hoot about the Second Amendment. As a matter of fact they see the Second Amendment as a hinderance to their criminal enterprise. An armed populace is the last thing they want and what they fear most.

Second, the criminal element is probably and most likely among the gun-control cult. The more restrictions that can and will be placed on the law-abiding public means that there are fewer obstructions for the criminal element to overcome. The criminal element is probably the loudest voice in the gun-control cult.

Third, the common sense gun control measures they push benefit the criminal element while they only effect and burden the law-abiding citizens.

Fourth, the ones bank-rolling this cult do so with armed, heavily armed, security at their side or at least very near. You can bet that what restrictions they want placed on the public will not apply to them.

I do have to wonder about the motivation of any government at any level that would start legislating away the rights and liberties of the population. They promise more security if you give up a little liberty. A quote attributed to Benjamin Franklin goes something like this, “Any society that will give up a little liberty for little security will deserve neither and lose both”. But even with the promise of increased security they have admitted that nothing can stop all of these mass murders. Yet their favorite mantra is “We just did not go far enough”.

Let us look at some of their common sense measures.
A national registry of firearms. Historically speaking this had led to disaster for the population registering their personal firearms. Registration leads to confiscation, even if only of political opponents. It would be difficult to confiscate firearms unless one were to know where they were and who had them.
Universal background checks. Each time you buy a firearm from a FFL you must do the paperwork and pass a background check.
Close the gun show loophole. One can not close what does not exist. If you want a background check done on all firearm sales, including private(between individuals)just say it.
A ban on the AR and AK platforms, which will morph into a ban on all semi-automatic rifles, which will morph into a ban on a semi-automatic anything, which will morph into a ban on their next “demon” until we are left with nothing but sticks and rocks.
A gun violence tax. A per bullet tax. A gun buy-back. A background check to by ammunition. Limits on magazine capacity. Bans on bump-fire stocks. The list just goes on and on.

Please note that none of the above will affect the criminals in the least.

In the past they claimed they did not want to stop us from hunting, sport shooting or target practicing, well that was pretty generous of them considering. But it was not all that long ago they said they thought it was time to repeal the Second Amendment.

We now wait to see what laws are shoved down the throats of law-abiding gun owners in the states now in control and those that will be in the control of the anti-gun left.

We are living in interesting times.

DEO VINDICE

Advertisements

Tugging at heartstrings

Again the left uses a tried and true scheme to influence public opinion, using emotion over logic. The latest outrage from the left comes courtesy of illegal immigration. It seems that children are separated, or were being, from their parents(mothers mainly)at the southern border. This happens when and because the “parents” cross the border illegally with children.

They even stoop to using a false(manufactured)picture on the cover of a liberal leftist “rag”, the one showing a crying child looking up at the President while the President looks down on the crying child. Again it is all about the children.

The left is once again “worried” about the children. They claim it is inhumane to separate children from their mothers. They claim that common sense gun reforms(restrictions placed on law-abiding citizens)will protect the children from murderers(non-law-abiding people). They care not about children whether inside or outside of the womb, what they do care about is their socialist/communist leftist agenda. They care not about children, private property rights or borders, if they did they would not be socialist/communist leftists.

The “children” crossing the southern border face unlimited/untold dangers(exposure to harsh elements, rape, human trafficking and such). If the leftists really cared about those “children” they would demand that a border wall be constructed. The children would not be placed in danger while making that long arduous journey, there would be no way in except through authorized entry points.

Look at some of the benefits at a wall along the southern border. It would cut down on illegal drugs entering this country. It would cut down on undesirables(gang members and other criminals)entering this country. It would benefit and protect the children they would face less dangers.

Entering/attempting to enter this country is an unlawful act, those who commit unlawful acts are usually detained. The illegals crossing the border illegally are placed in detention centers while they wait for disposition. Children are separated from adults at hose centers as a protection for the child. If one crosses illegally with a minor, the minor is separated from the adult as a precaution while things get sorted out, if the child is the offspring of the adult the separation is only temporary.

They even try tugging at the heartstrings of pro-life conservatives, they “worry” that the illegals that just happen to be pregnant are getting the pre-natal care they so desperately need. They have a “concern” for the unborn and the mother all the sudden. Since when did the leftists care one iota about the unborn.

Show that you really care about children. Build the wall. Protect the children, do not place expectant mothers in harm’s way. You have to do this for the children, As you say if it saves even one life it is worth it.

Prove you care. You do care don’t you? Come on leftists do it for the children you claim to want to protect.

DEO VINDICE

This is going to get ugly

The left is unhinged and is rapidly becoming totally unhinged. Where has the civility gone? The left has no idea of how to conduct themselves in a civilized manner. Many thought they were just “blowing off steam” after Donald J. Trump was elected President, and they would finally just accept that fact and move on. They are never going to accept that fact and they get can not get past the fact that HRC is not president. It is already ugly and is only going to get uglier.

A so-called comedienne who referred to the daughter of the president as a “feckless cunt”, many thought that funny. A washed-up actor referred to a female cabinet member as a “gash”, and again many thought that funny. In years past the democrats were claiming that the republicans were waging a “war against/on women”. I guess now we know who has the least amount of respect for women.

The President’s Press Secretary was denied service and asked to leave because the owner of the restaurant has differing political views. So now are we expected to believe it has become appropriate to deny service based on political views? The Secretary of DHS was forced to leave a restaurant because of protesters. Has it now become appropriate to protest a person trying to have a quite dinner with their family?

I might point out that both the Press Secretary and the Secretary of DHS are both women and it was the left that showed once again they can not be civil. Again tell me just who is against women.

One of the protesters at the eatery chosen by the Secretary of DHS was identified as a current employee of the DOJ. Are there no standards of conduct for government employees?

The antifascist left made their way to the scene after the election of President Trump, claiming the president to be a fascist. They set about rioting in the streets, destroying property and creating all sorts of mayhem. They claim to be antifascist yet they act in the most fascist manner. They have attacked both verbally and physically those who have a different political view. They have shut down many free speech events because of a differing view.

A political has-been(political hack)from a previous administration has come right and said that the Cabinet should turn against the President. He may as well have called for a mutiny against the President.

A leftist talking head(political hack)has come out and said that if the voters support President Trump, they are the problem, not Trump but his supporters. He as much as said that the ones who support and vote for President Trump are Nazis.

Yet another political has-been(political hack)from a previous administration came out with a tweet showing a picture of the entrance to a Nazi concentration camp. Saying something to the effect, there was another country that had separated children from their mothers. Again a comparison to Nazis.

A sitting member of Congress from the House of Representatives has come out in support of the events at the eateries above and says more like those need to be happening. From my interpretation of what she was saying she was actually encouraging these acts, even saying more like them should happen. Saying as much as when ever a member of the Trump administration is encountered they should be heckled and driven away from eateries, gas stations and where ever they are encountered. Some, if not most, on the left are going to see this as their “call to action”, their license if you will.

This will at some point get out of control.

We need not be wasting our time with challenges as to what would have happen if the right had acted like this towards the previous administration. We on the right manage to conduct ourselves in a civil manner, something they are incapable of doing. We do need to come to the realization that the left operates on hatred. They hate President Trump and will transfer that hatred to his supporters.

DEO VINDICE

Now they try this

The gun control cult will try anything to get us to relinquish our rights as owners of firearms. They now go to the church and try to shame Christians. They use the same old tactics and spread the same lies(drivel)but now some in their cult are doing it from the Church.

Came upon a post in the WordPress reader this morning, not one that I follow and have never seen it before but the title grabbed me so I read it, glad I did. The post is entitled Guns as Idolatry posted on the 28th. I did not link to it and I will sure as heck not re-blog this one. In this case paraphrasing his words would not do so his is word for word. His words are his words my words are my words. We need to know where these people(hide)are and what they do. This individual claims to be a Youth Pastor, and in his words has been one all of his life. Personally I would not let my children anywhere near this man. He put it out there I am obliged to respond.

I will admit when I saw the title I had my suspicions of where this post would lead, just by the title. Even with that suspicion I did read the whole post through, which is something this man will not do when or if he comes across this post being my response. He will stop as soon as he realizes I am on the opposite side.

Well here it is.

(His words)I have to admit, I grew up loving all types of guns. I was the typical full-blooded American boy. I could turn anything into a gun. Give me a stick, it’s a gun. Give me a pile of Lego’s and guess what I would always create . . . a gun! And then Star Wars came out and I wanted to be Han Solo with a laser gun strapped to my waist. Every young boy is fascinated with guns. But this is the realm of fantasy, whether it is imitating a cowboy, a sci-fi space pirate, a gangster or a cop. My teen years were even more influenced by the way of the gun to solve problems through the cinematic influences of Arnold Schwarzenegger, Sylvester Stallone, Harrison Ford, Mel Gibson, Clint Eastwood and Bruce Willis. There are no aliens, terminators, Nazi’s, Russian’s, or bad guys that a good gun with an all-American superhero could not stop.

He referenced a “good gun”. So I think his point was it was “fantasy” to believe a good guy with a gun can stop a bad guy with a gun, not sure because of the wording he used. It is not fantasy that good guys with guns stop bad guys with guns. It is however under reported. It is under reported because the MSM has become the propaganda arm of the leftist gun control cult. If they believe it to be fantasy, why do they always call the cops, the cops are the good guys and they bring guns, sometimes they bring their friends with their guns. So stop living in a fantasy world by calling the cops every time a bad guy comes into someone’s life. By the way the vast majority of Civilians are also good guys, they also have friends, I have heard no complaints when a good guy “civilian” stops a bad guy when he/she comes into someone’s life.

(His words)Unfortunately our country is in a moral quandary with the fact that we are seeing more and more actual gun violence playing out in real-life America. It is getting to the point where it seems like every week we are introduced to another news story of someone taking out their grievances by using guns on innocent victims. Whenever this happens it seems like a majority of Americans are broken by the cycle of violence that we seem to find ourselves in. And yet there seems to be a small but powerful segment of America that digs their heals in and praises the 2nd Amendment despite all the gun violence we are experiencing as a nation. Now I have no problem if someone chooses to own a gun for the purposes of hunting or home protection. But what I am witnessing is that the gun has become a form of idolatry within our country. When the “right” to own certain types of weaponry trumps the lives of innocent victims, I have a problem with that, especially with those who claim to be apart of the community of Christians.

Here he “comes out” to reveal what I suspected from the start. In true leftist fashion he is blaming the gun not and not the person. The violence you blame on the Second Amendment would be much greater without the Second Amendment. The Second Amendment was not written so we could hunt. Just for your education the Second Amendment was written because of the following and it comes to us straight out of the Declaration of the Causes and Necessity of Taking Up Arms July 6, 1775. One of the Founding Documents of this country you claim as being in a quandary.

The inhabitants of Boston being confined within that town by the general their governor, and having, in order to procure the dismission, entered into a treaty with him, it was stipulated that the said inhabitants having deposited their arms with their own magistrate, should have liberty to depart, taking with them their other effects. They accordingly delivered up their arms, but in open violation of honour, in defiance of the obligations of treaties, which even savage nations esteemed sacred, the governor ordered the arms deposited as aforesaid, that they might be preserved for their owners, to be seized by a body of soldiers; detained the greatest part of the town, and compelled the few who were permitted to retire, to leave their most valuable effects behind.

That, Sir, is why we have the Second Amendment. It was not deer, rabbits or squirrels that confined those people to that town. Nor was it the aforementioned animals that denied them their most valuable effects. Now as to idolatry, I have yet to pray before anything but the Lord, never have never will. You seem to think a person can not own a firearm and still worship the Lord.

(His words)I will be straight up, I have never owned a weapon. I can’t justify it theologically, nor do I feel that I would want to bear the responsibility to own one. With kids in my home and working as a pastor, I see that owning a weapon would be hypocritical to what I believe. First of all, I am not a hunter. I have no problem with those who choose to do so, but this born-and-raised suburbanite could not find the will to kill any of God’s creation. I couldn’t do it. I will leave that task up to people who have a stomach for that type of thing.

He has never owned a weapon, if he had he would know that guns do three things; 1 they work 2 they don’t work 3 they rust. He we go with the leftist drivel, he could not justify owning one. Why is it that the left always want justification for owning a firearm. How about this for justification, because I want to, not mention what happened in Boston in 1775. He thought he would be a or seen as a hypocrite if he owned one being a pastor and having children around. He also points that he is not a hunter but has no problem with those that do. Here we go again with the hunting thing. Being a born and raised suburbanite he could not muster the will to kill any of God’s creation, didn’t have the stomach. More on this as the post unfolds.

(His words)Have I ever shot weapons for sport? Absolutely! I have been to gun ranges. I have shot clay pigeons. And I actually enjoy the sport of paintball in that you can actually play games against each other without death and carnage occurring. I grew up on video games with digital guns (especially Goldeneye!), and I loved movies with lots of guns, superheroes and villains.

Here he brings up weapons for sport been to the range and has shot clay pigeons, interjecting the sports shooting thing the left is famous for. He fails to mention if he had a range safety course, safe handling of firearms. So he enjoys the sport of paintball, pointing out that you can actually play games against each other without actually causing death and carnage, pretend death and carnage. He grew up on video games with digital guns and loved movies with lots of guns, superheroes and villains. I would point out that maybe we should have never made a game of killing. This goes back to the responsibility issue, one is not held responsible for what they do in a game, you can make all the mistakes you want and just say “oops”. No punishment no penalty.

(His words)But there is a difference between fantasy and reality. Our country has a huge obsession with weapons and we fail to see the benefit to having a conversation about how we can best protect the greater good of people and still respect responsible gun owners. We desperately need to have this conversation. Instead, we see the NRA, backed by some of its supporters, constantly raising the warning that the government is coming to take you guns away and destroy the 2nd amendment. This simply is fear-mongering at its worst. And what is the purpose of such fear mongering? To sell more weapons. The NRA played this card all throughout the Obama administration. Any suggestion to talk about gun violence and gun safety was always met with cries that they are coming for your guns! Now that our own kids who are victims of gun violence are speaking up they are being called out as terrorists and liberals.

Wow. We have been trying to talk to them, we have talked to them until we are blue in the face. They are the ones who refuse to talk, they only make demands. In true leftist fashion attacks the NRA. Accusing them of fear mongering. As for them coming for our guns and trying to destroy the Second Amendment, maybe he missed the op-ed written by a former Justice of the Supreme Court when he offered his opinion that it was time to repeal the Second Amendment. Maybe he missed the interview where the “queen of confiscation” said if she could have gotten enough votes in the Senate it would have been “Turn then in Mr. and Mrs. America, turn all of them in”, I believe she mention the number 51. Not to mention many in his cult have come right out and said the same thing. I might point this out to the gentleman that the kids are not the victims of guns or gun violence(as you call it)they are instead the victims of other kids, violent kids. Was it an adult or one of those precious children that was shouting “Burn Her, Burn Her” at the NRA representative, Dana Loesch during the town-hall? Just who is it that resorts to name calling when they loser or begin to lose a debate? As to the obsession with guns he alluded to I will get to who is obsessed and with what later in this post.

(His words)I have heard tired and lazy arguments to blame everything else other than the easy access we have created within our culture to be able to get any type of weapon you want. It’s video games! It’s the entertainment industry! It’s medications! It’s mental health! It’s the breakdown of the family! It’s because we took God out of the schools (which actually is HORRIBLE theology of God’s omnipresence)! We want to blame everything else other than the fact that we have ridiculously easy access to weaponry that is designed to kill as many people as possible in a short amount of time.

So he grows tired of the same argument we put forward as possible causes. He really proves how little he knows about guns. We can not just have anything we want, somethings are totally prohibited and something require a special tax and approval just to possess making them out of reach for the average citizen. Of course he blame the easy access to firearms, yet above he admitted to never owning a firearm, therefore he has no direct knowledge of it being either easy or difficult. Again just regurgitating what he has been feed, which is a line of crap.

(His words)So, being that I have never gone through the process of actually owning any type of weapon, I propose the following if it is not already law:
1.Buying a gun should have a process that is similar to getting a driver’s license. One should have to get a license to own a weapon. I understand that this is the case but there are still loopholes in which people can buy weapons without going through this process. Recently a news story showed an underage boy trying to buy cigarettes, alcohol and pornography at a local convenient store and got denied in all three instances. But then they took him down to a gun show where within minutes he walked away with a high-powered weapon. He was a 13 year old.
2.Which brings me to my second point, the age of owning a gun needs to go up to 21. Now that we better understand the brain development of teens, and their ability to be impulsive without thinking thorough the consequences of their actions, we should not be providing them with weapons that kill. Give them time to develop and grow. They need to earn the responsibility to own a weapon.
3.When a teenager causes a death that was influenced by being under the influence of alcohol the parents are held responsible if the alcohol came from their home. I am tired of mindless parents of school shooters having no clue that their kid was into said violence. This is not responsible gun ownership or parenting. They need to start bearing the responsibility for the actions of their child/teen. Having high-powered weaponry easily available to their kids is the height of irresponsibility. We hear a lot about “law-abiding” gun owners but let’s talk about RESPONSIBLE gun owners instead. If your kids uses your guns to shoot up a bunch of innocents then you lost your responsibility to own guns and you should be held accountable for the consequences.
4.There needs to be a national gun registry. We need to be able to track where weapons have come from and hold those people responsible. The government already knows what vehicles I own and apparently anyone can pull up a CarFax to know the history of my cars. Why can’t this be done within the context of weapons?
5.The CDC needs to be able to study gun violence. Why would we not want this? And the bigger question is why would the NRA prevent this from happening? The more we know, the better equipped we will be to tackle this plague of gun violence within our country.
6.One should have to have a certain amount of recorded training in order to own a weapon. My teens have to go through 50 hours of driving experience with a licensed adult in order to qualify to take their driving test! Why can’t we require this type of training before one can own a gun?
7.I am tired of our politicians being owned by special-interest lobbies, in this case, the NRA. The NRA bears some of the responsibility for where we have found ourselves because they stoke the flames of fear that people are trying to eradicate the 2nd Amendment and do all they can to prevent legitimate research that would help us know more about when, where and why gun violence is happening. We need to vote out politicians who accept money from the NRA and ignore the voices of those who voted them in. I have not found one quote in which someone wants to eradicate the 2nd amendment. I want gun owners to be responsible and not cave in to the constant fear-mongering of the NRA. Is it just me, or is it not so obvious that this constant fear-mongering helps to sell more guns which benefits the gun manufacturers? Someone is becoming ridiculously rich off all this fear mongering. Why do people cave into this so easily? Is it just plain ignorance, gullibility, or naivety? There is no doubt in my mind that we have experienced a “dumbing-down” in America. Have we just become that stupid that we do not see when we are being played?

Well, looky here he never has been through the process of buying firearm, yet above he said it was ridiculously easy. He aint even sure if what he suggests is a law or not, Lordy.
Point 1. Truth is it is far easier to get a driver’s license than to get approved to purchase a fire arm, in some of the leftist states they will allow anybody a to get a driver’s license even if they are in this country illegally. Are you sure you want to lower the standards? Besides a drivers license is a privilege while owning a firearm is a right. So if he suggests having a license to exercise rights, would he be okay with getting a license to exercise his First, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Seventh or Eighth? Thirdly he mentions the mythical loophole the left say exists, for the umpteenth time there is no loophole. Fourthly, Good God, man, crimes were committed was anybody arrested. There was at the least conspiracy in his news story, conspiracy to corrupt a minor. Was the fellow who sold the gun to the 13-year-old arrested? Did this even happen, come on? News reporters do not have the right to commit crimes to prove a point or get a story. I do hope that if this real you had the common sense to report this to law-enforcement. There should be at least three people sitting in jail right now because of this, the two(at least two)people(you did say they)who were corrupting the minor and the one who sold him the gun(I say sold because based on experience there is nothing available at a gun show for free). He accuses the NRA of fear mongering. What does that say about his first point, fear mongering?
Point 2. Did the brain development of teens slow down over time, their brains developed just fine a few years back. Just how, pray tell does one earn responsibility? Did he mean right? Besides if the age limit was raised to 21 you next would demand 25.
Point 3. His third point is going to cause a boom in the construction industry. Never once did he mention punishing the child for his crime. He qualified the drunken kid excuse with statement if the alcohol came from their home. He knows full well that there is no way to prove when much less where the child got snockered. He further claims that he is tired of mindless parents of school shooters having no clue that their kid was into said violence, saying this was not responsible gun ownership or parenting. They need to start bearing the responsibility for the actions of their child/teen. He went on claiming the height of irresponsibility was having high-powered weaponry easily available to their kids. He is also tired of the talk about law-abiding gun owners, he wants to talk about RESPONSIBLE gun owners. He then says, if your kids uses guns to shoot up a bunch of innocents then you just lost your responsibility to own guns and you should be held accountable for the consequences. Wow, where to start? I will just say for now that he wants the parent and the gun to be responsible. He fails to hold the child/teen/kid accountable. Perhaps he does not understand that law-abiding gun owners are responsible gun owners. Once again he uses the word responsibility where I think he meant to use the word right. So if his kid were to kill someone while he/she was driving and texting he would lose his responsibility(right)to own a car and a cell phone. Better build more prisons.
Point 4. His fourth point is that we need a national gun registry, because he has to register his cars and apparently anyone can pull up a Carfax on his car and know the history of it and he wants to know why this can not be applied in the context of guns. I could point that historically speaking gun registries have spelled disaster, but instead I will use this. Would he be happy registering all of his effects with the government? Given the hacks on information, he might just be uncomfortable if some nefarious person would gain access to what he has, you know just in case they wanted it? Then they could just enter Stuff Fax. And again driving is a privilege owning a firearm is a right.
Point 5. he thinks we need a study by the CDC and he accuses the NRA of trying to prevent this. He wants this study because the more we know the better we can tackle this plague of gun violence. He might just not like the results when the results of that study comes out, provided they were to conduct an honest study and our side is proven right.
Point 6. Has he never heard of hunters safety courses? I might also mention the NRA has partnered with others to provide firearms training. Even with the training required to become a licensed driver children still die, far more children are lost to motor vehicle accident than to what he calls gun violence.
Point 7. His biggest beef is with the politicians who get financial support from the NRA. He wants all NRA backed politicians backed by the NRA voted out. He also claims the NRA bears some of the responsibility for where we have found our selves because they stoke the flames of fear. He says, He has not found one quote in which someone wants to eradicate the Second Amendment. He must have missed the op-ed by the former Justice and the interview with the “queen of confiscation”. He wants gun owners to be responsible and quit caving into the fear mongering of the NRA. He goes on by asking several questions that I feel he should ask himself. Especially the one, on just plain ignorance, gullibility and naivety. He then states, There is no doubt that America has experienced a dumbing-down. Then he asks, Have we become that stupid that we can not see that we are being played? I have a question in response, just who has been dumbed-down? By reading your post, the entire thing I would say that the answer to the last question, in your case is yes.

(His words)And finally, the most disappointing thing I believe in all of this is that the church is not the leading voice in wanting to stop this carnage. We as Christians need to speak up louder against gun violence. This is a BIG pro-life issue! It is the height of hypocrisy to act so sanctimonious about life in the womb but ignore lives affected by gun violence. If you believe that there is a real devil who is out to destroy God’s creation then you have to see that he is celebrating our idolatry to weapons and reveling about each loss of life. The Bible teaches that he has come to kill, steal and destroy. If you are defending the current state that we find ourselves in you can not claim to be following the way of Jesus. Jesus is the Prince of Peace who told his followers to turn the other cheek, pray for your enemies, and to bless those who curse you. He was the very one who took on all the violence directed at him on the cross and defeated all his enemies through love, self-sacrifice, non-violence and resurrection. We are encouraged to pray “Thy kingdom come, thy will be done ON EARTH as it is in heaven”. We are supposed to be ushering in a new way of life as a community that is radically different from the status-quo, yet the modern-day American church has unfortunately become a mere reflection of our culture. We have allowed empire worship to trump Christ worship and we don’t see the difference between the two.

So he thinks the time is right for the churches to come out for gun control, being the leading voice. I guess he never heard of the table being overturned and the money-changers being driven from the Temple.

(His words)I have been a youth pastor all my life. I am grieved beyond words for the kind of country we have created for our kids. We have been in a perpetual war ever since 9/11, we are spending ridiculous amounts on our military while Flint, Michigan still doesn’t have clean water and Puerto Rico doesn’t have full power. I honestly believe that we have become more of a reflection of the Biblical state of Babylon than the mythical “Christian nation” that some still believe. It is time we stop hunkering down to protect our “rights” and begin to break out of our selfishness and lust for power, and start thinking about what is best for the next generation of kids growing up. It is time to take our eyes off of the idols we have created and focus back on our kids who are dying. It is easy to read the Bible and be horrified that the Israelites got to the point where they were literally sacrificing their children to the god Molech. But I fail to see the difference between that and where we are at right now. We have more innocent Americans who have been murdered by gun violence within our country than service people in the line of duty! That’s just crazy and should be a big wake-up call for our entire country but especially the Church!

Where did he find those statistics?

(His words)So if you are a Christian and a gun owner, I would encourage you to advocate for sensible gun laws and consider what is best for the greater good of humanity. Think about your own children, think about your local schools, think about your communities. Every mass shooting has the same response: “I never thought it would happen here!” Why do we have to defend our rights until the violence comes to our own communities? Let’s come together as the body of Christ and be the kingdom that we are called to be and shake off the dirt of the Empire that we are entangled in.

Just another social justice warrior.

(His words)Lord have mercy on this nation.

His last statement is the only thing I can agree with him on. I cut my answer short on the last three, this post has gotten long, real long. If you are still here at this point I really appreciate it and thank you. I did it this way because I felt this should be exposed, again sorry about the length. Bear with me just a bit more.

I am nowhere near done with this, he has given me much ammunition.

If you attend Church and I hope that you do, please pay attention to the message being “preached”. This man claims to be a Youth Pastor, he is preaching to the kids. I am quite sure that he is not the only one.

DEO VINDICE

Just too far apart

Liberals and Conservatives can work things out through compromise(negotiation), truth is they have much in common. Their differences are not all that far apart. They just have to hammer out the finer details. The same is not true of the Left and the Right, they have nothing in common. There are no finer details to hammer out. When it comes to compromise(give and take)with the left they are willing to give nothing and are only interested in how much the right is willing to give them. That is their idea of give and take, taking anything the right is willing to give. The Right and the Left have nothing in common on any issue.

As stated above the Right and Left have nothing in common, no common ground. They, the Left, cant be negotiated with, they seek no compromise. Yet many on the right believe, and wrongly so, that they can work out the differences between the Right and the Left. Here is how the Left negotiates with the Right. We(the Left)are going to cut off one of your arms. Here is what the right does. They present the left or right arm to be cut off and then claim that at least they(the Right)saved the other arm, or say at least we(the Right)did not lose both arms. You simply cant negotiate like that, the correct response would have been “No you(the Left)are not, You(the Left)will cut neither arm off”. No negotiation. No compromise.

Look at what happened in Broward County as a direct result of the PROMISE program. Criminal behavior and acivity were decriminalized because of a supposed school to prison pipeline. There is no direct path from school to prison. To get to prison one must be convicted of a crime serious enough to be sent to prison, that means that law-enforcement was involved. Crimes were overlooked and as such there was no punishment for criminal acts or behavior, no law-enforcement involvement. It seems that too many school children were having run-ins with law-enforcement in Broward County, making the school district look bad. In other words some if not many students were not conducting themselves in a legal and lawful manner so the school district intervened. Because laws were not being enforced one POS was able to legally acquire a firearm, one which he would later use to do exactly what he threatened to do. So in this instance it was the Left that had a program that decriminalized criminal activities and then demanded that non-criminal activities be criminalized. Lost yet? Had the laws already in place been enforced the shooter would have in most likelihood been denied the purchase of a firearm. But sadly we will never know for sure. What we do know for sure is that each and every 18, 19 and 20 year-old(unless in the military or law-enforcement)in the State of Florida is being penalized for the actions of one, just one, 19 year-old. The Left demanded more gun control and the Right offered up the less that 21 year-olds, they can no longer purchase long guns without meeting certain criteria. In fact all Floridians were offered up, as now there is a waiting period to purchase long-guns(unless the customer holds a CCW license). The laws on the books were not being enforced and yet more laws were demanded and enacted. Great, just great.

How are these laws going to effect the elections here in Florida? The gun control legislation in Florida was enacted with the support of the republicans, here the republicans control both Houses and the Governors office. The republicans running for re-election are going to have some explaining to do. They were elected to serve the State, not to vote away the rights of its citizens. States that have enacted onerous gun control laws that are firmly in the hands of the leftist democrats have little to worry about. But Florida? Nationally?

One thing that happened as a direct result of the shooting at MSD in Parkland was that the gun control cult has finally been unmasked, and they did it themselves(though most of us have long suspected). They have come right out and said it is time for the Second Amendment to be repealed. So all of their talk about “common sense reforms” when it come to firearms in the hands of normal citizens was and is just that, talk. They do not seek anything less than total disarmament of the general population. The Left wants the population disarmed, the Right wants to keep and bear arms. There is no middle ground here, but again the Right believes they can negotiate and compromise.

One thing the Left always screams for a more background checks. We already submit to background checks to purchase a firearm from a licensed firearms dealer. They claim it is to keep guns out of the hands of criminals. But how good is a background check if the information is missing or inaccurate? If the young chap in Parkland had been arrested for his many episodes would he have been able to pass a background check? Would his butt have been sitting in jail or prison instead of taking those innocent lives?

So let us stick with background checks for just a moment. As far as legal immigration is concerned a person legally entering this country must pass a background check including a health screening and submit to several interviews. The same cant be said of illegals entering this country, there is no background check, no interview, no health screening, no nothing. When anybody and everybody is let in you have no idea who or what is among us. So the left does not really give a tinker’s damn about background checks.

The Left likes to promote and throw their idea of gun control(gun confiscation)in the country’s collective face, using the UK and Australia as an example.. The UK has some pretty restrictive gun laws. I am sure that by now most everyone has seen the video of the man with a knife keeping a large body of law-enforcement at bay. Even chasing them, first one then another. It looked a bit like an old Keystone Cops episode. Thing is the Keystone Cops were meant to be funny, you know poking fun. I was actually embarrassed for the UK police force, humiliating video. But even with the strict gun laws in the UK there are still reports of people getting shot. But in addition to people still getting shot they now have new threats, knives and acid. People being stabbed and most often being killed and acid attacks leaving the victims horribly disfigured. Not to mention the occasional motor vehicle being used as weapon. The city of London surpassed New York City in murders for two straight months. What is the Mayor of London concerned about? Fat food ads. Seems like not all that long ago NY city had a Mayor with similar concerns. Recently Australia, also having restrictive gun laws, suffered the first mass shooting in over two decades. Clever wording the report said first mass shooting not first shooting.

Back to America and the Leftist enclaves. If your so-called gun control laws worked the cities and states with the strictest gun laws would be the safest. The opposite is true, the cities with the strictest gun laws are the most violent and dangerous cities in this land. They are also the most crime infested. It is the law-abiding citizens who are the losers, while the criminal element enjoys the upper hand. Law-enforcement just cant keep up. I could not imagine being afraid to sit on my front porch at night because I might become the victim of a drive-by shooting. Nor could I imagine sitting in my house behind locked doors out of fear even in broad daylight. Criminals do tend to operate most effectively in areas where they will face the least resistance. The opposite is true, they tend to avoid areas where they don’t have the upper hand, facing resistance and possibly(most likely)armed resistance at that.

The Right can no longer foolishly believe that the Left can be reasoned with, negotiated with or compromised with. The time has come to say “No more”. Perhaps it is time to tell them to go piss up a rope. The left has renounced reason.

DEO VINDICE

The liberals in a nut shell

They are for the death penalty as long as the condemned is still in the womb. Other wise they are totally against putting a person to death. Kind of seems backwards to me, willing to condemn the innocent but protecting the life of the guilty.

They fight tooth and nail against voter ID laws, claiming it imposes undue hardships on the poor. I guess that the poor can not afford a picture ID. Yet they have never proposed legislation that would provide a photo ID at taxpayer expense for the poorest. I can not understand why they never propose such legislation especially when they believe that government is always the solution. I also wonder why the republicans never propose this.

They are for religious expression as long as Christianity is not the religion being expressed. They are for free speech as long as everyone is saying what they are saying or what they want to hear. If it goes against what they say, think or believe then they call it hate speech. They demand to be heard while demanding others be silent. They don’t really have to worry about the press, the press is in their corner. They would rather have the First Amendment repealed than have to contend with differing view points.

They support the Second Amendment as it pertains to hunting, except for those that have come right and said the Second Amendment should be repealed. Problem with that cupcake is that the Second Amendment was not written to allow hunting. You can read the Second Amendment forwards, backwards and even upside down and you will not find the words hunting, target practice or sports shooting. The Second Amendment was written for a specific purpose and reason.

They only want to ban scary looking rifles and high-capacity magazines. They even come up with new words, their new one is military grade. The old one was assault weapon. They say no one should be allowed to have military grade weapons but the military and law-enforcement. I believe the correct term would be Mil-Spec(Military Specification). But you could not call the AR-15 a Mil-Spec weapon could you? The AR-15 is not made to Military Specifications, it is a modern sporting rifle made for civilian use.

But then that is what you do you use words, more accurately use a play on words. You cant really come out and say you are pro-abortion, can you? That would equate to being pro-death. So you use the phrase pro-choice, by using the word choice it gives the impression that what happens was the choice of all. The truth of the matter is that the one directly effected by the “choice” had no “choice” in the matter. So lets look at some of your other plays on words.

When it comes to gun-control you use phrases like;
End gun-violence. Why do you never speak of ending violence? The U.K. banned guns and that did not end or stop crimes committed with a firearm, they still happen. They may have lees crimes committed with a firearm than here in the U.S., but for two straight months this year(Feb and Mar)the murder rate in London surpassed the murder rate in N.Y. City. The residents of London now have to contend with knife-crimes and acid-crimes(violent acts committed with a knife or acid). So the U.K. stopped the mass shootings, sort of, and now they face the possibility of mass stabbings and acid attacks. Now London lawmakers are having to come up with laws to control knives and acid. They now have to end knife-violence and acid-violence. Our northern neighbors had an act of violence that involved a man driving a van on a sidewalk and mowing down pedestrians, 10 dead and 15 injured. He used neither a gun, knife or acid his weapon of choice was a motor vehicle. A person intent on killing or maiming will use whatever tool is available. Neither the gun, the knife, the acid nor the motor vehicle is violent on its own in each case it takes a human to use those items in a violent manner. For you it is not about ending violence, it is about ending guns in the hands of the citizens(law-abiding citizens). If your gun-control measures worked the most violent cities in this land would be the safest, but it is the exact opposite.

We have to do it for the children. You really expect me to believe that you care about children when far more are murdered by abortion. Enough said on this one.

If it saves just one life it is worth it. My question is worth what? You and I both know that there is no way to prove that even one life was saved. This simply can not be measured. Besides some in your camp(cult)have come out and said that no legislation could have prevented______(fill in the blank).

And then there is everyone’s favorite. We just did not go far enough.

Now that the gun-control cult has been outed, your far enough in that matter is the repeal of the Second Amendment and banning all firearms from the public. You are okay with the military and law-enforcement having all of the guns, well all of them but what the criminals have. The criminals will still have guns. Maybe you should look back in history, not that far back either, and see what happens to the civilian population when they are deprived of the tools to defend themselves. There was a reason that the Founders and Framers included a Bill of Rights, in particular the right of the people to keep and bear arms. Read about Boston, Lexington Green and Concord. Read the Declaration of Independence. Read the Constitution, there was a reason the Founders and Framers did not want a full-time standing army, if they did not want a full-time army they certainly had no intention of giving them all of the guns. Since law-enforcement is part of the government local, state and federal they certainly never meant for government to have all of the guns either. They also never meant for the people to be deprived of arms, if they had they would have said so.

Speaking of the Constitution you use it to your advantage when it suits your agenda. Take the Electoral College for instance, when your guy wins the Electoral vote you shout to the world that the system works, you do not mention the popular vote unless you by chance get both. When your guy, or in this case gal, loses the Electoral vote but wins the popular vote you scream that the election was illegitimate the Electoral College is outdated and does not represent America. When it comes to the Second Amendment you say the Founding Fathers never intended for us to have _____(fill in the blank). You use the equal protection clause for every group but Christians and gun owners.

They want every person in this country to vote in the elections regardless of citizenship. I guess not enough legal citizens supported your candidate, you need some illegal support. Win any way you can, right? You really are an obstructionist when it comes to securing the border. Would you act the same if those coming here illegally were apt to vote republican? While on this subject, you are having a “kitten” over the citizenship question being talked about when the new census comes out. You want to count heads not citizens. Why? Seats in the house are based on population, the number of citizens not heads. You could stand to lose some House seats, reports have it that there has been an exodus of citizens from your liberal leftist states. Not to mention the money that flows to states is also based on population. If it was the way it was you would have to send money to D.C. based on the census, you would kick the illegals out so fast and hard they would bounce three times before coming to a rest on the other side of the border and build a wall a hundred feet tall and ten feet thick with a minefield to keep them out.

What is going to happen on your march to go far enough? This question sets up another post.

DEO VINDICE

The hypocrisy of the left

It seems that the “spokes mouth” for infringing on the Constitutional Rights of others has his panties in a wad over his Constitutional rights be infringed. The little fellow wants his rights protected. He seems to think that the requirement imposed to carry only clear back-packs(book bags)violates his First Amendment Rights as well as his right to privacy. I thought the “march for our lives” was about making a safer environment for students. Does he not understand that the requirement to have see-thru bags increases his safety, thus increasing his security. By making just that one little sacrifice of his rights to better his chances of security would be worth it, would it not. I mean if it saves only one life, it would be worth it. After all I am sure that no further restrictions will be placed on them, the students I mean and their possessions. The ones who made the decision to increase safety by requiring clear back-packs(book bags)would never make further intrusions like creating a maximum size limits or conducting random searches. They will most likely be satisfied with just the clear bag requirement, they wont do anything else and wont want anything else. Good grief what a hypocrite.

But then again the leftists excel at hypocrisy. The students should take a closer look at those adults who have offered all of this support to their effort, misguided as it is.

The politicians for instance, they come out after every tragedy and shout that more must be done to save the lives of the children, are in fact the same ones who support abortion. That’s right, they are for killing children as long as it is in the womb, by the millions. Would more gun control have saved the first life that was cut short by abortion. But even the pro-choice supporters, who are not supportive of choice they are instead supporters of abortion, are hypocrites of the worst type. Each is the product of a mother that choose life, life for them. It is the pro-life supporters that are attempting to save those millions of lives. I say attempting because their attempts are thwarted by the pro-abortion activists and judicial system.

The Hollywood(Hollyweird)types for instance they, the vast majority of them, have made their millions producing, directing or acting in movies that promote violence and most of them kill more people in the course of one movie that die in the mass-shootings they claim to be opposed too. If they really were in support of your march they would swear off making violent movies. But if they did they would not have made their millions and been able to give you just a pittance. And by the way just how many of them have an armed security detail, for their safety and protection. But just who is it that they need protection from. You their fans or just in case of one deranged fan, or is it both? Do they care about your safety or your money. By the way why do you go to see those violence filled movies anyway? Oh, and the music industry types. Kind of think they too just might have an armed security detail, you know for security and protection.

Your big money supporters they, the vast majority of them, have armed security details. They are not against guns at all they just want to control who has guns. Who is it that they need protection from? By the way most of them give considerable political campaign contributions to the pro-abortion candidates. If they really cared about the safety and security of children they would with hold those contributions.

You bitch and moan about the NRA and politicians who accept money and support from the NRA, while you remain silent about the politicians who accept money and support from the pro-abortion providers and supporters. You say the NRA and those supported by the NRA have blood on their hands, while ignoring the ones whose hands are truly bloody. The NRA itself has not taken the first life, pro-abortion has taken lives by the millions. Seems a bit hypocritical.

Your march(rally)and the associated protests were, in my opinion, a bit more than disingenuous. What you held was a gun control event. There have been proposals made that would enhance safety and security for schools, but you don’t like these proposals. You and you supporters proposed only gun-control. But let me point this out. None of you are against guns, you only want to have guns in the hands of a select few. Ask yourselves this, if your money people had to forfeit their armed security would they continue this rhetoric? I submit they would not. They do not personally provide for their security and protection, they outsource.

You have no idea of what spews forth from you mouth. You claim to be the school shooting generation, the generation that must endure active shooter drills. You want your school day to be free of distractions, hazards and interruptions. And to this you say “No more”, well good for you. However you are not the only generation that has had to endure distractions, hazards and interruptions during your school day.

Personal story segment. When I was in school right here in sunny Florida we never had to endure active shooter drills or worry about someone shooting up our school and killing classmates. We did however have to endure Civil Defense drills and all else that came with the Cold-War. We had to know what to do if the Soviets were to launch an ICBM. You should have been here during the times of the Cuban missile crisis. Imagine that, the Soviets were placing nuclear missile in Cuba, extremely short flight time. We were taught to dive under our desks if we were in class and the drill occurred. If on the playground we had to dive in low spots. Remember to close your eyes, don’t look directly at the flash. If you did see the flash count off the seconds to judge the distance. Remember that there would be a back-blast. Fall-out shelters were everywhere in town. Some more affluent families had their own constructed. When ever you were out you would look around for the symbol that identified the shelter, and know where every shelter was that you could get to, just in case. That was a lot for a kid to have to endure and still get an education, we managed.

You did learn about the Cuban missile crisis and the Cold-War in your American history classes didn’t you? Did you learn about Civil Defense? You know of “safe spaces”, but do you know of fall-out shelters?

I am going to interpret your way of thinking for just a moment. You obviously think that the whole ordeal of Civil Defense drills could have been avoided if America would have just destroyed all of its nuclear weapons. That would leave the Soviets with no one to launch nuclear weapons against because no one could launch one at them. There would be peace and security with no threat of a nuclear war.

Another personal story segment. I wrote a post recently concerning the fact that most of the boys in school carried a pocket knife. There was no way of knowing who had one and who did not, hell some of the girls probably had one as well. Yet we managed not to cut or stab each other. Mostly because we had no desire to cause that sort of harm to one another, that and we exercised self-control. We fought after school, a good old-fashioned fist fight and on the less dramatic occasions it was settled with a good old-fashioned arm wrestling contest, but never with knives. In hindsight there could have been another reason or two we never pulled a knife on each other. (1)The other guy might have one and(2)it might be bigger. Just those facts may have prevented some stupid acts. One acts stupid the other responds in kind, an understanding even if unspoken.

Back to the Soviets and nuclear weapons. First there was something called MAD(mutually assured destruction)if one nation were to launch nuclear weapons the other would respond in kind and possibly launch even more. You shoot we shoot back. Both would be destroyed. It was an understanding. Each knew the other would retaliate and keep doing so until all was destroyed. There have been talks to limit the size of the nuclear arsenal. Neither the US or Russia is willing to totally disarm, limit the number but never disarm. Why? If one or the other were to disarm the other would have total control and could do as it wished, the other would be powerless to stop aggression. MAD has prevented all out nuclear war and that idea still works today. Think about it, would you like to live in a world where only one person or country had the ultimate power to do as they wished? If the one with nuclear weapons decided to use them, with what could you deter them? More importantly how could or would you respond?

The turd that decided to come into your school had the advantage. First, having attended that school he “knew the lay of the land”. He knew when and how he could get in. He did not have to wonder if he could get in, he knew he could and he knew when. He knew the classroom layout. He, from what I understand, knew the SRO. He knew the schedule. Second, he knew there was no counter to his threat. He knew there would be no such thing as MAD. There is a reason that mass shootings never happen in “cop-shops”.

So I ask is the problem guns or the absence of guns?

There sure was a lot of security(guns)at your rally. Did you feel safe or unsafe? None of you looked the least bit uncomfortable. You did clean up behind yourselves didn’t you?

There have been other options brought forward to counter the school shootings. More armed security, more law enforcement, training and arming teachers and other school employees. But none of you have expressed any interest in those options. Why? It goes against your agenda of gun control. Which is the agenda to disarm the law-abiding public and leave firearms in the hands of a select few, the police and the military. Right? Wrong. There will be exceptions, there will always be an exception to the rule. Like I before E except after C.

Back to the first paragraph. You demand that your rights not be violated while demanding the rights of others be infringed. You cupcake are a hypocrite.

You claim that you should be able to carry a backpack(book bag)in the color of your choice, free speech. What would be your reaction is a student were to come to class sporting an NRA book bag or t-shirt? You support the First Amendment(free speech)when the person has the same view that you have. I could swear I heard someone at the town hall you all had where someone yelled “Burn her” when a spokeswoman for the NRA was speaking. You support the Second Amendment but only if the police or military are armed.

You might want to check your history about what happens when only the police and military have the guns, all of the guns.

As I recall, when I did stop by to check on your rally a couple of students made mention of being in a Holocaust history class when the shooting began. So I have to ask, were the victims armed or had they been disarmed?

DEO VINDICE