Diagnosing “Gun Derangement Syndrome”

I recently received a tongue-in-cheek message from the Virginia Citizens Defense League. While humorous, it also carries more than a little truth, so I thought it worth sharing in full.

Do you know someone suffering from Gun Derangement Syndrome?

Gun Derangement Syndrome, or GDS, is a severe mental disorder characterized by irrational beliefs and behaviors despite objective evidence. There is no age, sex, race, or other demographic characteristics that predispose someone to this disorder. This insidious disorder can affect anyone. However, individual susceptibility can occur with other irrational beliefs such as: criminals are the victims, the police cause crime, the First Amendment includes government censorship, or disarming someone makes them safer.

To receive a diagnosis of GDS one must meet 3 of the following diagnostic criteria for at least 21 days. 

1. A belief that merely owning a gun can turn any good, honest person into a deranged killer.
   
   
2. A belief that a gun can plan a crime and carry it out by walking to a victim’s location, aiming itself, and pulling its own trigger.
   
   
3. An obsession with firearms such that they use a gun-centric vocabulary. For example, if they use “gun violence,” but not machete violence, beating violence, or strangling violence. Or they use “gunman,” but not macheteman, beatingman, or stranglingman.
   
   
4. A belief that the gun, and not the criminal holding the gun, is responsible for shooting someone, while also believing that a police officer, and not his gun, is responsible for shooting someone.
   
   
5. A belief that all gun owners are “gun nuts.” 
   
   
6. A belief that guns are so easily obtained that guns are found lying in the street. Or they believe that guns are easier to obtain than a book. Or they believe that guns are only designed to kill humans as fast as possible.
   
   
7. Having anger-management issues and falsely projecting that character flaw onto peaceful gun-owners.
   
   
8. Knowing absolutely nothing about guns, including how they work, but claim to be an expert on “gun safety.” They usually believe that guns “just go off” on their own. They often call for a ban on “assault weapons” or “barrel shrouds”, but they can’t give you a definition of either one. They use gun word-salads, like banning “high-velocity magazine clips,” to attempt to hide their ignorance.
   
   
9. Stating that an openly carried gun makes them afraid but then say that a gun carried concealed makes them afraid.
   
   
10. Holding innocent gun owners to blame for the misuse of guns by criminals, while not holding themself to blame for owning a car, which drunk drivers use to create horrible carnage on our roads.
    
    
11. Stating a magazine limitation of “X” rounds is safe, but they are unable to explain how having “X+1” rounds would be dangerous.
    
    
12. Complaining about the loud noise coming from a neighbor’s shooting range but stating that suppressors should be outlawed because they make guns quieter.
    
    

Additional Note: This diagnosis may coincide with other personality disorders and maladaptive personality traits. Individuals meeting the diagnosis of Gun Derangement Syndrome may be strongly influenced by other irrational sub-cultural beliefs. Resistance may be very strong during treatment.

The good news is that GDS is not necessarily a lifetime disorder!  A person with GDS can cure themself by getting to know a few gun owners, getting educated on guns and gun safety, and making a trip to the range!  Alternatively, you can reach out to someone with GDS to help free them from GDS’s grip.

GDS is also commonly referred to as “Hoplophobia.”

For more information on the VCDL, and the good work they do for Virginia gun owners, visit the organization's web site at vcdl.org.

Cheers!

Bullets and Beans. And Lingerie.

Last month, we reported on the "Controversy Over Guns and Coffee" in Loudon County, Va. The local government was resisting allowing the owners of Bullets and Beans gun shop to sell coffee to its customers. It appeared promising that the shop would finally be able to sell caffeinated beverages.
Alas, it was not to be.

After more than two months of meetings, rescheduled votes and anticipation, the Bullets & Beans gun shop in Hamilton is officially prohibited from selling coffee.

The Town Council voted unanimously Monday night to deny shop owner Kevin Jones the special use permit he applied for in August 2017 that would have allowed him to sell coffee in the Retail Sales and Service Commercial District, since town zoning for that district prohibits food sales in buildings adjacent to residences.

Although the council previously announced that it would vote on a trial period that would have allowed Jones to sell coffee for six months while town staff assessed the impact it had on the town, the council voted to end the coffee selling idea altogether.

In a not-so-shocking admission, one of the Councilman who voted against the shop, confesses that the opposition was based on guns not coffee,

Councilman Craig Green said that the pushback wasn’t necessarily because of opposition to a coffee shop, but because of opposition to a gun shop.

That admission is especially onerous and proves the gun-grabbers will resort to any tactic in their fight against legal gun ownership.

The outcome doesn't surprise me though. I had the opportunity to drive through Loudon County before the recent elections. Based on the content of the the prolific political signs I saw, the area is home to a large population leftists.

Since the residents got their panties in a wad over guns, it's only fitting that the shop owners will get the last laugh.

Jones and his wife, Tammy, said that they’re now going to work on a plan to sell lingerie in the 108-year-old bank building, which they can do without special approval from the council.

See "Hamilton Council Denies Bullets & Beans Coffee Sales; Owners Opt to Sell Lingerie" for the story.

Five O'Clock Friday: Printing Guns

Almost finished.

Beware of "ghost guns" this weekend.

Those Scary Gun Emojis

With so many liberals today exhibiting irrational fears of inanimate objects, it's not surprising that even cartoon drawings of guns would invoke trepidation in these tender snowflakes. Emojipedia has a revealing synopsis of the gun emoji on various platforms.

This graphic is interesting.

The switch to a more realistic depiction by Microsoft in 2016 caught my eye. A cynic might suspect it had something to do with trying to differentiate from Apple's shift in the opposite direction at the same time. However, Microsoft will be following the trend in the future.

Even cartoon drawings can trigger the hoplophobia it seems. For a group of people so immersed in a fantasy world, one would think those ray guns would illicit even more anxiety.

See Google Updates Gun Emoji for more.

Stones vs. Guns

Which is more lethal, a can of soup or a rock? That's the question schools systems must be asking themselves.

A few years ago, we heard about a public school where "each science classroom is equipped with cans of soup to be thrown at the intruder in the instance that the intruder enters the classroom." Now, a school in Pennsylvania has armed their students with stones that "are the right size for hands" to be used in case of attack.

Blue Mountain School District Superintendent David Helsel made headlines recently after testifying to lawmakers at the state capitol that his students could be armed with rocks in case of an active shooter lockdown.

“Every classroom has been equipped with a five-gallon bucket of river stone,” Helsel told lawmakers. “If an armed intruder attempts to gain entrance into any of our classrooms, they will face a classroom full students armed with rocks and they will be stoned.”

Of course, some idiots are probably now afraid white teachers will start stoning the black kids in their classrooms.

What sort of parent would choose kids armed with rocks over an adult with a gun to defend their child from a mass killer?

See "Pennsylvania school wants to arm students with rocks to protect them against active shooters" for all the absurd details.

"Gun Free Zones" Movie

This short film sums up "Gun Free Zones" perfectly.

H/T to Andrew Branca.

Jeff Cooper On Hoplophobia

From To Ride, Shoot Straight, and Speak the Truth.

Source.

Hoplophobe Logic

Maybe we should pass more "commonsense" car laws.

Hat Tip Guffaw in AZ.

Lies and Deception

The left loves misdirection. They are artists in deception, and they will gleefully revel in the blood of innocent Americans as long as they can promote their agenda of opression. Take for example this email from the Senator from Virginia, Tim Kaine...

This week, in response to the tragedy in Orlando, I joined Senator Chris Murphy and 37 of my colleagues in a more than fifteen hour filibuster on the Senate floor. Our goal? Finally get Senate Republicans to agree to votes on commonsense gun reform measures like preventing suspected terrorists from obtaining weapons and expanding background checks to ensure only responsible citizens are authorized to own firearms.

That line about "preventing suspected terrorists from obtaining weapons" has been bandied about by the dishonest pundits of the left since the Orlando terror attack. It's referring to the fact that the Orlando shooter was investigated by the FBI at least twice prior to his jihadist actions. What they neglect to say is that he was not restricted from buying guns because the FBI is more concerned about not offending the mohammedans than they are are protecting innocent Americans. If Tim Kaine really cared about saving lives, he would be calling for an investigation of the FBI itself. His line about "expanding background checks" is misdirection too. The Orlando terrorist passed multiple background checks as part of employment investigations. In that process as well he was given a pass. There is simply no way for the left to promote gun control without engaging in lies and deception.

Another favorite lie of the left put forth in the past week is blaming Conservatives and Christians for imagined "anti-gay" rhetoric inciting the murders. Why do some feel the need to make this into an LGBT issue, or even a "gun" issue? It's more misdirection. The real issue is the twisted evil political ideology called islam. Honest Christians stand against the evil that is islam, and its acts of violence against ANYONE. I will not defend LGBT lifestyle choices in any way, but I will support anyone in a fight against violence from islam or any other fanatical group. Sadly we even see Catholic priests promoting leftist screed in order to direct attention away from the real issue. Too many Catholics today are led by ill informed men who have strayed from the teachings of Holy Church and instead treat their flock to PC nonsense and false social justice teachings.

It's my opinion that if a person spouts the progressive agenda, they have already proven their lack of integrity. Don't fall for the lies of the left. These are dangerous people who aren't happy with simply removing the 2nd Amendment, they are after the entire Constitution. They openly decry the 5th Amendment too. In the past weeks the left has shown its true colors through unabashed promotion of "lists" to which they can add Americans, with no due process or even knowledge by the affected citizen. They wish to deny Constitutional rights just because someone holds an opinion different from their own agenda. It's spun as a "terror watch list" or "no fly list" but what they actually desire is to add anyone with whom they disagree, on any issue, even the weather. Secret lists have been the weapon of oppression throughout history. We, the law-abiding, freedom-loving citizens of this country need to stand up for our rights. There is no room for debate. We will not accept blame for the acts of violence committed by criminals and thugs, nor will we have our freedoms restricted by elitist rulers.

Those who wish to limit where and how our rights exist, while preserving those same rights for themselves, are no better than the other fascists of history. Fortunately for us, while they may be vocal and violent, I believe they are still in the minority. The time for debate is over; they won't change. Arguing with them is a waste of time. What we must do is wipe out any apathy on our side, and stop the "it won't happen here" thinking. This is a war. The only way this war will be won, is if freedom-loving people speak out and join together to deny the leftists the power they desire. Hopefully, the ballot box will be sufficient, but that is by no means guaranteed.

Victims-In-Training

Earlier this week, I was faced with this comment in an online forum:

“If I had to defend myself, I would not be able to and that does not bother me in the least.”

I think it actually caused me physical pain to read that comment. How can a person have such little regard for their own life, or the lives of their loved ones, as to be comfortable with accepting their own rape or murder? I feel more sorry for any children who might be in this person's care than I do for them. Not everyone can, or should, carry a weapon for self-defense. But everyone should care about their loved one's safety, if not their own.

In the recent Orlando terrorist attack, the victims waited three hours to be rescued. We now know the jihadi took time to make phone calls to friends, he also stopped to wash his hands and even clean his gun!!!! Yet no one in the night club stepped up in their own defense, they simply waited. The killer was greatly outnumbered, he was often distracted. There's a reason a group of street thugs will approach their victim from opposite directions at the same time. You can't watch in two directions at once. This isn't meant to blame the victims or play Monday morning quarterback. I'm pointing out a mindset that has become so predominant in this country.

Americans today are brainwashed to think that must obey direction from any authority figure, without question. (And the jihadi with the gun IS an authority figure.) Americans are taught that someone else will save them. Federal and local government agencies, school systems, all teach "cower in place" as a defensive technique. People are trained to mindlessly do what they are told by people who want to kill them. I've lost count of the number of security videos I've watched where a criminal holding someone at gunpoint will actually turn his back, or set the gun down and start grabbing money from a cash register, and the victim just stands there, even when next to an exit. It's pathetic conditioning promoted by the leftist leadership; progressives savor mindless cooperation. And it creates victims.

A gun in the criminal's hand is a dangerous weapon. That's why a gun in the hand of a competent law-abiding citizen is the best defense. People need to plan, and train, before they face the need to defend themselves. Unless you have decided in advance that you will not go quietly, you will indeed go quietly.

I often think that Colonel Jeff Cooper's "Principles of Personal Defense" should be required reading in schools. I re-read it frequently. The wake up call has already come. How will you answer?

I'm even willing to help you get started.

Treat Guns Like Cars?

I am typically distrustful of American citizens who would advocate ignoring the Constitution of the United States. Despite that, I did give thought to this Letter to the Editor published in our local newspaper.

To operate a motor vehicle you must be licensed by the state and pass driving and written exams. You also have to pass an eye exam, because if you can't see you have no business driving.

Every vehicle you own must be registered with the DMV, and your tags, stickers and insurance kept current. Get ticketed and the DMV puts points on your license. Get too many points and the DMV can suspend your license. Drive on a suspended license and you can go to jail.

Why such strict regulation of vehicles and drivers? Because vehicles moving at high speeds can be very dangerous, and if the driver is impaired or the brakes are faulty, innocent people can die. So we comply with these safety regulations, which have saved millions of lives.

But what about the 13,140 people who are shot dead in this country every year? Regardless of criminal history or mental status, anyone can buy any kind of guns they want because background checks are not required on private sales. And that’s perfectly legal with zero accountability. That’s insane.

Gun ownership should be licensed and regulated much like drivers and motor vehicles.
The first requirement for licensing should be medical proof of mental competency, because someone not mentally competent has no more business with a gun than a blind person has driving.

The biggest problem with guns today is gun owners who are nowhere near mentally competent.

I’m a gun owner who welcomes strict gun regulation. Unfortunately too many in this country fiercely oppose any gun regulation at all, and couldn’t care less that innocent people continue being slaughtered because of it.

We must find a way to get control over this license to massacre that the Second Amendment has become. 

The author incorrectly equates a Constitutional right to a State-granted privilege and also equates gun "ownership" with car "operation." However, I was willing to ignore those flaws in the proposal and give it fair consideration. Unfortunately I was unable to fully reply in my own Letter to the Editor, as the paper restricts letters to a mere 300 words.

In the United States, anyone can buy a car with absolutely no background check, whether dealing with a private seller or a licensed car dealer. Under this proposal, gun dealers should no longer be required to perform background checks. Equalizing the regulations would also remove any waiting periods to buy a gun. Since there are no age restrictions on buying cars, this proposal makes gun purchases available to all as well. Like cars, there would be no restrictions on the type or quantity of guns purchased either. By extension, the free giving of guns as gifts, as with cars, would also be allowed.

To operate a car on a public street, one must register the car with the State. Of course, the ultimate purpose of this is actually taxation, not regulation. In addition to registering the vehicle to be taxed, one must also demonstrate a very elementary knowledge of traffic laws, and exhibit a basic ability to operate a motor vehicle. These requirements are easily passed by thousands of fifteen and sixteen year olds every year. That initial requirement accomplished, anyone is free operate just about any type of car or truck, on any street, in every state in the country, for the rest of their lives, without retesting as long as they continue to obey the law, and pay a renewal fee every few years.

The registering of firearms, and paying for a permit to carry that gun concealed for self defense, is a repulsive idea to many gun owners. However, treating gun ownership like a license to drive would finally mean gun owners could carry their guns for self defense in every state. Like cars, we would also be able to possess our guns when going on to school property, and even drive to U.S. Postal Service parking lots, the same privileges granted every licensed driver.

Without ammunition, a gun is pretty useless, just as a car without gasoline is of little use. If we equalize the regulations, it would make ammo purchases also open to all without regulation, age restrictions, or ID requirements. Perhaps gun stores would become as ubiquitous as car dealers and gas stations. I am liking this proposal even better the more I think about it.

The author adds to the proposal by demanding "medical proof of mental competency" in order to own a gun. I am willing to see the same requirement of anyone granted the privilege to drive a car.

After consideration, I find myself willing to compromise and accept the proposal. While the interference of the State in a right is still offensive, treating gun ownership like a license to drive would make life as a gun owner subject to far fewer restrictions. It would also equalize the laws regarding guns across all localities. I want to thank the author, a supposed gun owner, for the thoughtful suggestions to reduce the inconveniences imposed on law abiding citizens when exercising our 2nd Amendment rights.

Obviously, my reply is written tongue in cheek. Intelligent people realize that equating gun ownership with driving a car is nonsense. That is the abysmal level of commonsense and intelligence we must deal with from the gun grabbers and hoplophobes. Personally, I'd prefer to simply ignore such people, or provide a much shorter, two word response.

Ammo Vending Machine

I thought the idea of a free beer vending machine was a great idea, but I'm liking this machine's offerings even better. It's at a range in Beaver Falls, PA.

But of guns or ammo are involved, you can be sure someone objects. Amazingly, it's some members of the club who have their knickers in a twist over this innovation.

A vending machine operated by a candidate for Beaver County Sheriff that distributes firearms ammunition is raising some eyebrows. The machine is installed inside of the Beaver Valley Rifle & Pistol Club, offering both rifle and handgun ammunition and operating in the same fashion as vending machines commonly used to sell snack foods.

The Beaver Countian received several tips from members of the Beaver Valley Rifle & Pistol Club (BVRPC), located next to Brady’s Run Park in Brighton Township, who said they have concerns about the appropriateness of using a vending machine to sell firearms ammunition. This publication was provided with several photos taken of the machine by the members.

The club’s vending machine is operated by Master Ammo Company, a small ammunition manufacturing business owned by Sam Piccinini, a Rochester Township patrolman and Republican candidate for Beaver County Sheriff.

Members of the club who are under 21 must be accompanied by an adult when they are at the club, so there doesn't appear to be an issue with those under 21 getting unsupervised access to dangerous pistol ammo. When I first heard about this, I thought the objections were coming from the hoplophobes in the public. Sounds like another case of the "I'm a gun owner, but..." rhetoric we hear so much from the anti-2nd amendment politicians. I don't understand how the objecting members can rationalize allowing young adults in the club, but at the same time objecting to their access to ammunition.

Assault Soup

Public schools are now "arming" students and teachers with canned vegetables as protection against active shooters in schools. An Alabama school recently sent letters home asking students to arm themselves with canned goods.

The procedure will be the same as we have done in the past with the addition of arming our students with a canned food item. We realize at first this may seem odd; however, it is a practice that would catch an intruder off-guard. The canned food item could stun the intruder or even knock him out until the police arrive. The canned food item will give students a sense of empowerment to protect themselves and will make them feel secure in case an intruder enters their classroom. 

We are asking each student to bring an 8 oz. canned food item (corn, beans, peas, etc.) to use in case an intruder enters their classroom. We hope the canned food items will never be used or needed, but it is best to be prepared. At the end of the school year, the cans will be donated to the food closet.

This is the state of surrender we've reached when it comes to the safety of children in schools. In a Concord, MA, school "each science classroom is equipped with cans of soup to be thrown at the intruder in the instance that the intruder enters the classroom." Rather than allow trained personnel access to firearms, which might actually discourage the violent criminal from entering the schools in the first place, educators choose to protect students with fruit cocktail. Do twenty 7th graders throwing cans stand a chance against an active shooter? Of course not. In their own words, the administrators' goal is to lull the kids into simply feeling secure. Security theatre is all they have.

One wonders, if a student brings a 16 oz can of soup instead of the requested 8 oz, will that lead to a charged of possessing a "high capacity" weapon? Will canned fruit in a lunch box be treated as a concealed weapon? I pity the kid who chews his pop tart into the shape of a can of soup. Maybe they could equip the students with "ammo" belts to hold extra cans.

In all seriousness, this is the level of absurdity to which the hoplophobes will go to avoid seeing scary guns in schools. A good guy with a gun might be able to stop a bad guy with a gun. A teacher armed with creamed corn is woefully ill equipped. I wonder if the people who came up with this plan sat around a table smugly thinking, "If only Columbine High School had been stocked with canned peas." Or "It's a shame someone didn't bean Adam Lanza with some chicken noodle soup." The deep seated fear of doing something to actually protect kids would be laughable if it wasn't the safety of school children they were risking to appease their own fears.

Indeed, some schools systems are taking a realistic approach to student safety. There are at least 10 states that have provisions for armed employees. Missouri legislators recently overturned the hoplophobic governor's veto of a bill allowing trained teachers to carry in school. Teachers in a north Texas school district are discreetly armed. However, until we see a repeal of the ineffective and unconstitutional Federal Gun-Free School Zones Act, students and teachers will be relying on a well-stocked food pantry for protection.

Don't Look in the Mirror

In recent weeks, we were once again faced with drug-addled, psychotic mutants going around killing innocent people. And once again, we see the usual suspects screeching about the dangers of guns, and ignoring the real issue.

But then again, it's not really that surprising that the left fears a focus on mental illness.

It is my belief that we're seeing the result of a decade of the progressive ideal of "everybody's a winner" and a move away from personal responsibility. No longer do we teach that there exists absolute truth in morals, and actions have consequences. It's no wonder we have a generation in despair.

"When SHTF, I'm coming to your house"

How often have we heard that, or something similar? When non-gun owning acquaintances find out about our interest in self-defense and firearms, they remark that they "know where to go when trouble starts." It's often said as a joke, but not without some seriousness. I usually just smile, but in my head I'm evaluating their declaration. "What do they offer?" Or I think, "Sure." Or even, "No way in hell."

I recently came across an essay entitled "Gun Wimps for Gun Rights" that got me thinking. The author explains his lack of desire to own any firearms, while supporting the rights of others to do so. So far, so good. But he goes on to explain the reasoning behind his support for those rights.

So I would like to make a plea to my fellow citizens: please buy, carry, and even stockpile weapons. Carry them with you always. Keep them in your homes and cars. It’s especially important to do this in public places, where freak murderers lurk. The weapons should be loaded and dangerous, capable of killing with one shot. 

I especially desire this because I don’t want to do this. Truth be told, I don’t like them. I don’t want them in my home. I don’t like shooting at the range. I don’t like looking at them, shopping for them, cleaning them, or even thinking about what they do to others. I loathe violence of all sorts, and hope to never have to use it. I’m a pacifist in spirit.

I was reminded of a situation a few years ago when a co-worker provoked a homeless person with what he considered a humorous remark, but one that caused the other party to begin pulling knives out of his backpack and waving them threateningly. My worker, knowing I was likely armed, took shelter behind me. When I had some words with him later he remarked, "I knew you'd protect me." (He did later become a gun owner.)

I exercise my rights for my safety and the safety of my loved ones with whose protection I am charged. Should people who WILL NOT (as opposed to CANNOT) defend themselves expect the same protection? What do we do about those who make a conscious decision to NOT protect themselves and their family? This could apply to food and shelter planning as well, not just defense against violence. This isn't a question of should such people be aided, or if there's a moral obligation to so do. That's a personal decision for each of us who choose to be prepared. The question is, do the willfully helpless have a right expect aid from others?

My own Faith teaches that I have a "grave duty" to protect those entrusted to my care, and my family knows and rightfully expects such protection.

"Legitimate defense can be not only a right but a grave duty for one who is responsible for the lives of others. The defense of the common good requires that an unjust aggressor be rendered unable to cause harm. For this reason, those who legitimately hold authority also have the right to use arms to repel aggressors against the civil community entrusted to their responsibility." (CCC 2265)

I do agree completely with the author's assertion that an armed society will provide for a safer society. He, in some sense, understands the inherent right to self defense in a free society, and the roll firearms may play in a free and safe community. However I find his expectation that it is others, not himself, who will provide for his and his family's safety, to be both naive and selfish, and even somewhat offensive. He concludes with this:

The only real means to prevent the emergence of a world safe for criminals and government is to see the proliferation of guns among everyone else. I’m sorry, but I will not do my part in this respect. But I will defend the rights of others to do so, with a sincere hope that they will stockpile and be ready. Yes, I’m a free rider, but gun owners need to know that I’m truly grateful.

Grateful or not, is he justified in his expectations?

Media Bias

Is there a better indicator of leftist media narrative against guns than this headline on the Chicago Tribune web site?

The accompanying article does go on to mention that the Hollywood liberal woman-hater killed half his victims by stabbing, but apparently that wasn't important enough to affect the headline. It's quite interesting that all the killer's stabbing victims died, while less than half the people he shot were killed. Still, the focus is on the gun. Of course, the source of the murderer's rage, the fact that he was raised in a pornography-worshipping culture which teaches that women only exist for a man's sexual gratification, doesn't get a mention at all.

The idea among California men males of murdering women for refusing their sexual advances seems to be not uncommon.

Why Gun Rights Will Survive

When the opponents have this level of intelligence, how can freedom not survive?

It's sad that California Senator Kevin de León (Democrat naturally) probably believes what he's saying. He's so naive that he blindly accepts the stuff the anti-gun groups feed him. They know they lie, he's not smart enough to see through it. The same thing could be said of the people who voted for this fool.

I bet his English teacher is proud too.

Lost & Found: Anti-Tank Missiles

Some people have all the luck. I felt lucky when I found a box of 9mm ammo I had forgotten about. These folks in Leesburg found anti-tank missiles in their shed.

No word on who lost them.

Meanwhile across the pond: This U.K. couple is so shook up they are ready to move out of their home after finding some corroded ammo their pond.

Gun Grabber Vileness II

I've said it before, that those who clamor for "gun control" are no more than accomplices for the criminal segment of the population. They press their agenda in order to create a defenseless victim pool. Just this week, the most vocal of the anti-rights groups again showed their support even the most vile of criminals. At a stop in New Hampshire, among other venues, members of New York Mayor Bloomberg's MAIG memorialized Tamerlan Tsarnaev as a victim of gun violence.

At a June 18 gun control rally in New Hampshire sponsored by New York mayor Michael Bloomberg's Mayors Against Illegal Guns group, the name of Boston bomber Tamerlan Tsarnaev was read aloud as a recent victim of gun violence. 

Throughout the rally, organizers read a list of names of people who had been killed with guns since the Dec. 14 shootings at the Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, CT. 

When they read Tsarnaev's name, pro-gun supporters who were at the rally to counter Bloomberg's group began shouting, "He's a terrorist," according to a report by Tim Buckland of the New Hampshire Union-Leader.

That's right, the depravity of the hoplophobes runs so deep that even a islamic terrorist who killed and maimed dozens in an attack on innocent people, is to be mourned and remembered as a victim of gun violence after being shot and killed by law enforcement.

The gun-grabbers continue to expose themselves for what they truly represent. They care more for keeping criminals safe than they do about keeping innocent people alive. The level of depravity exhibited by such people is disgusting and deserves no place in a free and civilized society.

The Stupid, It Burns

"A pencil is a weapon when it is pointed at someone in a threatening way and gun noises are made."

 --Bethanne Bradshaw, Suffolk Public Schools

Yep, a Virginia second grader was suspended for holding his pencil like a gun. I wonder how Ms. Brandshaw manages to dress herself each morning. Sadly, this is exactly the sort of mindlessness that we've come to expect from the State indoctrination centers.