Guns are easier to buy than fresh veggies and books

7Mar15-ObamaSpeaksSCFImg

President Obama vented about his failed attempt to increase background checks at a town hall event in South Carolina last Friday. His mockery of gun rights activists wasn’t surprising, but the fact that he stated that guns are easier to purchase than vegetables and books is insane.

As long as you can go in some neighborhoods and it is easier for you to buy a firearm than it is for you to buy a book, there are neighborhoods where it is easier for you to buy a handgun and clips than it is for you to buy a fresh vegetable, as long as that’s the case, we’re going to continue to see unnecessary violence,

Last time I checked, I don’t have to fill out a stack of paper work and wait at the counter for 30 minutes while I have a background check performed every time I head to the local grocery store to buy fresh veggies. Last time I went to a library or book store, I was not asked for my photo ID, my car registration, along with other forms to provide as proof of residency. I was not told I couldn’t purchase a book because I haven’t lived in my state for more than 60 days. I did not have to provide my finger print or give my reason as to why I wanted to purchase that book. Saying that purchasing a gun is easier than things we purchase on a daily basis is just another statement made in hopes of scaring those who are less informed.

Last time I checked, I was not given a list of questions to answer regarding my criminal history and citizenship. No Obama, it is not easier to purchase a firearm than it is to purchase books and food.

There are two problems with this.

1) You may be thinking “yes, but he isn’t talking about the average citizen. He is talking about areas where criminals can buy guns from other criminals just like we can buy groceries at the grocery store”. Exactly. He isn’t talking about the ‘average citizen’ so why is he advocating to make MORE restrictions and more extensive requirements for the average Joe to purchase a gun. Criminals who buy or steal guns from other criminals are already avoiding background checks. So how will performing more extensive background checks decrease the number of guns in the hands of criminal people? It won’t. These laws and background checks are only effecting those who actually follow them.

2) Criminals having access to illegal firearms isn’t as easy as you think, and it is definitely not as easy to obtain as everyday grocery items. It is, yet again, another thing for Obama and other gun control advocates to say to you to put fear into the minds of American people. Not to mention, if less gun control laws were implemented on innocent people, criminals would have more of a reason to fear those around them. After all, if guns are allowed, how do they know who will fight back?

Obama then goes on to say that they have been trying to reduce the number of available guns and that Sandy Hook should have motivated people to get things done. Because that wasn’t enough of a motivator, our homicide rate continues to increase. Where exactly is he getting this information from and why are people automatically agreeing without fact-checking?

Here is a 5 year graph reflecting violent crime rates from 2009-2013, provided by the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

violent-crime

We can also look at larger figures, dating all the way back from 1992. From 1992 to 2011, our homicide rate decreased from 9.3% to 4.7%.

Not only are homicide rates down, but crime rates in general.

The CDC also reports that death per firearms in 2013 was only 3.5%.

Read more about how 2013 crime rates are actually HURTING the gun control campaign.

So before you jump on the Obama bandwagon and come out with gun control anthems, do your research. Everything that Obama claims is true about guns and gun violence is not correct.

Advertisements

What Obama Really Says About Guns and Violence

Y’all should be proud. I made my first Obama meme! If you want to fact-check me, you can view both interviews to see for yourself on my recent post, Obama Openly Lies About Background Checks To The Media.

My Obama Meme

Obama Openly Lies About Background Checks to the Media

Wait..what?! What rock are these people hiding under?

First lie:

My biggest frustration so far is that this society has not been willing to take some basic steps to keep guns out of the hands of people who can do just unbelievable damage.

Obama, let’s be real here. First of all, your ‘basic steps’ are not aimed at keeping guns out of the hands of criminals. Your ‘basic steps’ are aimed to disarm law-abiding citizens. Secondly, I HIGHLY doubt this is your biggest frustration as president. If it is, then you have a serious mental issue. What about Benghazi? Fast and Furious? ObamaCare? Driving our country into severe debt? TRADING 5 ISLAMIC TERRORISTS FOR A TRAITOR?

Second lie:

We’re the only developed country on earth where this happens.

FALSE. We are not the only developed country that is exposed to gun crime. How about the 69 killed on Utøya Island in Norway? Or how about the gunmen that shot and killed 16 teens at a school in Germany? Oh and let’s not forget the fact that Germany is considered to have the STRICTEST gun control laws in the WORLD.

Third lie:

Our levels of gun violence are off the charts.

Also not true. Gun homicides and gun-related crimes have actually DECREASED by 50% in the past 20 years. In my previous posts, I provide more data and information, including a study showing that a majority of American citizens believe gun crime has increased (gee, I wonder why).

But wait! If our levels of gun violence are “off the charts”, than why do you see in this video that “the world is less violent than it has ever been”? Because I am pretty sure you aren’t talking about Iraq, The Russian/Ukrainian border, Libya, Egypt, the soccer riots in Brazil, the girls in Nigeria, Pakistan, and Afghanistan. Or what about all of the Christians being slaughtered through out the Middle East? Surely you couldn’t be talking about that.

Fourth lie (start at marker 1:23):

I respect gun rights. But the idea, for example, that we couldn’t even get a background check bill in, to make sure that if you’re going to buy a weapon you have to actually go through a fairly rigorous process so that we know who you are, so that you can’t just walk up to a store, and, um, buy a semi-automatic weapon… um, it makes no sense.

Now listen (or read..) closely. ALL FIREARM PURCHASES FROM GUN STORES, RETAIL CHAINS, PAWN SHOPS, GUN SHOWS FROM FEDERAL FIREARMS LICENSEES, DEALERS, AND TRANSFERS REQUIRE A BACKGROUND CHECK. It’s called the Brady Bill, which went into effect in 1993 and requires that background checks are conducted before purchasing a firearm.

And lie number 5:

I respect gun rights.

HA! Obama doesn’t respect anything in the Constitution which is why New York Rep. Jose Serrano, a Democrat and ally of Obama’s, introduced a bill(H.J.RES.5) proposing the repeal of the 22nd amendment, which limits presidents to only 2 terms. He most certainly doesn’t respect gun rights. If he did, he wouldn’t be lying to the public to promote his agenda. Ok, so this leaves 5 lies in under 2 minutes..When are you all going to get mad? This guy BLATANTLY lies to your face every time he opens his mouth. WAKE UP, AMERICA!

Gun Free Zones Are Working So Well

Well, I got your attention. Maybe even made you a little angry. But don’t worry, I was being sarcastic.

So, when is the last time you’ve ready up on violent crime in Venezuela?

Here is a country with very strict gun and knife control and no civilian sales on firearms in the past 2 years. Since May 1 of this year, 185 civilians have been victims of violent murder. Even this past weekend, 59 have lost their lives.

Image

In the year 2009, there were more than 16,000 civilian deaths from violence. That is almost 4 times Iraq’s civilian deaths that year with the same population. Even the Mexican drug war has claimed less lives than this.

According to the Venezuelan Violence Observatory, Venezuela is suffering with more than a decade long surge of homicides since President Hugo Chavez took office in 1999. This number has climbed to over 200,000 deaths due to violent crime in the past 15 years. This comes out to be about 3 people killed every hour.

This nation is filled with illegal firearms and their government is doing nothing to stop it. Well, I guess banning gory photos from their nation’s media is resolving the issue. Yup, you heard that right. The Venezuelan government believes these photos are for the purpose of undermining them instead of for the purpose of informing the public, so the court ordered the paper to stop publishing images on violence. Obviously that’s not working, and neither is banning guns and knives from the people in need of protection.

More than 90 percent of murder cases go unsolved. Actually, crime has been so prevalent that their government has stopped producing data. With the enormous amount of gangs roaming the streets and the soaring crime rate, it looks like Caracas in on track to beat last year’s murder rate.

The Venezuelan National Police Agency estimated that nearly 70% of murders in Caracas are related to armed assaults and warfare between the city’s street gangs.

no guns

shot Venezuela

Venezuela is considered to be one of the most dangerous countries in the western hemisphere with an average of 53 or more murders per day.

Though Chavez tried to blame the significant increase in crime rate to economic variables, I believe it is more about their government failing to fight crime and choosing to disarm their citizens. Hmm.. Sound familiar? Strict gun control laws were implemented in early 2012 after seeing 18,000 murder victims in 2011. This number climbed to 21,692 murders in 2012 and up to 24,763 in 2013.

That seems like a pretty big jump since they banned guns and knives from their citizens. Well, all of their law-abiding citizens that is.

Come on people, these are the same laws that liberals are wanting to implement in our own country. The crime rates in Chicago, DC, and Detroit speak for themselves. More gun laws = MORE GUN RELATED CRIME. Criminals will be criminals regardless of the law so crime will continue.

This is a prime example of what happens when government attacks the wrong people. How about we learn from other countries rather than follow in their footsteps?

Why Liberals Are In The Wrong Mindset About Guns

Ronald Reagan once said:

It isn’t so much that liberals are ignorant. It’s just that they know so many things that aren’t so.

Whenever I look at current research, surveys, similar past laws, current laws, etc I ask myself “why don’t liberals get it? I mean the information is all there!” I believe the truth is that liberals are constantly being fed falsified information to support an agenda. If you feel that you know everything already, why would you feel the need to look at research, journals, history, or past/present/future laws? 

I think about why I started this blog in the first place. Moving from Texas to the DC area was a huge change for me. I wasn’t used to homeless men threatening to shoot me and my family on the street in the middle of the day if we didn’t give him money (might I add, he finished this sentence with “Merry Christmas”). I wasn’t used to hearing about shootings or how crime rates are increasing. I wasn’t used to hearing about violent break-ins. I wasn’t used to the fear that sweeps over me every time I walk to my car by myself at night after meeting my husband for dinner. Fact of the matter is, I wanted to know that in a dangerous situation, I could rely on more than a can of mace to protect myself. 

Once I came to the conclusion that I should get a gun and learn proper gun safety, I then started to gain interest in current events pertaining to guns. But what if I was a liberal? What if I had liberal parents, liberal grandparents, and a liberal husband? What if from day 1, I had it engraved in my brain that guns were dangerous? In that case, I wouldn’t have looked into owning a gun as means to protect myself. Which would mean that I wouldn’t have gained interest in current laws and wouldn’t be the gun advocate that I am today. What’s the difference between me and that liberal? I didn’t assume that my prior knowledge of guns was correct. In fact, my research and follow-up has only further validated my previous claims that guns are for protection.

When I said “I want to get a gun”, it was natural to me because I was in that mindset based on previous/current knowledge. Liberals come from a different background or mindset and believe whole-heartedly that guns are not safe. Why? Because every time there is a tragedy, anti-gun advocates blame the gun instead of the shooter, which in turn puts fear in the hearts of people who are not well-informed. And because people FEAR guns, they aren’t willing to do research to validate statements they hear from people like Obama and Feinstein.

The main reason for this blog is because I want to share research findings and compare current events to that of past ones in a way that makes freedom to own and carry easy to digest. Along the way I choose to provide entertaining videos and stories to show you that guns aren’t dangerous in the hands of law-abiding citizens, so why take them away from them? Along the way, I take emails, comments, and tweets to heart because I can’t change your opinion if I don’t understand where you’re coming from. 

What do you, the gun control advocate, have to say about research findings showing that stricter gun control laws increase gun-related crimes?

Have you, the gun control advocate, ever learned how to properly shoot a gun and took courses to educate yourself of gun safety?

How will laws restricting law-abiding citizens from owning/carrying a gun stop criminals from conducting in mass shootings like Aurora or the elementary school in Newton?

If you don’t know how to answer these questions, how can you continue to stand up against something that you cannot logically defend? Shootings like this cause anger, heartache, frustration, confusion, sadness. These are all emotion-based and do not void the fact the research shows that stricter gun laws increase gun-related crime. 

Basing your arguments on emotion rather than logic and fact does not put you in the proper mindset. Educate yourselves and review the data that Obama and other anti-gun advocates want to keep from you. Maybe then you will see that law-abiding citizens are not the problem. 

How Obama Is Misusing Gun Terms To Deceive You

Think about words that you hear most in anti-gun debates; high-capacity magazines, gun show loophole, high-power ammunition, and assault weapons. As I have plenty of opinions on the supposed ‘gun show loophole’, I’ll save that discussion for a later post.

One of my biggest points that I have mentioned in previous posts is that most anti-gun advocates don’t actually know much, if anything, about guns. They believe that guns are a threat to their safety as well as their family’s. In the wrong hands, a gun can be a threat to anyone’s safety. Which is why I strongly believe in proper knowledge of how to handle a firearm. 

Obama is taking advantage of other anti-gun advocates to promote his own agenda: to disarm law-abiding American citizens. How can he take advantage of them? Because they aren’t properly educated. How can you advocate for gun control if you know nothing about guns in the first place?

Think about Obama’s speech in Denver in April of 2013. He says:

The type of assault rifle used in Aurora, for example, when paired with a high-capacity magazine, has one purpose: to pump out as many bullets as possible, as fast as possible. It’s what allowed that gunman to shoot seventy people and kill twelve in a matter of a few minutes. I don’t believe that weapons designed for theaters of war have a place in movie theaters. 

 

First of all, none of the weapons used in the Aurora shooting were automatic weapons. Which means, none of them were “assault weapons”. The weapons the gunman used include:

  1. An AR-15 rifle
  2. A Remington 12 Gauge 870 Shotgun
  3. 2 .40 caliber Glock handguns

Guns that have cosmetic features, such as an AR-15, look like military weapons. Because of this, Obama and other anti-gun advocates misuse the term “assault weapon” to confuse the public. That way, uneducated citizens are made to believe that an AR-15 is a military weapon and thereby associate a perfectly legal gun as an “assault weapon”. 

The public is extremely confused over fully automatic versus semi-automatic weapons. Anything that looks like a machine gun is assumed to be a machine gun, even if it does not function in the same way. An automatic weapon continues to fire as long as the trigger is pulled. A semi-automatic weapon needs time to reload, therefore requires a trigger pull each time in order for a round to be released into the chamber and fired out the muzzle. FULLY automatic weapons have been highly regulated for civilian ownership under the National Firearms Act of 1934.

Since 1934, there have been 2 homicides associated with LEGALLY owned automatic weapons.  When looking at automatic weapons obtained ILLEGALLY, the number associated with homicides is extremely low, even including cities with high homicide rates such as Miami and Detroit. This is mainly because criminals prefer something they can conceal. Furthermore, automatic weapons have been banned from manufacture and import since 1986. With such limited supply, you’re looking at more than $20,000 for an automatic weapon. If a criminal can neither afford these guns nor prefer them due to the lack of options for concealed carry, these guns aren’t the issue. Sorry Obama, it looks like you don’t have this girl fooled. 

It is extremely hard to find crime rates and statistics associated with assault weapons. One reason being that people like Obama and Freinstein insist on misusing the term “assault weapon” and because homicides hardly ever happen using a machine gun. 

Now is when you say, but doesn’t AR in AR-15 stand for ‘assault rifle’? No. Actually it doesn’t. It actually stands for ArmaLite Rifle, the company in which developed the model. Once the rights were sold in 1970, there were other manufactures that mimicked the model and released it for sale. If you ask me, I think it stands for ‘awesome rifle’, but I highly doubt the libs will agree with me (unless they shoot one). 

The term that you, Mr. President, SHOULD be using is ‘Modern Sporting Rifle’. Tell the truth- you aren’t going after law enforcement and military guns. You call these ‘assault weapons’ because you want to scare people into believing that standard semi-autos should be banned as well. Not to mention, they shoot ammunition at the same speed and power as other guns. These certain ‘cosmetic features’ that you say make a firearm an ‘assault weapon’ actually have NO effect on how the firearm actually functions. Do you know what ‘cosmetic features’ Obama refers to in determining whether or not a firearm is an ‘assault weapon’?

  1. A folding or a telescoping stock
  2. a pistol grip
  3. a bayonet mount
  4. a flash suppressor

Obama even tries to bring law enforcement in to justify his claim.

Weapons of war have no place on our streets, or in our schools, or threatening our law enforcement officers. Our law enforcement officers should never be outgunned on the streets.

First false claim right there. Law enforcement is not being ‘out-gunned’ by assault weapons. According to FBI data, in 2011 72 LEO’s were killed. 50 by handgun, 7 by rifles, 6 by shotgun, 6 by vehicle, 2 by hand, and 1 by knife. Even when asked if the ban on ‘assault weapons’ would have any effect on crime, 71% of police officials said none. Take a look at what our law enforcement officials are saying about gun bans:

  • An extraordinary 99 percent said policies other than an “assault weapons” ban are most important to prevent mass shootings. 
  • Almost 96 percent said that a ban on standard capacity magazines would not reduce violent crime. 
  • More than 91 percent stated that the use of a firearm in the commission of a crime should have stiff, mandatory sentences, and no plea-bargains. 
  • More than 91 percent stated they supported the Right to Carry by law abiding Americans. 
  • More than 81 percent said that “gun buy-backs” do not reduce gun violence. 
  • Eighty percent believe legally armed citizens can reduce casualties in incidents of mass violence. 
  • Nearly 80 percent said that a ban on private transfers of firearms between law-abiding citizens would not reduce violent crime. 
  • More than 76 percent indicated that legally armed citizens are important to reducing crime. 
  • More than 76 percent support the arming of trained and qualified teachers or administrators who volunteer to carry a firearm. 
  • More than 70 percent said that a ban on “assault weapons” would not reduce violent crime. 
  • More than 70 percent opposed the idea of a national registry of legal gun sales. 
  • Nearly 68 percent said magazine capacity restrictions would negatively affect them personally. 
  • More than 60 percent said that the passage of Obama’s gun control legislation would not improve officer safety.

So not only do a majority of law officials think that a ban on ‘assault weapons’ would not reduce crime, but take another look at the second bullet.

Almost 96 percent said that a ban on standard capacity magazines would not reduce violent crime. 

So much for Obama’s idea to ban ‘high-capacity magazines’. Wait a minute, WHAT is a high-capacity magazine? 5 rounds? 10 rounds? 15? 30? 50? 100?

Did you know that the average number of rounds fired in a criminal shooting is under 4? 

Another study, commissioned by
Congress, found that these bans
were not effective in reducing crime
because “the banned weapons and
magazines were never used in more
than a modest fraction of all gun
murders.”

Not to mention, you can have 4 separate magazines that meet the legal restriction, but that doesn’t stop you from using them. Which in this case, a magazine ban of over 10 rounds would be void because the shooter now has 40 rounds split between 4 magazines. Do you know how quickly you can release and load a new full magazine? I’m an amateur and I can do it in under 5 seconds. How quickly do you think it takes an experienced shooter to reload a handgun?

So as you see, Obama isn’t trying to implement these bans because he is some hero who has your best interest at heart. The research is all there. He is choosing to IGNORE the research and continually misuses terms to encourage people to get on board with his gun ban nonsense. 

Hitler Survivor CONDEMNS Gun Control

When are you people going to wake up and see that history repeats itself? Pay close attention to past events and understand what went wrong. Do you think you learn about history all through school because it’s fun? You’re learning about it as a lesson. Haven’t you ever heard of learning from past experiences? Isn’t the definition of an idiot doing the same thing over and over but expecting a different outcome?

Listen to this woman. She lived it. She saw how everything played out. “Hitler did not seem like a monster”. Obviously, otherwise he wouldn’t have been elected. Some even describe him as a ‘smooth talker’. Look at Obama (preferably after you take the brainwashing goggles off) and tell me he is innocent. OPEN UP YOUR EYES. He is well educated on manipulating the American people. Listen to his speeches. He makes everything sound like it’s good. Go back and listen some more– I guarantee you that you will find that one speech after another is full of lies, contradictions, and deceit. Of course, he has to say the right things in order to get people to trust in him.

“It took 5 years, little by little, to escalate up to a dictatorship”

Look at history. EVERY oppressive government that abused its own people started out using gun control to disarm and control its citizens. She even said it herself. Hitler required gun registration and played it off as if it would make them safe, because after all, they can track the serial numbers on the weapons to the criminals. Did that happen? No. What happened? They were disarmed. They will start with a gun registration only to obtain a list of citizens who own them, just like they have in the past, and then YOU WILL BE DISARMED. What happens when citizens are left unarmed while corrupt government and military who follow presidential orders are armed? YOU ARE LEFT DEFENSELESS. They WANT you to fear them so they can take control. How do you not see that our country is headed straight down the path to tyrannical government?

Let’s say I’m wrong. What’s that going to hurt? Probably nothing, but at least I could say I was prepared. Now let’s say I’m right. Where does that leave you? Unarmed, helpless, afraid, manipulated, powerless, and taken over by government THAT YOU ELECTED into office. That YOU HELPED with your anti-gun rallies and debates. Then you’ll look at yourself and what you’ve turn your country into and ask “what in the hell have I done?”

It’s happening now. States like California, New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, DC, Maryland, and more to come have already started down the same path. Making registration sound as if it is for a reason other than to document who owns a firearm and disarm them. When you stop fighting for one right, you will lose them all.

“When people fear the government, that’s Tyranny. When the government fears its people, that’s LIBERTY.”

Stand strong America. Keep your guns and fight.

God Bless.