If I Lived In A Chaotic City Like Chicago...

 ...or Portland (OR), Seattle, Los Angeles, San Fransicko Francisco, New York, Philadelphia or many others, I am of the opinion that would arm myself whether or not it was legal for me to do so. I say that because of violence like that reported on in this linked article and because I value my life and the lives of other innocent folks who wind up being victims because they could not defend themselves successfully against such barbarians. If the law was to say I cannot arm myself to defend myself or others from such violent scum, I would strongly consider violating that law. When these thugs are attacking you and you are in fear of death or serious bodily injury,I am of the belief that you should be ready, willing and ABLE to fight back. Sure, it would be better to avoid conflict but when it is all around you and attacking you - then you should fight back as I see it. Stopping them is the goal but if you kill one or more of them while trying to stop them in order to protect yourself & other innocents - from serious bodily harm or death - tough noogies for them. What they need, it seems to me, is instant justice by way of armed self-defense meted out by the attacked victim(s). I am not condoning illegal behavior, just considering I might do it if I lived in places like those mentioned and am most assuredly supporting the concept of a natural right, that of self defense in order for the targets of such attacks to remain alive, hale and injury free.

 

By the way, look at the video & photos in the article. Were they purposefully chosen to be included because for the most part they show the sides & backs of the rioters, very few are seen from the front. Really, do it, look at those photos & the video carefully. How many different racial groups of apparent troublemakers do you see in them? I see 4 or 5 individuals (other than law enforcement), who are evidently walking in the opposite direction of the mob who seemingly are not of the same race or ethnicity as all (or at least the great majority) of the rioters. I am not being racist, I am stating a fact as I see it. It kind of, sort of really dismays me that there is not a clear picture of the group from an angle that would allow the viewer to see the faces of most of them and I wonder if that was purposeful on the part of the main stream mud slinging media. My bet would be: Yes, it was just that - done purposefully.

 

All the best,

Glenn B

We Need To Purge This Country Of Sick Violent Animals...

...like the five alleged gang members who killed a 15 year old boy, an NYPD Police Explorer, this past Friday in the Bronx, NY in an apparent case of mistaken identity. I don't care how we get rid of them but get rid of them is what we need to do and in doing so we need to assure it is a permanent solution so that they will never return to be free to do something like this again.

The filth to which I am referring reportedly relentlessly and repeatedly stabbed and hacked to death the boy (there is a video of the attack embedded below under the page break). It has been reported that they are members of the Trinitarios.  Supposedly, gang members offered an apology to the boy's mother by saying it was a case of mistaken identity (source) - yet someone claiming to be one of the killers boasted about it on Instagram (source)! Imagine their unmitigated vile and sickening gall to brag about killing anyone let alone it having been the wrong person. They are the scum of the scum of the earth - in my opinion - they do not deserve to live.

Are you a bleeding heart, are you a leftist or liberal or a religious on the right who believes they deserve another chance and that they only killed the boy the way they did because they have been oppressed all of their lives and you want to offer every excuse for them! If so, watch the embedded video, if you do not change your mind after that to believing they are nothing more than sick savages and brutal animals - you are part of the problem.

Note, the video shows an actual extremely brutal and gruesome killing - it is not for the squeamish. Thus it is under the cover of a page break, click below to be able to watch it. My guess is it will be removed soon, either from my blog by Blogger or from the Internet by the news organization that posted it. I am very surprised they actually posted it for public review, it is that horrible; yet, they did post it. So, if you really want to watch it, do so while still available. I am sharing it only so that it may help make people wake up to what our country has become - a haven for violent thugs, gang members and other criminals - and hopefully take action to change things.

Is It Something In The Water...

...that could make someone ask the question that was recently asked at a Town Hall meeting in Salinas, CA? The meeting had been called concerning recent gang violence in or around Salinas, CA that has already resulted in the deaths of 6 people there this year (yes that would be in less than 2 months). The very first question reportedly was asked by Peter Valdez of Salinas who in essence asked: "why gun locks couldn’t be enforced in the city – forcing gang members to lock their guns in order to transport them". Get that? Read it again if you don't because the implications of what this man believes are there indeed. Does this person actually believe that gang members, who are quite possibly responsible for 6 homicides due to gang violence, are going to obey a law that tells them they must utilize gun locks when transporting firearms that they already own illegally and with which they kill people? Does he actually believe that because the government says to do something that gang members will all immediately obey? Does he think that because Obama was elected all things will now be rosy and we have been saved and gun control will prevent all violent gun related crimes? Did he think that was an intelligent question to have asked? Did he think at all before asking it?

My guess would be he sure thought it a good idea otherwise why ask such a question. Why would he believe that to be a good idea? Well probably because he was edumacated within the pUblik skuel sistem of kaleeforneeah where they taught him that the government has the power to do anything, and the peons must obey the government in all things about gun control, and that gun control is the end all be all to put an end to violent crime. After all, isn't California one of the states with the toughest gun control laws. They have a law or regulation to cover just about all aspects of whatever legal firearms ownership they allow, so does it not stand to reason that criminals should follow those laws and regulations too!!! Well maybe that makes sense to Mr. Valdez and to millions like him who have drunk the Kool-Aid (no offense to Kool-Aid intended, I love the stuff) from the everlasting fountain of ignorance. Maybe someone does not understand what it means to be a gun toting criminal because the government of California tries to make all gun owners appear criminal, and they who legally own firearms do follow the laws - so why wouldn't honest gang members do likewise! Oh it hurts to even think of what was going through this man's mind when he asked that question.

There is no note about any follow-up questions asked by Mr. Valdez in the article (at the Californian.com) from whence I gleaned this information, but the article does say that: "Salinas police Cmdr. Dino Bardoni was the first official placed in the hot seat tonight as a town hall meeting kicked off...". Now tell me what does a line like that tell you about the reporter writing up this event. Hot Seat? Whom is kidding whom here? Was that supposed to have been a tough question to have answered because the question itself was, in the mind of the reporter, such a cunning one; or was it just getting hot for the commander because he had to try to remain polite, civil, and informative in the face of what to me was an absolutely stupid question that probably made him want to burst out with laughter? As for the commander, he handled that question with kid gloves as he explained: "Gang member(s) are not going to adhere to the law". I have to wonder if Mr. Salinas understood how that answered his question.

The short article goes onto state that "he is one of six panelists...". For sanity's sake I hope that meant that the Police Commander is one of the six panelists and not that Mr. Salinas is one of them.

My hat doff to Another Gun Blog which brought this to my attention.

All the best,
Glenn B