Blog de KingShamus

"When an entire nation thirsted to break free from PC…Andrew Breitbart opened a big bar."–Chris Muir

Posts Tagged ‘Gun Control’

David Gregory Gets To Skate, Ben Shapiro Makes Piers Morgan Irate

Posted by KingShamus on January 13, 2013

Priveleges

Not surprising.

District of Columbia Attorney General Irvin Nathan issued a lengthy letter today explaining the decision not to prosecute David Gregory “despite the clarity of the violation of this important law,” despite rejecting NBC’s claims of a subjective misunderstanding of the law, and despite vowing vigorous enforcement of gun laws.

But it’s not like this Important Sophisticated Celebrity Journalist got any special favors.  Gregory’s wife is totally not BFF’s with the DC attorney general or anything.

Oh, wait… 

For a reporter, David “Laws For Thee Not Me” Gregory is a great dancer.

DANCE PLAYBOY DANCE!

Now that’s how you do “Gangam Style”, kids.

Meanwhile, Piers Morgan continued to make the case for a highly restrictive immigration policy against disgraced British tabloid editors by having a patronizing sneer-fest with Breitbart editor Ben Shapiro.  Watch for yourself.  Seeing an English know-it-all shoot himself in the foot (see what I did there?) is must-see TV.

Go to 10:10 to catch the real magic.  Everybody is talking about Beerz Morguecrotch calling the US Constitution “your little book”, but that’s just the obvious self-pwnage.  No, the really cool bit is when CNN dude holds up the Ronald Reagan letter and tries to club Shapiro over the head with it.

What is it with the liberal fetish for self-defeating interview props?  First David Gregory waves an illegal 30 round magazine in Wayne LaPierre’s face, then Pierce Organ throws a Gipper quote at Shapiro that promptly does nothing but make the  reasonable host gun control fanatic look stupid.  It’s like media leftists have to have some kind of comforting woobby to soothe themselves when going up against evil reich-wing thugs.

Prop reporting is sorta like prop comedy.  The Amazing Jonathan is often brilliant.  Gallagher can be funny as hell.  Carrot Top will stumble onto a decent bit every year or so.  People pay good money to see these guys do their thing.  Yet even with all that, there is a stigma against comedians who work with props.  Other stand-up guys look down on them.  Comedy nerds use prop comics as a punchline.

I think people hate on these guys because the prop is seen–rightly or wrongly–as a crutch.  It’s like if they didn’t have the sledgehammer or the treasure box full of crap or whatever, they wouldn’t be able to make a joke.  Again, your mileage may vary when it comes to prop comics, but that seems to be the critique against them.

When a reporter uses a prop to make his point, especially when using it against a guest, it’s sorta the same thing.  Couldn’t homeboy use his j-school big boy words to make the same point?  Does he have to have the prop to make the segment work?

During the David Gregory/Wayne LaPierre dust-up, the Meet The Press host wanted to put the NRA veep in his place–‘You love these death instruments more than you care about kids.’  Too bad for Gregory that LaPierre didn’t take the bait.  Instead, Gregory made himself look stupid.  And broke the laws that he wants everyone else to follow.

Morgan’s use of the Reagan letter was a little different.  There, he tried to use the 40th president’s position on assault weapons as a wedge to separate Shapiro from a conservative icon.  Unfortunately for Morgan, admiring Reagan doesn’t mean blind obeisance to every one of his positions.  That made it tough for him to beat up on Shapiro, so Morgan’s snippy moral outrage skit fell apart.

Far be it from me to tell the genius liberal media how to run their shows.  If they wanna keep using prop reportage, go ahead.  After all, how could anybody quibble with Piers Morgan’s sky-high ratings?

Posted in Celebutards!, Media Silliness | Tagged: , , , , | 6 Comments »

Operation Gunwalker: Government-Approved Illegal Gun-Running

Posted by KingShamus on June 18, 2011

I haven’t written about this story–yes, I’m coming to it late; blame it on Congressman Cockshots–but this is huge.

On December 14, 2010, a special unit of the U.S. Border Patrol came across a group of heavily armed suspects near Rio Rico, Arizona. The Border Patrol team identified themselves as law enforcement officers, at which point the armed men open fire. Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry was hit in the pelvis by a single bullet and died the next morning. One of the suspects was captured, and two AK-pattern semiautomatic rifles recovered at the scene were identified by serial number as weapons that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) — acting in concert with and with the blessing of the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) — allowed weapons smugglers to purchase at U.S. gun shops. The weapons were just two of more than 2,000 firearms that ATF supervisors and the highest levels of DOJ management allowed to be “walked” across the border to narco-terrorist drug cartels in Mexico…

Operation Gunwalker is what they’re calling this debacle.  How did it happen?

Three federal firearms investigators told the House Oversight and Government Reform committee that they wanted to “intervene and interdict” loads of guns, but were repeatedly ordered to step aside.

“Allowing loads of weapons that we knew to be destined for criminals — this was the plan,” John Dodson, a Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives agent, testified to the panel. “It was so mandated.”

He added: “My supervisors directed me and my colleagues not to make any stop or arrest, but rather, to keep the straw purchaser under surveillance while allowing the guns to walk.”

ATF agent Olindo James Casa said that “on several occasions I personally requested to interdict or seize firearms, but I was always ordered to stand down and not to seize the firearms.”

At what point does a sting operation go from letting the bad guys do criminal shit so you can nab them to just full-on aiding and abetting?  I think we have an answer and it looks like what the DOJ and BATF did here.

Imagine a scenario where the Canadian government allowed guns to walk across the border and into the hands of, say, the Folks Nation, MS-13Russian mafia and the Latin Kings.  Just how much understanding would we have in that situation.  I doubt we’d accept a heartfelt apology and an ‘oops, my bad eh?’ from Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper and just let it go. 

This is just speculation on my part, but here’s why I think this happened.  Eric Holder is an anti-Second Amendment hack lawyer.  Operation Gunwalker was going to be used as political cover for a major gun control push during Obama’s second term.  Holder would present the results of the investigation nailing lots of straw purchasers to the public.  Knee-jerk liberal gun-grabber sobbing would ensue, which the Obama administration would then be able to employ as the tip of a gun control spearhead movement. 

Now the only way that scenario works is if Holder’s DOJ had shit-loads of evidence.  You don’t get that if you cut the sting way short.  Something like this takes time.  Besides, this was supposed to all come to pass in early 2013.  There was no way an arch-lefty Department of Justice was going to let this scheme fall flat before the trap was sprung.  In this case, the trap was supposed to clap closed on the Second Amendment.

I could be wrong.  The scenario I lay out above could be completely off-base.  Operation Gunwalker could’ve just been aimed at criminal gun-runners without a political angle.  A lot of this is just me thinking out loud.  I have very little concrete evidence and a lot of circumstantial stuff that sorta fits my theory.

Having said that, Holder’s sleazy brand of progressive advocacy is fairly shameless.  We have a Clintonoid race-hustler as Attorney General.   Would it shock anybody if it turned out in the course of the investigation that a gun-grabber agenda was part of the reasoning behind Operation Gunwalker?

All I know is that Darrell Issa has some very serious work ahead of him.  Vaya con dios, Congressman.

Posted in Domestic Happenings, Politicians behaving badly | Tagged: , , , , , | 9 Comments »

Obama Wants Him Some Stealth Gun Control

Posted by KingShamus on May 20, 2011

Because I guess he figures he hasn’t pissed off conservatives nearly enough.

The Washington Post did a story on Steve Crowley, the White House gun control czar. Crowley is considered to be an expert on regulation and tort law. His approach to gun control appears to be a regulatory one.

According to the article, Jim and Sarah Brady visited Capital Hill on March 30, the 30th anniversary of the assassination attempt on Ronald Reagan; to push for a ban on “large magazines.”

The couple reportedly were meeting with press secretary, Jay Carney, when, according to Sarah Brady, the President came in. She said the President told her he wanted to talk about gun control and “fill us in that it was very much on his agenda.”

She went on to say Obama told her, “I just want you to know that we are working on it. We have to go through a few processes, but under the radar.”

I guess it’s not so stealthy if the Obamatons are blabbing it to the Washington Compost. What they’re doing isn’t really secretive. I guess you could characterize this gun-contol-by-fiat-move as antithetical to the letter and spirit of the US Constitution, so no big deal or anything.

But really, is this shocking? Obama has spent his presidency making shit up as he’s gone along.  To cite just one example, if anybody thinks President Peace Prize is actually going to get Senate approval for his Libyan debacle in accordance with the War Powers Act, I’m sad to report to you that Lindsey Lohan is not in fact drug-free.

So why is Obama signalling a gun control plan now?  My guess is that the President is nervous about his lefty base.  Discussing gun control ideas with Sarah Brady is a signal–or even better, a social marker–for the lifestyle left.  Limiting them, even if it means using extra-constitutional executive orders to do it, is all good and gravy for the gun-grabbers.

Broadly speaking, letting this future strategy leak out to the prog-o-sphere is a way For Obama to tell liberals that he’s with them.  That tells me that Obama knows he has to shore up his lefty base. 

Does this mean Obama won’t actually try to use executive orders to put limits on guns?  Not at all.  It does mean that Obama is concerned.  That’s pretty cool.

I snagged the original link from Instapundit.  Muchas gracias, sir.

Posted in Domestic Happenings | Tagged: , | 11 Comments »

Hey, look at that: The Second Amendment actually exists!

Posted by KingShamus on June 29, 2010

Say, does anybody still think Sam Alito isn’t gonna work on the Supreme Court anymore?

In today’s ruling, Associate Justice Samuel Alito cited the Fourteenth Amendment, legal precedent, the framers, and the intent of Congress in writing the majority opinion that extends the individual right to keep and bear arms to the states.
 
The Fourteenth Amendment says, “No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”
 
In Monday’s 5-4 ruling, the court determined that the Second Amendment applies to states in the case of McDonald v. Chicago.

Admittedly, that’s pretty rockin’.

Matt over at the Conservative Hideout has an optimistic view of this decision.

This is the legal history of this nation, and you’ll never see any of it on the MSM, or in the schools.  I recall that at the Constitutional Convention, some wanted the Second to be the First.  They argued that without the ability to defend the other rights, they would be rendered irrelevant.  The founders knew that some level of government would eventually attempt to control and dominate the individual.  If the people are unable to defend them, all will be lost.  Thankfully, this court (at least a thin majority of them) understand this.

Click on the linkage, because he’s got some other insightful stuff going on over too.  He’s got a link to the opinion as well.

One thing I would add is that Matt is correct-the majority that supported the Second Amendment is thin.  Too thin for comfort to be perfectly honest. 

So far the Obama Admenstruation has had two cracks at nominating Supreme Court justices.  Both Sonya Sotomayor and Elena Kagan are featherweight left-wing numbskulls.  Assuming Kagan gets confirmed, both of these people will not be supportive of originalist arguments.  The only good thing about St. Barry’s Supreme Court picks is that it hasn’t changed the basic ideological make-up of the justices.  Bamster has more or less just swapped out older liberals for slightly newer liberals. 

That won’t necessarily be the case in the future.  If Obama gets another term, there’s no telling what damage he could do to the judicial system in America.  Conservatives and Tea Party activists rightly oppose Obama because of profligate spending.  It’s important that we also remember that the judiciary is at stake every four years.  If Originalists want more victories like the McDonald decision, they’re going to have to show up to vote in 2012 and kick Obama’s ass out of the White House.

Posted in Domestic Happenings | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , | 3 Comments »

 
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 4,345 other followers

%d bloggers like this: