Friday, March 14, 2008

Bias Press, Na you don't say

Ok I was wondering about this but had not looked it up to see what had happened. If you have been in Utah in the last few years you have herd of Dell Shansy. Well he is a loud mouth that owned a computer store. He was known for his loud commercials. Well he is apparently running for Salt Lake county mayor. That is not what I want to talk about here.
A few years ago he was in trouble for pulling a gun on some guys that had stopped him in a neighborhood. The story was all over the place and big deal was being made about him pulling his gun. It seams that Dell was speeding through a neighborhood and was stopped by three guys. The event was escalated to a point where Dell pulled his gun. I did hear that the reason he pulled his gun was because one of the guys had a rock that he was threatening Dell with.
The story was covered in detail and a lot of his other antics were pulled out to show what type of guy Dell was.
Now was Dell speeding? Probably. Was Dell’s mouth the reason the situation escalated? Probably yes. Did the three guys have the right to stop Dell, no?
Was he right in pulling his gun? That is the question. There was no coverage of the situation after the original court date.
Talking to my wife when I got home she was telling me that Dell was cleared of the charges because it was deemed that he acted appropriately.
So it appears that a person used a gun leally and in defends of his person. But was there any coverage, nope.
Big Surprise
And people say the press is not bias.

Friday, March 7, 2008

Big Surprise

I have been watching the president primaries and am finding the fight among the democrats funny.
The big thing now is that The Clinton Camp is trying to make the delegates in Michigan and Florida count. Of course this is contray to the letter Clinton signed saying that she would abide by the DNC’s rules.
Obama of course is making a big deal about it, but I’m thinking he should just be quite because early in the race he sign an agreement with McCain stating if they won the nomanation they would us just public funds, now I’m not sure what that means completely, but Obama is shying away form this because he has raised so much money that to use only public money would be limiting himself.
So really both candidates will agree to something until it hinders them. Big Surprise

On the other hand I heard one guy on that had called in to Doug Wright stating that the reason Florida moved up their primary was because of the republican sensate moved the primary date and the democrats were forced to move and were being punished because of the republicans in the senate.
Wow, do you thing they could come up with something new besides blaming republicans for everything. I’m just waiting for them to blame Bush for the sinking of the Titanic.

Wednesday, February 20, 2008

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

Tuesday, February 12, 2008

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.

Thursday, January 31, 2008

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.

Monday, January 14, 2008

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.