| NEW - 2014 U.S. Senate Midterm Races | NEW - 2016 GOP Nomination Contenders | 2012 Presidential Election Maps and Polls | U.S. National Debt Clock |
Another example of lives saved because innocent, law-abiding people had a gun to protect themselves. This time, a 15-year old boy who protected himself, and his sister, with one of those vilified AR-15 Rifles.
H/t Poor Richard’s News via The Right Scoop
And another example of a law-abiding citizen using a gun to protect himself – and in this case, his baby son.
This time an Ohio man with a Concealed & Carry Permit using his handgun to shoot a man trying to rob him with a gun. The victim’s baby was nearby. You won’t hear Barack Obama, Joe Biden, or Diane Feinstein citing this case.
H/T WBNS-TV via Human Events
Legal Gun Saves 2-Month Old Child: humanevents.com/2013/01/09/leg… Try telling this man that “more guns are not the answer.”
— Human Events (@HumanEvents) January 9, 2013
Here is a new Gingrich Campaign ad that goes after Mitt Romney by using clips of his past statements over the years on guns and the 2nd Amendment.
The U.S. Supreme Court has upheld the right to “keep and bear arms” in a decision announced to day to reverse the Chicago gun ban. In making this ruling, the court is essentially making it clear that the right to “keep and bear arms” applies to gun control laws at the local and state level as well as the federal.:
Supreme Court Opinion: Two years ago, in District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U. S. ___, this Court held that the Second Amendment protects the right to keep and bear arms for the purpose of self-defense and struck down a District of Columbia law that banned the possession of handguns in the home. Chicago (hereinafter City) and the village of Oak Park, a Chicago suburb, have laws effectively banning handgun possession by almost all private citizens. After Heller, petitioners filed this federal suit against the City, which was consolidated with two related actions, alleging that the City’s handgun ban has left them vulnerable to criminals. They sought a declaration that the ban and several re-lated City ordinances violate the Second and Fourteenth Amendments. Rejecting petitioners’ argument that the ordinances are un-constitutional, the court noted that the Seventh Circuit previously had upheld the constitutionality of a handgun ban, that Heller had explicitly refrained from opining on whether the Second Amendment applied to the States, and that the court had a duty to follow established Circuit precedent. The Seventh Circuit affirmed, relying on three 19th-century cases—United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U. S. 542, Presser v. Illinois, 116 U. S. 252, and Miller v. Texas, 153 U. S. 535— which were decided in the wake of this Court’s interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment’s Privileges or Immunities Clause in the Slaughter-House Cases, 16 Wall. 36.
Held: The judgment is reversed, and the case is remanded……. FULL OPINION
Here is video of John Stossel on Fox and Friends where he said the truth is that the more available guns are, “crime tends to go down because the bad guys start to get worried about who has a gun.”
Stossel pointed out that when Great Britain banned guns, “crime went up.” He also said it is true that virtually everyone in the “mainstream media” is anti-gun. He said he knows because he used to be a part of them.
Despite all the emphasis in the media that increased gun regulation reduces crime, Stossel said the facts just don’t support it as true.
