The unnamed man who took hostages in a theater in Germany today had no problem getting a gun, despite Germany’s draconian gun laws. The House Democrats are perpetuating the prevailing willful ignorance about the real threat of jihad terror.
“GOP Congressman to House Democrats during sit-in: ‘Radical Islam killed these people,'” AOL News, June 23, 2016:
Tensions between Democrats and Republicans reached a boiling point , with one Republican lawmaker getting into a shouting match over a sit-in aimed at forcing votes on gun control measures.
Representative Louie Gohmert staging his own protest yelling at the Democrats saying, “We’re talking about radical Islam”. While also proclaiming, “Radical Islam killed these people.”
The Congressman waving his finger at posters featuring photos of the victims of the recent mass shooting in Orlando that left 49 people dead.
Gohmert’s own protests were then drowned out by the Democratics [sic] shouting, “Don’t let terrorists have a gun!”
The Democrats began their sit-in because of the Senate’s rejection of four purposed gun bills. Congressman John Lewis is leading the charge saying Congress has a moral obligation to speak up and speak out to address gun violence….

CogitoErgoSum says
Make it illegal for a Muslim to own a gun.
خَليفة says
How about gun ownership only for citizens. If they are naturalized, have a waiting period of 5-10 years.
CogitoErgoSum says
No ……. how about drawing up a list of Muslims and never allow any of them (citizen or not) ever to own a gun.
Mark DeFord Eletion says
“No ……. how about drawing up a list of Muslims and never allow any of them (citizen or not) ever to own a gun.”
That wouldn’t be legal unless war has been declared against islam, which probably will never happen. But until then, here’s my suggestion, which I will continue to make from time to time, so that more people can hear it.
“Any muslim or non-muslim who avows that he wishes to live under sharia law should immediately lose some rights and privileges, including the right to possess firearms. Claiming a preference for sharia should be taken as an immediate waive of any and all rights and privileges that the host country recognizes, but sharia does not.*
If that would become policy in the US or any major western country, I think the result would be spectacular.
CogitoErgoSum says
Mark, I would say that the very fact that a person is a Muslim indicates that he/she wishes to live under Sharia. Muslims are stuck with living under infidel laws until the Muslim population grows large enough or powerful enough to establish Sharia. No …. Sharia goes hand in hand with being a Muslim. Going against Sharia is like going against Muhammad. It’s just not right (for a Muslim).
Muslims who do not want to live under Sharia should renounce Islam. After that they should be able to live as full citizens of the United States with all the rights and privileges that go with citizenship.
Hudson Steele says
You got it, brother. NO muslims need to own guns, even the ones that have set up training camps across the US.
terry says
Great idea!
Shane says
Hooray for Rep. Gomert who tells the truth to the lying Treasoncrats who want to make this Jihad attack all about an issue that is favorable to them – gun control, instead of being about Islamic Jihad, which the Treasoncrats are weak on.
Mark Swan says
These folks appear to be—unconcerned with the fact that the media did not seem intersted in
the families and friends of these victoms and that the Muslims got the time with claims of fear—
No what they seem to be concerned most with, is to introduce more gun control demands. When every gun control bill that is introduced, and every event that demands we do something about guns, makes it that much harder to force the political system to do something real about our desperate conditions, and to address the fundamental social pathologies of modern America.
More gun control is not merely a phony solution to violence. It is a formidable political obstacle to genuine solutions, because gun control offers political officials a high-profile (but empty) way to tell the public that the legislature is “doing something.”
We can not stop all violence…yet where we do know we can find it…we could try there.
al says
Wake up and smell the roses — If we do not want to be murdered by Muslims — Then deport all Muslims back to where they came from….And make damn sure that we never let another into our Nation..for any reason. Duh — This is not rocket science…
Watch what England does with their Islamic problem — and it is going to surface very soon.
Veritas says
Picture says it all really.
Hope they’re all facing Mecca. That’s what they want.
Angemon says
Neither did the people who attacked Charlie Hebdo and the Bataclan – and I bet France’s gun laws make Germany’s look tame by comparison.
somehistory says
Shouldn’t they be arrested for this *sit-in*?
Wouldn’t *ordinary* Americans be arrested if they went into the House and held a sit-in?
They don’t really resemble anything *extra-ordinary* and look rather sullen and foolish because they didn’t get their way.
Jesus said there would be *increasing lawlessness* just before He returns. This spectacle is some of it.
Champ says
Sit in? Looks like adults pouting, to me …that one guy certainly is.
Ok, they may want to sit, but I stand for the second amendment:
The Second Amendment of the United States Constitution reads: “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.”
gravenimage says
I agree, Champ.
The idea of a “sit in” *by House Democrats* is insane.
Sit-ins *may* be a valid form of protest for people with no other recourse–the idea that Senators and Congresspeople–some of the most powerful individuals in the United States–need to stage a sit in in their own chambers is nothing more than a stupid publicity stunt.
I guess they wanted to relive their college days. Aren’t there any grown-ups among them?
Hope says
They look like petulant toddlers sitting on the rug at circle time in nursery school. Did you see their stupid slogan? “Disarm Hate.” Dhimmicrats disgust me.
Mark Swan says
This rhetoric is ignoring existing law that applies to all citizens and attempts to create
special law for of course special purpose,Votes, and much more.
There is a calculated popular ploy being played on the minds of the general public…to cause some to be viewed as victims, when they are not, at the expense of others, who can then actually be made unsuspecting victims themselves, accomplished by people who make their living by claiming a cause for an invented victimization, when done using deceit and misinformation, many do respond thinking them to be a real cause, donating to these professional panhandlers, helping them grow in profits and increase in propaganda, which is how they keep up the good work.
They find their niche and will work it for all it is worth, often a lot.
If We really wanted to control Hate Speech, We would need to go after some
of the Prominent offenders, Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, Lewes Foregone, just to name these three, would be a sincere start, honorable mentions of every kind has been poured on these Hate Monsters.
Show One Law for One People, no more Hyphenated Americans.
duh swami says
Define…’Well regulated…
KnowThyEnemy says
The 2nd Amendment is part of the Bill of Rights (BoR). The BoR is exclusively about the rights of individuals and to protect people from the tyranny of the state.
Now to what the 2nd Amend is actually saying-This amendment spells out two separate things:
1) A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, and
2) The right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.
In the first part, the Amendment is simply acknowledging that a free State needs a well regulated militia. (Some people say that it is giving the right to the State to form a militia. Personally I disagree. All the amendments of BoR are regarding the rights of individuals, not State. So if any amendment talks about what the State can do, it is simply acknowledging that right of the State.)
It is in the second part of the Amendment where it describes what right the people have! It is for this reason that the Supreme Court has always ruled that the 2nd Amendment does indeed give the right to individuals to keep and bear arms. (See Wikipedia)
The 2nd Amendment is not some exception in describing multiple rights. The 1st Amendment for example, also spells out multiple rights in the same sentence. As you might already know, those rights are- Free Speech, freedom of religion, freedom of press, freedom of assembly, and the right to petition the government for grievances.
Mark Swan says
“the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed”
If the people do not keep arms they will not have them to bear in a militia
or any other manner of self defense—-many minds have tried to reason about
this for many years—the right to self defense and the ability to resist dictatorship
is the greatest concern and reason for this right as written.
Hudson Steele says
Chump, you hit the nail on the head… with everything you just said.
I remember John Lewis from way back, when he used to show up at my city’s council meetings. He’s always had a sour puss. I saw a meme with pacifiers in all their mouths. He looked like a sour faced baby fixing to whine.
Champ says
“Chump”?
Explain your insult because I don’t find this amusing, pal!
Cecilia Ellis says
Champ, I believe that predictive text may be the culprit here, something which has happened to me after I have typed the correct moniker. In fact, it happened to me earlier today in a reply I submitted to Quotha Raven. As Hudson agreed with your comment, I don’t think that he intended the wrong the moniker. Fear not . . . we know you as the real champ. ?
Champ says
Dear Cecilia, thank you for your response, and I appreciate your kind words, my friend 🙂
What is “predictive text”? I’ve never heard of it; and I’ve never typed a moniker correctly and then have it come out all wrong–and I’ve been posting on JW for over 10 years now.
Cecilia Ellis says
Champ, predictive text is, as I understand, inherent in the software of mobile devices, such as my iPad or an iPhone. When turned on, predictive text takes the word you type and provides alternatives most commonly used. Unless you are careful, as happened to me when I typed Quotha, the word will change to another more widely used word. It is a tool that may be turned off, but it does have its advantages. Hope this answers your question, Chimp . . . Just kidding, Champ. ?
Champ says
Cecilia, I don’t think that “predictive text” is the case here with Hudson. Whenever you notice this error, don’t you immediately explain the mistake to said person? Well, notice that Hudson didn’t bother notifying me of any error. When I leave a comment, I always reread it, and if I made an error, then I post a follow-up correction. Hudson did not do that …
That said, precidtive text might be the issue. Perhaps he doesn’t recheck what he’s written, I don’t know. Which is why he needs to explain this himself.
BTW, I don’t necessarily consider myself a champ just because that’s my choice of a moniker. My maiden name is Champion, so there you have it …it’s been a nickname of mine since gradeschool and I like to use it here to fight *nasty* islam–perfect fit! Those on the frontline fighting evil islam, hey now THEY are the real champs!
Sorry if this stupid side-story bored anyone …;)
Champ says
Oh, thank you for the explanation on predictive text, Cecilia! I use a HP laptop, so I’m old-school. And I use a basic little LG cell phone, too, because I am *no* champ when it comes to techie-stuff, lol! My hubby has a SmartPhone and I find it too ..complicated! 😀
Cecilia Ellis says
Champ, in one of my above replies to you, I actually started to say, “Fear not . . . we all know you as the real champion.” And we do.
As for Hudson, I suspect he has not read your comment. Give him some time, as he may have gone offline subsequent to responding.
Hope you and yours, including “Li’l Champ” are well.
Richard says
Here I go again…And that reminds me of a joke.
A fellow at work was looking all hang-dog and his buddy asked him what was wrong.
“I had a bit of a Freudian slip at dinner last night and I think I may have ended my marriage,” the hang dog replied.
“What did you say?” the buddy asked, to which the hang dog said, “Well I meant to say, ‘Honey, please pass the salt'”
“So what was the slip?” the buddy asked.
“Instead I said, ‘Bitch, you fucked up my life'”
Thank you, I’ll be here all week. Please remember to tip your server.
gravenimage says
Champ, I agree with Cecilia’s guess here. The rest of Hudson Steele’s response to you seems to be entirely respectful, so I doubt he is insulting you.
I just had someone reply to me on another thread and refer to me as “gravy image”–which I would assume is some sort of silly “auto correct”. 🙂
Of course, it might also be a garden-variety typo. Goodness knows I make enough of those…
Champ says
Graven, in thinking it over, you and Cecilia are probably right about the predictive text.
My husband told me that he received a ‘voice text’ from our church secretary asking him for the address and phone number of our neighbor’s, whom just started attending our church, and their last name is “Tejada”; but the secretary at church didn’t double-check her message before sending it, so the voice text translated their last name to “the haters” instead of “Tejada”, lol! Oh my gosh that was hysterical! And “gravy image” is funny, too 😀
Cecilia Ellis says
Champ, yours and GI’s stories are hilarious! ?
Cecilia Ellis says
Graven, please tell me that reply did not come from me . . .
Richard says
How many of the gun bearing people in America are members of “the people”?
The constitution does not state, nor does it imply that the people need be members of a well regulated militia for the right to bear arms not be infringed. When the time comes, we, well many of us, will gladly become a well regulated militia.
You’ve done an extremely poor job of comprehending the words of the founders.
gravenimage says
GOP Congressman to House Democrats during sit-in: ‘Radical Islam killed these people’
…………………..
Hear, hear! A bit of sanity.
خَليفة says
Looks like the democrats are part of the “occupy congress” movement, and they are so juvenile and unprofessional.
More laws won’t make people safe if existing gun laws are not enforced.
gravenimage says
“Occupy congress”, indeed. Good grief…
Angemon says
Occupy movement? We know what to expect then – violence, looting, raping and defecating on cars:
gravenimage says
I just saw House Speaker Paul Ryan try to address these tools in a dignified manner, and they were booing and chanting and catcalling.
If I had seen this clip out of context, I never would have guessed that these yahoos were actually Congresspeople:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=75q1x2RVV_Q
Watch it and weep…
Angemon says
Shouting down people they don’t like – how “democratic” of them…
More worrying, if somoene told me that was taken from any given college, I wouldn’t have a hard time believing it
Oliver says
Angemon,
And that has been done to Mr Trump – more then once. Rather then debate an issue, jsut shut down those with whom you disagree.
DP111 says
How about dont let terrorists into America.
Jaladhi says
You mean “violent extremists” from middle east!!
Jaladhi says
At least there is one US Congressman who has guts to tell the truth about Islam and Muslims. Muslim will try to defeat him in his reelection bid next time.
Hope says
Yes, hats off to Representative Louie Gohmert!
Oliver says
To those (in Congress, the WH and elsewhere ) IN FAVOR FO GUN CONTROL.
IN BOSTON, PRESSURE COOKERS WERE USED.
IN JAMAICA (PART OF QUEENS) N.Y.- AXES OR HATCHETS-TO KILL 2 OR 3 POLICE CADETS.
IN NYC ( WHEN BLOOMBERG WAS STILL MAYOR) KNIVES IN SOME KILLINGS 9IN, AS I RECALL, A RESTAURANT).
IN 1948, WHEN INDIA WAS SPLIT- HINDUS AND MUSLIMS KILLED EACH OTHER-TOTAL WAS -I HAVE READ-OVER 1 MILLION-WITH ROCKS; TREE LIMBS; PIECES OF METAL, ETC.
NO GUNS.
SO, WILL THESE ITEMS ALL BE BANNED?????
JMB says
And in the greatest mass murder in modern history I understand the Muslims used box cutters as weapons to gain control of the flight deck of the airliners that went into the WTC.
Oliver says
JMB,
I forgot about that. So, outlawing box cutters a order for the Dems, if HEAVEN FORBID, Clinton is elected?
Then, the world is doomed. But good news- the Brits showed some spine. And Cameron quit today
Richard says
And if they can’t outlaw utility knives (box cutters) they will outlaw the blades for them.
Richard says
Or pass a law requiring that all utility knives be serialized and the serial number be stamped by the knife onto the blade.
Oliver says
The gunman was a Democrat.
The Sandy Hook killer was a Democrat 9 as was/is his mother).
The parents of the two punks in the Columbine HS shooting were Democrats.
PERHAPS JUST BAN DEMOCRATS FROM OWNING GUNS.
William says
How stupid can some people be? Don’t let terrorists have guns is a stupid statement to make. First off, the guy who shot up the night club was not a terrorist until he shot up the place. Moreover, he was legally in possession of firearms and was granted government approved permits to carry them. Apparently, his job also required him to carry a firearm. Second, he became a terrorist after the fact. He didn’t have the word terrorist written on his forehead leading up to the shooting. Third, if he were a terrorist before the incident, it would be against the law to sell him a gun. I believe that if one is convicted of a crime, one is not able to purchase a gun legally. I believe it is already illegal for a terrorist, someone who has been convicted of a terrorist act, to obtain and to possess a firearm.
Oliver says
William,
he was investigated by The FBI. And, for a longer time then is usual.
That should have been a tip off.
And kept him form a job for a Homeland Security contractor.
ElderlyZionist says
Funny thing is, it was the Democrat senators who voted down two of the four bills. Republicans proposed to properly fund the NICS system, so it can work as the laws mandate, and to input persons on the no-fly list into NICS to prevent them buying guns. Democrats voted those bills down on party lines. Now they sit-in to protest their own votes, and shout bare-faced lies that Republicans are the ones blocking action. The hypocrisy is sickening, and I have a strong stomach for politics-as-usual.
ElderlyZionist says
I’m forced to conclude that Democratic politicians intentionally want to prevent the laws from working as they should, in order to artificially create a crisis, sow panic, raise frustration, and gain an excuse to disarm law-abiding Americans. HELL NO!
aaron morand says
there may be one or two purist in the movement but I submit that the other sit-in*ers are
simply followers with little if any understanding of what it is they want…it seems that our Congress, principally the Democrat party, has reverted to the tactics of the 60*s and
what childishness of the lot….another principal reason to Clean Out Congress and Renew
America….our (?)Representatives have become children in their actions = children in their
reasoning (thinking) and this Nation needs intelligent and able adults as our Representatives..
Fire the Lot…….WTP>>>>>VOTE TRUMP>>>>>>>>>>>!!!
Richard says
“I’m forced to conclude that Democratic politicians intentionally want to prevent the laws from working as they should”
That’s exactly what they do, BINGO! They refuse to enforce the laws that are on the books so as to create the appearance of crisis and thus usher in even more draconian laws. And this is coming from the same party that supported walking guns into the hands of the Mexican drug cartels.
Democrats irrational fear of law abiding citizens exercising their civil right to arm themselves is very much the same as the hatred Muslims have for non Muslims to consume pork.
My gun is my pork! Molon Labe.
Wellington says
With each passing decade the Democratic Party, virtually all of it, becomes—-more infantile, stupider (as if this is possible), and an opponent of the plain meaning of the Constitution. Any residual doubt here can easily be removed by simply looking at the photo accompanying this article. Oh yes, jokers and clowns without exception.
But here is the really bad news: The bulk of the Republican leadership is not far behind this Democratic rot, examples being Lyndsey Graham, John McCain, Mitch McConnell, Paul Ryan, Mitt Romney and ALL the Bushes.
The good news in this dark cloud is that most registered Republicans (around 75%) understand that America is profoundly on the wrong course in sundry areas. Will this be enough to rescue the country from the worst (easily so) Presidential Administration ever, courtesy first and foremost of one Barack Obama?
Stay tuned as a maverick who has good instincts and is an American patriot but who does not have enough knowledge or enough of a filter between his brain and his mouth goes up against, not only arguably but easily, the single most vile major party candidate for the American Presidency in all of American history (and this would include Aaron Burr).
Interesting times. Exceedingly so. Dire times too. Especially for the preservation of the West, which is to say for the preservation of freedom since NO
Wellington says
For some reason I know not the genesis of, my 7:31 P.M. comment got cut off. And so now I will finish it, to wit, “…..since NO other civilization or society EVER pioneered freedom as Western Civilization has.”
This is all.
Oliver says
Wellington, this summer Ryan & McCain are facing primary challenges.
While Trump did NOT win the Wisc. primary, ONE REGION THAT HE DID CARRY–RYAN’S DISTRICT.
So, perhaps Ryan should have rethought his weird, lukewarm semi-endorsement of Mr. Trump. His opponent (in the primary) is an avowed Trump supporter. ( And, what i read, a tattooed biker who started and built a million dollar business).
And McCain-possibly not have been critical of Mr. Trump-his career on the public dole might be over. (Although he will continue with his multi hundreds of thousands in government pensions and his wife’s mega millions).
Richard Paulsen says
Weapons are for the military, the police and those allowed by authorities.
Arthur says
Sounds like something Stalin would say.
Mark DeFord Eletion says
Personal weapons are merely tools for increasing the safety one’s self, family, friends, etc. If you think it is wrong to injure someone who wants to enter your home and kill your family, you’d better leave the doors and windows open. The invader might hurt himself trying to break in.
خَليفة says
In most states you have the right to shoot someone invading your residence. When I was living in CA a police friend of mine said something to the effect that if I shot an invader and he managed to get out the door before he died that I should drag him back inside before calling the police. ( I think he was only half joking ) Self defense is key to a healthy society. If it becomes illegal to defend yourself and your family then you can have no other real rights.
Oliver says
When I lived in New York City ( where there are strict gun control laws) and in Cal., and now in Florida I HAVE BEEN TOLD THE SAME THING. Be sure that scumbag dies INSIDE the property.
I think less then a year ago, some poor fellow in (I think it was Montana) shot a burglar-as he was leaving-after robbing the people- and he was charged. AS ” HIS LIFE WAS NO LONGER IN DANGER”. (If he went to trial- he should have been found not guilty-I know if i were on a jury in a case like that, that is how I would vote).
Shakey_Premise says
I find it not surprising that Representative Elijah “Bloody Hands” Cummings is front and center at this idiotic display. I remember when the sit-in was an honorable tactic used to secure and insure Civil Rights for the marginalized, not take them from the American citizenry. Apparently, that irony is lost on Rep. Cummings.
He earned the moniker “Bloody Hands” Cummings back in 2010 when he was Chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee; he had the authority to address certain ATF management problems, including the Gunwalker Scandal, but he didn’t. These actions by the ATF caused the deaths of American Border Patrol Agents, US civilians and Mexican Military and civilians. (Gunwalker, if you don’t know, or maybe have forgotten involved the ATF facilitating illegal sales of weapons to straw buyers for the benefit of Mexican drug cartels, and others…) I’ts more than likely Islamists, staging themselves South of the border, were recipients of our Islamist infiltrated government’s largess. Representative “Bloody Hands” did Mr. Holder, Obama and the ATF a solid by ignoring the whole affair.
There are armed Islamist cells and lone wolves actively training, have and will again carry out their prime directive as outlined in the Quran *with guns*. Some of them are very well likely guns that the ATF supplied to them, and which Representative Cummins had the opportunity, but refused, to investigate. He’s still living up to his epitaph “Bloody Hands.”
All of a sudden, Ol’ Bloody Hands Cummings is front and center of the movement to disarm the American citizen while refusing to call the mass shootings by their true name – Islamic Jihad, or even connect the perpetrators with Islam. To do so would break ranks with the Islamist Administration.
I’m guessing you aren’t an American citizen, Mr. Paulsen. If you are, swallow your distaste for arms (I did) and hie thee to a reputable range for training. Learn to shoot well, and keep up with training. I hope I’m wrong when I say Western Civilization may come down to armed American citizens. If you’re European or Australian, how’s that disarmament working out for you?
Richard says
Gunwalking is what the BATF did under Obama, but the program itself was called Fast and Furious. Other than that, spot on.
KnowThyEnemy says
“Weapons are for the military, the police and those allowed by authorities.”
…. And for the people (if they wish to keep and bear them), per the Second Amendment of the US. If you don’t like the 2nd Amendment, go live somewhere else! There are plenty of countries in the world who don’t give people the right to keep arms.
duh swami says
Bone of them will protect you from home invasions or falling bricks with Allah’s name on them…
Myxlplik says
I don’t understand Democrats, I really wish I did, because they and everything about them seems to be some sort of anathema to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness, and as I watch them and their ilk destroy our culture I find myself feeling like my nation and culture has left me, like I don’t fit in anymore.
Myxlplik says
I used to be a Democrat by the way, but that was long ago, it’s not the same party it used to be. It actually used to stand for something and as time passes it’s only Conservatives who speak about actual freedom and are willing to bravely stand against oppression.
Wellington says
Modern conservatives in America (never to be confused with RINOS) are the true liberals in the sense of standing for freedom. Modern liberals in America have abandoned freedom and now are rooted in Orwellian conceptions that are inveterate enemies of liberty (e.g., hate speech codes on college campuses).
Old-fashion liberals of the Truman type, that is whatever is left of them, know or should know by now that they should make an alliance with modern conservatives and not with those still going by the name of “liberal” since such people have betrayed freedom.
I think it imperative for all who cherish real freedom, not just in America but in any Western country, to comprehend this verity.
Mark Swan says
You know Wellington, that makes a lot of sense—lets hope this thinking
takes root with what is left of our free thinkers.
Richard says
There was a turning point. Liberalism used to be about achieving equal rights. That was a cause that was truly championed by conservatives as the left sought to force blacks into poverty in order to make them slaves to social welfare in order to garner their votes.
The left quickly took credit for the achievement of social equality. However once equal rights for most, if not all, were achieved long ago the left found a new cause because they weren’t satisfied with an end to activism. Their new goal became ‘equal outcome’. This probably gained prevalence post-affirmative action but it has been an even bigger driver. Of course the new push toward equal outcome required the denial of fact that racial equality had been achieved, as Obama has demonstrated. That was the turning point in which the left drifted much further toward the social Marxism they promote today.
KnowThyEnemy says
It is not always necessary to “understand” someone before one decides what to do about them. Sometimes, simply the observation that they are “anathema to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness” and are causing destruction, is enough to realize that it is best to keep them away and stay away from them!
Mark Spahn (West Seneca, NY) says
What is the source of the photograph
https://www.jihadwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/House-sit-in.jpg
that illustrates this article and that appears on TV news commentaries when this topic comes up?
(Is it just me, or is this photo slightly out of focus?)
Who is that ugly man on the left? Could it be the Georgia Representative
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Lewis_(Georgia_politician) ?
He looks reasonably handsome in his Wikipedia photo, but what was the photographer thinking when he snapped Rep. Lewis’s picture yesterday? Why did the photo editor decide to publish an eyeless photo that was taken in mid-blink? There must be a behind-the-scenes account of this photographic sabotage of a congressman.
Tom W Harris says
Send in the cops.
“Stop resisting!!!” BIFF!! SOCKO!!
Charante says
Let’s create a picture:
We are 10 people and represent the population. We agree on two representatives which is our government. A decision is necessary and it happens that 5 of us are go with the opinion of the first and 5 with the second representative. The first believes he and his 5 supporters are right and therefore sits on the floor to show his anger and protest and won’t get up anymore. Ha, ha, ha …. This is Kindergarden niveau …
Eike Schwarze says
I totally agree with Mr. Spencer on the article, but the subheadline needs to be corrected.
“The unnamed man who took hostages in a theater in Germany today had no problem getting a gun, despite Germany’s draconian gun laws.”
Two webpages (spiegel online and zeit online) reported this morning that the gun was a blank gun, which was indistinguishable for the policemen in the field.
Blank guns can be bought legally in germany, so our gun laws are impotent in this regard.
gravenimage says
This may be the case. But certainly, Jihadists in France and Belgium had no problems getting their hands on automatic weapons, despite strict gun laws there.
siesmann says
There is gun ,and there is a gun.Republicans even won’t agree with having the terrorists access to guns.Pathetic
duh swami says
What’s pat6hetic is punishing the innocent to get to the guilty…
Mark Swan says
Absolutely
KnowThyEnemy says
The terrorists are already not allowed access to guns. If you believe some terrorist was given access to guns in the US, please tell us who, so we can report the matter to the government.
Now before you talk about Omar Mateen or the San Bernardino jihadis, remember that they became terrorists only when they carried out the attack. Up until then they were not terrorists (by the popular understanding of “terrorist”. Of course JWers know that it is never a good idea to give guns to any Muslims.)
Also Omar Mateen was a security officer, so of course he had weapons. Security officers all over the world have weapons, even in countries with the most stringent gun laws. If they don’t have weapons, they won’t be “security officers”!
CrossWare says
The representative of the Czech parliament has the right idea: (ban islam)
https://youtu.be/JqjodfrGOk4
duh swami says
“Well regulated militia’…
The founders left no definitions. What is a militia, and how is it ‘well regulated’?
And who say;s so? Apparently the ‘Fathers’ left it up to me to deci9de…So I am a militia of one and well regulate myself…
Angemon says
They were, however, clear on one point – the right to bear arms is intrinsic.
awake says
Democrat sit-in, AKA, fundraising publicity stunt.
Manuele says
BIGOTS SELF SERVING BUFFOONS.