There's a hero in West Virginia who should be all over the news. Instead, her story of preventing a mass murder with her sharpshooting is being buried by corporate media.
Do not give up your guns. The Christchurch massacre, which has our PM racing around Silicon Valley with her anti-guns narrative, is not a story fully told. There's issues with help that he (Tarrant) had, good guys who are not good guys (that's just my hunch tbh) and the back story which has him as a white supremacist on the web when the evidence for that is very weak. And the only countries that he visited (other than NZ where he was based & Australia where he grew up) for 10 years were North Korea, China, Pakistan, Turkey, Egypt and Texas. Russia too I think. And I would not call those he stayed with in Texas white supremacists exactly but they were quick to take down his chat with them on their website.
I used to be on the side of those who wanted to ban guns from private ownership. I've learnt my lesson the last few years.
Florida has concealed carry. In my opinion it makes it safer for everyone.
I'll share a story that happened half a mile or so from where I live.
There was a Woody's BBQ restaurant in a strip mall on the main road. It was dinner time. A man came in and went to the cashier, pulled out a gun, and demanded the money. The restaurant had quite a few people there at tables at the time. Two men, carrying concealed, from two different locations, stood up and fired on the thief. They missed. He fled.
We are a low crime area but that restaurant never had any fear of being robbed again. In fact, I can't think of a single restaurant or business in my community that has been robbed that way since.
Whenever something happens that doesn't fit the lame stream media's distorted perspective on gun ownership, they suddenly go deaf and blind. The media detest the "good guy with a gun" meme, not because it isn't true, but precisely because it is.
I'd love to know if people at the party were white or black? Terrible either way, but we all know how the news picks and choses what to reporr these days. White=bad, black/brown/hispanuc = good.
they always look the other way when these GOOD shooting happen because they DO NOT fit what they want just as the DEMS do. Where did you see the dems condemn the driver of the SUV killing people in WI? nothing!! You never see any liberal speak out when it doesn't fit what they want.. PERIOD
Media silence on this is appalling, of course, but the media upholding the establishment has been the rule rather than the exception since at least Woodrow Wilson.
If you truly want to all-but rid America of these shootings and other public crimes, we only need to return to the Bible’s non-optional responsibility to defend ourselves, our families, and others. With nearly every law-abiding man armed ready to engage any active criminal, these shootings would be all-but eliminated overnight.
The Second Amendment will never accomplish this and is, instead, part of the problem.
America was sold down the river when the 18th-century founding fathers replaced Biblical responsibilities (based upon the moral law of God) for Enlightenment rights, and nothing demonstrates it better than the Second Amendment.
Think about it: The Amendment WITH the wording "shall not be infringed" is the MOST infringed, licensed, and limited Amendment of the entire twenty seven. Furthermore, a future generation of our posterity is likely to see the Second Amendment whittled away entirely or repealed altogether. This is inherent nature and danger of optional Enlightenment rights versus non-optional Biblical responsibilities, such as the following:
"Let the high praises of God be in their mouth, and a two-edged sword [or today's equivalent] in their hand ... this honor have all his saints. Praise ye Yah." (Psalm 149:6-9)
"But if any provide not for his own, and especially for those of his own house [beginning with spiritual and physical protection], he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel." (1 Timothy 5:8)
Which is more potent: 1) An optional right, or 2) A non-optional responsibility?
Which is more likely to be infringed, licensed, and ultimately abolished altogether?
Which did the pre-Second Amendment Americans look to for their authority to bear arms, with little or nor infringement?
For more, listen to "The Second Amendment: A Knife in a Gunfight," delivered at the Springfield, Missouri Firearms and Freedom Symposium, at Bible versus Constitution dot org. Go to our Video page and scroll down title.
At this same location, you will also find a radio interview Larry Pratt (Executive Director of Gun Owners of America) conducted with me on this same subject. I think you'll find Mr. Pratt's remarks especially interesting. Go to our Audio Messages page and scroll down to T 952.
See also online Chapter 12 "Amendment 2: Constitutional vs. Biblical Self-Defense" of "Bible Law vs. the United States Constitution: The Christian Perspective." Click on the top entry on our Online Book page and scroll down to Chapter 12.
Do not give up your guns. The Christchurch massacre, which has our PM racing around Silicon Valley with her anti-guns narrative, is not a story fully told. There's issues with help that he (Tarrant) had, good guys who are not good guys (that's just my hunch tbh) and the back story which has him as a white supremacist on the web when the evidence for that is very weak. And the only countries that he visited (other than NZ where he was based & Australia where he grew up) for 10 years were North Korea, China, Pakistan, Turkey, Egypt and Texas. Russia too I think. And I would not call those he stayed with in Texas white supremacists exactly but they were quick to take down his chat with them on their website.
I used to be on the side of those who wanted to ban guns from private ownership. I've learnt my lesson the last few years.
Florida has concealed carry. In my opinion it makes it safer for everyone.
I'll share a story that happened half a mile or so from where I live.
There was a Woody's BBQ restaurant in a strip mall on the main road. It was dinner time. A man came in and went to the cashier, pulled out a gun, and demanded the money. The restaurant had quite a few people there at tables at the time. Two men, carrying concealed, from two different locations, stood up and fired on the thief. They missed. He fled.
We are a low crime area but that restaurant never had any fear of being robbed again. In fact, I can't think of a single restaurant or business in my community that has been robbed that way since.
Whenever something happens that doesn't fit the lame stream media's distorted perspective on gun ownership, they suddenly go deaf and blind. The media detest the "good guy with a gun" meme, not because it isn't true, but precisely because it is.
I'd love to know if people at the party were white or black? Terrible either way, but we all know how the news picks and choses what to reporr these days. White=bad, black/brown/hispanuc = good.
they always look the other way when these GOOD shooting happen because they DO NOT fit what they want just as the DEMS do. Where did you see the dems condemn the driver of the SUV killing people in WI? nothing!! You never see any liberal speak out when it doesn't fit what they want.. PERIOD
Brave hero.
Media silence on this is appalling, of course, but the media upholding the establishment has been the rule rather than the exception since at least Woodrow Wilson.
If you truly want to all-but rid America of these shootings and other public crimes, we only need to return to the Bible’s non-optional responsibility to defend ourselves, our families, and others. With nearly every law-abiding man armed ready to engage any active criminal, these shootings would be all-but eliminated overnight.
The Second Amendment will never accomplish this and is, instead, part of the problem.
America was sold down the river when the 18th-century founding fathers replaced Biblical responsibilities (based upon the moral law of God) for Enlightenment rights, and nothing demonstrates it better than the Second Amendment.
Think about it: The Amendment WITH the wording "shall not be infringed" is the MOST infringed, licensed, and limited Amendment of the entire twenty seven. Furthermore, a future generation of our posterity is likely to see the Second Amendment whittled away entirely or repealed altogether. This is inherent nature and danger of optional Enlightenment rights versus non-optional Biblical responsibilities, such as the following:
"Let the high praises of God be in their mouth, and a two-edged sword [or today's equivalent] in their hand ... this honor have all his saints. Praise ye Yah." (Psalm 149:6-9)
"But if any provide not for his own, and especially for those of his own house [beginning with spiritual and physical protection], he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel." (1 Timothy 5:8)
Which is more potent: 1) An optional right, or 2) A non-optional responsibility?
Which is more likely to be infringed, licensed, and ultimately abolished altogether?
Which did the pre-Second Amendment Americans look to for their authority to bear arms, with little or nor infringement?
For more, listen to "The Second Amendment: A Knife in a Gunfight," delivered at the Springfield, Missouri Firearms and Freedom Symposium, at Bible versus Constitution dot org. Go to our Video page and scroll down title.
At this same location, you will also find a radio interview Larry Pratt (Executive Director of Gun Owners of America) conducted with me on this same subject. I think you'll find Mr. Pratt's remarks especially interesting. Go to our Audio Messages page and scroll down to T 952.
See also online Chapter 12 "Amendment 2: Constitutional vs. Biblical Self-Defense" of "Bible Law vs. the United States Constitution: The Christian Perspective." Click on the top entry on our Online Book page and scroll down to Chapter 12.