Prepping “Italian” style

An old Italian man in Brooklyn is dying. He calls his grandson to his bedside. “Guido, I wan’ you lissina me. I wan’ you to take-a my chrome plated 38 revolver so you will always remember me.”

“But grandpa, I really don’t like guns. How about you leave me your Rolex watch instead?”

“You lissina me, boy! Somma day you gonna be runna da business, you gonna have a beautiful wife, lotsa money, a big-a home and maybe a couple of bambinos.

Then one-a day you gonna comea home and maybe finda you wife inna bed with another man.

Whatta you gonna do then? Pointa to you watch and say, ‘Times up!'”

Oh, those nasty black guns

Is there any such thing as common sense knowledge of guns and the need for gun control.

Day by Day

041416-1Died gun free too!

The Millennials

Date.pg copy

That horrible Gun Show Loophole

Also how you too can buy a fully automatic weapon according to the Obama, Whoopi and other assorted fools.

Guns and the Left

There never has been

a Fascist or Communist

Government that wanted

an armed Citizenry.

Gun grabEvery Lefty politician dreams of being the one who disarms America. The Second Amendment is the bane of their existence. Obama would like nothing more than do what the Reds did after the revolution; tell the people to turn in their guns. Fear not, the State will protect you. How did that work out?

Yes, The Australian Model On Gun Control Means Bans and Confiscation

Nobody wants to take your guns. That’s what most mainstream pro-gun control Democrats say ad nauseam at various rallies. There’s also the “I support the Second Amendment, but…” that advocates of gun control say prior to offering some pie-in-the-sky policy proposals that usually venture into bans on so-called assault rifles, limiting magazine sizes, or an all-out ban on semi-automatic firearms. That’s essentially a gun ban.

Both Hillary Clinton and President Barack Obama have praised the Australian-model of gun control, which the National Rifle Association decided to explain at length in a recent video. It deals with gun buybacks, confiscation, and bans. Oh, and personal protection isn’t a sufficient reason to own firearms down under.

10.png

The clip also includes the president invoking the United Kingdom as well. According to the Library of Congress, their laws are just as strict, and unconstitutional if applied here in the U.S:

Handguns are prohibited weapons and require special permission. Firearms and shotguns require a certificate from the police for ownership, and a number of criteria must be met, including that the applicant has a good reason to possess the requested weapon. Self-defense or a simple wish to possess a weapon is not considered a good reason. The secure storage of weapons is also a factor when licenses are granted. [snip]

Guns and the irrational media

Don’t ever expect a rational thought to emanate from the media when it writes about guns. Anything extreme isn’t too extreme for them to postulate as a cogent reflection.
Wee doubt the thrust of this bill was to protect anyone from rampaging black bears. Wild thugs is more to the point.

They rather you die than a Democrat voter be shot during the commission of a felony.

Bill allows suits over gun-free zone incidents

If a Tennessee grocery store bans guns on its property and a black bear or wild hog kills or injures a person who otherwise would be carrying his or her gun, the gun owner would be allowed to sue the property owner if a newly introduced bill became law.

Sponsored by Sen. Dolores Gresham, R-Somerville, Senate Bill 1736 has a very specific purpose.

“It is the intent of this section to balance the right of a handgun carry permit holder to carry a firearm in order to exercise the right of self-defense and the ability of a property owner or entity in charge of the property to exercise control over governmental or private property,” the bill states.

To accomplish that goal, the legislation allows any Tennessean with a valid gun permit to sue a property owner in the event of injury or death provided the incident occurred while in a gun-free zone.

The legislation places responsibility on the business or property owner of the gun-free area to protect the gun owner from any incidents that occur with any “invitees,” trespassers and employees found on the property, as well as vicious and wild animals and “defensible man-made and natural hazards.”

The bill does not define defensible man-made and natural hazards.

A handgun carry permit holder who is injured by any of the aforementioned would be able to file a lawsuit within two years of when the event occurred, provided they meet the following requirements:

  • the plaintiff had to be authorized to carry a gun at the time of the incident
  • the plaintiff was prohibited from carrying a firearm because of the gun-free sign
  • the property owner was not required to be posted by state or federal law but was posted by choice of the defendant

According to the language of the bill, the right to sue the property owner does not extend to individuals without gun permits. [snip]