Comments Subscribe to Personal Liberty News Feed Subscribe to Personal Liberty

Shooting Of Chicago Robber Strengthens Pro-gun Lawsuit, Says Second Amendment Foundation

June 2, 2010 by  

Shooting of Chicago robber strengthens pro-gun lawsuit, says Second Amendment FoundationLast week an 80-year-old Chicago man killed a home intruder, reigniting the debate on the merits of a landmark gun rights case that is about to be decided by the United States Supreme Court.

McDonald v. City of Chicago, brought by four Chicago residents, the Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) and the Illinois State Rifle Association, seeks to strike down a decades-old law that bans handguns and requires the annual taxation of firearms.

"We filed our lawsuit two years ago to protect the self-defense rights of Chicago citizens just like this man," said SAF executive vice president Alan Gottlieb.

"They have been unconscionably disarmed, and left in as much fear of being arrested and jailed for having a gun as they are afraid of being robbed and murdered by armed thugs who have ignored the gun ban," he stressed.

Meanwhile, Chicago Mayor Richard Daley said that he understood the frustration that led to the shooting—which is still under police investigation—but that in his view access to guns kills more people than it saves, according to Chicago Sun-Times.

"Criminals have more access to guns today than in the history of this country and that is frightening to America," he said, quoted by the news provider.

"We have to do something about it. You cannot have America as the Wild West," Daley added. ADNFCR-1961-ID-19808080-ADNFCR

Special To Personal Liberty

You Sound Off! is written by our readers and appears the last Wednesday of each month. If you would like to submit an article or letter to the editor for consideration for You Sound Off!, send it to by the Friday before the last Wednesday of the month. To be considered, a submission should be 750 words or less and must include the writer's name, address and a telephone number. Only the writer's name will be published. Anonymous submissions will not be considered.

Facebook Conversations

Join the Discussion:
View Comments to “Shooting Of Chicago Robber Strengthens Pro-gun Lawsuit, Says Second Amendment Foundation”

Comment Policy: We encourage an open discussion with a wide range of viewpoints, even extreme ones, but we will not tolerate racism, profanity or slanderous comments toward the author(s) or comment participants. Make your case passionately, but civilly. Please don't stoop to name calling. We use filters for spam protection. If your comment does not appear, it is likely because it violates the above policy or contains links or language typical of spam. We reserve the right to remove comments at our discretion.

Is there news related to personal liberty happening in your area? Contact us at

  • CJ

    So, the law exists to control guns in Illinois, and yet criminals still carry guns! Wow, who would think a criminal would WANT to obey the law and not possess a gun? Oh, yea, a cluless liberal.

    • Jim Fridas

      Very good, you did your homework, I like that, clueless, now as far as that excuse for a mayor who says in his view access to guns kills more people than it saves, how wrong, according to the FBI over one and a half million people thwart crime annually having a gun in the home saves countless lives, everything from home intruders to rapists to thugs of all sorts, sorry Mayer you are wrong and in this case it could be dead wrong, clueless, yup that would what it be CJ, “clueless”!

      • JohntheMick

        Me thinks the Daley crime syndicate sees the constitution more clearly than we give him credit for. The founders saw the right to bear arms as a method of keeping big government tyrrany in check. After all, Chicago is one of the safest cities in the world now that most of the riff-raff resides in D.C..

    • refuse2lose

      Everyone knows(except liberals)that in order for a government to get total control of a population they have to remove all guns,all weapons.And while the citizens are deprived of their right to defend themselves the government is allowed to have whatever weapons they deem necessary.


      • DaveH

        The Liberals know that too. They just think that they are going to be first in line at the trough when Government takes over. They think wrong. The useless people are going to be the first to go.

        • Rob Alexander

          Y’know, I think there’s a lot of truth to that. People in favor of more powerful government seem to under the DELUSION that the gov’t is going to exercise that power as they would themselves, or in a way that directly benefits them.

          Make no mistake about it though – it’s a DELUSION. Power will always be exercised to the benefit of the politicians and the money interests that finance them being in power – which will never be the common person.

    • http://none Alex

      What is it about “well-regulated militia” you Teabaggers do not understand?
      You people claim to support the Constitution of the White Estates of Amerika and yet none of you even understand it!!WELL-REGULATED militia means exactly that: a well-regulated militia—this means registration of all guns as well as background checks, you morons.

      • mark

        Alex, The term well regulated at the time it was written, mint: Self disciplined. There was no such thing as gun registration or background checks. How uninformed are you?

        • http://none Alex

          …”mint” What is it that you are trying so hard to say?

          • Jarhead1982

            What he meant to say is your the moron who cant read or do proper research for themselve and is the dancing meat puppet of the anti fascists Alex!

      • http://PersonalLibertyDigest Bruce D.

        I agree with Mark. You are uninformed. “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.” There is a comma after the word State and the people have the right to keep and bear arms with or without a militia. That right is well documented during that time in addition to the constitution. People not only needed guns to hunt to feed themselves, but also for protection. The peoples right to keep and bear arms were also meant as a check and balance against government power.

      • Steve

        Alex-Anti-American Liberal
        Go away little ignorant liberal. Your ignorant statements don’t hold any water. The supreme court has already defined it. I’m surprised liberals like you know when to take a breath with out one of your ignorant leaders telling you when and how.

      • DaveH

        If ignorance is bliss, you must be one happy Liberal.

      • Meteorlady

        Alex – do you know what “tea-bagger” means in gay language. You are insulting normal every day concerned people – mom and dads; teachers, doctors, lawyers, elderly, etc.

        Here a little thought for you:

        Using such a derogatory term us used to try and dehumanizes those that disagree with you. It is childish, unintelligent, insulting and you only belittle yourself. It shows you have no class and you have no ability to engage in intelligent and rational discussions.

        • http://none Alex

          Ms Meteorhead–the Teabaggers christened themselves as Teabaggers–look it up! We just love calling them that because it is such a funny self-inflicted pejorative. The Fright Wing throws around words with no sense of their meanings or of their history in popular usage—thus imbeciles like Glenn Beck rail against the term “czars” even though its use in the Amerikan vernacular dates to the Repubelickin’ administration of Ronald Raygun, the second-worst war-dodgin’ president after George Bush the Smaller. Please read some History rather than suffocating on Faux news every night.

          • Vicki

            Congratulations Alex. You have set a new bar for liberals everywhere to outdo. As Ad Hominum attacks go it is however rather transparent.

            Do come back sometime when you are ready to debate the ideas however.

            Btw what part of “…the right of the people…” were you having trouble understanding? (<—- Thinly veiled ad hominum attack :) )

          • Doug Rodrigues

            Alex, you obviously live in your own Liberal world where we all sing the Coca Cola song….what Obama suggested was a better choice for the National Anthem. I Suggest that you get back to reality.

        • CurtisS

          Hey Meteorlady… While the term “tea bagging” does refer to a sexual act… it most certainly IS NOT a gay term. Just like kissing, ‘tea bagging’ be done by anyone.

      • Cheryl

        Poor pathetic Alex, God gave him the ability to tap out letters on his keyboard, but didn’t give him a mind to think with. No rational thought processes at all. Lucky for him he falls under the “cradle to grave” program, or he’d be in a world of hurt.

      • http://?? Joe H.

        I see you haven’t seen the news out of the U.K. They have outlawed ALL handguns and some nut with an automatic went around in a cab shooting people! At least two dozen wounded and 12 dead!! Boy those regulations and outright bans sure work, don’t they???

        • Jarhead1982

          Actually, it was a shot gun I believe.

        • Sheldon

          Joe… on average about 100 people will be murdered with a gun this year in the UK, while over 11,000 Americans will be killed by a gun during the same period. (More people will die from a gun in Detroit THIS YEAR than the next THREE YEARS in the UK.) Your argument is flawed… and it plays right into the hands of those that want to disarm Americans. You found the UK’s most sensational gun crime to occur in the last 25 and twisted it into a weak argument to suit your position.
          A country’s history, its culture, even its economy can be big factors in gun use, gun crimes and gun laws. The gun debate is far more complex than your overly simple and totally out of context argument. Too many Americans die from guns and I don’t think that’s right. BUT taking away MY freedom to own a gun and defend MY home isn’t right either. If you want to help me keep my rights and freedoms… please stop making such ridiculous statements.

          • http://?? Joe H.

            It just serves to prove that no matter how many gun laws or bans you pass, the determined criminal will always get a gun! Hell, look at the Chinese guy that attacked students with a hatchet a few weeks ago. how does THAT play into their plan? I firmly believe that if you outright BAN all guns in the US then the crime rate will go up! As to all those arms they want to stop flooding Mexico from the US? Most of them come from China and Russia via a little despot leader that Obummer and crew are so fond of in South America!

          • mark

            Sheldon, Chicago has a gun ban. Gun crime only escalated after the ban was in effect. Your numbers don’t tell the whole story. Fact: Every year, people in the United States use guns to defend themselves against
            criminals an estimated 2,500,000 times – more than 6,500 people a day, or once every seconds. Of these instances, 15.6% of the people using firearms defensively stated that they “almost certainly” saved their lives by doing so. Firearms are used 60 times more often to protect lives than to take lives. Fact: In 83.5% (2,087,500) of these successful gun defenses, the attacker either threatened or used force first, proving that guns are very well suited for self-defense.

            Fact: The rate of defensive gun use (SGU) is six times that of criminal gun use. Fact: Of the 2,500,000 times citizens use guns to
            defend themselves, 92% merely brandish their gun or fire a warning shot to scare off their attackers. Fact: Less than 8% of the time does a citizen wound his or her attacker, and in less than one in a thousand instances is the attacker killed. Fact: Of all forms of firearm homicide, 13% are civilian legal defensive homicides. Then there are the criminals who kill each other and the ones who are killed by police. Last are the ones who commit suicide, which some years they have accounted for almost half of gun deaths.

          • Sheldon

            Mark… the numbers I mentioned (11,000 gun deaths annually) were for gun homicides ONLY (suicides were a separate number). I am curious as to what your source was for the numbers you quoted? Where did you get these numbers?
            Couple of thoughts… in a one-on-one situation a gun IS NOT a defensive weapon. In a one-on-one situation whoever draws first wins… that’s why the bad guys always say “hands-up”. That’s why I like concealed carry laws… it reduces the odds of one-on-one situations.
            A friend of mine in Canada says their gun laws work pretty well… few people die by guns, but it’s pointless because the number of stabbings is ridiculous. He says people will kill in the heat of the moment with whatever they can use, be it a gun, a knife, a baseball bat, fists etc., etc. He says the only ban that might work is the ban of homicidal emotions, otherwise bans are a waste of time and money.
            Anyway Mark… looking forward to your info source, if you’ve got the time. Thanks.

          • Jackie Barnes

            I don’t know about your stastisiks but if they are right of the 11000
            they were probably killed by criminals not lawabiding citizens. if it was lawabiding citizens they were more than likely defending themselves or their homes!

          • http://?? Joe H.

            In a one on one the first to draw isn’t always the winner. there are a lot of crooks that can’t handle a gun worth a dam! Look at this instance the crook shot at the old man and missed! Not untill the crook shot twice did the old man shoot and kill the crook!! Most times it comes down to who has the best control, as in control to hit what they shoot at!

      • Emo Zipper

        Why does it have to be ” White Estates of Amerika” ? What third world “Colony of Afrikan Negroes” did you get deported from? Morons ? Really ? I’ll bet you can even count with your fingers. one , two , three , four………Airhead…..EZ

      • Tom T.

        Alex, you need to actually read the bill of rights and the Federalist papers and the writings of Ben Franklin and you will see that the term Militia by the founders refers to the general populace not a military militia as defined today. The first thing a communist or totalitarian regime is to check gun registration rolls and arrest them first. Inform yourself before you speak and show your ignorance.

        • http://none Alex

          Slaveowner drivel–most of the Floundering Fathers did not believe any of the pretty words in the constitution or the Bill of Whites–they owned people, after all. The Fright Wing lunatics need to pay attention. How many of you ever listen to, say, Rachel Maddow? Eye can see how Olberman might get your panties in a twist, but Maddow is calm and precise. The people on the Left, the educated, curious, and open-minded get their information from a variety of sources, including Faux News. This allows us to hear DIFFERENT points of view and DECIDE for OURSELVES!! I am afraid that most Faux News viewers never listen to any other point of view. I am correct, right?

          • Vicki

            We listened to yours. Discovered you did not have any. We move on.

          • Steve

            No Alex, unlike you liberals that have to watch a news program/anchor like Rachael Madcow to tell you what “your point of view” is, we have had our “point of view” for years. We didn’t need the lame stream media to “get our point of view”
            All it took was watching and listening to all you liberal socialists nutjobs for several years with your Constitution bashing, Saul Alinski following, Louis Farakann idolizing, Marxist/Stalinist loving bull sh*t to get “our point of view”
            Unlike you, and your liberal/socialist brothers and sisters, we are not puppets. We can think for ourselves, and all it takes is seeing one more fool like you on here, to strengthen our resolve, and reaffirm our beliefs in a Constitutional America, and our “point of view”. Any questions Alex?

          • gregory

            hey alex

            you are not correct, im glad you brought up the subject of news sourses, myself and many others have invested into a veritas program that is a fact checking program that takes all the news that is being reported from most all news organizations and investigative journalist sites from around the world, it uses a mathmatical system that puts all the storys and subjects alike and weeds out any differences in story as add on or conspiracy, it measures the amount of lies put out ontop of a subject due to bias, it weighs the amount of lies and compares % of what is true and what is non factual bias agenda being put out, its a great program to have at your fingertips,

            and alex i bet you can guess wich investigative journalist news organization is spot on above all the rest,– i will give you a hint—its the one you commies hate the most…

            why are you such a racisist????
            jesus still loves you and you cant stop that!!

          • gregory

            hey alex

            if you hate this country so much, then quit riding this countrys free coattails, angola awaits you, you should feel verry safe there since you share the same interests as the thugs there do, or better yet join up with some of those pirates off of the n.e african coast..
            when you take the guns from the law abiding citizens in the u.s –then you will have the same situations here as you do over there, war lords armed to the hilt. dont forget the oppertunities this free country has given you and be thankful you were born here, think about this –if history hadent played out the way that it did–were would you be right now? be thankful to the lord, and look at what it could have been..

            T axes E nough A lready

          • Bob Wire

            Yes Alex, I think you are correct 30% of the time. And out of the 30% , 28 % of “Fox Noise Addicts” are Here!

            But that don’t change the notion that you are still wrong 70% on the time.

            We should not speak of things and think 30% accuracy is acceptable just because others do. ????? No?

            I’m a Democrat but much less Liberal and much more conservative progressive. I’ll vote for a Republican in a heartbeat that’s convinced me they are true to the spirit of their words and the words ring clear to my ears. Mc Cain failed that test as did all except Nixon, while admitting having a vested interest in Regan. Though just a “pitch man”, the better choice of the two, Cater failing to Marshall the respect and move the ball, tho he the better man.

            I hate guns, I love guns, grew up with them, my first at 13, a 12 Gage goose gun, (a lesson of respect came with every trigger pull) used them in many ways and for many reasons, hence the love/hate affair.

            from lighting matches with a 22 to dropping ducks flying 60 mph out of a fog bank at 75ft to men at 20ft to 400 yards in a hard run, does not make anyone a “conservative”.

            So all this bias political affiliation notions don’t hold water in this discussions of rights to possess and bear arms.

            All these actions or behaviors does not make me or anyone a Conservative.

            For if it be so, all armed commission of a crime would be by only conservatives. ~ or do I heard debate?

          • JLC

            Alex — With all your ranting and raving, you haven’t managed to come with anything that makes sense. Do yourself a favor — take a cold shower and sober up!!

          • mac

            if you want faxs look at scotland yard numbers crime rose by 350% after the gun band

      • marvin

        alax teabaging is something you fags do we tea party members respect the law and the right to own and use a gun for self protection from stuped ass liberals like you next time you post be respectful or don,t post

        • http://none Alex

          You should fight for the public education that you clearly missed out on.

          • Sandra

            And YOU, poor pathetic Alex, should strive for the Constitutional education that YOU “clearly missed out on”

          • gregory

            hey alex

            are you talking about the public screw’l system that handed you all your passing grades and screw’d everybody else that worked for there grades? dude i saw your culture of corruption get a free pass all through school, while hard working students got passed over.

            its ok-alex, we all saw , you can pretend you deserved your grades but deep down you know that you cheated everyone else, and if that doesent bother you than you are the marxist scum we all are starting to recognize, dont worry alex the free ride for you will be around for a long time to come, but take heed and know that at any time we can take that away from you, its a matter of when, maybe sooner than later…


            T axed E nough A lready

      • gregory

        hey alex

        have you studied the jefferson doc’s? direct your racisist hand onto google and find the library of congress, and research the subject through the origional doc’s from jefferson, then you will have been educated enough to speak about a subject you seem to not understand. the right to own fire arms is absoulute for the american citizen, there are many commie typ’s that hate the fact that we have the right to own guns, the reason is because the commies know that they will never beable to completly take over this free country as long as law abiding citizens are allowed to own fire arms, thats why commies are always trying to convience everyone the constitution has all these different meanings, give it up dude we all know what you are about, commie obamie will never beable to fully dissarm the american citizens of this country, he may get some crap guns in a gun grab scam, but will never get the guns that count no matter how hard he tries–there for he will never beable to take this country down all the way. if the constitution meant gun registration of citizens guns–then F.D.R, CARTER, CLINOCHIO,AND COMMIE OBAMIE would have already done it. a well regulated militia refers to a standing patriot army under orders of the president–thus a army payed by the american citizens. the private citizen has always had the right to keep and bare arms as a secondary patriot, a backup if you will, kind of like the backup pistol strap’d to my leg, and by the way why are you so full of hate against people who want to protect them selves from the hords of drug dealing pimps, cons and commies running around out there who mean harm to everybody they come in contact with, people arent going to give up there rights to keep and bare arms- especially in these days of unclear agendas that we are all whitnessing. try to take the guns from law abiding citizens and you will see the patriots become activated–and i dont think even you alex wish for that typ of punishment to break open, it would be like opening up a giant can of whoopass, this country is a lot bigger than you know alex, and there will always be patriots out there waiting for the chance to run the commies out into the ocean. i suggest you look up the heritage foundation and find all the proven facts about the subject that you seem to pushing for the commie party, the heritage foundation will be the best sourse of imfo you will ever find when it comes to the constitution, until then dont wast your time trying to covience all of us with the pocket constitution at hand. and why are you so racisist? and full of hate at the folks that want to preserve the meaning of the constitution? is it because we all own fire arms and thugs like yourself wont beable to rob us due to the fact that we will protect ourselves from scumbags,commies,thugs,pimps,gangs,and the general low class low lifes that mean us all harm,as long as there are thugs like these–you wont ever beable to take our guns.

        i say to you mr–GOOD LUCK
        stay sharp alex–as we noticed you are a racisist

        T ax’d–E nough–A lready

      • JC

        At the permission of the state? The state has no busieness, none! in gun registration. Bite me, Commie.

      • CA

        Alex, don’t pretend that you are intelligent. When the Constitution was written, “well regulated militia” meant the private citizens. It was never intended to mean a government force of arms. THAT was exactly what the founders were fighting against.

      • northwoods

        Alex will be giving a “teabagging” demonstration at a gay wedding sometime soon.

      • James

        Alex, Back then every man was required to keep a firearm in good working condition in his home because they were all subject to being called upon to serve in their state’s militia. All Americans had the right to bear arms before they created the federal government, with its subsequent Bill of Rights. It’s true that for a while the Supreme Court held that the Second Amendment’s restriction applied only to militia-type weapons, but it’s also true that the Court’s Heller decision (2008) reversed that, the court held that to deny a citizen, in the District of Columbia, the right to possess a handgun violated the Second Amenement.

    • Bud

      Any politician, office holder, or other public figure (Rosie, anyone?) who opposes gun ownership by us rabble should NOT be allowed to have armed protection. Especially if it has to be paid for by us rabble.

    • Bob Wire

      Do you really think in only black or white. Anti-gun is not a “progressive” position. But if you think it is, please offer your reasons.

      • Cindy

        Bob wire,
        You say anti-gun is not a progressive position. If anti-gun is not a “progress position”, they pray tell, what is it?

        Progressives in control of congress and the white house, and 5 anti-gun bills in progress. What do you call this?

        Do you only include issues that the progressives admit to openly, or do you also include things that the progressives lie about, keep in the dark, arrange through back room deals, and ram down our throats no matter whether we want it or not, “because they know what’s better for us” than we do?

        p.s. Bob, I expect that you will just pretend like you don’t see this question because you don’t have an answer, but that’s ok. I understand how you progressives are.

  • paul smith

    Dear Mr Daley: Since it is assumed by you that your citizens are much safer if none of them are allowed firearms let’s make it even safer by disarming the police. Ridiculous you say? sorry only using your rationale. let’s be reasonable, examine the history of violent crimes in cities where severe controls are placed on citizens ownership or firearms then compare the same where ciitizens are allowed ownership of firearms. Apples to apples, which cities are proven to be safer?

    • 45caliber

      Better yet, insist that Daley can neither carry a gun nor allow his guards to carry one. Let’s see what he’d say then!

      • Dean

        Amen! He shouldn’t have the benefit of armed guards while everyone else is left to helpless.

      • EARL, QUEENS, NY

        Good point, 45caliber. If we read the Bible, in Matthew 23:4 and Luke 11:46, we’ll see that today’s liberal democraps are phony hypocites, and will not live with the burdens they impose on us. They forced Obummer-care onto us, but will exempt themselves from it. They want to tax us to death while the rich democraps cheat on their own taxes. They condemn succesful people, but it’s okay for liberal democraps to be rich – even in unethical ways (i.e., Al Gore earning millions with global warming fraud). The environmental fascists want us to walk and ride bicycles, while they ride in big cars, limos and private planes….. So it should be no surprise that they’d strip us of our weapons while they keep their own, nor would they disarm their own security personnel. Disarming citizens is also just a stepping stone to tyranny…..Perhaps we should form a group – maybe VOATH?? – Vote Out All The Hypocrites!!

    • Jim Fridas

      You hit the nail on the head, only with liberals do not confuse them with facts their pea brain is already made up!

    • PabloKoh

      Or at least make his goons carry only Cook County compliant guns. The limits are 10 rounds of ammo per magazine and no assault weapons. Today his goons carry HK MP-5′s fully automatic compact machine guns w/ 30 round magazines.

      • Bud

        His goons should only be allowed to carry pea shooters.


      Good point paul. And let’s not forget the nearby town of Morton Grove IL, which outlawed guns back in the 1980s. Kennesaw GA responded by enacting a law requiring all competent adults (except conscientious objectors) to own guns. Kennesaw even said it would welcome all of Morton Grove’s confiscated guns. While Morton Grove’s crime rate increased, Kennesaw’s crime rate dropped over 50%!! But I’m sure Daley would never honestly comment on these facts.

  • Mark

    In spite of their oath to “…preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution…”, the fine members of Chicago’s “Law Enforcement” as well as other outstanding “Law Enforcement” continue to mock it by enforcing laws like this. Gosh Darn them for what they’ve done to this country! May they rot in Heck.

  • Robin, Arcadia, IN

    Major Daley is not the brightest bulb in the box. Guns don’t kill people. Where is the ACLU? The people of Chicago should have them on their side. They are being denied their second amendment rights!

    • s c

      Robin, you’re probably being sarcastic when you give an anti-American group like the ACLU the benefit of the doubt. Where is the ACLU?
      They pick and choose their ‘battles.’ They, too, like all progressives and useful idiots do what they’re told. They follow orders.
      At the moment, the ACLU is probably finishing the details on a master plan to protect Omao’s czars, his freedom-hating Suprme Court shills, and his growing list of unconstitutional attacks on the American people.
      The ACLU works for the same sub-humans that OStalin works for (puppet masters). They do what they’re told, in a long-term plan to control the world.
      If it wasn’t for progressive lawyers, groups like the ACLU wouldn’t exist. Unlike the scumbags in Congress, ACLU scumbag bastards can read and understand the English language (that’s why the ACLU is so dangerous).

      • independant thinker

        A little while back the ACLU wqas trying to get me to join them. I told them I would consider joining their organization when they started defending the second amendment. Their reply was they considered the second amendment to mean a collictive right not an individual right. Needless to say I am not a member and will not be one as long as they maintain that attitude.

      • Bud

        Why, how dare you talk about the Atheist Communist Lawyers Underground like that!

    • DaveH

      I think the people who keep electing Daley are the dim bulbs. He is only looking out for himself, like anybody in a leadership position would do. It’s up to the voters to get educated and realize that the leaders are playing them for fools.

  • Claire

    Wild West??? Chicago has been the land of the so-called Wild West for decades. The gang members, druggies, and the lowlife have been killing people for years. Does Daley think the decent citizens should not be able to protect themselves? The last I heard Daley was wanting the National Guard to be called in because Chicago is rampant with gun-toting criminals.
    This 80-year-old man had every “right” to protect himself. Why should this case still be under investigation? To me, it is a clear-cut case of self-defense. The politicians of Chicago have always catered to the gangsters. Criminals always have guns, and they use them. Daley better re-think this issue, and be in favor for the average citizen, not the criminals. He is another politician that needs to be booted out. The Daleys have been in control of Chicago for decades.
    If someone tries to rob me or break into my home, I will do what I have to do. I will just have to make sure the criminal is INSIDE my home. Isn’t that the way the law works?

    • JC

      Liberal morons love that “Wild West” label Claire. It’s all they’ve got. Sadly though, it works on those same morons because they were mostly educated by their TV and that’s what Hollywood presented the Old West as.
      Truth is people were just as reluctant to pull a gun then as they are now, especially in an environment where almost everyone had a gun.
      If you were trying to commit a crime at gun point, chances are you would be shot where you stand. It also made for very polite society.

      In any event, Daley (like most politicians)is afraid of the people and couldn’t care less for their safety. That’s why he’s against armed citizens.

      • JohntheMick

        Man, I love my Arizona gun regulations, I mean “lack” of regulations. The end of July starts our concealed with no permit time which makes us only one of three states to do so. We have always been allowed to carry loaded and in the open. Remember, former liberal commi-progressives turned libertarian conservatives did so because of crimes against them. Imagine that, liberal on liberal crime. I said for years when the debate was on machine guns, who needs a machine gun ? It’s for mass killing. I bought into their simple minded presentations. Now I see it for what it is in that if you let them control one type, they can control them all. Stand up and make our constitution gospel.

        • independant thinker

          “I said for years when the debate was on machine guns, who needs a machine gun ? It’s for mass killing.”

          I still feel that way to an extent but you know what, I would buy one in a minute if I could afford it just so I could shoot it. I don’t particularly like AK-47 look alikes either I think they are ugly but if you want one more power to you. Go buy it and have fun shooting it.

        • Carol in AZ

          Some years back when our beloved AZ began the “concealed carry” permits [with the same kind of training, etc described by Howe in Texas], our state crime figures dropped, year after year after year! As already mentioned, it has always been legal to wear a gun in plain sight in Arizona, to keep it exposed. Now, soon, it will become legal for ALL people to conceal a gun. When the crooks wonder who might have a gun they are not as eager to start shooting or to invade a home. Proven. Being a huge part Texan [since 1883], I love what Howe from TX says.

          We have to clean up our borders where half of the illegals come through for the entire USA! They kill our citizens and trash our desert. Many illegals die getting across, too, and are killed by the human smugglers when the smugglers [coyotes] can’t get the ransoms they ask for. GADS! Let’s make it less attractive for them to risk their lives!

          ILLEGAL IS ILLEGAL! Having our guns should never be illegal! Who is going to protect us if we can’t protect ourselves?


          • JC

            Florida’s had dropped 35%, 4 years after they brought in Conceal carry laws.

      • Lee

        You are so right! My grandfather was a kid cowboy in Arizona Territory the last part of the 19th century, while he could handle either a rifle or a hand gun with equal dexterity, he preferred the long gun because he felt a man would think twice before using it.
        Years later, he would laugh at the B-westerns put out by Hollywood, saying that had there been as many gun-fights in the old west as in the movies, there wouldn’t have been a cowboy left!
        Nope, I want six-gun justice back! Yes, there were those who wanted to do away with guns even in the old west, but what they really wanted was called “responsibility.”

  • J.M.R.

    mayor just another lib who claims to be protecting the honest person, people who have their own brain and can use it know better. just another time that they want to take control of our lives. god forbid the ACLU would do anything they say they are for, just more gimme people that sound off about B.S. on our dime.

  • Jim H.

    When seconds count the police are just minutes away. I live 40 miles west of Chicago, so I remember the news report. The reporters were speculating if the police were going to charge The 80 year old Korean War veteran for having an illegal hand gun. ( he wasn’t) Just because he protected himself and family from a criminal there was a chance that he would be considered one. I’m sure the police aren’t going to return the pistol even though it is his property. In Chicago we treat the victims like criminals and the criminals like victims.

    • Claire

      Jim H– Your last sentence is very accurate. There are so many times I believe the laws were made for the criminals. Some judges just give them a slap on the wrist. The old saying “get by with murder” certainly applies to some of the sentences that judges hand out. I guess it is a good thing that I am not a judge or a politician. I am so hard-nose on these type of issues. They speak of “rehabilitation” —this may help in some cases but I think the majority just go back to their old habits of crime. Strike three and they’re out. Totally.

    • JohntheMick

      Just like the seconds/minutes statement, the cops are there to fill out assumption documents over a victims dead carcass. I do not want to cheapen what cops do, but they can’t be everywhere when these things happen.

      • Vicki

        As good as (most) cops are the truth of the matter is that the victim is ALWAYS first on the scene. Cops are the “backup” How would a cop react to being told they had to leave their guns behind and if they find a gun to be necessary to control the situation they had to call for swat who would be allowed to bring the guns.

  • Mike Hassell

    I have never understood the mentality of these morons to let the criminals have guns and take them away form law abiding citizens.

    • Jim Fridas

      Its liberalism, A. K. A. socialism the need to control society, they cannot take care of themselves without conservatives, they don’t even join the military in most cases they are cowards who would rather attack their citizens than any enemy, in the 20th century they killed more of their own people than all the wars combined. Dr Savage wrote a book “Liberalism, A Sickness, Illness, Decease, great read gets you to understand these whack jobs.

      • s c

        Jim, on a good day, Daley is a useful idiot. Most of the time, he’s worse. A useful idiot does he’s told. Daley could be the new poster child for useful idiots (he took over for Gore).
        I’m not a great fan of Savage, but when it comes to progressives, home-grown useful idiots and ‘liberals,’ Savage knows what he’s talking about.
        The Savage book should be required reading for those who are still in doubt as to how low a liberal will sink to ‘fit in’ and (somehow) be seen as a “caring, compassionate, enlightened, public-spirited,” liberal. Thank God, Daley will never be a prez.

  • Eric A58sparky

    I live in Macomb Co. Michigan. Years back my county sheriff decided to issue concealed gun permit to anyone w/no felonies or assult charges on their record. We were the only county to do this in the state. Our crime rate w/guns dropped year after year & we were the only county in the state to NOT have a increase. Now anyone w/a clean record, in our whole state can get a CCW permit due to our example!
    Wake-up & realize the thugs will have guns no matter what you do.

  • 45caliber

    Why should Daley worry about citizens being robbed or killed? He has his own armed guards following him around day and night to keep him safe.

    What he is really saying is that it is okay for him to have guns for protection but not anyone else. Besides, he doesn’t really have to worry about the criminals; it is the angry citizens whose rights he had taken away he has to worry about.

    • Meteorlady

      Daley robs the general public daily. He doesn’t need a gun he has the office of the major on his side.

  • Brad

    Mayor Daley probably has security or body guards so he does not have to protect himself……citizens don’t…I they call 911 it will be all over before help arrives. Citizens need the right to protect themselves plus it is a constitutional right….

    • Claire

      Brad– I agree. If a person can call 911 the crime is committed before the police get there. Citizens do need the right to protect themselves.

  • James

    The Chicago ordinance is in violation of the Illinois Constitution, its Art. I, Sec. 22 reads: “Subject only to the police power, the right of the individual citizen to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” If denying Illinois citizens the right to own a handgun doesn’t violate that, what does?

    In the original U.S. Constitution (1789), the powers that were delegated to Congress (Article I, Section 8) made no mention of rights, and about half of the Founders believed that would suffice to prevent the new federal government from legislating over rights. However, others thought future congresses might misconstrue those powers, to include rights, and insisted upon adding a Bill of Rights (in 1791). The Preamble to the Bill of Rights reads:

    THE Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added.

    Thus the stated purpose for the Bill of Rights was to add “restrictive clauses” “in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers” with respect to rights, where ‘its powers’ referred to the federal government. The Second Amendment reads:

    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.

    Viewing the Second Amendment out of its Bill of Rights’ context has misled many to misconstrue its “shall not be infringed” as a proclamation to all governments, including state legislatures as well as Congress. But, just as the First Amendment’s “Congress shall make no law,” obviously applies exclusively to the federal government, so also does the Second Amendment.

    In Barron v. Baltimore, 32 U.S. 243, 247 (1833), Mr. Chief Justice Marshall said: “The [U.S.] constitution was ordained and established by the people of the United States for themselves, for their own government, and not for the government of the individual states…the fifth amendment must be understood as restraining the power of the general government, not as applicable to the states.”
    In United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 542, 553 (1875), a mob of whites had disarmed two blacks (in Louisiana) and the issue was whether that action had violated the Second Amendment right of the blacks. Mr. Chief Justice Waite said: “This is not a right granted by the Constitution. Neither is it in any manner dependent upon that instrument for its existence. The second amendment declares that it shall not be infringed, but this, as has been seen, means no more than that it shall not be infringed by Congress. This is one of the amendments that has no other effect than to restrict the powers of the national government.”
    In District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. ____ (2008), the U.S. Supreme Court said: “We consider whether a District of Columbia prohibition on the possession of usable handguns in the home violates the Second Amendment of the Constitution.” After meticulous analysis of every word and clause in the amendment, the Heller Court stated: “In sum, we hold that the District’s ban on handgun possession in the home violates the Second Amendment, as does its prohibition against rendering any lawful firearm in the home operable for the purpose of immediate self-defense.”

    Just remember that that decision involved an ordinance of a territory (the District of Columbia), which falls under federal jurisdiction, it has no effect within the States. The Heller Court cited Barron, Cruikshank and other High Court decisions as precedents.
    Stated otherwise no State law has ever been held violative of the Second Amendment. In McDonald v. Chicago, the case now before the High Court, the issue is whether a state’s city ordinance, which prohibits handgun possession in a certain area, has violated the Second Amendment. Based upon previous High Court decision, it obviously does not, but whether it violates the “liberty…without due process of law” clause, of the Fourteenth Amendment remains to be seen.

    • Vicki

      interesting James that you should miss the point of the 2nd.

      The First Amendment clearly states that “Congress” shall make no law… As such it is clearly a restriction on the Federal Government only.

      The 2nd Amendment has no such limitation. Combined with the 10th Amendment it is clear that the 1st does NOT transfer to the States but the 2nd does.

      Of course the 14th makes the 10th a little harder to parse but it is clear by the writing of the founders that the 2nd was to restrict ALL government at ANY level (…. shall NOT be infringed.)

      • James

        Vicki, You obviously missed the High Court’s Cruikshank decision, it clearly stated: “The second amendment declares that it shall not be infringed, but this, as has been seen, means no more than that it shalll not be infringed by Congress. This is one of the amendments that has no other effect than to restrict the powers of the National Government.” The Bill of Rights is one document, it all applies exclusively to the federal government. If you will read your own state’s constitution, you will find a similar restriction that each state’s citizens placed upon their state government. You are viewing the Second Amendment out of its Bill of Rights context.

        • Vicki

          James: We shall soon see as the High Court is to rule on a gun control law in a state. They have already put to rest the illogical claim that the 2nd is for “militias” only in the Heller decision.

          Carol: I came about my observations by reading the Constitution.
          As I said the first clearly says Congress. It even uses the word Congress. The 2nd specifies no single government entity nor body. Further reading of the founding fathers makes it clear that they ment all government.

          The decision in Cruikshank

          supports my assertion that the first is a limit on the fedgov only but asserts that the 2nd is also only for the fedgov.

          Interesting that we can still plead the 5th even though James would have us believe that the 5th amendment is only a restriction on the fedgov.

          Of course much of The decisions in Cruikshank have been invalidated by later court decisions however with respect to the 2nd it was upheld in Presser v. Illinois which is the only Supreme Court finding on the 2nd untill the murky United States v. Miller decision which says in part that

          “In the absence of any evidence tending to show that possession or use of a ‘shotgun having a barrel of less than eighteen inches in length’ at this time has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia, we cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument.”

          Which seems to imply that the 2nd can and does affect the states. As I said it is very murky.

          Further history would and has taken up books. I can not add all the links here cause there is a limit to how many links they allow in posts.

          • James

            Vicki, you are confusing rights with the Bill of Rights amendents. Rights existed before that, rights are inalienable, Americans are born with rights. The First Amendment does not say: “Americans now have these five rights,” it simply says “Congress shall make no law respecting…or prohibiting…or abridging” those rights. The First Amendment is not the source of those rights, it’s a restriction on Congress to legislate concerning them. The Ninth Amendment says this restriction includes all rights whether enumerated therein or not. If that amendment is viewed separately from the Bill of Rights, it makes no sense whatever. The Tenth Amendment states “powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution…are reserved to the States…or to the people.” This again reminds Congress that power over rights was not delegated to the U.S. Congress.
            Rights are not dependent on any document for their existence, they are inalienable. Forty-four state constitutions have similar bills of rights in them. The U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly held that the federal Bill of Rights restrictions applies exclusively to the federal government. I realize that Wikipedia doesn’t agree with that, but they are wrong, the U.S. Constitution means what the Supreme Court says it means. The Crukshank case was an example of that, blacks had been deprived of their right to bear arms, and charged that that violated the Second Amendment, the High Court held that it did not, because the amendment does not apply to state legislatures.

          • Vicki

            James says:
            “Vicki, you are confusing rights with the Bill of Rights amendents. Rights existed before that, rights are inalienable, Americans are born with rights. ”

            I’m not the one that is confused. I often point out amendment 9. I point out that the Constitution is a set of limits on what powers we can give our government. I often point out that should the 2nd amendment be repealed I have not lost the right to keep and bear arms for that right was given to us by our creator not by the Constitution.

            I think that about the First amendment as well which is why I am glad that the first amendment stuff has been “properly” incorporated onto the states. Now if folk would like to wake up and do the same for the 2nd we would have much less trouble protecting the rest of our rights (See amendment 9)

          • Vicki

            P.S. Amendment 9 is where the right to keep and bear arms would still be in the Constitution should the 2nd be repealed btw.

        • James

          Vicki, In my above brief, the barron case (1833) stated that the Fifth Amendment restriction also applies only to federal legislation. When we plead the ‘Fifth’ so to speak, we are asserting our right not to incriminate ourselves. If the Fifth Amendment were removed, we should still have that right. The Ninth Amendment’s “The enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights” refers to the rights just mentioned in the preceding eight amendments, it simply states that the restrictive theme of the Bill of Rights applies to all rights whether mentioned therein or not. This amendment was suggested by Alexander Hamilton, he reasoned that if only certain rights were mentioned as being off-limits to the feds they might assume those not mentioned were fair game. The Tenth Amendment doesn’t limit the powers that the people may delegate to the federal government, it just reminds Congress that the only powers it does have are those enumerated in Article I, Section Eight.

          • Vicki

            The tenth does a little more than that.

            “….nor prohibited by it (The Constitution) to the States….”

            Clearly shows that the intent of the Bill of Rights is to apply prohibitions to what powers the people can grant to their state governments.

            This can be clearly seen by reading the entire amendment.

            “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

            So the powers that are NOT delegated to the US Government by the Constitution and are NOT prohibited by the Constitution to the States, are reserved to the States respectively or to the people (if not delegated to the states).

        • James

          Vicki, The U.S. Constitution, Art. I, Sec. 8, is not a limit on what powers we can give to our government. It simply enumerates the powers that we GAVE to the federal government. And, the First Amendment has never been “incorporated onto the states,” as you put it. State constitutions preceded the U.S. Constitution, and rights preceded the state constitutions.
          The Bill of Rights was added to the U.S. Constitution to preclude the possibility that Congress might misconstrue the powers that were granted to them to legislate over rights. It’ a Bill of Don’ts.
          Today, almost everyone refers to their right to bear arms as a Second Amendment right, and/or as a constitutional right, and that has cconfused many into thinking that the Second Amendment IS the right. Not so. It only says the right to bear arms “shall not be infringed,” and the U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly held that that restriction applies exclusively to the federal government.
          As to ‘pleading the fifth,’ this arose in Miranda v. Arizona. The High Court, therein, simply held that criminal suspects must be advised of their right to remain silent, before any questioning may proceed. The Court said every American has this right, not “to be a witness against himself,” and must be reminded of it. It has never held that that right was granted by the Fifth Amendment. Rights, all rights, are inalienable, they are not dependent on any documents.

          • Vicki


            The Bill of Rights is a list of specific rights for which we can not give our government power to infringe. That is why they are there. Now as you and I have both observed the First Amendment only restricts Congress.
            However SCOTUS has disagreed with us and used the 14th to “incorporate” the first.

            The following are Supreme Court decisions that “incorporated” features of the First Amendment to apply to state as well as federal action.

            * Freedom of speech and press: Gitlow v. New York, 268 U.S. 652 (1925). Applied the First Amendment to a New York anti-anarchy law challenged by a Socialist who was arrested for leafleting.
            * Freedom of assembly: DeJonge v. Oregon, 299 U.S. 353 (1937). Overturned an Oregon criminal syndicalism law used to arrest a Communist for organizing a meeting.
            * Free exercise of religion: Cantwell v. Connecticut, 310 U.S. 296 (1940). A victory for a Jehovah’s Witness member arrested for door-to-door soliciting.
            * Establishment of religion: Everson v. Board of Education, 330 I.S. 1 (1947). Applied the First Amendment to a New Jersey law that allowed school boards to reimburse parents for the cost of student transportation to and from parochial schools.

            The 2nd clearly restricts ALL governments as it clearly states that the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall NOT be infringed. Note that, unlike the first, no specific part of government is named.

      • Cindy

        Vicki & James;
        Well now I’m totally confused. Could you both expound a little bit on your cases please.

        • James

          Cindy, The 14th Amendment (1868) made Blacks “citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside…[and]Nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.” Back then, that meant no State could execute, imprison or confiscate property, without due process of law, which some southern States were doing to Blacks. “Liberty” simply meant the absence of incarceration, but the Supreme Court has, since, added other meanings to it. The four cases Vicki cited (Gitlow, DeJunge, Cantwell and Everson) held that, through the 14th Amendment’s due process clause, “liberty” now includes First Amendment rights. In Row v. Wade (1973) the Court added the Abortion right to “liberty” and in Lawrence v. Texas (2003) they added homosexual rights to it (they said those rights were part of the “others retained by the people” in the 9th Amendment).
          This does not mean that the Bill of Rights restrictions now apply to the States, it just means the High Court has expanded on the original meaning of “liberty” in the 14th Amendment. Back then the 14th Amendment just applied to the just freed Blacks, now it applies to all Americans. But inserting rights through its liberty clause has misled many to assume the Bill of Rights now applies to the States. Not so, it is a restriction the States placed upon their new federal government. Again, the Bill of Rights is not the source of our rights, rights are inalienable.

          • Cindy

            Thanks for your replies and Vickis too. You and Vicki have subsequently clarified some of the issues since I asked that que. on June 3. with your post between June 3 to June 6th, however for those of us (me) who have a difficult time understanding and following all the “legalese” the issue still remains cloudy.
            If our inalienable rights are truly “inalienable” how are Chicago and other cities able to put restrictions on law abiding citizens rights
            to own a gun? (Chicago, Wa.DC, etc) No 2nd amendment right/inalienable rights allowed in these cities? What is the legal loophole they are using, or are they just breaking Constitutional law to accomplish this?

          • James

            Cindy, Inalienable means no state or federal government has the power to infringe on our right to bear arms. Unfortunately, that doesn’t mean they can’t, or wont, try to do that. If a State has infringed on that right (like in Illinois), the proper action would be for the offended citizen to file suit in his state court system (like McDonald v. Chicago), charging that that state law has violated Art. I Sec. 22 of the Illinois Constitution. If the federal government has infringed on one’s right, he should file suit in a federal District Court, within his State, charging that such law has violated the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
            Our rights don’t protect themselves, individuals do. The D.C. v. Heller decision (2008) held that a D.C. Ordinance had violated the Second Amendment, federal courts, there, had jurisdiction because D.C. is a federal territory. Federal courts have never held a state law violative of the Second Amendment, because the Bill of Rights restricts the federal government only, as the Supreme Court held in U.S. v. Cruikshank (1875), see my above brief. When the High Court decides McDonald v. Chicago, they will uphold Cruikshank. Mr. McDonald’s beef is with Illinois, not the federal government.

          • Cindy

            Thank you James. I have learned more about the Constitution on this site from posters like you & Vicki & others, than I ever did in school.

          • Vicki

            You’re welcome Cindy. I am glad that even though we (James and I) disagree on some points that we have helped you to think more about these issues and I hope you will study them more and draw your own conclusions.

  • REB

    What the country needs is an open season law, where you tell someone to leave your property if they refuse then pull a gun on them ask only once more then let the county drag their lifeless body off. This would save millions in taxes.

  • Al Sieber

    Here in Arizona we don’t give our 2nd amemd. rights a second thought, we have no problem. to live some place like Chicago and N.Y. and not being able to protect yourself is a crime in itself. I feel bad for anyone that has to live in fear in their own home. this case should be cut and dry.

    • Al Sieber

      I forgot to add, how do you protect yourself in Chicago? why do we have to raise our hands and ask permission just to exercise our God given rights?

      • JC

        It’s an immoral law Al, and according to the Constitution should be null and void.

    • James

      Al Sieber, No one has a ‘second amendment right,’ but everyone has the right to bear arms. Rights are inalienable, they are not dependent on any document for their existence.

  • Dave

    It’s time to begin defunding all of these 60′s thinking groups. The 60′s are gone dude. Only problem is, the old hippies are in office. They need to go! In their own words, don’t trust anyone over 30! The hippies are the socialists and they are running this country at present. Kick em’ all out…NOW! I have a older brother that grew up in the 60′s and has these liberal views. When I present him with facts he turns away and says nothing. He never believes facts and he never changes. Just wants to leach as nuch as he can off other people.


    • Jim Fridas

      That’s what I wrote in another post, liberals are leaches that suck off the backs of the working class whether they are Democrats or Republicans or any other group, think welfare, generation after generation after generation all vote Democrats for the free ride, then there is free housing, free medical free food stamps and any other free things all for those that vote Democrat or socialists feeding off the backs of the working class who pay the taxes while these shiftless lazy useless gold brickers who hate America suck off and sponge off the rest of us! Thank the criminals in the Democrat party.

      • Lee

        Well put! Wisht I had thought to write that!

      • Meteorlady

        The “free” is not free. It is called slavery or government dependance. Though most don’t think of it that way – it’s there and it’s pretty obvious. Since the inception of the War on Poverty there are not 20% more people at the poverty level per capita. Nice to know it’s all working according to the enslavement plan of big government huh?

    • marvin

      Dave i am an old hippe grew up in the 50 and 60 and i think ever one needs a gun that is ever one but a liberal for the simple reason they would most likly shoot them self in the foot and die reason i say foot is if a liberal got shot in the head most likly would go thru and hurt someone beside them an,t nothing in there head to slow a bullet down,as for me i own 3 or 4 or more guns

  • gongdark

    I think the 80 year old overreacted to the situation. He should have called the police in order to have them pick up his body after the robber killed him. F… the Liberal B..tards who want to ban guns.

  • gongdark

    I think the 80 year old overreacted to the situation. He should have called the police in order to have them pick up his body after the robber killed him. F… the Liberal B..tards who want to ban guns.
    You have a right to bear arms if for nothing else than to protect life and property. If the robber was an illegal …..good!!!

    • Jim H.

      The robber had fired 2 shots before the homeowner shot him, so we know the robber intended to kill these people. Had he not ignored Chicago’s hand gun ban he would be dead.

      • Frank

        If a robber enters my house uninvited I will not wait for him to get of the first shot.

        • JC

          Exactly, fire a warning shot through his forehead…then call 911.

          • Steve

            “A warning shot through his forehead” ha ha ha I LIKE that!! ;-)
            That’s good…..Really good!!!!!!

          • http://?? Joe H.

            I like the way you think!! I like it very much!!!

          • Steve

            That’s the second good one JCs’ come up with in two days. I saw on one of the other pages his new campaign slogan for ousting the leftist, dims, and rinos in the Nov. 2010 election.
            It was “Throw the Trash Out in November” or “Take the Trash Out in November” can’t remember which it was but they both work well.
            JC rocks!! :-)

          • Jarhead1982

            Nah, 20 gage #4 shot to the family jewels, pretend you had a hard time shucking another round in and then pop em once more in the face to stop him from hopping around. If they survive, they will never breed again!

          • Jim H.

            Luckily the home owner was a better shot than the home invader.

          • http://?? Joe H.

            Jim H,
            He was probably a vet!!!

          • JC

            I like to think I’m working with basic moral action as my foundation guys…and a little humor doesn’t hurt. ;)
            I still can’t believe someone on the other thread cxalled me a Liberal…hahahaha…Me! A liberal! That’s rich.

          • Jim H.

            JoeH, I don’t know why the article didn’t mention it, he is a Korean War vet. I live west of Chicago and it was mentioned in the local news.

          • http://?? Joe H.

            Jim H.,
            when I was in college in the mid seventies, the vets association did an ice sculpture for the winter carnival and the caption on it is one I’ll never forget. “Your best bet, a fired up vet!” Very apropriate!

  • tahDeetz

    While Daley denies Chicagoans their God-given rights to self-preservation, he himself is protected by a cadre guards with fully-auto weapons.

    Daley believes, just as all mouth-breathing marxists do, that they are “the ones the world has been waiting on” & that the world must not be denied their magnificent presence.

    We The People are not worthy to even breath their rarified air.

    The marxists are aggressively asserting as much control as they possible can prior to the next elections.

    Its not much of a leap to think that the DCCC Party of Cloward-Piven, would resort to a Reichstag incident to cement, or reclaim, their power.

    This is the real reason for gun control. We The People are a direct & existential threat to marxist tyrants in government everywhere.

    Without the 2nd Amendment, the 1st is useless.

    Obama & Co want a marxist utopia; what the US marxist blok will get, is an American Pinochet.

    Is that Pinochet’s HUMVEE is hear in the distance? I will answer his call.


  • Richard

    Only the criminals and or(Politicians) are allowed to have guns in Chicago.

    • Ohyea55

      True, only government can be armed-Daley and his Alderman-iacs and police are allowed. It’s scary when the the government is armed and we are not. The 2nd Amendment was written so that tyrany by our government COULD NOT PREVAIL.

    • independant thinker

      In Chicago they are pretty much the same aren’t they?

  • Geronimo

    Being Indian, I can use the argument that any attempt to disarm me is a violation of my freedom of religion. Being a warrior of the Absarokee, my weapons are sacred and are consecrated to the protection and defense of the people. I can even help in the defense of my paleface brothers because despite past hostilities we are blood brothers and are both fighting against the evil forces that would deny us our freedoms and force their ideologies on us. I have a deep spiritual relationship with my weapons. Out in the woods at home in Montana I carry it for defense rattlesnakes but here in the Pacific Northwest I always carry it as a defense against the two legged rattlesnakes you find around here. When it comes to spiritual warfare, we Native Americans know the drill.

    • scot_belle

      Thank you, Geronimo, you and I…share the same rules. *S*

      • John

        Well said Geronimo, I’m in with you guys.

  • Frank in Arizona

    One of the reasons I left Chicago is its gun laws. RD junior is not even a speck of the old man. I recall a time the old man gave the “shoot to kill” order in 1968. Junior probably would allow the order only for his gang member voting block. Did I mention that the voting block is run from the south side of Chicago. I wonder what notable names are associated with the south side of Chicago?
    Let us not forget a time when junior was suing the gun manufacturers; that he had to back off when it was found out a connection existed between the Chicago PD and organized criminals in Florida about illegal guns and drugs. Access to guns kills more criminals. And criminals are people, too.

    • Geronimo

      The aliance between the politicans and the gangs in Chicago goes back a long way, back to the 1920′s and prohibition, before the laws were passed against fully automatic weapons. Why do you think that the old Thompson Sub-Machine gun was known as the “Chicago Typewriter?”

      • Lee

        One of my professors in college was a former Chicago attorney. Some of his stories even scared the former WWII Marines in the class. One made the remark he had faced Iwo Jima, Guadalcanal, Okinawa and a couple of other bad places, but he would not want to live in Chicago!
        A former boy-friend of mine was from Southern Chicago; he was one of the Army guys who went island-hopping in WWII, but thought Chicago’s way of doing things was fine! He was also part of the immigrant community, being from Germany. Had a lot of different ideas. He also thought Al Capone was the greatest thing since sliced bread because he would hand money out to the immigrants during the depression. I wanted to know where the money came from, but he didn’t question it.
        My late husband was from the Forest Park region of Chicago. He had a completely different mindset from the boyfriend. Some of his stories of depression era Chicago were fascinating! His aunt and uncle lived right down the street from the Valentine’s Day Massacre!
        It is no wonder he moved to Arizona!

  • Clemente

    Mayor Daley,

    How about you live under the same conditions you subject the citizens of Chi-town and fire all of your armed bodyguards? Does that sound fair? After all one of your bodyguards might go loony tunes or have a bad hair day and take out some innocent family.

    That’s what you assume happens everyday among the millions of law abiding gun owners.

  • Jim H.

    Daley gripes the the city is short on money, I wonder how much went to lawyers to fight against his citizens 2nd amendment rights? McDonald vs. The City of Chicago has to run up some hefty legal fees and he knows he is going to lose and he spends the cities money anyway.

  • Frank

    The lib anti- gun elitists will never change their stand. They are blinded by their own ideaology and lust for power. Simply put if you can successfully disarm the citizens you can take total control and enslave the people. That is what all good dictators do- look at history.
    Libs do not want our safety they want to dictate how we live our lives while they do as they please.
    Mayor Daley has armed security- I bet it makes him feel safe.
    Criminals break the law- so more laws have no effect on them.
    The constitution gives the people rights- why do we have to ask permission of our Government to excersize those rights.
    Wake up America.

    • Lee

      I would love to see something bad happen to Sarah Brady! She just went off the deep end when her husband was shot, and, I think it was actually a ricochet, and not a direct shot. Two others were shot directly, but they didn’t whine and cry. I consider her to be one of the biggest wusses there ever was! Get over it, and move on!

      • libertytrain

        Lee this is not to condone Mrs. Brady but I think she went through a lot, ricochet bullet or not – don’t you remember – I think she and her husband both suffered for their unexpected lot in life. I’m not on her side but do feel compassion for that which happened to them. And yes, her husband was shot, not her, but it did change their lives forever.

        • http://?? Joe H.

          I have to agree with you. I wish nothing bad on Ms Brady, misguided as she is. she can not be expected to see things clearly after what happened to her husband but if she doesn’t want to have guns around her then fine don’t have any around her. The thing that she isn’t seeing is if it hadn’t been for the bravery of armed men and women, it very well could have been her as well!

    • Vicki

      Frank, the Constitution does not give rights for it can not. The Constitution LIMITS the powers that we, the people, can give to our Government. That is one of the reasons tyrants so hate what it says and have spent many decades trying to make people forget that the rights belong to us by birthright from our creator.

      The Constitution is there to protect our rights from government power to abridge our exercise thereof.

  • KevinC

    I wholeheartedly agree with your statements. I only wish every state would wake up and allow anyone w/o a record of violent offense be given a CCW permit, if they so choose. That would cause gun-related crimes to drop significantly.

    It’s a historical fact that when the law-abiding citizen is allowed to own, and even carry a concealed weapon or one that is out in the open -not to mention know how to use it responsibly- the chances of a “thug” considering to do something foolish is practically non-existent. Why, because their chances of having the upper hand has been lost and so do their nerve. It is to the owner/handler’s detriment to NOT know how to handle a firearm (and with confidence) in a situation where their, or the perpetrator’s, life hangs in the balance. Most states require a training course before obtaining a handgun if they had not been in the military. I personally knew how to operate and respect a weapon from an early age; nowadays, adults fear letting a child handle or even come close to a “gun” for fear of something happening. It is to their shame when someone fails to fulfill their parental duty when it comes to weapons of any kind with a child whether it be a handgun, rifle, shotgun, doe roller, hoe, baseball bat –you name it.

    Nobody in their right mind would want to confront someone who has a weapon on their person or in their hands and pointing it directly at their head or chest would even consider making a move. Cities across the nation where the common citizen who possess a handgun of some sort have been more peaceful than those without. With that said, why is it so difficult for government to think we are better off to let our safety lay in the hand of local authorities than our own selves?!

    It’s also a historical fact that when a crime is committed, the thug has already fled the scene way before police arrive. So how can they protect us when they aren’t even there while the act of violence is being perpetrated on the average American John Doe. Sure there are moments when they show up during an incident, but that is rare and far in between indeed. If we aren’t able to or prevented from protecting ourselves, our homes, our loved ones, WHO WILL?!?!?!?!

    I say, let every individual who so desires, obtain legally a handgun and learn how to respect & use it responsibly so that when that moment pops up, our fellow police officials are not overtaxed with action. Let them be the ones to clean up the mess, if it’s needed. The government cannot be our conscience, our spiritual guide, or protector; it is up to us to take affirmative action and then when it’s all said & done, deal with the fallout of emotions and red tape that imminently follows.

    • Jim H.

      KevinC, I live in Illinois and I have a Utah concealed carry permit. I can carry in 29 states, but not my own.

    • Frank

      The Supreme Court recently stated that local Police Departments are NOT obligated to defend the public in a case like this. They can only respond after the fact. So we must protect ourselves. Repeatedly the FBI stats show that states with CCW has less violent crime then states that ban legal gun ownership. Yet the anti- gun commies swear by the same talking points that more guns mean more violence. None of the stats prove this out.
      I only wish I could carry openly in NY. Thank goodness that my county issuing Judge is pro gun and pro hunting. He signed my permit with a smile on his face.

      • JC

        That’s great Frank. Good on ya!

  • s c

    A criminal is a PROGRESSIVE. Daley is a criminal (progressive) who doesn’t believe in having weapons. People like Daley are OBLIGATED to uphold the proposition that ALL PROGRESSIVES must stick together.
    Elected CRIMINALS believe that the protection of ‘normal’ unelected criminals amounts to making ‘points’ with them. Each scratches the other’s back, and it’s one, big, happy ‘family.’
    What they won’t know until it’s too late is that when hardcore criminals gain the upper hand, the elected criminals will be ‘expendable’ (like the rest of America).
    It is a matter of two delusional groups working together ‘temporarily.’ The rest of us are caught in the middle.
    A progressive is a progressive is a progressive. Only someone with a death wish would listen to progressives or tolerate them. As for Daley, he needs another brain transplant. The first one didn’t work. His ‘explanation’ proves that.

  • Average Joe

    An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life.
    Robert A. Heinlein

    I am free, no matter what rules surround me. If I find them tolerable, I tolerate them; if I find them too obnoxious, I break them. I am free because I know that I alone am morally responsible for everything I do.
    Robert A. Heinlein

    ‘Nuff said.

    • Carol in AZ

      LOVE THE QUOTES! Thanks.

    • Sheldon

      Great quotes! Did you know that Isaac Asimov once described Robert A. Heinlien as a “flaming liberal”. Did you that Robert A. Heinlien’s classic book ‘Stranger In A Strange Land’ is sometimes referred to as “the unofficial bible of the hippie movement”. Did you know that Heinlein was an active socialist in the 30s and very active for the democratic candidate for the California Governor in the mid 30s. Goes to show that even liberals can get things right every now and then.

  • Eddie Severt

    Here in West Virginia we recently passed a “Castle Law” which makes it legal to protect our own property and life, as well as our neighbors’, by any means needed. I have a rifle, shotgun, and two pistols that are kept loaded and within reach at all times. My grown children were taught from the time they could understand the following rules:

    1. Guns are not toys.

    2. Treat any gun like it is loaded, it probably is.

    3. Never aim at anything you don’t intend to shoot.

    4. Never shoot anything you don’t intend to kill.

    My children never bothered any of our guns and wanted to learn to shoot as soon as they could hold a gun. My wife was also a very good shot. We shot skeet and regularly have target practice on our farm.
    My daughter is a crack shot with any gun I have and so is my son. She had to stay alone last summer while I was away while my wife had cancer treatments(my wife did not survive). I was able to rest a lot easier knowing my daughter had the means to protect herself, knew how to use it, and would not hesitate TO use it.

    • JC

      Good policy Eddie S.

  • libertytrain

    Eddie, good post – and, sorry about your wife -

  • Marilyn

    The Constitution is being violated. It’s just that simple. Americans have the right to bear guns. Now, why was that ever introduced and made part of the Constitution? well, for a lot of reasons. Look what happened in Germany when all firearms were banned. That was part of the big ‘take-over.’ Other countries have tried it and crime rates soared. There is one country that Demands each household has at least one firearm. Their crime rate is next to zero. Check it out on your computers. I am on the side of this 80 year old who decided that if he was going to be harmed, his personal possessions were his and not the thugs, he wasn’t giving up without a fight. We are on a path to have our personal guns removed from our homes and be sitting ducks for the “bad guy.” Does that make any sense? Real criminals will always have guns not matter what the law says…and they aren’t going to be shooting all of the groundhogs that like my house instead of the woods.

    • scot_belle


      I AGREE WITH YOU. Our Constitution is being undermined, and directly attacked, by most of those who are currently in power. Especially those who are pushing a “quasi-Marxis-Socialist Agenda”. It has been for a very long time, and we do need to…make sure to use whatever LEGAL MEANS TO FIGHT for our Constitutionally guaranteed rights.

    • Lee

      There was also Poland, Norway and Denmark. The Nazis waltzed in and took over.
      Eddie, you have taught your children the same way I and my brother were raised. There was only one time my mom had to use a gun to defne our house, and that was in 1939, just before the depression ended. We lived next to the railroad, so we got a lot of hobos and bums. One evidently tried to break in, mom leaned out the kitchen window, with my trembling aunt holding a shaky flashlight. She fired two shots, neither of which hit the bum, which infuriated me! I figured she should have drawn blood if she was going to shoot! My dad was out of town at the time, and later in the week, he came home with my mom’s policeman cousin from San Francisco. While mom felt she had done right by not trying to hit the person, both men agreed with me. She was one of the few people I have ever seen who could shoot a lever-action rifle rapid fire either from the hip or from the shoulder. One did NOT want to be in her sights! She grew up in the early part of the twentieth century in the Jerome/Clarkdale area of Arizona. She saw all sorts of immigrants who came to the mines to work, and some of them weren’t nice. She and her brothers were legend as well as her father and his brothers with their prowess with firearms. No one messed with that family!

      • Jarhead1982

        Lee, only time in 5 occurrences in my life ever pulled the trigger was a funny and painful encounter for the bad guy. Late summer night, early 80′s, been at the beach all day chasing ladies and drinking beer. 3 am, dog begins to bark, window is open and hear a thump. I ease the screen open look down stairs outside and see a guy trying to kick in the basement window. Pulled the 12 ga, loaded with #8 shot and aimed behind him. Well, had lotsa beer and didn’t mean to but put most of that load of # 8 in his butt at about 15 feet distance. Heard a UMPH, he bounced forward, then he got up and sprinted off the property.

        Being the laws weren’t kindly then and I was legally drunk was kinda worried until I realized he couldn’t go to the hospital and would have to have someone pull all that birdshot outa his butt, without a local pain killer, ROTFLMFAO! Having trespassed at a junk yard as a way ward 12 yr old with an old lady owner who was sneakier than Geronimo (sorry buddy, I have sneaked up on a live buck before, she was good) and carried a loaded 12 ga with rock salt, I can attest to the pain of getting nailed and trying to keep it secret from my parents. PS if your with friends and the old lady has rock salt in her shotgun, always be on the outside, not between your friends as you tend to catch center mass on both cheeks!

  • Victor L Barney

    How long has the Chicago Irish-Mob been controlled Mayor Richard Daley and/or his family? Did they come before, during, or after the Italian Mobster got kicked out, or whatever? I’m quite sure that they came before? I can’t recall the Italian, except the he ran Las Vegas and got rubbed-out or something? I say this because Daley seems to own Chicago, although I’m not sure if that includes the Black Mob that Obama came out of, but I’m pretty sure that it would? I know that they have never successfully got any evidence against Daley. Rico law must not work against him?

  • kelly ruggles

    He had every right to shoot the robier. If somebody and when somebody breaks in and harms your family or you and even if you fell like it you have every right to protect your property,and that means if we hafto to kill we will. It is so stupid the flippen liberals piss me off. I bet they have guns, see its ok for them but not us so rong. It is our God giving right to bear arms. I dont fell safe with the goverment having guns and not us,I dont trust them as it is. So what happens when they come armed for us or at us and we have nothing when they come to us with guns. The most frusterating thing is that the crimanals will get them no matter what and we wont be able to cause its the flippen black marget.We should be able to deffend our selves no matter what it is our God giving right . And what about when we got the radical muslims and terriosts which are about the samething. Its not right we need to be able to proctect our selves the goverment wont,they will take their side cause we have a flippen musslim for a president and his nazi regium still if it was their fault and in the rong. and they know all of this already but they dont care. Its about them controlling the hole world and treating us like robots. This is not their place and we are not robots we are human beings that want to live in a free country and not be told what we can and cannot do we do not want a flippen nazi communist hitler and its sad because they are going down the same path and pulling the same thing that hitler did when he took complete controll. This gun issue should not be an issue and should not even be tooken to court, he did not do anything wrong just his God giving right. It pisses me off that the goverment is in everything and has its hand in all of it should not be and again this shouldnt even be a issue and it should of never went to court.We hafto fight and make a loud noise,shake the foundation and be heard and not let this go God says fight for what you love and what you have. I just pray that when the time comes through Gods grace and mercy I mean what I say and stand in boldniess in Christ and His word for I want to be recived not rejected by my God and be wellcomed with Christ open arms

  • Tom in las vegas

    Chicago Mayor Richard Daley said that he understood the frustration that led to the shooting—which is still under police investigation—but that in his view access to guns kills more people than it saves, according to Chicago Sun-Times.

    Hey Daley, tell that to someone who has lost a loved at the hands of some low-life SOB. All due respect Mayor, my opinion is, you have no idea what the hell your talking about. I just hope it never happens to you or someone you love.

  • http://personallibertydigest robert williams

    this is robert you say you want the trouth of how we the people feel abought the pUNISHMENT hE AS wELL AS oTHER cITISINS OF THIS cOUNTRY STILL HAS THE RIGHT TO sELFDEFENCE ALSO THE 2ND ADMENDMENT SAYES THERE SHALL BE NO LAWS TO IMFRENGE UPON THIS RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE SO what part of No dose the Feds NOT Understand Peared.By the way What right dose the Feds Have to Deprive the Citisens Right to vote Our to a court of law in there own Defence if they do there Held in Contempt of Court What Happend to Freedom Of speech then Look at senate bill 3081 The most Corupt Bill of all it Elemanates more Rights of We the People No Maraden Rights No Right to Councel and others Look it up onPdf Senate bill s3081 and read it. i call it Stolen Rights.



    • Bob Wire

      What? hmm?

  • James A Graham

    “Act like you are his friend. Then kill him.” – Sheik Muburak Gilani explaining how to kill American infidels

    Washington, DC-Christian Action Network will show Homegrown Jihad at the Landmark Theater in Washington, DC, on February 11, 2009, at 7:30 pm. There is no charge to attend the viewing. Copies can also be obtained at

    The American public was never supposed to know. The 2006 Justice Department document that exposes 35 terrorist training compounds in the U.S. was marked “Dissemination Restricted to Law Enforcement.” All the copies of Sheik Muburak Gilani’s terrorist training video, “Soldiers of Allah,” had been confiscated and sealed-all of them, that is, except one-that Christian Action Network now reveals in the documentary Homegrown Jihad: The Terrorist Camps Around the U.S.

    It seems unfathomable-nearly three dozen terrorist training compounds in the U.S. and the FBI, Homeland Security, and State Department are no help at all? But the evidence is irrefutable: as Jamaat ul-Fuqra (known in the U.S. as Muslims of America) leader Sheik Muburak Gilani professes on the Soldiers of Allah video, “We are fighting to destroy the enemy. We are dealing with evil at its roots and its roots are America.”

    The Soldiers of Allah training video teaches American students how to operate AK-47 rifles, rocket launchers, and machine guns; how to kidnap Americans and then kill them; how to conduct sabotage and subversive operations; and how to use mortars and explosives.

    With almost 50 terrorist attacks on American soil linked to Jamaat ul-Fuqra-ranging from bombings to murder to plots to blowing up American landmarks-what will it take for the government to protect its citizens from self-professed enemies of Americans? They hide across 35 American cities as innocuous-sounding as Hancock, NY; Red House, VA; and Seattle, WA.

    The allegations are serious, which is why Christian Action Network took more than two years to research Muslims of America-going inside the compounds with their video cameras and questions to confront violence and confirm the truth. Their mission? To make Americans aware of the threats and have Jamaat ul-Fuqra placed on the State Department’s Foreign Terrorist Organization Watch List, thereby shutting down the camps in the U.S. run by ul-Fuqra’s front group, Muslims of America.

    The State Department issued a statement on January 31, 2002, regarding why the group was no longer recognized as a terrorist organization: “Jamaat ul-Fuqra has never been designated as a Foreign Terrorist Organization. It was included in several recent annual terrorism reports under ‘other terrorist groups,’ i.e., groups that had carried out acts of terrorism but that were not formally designated by the Secretary of State. However, because of the group’s inactivity during 2000, it was not included in the most recent terrorism report covering that calendar year.”

    The effect of being removed from terrorist reports? In January 2002 Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl was kidnapped and later beheaded while attempting to attend an interview with Jamaat ul-Fuqra leader Sheikh Mubarak Gilani.

    Was this an isolated incident? Hardly. In March 2003, Fuqra and al Qaeda member Iyman Faris pled guilty in federal court to a plot to blow up the Brooklyn Bridge, and the list goes on.

    According to a 2006 Department of Justice report, “Today, Jamaat ul-Fuqra has more than 35 suspected communes and more than 3,000 members spread across the United States, all in support of one goal: the purification of Islam through violence.”

    In 2005, The Department of Homeland Security predicted that Muslims of America will continue to strike in the United States-yet they are still not listed on the State Department’s Foreign Terrorist Organization Watch List. “Other predicted possible sponsors of attacks include Jamaat ul-Fuqra, a Pakistani-based group that has been linked to Muslims of America.”


    What we are witnessing here is kind of a brand-new form of terrorism. These home-grown terrorists can prove to be as dangerous as any known group, if not more so.

    -Special Agent Jody Weis, FBI

    We must also work to protect our country against the next attack-terrorism spawned right here among us.

    -Senator Joseph Lieberman

    These home-grown terrorists may prove to be as dangerous as groups like al Qaeda, if not more so.

    -FBI Director Robert Mueller

    • scot_belle

      Thank you James, this is information that most everyone in this country, needs to be aware of.

      The few bands, of radical Islam, who preach this attitude-behavior are what we have to be wary of. Islam, like Christianity, is actually a peaceful religion; HOWEVER, in the hands of sociopaths who corrupt the texts, both of these religions can wreak havoc and misery. Unfortunately, not all radicals, come with signs on them.

    • Lee

      My Air Force son was part of a security/terrorist group at Davis Monthan in the early eighties. It was part of an experiment, but had some incredible success. He was telling me that just before the Olympics in L.A. in 1984, their group was alerted to the presence of four possible terrorist groups in the country. They and other top security groups traced three of the jihadist groups, the fourth was never found. He feels that much of the trouble since could be laid to this group.

  • Rich

    wild west was only in hollywood, and the FBI shows facts that the more honest private gun owners there are , the safer their community is!! the media and political leader just lie to the sheeple ….crime is money, revenue for the county coperation (city and county governments) to make a profeit

  • http://GOGGLE vaksal


  • Millard Shirley

    Daley’s comment concerning Chicago’s gun ban is typically ultra-progressive leftist – with personal Chicago thugs as bodyguards, he and his ilk have no security concerns. Too bad about the scared-to-death 80 year olds; in any case he understands their concerns.

  • John

    I live in California where I had to buy “another” license in order to buy another gun last year. To get my monies worth, I used my license to buy 3 more guns than I originally intended to, over the course of 6 months.
    I know some liberal idiot is wondering why so many guns. I like guns so I collect them. I’m also trained in using guns and I will also train my children to properly use them too.

  • Norman

    Only FREE people have guns. Support the second amendment.Urge all polticians to vote against Hillary’s Small Arms Treaty. Read it and become familiar with it. It could affect you. It, like the healthcare bill, the patriot act, all have hidden clauses and meanings. They think they are so smart. We are not stupid. we are just not paying attention. They are taking our freedoms because we don’t pay attention. Wake up.

  • Frank the Libertarian

    The Bottom line is that Guns are the only property that give power to the people and it “can/could” empower a Free people to revolt against a dictatorial power which would try to enslave them. Leader/politicians/or anyone who fears that has a guilty conscience and is afraid of honest gun owners..tells it all now doesnt it!

  • Antonio

    wow out of all the comments i just read not one person has stated why they REALLY want your guns.

    Listen people the main point behind all this gun control crap is to implement the new world order. They are ready, they have the concentration camps, they the foreign troops here, they their equipment here,and they have already brainwashed most of the American people to believe that they are good. I mean after all they take care of you dont? food stamps need i continue??? The people trust the government. Dumb sheep. The only thing they dont have is take a guess.


  • Meteorlady

    Two questions:

    When was the last time you heard of the police showing up BEFORE a crime or murder was committed?
    When was the last time a gun actually jumped up and killed someone?

    I feel much safer in Texas than I would in Chicago because we have a lot of armed civilians and we know how to use the guns we openly carry. It’s sort of hard for a criminal to bring himself to rob me when there is a gun visible on my person.

    • http://?? Joe H.

      Like they say,”When seconds count the police are just minutes away”!

      • Cindy

        A 911 police dispatcher asking you 20 freakin questions before they will send out a cop, because said dispatcher doesn’t understand the definition of an emergency,,,,,, OR a gun in your hand. Not a tough choice, grasshopper.

        • Claire

          Cindy–I will agree with you on your statements. I have heard the “real thing” and they do ask so many questions, that by the time the police get there, it is all over with, the crime has been committed.

  • silvereagle

    If someone breaks in my home and I am there.They will need a few body bags to pick up all the pieces.That is all I have to say!

    • JeffH

      Amen…15rds of 147gr silvertip 9mm

      • independant thinker

        I prefer 7 rounds of 230 grain 45 acp.

  • Brandy40

    I hope true justice is served in this lawsuit. The courts are becoming too liberal in my thinking and are more sympathetic to criminals than the victims of crime.

    My take on this is that the gentleman had every right to shoot that robber. I can’t imagine anyone in their right mind having a problem with that. That bastard deserved to be shot.

    As for banning guns, saying it would save lives, that’s absurd…pure hogwash. The only way to save lives is to get them out of the hands of criminals and terrorists. We know that isn’t going to happen, so the only way, obviously, is to eliminate criminals and terrorists. If the government can’t or won’t do it, the citizens must have guns to protect themselves. If they come after us, we simply have to shoot the bastards ourselves.

    As for me, I’m a pistol-packing 70-year old great-grandma and wouldn’t hesitate a second to shoot an attacker. I’m fed up and would shoot first and ask questions later. I think I could do adequate damage with a 357 Magnum. People are having security systems installed around our neighborhood, but I can’t afford it so I’m putting up a sign on my property.

    To all Robbers…Make My Day!
    Angry Armed Granny on Duty 24/7

    • tracycolorado

      You go girl !

  • http://charter howe

    When these leader wannabe’s figure out how to keep the guns away from criminals who have no intention to obey the law, they may quit trying to infringe on the 2nd amendment rights which lawful Americans feel is their unalienable right. Texas was a wide open side arms show during the wild west days, but to carry a handgun concealed in the state of Texas, a lawful citizen must attend a class taught by a qualified fire arms instructor and pass a background check and of course qualify by taking a written test and live firing on the gun range. You don’t need a gun license for hunting with a shotgun or rifle just a hunting license. A concealed carry license is all that should be expected by the USA mafia king Mayor Daley and his cronies. Instead of reasonable gun laws to insure granny doesn’t blow her toe off or accidently killl a neighbor he wants a radical no guns law which he will never get. Criminals cannot afford to avoid carrying a gun because it is instrumental in their success to rob, kill and otherwise plunder, and many law abiding citizens will be criminalized because they fear for their life and want to carry firearms protection. Te people who don’t carry because of Daleys stupid ill advised talking point will be at the mercy of a ton of thugs. The police in Chicago are somewhat impotent toward the gangs and slum areas that breed violence. I was raised in a ghetto so I know what I’m talking about. After 29 years in the military I would feel naked without my piece, but I would never use it except to protect my life or the lives of family or innocent victims of a crime. The training is recurring for carry permits and solves lots of problems with weapons mismangement and clearly defines the laws on the books. Daley wants to do away with all firearms except for the one he carries, but he is not of this world if he thinks he can pull that act off. Why do the democratic liberals always think they know best for the folks who don’t want govt poking their noses into our business. Make sure the Fire Dept, Police and city workers do their job and leave WE THE PEOPLE to take care of ourselves. It would help if Daley would get off his fat ass and ratchett up on the gangs units because right now that is the biggest sore on the high incidence of violent crimes. You people need to vote those do nothing democrats out of office because corruption is so wide spread in Chicago even the Mafia doesn’t want to relocate there to compete with the Mexican drug cartels. I have a friend in Calif that I keep telling to do the same. I believe its idiotic to do the same thing (like voting for liberals) year after year to solve our serious problems and expecting a different result.
    Send them to Texas we’ll use them for border patrol on midshift.

  • http://gmail i41

    Democrats that the NRA give passing grades, do everyone a disservicer. I pulled out of the NRA because the the demcrats in politics got passing grades, when in the real world, the democrats went the sleazy way and passed bills taking away rights by defending the UN at all times and voting for bills to limit ammo sales, and doing the tearing slowly around the edges of gun and ammo ownership. You need to really look at all democrats to see how they hide their true veiws. They all are against hand gun ownership, next time you get to confront a democrat on why they want restrictions on the number of shells in a magazine, ask why the hell do they need a multi cylinder high horse powered engine in their vehicles in Washington, a lawn mower motor should be enough power to put put around in the beltway.

    • Sandra

      The NRA gives those dems “passing grades” because they are politically conservative with regards to the Constitution, (2nd amendment) even though they may be fiscally irresponsible liberals. ie: They don’t give a rats ass if they spend a lot of money as long as they don’t subvert the 2nd amendment.
      My state has one dem who I give an “A” for never voting for any anti-2nd amendment bill, even though he is right in the lead as far as social spending programs.
      There are also 2 dems in Montana (I think) who were responsible for getting the government to release all the used military brass for the private reloaders, instead of destroying it like the gov. had wanted to do. There ARE some dems that are pro 2nd amendment, just like there are some rinos who are anti-2nd and vote for every gun control bill that comes down the pike. You just have to sort them out, or let the NRA do it for you.
      If the NRA does give a rep a good score, and then later that rep turns on us, and votes for ANY gun control bill, the NRA makes it a point to tell you/us about it in their next update.
      Harry Reid is one of those democratic conundrums. One of the biggest “fiscal” liberals in DC, but gets good grades from the NRA because of his 2nd amendment support. You just have to decide if the Constitution and the 2nd amendment is more important to you, or the fact that the rep. spends more or less money. Personally I always vote for the most Constitutional candidate. I vote for 2nd amendment candidates first, and “no new taxes” next.
      You should really rethink your resignation from the NRA. It is the largest pro 2nd amendment organization worldwide, and has done a lot to defend your 2nd amendment rights. Even if you don’t want to rejoin the NRA, you can sign up for their daily email updates that will keep you informed on nation wide, state by state, pro and anti 2nd amendment legislation.

    • Bob Wire

      I41″I pulled out of the NRA because the the demcrats in politics got passing grades, when in the real world, the democrats went the sleazy way”

      There’s no need of you holding back on us now, why don’t you tell us how you really feel? So? what are you going to join next? I think you’d make a perfect suicide bomber myself, think of the “glory” that could be yours!

      • Julie

        That time of the month Bob?

  • XDM

    Daley- you communist piece of trash…..pop 50 rounds of .40 caliber hollowpoints in your big mouth and chew boy chew!

  • IronHorse

    I don’t give a flying rat’s ass what any government says about any guns.
    I have mine, and I’ll keep mine…

  • Maverick

    I could speak volumes about this matter, but I will restrain myself. In my opinion, ‘justice’ was better served in the 1800′s than what we currently have. Right was right and wrong was wrong. The First and Second Amendments are two of the most important government pieces of legislature we have. Even having been involved in law enforcement for 13 years, I can appreciate the right of an individual to own a firearm. It’s sad, the mainstream media does not report the number of lives that have been saved by individuals who have been able to protect themselves and the ones they love. I have several guns in my house, none of which are registered. And, I have no fear or reservation of using any of them. Even the ‘Carry Concealed’ permit is a way of telling the Gov. that you own a firearm. If they wish to disarm me, the will get my guns, one bullet at a time. This is HOGWASH !!!

  • Stephen Russell

    Wrong Daley your actions & your “Machine” allows them to have Guns.
    I wont go to your city without one.
    Make mine a Biggie, One hit & hes F**** for life.
    See Israeli raid on Gaza ship.
    Same MO.
    Or lose the city to crime & NO Taxes.

  • Oags

    To ban guns is just stupid. All you have to do is look at the U.K.
    They band guns back in 1997 or 98 and their crime rate has risen by over 340%. Yeah great idea. Do you really think that the crooks give a damn about anti gun laws? All you are doing is taking guns out of the hands of law abiding citizens and doing nothing about getting them out of the hands of the crooks.
    Let’s quote Hitler: “The most foolish mistake we could make would be to allow the subject races to possess arms. History shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by so doing.” Shouldn’t this be enough of a reason?

    • http://?? Joe H.


  • Bob Wire

    The only guns that every killed anyone that I’m aware of were due to faults of improper usage, defective materials or workmanship.

    Anyone else know of a case where a gun jumped up and killed anyone?

    • Steve

      Bob Wire,
      I’ve never, ever heard of a single case of a gun killing anyone due to a defect in “materials or workmanship” in the modern era 1960-2010 that was manufactured in the US (and was not modified by some no nothing guru).
      The only convoluted connection that could be misconstrued as a “malfunction” that caused lost lives, (during this era) was due to a design flaw for a “particular climate”, NOT a defect in materials or workmanship, on the first generation AR-15 (before it was modified with the forward assist) that jammed in the humidity and jungle grime of Viet Nam.
      But those caused deaths of our military BECAUSE THEY DIDN’T FIRE because they didn’t PROPERLY LOAD THE ROUND, and NOT because they went off accidentally and plugged someone.
      Can you give us JUST ONE (1) example of a US manufactured gun that has killed somebody due to a defect in materials or workmanship?

      Zip guns made by gang members in the barrio of south central LA don’t count.
      Guns that have been modified by Guido the gun guru, to a state other than which they left the manufacturer don’t count.

      I’m talking about guns manufactured by bonafide American Arms Manufacturing Companies.

      • http://?? Joe H.

        My 9MM is made in Datona Beach Fla. and I’m well pleased with it!!!

        • Steve

          Yeah Joe,
          I like the quality of American made when it comes to guns. I know the Germans used to be the class of the field with the machining in the ’40s and ’50s but we caught up. I’m glad you’re happy with your 9 Joe.
          What manufacturer is it? I can’t remember which ones are in Florida.

          • independant thinker

            My handguns are CZ and Ruger. All are quality firearms and with one exception (CZ-52)very accurate.

          • Steve

            I have a couple Ruger rifles & I like them, but all my pistols are Colts. Some of my friends have Redhawks & Blackhawcks.

  • Myron

    I’m a retired police officer with 30 years of service. Most of those years I did traffic enforcement. I used to wondered why they didn’t allow officers to patrol in unmarked cars if they really wanted us to catch violators. As we’re all aware violators won’t violate the law when there’s black & white nearby, but there’s so few of us. If the officers were driving unmarked vehicles every vehicle would could be a potential police officer. Most everyone wouldn’t take the chance to violate the law.

    The same holds true about armed citizens. If the bad guys knew that his or her state allowed everyone, with proper controls, to carry concealed weapons they’d do their dirty deeds where that wasn’t allowed.

    I only thank President Bush for permitting retired peace officers to carry concealed firearms in all 50 states. I wish all of law abiding citizens could do the same.

  • CA

    Alex, I HAVE listened to Rachel Madcow. She is a lunatic leftist. There is nothing open-minded about the left. They don’t think for themselves. They swallow the liberal rant and regurgitate it. They spew hatred.

    • http://none Alex

      Dear Caca–you make no sense–as I said–try to get your information from various sources, not just one. Intelligent people read and CONVERSE with others–we don’t just sit around and watch the radio or listen to the tv. The rest of the world laughs at us because of our stupidity–we have some fundamental rights like speech and assembly that much of the rest of the nations would benefit–but our stupidity and greed undermines it all.
      We are worse than the Nazis—in less than two centuries we committed enough genocide and forced relocation to make Heinrich Himmler envious. America is a lie–my own son wanted to join the service after 9-11 but thank God I talked him out of it and got him to read the right books and learn the true story of this Evil Empire. HAA! six or seven years ago he wanted to join the Army and go die, not for his country or his family, but for Capitalism. Thank God I taught him right!

      • JeffH

        …to call yourself intelligent is a misnomer…to live in a country you hate is stupidity…

      • Cindy

        I think you would be happier if you relocated to Venezuela, Cuba, Somalia, or any of a number of those “other liberated countries”.
        Bon Voyage comrade !!

        • http://?? Joe H.

          I can wholeheartedly recommend that tropical paradise VietNam!!!!

          • Cindy

            I don’t know Joe. Viet Nam might be tame now compared to what it was in the 60s and 70s when you were there. Personally I would like to send him (& the rest of the liberals in this country) to Machmoud Amadimijad and tell him that he spits in his face, spits on Allah, pisses on the Quoran and wants to be Machmouds gay lover ha ha ha… How long do you think he’d last with that resume’

    • Claire

      I truly believe both parties spew hatred. One is no better than the other at this time.

      • Claire

        I stated this comment just as my own thoughts, this is not aimed at anyone on this post. I want to make that clear.

    • Bob Wire

      yes she is and no she doesn’t. She is extremely gifted, very bright and seems to enjoy women am much as I do! So she can’t be all bad!

      You just don’t agree with what she says. ~ You share with me just one of her “embellishments” ~ just one.

      And I share one of ~ say, hmm? Rush’s, ~ what you say? We got a deal? I’ll do you one better, You give me just one and I’ll give you two!

    • Duende

      I’d give you that CA if you could just apply the same to the right wing. See that’s the problem. Both wings think the other wing is screwed up and the bird just sits on the ground due to lack of cooperation. We could really fly if both wings would get their heads out of their asses, and see how they them selves have been duped. Namaste God Damn it.

  • http://gmail i41

    Wire, I don’t need to join any damned organization, to own or carry a gun. If you are one of the National Socialist Democrats Party pee brains, join them and be a party member for all I care. I left the NRA because they are trying to be PC with “centist” democrats, in to days BS world, there is not one conservative democrat. All dems, no matter the crap they spew, they want gun laws of some form and kind. Compromise only means you are giving in slowly to the communist bastards. When the NRA gets their crap together , and really follows dems and their votes on everything, not just picking and choosing on certain issues, then I join up again. Until then I stay in the Tea Party crowd. Come on my property with a night gown and a diaper around your head, you will be eating dirt one way or another, and if you want to get squirrel, it will not be to long of a wait, my horses don’t like the smell of camel jockeys or democrats, and neither do I!

    • Bob Wire

      >>Wire, I don’t need to join any damned organization, to own or carry a gun. << Your approval rating just went up 15 points.

      Not one to be asking for permission myself.

      "Badges?" We don't need no stinking badges!"

      As for Maddow, ~ yep, she's about as far left as you can go without going off the chart. That said , she's accomplished in many areas, Rhodes Scholar and can articulate extreme well, able to separate facts from fiction. ~ She's a product of Law abiding citizens, and would have a difficult time surviving in a harsher climate. The world she lives in has been created and maintained by more conservative thinking. I enjoy her left views ~as I might enjoy Bill O Reilly right, while perhaps not supporting either. ~ We have many talents and skills to draw from, but it a fools folly to misapply them. Choose the right talent of the job at hand for effective results.

      as for firearms, ~ For the record, I don't have any.

    • Bob Wire

      >>”All dems, no matter the crap they spew, they want gun laws of some form and kind.”<<

      there you go , painting with that wide brush again.

      Don't you ever tire of being right only 50% of the time?

      Leaving the balance to be wrong. For 50/50 odds really sucks!

      Sir! even a broken clock is correct two times in every 24 hours.

      So ~ think about it and work on your accuracy as you attempt write a more "believable" post as you paint your adversary with nasty colors.

      It makes it clear to us, you are clueless to political affiliation but just cracking wise and throwing paint around, hoping to hit someone. Glenn Beck is a political entertainer and paid quit well for making out outlandish statements in some effort to misrepresent the facts and program the masses of mullet heads.

      Are you being paid big bucks to say such things or are your just the reason Glenn is payed big bucks?

      This kind of thinking fails to serve anyone. In fact it's "not thinking" at all but just repeating what you heard somewhere and void of cognizance thought.

      To make a point; "Nappy Haired hoes" ~ these are not Don Imus words, but words he heard somewhere, words he borrowed from somewhere.

      Now Don Imus is retied, out of business, not needed, don't call us, we'll call you.

      Words spoken are like bullets coming out of a gun barrel, can't be unspoken, recalled, put back where they came from, no harm no foul. Everyone is left live with the results.

      Now ~ how hard is it to understand, you don't call peoples "children" nappy haired hoes ? much less on national Television? It's unwise borrow other peoples thoughts, repeat their very words, have some of your very own, founded by your own "efforts"

      The way you talk, ~ the beaches of Normandy was stormed by a bunch republicans. There would be no demand for guns if it wasn't for Republican.

      Are you telling me Ira Hayes was a Republican? I know Audy Murphy was.

      The points is, ~ this dividing the world as you attempt to do, is just plain insanity.

      Making you only someones puppet.
      and Joe, you nailed it, the ingredient required to kill ~
      "The one most important part you left out is the WILL to use it "

      Will and Intent ~ or willful intentions

      • Cindy

        Bob Wire,
        …and sometimes you are not 50% correct either Bob. Imus’s words were… “nappy headed hos” not nappy haired hos, and my Afr. Amer. gf laughed her “nappy head” silly for 5 minutes straight, she thought it was so damn funny. If you read Louis’s post you might better understand just why some people are offended by certain remarks, whereas others are not. Read carefully what he says about Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton and the agitators. The real racists are usually the first to stir the pot, as well as all the “holier than thous” because of their need to elevate themselves above everyone else. It gives their insecure personalities, security in themselves.

        re: The clock.. In your rush to chide i41 YOU have used a rather WIDE brush yourself Bob. Your wide brush has conveniently given this clock accuracy parameters of one hour in 24H, as opposed to 1440 minutes in 24H. Who do you know that would consider a clock to be right if it was in real time almost an hour off (59 minutes)? Using your “hours” parameter you are saying the clock (which says “for example” 4:00 o’clock twice a day) is accurate from 3:01 real time, all the way until it is 4:59 real time.
        Even using your WIDE brush analogy of hours, that still only gives the clock an accuracy rating of 0.08% Not very good, but using minutes which is more within the realm of most peoples definition of accuracy, the rate drops to 0.001% Is that an accuracy rating you would be happy with Bob?

        Your writing, for the most part is very eloquent, but your wide brush analogies, ragged vaguer, and superfluous ambiguities, many times leave your arguments cloudy, and unintelligible.
        wide brushes Bob…wide brushes……..

        • Bob Wire

          Thanks Cindy, I’ll consider your thoughts. I think we all have our moments, some less inspired then others. I enjoy left handed compliments and comments that lean to the right.

          I consider it 3 AM, twice each day. It’s true, the accuracy being very brief. So wide brushes fail to offer much detail leaving “any accuracy” to the sport of debate. So we might well say 3′ish strengthing our position of debate?

          The sport of throwing horseshoes and hand grenade has it’s appeal and the weapon of choice of many. To just get close is considered a score. Myself, I prefer one target and one round and a flame thrower for a backup.

          • Bob Wire

            >>”Bob. Imus’s words were… “nappy headed hos” not nappy haired hos, and my Afr. Amer. gf laughed her “nappy head” silly for 5 minutes straight, she thought it was so damn funny.”<<

            The error fails to change the thrust of my argument or the borrowing of someone else's words can boomerang on you. ~

            Don't call me Sonny, that's privilege left only for the aged, the right to say anything is not granted to everyone.

            And evidently, everyone didn't share your GF's light sense of humor, in spite of Imus's long history of service, social work and apologizing all over himself.

            As a combat vet, I've been asked how I shot women and children. To which I replied, You just don't lead them as far.

            Now that might be funny to some people, but it's really not funny at all. Am I permitted to say it?

          • Cindy

            For me it was an oh sh*t moment, because I have been conditioned by the racist and their political correctness, and continual stirring of the pot, to have a knee jerk reaction to any things such as that being said. I couldn’t believe he had said it, and I expected my gf to be really sad and disappointed at such an utterance, but she is not racist, so it didn’t bother her. She is able to laugh it off, just as whites laugh off “honkey” “cracker” and the plethora of other verbage thrown around. It’s a “consider the source” type of thing. She got over that kind of crap years ago, and has moved on to bigger and better things.

          • Bob Wire

            Well, Thank goodness for people like her. We need more of them.

            I’m like you, I was very surprised he thought something like that would float, considering his profession. He was suckered into it in a way, but he shouldn’t have been. He should have been wiser.

            I think we all hear things everyday, casual comment, explicative, things we might find funny, amusing or interesting. It should be a deliberate act to accept, claim and use them as your very own.

            nappy haired hoes, is not one, I share or have common ground with on any level, while I too have darker shades of pale friends that have “bad hair days” seven out of seven.

            But that’s just me, I don’t attempt to “be or project” something other then “me”. I’ve found it makes life much simpler and easier to live.

            Call me crazy, but I thought Don Imus was too!

  • http://gmail i41

    Sandra, the democrats in my state along with Montana, now sell the militaryy brass to the Chinese. Again democrats talk out of both ends of their frames. The reason I know is because I used to by used 50 cal brass and reload. China has us by not only our pockety book but also our brass. That is why Onumnutt had Killary sign on to the Useless Numshull Organation to control with the muslim executive orders to slow down and decrease ammo. If you don’t beleive me try and spin it, it is still the facts!

    • Sandra

      The government WAS shredding the once fired military brass and selling it to China, but that has changed. Please read the article below. You will find that we do have some good pro-2nd amendment Democrats.

      Feds Undercut Ammo Supply

      Defense Dept. policy reversed after
      intervention by 2 Montana Senators

      Posted: March 17, 2009
      9:00 pm Eastern
      By Drew Zahn
      © WorldNetDaily

      Fired brass shell casings

      Responding to two Democratic Senators from Montana, representing outraged private gun owners, the Department of Defense announced last night it has scrapped a new policy that would deplete the supply of ammunition by requiring destruction of fired military cartridge brass.

      The policy already had taken a bite out of the nation’s stressed ammunition supply, leaving arms dealers scrambling to find ammo for private gun owners.

      Mark Cunningham, a legislative affairs representative with the Defense Logistics Agency, explained in an email last night to the office of Sen. Jon Tester D-Montana, that the Department of Defense had placed small arms cartridge cases on its list of sensitive munitions items as part of an overall effort to ensure national security is not jeopardized in the sale of any Defense property.

      The small arms cases were identified as a sensitive item and were held pending review of policy, he said.

      “Upon review, the Defense Logistics Agency has determined the cartridge cases could be appropriately placed in a category of government property allowing for their release for sale,” Cunningham wrote.

      The Defense Department liaison was responding to a letter yesterday to the Defense Logistic Agencys’ Vice Admiral Alan S. Thompson from Tester and fellow Montana Democrat Sen Max Baucus. The senators argued “prohibiting the sale of fired military brass would reduce the supply of ammunition – preventing individual gun owners from fully exercising their Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms. We urge you to address this situation promptly.”

      One of the companies that brought attention to the issue is Georgia Arms, which for the last 15 years has been purchasing fired brass casings from the Department of Defense and private government surplus liquidators. The military collects the discarded casings from fired rounds, then sells them through liquidators to companies like Georgia Arms that remanufacture the casings into ammunition for the law enforcement and civilian gun owner communities.

  • Christopher51

    I think that George Washington summed it up when he said, “A free people ought not only to be armed and disciplined, but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from any who might attempt to abuse them, which would include their own government.”

    And as Thomas Paine once said, “It is the duty of every patriot to protect his country, from its government.”

    Laus Deo

  • Julian Snead

    This immigration stuff is just one more nail in the coffin of America. United States of America OUT GOING,INCOMING American Union. Laws are being re-written without the general publics knowledge. Divide and Conquor is a very powerful concept and it works like a charm. Good-bye America it was fun while it lasted.
    It’s to bad Americans don’t own America.

    • Bob Wire

      can’t argue with you there, but your warning 30 years late, must has got lose in the mail somewhere.

  • bruce

    more guns means less crime while fewer guns mean more crime just look at detoilt,d.c.,nyc.most murders in america are committed by negroes and mexicans as is most of the crime.if those two groups are removed from the equation we would have the lowest crime rate in the industrial world. statistics are at f.b.i and justice department all though some lump caucasians and mexicans together in order to make it look like caucasians are as bad as the negroes do.i know i will be called names but truth is truth so fire away.

    • http://?? Joe H.

      I’m not gonna call you names, I’m just gonna say GET OFF the RACIST B.S.!!!On second thought, If brains were dynamite, you couldn’t blow your nose!!!

      • Sheila

        Joe, though I don’t agree with the way he worded that, statistics bear him out.

        • http://?? Joe H.

          I know they do, but the way he worded it was just plain racist!!

          • Louis

            Shiela and JoeH;
            Do you think it was racist because Bruce used the term negro? Personally I don’t think it is. If he had used the other n word then yes that would be inexcuseable. Negro was actually what we wanted to be called up untill about 1970, but we have changed what we’ve wished to be called so many times now, that I don’t see how anyone who didn’t have their true roots in Africa could possibly keep up. Negros, blacks, Africans, Afrikans, African Americans, what’s next? ha ha… I may have even forgotten a few. The only people who really make a big issue out of it are people like Rev. Al Sharpton, and Jessee Jackson, and the only people who follow them are zealots who could be called more racist than a white person who uses the wrong word. Those 2 leaders have done some good things for my people, but they are in the game more for the money than for our people now [in my opinion]. They have everybody so bullied and buffaloed about useing perfect precise exact non racial words and language that people don’t even know what to say anymore and are so scared of saying the wrong thing that they end up saying the wrong thing. Do you understand? Jackson and Sharpton think they are Martin Luther King and they are not! They are Not even close but they pretend for the money my opinion] I think this political correct stuff has got to stop. It is doing nobody any good and just serves to drive the races farther apart. I really believe this. If there were no Jacksons, Sharptons, Rev Jeramiah Wrights<<there's a real winner… Louis Farakahns and the rest of the agitators stirring crap up all the time, we would all be fine with each other. If someone made a mistake with a word, it would not be a big issue because those 5 or 6 agitators wouldn't be screaming about it all the time. People would mellow out toward each other if the agitators weren't always making a big stink about everything. Does this make sense to you? You guys can relax and not worry so much about it. Everybody has a hundred things they've said that they wish they hadn't and most of it was to people of their own race and to their own families and friends. So just relax a little cus Jessee and Al have you all wound up too tight. Sorry to post so much on the wrong page, but I saw your post and I just thought I should tell you.

    • Bob Wire

      “all though some lump Caucasians and Mexicans together in order to make it look like Caucasians are as bad as the Negroes do.i know i will be called names but truth is truth so fire away.”

      I don’t see that as a racist statement. But someone questioning the stats.

      As Mark Twain put it; “: “There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics. …”

      I feel it “in bounds”

      Texas Tech had a contest; who could best define; “political correctness” And the winner was; “the willful endevear to pick up a turd by the clean end”



  • Boo Ewald Taylor

    It’s so cut and dried, more citizens acquire guns for protection, the crime goes down. Especially when they are not afraid to use them in self defense. There is not one bad thing about owning a gun/weapon, it’s the lack of knowledge of how and when to use it.

    • http://?? Joe H.

      Boo Ewald,
      The one most important part you left out is the WILL to use it if needed! The only people that a crook will disarm are the ones that don’t truly have the will to shoot!

  • Lea

    You know, recently there were FOUR – not one, not two, not even three, but four knife attacks at schools in China, where several young children were knifed to death, and many more were wounded. This bit about outlawing guns so only outlaws will have guns is pure B.S.!!! If someone wants to commit a crime, they will find a way to do it, whether it is a gun, a knife, or rocks and sticks.

    • Jim H.

      The first reported murder, Cain killed Abel with a ROCK. People killed each other before gun powder was invented.

  • Obert

    alex does not understand that a well regulated millita means that the millitia trains on shooting and keeps a weapon in his or her possessin so when called into service they have a weapon to use immeadiatly. they would in some cases travel a long way. so to train and have a weapon was necessary. Our founding fathers were not dummies, only they did not know that later on we would have polliticians that would want to controll us and to do that would take our guns away from us. and that has happened. we are now defenceless against a totallatian government. just look at all the things they are dictating to us under threat of government guns. and make no mistake the mean just that. they have the guns and we have what they want. he who has the guns rules. you think i am crazy just read the federalist papers to see the intent of our founding fathers. it is written that he who gives up a right to get safety will sure lose both.


Sign Up For Personal Liberty Digest™!

PL Badge

Welcome to,
America's #1 Source for Libertarian News!

To join our group of freedom-loving individuals and to get alerts as well as late-breaking conservative news from Personal Liberty Digest™...

Privacy PolicyYou can opt out at any time. We protect your information like a mother hen. We will not sell or rent your email address to anyone for any reason.