Pastor Burns Makes Sense

Want Gun Reform? Do Something That Makes Sense!

Here are some common-sense gun laws

Posted on November 11, 2015 by Doctors for Responsible Gun Ownership

The growth in both types and numbers of gun owners and the coincident drop in violent crime have not induced gun prohibitionists to reconsider their position. A rational person might look on these big-picture truths as evidence that her thinking could be wrong. But if gun prohibitionists were rational people, civil rights activists wouldn’t be working day in and day out to defend that precious right secured by the 2nd Amendment.

On the contrary, as more women, African-Americans and others become proud gun owners, gun-hating activists have become more strident, even abusive, in their campaign against gun owners.

Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton even sees enough political traction among that crowd to go on national television and call the National Rifle Association (and presumably the tens of millions of Americans who support the NRA’s politics) an “enemy.”

Gun control groups have long followed a strategy of endlessly repeating their talking points, which are instantly and eagerly echoed by traditionally gun control-friendly major media outlets. Just this year, they dusted off a couple of old gun control schemes dating back as far as the 1970s (regulating guns as consumer products through a federal agency, the Consumer Product Safety Commission) and hawking “gun violence” as a public health problem. They present these nostrums as new ideas, counting on a gullible public to buy these discredited ruses.

One such proposal came just this month from Ceasefire Oregon, a state gun prohibition group. The author thanks Portland Congressman Earl Blumenauer and long-time Johns Hopkins anti-gun advocacy researcher Daniel Webster for their work, from which the Ceasefire Oregon plan draws. Blumenauer’s report “Enough is Enough” was already a stale recitation of a gun grabber’s wish list when he promoted it nearly a year ago.

Gun rights defenders have mostly been on the defensive in this flurry of repetitive propaganda. Yes, we have won most battles, especially on the national front. And the science constantly reinforces our contention that gun ownership provides an overall societal benefit. But still, we could advance our cause more effectively in the political arena. Therefore, I propose we go on the offensive with our own agenda. Call it “Reducing Gun Rights Infringements — Time to Stop the Madness.” Here are the main points, but consider this just a first step:

• Mandate a national ban on the child’s fantasy known as “gun-free zones.” Any rational adult can comprehend the reality that the great majority of mass shootings have occurred in these legally established safe hunting grounds for homicidal maniacs. And any rational adult can logically conclude that only good people who follow rules will actually refrain from bringing guns into a “gun-free zone.” Let’s stop the insanity and start doing what is logical. Let’s start saving lives.
• Make nationwide constitutional carry of self-defense firearms the law of the land. Let no one be harassed, persecuted or jailed for daring to take the natural right of self-defense seriously.
• Defund the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) and abolish it. This scandal-ridden agency now serves only to persecute good gun owners and gun dealers.
• Repeal the National Firearms Act (NFA) restrictions on firearm suppressors and all state laws banning them. Public health demands their use in shooting applications such as hunting and target shooting, where they can prevent the disability of irreversible hearing loss in millions of Americans. Anyone who cares about public health must support the legalization of suppressors.
• Repeal any and all import restrictions designed to prevent new overseas firearm technology and products from reaching American shores.

These measures would restore some sanity to our firearm policy and remove some of the traps for good American gun owners deliberately built into our laws by gun rights-hating politicians. They would restore some of our freedoms at a time when politicians seem to compete for how many of our freedoms they can take from us. And, to use a favorite tag line of the gun grabbers, if it saves one life, it’s worth it.

–Timothy Wheeler, M.D.
Director of Doctors for Responsible Gun Ownership, a project of the Second Amendment Foundation

Would It Not Be Ironic If Jackson Was Replaced by Margaret Sanger On The 20 Dollar Bill? The First Black President Promotes A Woman Who Wanted To Rid The Garden Of Human Weeds!

EUGENICIST TO REPLACE JACKSON ON $20 BILL?

Organization conducting vote on women candidates

Published: 15 hours ago

• image: http://www.wnd.com/wp-content/plugins/wp-print/images/print.png
  
• Text smaller
• Text bigger

     582

image: http://www.wnd.com/files/2015/03/andrew-jackson-20-dollar-bill-600.jpg

WASHINGTON – Barack Obama says a little girl wrote to him asking why there were no women’s faces on U.S. currency.

That started a movement by a group called Women on 20s, which is now conducting an Internet poll on which of 15 candidates should be the first to replace President Andrew Jackson, ironically the founder of Obama’s party.

But creating the biggest stir on the list of candidates is Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood, a eugenicist who advocated aborting as many black babies as possible for the benefit of society.

In Sanger’s book, “Pivot of Civilization,” she characterized African-Americans and immigrants as “human weeds,” “reckless breeders” and “spawning … human beings who never should have been born.”

image: http://www.wnd.com/files/2014/11/141111margaretsanger.jpg

Margaret Sanger lobbying Congress, 1932

In Birth Control Review, she explained the purpose of the American Baby Code was to provide for a better distribution of babies and to protect society against the propagation and increase of the “unfit.” She also argued that women shouldn’t have the legal right to bear a child, and no man shall have the right to become a father, without a permit.

Yet, there she is among 15 candidates on the group’s website to replace the founder of the Democratic Party by 2020 – the 100th anniversary of the passage of the 19th Amendment that gave women the right to vote.

Legally it requires an act of Congress to order the secretary of the Treasury to make such a change, but these are different times. Obama has used executive orders frequently in lieu of getting what he wants from the legislative branch of government, and that’s just what Women on 20s is urging now.

Of the seven bills in current circulation, all feature portraits of either a former president or a Founding Father. And, yes, they are all white men.

Of the 15 candidates, the group is asking poll-takers to pick three. They include a bevy of other Democrats, radical feminists and progressive heroines:

Betty Friedan‎
Rosa Parks‎
Shirley Chisholm‎
Barbara Jordan‎
Rachel Carson‎
Susan B. Anthony‎
Eleanor Roosevelt‎
Patsy Mink‎
Frances Perkins‎
Sojourner Truth‎
Alice Paul‎
Elizabeth Cady Stanton‎
Margaret Sanger‎
Clara Barton‎
Harriet Tubman‎

“We at Women on 20s applaud President Obama for acknowledging that it’s time to put a woman’s face on our paper currency,” the group says on its website.

The group also let it be known it is pulling for the more radical “disrupters” on the list. Two former black slaves who went on to achieve greatness – Tubman and Truth – were also included, perhaps to compensate for the choice of Sanger.

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2015/03/will-this-woman-replace-jackson-on-20-bill/#1du6WJ3mbPxPpx19.99