Articles tagged as

Criminals

Support our police

“To protect the public, police are charged to complete an arrest even if there’s resistance”

by Don

The saddest thing about someone who loses his/her life at the hands of the police is that the death is almost always the consequence of the deceased’s resistance to being arrested.  The likelihood of someone dying when he/she fully complies with police orders is nearly, and should be, zero. To protect the public, police are … Read more

AG Bill Barr – No, You Can’t Keep ICE and Border Patrol from Arresting Criminaliens

by Steve MacDonald

You are in the country illegally and break the law. ICE and Border Patrol come to collect you. But cry-baby liberals with Twisted Panty syndrome get the Sads. They pass State Laws prohibiting that. AG Barr Looks at them and says, good luck with that.

Read more

Criminals for Students for “Safe Schools”

by Steve MacDonald

If you have any doubts about whether criminals support efforts by progressives to get students to disarm law-abiding citizens then let me help. Street thugs, muggers, rapists, Gangs, and crime syndicates (including the ones pretending to be from the government), are all for a force monopoly that favors their endeavors. They are all advocates of gun-free … Read more

A New Kind Of Vicious

by Rick Olson

“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.”   —Sir Edmund Burke

D'Marquis Elkins - Brunswick Georgia Baby Killer
D’Marquis Elkins – Brunswick Georgia Baby Killer

This is 17-year old D’Marquis Elkins of Brunswick, Georgia. Elkins is a criminal…a young criminal…not even eighteen years old yet. In early March Elkins needed some cash so he decided to do what his skill set allows…a Robbery.

Sherry West was pushing her stroller along when she was confronted by Elkins and 15-year-old Dominique Lang. Elkins demanded money. West told him, she didn’t have any money. He fired a shot, grazing her ear. Repeating his demands, West again pleaded with him that she didn’t have any money.

Read more

Response to Questions about Guns

by Don

Questions were asked of me in two letters to the editor that I didn’t see until there was a third letter on May 18th.  My response below has been submitted to the Laconia Daily Sun (http://issuu.com/dailysun) which carried the original letters and all can be reviewed at the link above.

To the Editor:

Dear Bernadette Loesch,

Apparently three times is the charm as I finally noticed your letter in Saturday’s Laconia Daily Sun.  I regret not seeing your earlier letters.

Your letter of April 26 asks, “why (do) ordinary, law abiding people need to own or be able to use high powered, lethal weapons?”  In America the poor, weak, un-famous, and politically unconnected have the same right to life as rich, powerful, famous, and politically connected people.

Law abiding people need guns because governments don’t keep guns out of the hands of criminals.  Our right to life includes our right to protect ourselves and other innocent lives from criminals.  That requires guns with enough bullets.  The police will rarely arrive in time to protect you.  As the NRA correctly states, when seconds count, the police are minutes away.

I am not aware of any low powered, lethal weapons.   If something is lethal, it is high powered enough.  Neither of us is going to care if we are killed with a 22, a 50 cal. Barrett’s, or a 30 cal. machine gun, we’ll be just as dead.  I prefer that potential murderers, and other criminals, are detoured by knowing that they may be seriously harmed by a potential victim.

Read more

Kelly Ayotte shoots down Manchin/Twoomey background check bill

by Skip
Senator Kelly Ayotte Telling Andrea Mitchel she opposes a filibuster of the gun control bill
Senator Kelly Ayotte Telling Andrea Mitchel she opposes a filibuster of the gun control bill

Yeah, I couldn’t help but notice that it seems that Kelly, even though she did vote to kill the gun control filibuster, has now signaled that the Manchin / Twoomey “compromise” background check gets the back of her hand.  With that, the M/T bill is now in worse shape than a spent 12 gauge shotgun shell laying on the ground.  Good riddance to it, as both of those senators said that their bill would not have stopped either Aurora or Sandy Hook.

Thus, in my mind, this is the perfect example of why sometimes the best thing is to do nothing instead of the knee jerk reaction “Hey, we’re supposed to be charge – WE GOTTA DO SOMETHING!”  And then we get bills that impinge on people in a myriad of small, incremental ways – but don’t solve the actual problem.  Or worse, charge ahead to solve problems that extremely few have – or create solutions to which no problem exists.

And that is why before we give a thumbs up to Kelly on HER legislation, we need to see if it:

  • Actually keeps guns away from evil doers instead of just making it harder on law abiding folks
  • Actually starts to address the flip side – how to keep firearms out of the hands of the likes of Lanza and Holmes (Sandy Hook and Aurora, respectively) without it becoming a backdoor gun confiscation process (like declaring that returning vets have PTSD, so you loose your Constitutional Right).

And that is the main thing that most won’t bring up –

Read more

Open Letter to Congress on Gun Control

by Don

There are things that can be done to reduce gun violence in our country.  Those things can be summed up as:  enforce the current laws, lock up violent criminals,  and stop doing stupid things and start doing thngs that work.  Unfortunately some people are evil and no gun laws will stop them from getting guns if they wish or doing what they wish until they are stopped.

I don’t think that I have heard a single thing coming out of Washington that would do anything but make it more difficult for law abiding people to defend themeslves. So one has to wonder if protecting people is what they are after, or if there are other objectives.   Only a tiny fraction of gun owners ever harm someone with a gun.  Americans are four to five times as likely to die of second hand smoke than to die of a gun, and there are half as many American smokers as gun owners.

There is no guarantee, anf frankly little indication, that Congress without our help will do anything useful to save the lives of law abiding Americans.  Congress already put our innocent children into “Gun Free Zones” which are a perfect example of a liberal idea than anyone with common sense knew would be counter-productive.  Some of the blood from Newtown and every school mass killing belongs on the hands of Washington politicians who turned all our schools into attractive nuisances for killers looking for lots of easy victims.

Most Americans (not the ciminals and it seeems some politicians) want to save innocent lives, but taking guns away from law abiding citizens and leaving them in the hands of criminals is not the way to do it.  Congress has a history of passing stupid and often counter-productive laws, so without our input they could easily do it again and cause many more dead law abiding Americans.

I encourage everyone to contact our elected representatives and let them know how you feel.  If my letter gives you any useful idea, great.

Dear Senator or Congresswoman,

If the real intent of the new gun laws being considered is to save lives, there are four things that would help.  First, and most beneficial, would be to ensure that a better job is done of enforcing the existing laws and putting the people who intentionally harm other people in prison for a very long time.  Existing criminal laws are not being enforced adequately at any level of Government including the Federal level, and we both know it.  Enforcing our immigration laws would help significantly because illegal aliens commit a disproportional amount of crime including homicide.

Read more

Differences between an “assault weapon” and a shotgun

by Don

A Minnesota resident created a video letter to his Congresman and Senators (see the link below).  The video demonstrates the differences between the affects of a shotgun and what are incorrectly being called assault weapons.  It is clear that some of our elected representatives do not know about guns, live in a complete fantasyland, or they just don’t care about the safety of people who can’t afford to hire their own security or have it provided for them like the President, Senators, Congressmen, other government officials, and other prominent people.

http://freedomoutpost.com/2013/02/video-letter-constituent-educates-his-elected-representatives-on-shotguns-ar-15s/

The vdieo shows the affects of these weapons when used by trained people in essentially a pressure free situation.  This is a lot different from when somone needs to try to protect themself and their family or others from criminals.  At that time you need to factor in suprise, fear, perhaps screaming children, dialing 911, trying to escape an attacker, and perhaps having to dodge bullets being fired at you.  All these things will affect someone’s ability to ensure that they, their family members and / or other innocent people survive.

Read more

Biden, “If it only saves one life.” Did Biden Say Something Rational? Yes, but He didn’t mean it.

by Don

Vice-President Biden surprised reporters by saying something that actually makes sense, unfortunately the administration intends to do something else.  Here is the rational part of what Biden said, “Nothing we’re going to do is going to fundamentally alter or eliminate the possibility of another mass shooting or guarantee that we will bring gun deaths down to 1,000 a year from what it is now.”

Here is the part that differs from what the administration intends to do, “But there are things that we can do, demonstrably can do, that have virtually zero impact on your Second Amendment right to own a weapon for both self-defense and recreation that can save some lives.”

Yes, there are things that could cut down crime and have virtually zero impact on the Second Amendment rights of law abiding people.    Here are a few things they could do:

Read more

Response to Nancy Parsons Questions about Objections to Obama’s Gun Control Policies

by Don

Perhaps other people wonder about the questions in Nancy Parson’s letter of January 18, 2013 in the Laconia Daily Sun.  (See:  http://issuu.com/dailysun/docs/lds1-18-13 ) My beliefs are based on the following: True safety requires consideration of reality not wishes. If anyone is hurt during a crime, it should be the criminal not the intended victim.  Criminals will ignore gun laws and get the guns they want.  Lack of accurate information causes many people to irrationally fear guns in the hands of law abiding Americans.

First.  I lived most of my life outside of New Hampshire in states with very restrictive gun laws so initially it felt strange to see armed civilians.  All those other states have much higher crime rates than New Hampshire, and I feel much safer in New Hampshire where criminals aren’t assured of helpless victims.

Second.  A common question among people who know nothing about guns is about “how many bullets does one need?”  The answer is, it depends.

Anyone who thinks you only need one or two bullets should go to a shooting range (there is one in Belmont) and shoot at a target (they’ll help you).  Then consider how hard it is to hit a flying bird or a running, jumping and turning animal.

Self-defense is another matter.  To an unpredictably moving target, add in surprise, fear, perhaps terror, attempts to corral and calm children, calling the police for help, perhaps an angry attacker shooting at you, and our natural hesitancy to shoot another human.

Read more

More Scared Shurtleff

by

Though I suspect this young lady is not.  

Commentary From Crooks On Journal News Gun Ownership Postings

by Rick Olson

“Having a list of who has a gun is like gold – why rob that house when you can hit the one next door, where there are no guns?” —Walter T. Shaw, Notorious Ex Burglar and Jewel Thief

On December 30, Steve shared with us about the Journal News and its’ December 22nd publication of each and every address of gun owners in Rockland and Westchester Counties, NY…replete with interactive maps. Moreover, Steve provided the names and addresses of the principle players at Journal News.

Steve makes a valid point here:

Because turnabout is always fair play, a blogger went and dug up the names and addresses (phone numbers and other contact info) of the folks at theJournal-News. 

Read more

Home Invasion Stopped With Scary Black Gun…By A 15-Year-Old

by Rick Olson

Res Ipsa Loquitur!

Join the UAW! Smoke Dope, Drink Beer While You Work!

by Rick Olson

 “Stupidity combined with arrogance and a huge ego will get you a long way.” —Chris Lowe

You can’t make this stuff up! “Whistle Smoke Dope, Drink Beer While you work!” Thirteen UAW auto workers have been reinstated with back pay after being fired when they were caught drinking and smoking dope on break. In my own slice of world, reasonable people agree this rises to the level of workplace misconduct. But not if you are a Union Auto Worker…Clearly, one of the effects of alcohol is pretentiously making one feel, “six foot tall and bullet proof,” but CLEARLY, if one is a UAW Chrysler Auto Worker, that is a literal metaphor.

Read more

More GSA Hackarama

by Rick Olson

“Experience has shown, that even under the best forms of government those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny.”   —Thomas Jefferson

The most Corrupt Jeffrey Neely before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee

On April 3rd I detailed the happenings of the GSA and their corrupt spending practices in, GSA, Clowns, Mindreaders and Sushi. So, this morning at 5:50 AM I am watching Fox News and the narrative detailing a report on Jeffrey Neely, the western regional commissioner for GSA.

Representative Elijah Cummings, (D) Maryland made references to internal documents indicating that Jeff Neely was gleefully spending taxpayer funds like crowned royals. Neely and his wife  were enjoying living large off of the taxpayers and were giddy about it.

Check out the Fox News Video, HERE.

Read more

It’s The Shoes, Man

by Steve MacDonald

Occupiers redistributing without authorizationNothing says #Occupy movement like inspiring young people to support redistribution.  That is, unless, they are four minors and you have recruited them to remove a safe from your neighbors house. (So many fine lines between social justice and criminal justice and so little time to explore them all.)

Such is the predicament of Marion Smith, of Cross Street in Nashua; a multi-faceted #occupier-ette*, who tried to liberate some sneakers from Sears Essentials in Nashua the day before the company announced it would close that store.  Marion got caught sneaking the (presumably essential and no loner eponymous) sneakers just a few weeks after the great underage safe heist went awry, and is now facing a Class B Felony.

(*#occupier-ette: one of those people the Democrats are convinced can’t run their own lives who may not have been an actual occupier, but has undoubtedly been motivated by months of glowing media exposure and left wing praise, to the idea of redistribution)

Read more

KRISTIN TAKES THEM DOWN ONE BY ONE

by Rick Olson

“Liars are always ready to take oaths.” —Vittorio Alfieri

Brendan_Bisbee_GROK.jpg

Brendan Bisbee, love interest of the infamous shrew Kristin Ruggiero is presently on trial
answering to seven counts of Perjury where prosecutors allege he lied for Kristin during her trial. Also under indictment are Elizabeth “Kim” McDonald, Kristin’s mother, Daniel Ruggiero, Chief Petty Officer Jeffrey Ruggiero’s estranged brother and of course, Kristin has been re-indicted following her trial on twenty-one new counts consisting of witness tampering, four counts;  falsifying evidence, three counts;  Solicitation/Perjury, four counts;  Perjury, six counts and,  Unsworn Falsification, four counts. Shrew Kristin pal, Sharon Cohen who testified at trial, also faces legal exposure, but has yet to be indicted.

Aside from the obvious “Midas Touch: of sorts Kristin seems to possess, that is, those who get tangled up in Kristin’s web of manipulation would be well-served to have legal counsel retained. People who take up with Kristin inevitably face legal exposure.

Read more

OCCUPY WALL STREET FOR DUMMIES

by Rick Olson

“In hindsight it may even seem inevitable that a socialist society will starve when it runs out of capitalists.”  —Larry Niven

Occupy_Wall_Street_For_Dummies2GROK.jpg

How does one become an Occupy Wall Street Protestor? A quest for understanding in a somewhat complicated topic. Why? Because there are some who seem to demonstrate a modicum of intelligence and articulate usage of the language when the camera is rolling. And, there are some who dress reasonably normal (normal meaning, no obvious hygiene challenges, maintaining a groomed appearance). Those folks are in the vast minority. And certainly it would not be an accurate statement to say these slackers are all “youth generational.” The camera has caught some old enough to be peers of my parents.

But the task at hand is an immediate one. How do I blend in? How do I become an OWS protestor. I suppose I should start with something superficial. Ah yes! you say, “Things aren’t always as they appear.” and how right one might be to make such a characterization. But any good leftist will tell you, honesty is a relative term. “Your views are your views.”  Kind of akin to calling people racists because they don’t like Obama… Yet, when it is pointed out that these same “racists” like Herman Cain, the argument shifts to, “you only like him because he gives your racism cover.” Rank dishonesty is the domain of the left. And outward appearance is what we first see from our friends in the lame stream media.

As a segue into my OWS protestor journey, I neither shave nor shower for an extended period of time. (if I wish to wholly embrace this slacker look, I don’t brush my teeth, either..If a casual observer spies a chive stuck in my teeth when I smile, I have arrived) It is important to engender that, “rail against the establishment” appearance. Smelling ones’ own smell, is sufficient validation one has achieved parity with the OWS appearance.

Read more

KRISTIN RUGGIERO GOES TO THE SUPREME COURT

by Rick Olson

“Liars are always ready to take oaths.” —Vittorio Alfieri

Fukken_Bitch.jpg

On Wednesday, September 21, The New Hampshire Supreme Court heard from Kristin Ruggiero. Kristin seeks to overturn her convictions arguing that the court should have excluded a photo of her cell phone number, and an intercepted telephone conversation that served as the evidence that brought her to her current demise.

Kristin Ruggiero was sent to Jail in May of 2010, convicted of twelve counts consisting of lying and falsifying physical evidence. Kristin had tried to do what many before her have done and gotten away with: Using the court system to exact a personal vendetta against her ex-husband Jeffrey Ruggiero.

In oral arguments before the Court, Attorney Mark L. Sisti argued that the evidence used to convict Kristin should have been thrown out because it was disqualified under N.H. RSA 570-A:6 because in New Hampshire, her consent was not obtained by the parties in South Carolina to make the intercept.  New Hampshire commonly referred to as a, “two party” state, requires consent of all parties before any recording may be made, while South Carolina does not. Sisti concedes that, while no crime may have been committed by the recording because the interception took place in South Carolina, A New Hampshire resident still has the expectation of privacy under the statute, and the evidence should have been excluded. Sisti essentially argues for an absolute long-arm immunity without consideration to laws of extra-territorial consequence. (Listen to the arguments HERE).

Read more

Share to...
BufferCopyFlipboardHacker NewsLineLinkedInMastodonMessengerMixPinterestPocketPrintRedditSMSTelegramTumblrVKWhatsAppXingYummly