No to Christian Soldiers

Leave a comment

June 23, 2015



The anti-gun lobby has to share responsibility for the nine people shot to death at a Bible study in the Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church in Charleston, South Carolina on June 17.


1620385_620302828018437_1618545578_nBecause thanks to the disarmament brigade, the government of South Carolina assured Dylann Roof, or whoever the triggerman was, that once the shooter was inside the church, nobody would be shooting back.
South Carolina, you see, has a concealed-carry law that expressly forbids anyone bringing a gun into a church.

If you have a license to carry a gun except in certain places — like churches — then those certain places become government-sanctioned shooting galleries. Churches in South Carolina are free-fire zones.

The goody-two-shoes lobby that wrote that caveat into the state’s restrictive firearms law set those nine victims up for target practice.
They probably argued at the time it was enacted that they were protecting parishioners from anyone wielding a gun.

All the evidence shows how wrong they were. The only one protected by that law was the shooter. That means nobody else had a chance.
Disarmament is high on the agenda of National Socialism, just as it was when the Nazi scourge ran the table in Europe. Make sure the oppressed can’t fight back so they’ll all trudge off happily to Auschwitz.
It might escape attention elsewhere, but the massacre in Charleston occurred on what is celebrated as Bunker Hill Day in Massachusetts.
That provides us an opportunity to mention the gun control laws that were in effect in colonial times.

In 17th century Massachusetts, everyone was taxed to support the Congregational Society (the state church) and everyone was required to attend Sunday worship services at the meeting house. All able-bodied inhabitants were required to bring their weapons to church. That was the law.

Take your time to chew on that.

Families were required to bring their guns to church. Sentinels were posted at the doors. The manufacture of gun powder was a staple industry at the time. Journeys from home to Sunday services could be arduous and dangerous. They had to deal with hostile Indians. Wild beasts still prowled the wilderness the way deranged killers stalk gathering places today.
The message was simple: for your own sake and the sake of others, make sure you are armed. That was the law.

The progressives — the Nazis of today passing as Democrats — are a thousand times dumber than those who settled America 400 years ago.
Two days after the Charleston massacre, MSNBC used its Ed Schultz Show to let Democrat activist Bob Shrum put his party’s malarkey on parade.
It is Shrum’s considered opinion that the carnage was kept to a minimum because the black parishioners were unarmed.

He said,

“Now I cannot imagine the horror that could have occurred if people were sitting around with concealed weapons, this thing started, and you have a full-scale gunfight. You might not even have three survivors.”

There you have the liberal mind in a nutshell: it would have been worse if somebody had shot the shooter. Well actually, that is what President Obama and his cadre of lying toadies are going to peddle to the legislatures so they can exterminate worshipper’s the way South Carolina does.

One shooter killed 12 people and injured 70 others because the audience at a midnight screening of a movie in Aurora, Colorado was unarmed.

With one day to live, mayflies enjoy a higher I.Q. than Democrats.
All the proof lawmakers need that their thinking is ass-end-to can be found in Kennesaw, Georgia. It passed an ordinance in 1982 that says,

In order to provide for the emergency management of the city, and further in order to provide for and protect the safety, security and general welfare of the city and its inhabitants, every head of household residing in the city limits is required to maintain a firearm, together with ammunition therefor.

The first year it was in effect, crimes against persons dropped by 74 percent. The next year it fell by another 45 percent. Murders in Kennesaw are nonexistent. Burglaries barely appear on the charts.

The mainstream news media will not share this new gospel with you because they favor the agenda crafted by your political leaders. That is, your right to keep and bear arms is too precious to be put to use when you and your neighbors only believe it is needed.

North Carolina SB 141 NIB : The Right To Conceal Carry For Special People.

1 Comment


Left: Citizen Right: Government Employee

Lynn Swearingen (c) copyright 2010 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

Arrogance abounds in the halls of North Carolina Legislature. All citizens are special, but according to SB 141(pdf) – some are “more special” than others

State lawmakers last week introduced a bill that would allow North Carolina district attorneys, assistant DAs and investigators to carry concealed weapons while on official business. Sen. Debbie Clary, R-Cleveland, said some prosecutors fear falling victim to violence.

“They want the right to protect themselves,” said Clary, a co-sponsor of the bill. “They have a very dangerous job just as all of our law enforcement does.”

Partial Text:


Here is an interesting question to ask the Sponsor(s) of SB 141 – why can’t Defense Attorneys be granted this special status along with Government Employees? More

The Great Second Amendment Con Job


Supposedly, a great “march on Washington” in support of the Second Amendment is being planned for spring 2010, according to a recent article on WorldNet Daily, however, to anyone who is truly familiar with the Second Amendment and with these several organizations that purport to protect it, the truth is that this planned event will just be more verbal and emotional sleight of hand.

Take, for example, the National Rifle Association (NRA), one of the event’s sponsors. The NRA has been, from its beginnings, an organization that seeks not to preserve our inalienable right to be armed, but rather, seeks to cooperate with every step in the institution of gun control legislation, as it did recently, following the Virginia Tech shootings. The NRA also supports concealed carry laws, which require a gun owner to apply for a license from the state in order to exercise what the Second Amendment guarantees every gun owner already has the right to do.

Also sponsoring the march is Michigan Coalition for Responsible Gun Owners, an organization whose very name should raise a red flag as to their true intent. MCRGO has also backed concealed carry laws, which don’t promote freedom, but restrict it by making a right into a state-granted privilege. Apparently, what MCRGO means by “responsible” gun owners is those who fully cooperate like good sheep with every government step in the removal of their rights.

To be fair, not all the organizations sponsoring this march are agents of the gun grabbers. For example, there is Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership, an organization that does seem to understand what the concealed carry laws are really all about and, not only do they “get it” when it comes to this, they also have campaigned to wake up cops to the martial law agenda and now have aware policemen pledging not to participate in the disarming of their fellow Americans.

Gun Owners of America, another of the event’s sponsors, is a little harder to pin down, regarding their stance on concealed carry laws, which seems to flip-flop between both viewpoints, depending upon who the author of the organization’s publication may be. Several of their articles have supported concealed carry permits for women.

Yet another of the march sponsors is the Second Amendment Foundation. I could find no mention of concealed carry on their website, so it’s hard to say what their stance on the issue is.

The Virginia Citizens Defense League, on the other hand, makes it glaringly apparent that they support concealed carry laws, as one glance at their homepage confirms.

The Virginia Shooting Sports Association, another march sponsoring organization, appears to also be in the same camp with the NRA. In fact, they even admonish gun owners to join the NRA in their “Six Steps to Protect Our Second Amendment Rights” page.

Lastly, Ohioans for Concealed Carry are yet another sponsor and their name makes their position on concealed carry laws quite obvious.

Sen. Alan Cropsey, who sits on Michigan Coalition for Responsible Gun Owners’ board of directors, makes it apparent this “march for the Second Amendment” won’t achieve anything other than the continued illusion of the “freedom” we supposedly have: “In the wake of last spring’s D.C. vs. Heller U.S. Supreme Court decision which protects an individual’s right to possess a firearm for private use [in reality, it does no such thing] and the renewed importance placed on the issue of gun rights across the country, the time is ideal for this historic gathering of gun owners at our national and state capitols.”

What Cropsey and the leaders of these other supposed pro-Second Amendment organizations want us to believe is the myth that the Supreme Court’s decision last year was a “victory” for the Second Amendment. In fact, it was anything but, and I have elaborated upon this here before.

To clarify, let’s briefly examine the Second Amendment, which states only:

“…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.”

Despite the nonsensical arguments over what the framers meant by “militia,” the amendment is quite clear in its intent. It clearly does not restrict:

  1. Who may own or carry a gun. It doesn’t even limit gun ownership to only sane people who have never committed a crime.
  2. The type of “arms” (i.e., weapons) to firearms, only. As it is worded, any weapon of any type can be used by anyone.
  3. Where weapons may be carried or how they may be carried.
  4. The purpose for carrying a weapon.
  5. The type of ammunition one may possess or use.

Given this, every gun control law ever passed is a clear violation of the Second Amendment, as these laws have added all the above listed restrictions upon firearms ownership. So, I ask you, how are organizations that have consistently accepted these restrictions in any way defenders of the Second Amendment?

%d bloggers like this: