What Happened to Chicago’s Crime Rate When Illinois Relaxed Gun Control Laws

By Kelsey Harris

140826_Guns-FINAL-01

The post What Happened to Chicago’s Crime Rate When Illinois Relaxed Gun Control Laws appeared first on Daily Signal.

…read more

Source: What Happened to Chicago’s Crime Rate When Illinois Relaxed Gun Control Laws

Share and Enjoy

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Delicious
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Add to favorites
  • Email
  • RSS
image

Journalist Glasses

Journalist Glasses

Share and Enjoy

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Delicious
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Add to favorites
  • Email
  • RSS

Guns Don’t Kill People

Guns Don't Kill People

Share and Enjoy

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Delicious
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Add to favorites
  • Email
  • RSS
video

VIDEO: Hitler Finds Out Gun Control Law Failed in the Senate

This is a must see video! It’s hilarious and sad at the same time. One can only imagine how President Obama reacted on the news. Check out this video, and let it seep in for a little while. The true impact will hit you later.

Share and Enjoy

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Delicious
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Add to favorites
  • Email
  • RSS

Another Example of “The Police State” Mentality

What does it say about our society when the police, who job it is to enforce the law, do not understand the law, and abuse the law. Have we as a society, become so indoctrinated by the media’s fear and terror frenzy, that we willingly give up our rights and freedoms, and put all of our trust in the “nanny state” to protect us. Read the following account of the arrest of Master Sargent C. J. Grisham, and ask yourself 1) What was the crime, and 2) were the police justified in the action that they took.

If you feel that an injustice has been committed in this case, feel free to contact the Mayor of Temple, Texas and share your thoughts.

Mayor William A. Jones, III
City of Temple
PO Box 207
Temple, Texas 76503
254-298-5700   bjones@templetx.gov

Texas Soldier Arrested for ‘Rudely Displaying’ Weapon (From an article in National Review Online)

I just got off the phone with Army Master Sergeant C. J. Grisham, a serving American soldier and veteran of the the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, who recently was illegally disarmed by the Temple Police Department while out for a walk with his son.

“We live out in the country in Texas, near Temple,” he told me. “My son and I were on a ten-mile hike so that he could earn his hiking merit badge – it’s the last badge he needs to become an Eagle Scout.” But half way into the hike, Grisham said, “a police officer pulled up.” Initially, he was “cordial” and he “asked what we were doing.” Grisham told him. “Then he looked at my rifle. I carry a rifle any time I walk around because there are feral hogs and cougars and things like that.”

From here, things took a turn for the worse.

“‘Where you going with that rifle?’ he asked me. I said, ‘does it matter? Am I breaking any laws?’” Then, he says, the officer “grabbed the rifle without telling me – but it was attached to me. My immediate reaction as a combat veteran was to grab it back and then take a step back. I asked him what he was doing. So he pulled his gun on me. Then I thought about my son, so I put my hands off my gun and he told me to move over to the car. Luckily my son had the video camera to document the hike for his merit badge. I told him to turn it on.”

The video of the incident is below. I’d recommend you watch the whole thing. Note the officers’ ignorance of the rules they are there to uphold, the suggestion that the law doesn’t apply in this “day and age,” and the persistent claim that American citzens are presumed to have their weapons illegally unless otherwise demonstrated. Note the officer’s claim that merely owning a gun makes someone dangerous. Note the conflation of a soldier in a war zone with a citizen in rural Texas. Note the presistent refusal to explain what law Grisham has broken.

Particularly chilling is the officer’s telling Grisham that a police officer is “allowed to” carry a weapon, but that Grisham is not — despite Grisham’s having a permit. “We’re exempt from the law” is not a phrase you want to hear from law enforcement in a constitutional republic.

In an interview today, I asked Grisham why he thought the officer behaved in this way. “I don’t know,” he said “It’s not the law. You can’t go around taking guns without probable cause or a reasonable suspicion that someone is about to commit a crime. A lot of what the officers said is illegal, against Texas law, against national precedent, against Supreme Court decisions. I was legally exercising a right, especially in Texas where we have a right to carry weapons openly, and I have a concealed-carry permit. I wasn’t looking to make an issue out of it. I go up to Austin for Second Amendment rallies with my AR [rifle] all the time. But here in the country? Ultimately, it happened because I stood up to a police officer. I support the police. I’m on the public safety committee. But I also know that when I’m stopped by a police officer, I don’t have to say anything unless I’m accused of committing a crime. I’m not being a prick. I don’t think it was the gun initially, I think it was that my reaction hurt his ego.”

I suggest that this creates a Catch-22: If you comply, you’re giving up your rights; if you don’t, you’ll be punished. He agrees.

I ask what ”rudely displaying a firearm” means. ”There’s no such wording,” Grisham tells me. “I couldn’t find the word ‘rude’ in the penal code at all. You can openly carry a rifle as long as it’s not threatening. If it’s slung across your shoulder, it’s not threatening. When you point a gun at somebody then you’re breaking the law. But just walking around with a gun strapped in front of you is not threatening in any manner.”

What happens next? “I still don’t have my guns back and they took my concealed-carry license. I’m not accused of a gun crime, so there’s no reason for them to have my guns right now and the problem is that, what’s happened in the past with other soldiers is that the prosecutors will try and get the soldiers to agree to the police dropping the charges if they confiscate the gun — to have the charges dropped at the expense of their gun. This is a workaround loophole for gun confiscation.”

Does this happen to soldiers a lot? I ask. ”Yes, this has happened several times in this area. To Staff Sergeant Nate Samson, for example. He had to fight these guys for ten months. The charges were dropped, but he has no justice. He doesn’t have a lot of money to fight them. I have a pretrial hearing on May 29. The police are dragging their feet, not releasing the video. They’re waiting as long as they can — playing hard to get. . . . The reason I’m aggressive on this is that, in the military, if this happens, they initiate a flag that halts your career. You can’t take leave, you can’t be promoted, can’t receive awards or decorations. I am supposed to move to new base in July. I can’t do that. I’ve been on active duty for 18 and a half years and it’s got my career on a hold.”

I ask about his son. “I’ve tried to tell my son that this isn’t normal; that police officers don’t walk around doing this. He’s developed an unrealistic fear of police officers. We were bowling yesterday and he freaked out when a police officer walked in. He’s traumatized by the incident — seeing a gun pulled on his dad. I’m proud of him for his reaction. He’s doing well . . . we sit down and talk to our kids about the Constitution and guns and safety. My son can use every single weapon I have in the house from the AK-47 to .38 special.”

Is it particularly bad at the moment? ”I think so, yes. All the attention that the media and the politicians are giving to ‘assault weapons’ — I insist that none of my guns are ‘assault’ anything – is causing people to call and complain about seeing one. And instead of saying, ‘hey there’s nothing to be afraid of,’ they go out and hassle legal gun owners. Law enforcement have a duty to recognize that if someone is lawfully carrying a weapon then you should leave them alone. Who cares what somebody complains about?”

Share and Enjoy

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Delicious
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Add to favorites
  • Email
  • RSS

The Focus on Gun Control Is A Diversion From Society’s Real Problem

It has now been over 4 months since the Sandy Hook shooting in Newtown, Conn. The clamour and cry for all sorts of gun control measures has not abated, which include a complete ban on assault weapons, a restriction on the number of bullets per magazine, the registration of all weapons, and finally to universal background checks. 

The NY Times ran an editorial today entitled “Rugged Road for Gun Control” decrying the fact that anti-regulation EXTREMISTS may attempt to kill the universal background check bill by adding amendments that will make passage of the bill difficult.

This is all a diversion from society’s real problem which has yet to be acknowledged or investigated. Consider these facts that have been pointed out in the Citizens Commission for Human Rights International’s website:

Fact: Despite 22 international drug regulatory warnings on psychiatric drugs citing effects of mania, hostility, violence and even homicidal ideation, and dozens of high profile shootings/killings tied to psychiatric drug use, there has yet to be a federal investigation on the link between psychiatric drugs and acts of senseless violence.

Fact: At least 31 school shootings and/or school-related acts of violence have been committed by those taking or withdrawing from psychiatric drugs resulting in 162 wounded and 72 killed (in other school shootings, information about their drug use was never made public—neither confirming or refuting if they were under the influence of prescribed drugs).

Fact: Between 2004 and 2011, there have been over 11,000 reports to the U.S. FDA’s MedWatch system of psychiatric drug side effects related to violence.  These include 300 cases of homicide, nearly 3,000 cases of mania and over 7,000 cases of aggression. Note:  By the FDA’s own admission, only 1-10% of side effects are ever reported to the FDA, so the actual number of side effects occurring are most certainly higher.

Fact: It took months for  the release of information showing that police had found psychiatric drugs in the apartment of Aurora Colorado movie theater shooter, James Holmes—including the anti-anxiety drug clonazepam and the antidepressant sertraline, the generic version of the antidepressant Zoloft.

David Kupelian wrote an article entitled “The Giant, Gaping Hole In Sandy Hook Reporting” in which he questions his colleagues  in the media “where is the reporting about the psychiatric medications the perpetrator? So, what is the truth? Where is the journalistic curiosity? Where is the follow-up? Where is the police report, the medical examiner’s report, the interviews with his doctor and others?

Mr. Kupelian wrote a book called  “How Evil Works” in which he documents how most perpetrators of school shooting and similar mass murders in our modern era were either on – or just coming off of – psychiatric medications. The following is information contained in this book:

  • Columbine mass-killer Eric Harris was taking Luvox – like Prozac, Paxil, Zoloft, Effexor and many others, a modern and widely prescribed type of antidepressant drug called selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, or SSRIs. Harris and fellow student Dylan Klebold went on a hellish school shooting rampage in 1999 during which they killed 12 students and a teacher and wounded 24 others before turning their guns on themselves.Luvox manufacturer Solvay Pharmaceuticals concedes that during short-term controlled clinical trials, 4 percent of children and youth taking Luvox – that’s 1 in 25 – developed mania, a dangerous and violence-prone mental derangement characterized by extreme excitement and delusion.
  • Patrick Purdy went on a schoolyard shooting rampage in Stockton, Calif., in 1989, which became the catalyst for the original legislative frenzy to ban “semiautomatic assault weapons” in California and the nation. The 25-year-old Purdy, who murdered five children and wounded 30, had been on Amitriptyline, an antidepressant, as well as the antipsychotic drug Thorazine.
  • Kip Kinkel, 15, murdered his parents in 1998 and the next day went to his school, Thurston High in Springfield, Ore., and opened fire on his classmates, killing two and wounding 22 others. He had been prescribed both Prozac and Ritalin.
  • In 1988, 31-year-old Laurie Dann went on a shooting rampage in a second-grade classroom in Winnetka, Ill., killing one child and wounding six. She had been taking the antidepressant Anafranil as well as Lithium, long used to treat mania.
  • In Paducah, Ky., in late 1997, 14-year-old Michael Carneal, son of a prominent attorney, traveled to Heath High School and started shooting students in a prayer meeting taking place in the school’s lobby, killing three and leaving another paralyzed. Carneal reportedly was on Ritalin.
  • In 2005, 16-year-old Jeff Weise, living on Minnesota’s Red Lake Indian Reservation, shot and killed nine people and wounded five others before killing himself. Weise had been taking Prozac.
  • In another famous case, 47-year-old Joseph T. Wesbecker, just a month after he began taking Prozac in 1989, shot 20 workers at Standard Gravure Corp. in Louisville, Ky., killing nine. Prozac-maker Eli Lilly later settled a lawsuit brought by survivors.
  • Kurt Danysh, 18, shot his own father to death in 1996, a little more than two weeks after starting on Prozac. Danysh’s description of own his mental-emotional state at the time of the murder is chilling: “I didn’t realize I did it until after it was done,” Danysh said. “This might sound weird, but it felt like I had no control of what I was doing, like I was left there just holding a gun.”
  • John Hinckley, age 25, took four Valium two hours before shooting and almost killing President Ronald Reagan in 1981. In the assassination attempt, Hinckley also wounded press secretary James Brady, Secret Service agent Timothy McCarthy and policeman Thomas Delahanty.
  • Andrea Yates, in one of the most heartrending crimes in modern history, drowned all five of her children – aged 7 years down to 6 months – in a bathtub. Insisting inner voices commanded her to kill her children, she had become increasingly psychotic over the course of several years. At her 2006 murder re-trial (after a 2002 guilty verdict was overturned on appeal), Yates’ longtime friend Debbie Holmes testified: “She asked me if I thought Satan could read her mind and if I believed in demon possession.” And Dr. George Ringholz, after evaluating Yates for two days, recounted an experience she had after the birth of her first child: “What she described was feeling a presence … Satan … telling her to take a knife and stab her son Noah,” Ringholz said, adding that Yates’ delusion at the time of the bathtub murders was not only that she had to kill her children to save them, but that Satan had entered her and that she had to be executed in order to kill Satan.Yates had been taking the antidepressant Effexor. In November 2005, more than four years after Yates drowned her children, Effexor manufacturer Wyeth Pharmaceuticals quietly added “homicidal ideation” to the drug’s list of “rare adverse events.” The Medical Accountability Network, a private nonprofit focused on medical ethics issues, publicly criticized Wyeth, saying Effexor’s “homicidal ideation” risk wasn’t well-publicized and that Wyeth failed to send letters to doctors or issue warning labels announcing the change.And what exactly does “rare” mean in the phrase “rare adverse events”? The FDA defines it as occurring in less than one in 1,000 people. But since that same year 19.2 million prescriptions for Effexor were filled in the U.S., statistically that means thousands of Americans might experience “homicidal ideation” – murderous thoughts – as a result of taking just this one brand of antidepressant drug.Effexor is Wyeth’s best-selling drug, by the way, which in one recent year brought in over $3 billion in sales, accounting for almost a fifth of the company’s annual revenues.
  • One more case is instructive, that of 12-year-old Christopher Pittman, who struggled in court to explain why he murdered his grandparents, who had provided the only love and stability he’d ever known in his turbulent life. “When I was lying in my bed that night,” he testified, “I couldn’t sleep because my voice in my head kept echoing through my mind telling me to kill them.” Christopher had been angry with his grandfather, who had disciplined him earlier that day for hurting another student during a fight on the school bus. So later that night, he shot both of his grandparents in the head with a .410 shotgun as they slept and then burned down their South Carolina home, where he had lived with them.”I got up, got the gun, and I went upstairs and I pulled the trigger,” he recalled. “Through the whole thing, it was like watching your favorite TV show. You know what is going to happen, but you can’t do anything to stop it.” Pittman’s lawyers would later argue that the boy had been a victim of “involuntary intoxication,” since his doctors had him taking the antidepressants Paxil and Zoloft just prior to the murders.

He concludes his article with the following comments:

“All of which is, once again, to respectfully but urgently ask the question: When on earth are we going to find out if the perpetrator of the Sandy Hook school massacre, like so many other mass shooters, had been taking psychiatric drugs?

In the end, it may well turn out that knowing what kinds of guns he used isn’t nearly as important as what kind of drugs he used.

That is, assuming we ever find out.”

To which I will add that most if not all in the main stream news media will either not raise these questions publicly for ideological reasons, or because their editors/owners would not allow this type of reporting to see the light of day. After all, the pharmaceutical industry is wealthy, powerful, and politically connected. It is much more politically correct for the liberal mind to view guns as the source of the problem rather than pharmaceuticals. You will probably also not see a complete report anytime soon from the Connecticut State Police either. That may serve to raise questions, which would detract from the effort to “strike while the iron is hot” on gun control measures. In fact, cynical me would not be surprised to see one more mass tragedy like “Sandy Hook” or “Columbine” to really push this issue over the top, and get the job done!

I would like to finish this post with a short video by Karen Barth Menzies, a civil rights attorney who has litigated against the Pharmaceutical Industry for the past 10 years.

 

 

Share and Enjoy

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Delicious
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Add to favorites
  • Email
  • RSS

VIDEO: NRA Established to Protect Free Black Slaves

Must see video. Hearing these folks explain how the NRA was established in part to protect black folks needs to be heard. This is history. This video helps explain why our 2nd Amendment rights are so vital. Hear this video all the way through. I’ll bet you never heard this before. Escape the cave!

Share and Enjoy

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Delicious
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Add to favorites
  • Email
  • RSS
image

Biggest Hypocrite

Biggest Hypocrite

Share and Enjoy

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Delicious
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Add to favorites
  • Email
  • RSS