The Democrats have a long history of anti-firearm rhetoric and yes, even actions. There have been no less than twelve bills introduced during this session of Congress by Democrats dealing with restriction of firearm ownership. While these bills have little chance of moving through the Congress, it does exemplify the Democrats’ long-standing fear of gun owners.

Obama’s own voting record in Illinois and his own words show a desire to do away with private firearm ownership. And yes he does publicly support a UN treaty that would ban private firearm ownership.

I believe Palin is correct in her assessment, although I would question her motives.

I would invite every one to read this article.

A few excerpts…

“While taking groceries to her car, a man approached an 82-year-old woman and said something horrible to her: “This is your day. You are too old to be alive anyway.” According to police, he then grabbed the woman’s cane and beat her. Despite the savage assault, the elderly woman managed to reach into her purse, draw her gun and fire a shot. The man fled and, upon hearing the shot, store employees quickly came to the woman’s aid. The self-proclaimed “stubborn, old broad” is badly bruised but will fully recover. “If I go naturally or to a sickness or something, fine,” she said. “I’m ready to go, but I’m not ready to let some idiot like that take me out.” (KVOA-TV, Tucson, AZ, 03/15/10)”

“A crazed, knife-wielding man attempted to stab people at random in a convenience store parking lot. Police said he’d already chased a delivery driver and others when he ran down a car leaving the lot. He lunged at the car’s driver with the knife, wounding him. That’s when the driver, whose two young stepdaughters were in the vehicle, produced a handgun and fired about six shots, killing the attacker. The driver will recover from his injuries.“You’ve got to protect yourself,” said witness Byron Cook.“He had his two kids in the car and they were terrified.” (WREG-TV, Memphis, TN, 03/05/10)”

As Americans, Democrats have every right to be helpless victims; that would be a personal choice. On the flip-side, government has no right to restrict a citizen’s right to defend his home, family and property.

My post was to be somewhat of a spoof concerning Sarah Palin’s airborne wolf hunts, but just to set the record straight I’m not too far from the truth concerning her sentiments.

She’s no longer governor of course, but being an avid outdoorsman myself, I find shooting wolves in such a manner a gross affront to their majesty in nature as an apex predator. Wolves have earned their stripes as a species whereas our current humankind only about 70,000 years old since the last great close extinction of our species have not earned theirs.

All we as a species are good for is fouling our nest; ie, the planet at large while doing grave harm to our fellow beings and creatures. Truly, we’re a sorry lot indeed. : |

http://www.slate.com/id/2199140

Carl Nemo **==

I do not believe that is correct. You state it is a fact, so please provide documentation to support the assertion. Defend or retract.

“Fact: DCvs Heller SCOUS ruled “the 2nd amendment has nothing to do with the national guard””

Show me. Defend or retract.

This is just plain flat incorrect. Due process is not restricted solely to criminal law. Frinstance: eminent domain.

We recently went through all the happy horse puckies of the case in Connecticut where eminent domain was used to take real property for a quasi-public use. The Supreme Court ruled, quite properly, that the law was there and if people didn’t like the law they should change it.

Taxes are another example. Money is property yet governments state, local, and Federal all have laws that require you to pay taxes, whether you like it or not. Due process was achieved by the enactment of statutes that allowed collection of taxes. There is no criminal process involved.