Category: Cult of Gun Control

New Jersey Governor Phillip Murphy wants to pass more laws criminals will ignore

Is he just this stupid? Is he just playing politics? Maybe he just loathes the right to self-defense. More at Bearing Arms

Now, though, they’re taking things to a whole new level. They want to make it even more difficult to purchase a firearm legally.

Gov. Philip D. Murphy of New Jersey wants to put the state at the forefront of a movement to raise fees on gun permits in order to expand efforts to tackle gun violence and reduce the flow of illegal firearms.

Though New Jersey has strict gun control laws, its firearms fees have not changed since the mid-1960s, making it a bargain for gun owners. A firearm identification card costs $5, while a permit to own a firearm is $2. A permit to carry a gun costs $20.

New York City, which also has stringent gun laws, charges $340 to apply for a permit to own and carry a gun.

Mr. Murphy, a Democrat, has proposed fees that would be among the highest in the country. An identification card would cost $100, an owner’s permit would be $50 and a carry permit $400.

The hardest hit here will be the low income residents. Such people are often living in higher crime areas, so, really, Murphy is attacking the most vulnerable New Jersey residents. And the least hardest hit will be criminals

Kamala harris blusters about taking executive action on “common sense gun laws”

Here she is taking a question from a soy boy. 

Lots of bluster and BS. Anyone who sells more than 5 guns a year would have to do background checks? Sounds like a licensed dealer, who have to do background checks by law. And anyone else would simply ignore that law. Dealers can already lose their licenses for making illegal sales or not doing background checks. Of course, as she states, these would just be the first steps…………..

Yes, yes, and yes again, the left wants very badly to take your guns

Just ask noted douche nozzle Eric Swalwell

Bay Area congressman Eric Swalwell on Monday became the latest person to join the incredibly crowded 2020 Democratic presidential race.

His primary policy message of the campaign will be gun control, and he’s proposing a mandatory buyback of “military-style semiautomatic assault weapons.”

“I will be the first candidate to say that reducing gun violence has to be a top three issue,” Swalwell told Esquire. “Last year I wrote a bill calling for a buyback and ban on assault weapons — not just to ban future manufacturing, but to just take the 15 million that are out there and buy them back.”

Swalwell stated that the buyback is mandatory.

Mandatory he says. Hmmmm, sound a tad, how shall we say this, dictatorial. Yeah, how about no Rep. Swalwell. You know folks, Swalwell is the very type of person the Founders had in mind when they wrote our constitution. He is a person who does not believe in natural rights, he believes himself as fit to dictate what free people should do, and should not be able to do. And, as such, he deserves but one response


Monday Truth!

This excerpt from Bearing Arms sums up so much truth, in one paragraph

However, this is a prime example of what happens when citizens are required to “prove” they “need” to exercise their constitutionally-protected right to self-defense. Some bureaucrat will invariably decide that they don’t need it, if not now then at some point in the future. They’ll then try to revoke the permission that had been granted.

Go read the rest it is good, and a great reminder that “rights” once surrendered to the State, and simply privileges, privileges the State can take away

Senator Spartacus opens his mouth, lies spew forth

Booker is either a complete moron, or he is deliberately lying. Either way he is unfit  to shovel camel dung, much less be president

Ah yes, “good intentions”

Those do pave the road to destruction don’t they? And yes, good intent is not automatically bad, but wilfully disarming yourself because evil people exist? Not sure that we can even call that good intent, unless your intent is to make yourself an easier victim. Tom Knighton shares my view

Among the many happenings is that apparently, a number of New Zealand gun owners are turning in their guns. This is well ahead of any official gun ban, but they’re turning in the guns they lawfully own. I guess they think they’re “icky” now.

Since Friday’s deadly attack at two mosques in Christchurch, New Zealand, gun owners have been turning up at local police stations seeking to have their own semiautomatic rifles—the weapon believed to have been used in the shootings—destroyed.

In the days since the attacks, which saw 50 people killed and dozens more injured, a number of gun owners in New Zealand have gone on social media to encourage others to follow in their footsteps. They want them to hand over their weapons and prevent another attack like Friday’s from happening again.

“Until today, I was one of the New Zealanders who owned a semiautomatic rifle,” one gun owner, farmer John Hart, wrote on Twitter. “On the farm they are a useful tool in some circumstances, but my convenience doesn’t outweigh the risk of misuse.

“We don’t need these in our country,” he added, sharing an image of a police form registering his weapon for “destruction.” “We have make sure it’s #NeverAgain.”

Misuse? Does this man not trust himself? Does he think his rifle will come to life? Sorry, that argument has always baffled me. But, as Knighton writes, virtue signalling is a thing

What is this? What is it really?

Mostly, it’s virtue signaling. It’s a gun owner who is aghast at what happened in Christchurch and needs to tell people that he’s right-thinking on guns now. So, he goes and turns in his guns and tells the entire world.

Hart isn’t the only one. The article profiles yet another who did the same.

But the question none of these people can answer is just how would their weapons, lawfully held by supposedly law-abiding citizens, represent any kind of threat to anyone? The answer is that they don’t. They won’t. They’re inanimate objects with no will of their own. They’re machines, devices meant to fire a projectile so a target some distance away can be hit.

As I wrote earlier, surrendering or wilfully hamstringing your ability to protect yourself is not a virtue. Evil people will not leave you alone because your act of contrition impressed them. In fact, it is usually soft targets that evil people pick to, well, be evil. Sheep may pretend to be virtuous, but….

The problem is, this isn’t the act of the morally superior. It’s the act of a sheep.

I hold onto my guns because I know damn good and well that when seconds count, help is just minutes away. Hell, in Christchurch, it took 36 minutes for police to respond. How many people died in those 36 minutes?