Thursday, January 17, 2013

Gun Control in America ... Really?


DHS Preparing For Civil War In The US? 
Man who doesn't 'believe' in guns rescued from armed robbery by two good Samaritans with guns
by: J. D. Heyes
Friday, January 18, 2013
(NaturalNews) He doesn't own a firearm and says he "doesn't believe" in guns at all. But now he's grateful a couple of other locals did not share his values.
According to Houston-area station KHOU-11, the man had just been victimized at gunpoint by a robber when a pair of good Samaritans came to his rescue recently.
Police say the criminal suspect, identified as Christopher Hutchins, who was canvassing a neighborhood near the 2500 block of Wichita St. near Hermann Park, had no clue what he got himself into when picking his target.
'I don't believe in guns, but...'
In this case, the station reported, the victim, Kevin Dorsey, had just walked back to his car from a bar around the corner and had not yet closed his car door one evening when a man alleged to be Hutchins who was wearing all black and a ski mask pulled a gun and put it to his chest. The suspect took Dorsey's wallet, cell phone and car keys.
Following the robbery, Dorsey started running down the street, at which point he said two men in a Mercedes stopped and asked him what had happened. When he told them, the men in the car took off in pursuit of the suspect. When they caught up to him, they opened fire on him, Dorsey said.
The suspect fired back but in the end, the station reported, the two Samaritans won the gun battle and took him down.
"I don't believe in guns," said Dorsey. "I don't own a gun. I'm totally at the mercy of my saviors. They obviously sent two angels to help me. These people protected me when I couldn't protect myself."
After he had been shot, police say Hutchins allegedly jumped a fence and was then attacked by a German Shepherd, an attack that served to prevent his escape. Talk about having a bad day; first, he loses a gun battle with a pair of armed, justice-minded gun owners, then gets nearly mauled to death by a dog.
Police say Hutchins was sent for treatment at local Ben Taub Hospital and that he is expected to recover.
New rules and restrictions not really about 'saving lives'
As we've pointed out here at Natural News, especially lately since new
gun control talk began within the Obama Administration and his allies in Congress following the horrific massacre of children and adults in Newtown, Conn., good people exercising their Second Amendment rights to protect themselves and others is reason enough to end the assault on American gun owners.
"As the president said, if your actions result in only saving one life, they're worth taking. But I'm convinced we can affect the well-being of millions of Americans and take thousands of people out of harm's way if we act responsibly," Vice President Joe Biden said recently, in reference to new gun control policy and legislation under consideration at the White House.
Banning certain weapons, limiting ammunition capacity, licensing and other restrictive requirements won't save lives - they are measures that will cost lives because they will empower the criminal who is already operating outside the parameters of civil society.
Violence in America: Ban all Guns, Knives, Bats, Bras, and Rocks!
Rocks should be registered as to size, weight, color, and sharp edges and kept under lock and key by rock owners
Dr. Don Boys
Thursday, January 17, 2013
Enough is enough. Today two more 6-year old students in Maryland were suspended for pretending to throw rocks at each other on the playground. It’s about time we got serious about the violence that rocks (especially assault rocks) play in our society and we must act now. I have a suggestion.
If we are really serious about protecting people from violence we should ban all guns, knives, hammers, clubs, (far more people were killed last year with hammers and clubs than with assault rocks),frozen meat, bats, bras (since one man killed his wife with her bra), and rocks. Rocks are really dangerous since they are so plentiful and easily attained. Students will go from pretending to throw rocks to actually throwing them. Stop the madness now with a ban on all rocks.
Let’s not play around with this issue when lives are in the balance. Get serious and eventually ban all rocks, in all places, all weights, and all sizes. I mean if we save even one life, it will be worthwhile. I know the conservative bleating hearts will scream but they are mean, mad, and malicious people. Who cares what they think? They spend all their time clinging to their rocks as they read their Bibles, so who cares about them? They drive around town in their pickup trucks with a huge load of rocks in the bed. What does an honest person need with all those dangerous rocks?
All sane people know rocks are evil. Is it necessary to remind anyone of the use that rocks play in the religion of Islam? Children, especially boys, seem to have a tendency to throw rocks at other children, birds, cats, and other innocent animals. Rocks are evil and must be illegal.
Maybe not today, but soon America will be rock-less except for police, FBI, CIA, FEMA, IRS, BATF, military, security guards, celebrity bodyguards, senators, etc. Only the elite need rocks.
It may be difficult to ban all rocks since the National Rock Association (NRA) is such a powerful and heartless organization and all the rednecks belong to it. The (NRA) is getting rich from fees by selling memberships, coffee mugs, sweatshirts, etc. So we may have to ban the biggest rocks and eventually ban smaller rocks when another tragedy happens. You know, don’t let a crisis go to waste. We must take advantage of every situation to eventually take every rock away from every American. You know, a totally rock-less America.
For a while we will have to settle for getting rid of rocks incrementally, and to begin with, we can license all rock carriers. We can charge large fees for their license, the bigger the rock, the bigger the fee. This will also give us a list of all rock owners and their locations.
Arrest any person seen with a rock unless he has a permit to carry. Even then, the size and shape of the rock should be restricted. Some rocks are more dangerous than others. I remind the heathen out there that little David killed a giant of a man with a smooth rock but he had five rocks. It should have been illegal for him to have an excess of rocks. That is over-kill. The law must stipulate that no person can have more than one rock in his possession at any time. After all, why does a person need more than one rock? Such people are obviously up to no good and innocent lives are at stake.
Rocks should be registered as to size, weight, color, and sharp edges and kept under lock and key by rock owners. Of course, no felon or mentally unstable person should be permitted to possess dangerous rocks, so no politician can legally have rocks–Not too sure how small or large a prohibited rock should be but we’ll leave that small detail to the regulators. Surely we can trust them to be reasonable.
Until we can pass laws banning all rocks, we should go after all Rock Throwing Clubs where their sole purpose is to kill innocent and helpless creatures. Such clubs should be disbanded along with all Rock Throwing Ranges where they practice their rock throwing. After all, such activities are dangerous and will destroy a neighborhood. Also, none of those ranges did an environmental impact study before they were built so we can close them down without new laws! We should use any pretext to destroy the whole rock business.
Rock fanatics will resist these common sense suggestions and speak of never, never giving up their rock until it is pried from their cold, stiff fingers. Well, we can arrange that.
Copyright 2013, Don Boys, Ph.D.
Dr. Don Boys is a former member of the Indiana House of Representatives, author of 14 books, frequent guest on television and radio talk shows, and wrote columns for USA Today for 8 years. His most recent book is ISLAM: America’s Trojan Horse! His new eBook, The God Haters is available for $9.99 from These columns go to over 11,000 newspapers, television, and radio stations. His other web sites are and Contact Don for an interview or talk show.
Don Can be reached at

The Great Gun Debate: Piers Morgan vs Larry Pratt

Obama’s gun policy advisors: 8-year-olds

Dan Calabrese
Hey, why not? The entire gun control push is based on emotion anyway, so why not justify it by releasing a bunch of handwritten letters from kids urging the president to do something? It’s as shameless as it is pathetic, but is anyone really surprised by now that
Eight-year-old Grant from Maryland, writes the President, “there should be some changes in the law with guns. It’s a free country, but I recommend there needs be [sic] a limit with guns.”
Grant’s ideas: “Please don’t let people own machine guns or other powerful guns like that. I think there should be a good reason to get a gun. There should be a limit about [sic] how many guns a person can own.”
“Even though I am not scared for my own safety, I am scared for others,” writes Eleven-year-old Julia from Washington, DC. “My opinion is it should be very hard for people to buy guns.”
Julia continues: “I beg you to work very hard to make guns not allowed, not just for me, but for the whole United States.”
Ten year-old Taejah is less specific. “I am very sad about the children who lost their lives in Conn.,” he writes. “So I thought I would write to you to STOP gun violence. Thank you, Mr. President.”
I especially like Taejah’s letter, because it so perfectly encapsulates the mentality of a kid. Mr. President, gun violence is bad so please stop it. Sure, kid. We’ll get right on that. An adolescent can be forgiven for failing to understand that the president of the United States is not all-powerful, and cannot stop evil just by deciding he wants to. He’s a kid. It’s fine that he wrote the letter and it’s fine that he wants to see gun violence stopped.

Emotional appeal that relies on THE CHILDREN! to shield him from criticism

But it’s not fine that the actual president of the United States, who is well aware of the limitations of his office and of his power, to wave around naive stuff like this as if it’s justification for serious policy. Obama knows perfectly well that he is not going to make a dent in gun violence with his proposed actions, so he tries to justify it with an emotional appeal that relies on THE CHILDREN! to shield him from criticism.
Know what, though? These pint-sized letter writers are pretty typical of the mentality that elected and re-elected Obama in the first place. If you believe in the magical power of government to solve problems simply by passing decrees that declare them solved, then Obama’s the kind of guy you’re probably going to vote for because he encourages that belief and offers policies that presume to harness this wonderful beneficient power for the benefit of all of us.
There’s a reason you can’t vote when you’re 8. You’re too naive and immature to understand the real issues and the real nature of government. Maybe 18 is too young too, judging from the apparent mentality of so many young voters to expect the government miracles Obama promises. At least Taejah has the excuse of being 8. The fact that Obama resorts to infantile stuff like this to sell his policies tells you all you need to know about them.
Dan Calabrese’s column is distributed by CainTV, which can be found at
Complete list of Obama’s 23 executive orders on guns
23 steps to....nothing substantial
Robert Laurie
Thursday, January 17, 2013
Here's a list of all 23 executive orders signed by the President this afternoon. Most are geared toward health care, post-crime investigation, and gun safety education. Not one of them would have done a thing to prevent the shootings at Sandy Hook. If today’s goal was to ensure this “never happens again,” this list represents an epic failure.
As the boss said earlier, Washington excels at doing things that, in the end, do absolutely nothing.
Issue a Presidential Memorandum to require federal agencies to make relevant data available to the federal background check system.
Address unnecessary legal barriers, particularly relating to the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, that may prevent states from making information available to the background check system.
Improve incentives for states to share information with the background check system.
Direct the Attorney General to review categories of individuals prohibited from having a gun to make sure dangerous people are not slipping through the cracks.
Propose rule making to give law enforcement the ability to run a full background check on an individual before returning a seized gun.
Publish a letter from ATF to federally licensed gun dealers providing guidance on how to run background checks for private sellers.
Launch a national safe and responsible gun ownership campaign.
Review safety standards for gun locks and gun safes (Consumer Product Safety Commission).
Issue a Presidential Memorandum to require federal law enforcement to trace guns recovered in criminal investigations.
Release a DOJ report analyzing information on lost and stolen guns and make it widely available to law enforcement.
Nominate an ATF director.
Provide law enforcement, first responders, and school officials with proper training for active shooter situations.
Maximize enforcement efforts to prevent gun violence and prosecute gun crime.
Issue a Presidential Memorandum directing the Centers for Disease Control to research the causes and prevention of gun violence.
Direct the Attorney General to issue a report on the availability and most effective use of new gun safety technologies and challenge the private sector to develop innovative technologies.
Clarify that the Affordable Care Act does not prohibit doctors asking their patients about guns in their homes.
Release a letter to health care providers clarifying that no federal law prohibits them from reporting threats of violence to law enforcement authorities.
Provide incentives for schools to hire school resource officers.
Develop model emergency response plans for schools, houses of worship and institutions of higher education.
Release a letter to state health officials clarifying the scope of mental health services that Medicaid plans must cover.
Finalize regulations clarifying essential health benefits and parity requirements within ACA exchanges.
Commit to finalizing mental health parity regulations.
Launch a national dialogue led by Secretaries Sebelius and Duncan on mental health.
Robert Laurie’s column is distributed by CainTV, which can be found at
When Only Tyrants Have Guns
By Chip McLean
January 12, 2013
The death of innocents is always tragic. To feel empathy for those who lost their lives and their grieving loved ones is a normal, healthy reaction. To feel any less would be less than human. Unfortunately, a far less noble part of humanity – the “never let a good crisis go to waste” mindset of those who see human suffering as a means to an agenda – always display their ugly faces at such times. So it is with the recent Sandy Hook shootings.
Predictably, before the mourning families could even make funeral arrangements, the usual suspects were already inundating the airwaves with a cacophony of anti-gun gibberish. People such as Michael Bloomberg
were already demanding “immediate action.” Naturally by “immediate action,” Bloomberg and others of his ilk mean to strip gun owners of their right to bear arms.
The gullible that rely on emotion rather than logic are easy prey for such opportunists as Bloomberg, Dianne Feinstein, Eric Holder and of course Barack Hussein Obama. Governmental anti-gun types are shameless in their efforts to exploit a tide of mindless emotionalism by advocating what they euphemistically refer to as “sensible gun laws”. While they bend over backwards attempting to sell their notions as “sensible,” there is nothing sensible about it. To these control freaks, the only solution to gun shootings is to disarm the law abiding. Take for example Obama’s flippant response to the NRA’s idea of posting armed guards in schools: “I am not going to prejudge the recommendations that are given to me. I am skeptical that the only answer is putting more guns in schools. And I think the vast majority of the American people are skeptical that that somehow is going to solve our problem.” (emphasis added)Such vapid “reasoning” and presumptuousness are unfortunately typical of this administration... Apparently it hasn’t dawned upon Obama et al, that high profile school shootings such as the recent Sandy Hook incident, occurred in “gun-free” zones. Ever since the passage of the Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990, students and faculty alike have become sitting ducks. By 1995, the law was found to be unconstitutional by the USSC, but in 1996 Bill Clinton, with assistance from his anti-gun zealot attorney general Janet Reno, found a “creative” means of simply bypassing the constitution and keeping this horrendous law in effect. Based on the exponential increase in school shootings (can you say Columbine, Virginia Tech and yes, Sandy Hook) it is more than safe to say that this “gun free zone” idea has been an abject failure - and has actually led to an increase in school shootings. Armed guards - or better yet - faculty members who have concealed weapon permits would provide a far more effective deterrent to lunatic Columbine wannabes, than leaving our children and teachers defenseless against such attacks.
How about rephrasing “more guns in schools” to “more guns in the right hands” Mr. Obama? That would be a “sensible” gun policy.
Here’s the dirty little secret – for all their hysterical anti-gun rhetoric, the gun grabbers really don’t care about saving lives – what they care about is power. They use tragedies like Sandy Hook to pursue their real goal, which is to disarm American citizens. They attempt to disguise their real intents, and in some cases even give lip service to the second amendment. One especially comedic example is that of John Kerry, who during his unsuccessful 2004 presidential campaign went on a photo-op “hunting” trip, complete with camos in order to show he supports “hunters”. Understand – and this is a crucial point – the second amendment isn’t about “hunting.” It never has been. The fact is that the right to bear arms was put into place by the founders as a means of protecting the citizens from tyranny. That is why would-be governmental gun grabbers hate that pesky second amendment. An armed populace is the one thing standing between them and what they want – an omnipotent central government accountable to no one and free to impose its will on a defenseless public. Sound harsh? Consider the gun policies of Adolph Hitler, Joseph Stalin and Mao Tse Tung and think again…
Reading the founders’ own writings about the right to bear arms makes it quite clear what their intent was when adding the second amendment. Chuck Baldwin
wrote a recent column that addresses this issue and I will repeat here two quotes he used from Thomas Jefferson and George Washington: “The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.” – Thomas Jefferson
“Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the American people’s liberty teeth and keystone under independence… From the hour the Pilgrims landed, to the present day, events, occurrences, and tendencies prove that to ensure peace, security, and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable… The very atmosphere of firearms everywhere restrains evil interference. When firearms go, all goes.” – George Washington
In Baldwin’s follow-up column, he puts forth a three point plan of action for combatting these assaults on our freedom. I agree strongly and recommend you read Chuck’s complete column on this, but allow me to boil it down here with a couple of observations:
1) Make phone calls to our representatives and senators on Capitol Hill. It is imperative that our congress critters hear from us regarding our complete and total opposition to any new gun control measures. They need to hear from us NOW and en masse.
2) If Congress passes any new gun bill, the states themselves need to stand up to Washington – therefore our state governors and legislatures need to hear from us as well…they need to be reminded that the federal government serves at the pleasure of the people – not the other way around. When the federal government oversteps its bounds and tramples the very constitution that limits its scope, it is incumbent on the states to preserve the rights of its people. I would say that governors need to prevent the enforcement of any unconstitutional seizure of firearms by the federal government using every means at their disposal, including arresting and incarcerating any federal agent who attempts such action on the individual state’s soil.
3) Baldwin’s third point is that we as individuals must be prepared to draw a line in the sand... “(I) refuse to comply with any law requiring us to register or surrender our firearms–including our semi-automatic rifles. Ladies and gentlemen, whatever the consequences might be, and whatever anyone else does or doesn’t do, I am prepared to become an outlaw over this issue! I don’t know how to say it any plainer: I will not register my firearms, and I will not surrender my firearms. Period. End of story. It’s not just a saying with me: when my guns are outlawed, I will be an outlaw!”

Amen Chuck Baldwin! Freedom is worth fighting for – now, as it was in 1776. Our right to bear arms is the one freedom that preserves all of the others. It is time to let the Obama-coms and any spineless representatives who would simply cave in order to “get along”, know that enough is enough. It is time to let them know that their days of shredding our constitution are over, and that their idea of a socialist utopia with the elite feeding at the taxpayer trough – all the while issuing unlawful edicts to the rest of us that threaten our liberties – is not going to happen. There are millions of law abiding gun owners in this country…but an out of control federal government coming after them will do so at its own peril.
© 2013 Chip McLean - All Rights Reserved
Chip McLean is the editor/publisher for Capitol Hill Coffee House. Chip is a former broadcaster.
His interest in politics began at the age of eight, when his parents took him to a Barry Goldwater rally during the 1964 presidential election. In addition to his work at CHCH, Chip's columns have appeared in a number of online conservative publications.