Video Podcast – Censorship, Gun Control and Red Flag Laws

by: Brent Smith at the Common Constitutionalist

A California man has been banned from Twitter after creating a video of himself shooting an effigy of Parkland student David Hogg for target practice. And he then wonders why Twitter pulled down the video.

Twitter had every right to yank what he calls “performance” art. But no one has the right to confiscate his weapons. He’s not a danger to society – he’s just a dope, looking for his 15 minutes of fame.

Yet this is what these new State Red Flag Laws seek to do. They begin as law for the “good of society,” but in time will further erode our natural right to keep and bear arms, as the State seeks to expand the law beyond its original intent. read more

Weapon Wednesday – Marines Get New Sniper Rifle

U.S. Marine Corps photo by Lance Cpl. Audrey M. C. Rampton

The U.S. Marine Corps is replacing its existing sniper rifles with a newer model that fires a heavier, longer-range bullet. The new Mark 13 Mod 7 sniper rifle, a favorite of Navy SEALs is replacing the older M40 series of rifles. The result is a more accurate rifle with the potential to hit targets at nearly three quarters of a mile. read more

Never Show off a Gun in Diner Filled with Leftists

by: Brent Smith at the Common Constitutionalist

Scroll Down for Audio Version

It seems that yet another Republican has stepped in it and democrats intend to take full advantage.

How long will it be before spineless Republicans, cut Representative Ralph Norman (R-S.C.) loose before running for the tall grass?

In case you’re unfamiliar – here’s what happened.

Ralph Norman, as he has done in past, recently had a get together at a restaurant in Rock Hill, S.C., that he calls “Coffee with Constituents.” Among the “constituents” were women sporting bright red t-shirts emblazoned the words, “Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America.”

“Moms” was founded by an Indiana stay-at-home mom, Shannon Watts. It was quickly merged with billionaire Nanny-Stater Michael Bloomberg’s “Everytown for Gun Safety.” This new group launched, thanks to a $50 million donation from Nanny Bloomberg. read more

WND Exclusive – Bill of Rights: 9 Apply to the Individual but 1 Does Not?

It recently dawned on me what should be the most obvious argument for the individual right to “keep and bear arms.”

The primary purpose of the 10 Amendments that form the Bill of Rights is to protect the natural rights of the individual from an encroaching federal government function. The only way someone would not know this is if they have not read them.

In fact, each of the Bill of Rights’ 10 Amendments – there were originally 17 – states this by use of the words person, people, owner, or accused. The only two that do not expressly state the individual are the Seventh and Eighth. They do, however, use inference to make the point that both pertain to the individual. read more

The Second Amendment is an Individual Right – the Founders Said So

The primary purpose of the 10 Amendments that form the Bill of Rights was to protect the natural rights of the individual from encroaching federal government function. We must remind ourselves and others of this. The only way someone would not know this is if they have not read them. So when a leftist begins to spout off about the Second Amendment, that it applies only to hunting or militias, we must remind them of this. If necessary, review each of the 10 and it will become clear that the founders did not intend for nine of the 10 to pertain primarily to the individual and yet single out just the Second as not having any individual component. It defies logic. But then so does liberalism.

So if we agree that the 10 Amendments pertain to individual rights,  we must then agree that the right to “keep and bear arms” also pertains to the individual. I might also suggest that you explain what “keep and bear arms” means. Simply put, it means to own and carry arms in defense of oneself and others.

Justin Haskins of the Blaze has cataloged several of the views of our founding fathers in the following article.

from the Blaze:

In their own words: What the Founding fathers really believed about guns

When the Founding Fathers approved the “right to bear arms” and the 13 newly formed states agreed to ratify the Second Amendment, the reason couldn’t be clearer: An armed citizenry is a free citizenry.

Yet despite the clear historical evidence showing the true intention behind the Second Amendment, liberals continue to mislead the public by asserting the founders believed the Second Amendment only protects guns necessary for everyday life in the 18th century, such as hunting rifles, or that the founders believed these constitutional protections apply only to militias, not to individuals.

These notions are nothing more than left-wing delusions, carefully crafted by people who in their pursuit of power and “public safety” have become desperate to take away law-abiding citizens’ centuries-old rights to own and operate guns.

As Richard Brookhiser, a historian and author of “What Would the Founders Do?,” concluded in his book’s section on the Second Amendment, “The founders lived among guns; they would never make them illegal; they would subject them to necessary laws, following [William] Blackstone. And they broke their own laws when honor demanded it.” 

Continue reading

WND Exclusive – 1 State and 1 School Bucking Gun-Control Mania

Despite what they say, it’s understood what the left really desires. They do in fact want to confiscate our guns.

David Hogg, the new fresh face of fascism, even said so. “Yeah, exactly. It’s one of the loopholes, and we have to address those – a ban on high-capacity magazines and an assault weapons ban,” Hogg declared. So he doesn’t want to ban them all – just the scary ones – to start.

Oh, but it just got a lot worse. This past Tuesday, progressive leftist former Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens let the cat out of the bag by proclaiming that he wishes to repeal the Second Amendment. read more

What Did and Did Not Stop the Maryland School Shooting

The Maryland school shooting has predictably NOT garnered a lot of main stream media attention. Tragically one girl did lose her life, but it would have been much worse had an armed resource officer not engaged the dirtbag shooter.

Fred, the joke man, has found for us a list of what did not prevent or stop the school shooting in the leftist State of Maryland.

read more

Why Carry a Gun?

Another Pearl of Wisdom from Fred the Joke Man:

My old Grandpa said to me, “Son, there comes a time in every man’s life when he stops bustin’ knuckles and starts bustin’ caps and usually it’s when he becomes too old to take a whoopin’.” I don’t carry a gun to kill people; I carry a gun to keep from being killed.

I don’t carry a gun because I’m evil; I carry a gun because I have lived long enough to see the evil in the World.

I don’t carry a gun because I hate the government; I carry a gun because I understand the limitations of government.

I don’t carry a gun because I’m angry; I carry a gun so that I don’t have to spend the rest of my life hating myself for failing to be prepared. read more

What Makes One a Mass-Shooting Survivor?

by: Brent Smith at the Common Constitutionalist

Scroll Down for Audio Version

Say I’m walking down the street. There’s a bank being robbed about 500 ft up the road. The robbery goes bad and the crooks start opening up on the patrons inside the bank. 20 people are shot and killed. By now I’m only about 200 ft from the bank, but that’s as close as I get. That places me less than a football field away.

When it’s over, I head up to the bank steps, where I see reporters descending on the bank. One of them sees me and asks if I’m one of the mass-shooting survivors. I said I heard gunshots, but can I consider myself a survivor of the bank mass-shooting? No – of course not. That’s ridiculous.

But if not, why not?

I ask this because it seems that every student on the campus of the Florida high school is somehow considered a mass-shooting survivor. This may seem crass, but I’m just asking a reasonable question. read more