Notes from the Resistance
Here’s the conclusion they don’t want viewers to realize: If expended ammunition wasn’t capable of producing lethal destructive force on human bodies, it would be useless as a defensive deterrent. What should be the object of focus is not citizen disarmament, but armed citizens being able to minimize “success” by promptly dispatching child-slaughtering monsters to hell. [More]
More manipulation and lies from “the most busted name in news”…
So background checks aren’t enough. The prohibitionists want more. They’ll take what they can get now in increments, but once that beachhead has been secured, they’ll use it to launch their next attack into deeper territory. That’s forever been their M.O., something you’d think even an establishment Republican would be smart enough to realize before signing onto any more “bipartisan deals.” [More]
The first step for grabbers is to lie.
The point, of course, is equality under the law and no special privileges for the elites and their relatives. [More]
More than one gun means more than one 4473. Meanwhile, the “Authorized Journalists” and gun grab groups and politicians are doing a media blackout while “progressive” apparatchik trolls try to sabotage it on social media by changing the subject or attacking with transparent Alinsky Rule 5 ridicule.
UPDATE: It appears I am contemptible for calling this to people’s attention.
Who cares what he thinks? The answer, like it or not, is “millions”… [More]
Undersized knowledge meets oversized influence.
Might such overt pressure from the very top be construed as creating a hostile working environment for employees who hold different political views? Might expressing those views be reasonably considered career and advancement-limiting, and might not expressing any political views on the taxpayers’ dime, by either side, be considered inappropriate and unethical, especially when coming from management that controls employee reviews? [More]
It’s the moral equivalent of requiring a “bullet fee” from the family of the condemned, and those imposing it get off on that.
UPDATE:
Why did the USDA buy submachine guns? [More]
“Weapons of war”? The better to kill you with, my dear!
The devil being in the details, “due process” can mean different things, with not all “hearings” providing the same legal safeguards as a jury trial. And that raises questions of concern that haven’t been spelled out. [More]
Anybody who thinks that this squares with “Shall not be infringed” is nuts.
Biden doesn’t even try to make sense. He doesn’t have to. [More]
It all boils down to banning guns and counting on a dumbed-down public to be ignorant enough to vote for cultural suicide.
“OK, you can have your guns, but you can’t have your AR-15. If you’re gonna get all in my business and tell me what my family can and cannot do, neither can you. They’re gonna come for those AR-15s and you better get ready to give them up!” [More]
Somehow, “nasty” doesn’t seem strong enough…
Democrats, we don’t need to concern ourselves with, at least for now—assume they’re all for whatever disarmament edicts they can get whenever they can get them. It’s the Republicans gun owners need to focus on, and there are few surprises here… [More]
Betraying gun owners and drowning the fire in their bellies will break up the anticipated wave before it hits the shore.
Will they treat the Dettelbach nomination like the existential threat that it is, or will they play politics as usual and make just enough comments to claim plausible deniability on opposing him, without really doing anything concrete to upset a foregone conclusion? [More]
Will even one doer declare “You shall not pass!” and separate himself from the talkers? If he does, who will join him?
