Mandatory Smart Gun Bracelets: Reliable or Inadequate?

Coming up with the idea of a gun that works only by activating it through use of a battery-operated device sounds far from reliable to me. Think of how often your iPhones or your Nike Fuel bands die. Would you let your life depend on the life of your phone? I sure wouldn’t. So how is this any different?

Not to mention, this technology is for one purpose and one purpose only: To track and disable your firearm whenever it seems fit. Did you know that authorities are requesting permission to gain access to Smart Guns and the devices that kick them into gear? That means, they want access to override your Smart Gun if they feel it as necessary. So tell me, if there is technology that can allow a police officer to override your gun, what makes you think that a criminal can’t access YOUR GUN in the same way?

Let’s also think of it this way. Do you honestly think criminals are going to allow their lives to depend on a gun in which law officials obtain the technology to turn off?

People like Eric Holder are talking this up like it is actually for your own safety. That’s not the case. Gun control has always been about one thing: CONTROL. They want to make it seem like they are compromising and letting America keep their guns. This is far from it! Tell me, can law enforcement officials deactivate your gun right now? They sure can’t. Can they deactivate it if Smart Guns become the only legal gun in this country? Yup. So tell me, how is turning off a Smart Gun any different than confiscation? And what’s even better for them is that Smart Guns have a GPS tracking device so they will know exactly who has it and where it is.

Get with it America. Smart Guns are not ‘safer’ or made for your best interest. It is an easy way for very bad people to restrict your right to bear arms before completely taking it away.

Liberal Radio Show Host Wishes to Shoot NRA Board Member

A lot of debate is taking place over the new “guns everywhere” law in Georgia. Although gun owners in the state are pleased with the expansion of Georgia’s concealed carry laws, liberal radio show host Mike Malloy is far from it. He is so angered that he said he would like to invite an NRA Board Member to his home and shoot him using the “Stand Your Ground” Law in defense.

Once the state’s Safe Carry Protection Act receives the governor’s signature, concealed carry will be permitted in schools, bars, churches, and sections of the airport that are outside of the security parameter. Malloy’s reaction was anything but friendly OR logical.

[The] organization founded by Gabrielle Giffords…the former Arizona Congresswoman…who was critically wounded in a mass shooting in 2011, she calls it “the most extreme gun bill in America.” The NRA, which they’re behind this of course, they want guns everywhere….I would like to invite one of the NRA board members, and I’ll be armed, let’s just get this over with, OK? Come on down to Georgia and I’ll be packing heat and you be packing heat or whether you want to or not, I don’t give a damn, it’s up to you. And you come, meet me someplace, and all of sudden, see, we have stand your ground here, and all of a sudden I’m going to feel real $&#^*!@ threatened by you! And I will shoot you! If I feel threatened. The law says I can. Ha ha ha ha ha, Ha ha ha ha ha!

Seems to me that Mr. Malloy lost his ability to debate intelligently so he resorted to threats. That’s pretty typical when you face a person who bases his arguments on emotion instead of facts. Once again, another example of a liberal who has no knowledge of guns or the laws the govern them. 

So tell me Mr. Malloy, why are you more concerned that law-abiding gun owners (who I assume have proper knowledge and training) will abuse the second amendment when you’re the one publicly making threats on a person’s life? But I thought you were AGAINST gun violence!?

Student Workbook Teaches 2nd Amendment Includes Gun Registration

                                      SCHOOL WORKBOOK BLATANTLY REDEFINES 2A TO INCLUDE GUN REGISTRATION

Just in case you cannot read the print because the picture is a little blurry, here is what an Illinois student’s workbook said about the 2nd Amendment:

This amendment states that people have the right to certain weapons, providing that they register them and have not been in prison. The founding fathers included this amendment to prevent the United States from acting like the British who had tried to take weapons away from the colonists.

 

Well if that isn’t a bold-faced lie, I don’t know what is. Let’s take a look at what the 2nd amendment ACTUALLY says, shall we?

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed

What part of “SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED” do you not understand? Look at that simple sentence. Where does it say that you have the right to own CERTAIN weapons IF you REGISTER them? Because, I’m reading over that line and I don’t see it mention any of those words. It doesn’t say “The right of the people to keep and bear CERTAIN arms as long as they register their weapons”. So why teach it that way? 

It’s quite simple actually. They want to implement curriculum that will make students believe that they have to obtain government approval in order to exercise their constitutional rights. THAT IS COMPLETELY FALSE. Why has it become that government runs the people? You can’t just re-write the constitution so that it fits in with your agenda. That’s not how this works. 

Wake up guys. They can’t change the minds of millions of responsible gun owners so now they are moving onto minds in which they can manipulate; your kids. 

No Finger or Pop Tart Will Be Punished In Florida

We are now up to three (that we know of) incidents in which a child was suspended from school for ‘pointing’ or ‘chewing’ their weapons in the wrong direction. After all, the number one rule of firearms is never pointing your weapon at something you don’t want to harm, right?

In January, a 6-year-old student in Silver Spring, MD was suspended for making a shooting gesture with his finger.

In February, a student in Ohio was suspended for 3 days for shooting a classmate with his “finger gun”. He was disciplined for bringing a “look a like” firearm on campus. I’ll save my rant on this one for later, although I’m pretty sure that is not what the term “look a like” was originally intended to be defined as. 

The next, more recent, incident that we have heard on the news is that a 7-year-old boy was suspended this month from a Maryland elementary school for chewing his Pop Tart into the shape of a gun

                     

 

                                     

Although the child was not punished by his parents, the school has no regret in their decision for implementing their “zero-tolerance policy”. 

I understand that some people are terrified by guns, which in turn is fueling this negativity around America’s gun culture (which I have mentioned in my previous post), but where is the line here? Were any children afraid for their lives or threatened by these “gun look-a-likes”? Probably not. If anything, I would guess that the odd way of eating this Pop Tart spiked curiosity by surrounding peers. I’d probably stare and wonder what he was doing too. 

Well, thankfully for Florida, there is a line. 

Today, the Florida Senate will be holding a committee hearing on a legislation that has become known as the Pop Tart Bill. The new bill ensures that children in Florida public schools will not be punished for imitating a firearm with their hand, their Pop Tarts, or any other ridiculous body part or pastry for that matter. 

“Children should not be punished because some adult lacks common sense or the capacity for rational judgment,” said Marion Hammer, a former president of the National Rifle Association and the current head of its Florida lobbying operation.

Ms. Hammer said the NRA supports the legislation because it would “give guidance and relief to school administrators who must walk a fine line between following the law and protecting our children” as well as “stop the abusive result of overreactions of some administrators.”

-Emily Miller: Washington Times

The new bill also states that children will not be punished for expressing their rights to free speech by wearing or promoting clothing in support of guns or the 2nd amendment right to bear arms. 

After all, the zero-tolerance policy isn’t about keeping children safe, it’s about controlling them. Take away their creativity, imagination, and their opinions and what are you left with? A bunch of brain-washed liberal children who will be paving the way for our future generation. Thankfully Florida has adopted the right mindset, have you?

Why Good People Should Have Guns

This girl hit the nail on the head. Gun control is about control. Government isn’t going to disarm the military or police officials (who take orders from the president), but WILL disarm citizens. GOOD citizens. What makes you think this is a good thing? All your anti-gun liberals aren’t thinking! You want to disarm RESPONSIBLE GUN OWNERS and leave criminals and corrupt government armed? Who’s going to save you then?

Look at countries throughout history where government has become too powerful. When the Nazi power was elected in Germany, the people had a Constitution, yet SO many innocent people lost their lives. “Constitution does not stop tyranny. When it comes to liberty, nothing can destroy it but downright force”. Do you want that to be America next?

Listen to this woman. She’s got it down.

NY Student Suspended for Wearing Pro-Second Amendment T-Shirt

High school student Shane Kinney was placed in on-campus suspension in New York for wearing an NRA Pro-Second Amendment t-shirt. School officials claimed that the shirt was disruptive, inappropriate, and in violation of the GICSD Code of Conduct. After the school administrator acknowledged the shirt, she immediately demanded he turn the shirt inside out or place duct tape over the NRA logo. When the student refused, he was then sent to the principal’s office where his parents were contacted.

nra-shirt

Now, I am interested to learn the school’s logic behind punishing Shane for wearing a t-shirt supporting the NRA and the 2nd amendment. Students are given a right to free speech, are they not? I understand that schools implement certain limitations in terms of clothing if they believe the clothing contains vulgarities, promoting drug-usage, gang relation, or other forms of dangerous conduct, or if they have evidence showing that the shirt will likely cause a disruption. In some cases, public and private schools may go as far as to ban logos of any sort. However, at this high school, none of the following apply. There is nothing vulgar about the NRA or the second amendment. His shirt was not promoting gun violence, suicide, homicide, drug usage, gang relation, or dangerous conduct of any kind. He was wearing a t-shirt in support of an organization that he is involved in. So what? Even with all of the above out of the way, the school still claimed that the shirt was disruptive. How so? Because it has a rifle on it? It’s not like he was standing on the cafeteria tables preaching to the student body about shooting people. Come on now! If anything, another student can openly disagree with his organization of choice which can lead to a debate. Big deal. Shouldn’t we be encouraging students to have an opinion and to stand up for what they believe in? 

The parents were up in arms over this because no where in the handbook did it say that their kid could not wear a t-shirt from an organization. The closest offense they could find was the schools ban to encourage illegal or violent activities. Last time I checked, the NRA is neither violent nor illegal. Taking away a student’s right to the first amendment? Now that I call illegal.