More gun control

Ok I have to write this, there has been a lot of shooting over the last few weeks. These things are terrible events and each one saddens me.
I have noticed that there is a general trend among the shootings. They are all at gun free zones. They have been on school campuses and in courthouses. The one at the courthouse the gunman went after the cops first, to eliminate any threat to himself. An gun freezone really does a good job of elimitating threats to the shooter.
As usually there is more calls for gun control, even thought the new laws would not have stopped the crimes. I mean how could a gun free zone such as a school be more restrictive to guns?
Anyway here is the typical liberal response

I have also read posts or editorials that state that the shootings that were stopped by armed citizens were more a chance thing and not a good idea.
Give me a break.
In the case of the trolley square shooting there were several concealed weapon permit holders in the mall with their guns, they did not run out to confront the shooter, but had the shooter come into the store where they were located, the shooter would have meet strong resistance. Still as it was a citizen with a gun that slowed the shooter down and allowed the cops to take him down.
Any way it’s just another attack on the second amendment.
My question is “ Once you do away with the second amendment, what amendment are you going to go after then?”

People it’s not just about guns it about freedom

One year from the Trolley Square shooting

I really mostly forgot about this but I really think it should be something to take about. It is the one-year anniversary of the shooting at Trolley Square here in Salt Lake City. This was a scary night. I remember watching the new flashes and thinking of the terror that someone there would be thinking and how I wished I were there to help.
This was a tragic event that no one thought would happen in our town, and there are some that are still feeling the affects. My heart goes out to the families that lost love ones, and a sense of pride goes to the offices that went in to face the evil that was happening.
My wife’s Aunt was working in a store in Trolley Square and missed the shooting by just a few hours. Way too close for comfort.
Now I get to get up on my soapbox. The shooter at Trolley Square (I refuse to use his name) was using a shotgun. Now the damage a shotgun can do is enormous. Pretty much anyone that was shoot was killed, very few wounded, but over all the total killed was less than what it should have been considering the weapon used and the amount of ammo the shooter had with him. Why, because of an armed citizen. Yes he was a police officer, but he was off duty and did not have to have his gun with him or really get involved (of course any good cop would have gotten involved). Now the officer was not the one that killed the shooter, that was the other responding officers, but he slowed the man down and in doing so saved lives.
There have been other examples recently were an armed citizens stopped if not killed a shooter in a public place, and if you really look at the recent shooting across the country you will notice that most are happening in gun free zones. Where if not banned then strongly discouraged.
So what is my rant, I have a cwp and carry a gun the majority of the time. Why, because I feel that you have to fight evil, not just run away, if you want to protect life.
Again, My heart is with the families that must still be feeling the pain of the shooting; you are not alone.

Movie Shoot Em Up

Well I finally saw shoot em up, and have to say it was totally under whelming, in fact it was upsetting. I wanted to see it because there were a lot of guns in the movie but it ended up being a slam against the 2 amendment and all gun owners.
The movie starts with the hero saving a pregnant woman from the gun-toting thugs. He does a good job fending the off with the 380. And even delivers the baby. Now I will not go into the fact that you will be hard pressed to get a one shot kill with a 380, not that it isn’t possible but very difficult and he shot about 4 time the number of bullets that gun will hold regardless of the three reloads he does but I digress, anyway the women doesn’t make it, they kill her off with a head shot but the way she was bleeding she wouldn’t have lived anyway. This just kind of shows the level of realism about guns in this movie.
The hero take the baby and tries to give it up but the killers don’t give him the chance, he has to rush in and save the baby.
As the story goes on it comes out that the guys trying to kill the baby are from a gun manufacturer and are trying to kill the baby that would be the marrow donor for the congressman they is ding and is stanch anti-gun guy.
The hero figures this out and goes toe the congressman only to find he’s in bed with the gun company, and will be changing his mind about gun control. This leads the hero to kill the congressman to give the anti-sun movement a poster child or martyr.
As the story progresses the guy leading the thugs is looking in to find out who the hero is, because no matter how many people he throws at him they can’t kill him. He digs up somewhere that the hero is some kind of special ops solder and was the son of a British gunsmith chased to the US by the Uks gun bans. He also uncovers that his wife and child were killed by the lunatic that shot up a McDonalds, also that the hero owned the gun store that sold the lunatic the shotguns used in the shooting. I thought it funny that is wasn’t until the last few scenes that you find out the hero was sloppy in the background check when he sold the gun and was prosecuted for it and is a fugitive because of that.
So we have a fugitive from justice that couldn’t even follow the laws that are already in place proving the point that the gun companies are evil.
What a load of crap.
The laws are in place to help prevent the lunatic from getting a gun legal and the hero didn’t follow them. Not saying that he desired to lose his wife and child, but then he runs and becomes a fugitive. This is your anti-gun poster boy. Not to mention that he very willing execute the congressman and many guards at the gun warehouse, who were doing their job and we legal where he was trespassing.
So this is the man so show that if guns were illegal that the violence would go a way.
I guess I shouldn’t have expected straight thinking from a movie where the hero is able to kill anyone he looks at by just sweeping the gun in that direction, while no one else could even shot sort of strait.If you get a chance to watch this movie, skip it and watch something else more interesting, like paint drying. Your intelligence would be less insulted.

Science Friday

I was listening to Science Friday on NPR tonight. The had an author on that wrote the book "Plan B” Ok I forgot the authors name, but it was basically the plan we should have to curb global warming and what we should do to accomplish that. The plan is the typical push for alternative energy, now I have to say here I am all for renewable recourses. I have a real difficult time with the US being dependant on foreign oil. This has caused us all sorts of problem and will continue to do so considering the oil comes from the unstable regions of the Middle East.
Most of his ideas were fairly typical global warming rant, you know we need to stop using our cars and we should use solar and wind power (at least he wasn’t advocating population control, at least not in this interview). What surprised me was the author was talking about how the market needed to drive this push towards using alternative energy. However his suggestion was to lower the income tax and make up the difference with a carbon tax. I don’t know about you but that is not having the market drive us towards alternative energy. It is more government program.
However this is what he is calling market driven. This is still government control, or the government knows best attitude.
I love how the global warming group is all for government clamping down. It fallows the liberal view that the government will save us all.
Now I believe there is a reason to control our emissions, and find a better way to fill our energy needs, but it shouldn't be done with a tax or government control.
He was right in one aspect; the market is the force that will ultimately make the country go green. It has more power than any government program to shape how people live.Just another global warming alarmist expecting the government to save him. I wonder what he is willing to give up to have the government to fix it for him. He probably thinks he doesn’t pay enough in taxes now.

Fair Game

So I was listening to NPR some time. There is a show called Fair Game. The promo states they blow up the news of the day and put it back together. They just left out that when they put the stories back together they only use the liberal talking points for their template.
Anyway, the host had John Bolton on tonight. After tonight I really like John. John has gone on record that the recent intelligence report about Iran giving up their nuclear program and has been a critical of Bush and his administration. That last point is I think why he was on the show. The host (I can remember her name o well) was trying to pin john down by saying this report doesn't fit your view you are just going to ignore the facts. I love John’s response; He asked her if she had read the report. Of course she hadn't, she just knew what had been said. John ripped into her about no knowing what Iran had really stopped doing, and that it really was only a small part of the program to create weapons. He then when a little more in to how this report was to effect policy and well we don't really know all the info as the majority is still classified. So in true liberal style because she wasn't getting the answer she wanted, she went to her bush bashing and how John had stated in an article about something he had said against Bush. I'd admit I wasn't listing has hard because I was getting out of the car but John wouldn't rise to the bait and the interview ended really abruptly after that. Not surprising, I'm just supposed that she aired it, probably to fill the quota of conservative time on the radio.
O well I just thought it was funny that she wanted to talk and force a point but because she had not read the report and was trying to use the headlines to prove a political point, or really just a point against Bush and his administration.O well she went on to her music section, which is really a better place for her to talk on.

Highway Patrol Memorials

Ok have to talk about this. There are memorials on the side of the road here for highway Patrolmen that have fallen in the line of duty. Normally this is a cross, although I have seen a Star of David on one. I have always thought these are according to the troopers’ religion. I feel this is right. The memorial should be to honor them and their family.
Well there is a group call Atheist of America that is suing the Highway Patrol to remove the cross from the memorials. They claim that the highway Patrol is promotion Christianity with the crosses.
This makes me so mad, and I feel this is a load of crap.
If seeing a cross is going to convert you to Christianity you are not strong in your belief anyway, and if a cross can convert someone then pulling the cross will convert someone to atheism. So why is it ok for you to force your religion on me (Yes I feel that atheism is religion, it is a way of belief. I will talk about this later)?
I am sick of people that look for things to be offend about, but really get put out if you get offend by them. Grow a backbone.
I feel that the memorials are for the families of the fallen Patrolman, their families and the other Officers. The rest can go to hell if they are offended.
Just my two cents.

Hollywood Writers Strike

Ok I just have a comment about the writers strike. They are saying on the news that this strike is going to affect everyone right down to the waiters in the dinners around Hollywood.
OK so they are saying that the people that make money will in Hollywood will spend and help all the little people.
That’s a good concept, but it needs to be applied to rich businesspeople as well. They will spend their money on the waiters and the workmen. They are the ones employ, but somehow this is never considered. It seams that if you’re a businessperson you are hoarding your money (of course given the situation in Washington it might be good to hoard and hide your money).
So why is there a different standard applied to Hollywood than there is applied to Wall Street?Just wondering?