Tuesday, December 18, 2012

IT TURNS OUT GUN OWNERS REALLY DO NEED WEAPONS: To protect themselves from left-wing thugs who threaten them with murder

Whatever happened to the post-Gabbi Giffords calls for civility? Oh, that's right: there's always a double standard for the Democrat Party and its hard left, progressive leaders:

Texas Democratic Party Official Calls For Murder of NRA Members

John Carburruvius tweeted this out after the Sandy Hook School shootings: "Can we now shoot the #NRA and everyone who defends them?"

John Carburruvius is a Democrat precinct committeeman in Bay Area Houston. He is a well-known Democrat in the state, worked on Noriega for US Senate campaign. He also SERVES ON THE TEXAS STATE DEMOCRAT COMMITTEE. On Friday he urged his twitter followers to murder NRA members and anyone who supports them.

His was hardly the only call for murder:

University of Rhode Island Professor Erik Loomis calls for killing NRA executive.

Actress Marg Helgenberger: ‘One can only hope’ NRA members get shot.

• Radio host Tony Katz, among others, was among many conservatives who received threats.

• And columnist/author Katie Pavlich collected additional threats.

Angry White Dude is right: "Gun owners need weapons to protect themselves from anti-gun violent thugs!"

Hat tip: BadBlue News.


S.B. said...

The only reason they talk crap like this, and not actually DO it, is because their desired "victims" are armed and able to protect themselves.

You can almost taste the irony.

Rhymes With Right said...

I've been dealing with John down here in Houston for years. He's quite a piece of work.



Of course, what do you expect from a guy who fought to keep children at an elementary school from receiving free bikes and turkeys at the holidays because the gifts came from REPUBLICANS! http://rhymeswithright.mu.nu/archives/310342.php

Bones said...

Such statements could be labeled as a "terroristic threat" which is a crime.

Anonymous said...

But nothing will happen because equal protection under thw law is a thing of the past, bones.

Anonymous said...

The 1st amendment guarantees the freedom of the press but that isn’t an unlimited right by any means. The 1st amendment was written back in a time of printed media that traveled at the speed of a horse.

There is no way the founding fathers could have known how media technology would evolve.

These days the BSM can operate at the speed of light, with video cameras shooting at least 30 frames a second. They could not have envisioned high-capacity magazines that can shoot out reams of lies before they need to be reloaded with the next issue.

They could not have envisioned the private sale of Media outside the control of the government, private Media that could easily set off the next lunatic on a spree of carnage.

So, when is the best time to make sensible, pragmatic changes to our media law?

How about now?

And I'll get us started:

We need a ban on High capacity magazines, there is no reason that Time or Newsweek to be more than 10 pages.

We need a ban on 5 minute news clips – there is no reason any one needs a clip longer than 5 minutes

We need to end private sales of Media – we need the government to control who can buy media and whether they have the mental capacity to consume such media.

We should make it a felony to purchase Media for those who can't legally buy Media themselves.

We should have background check on all purveyors of Assault Journalism to close one of the major loopholes in our current Media law and make it harder for criminals and those with mental illness to engage in Assault Media.

Ensuring background checks on all Media personal would close one of the major loopholes in our current laws and make it harder for criminals and those with mental illness to gain access to Media microphones.

We should deny a Media permit for habitual offenders who have continually celebrated the murderers in these mass shooting outrages.

You can help if you have a device capable of receiving Assault Media; you need to turn it into the government right now.

We should put in place a national ban on assault journalism and have a serious review of Internet transmissions of large amounts of media.

And if the media fails to submit by these Common-sense measures We will need stricter penalties for those who refuse to abide by the provisions of the a new Assault Media Ban.

Obviously, our children, our families, our neighbours, our law enforcement officers (did I mention children yet?) deserve and expect more responsibility than talk.

Renée Pseudonym Laggard is a founding member of Citizens Against Idiotic Mayors.

Just a final note: Journalist should take my sarcasm as a cautionary tale in that if you take to destroying one group’s Constitutional rights, don’t expect people to respect YOUR Constitutional rights.

The constraints on government put in place by our founding fathers either stand together – collectively if you will – or they fall together. Something you should keep in mind whilst you seek to eviscerate everyone’s right of self-defense.