What’s Left On Dems’ Agenda?

Democrats are going to use the lame duck session of Congress to try and get as many of their liberal wish-list items through Congress and on to Joe Biden’s desk as they can before the next Congress takes over with Republicans at the helm in the House. And knowing the speed at which Congress has been working this term, they’ll be lucky to get some sort of budget resolution passed.

The list is long and complicated. And, with a 50/50 split in the Senate, it’s not a sure thing that either Kirsten Sinema or Joe Manchin are going to go along with the stuff. First and foremost, they need to address the elephant in the room, which is the December 16th deadline to fund the government without shutting it down. Then there’s the whole same-sex marriage codification, which should probably be a slam dunk since the Supreme Court has already okayed it, and there are more than enough Republicans ready to sign on to it. Democrats are also worried about doing something to help those illegal aliens who came to this country as children (known as “dreamers”), and give them a path to citizenship.

The Dems are also working on a way to raise the debt ceiling of $31.4 trillion. If they don’t get that done, they won’t be able to accomplish anything up the road. And it will most likely cause Joe Biden’s request of $37 billion for more aid to Ukraine to go unheeded. That’s not to say anything of getting any new gun legislation through, as Biden wants. The House is ready to pass a measure, but the Senate is far short of the 60 votes it needs to cut off debate.

So, each of the items I just mentioned would take a “normal” Congress about a year to get hammered down and passed. And there’s no guarantee that any of the stuff, other than the budget would get passed anyway. There are just not enough people sitting on the Democrats’ side to pass anything that big.

What do I see happening between now and the end of the term? Probably a last minute budget resolution that kicks the can down the road until next year. Of course, that means Biden’s wish list is not just dead, it’s dead, buried, and rotting by now. I do see the whole same-sex marriage thing passing because there isn’t enough opposition to that, but as far as trying to do stuff that would actually improve this nation and the troubles we are in (that have been basically caused by the Democrats), you have a better chance of catching Santa Claus leaving you presents on December 24th!

We aren’t going to get anything dealing with the crime problem. You can forget about the southern border as an issue until next year, because most Democrats don’t want to tackle immigration, and certainly not the wall. Inflation will be left to the FED, and there are a number of leftists that will say that inflation is coming down on it’s own due to interest rate hikes. As far as a faltering economy, how do you tell a tax and spend liberal that they’ve spent way too much money too fast, and are now paying the price for it? They’ll never believe you. As far as the debt ceiling being raised, that’s going to be a tough road with a 50/50 split in the Senate as well. And though the Republicans will kick and scream about sending more money to Ukraine ($37 billion IS a lot!!!), they probably are going to hold their nose and go along with it.

Overall, Congress is going to try and do more in the next month than they’ve done in the past two years. Frankly, I can’t see more than one, maybe two bills coming through Congress, and most of those leaving Washington either through retirement or losing their reelection are going to want to be sitting by the fire at home rather than debating any of the really important issues facing this country. Leave it for the next Congress. That’ll be the mantra!

Carry on world…you’re dismissed!

But Is It Too Little Too Late?

Democrats are scurrying. Not the rank and file Dems that are your neighbors. I’m talking about the do-nothing Democrats (when they do something, it’s usually the wrong thing!) in Congress. Realizing they are less than two months away from midterm elections that still don’t bode well for their party, Democrats in the House and Senate are trying desperately to do SOMETHING before November 8th.

But it ain’t gonna be easy.

See, in order to get Joe Manchin on his side for the big trillion dollar budget busting spending bill Congress passed (I think they called it “Inflation Reduction”?) Chuckles Schumer had to agree to a side deal. That was that the fossil fuel industry was going to get some sweetheart deals going forward. Of course, that is included as part of the federal budget bill that has yet to pass Congress. But that throws a wrinkle into the whole process because people like Lizzy Warren and Bernie Sanders are totally against the deal. Worse yet, there are 70 Democrats in the House that say they won’t vote for the budget if Manchin’s deal is included. They don’t have a 70 vote margin! It won’t even pass the House!

So, what happens if Manchin gets screwed and the federal budget doesn’t pass because they don’t have 50 Democrats to vote for it (without Sanders and Warren)? Does Manchin get fed up and join the Republicans (which would give them a majority and totally throw the last month into chaos)? It would be interesting.

But Democrats can’t afford to be blamed for a government shutdown at the end of this month. That would put the brakes on any “wins” they think they’ve had this past summer.

That is the most pressing issue Dems face leading up to the midterms, but they want more. They want a “Defense of Marriage” act that basically codifies what has already been passed as a federal law. Interestingly enough, Congress is worried because of the Dobbs v. Jackson ruling by the Supreme Court that ended the federal law with abortion rights. The reasoning here is that it’s a states-rights issue and that states can decide whether or not same sex marriage is legal in their state. But the difference is huge. One is a procedure. The other is a “binding contract” between two parties. I don’t know how you could be recognized in California as a married couple, but not in Ohio (which is the case). A lot of states don’t recognize same sex marriage today, some even have it in their state’s constitution that it’s banned!

The House is still considering a “robust public safety package”. It’s basically a walk-back of the Democrats’ “defund the police” movement. It was supposed to go for a vote in July, but Nancy Pelosi didn’t have the votes (and still doesn’t).

Then there is the ubiquitous assault weapons ban that keeps rearing it’s ugly head. Doubtful that will even come up before the midterms.

Dems are hoping that they can do something besides pass a federal budget bill before the midterms. However that could very well be too little too late. Most people seem to already have made up their minds. Only the independents are making up theirs now, and that’s what causing the races around the country to be tightening. The big question is, will it be enough?

Carry on world…you’re dismissed!

And Damn It! We Mean Business!

Both the Republicans and the Democrats are guilty parties on this one, and I don’t mind calling them out in the least. That’s not to say I’m on one side or the other on the issues they are currently dealing with. But I find it really upsetting to say that if you as a sitting member of the House of Representatives don’t fall in line with party doctrine over one issue, you can be axed as far as your career goes. Especially when the Democrats have people like Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema sitting in the Senate and people like Lynn Cheyney and Adam Kinzinger sitting in the House.

Chris Jacobs (R-NY) had to find that out the hard way.

Jacobs was running for reelection, but he made a fatal mistake. He backed banning AK-47’s. Now, I don’t agree with his position on this.The Second Amendment says we have the right to bear arms, and they don’t differentiate between muskets and RPG’s. Arms is arms. But Jacobs had voted in favor of the ban, and all of a sudden, everyone that had endorsed him, pulled that endorsement. He was basically a man without a party. The same thing happens on the left when a Democrat running for reelection comes out as pro-life. Those are the two issues that you had better fall in line with if you want to be a member of either of those parties.

Jacobs has since decided to stop his campaign for reelection, and pull out of the race. He represents the Buffalo, NY area in the 27th district.

So, I guess the question is, should the party have litmus tests like gun control or abortion when it comes to their members? To me, I view things a little differently. I don’t agree with the Republican party pulling support of one of it’s members, especially a sitting member of Congress that voted the wrong way on one issue. But I’m more of a Constitutionalist. If there is going to be a litmus test, let the Constitution be the deciding factor. And while yes, I believe Jacobs vote was wrong, because the Second Amendment, backed by the US Supreme Court says we can, as individuals own guns, and doesn’t specify in the Second Amendment which guns we can and cannot own, the GOP was wrong in killing one of their own. I agree with their position, I disagree with the way they handled it.

Likewise, I guess, because of the Democrats’ view that you can’t be a Democrat and be pro-life, I’ll never be a member of that party. Not that I’m all upset over that one, and I doubt I’ll lose sleep over it tonight. But to have any litmus test that isn’t the Constitution is just plain wrong. In Jacob’s case, he was wrong in his position. There are other things that need to be tackled befoe you start banning guns. First of all, look at the shooters. They have all shown to be wack-jobs. There is something mentally wrong with them. They need to be better screened for their mental capacity and their abilities to correctly reason what is and is not acceptable human behavior. That is the starting point here. I doubt Democrats would have a problem if they attacked “gun control” from a mental health standpoint.

But, just like not wanting to blame the poor ghetto kid that only had a crack Mom as a parent, and not wanting to send him to prison for the rest of his life for shooting some cop because of his upbringing, the blame doesn’t lie with the gun that killed the cop. The blame lies with the person holding the gun. Had that kid, like any of the mass shooters we’ve heard of lately been forced to undergo a psychiatric evaluation to check for mental stability, and have it regularly monitored once approved, it would stem the tide of shootings much better than banning guns that they are going to get their hands on anyway.

Carry on world…you’re dismissed!

No Right?

If you were to listen to leftist idiots, like Dean Obeidallah, who is nothing more than an attorney and a comedian (what a combination!), you don’t have a right to bear arms. That’s right. He says that the Second Amendment does not give you the right to own a gun. Let’s just take a look at what the Second Amendment to our Constitution says, shall we?

“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

And here’s what Obeidallah has to say about it.

“There is NO constitutional right to own a gun. That was literally made up by 5 GOP Justices in 2008 decision of DC v Heller. We need to make overturning Heller a cause like the right made overturning Roe v Wade. Between 1789 and 2008 NO federal court found 2nd Amendment created a PERSONAL constitutional right apart from being in a militia to own a gun. In 2008, five supreme court justices INVENTED that in DC v. Heller. We must OVERTURN Heller so we can pass gun safety laws!”

Now, you’re going to have to forgive me here for a minute. I’m not sure if Obeidallah is coming at us wearing his attorney hat or his comedian hat. Because what he tweeted over this past weekend is absolutely hilarious, and shows he doesn’t really understand our Constitution.

See, as said in the second paragraph above, it says, “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed.” That is rather simple English. I would assume any L-1 student could understand the definitions of words like “keep and bear Arms”, and “people”.

Now, Obeidallah inappropriately claims that no federal court found 2nd Amendment created a PERSONAL constitutional right apart from being in a militia until the DC v. Heller case. That’s a fallacy that any 3rd grader could figure out. No, according to the Supreme Court ruling IN DC v. Heller, you don’t have to be in a militia in order to own a gun.

See, this is what I really hate about liberalism. If they don’t agree with the wording of something, they want to change the wording so it fits their narrative. If they can’t get that done, they’ll do something even more drastic, like term limits for Supreme Court Justices or packing the court. They can’t seem to play by the rules and get things to go their way, and if they don’t, then try again at a later date. That’s what earlier liberals used to do. If they got beat on an issue, they’d get whatever part of the issue they could on the books, then they’d come back later and expand it (I call it the “Seat Belt analogy”. When seat belts were introduced in the 1960’s it was an option. Then it became mandatory, but they couldn’t ticket you. Then they could only ticket you if they pulled you over for something else. Now they can pull you over for not wearing a seat belt.)

People like Dean Obeidallah need to be either corrected or silenced. It’s one thing to have an opinion, and I respect other opinions. It’s quite another to come out with absolutely ludicrous statements and thought processes like we’re hearing from people like Dean Obeidallah. Maybe he just needs to drop being a lawyer and focus on being a comedian. He’s much better at making me laugh than he is at making sense of the law!

Carry on world…you’re dismissed!

Do You NEED Any More Proof?

Let’s say for grins and giggles that you are Chuck Schumer. I wouldn’t wish that on anybody, but let’s at least say you had his current job of running the US Senate. What do you put first, a bill that isn’t going to be popular enough to get at least 60 votes to pass, or do you try and protect people in your own party that are already facing a tough reelection situation?

Schumer is picking the latter.

It basically boils down to the gun issue. The shootings that seem to be occurring on a daily basis now somewhere in our country, is pushing the gun issue ahead of inflation, of abortion, of immigration, ahead of all of that stuff. The problem that Schumer has is that he can’t lose any of the seats his party now controls and still have his current job. So, he has to protect the dozen or so Senators that are up for reelection, five of them may actually switch parties. I’m also not talking about wild “if we got everybody and their dead grandmother to vote Democrat” states. I’m talking six states that legitimately could flip seats this fall. That would include Pennsylvania, Georgia, Arizona, Nevada, and New Hampshire. We can leave out seats where either an incumbent is retiring, but it’s basically a red state, like Alabama, Missouri, or Ohio, and North Carolina. And we can leave out places where Democrats have actually found a popular candidate, but will most likely lose to the incumbent like what’s happening in Florida and Wisconsin.

So Schumer has decided that the control of his party is more important than actually solving the gun issue. And as I’ve said here many times, the way to solve the problem with the mass shootings isn’t to start with the weapon, it’s to start with the mind. The mind of the shooter that obviously is in conflict of ethics and morals. There is a mental illness component that if it’s not addressed, it won’t matter what all else you pass as a law. These people that are shooting kids, and others, are mentally ill and shouldn’t be allowed to have weapons. But until that is addressed, all of the gun laws passed won’t matter.

And Schumer is more worried about protecting his five states that will most likely flip this fall, and less concerned about shootings in New York, and Texas, and Tennessee. In my book, that’s the main reason Chuck Schumer needs to be sidelined. He’s got it all wrong. It’s not about his power in the Senate. It’s about serving the people. Too many Democrats have lost touch with that notion. They are easy to spot. They’ll be the ones out of a job come November 9th.

Carry on world…you’re dismissed!

What’s Going On With The Shootings?

I don’t usually say much about these mass shootings that have been going on. There’s usually enough grousing about it on both sides. Let me just say this. It IS a tragedy. However I think the media, who rarely gets anything right, and the Democrats and leftists out there are getting it wrong on one account. It ain’t the guns doing the killing. It’s other people.

Joe Biden called the latest mass shooting at a Tops Friendly Market in Buffalo, “a national embarrassment.” Presidents going back as far as the eye can see have tried to stop the violence. It hasn’t worked. So let’s take a look at why it hasn’t worked.

It’s not the guns.

If you look at what the left is saying, they are calling the latest shooting in Buffalo a “racist” killing. 18 year old, Payton Gendron was taken into custody after killing 10 people. He was arraigned Saturday evening on first degree murder charges. Gendron is white. The shooting occurred in a mostly black neighborhood. But is race the issue here? I think not. In 2021 in Boulder, Colorado, a Syrian man shot and killed ten people at a King Soopers grocery store. Look at the mass shooting in New York City on the subway last month. The shooter was black. Race isn’t the issue here.

Was it right-wing ideology? Nope. That doesn’t fit either. Shooters have crossed ideological lines all over the place. You can’t blame it on Trump. You can’t blame it on George W. Bush. You can’t even blame it on Biden or Obama. It’s not ideological.

So, what was it?

I’m going to have to join the ever-growing group that says it’s a mental illness situation. I think it’s basically the situation that we’re seeing a decline in our social fabric. What’s causing it? I really believe it’s the breakdown of the family, and a laxness in religious belief. We’re seeing fewer and fewer people going to church. We’re seeing families that are now second and third generation single parent households. And those kids grow up without the proper parental guidance. I’m not going to blame it on Hollywood or violent video games, though that may be part of it. But somewhere, these shooters have a few screws loose. That seems to be the cause, and that is the issue that needs to be addressed.

Let’s all agree on one thing. If you got rid of guns altogether, and no one had them, there would still be murders. People would be stabbed, bombed, strangled, you name it. Guns are convenient, yes. But guns aren’t the cause of the murders. People are the cause of the murders. And by the way, don’t blame Trump. In the last three presidents, Barack Obama in eight years in office had 18 mass shootings in which eight or more people were killed. Donald Trump had seven on his watch in four years. Joe Biden in 16 months has had 12.

I know the familiar mantra is to blame the guns and call for the banning of assault rifles. That doesn’t matter. Until we start getting serious in this country about mental health, and not allowing those that aren’t sane to have guns, this will continue. Payton Gendron was a racist, that we know is true. But he also had to be mentally ill. You don’t travel three hours from home to target a black neighborhood’s grocery store and then target blacks in that grocery store if you’re all there mentally. Banning guns isn’t the problem. Banning people that shouldn’t have guns is. That’s not to say that is going to get rid of the problem either, but it will help.

Look at the city of Chicago. There are more shootings in Chicago than just about everywhere else in the country. There have been 186 murders in Chicago (up to the point this was written) in 2022, and there were 800 there last year! And this is a city that has outlawed guns. How is that happening? It happens because the shooters don’t care if they are breaking the law of having a gun. They are already breaking the law in murdering someone. Why would they care if you tack on another three years to a life sentence?

Until the leftists realize what the problem really is, and take steps to solve that problem, you’re going to see these mentally ill people continue to shoot up America. What’s it going to take to get them to realize, guns don’t kill people. It’s the person with their finger on the trigger.

Carry on world…you’re dismissed!

Is Biden REALLY That Popular?

Well, it depends greatly on who you ask. The latest polls show Biden right around 54% approval as far as how well he’s handling his job. There’s 41% that disapprove. But the breakdown of the numbers are interesting.

When you look at who’s doing the approving, and who’s doing the disapproving, the great divide between the two parties is incredibly clear. 95% of Democrats are approving Biden’s job so far. 88% of Republicans disapprove. And from the independents, 47% approve and 43% disapprove.

What’s interesting is that the gap between Democrats and Republicans aren’t getting closer signaling that Biden isn’t “bringing the country together” as he promised he could do. Democrats approve was up four points in the last month from 91%. Republicans disapproval was up 8 points in the last month from 80%. The poll was conducted by Monmouth University and has a margin of error of 3.5%.

So, in reality, what does this tell us?

Not much. You would expect that Democrats would think their guy is doing gangbusters and that Republicans would think he stinks. I think the big thing is the independents who slightly favor Biden at this point. Everybody seems to think he’s doing poorly in handling the border crisis. In fact, about 80% disapprove of the way he’s doing that, and 90% disapprove of the way K-baby Harris is handling the border (since she’s the point person for the administration).

What this does say is that while Democrats who voted for Biden in November are generally happy with him, there are a bunch of people out there that are still pissed at him for lying about the $2,000 checks turning into $1,400 checks, and waiting two full months before they got released. Republicans don’t like his stance on the filibuster, which has flip-flopped over the years, and his stance on packing the court, which has semi-flip-flopped (he hasn’t really come out one way or another with that one). As was pointed out earlier this week, Americans as a whole are against the Senate getting rid of the filibuster and packing the court in rather large numbers, and if each were to happen, I’m pretty sure Biden’s overall approval numbers would crater.

The other thing to realize is, he hasn’t really done much. Oh, he got the $1.9 trillion stimulus bill passed. But his infrastructure bill seems hung up in Congress and now there’s a bi-partisan bill that costs about half as much but gets rid of a lot of the non-traditional infrastructure crap he’s foisting. I read a report the other day that says the infrastructure bill only has about a 50/50 chance of passing because it’s nowhere near the 60 votes it needs in the Senate.

Biden also sent up to Congress a sweeping immigration reform bill. Unfortunately for him, it hasn’t gone anywhere and isn’t likely to anytime soon. The only time immigration reform usually gets through Congress is when it’s done in small bites, not sweeping omnibus bills. This one was certainly omnibus.

And while Biden has come out against all of the mass shootings that have been elevated to front page status to draw attention for the need of gun control in the country, there’s very little chance of getting anything through Congress. They are dealing with the NRA, and while they may be facing a bankruptcy in New York State, they are still the most effective lobbying group in America today. I would doubt seriously that very little is going to be done that will actually have teeth.

The whole point here is Biden really hasn’t been tested yet. He’s put his pet projects up on a pedestal, as most presidents do in the first 100 days. That was to be expected. But when he has to deal with China, or North Korea, or Iran, or Russia, we’ll find out what happens to his approval rating. Remember, everyone has a strong approval rating early on. That’s why they call it a “honeymoon period”.

Carry on world…you’re dismissed!

The AZ To Become A “Sanctuary State”?

It is if one state representative has his way. Leo Biasiucci (R-Lake Havasu City), is proposing that the State of Arizona become the fifth Sanctuary State in the country. Oh…wait. You thought I was talking about illegal aliens? Nope. This would make Arizona the fifth state in the country to be a Sanctuary State for gun ownership.

Alaska, Idaho, Kansas and Wyoming have similar measures already in place.

The law is patterned after the illegal alien sanctuary cities around the country, except it’s about guns. Basically what Biasiucci is saying is, it would be illegal for any law enforcement entity in the state of Arizona to help any federal law enforcement entity in tracking down, registering, or taking away guns from citizens in this state, and that the state could not spend any money to enforce any federal law doing so.

Now, if you want to get technical, and consistent, it’s exactly what the sanctuary cities like Chicago, New York, Los Angeles, and San Francisco have done with ICE. And I’m sure it’s going to really piss off the Democrats in this state. Republicans still hold a majority of the both the House and Senate in Arizona, and Doug Ducey, our Governor is Republican as well. The chances of this passing in the upcoming legislative session are better than average. You have to also understand that in Arizona, our legislature only works until they get a budget passed. That’s about it. Usually four to six months a year. And the odds of normally getting a bill passed are exceedingly small. Usually less than 5%. That’s because of the hundreds of proposals that try to become bills, most die in committee. Those that don’t die on the floor of either the Senate or the House, and the Governor doesn’t sign that many. It takes a lot of lobbying and a lot of work to get something through, so Biasiucci has his work cut out for him.

All of that being said, it’s an interesting twist on the liberal idea that “we’re not doing to follow the law if we don’t like it!” Except in this case, the states that have adopted this measure ARE following the law…the Constitution. The Constitution and the Supreme Court have both said that you and I have a right to own a gun. Period. And if the Biden administration wants to change that, they need to change the Constitution. That’s not likely to happen.

So, if the bill becomes law here, you’re going to be able to do, what we in Maricopa Country are already able to do (we’re already a Gun Sanctuary County), and that’s carry a gun without a permit, and if you buy a gun at a gun show, you don’t have to go through a background check. The only permit you need is concealed carry, and they are very easy to get in the AZ.

Carry on world…you’re dismissed!

Making Sense Of The Senseless

Over the weekend, there were two incredibly evil acts of violence that tore apart not only El Paso, Texas, and Dayton, Ohio, where about 30 people were senselessly murdered by two gunmen. One of them, the one in El Paso, was an admitted white nationalist and was out to try and murder immigrants. The other in Dayton, was killed, and the motive wasn’t entirely made clear. The shooter in Dayton was a Satanist, and a leftist liberal.

What is clear is that the left loves to politicize this tragedy. We see it every time there is a mass shooting of any kind. You can almost write the script as it happens…there is the obligatory wailing and gnashing of teeth followed by the immediate call for more gun control.

If you are in the camp that agrees that gun control is the answer to stop this violence, you also would believe that stopping abortion would be necessary to stop the senseless killing of children. For to believe one but not the other is inconsistent. You can’t come out as very anti-gun violence, and still be for abortion in any sense of the word…it doesn’t make sense.

Let’s be clear about the gun violence. People that are deranged are going to figure out a way to kill people regardless if guns are available or not. Go back to 1888 in England. There were five women murdered by a still unknown assailant who later became known as “Jack The Ripper”. No gun was used. All of the victims were strangled to death.

In today’s society, the problem isn’t necessarily the guns, it’s the mental condition of the people buying or using them. Obviously in the two cases over the weekend, both of these people were mentally ill and should not have been allowed to own or use them. But what I find interesting is the fallacy in the liberal way of thinking.

The biggest misconception the left has in this particular situation is that they feel that more laws are going to be the answer. They are convinced that if you just had strong enough laws, up to and including taking away guns from everybody, then you wouldn’t have to worry about gun violence anymore. That is an extremely naive way of thinking. In truth, even if you took guns away from the law abiding people of this country, there would still be guns in this country. Drugs are illegal in this country, and you still have drugs. Murder is still illegal in this country and you still have murder.

The problem isn’t the guns, it’s the people. If these gunmen know going into their shooting rampage that the odds are they are going to be killed, do you think they really care if they are breaking the law or not? And for the leftist snowflakes that want to blame the President, or the Republicans for this, they are so far off the reservation on this one, I would question their ability to serve in any political capacity. They aren’t leaders. They’re sheep.

When America wakes up and realizes that prior to buying a gun, it needs to be determined that the buyer is sane, mentally ill, or poses a threat to people if he or she owned a gun. If there is anything that would show that they would, deny them access. Now, I’ll be the first to admit, that isn’t going to completely stop mass shootings…but then again, the left can’t guarantee that in any sense of the word either.

I’ve always made the offer that I would back any left-wing proposal to eliminate guns in this country under one condition. Let the left write the rule. Whatever they want as long as it pertains only to gun control would be allowed. And after the first murder by firearm that occurs in this country, they lose their right to ever ask for anyone to be denied access to guns ever again. No one would ever take me up on that…because they understand they are just about amassing power. And the only way to do that is to take it from the people. That’s the one thing they are best at!

Carry on world…you’re dismissed!

Pittsburgh Shooting…How Long Before The “Gun Control Freaks” Come Out?

It was a terrible tragedy on Saturday in Pittsburgh, when a gunman entered a synagogue and shot eleven people, wounding at least six others including four policemen that were called to the scene. The man that was arrested, 46 year old Robert Bowers, shouted Islamic chants as he gunned down the people in the heavily Jewish neighborhood. He surrendered to police and is in custody.

OK, so we’ve seen this before. My question is, how long before the gun control freaks on the left come out and call for more gun control. See, they really don’t understand the problem. More effectively, they don’t want to understand the problem. They want to have an argument for getting rid of the Second Amendment, which will never happen. We know that by the shouting the guy did while he was mowing people down, he is an Islamic terrorist. As such, he needs to be sent to Gitmo to cool out there till he dies… but you know that won’t happen. He’ll be taken in to Pittsburgh custody, given a free attorney, and a fair trial. Then, he’ll probably do something like plead insanity, or get life in prison for this heinous crime, and we’ll all end up paying the bill for his fate.

That’s the way it goes.

Now, don’t get me wrong. I’m as much in favor of the Second Amendment as anybody, but I do think there probably should be a little bit of a jog as far as the debate goes. It’s not about guns. It’s really never been about guns. It’s about the idiots that pull the trigger. There is something seriously wrong in their wiring. They need to be evaluated. I’m not saying do it in order to buy a gun…I’m saying that people that display this type of behavior need to be evaluated and incarcerated. They need to be taken out of the public sector and held where they can never do such a thing. The guns this guy used aren’t the problem. The problem is, a) he is a very sick individual who doesn’t value human life or b) he’s an Islamic extremist, and needs to be jailed for the rest of his life as a war criminal.

You cannot blame any of these shootings on the gun, any more than you can blame Bernie Sanders for the shooting of Steve Scalese, or Donald Trump for the sending of bombs to Democrats by Cesar Sayoc. Those sick individuals were the ones allegedly (because they haven’t yet been brought to trial in Sayoc’s case, and Hodgkinson is dead and was never tried) who did the deed. It was just the gun that carried out the order.

Gun control is not the issue here. The issue is mental illness. The issue in this particular case is one of a home-grown terrorist that felt the need to eradicate Jews on behalf of Islam. That’s a pretty normal feeling among a lot of Muslims, but of course, not all. In the Middle East, it’s a lot more prevalent than it is here. But be assured, it does happen.

Look, there is no way in hell to guarantee anyone’s safety in this world. It’s a dangerous place, and the world is full of crazies that would love to end your life, my life, or even their own life,. We may never find the reason why such people do the things they do. They are missing a few screws, and need to be put away. What we need to solve this problem isn’t more gun control. If you took away guns, they’d send bombs. Or they’d figure out some other thing to use. Fire, knives, strangling, bombs, there will always be another way to end someone’s life. It’s just the world we live in. You don’t have guns in England, yet people still die there in mass murder. How in the world is that possible?

Here is the solution I’ve proposed to the left forever. Ban whatever weapons you want. Take the Second Amendment and throw it in the trash, and I will support it. UNTIL… there is another shooting. At that point, you have to admit that you’ve been wrong all of this time, you’ll agree to re-institute the Second Amendment as it’s currently written, and you’ll never speak of gun control again. Think they’ll take me up on that? Nope. No way in hell.

Carry on world…you’re dismissed!