Enlightened Leftist professor calls for the killing of NRA members

James Pearce, LEFTIST MOTHERFUCKERThis is adjunct professor James Pearce, from Ohio’s Southern State Community College.  He’d like to kill you.  Nah.  He’s kidding.  Not.  He wants to kill you.  Really.

Ah yes, another reason that Leftists are more predominently becoming indistinguishable from Muslim terrorists, advocating the wholesale slaughter of persons with which they disagree.

Ah yes, the loving tolerance of Leftists and Islam, embracing peace, understanding, true diversity of thought and speech on as many levels as possible, expanding outreach and encompassing a startling inclusivity offered to all philosophies and beliefs.

My dripping, frothing sarcasm ends, at least for the moment, now.

From PersonalLiberty.com:

Liberal insanity: Professor calls for mass shooting at NRA headquarters, says leave ‘no survivors’

by Sam Rolley

A professor at Southern State Community College is currently under investigation after suggesting via social media that the mass murder of 2nd Amendment supporters would help the Left’s gun control cause.

In a Facebook post last month, Ohio adjunct professor James Pearce said the only way for the left to win its gun control battle is for “a bunch of us anti-gun types” to “arm ourselves, storm the NRA headquarters in Fairfax, VA, and make sure there are no survivors.”

Placed into the clear digital ether in black and white.  Retrievable.

My first question: do you think adjunct professor Pearce is “kidding”?  Do you think he “doesn’t mean it”?

These days, I’d attribute the veracity of his statements as I would those of Barack Hussein Obaka.  He meant every damned word.  But what did he actually write and post?  Oddly enough — and you would expect no less — I have it.

James Pearce FACEBOOK POSTAdjunct professor — not quite a real, actual professor — James Pearce meant every word he wrote.  It wasn’t fun, it wasn’t ribbing, it wasn’t bust-a-gut.  Because Leftists have no sense of humor.  They, he, are and was completely dead serious.

Pearce’s post has since caught the attention of law enforcement authorities and an investigation is underway.

The professor is protesting the conservative backlash and criminal investigation into his post, saying it’s obvious that the people he threatened can’t take a joke.

“It was suppose to be a joke, folks. I really do think that Facebook needs something like a ‘sarcasm punctuation mark,’” he said. “The less literate among us don’t seem to recognize humor when they see it.

Right.  The unwashed amongst us, the Proles, the Serfs, the Underlings, the Commoners.  The arrogance drips from his every word.

This is the man who wouldn’t know a handgun from a rifle, a hard day’s work, sweating for a living, a student not bowing down before his swelled cranium.

One can immediately suss that Professor Pearce is the person upon which one would rely should you encounter some kind of violent critical incident, yes?  Yes.  His persona is such that he would fight tooth and nail for you and me.  He would obviously be not unlike Brave Sir Robin.

He’s the typical GOWP: Guilty Overeducated White Person, who has been taught, but has learned little about life.

He can’t understand the fuss.

Right.  Smart guy.

BZ

 

New Leftist tactic: go after ammo — “not protected by 2nd”

Obama Gun ConfiscationThose who are paying attention realize that the Second Amendment has been under assault by Leftist elements for literally years.  Decades.

This focus has been even more pronounced under Barack Hussein Obama, the worst president the United States has ever had to suffer through and attempt to survive.

That said, Leftists know that it is difficult to go after firearms themselves — though a large bulk of Europeans wish they had their own version of the Second Amendment today due to the invasion of their continent by Muslim “refugees” and usurpers.

So: how to kick Constitutionalists in the slats?

Go after ammunition.  In Fornicalia, they have already done so.  It is illegal to hunt with lead bullets, for example.  Facts be damned.

Ammunition Ban ItTherefore, from Breitbart.com:

Gavin Newsom: Ammunition ‘The Most Dangerous Part’ of a Gun

by AWR Hawkins

Californian Lt. Governor Gavin Newsom is hitching his 2018 gubernatorial campaign to a statewide ballot proposal that would sharply restrict the sale of ammunition.

“It seems to me the most dangerous part of the weapon is not the weapon itself, it’s the ammunition,” he said April 1.

He wants anyone buying ammunition to endure a background check similar to the one that would-be gun buyers currently have to pass to buy a firearm.

According to the Press Democrat, Newsom, speaking at the Graton casino, told a story about being denied a Sudafed cold medicine purchase because he did not have a driver’s license to show at the pharmacy counter. He suggested it is strange that a person has to show ID to buy cold medicine but not ammunition.

So you want ID for ammunition?  You want background checks for ammunition?

How about we apply what I call the Logical Extension then, sir?  That would be: mandatory identification for voting.  Background checks for voters.  Appearing at one’s voting precinct is a perfect time to run persons for criminal warrants. to check if they are welfare abusers, drug abusers, in violation of any number of restraining orders, tort violations, domestic abuse violations.  Imagine how many domestic abuse cases could be solved with abusers in custody?

After all, voting is one of the MOST consequential actions one can take yearly.

It’s only fair — I love that Leftist word when applied against them — that the United States know — like firearms — if actual CITIZENS are voting upon issues that determine the future of the nation.

Newsom is also pushing a ban on the possession of “high capacity” magazines. He says such magazines are “disproportionately responsible for mayhem.”

What is a “high capacity magazine”?

Would that be a hundred rounds?  Fifty rounds?  Thirty rounds?  Twenty rounds?  Ten rounds?

How about five rounds?

Like Barney Fife, keep your one round in your pocket.

BZ

 

January 1st: Texas prepares for open carry

Open CarryWhich, in my opinion, is one of the most ridiculous concepts in the history of firearm concepts.

Also, in my opinion, anyone who would openly carry a firearm on their person isn’t thinking clearly, particularly if they live in a larger city.  You have painted yourself as a target.

I say this with the greatest amount of love possible: you’re not thinking it through..

Unless you are Steven Seagal, you’re asking to be disarmed.  And I’ll wager that even an inattentive Steven Seagal can be disarmed if he’s coldcocked first.  I certainly know that cops can.  And they have more training than you do with the exception of a Massad Ayoob, etc.

I say this as a law enforcement officer of 41 years (retired 6 months ago), having worked Patrol, Detectives and as the Rangemaster for my 2,000+ officer department.  I know what cops can and cannot do, and I have watched them train — and trained them — for over 35 years.  As I used to say in the classes I taught, “because you can do a thing doesn’t necessarily mean that you should do a thing.”

I can hear many of you ridiculing me loudly.  “I’m not thinking, you say?  What about all the people who carry rifles and shotguns in gun racks?  Even California used to do that!”

You’re right.  I can remember, as a kid, men in pickup trucks having gun racks in their pickup trucks, in the back window.  It was a common sight for many years of my childhood.

However, that was before America decided that it’s best to let the insane run throughout the nation unmedicated and unrestrained.  Before nuts could refuse their meds and before they were mandated to be released onto the streets.  Today, the only major system that is forced to deal with the truly mentally disturbed would be — you guessed it — our jails and prisons.  Because we kick our mentally defective back into the street, they will offend and re-offend up to and until they commit a crime and come to the attention of law enforcement.  It is now considered barbaric to physically restrain and/or keep the mentally challenged in facilities against their will.  We are paying the price for that philosophy.

That was also before the mentality of the US changed when the number of gangs and the number of its members literally exploded geometrically.  The viewpoint of America also changed, and criminality became somewhat mainstreamed.  Criminals and gang members weren’t real criminals; they were merely victims of their environment.  We needed to understand them and not pigeonhole them.  And oh, by the way, gangs were and are very well armed.

Further and most recently, cops became the criminals and the criminals became the saints.

That said, cops still have problems with their version of “open carry.”  Civilian open carry presents an entirely new level of complications.

Now if you’re in a crowd of people all carrying openly, there is strength in numbers.  If you are at a public event where others are carrying openly, so be it.

But to me, there are those who will be openly carrying a sidearm in order to simply make a statement.  That they can do it.

Because you can do a thing, should you do a thing?

Carrying a firearm also means a concomitant weighty responsibility.  And by carrying your firearm in, say, a holster on your belt for all to see, not just the “good people” will see your gun.  So will “bad people.”  Some “bad people” will want to make an example of you, particularly if you are a woman, if you are small, if you are fat, if you look like a target or a victim, if you look or act like a sluggard or a dolt.  Or if you are unaware.  Trust me, criminals have excellent “radar.”  Like sharks, they can sense idiots, victims and morons in the water.  Carrying a firearm openly doesn’t make you bullet proof or smarter than anyone else.

For these reasons and many more I say: if you are properly trained and within the law, carry concealed.  It’s best for everyone, yourself included.

Plus, the cops have a little preparation to do.  From the WashingtonTimes.com:

Texas police hurry to prepare for open carry of handguns in January

by Andrea Noble

SAN ANTONIO — Texans have long carried rifles and shotguns openly in public. But with the Lone Star State poised to allow residents to openly carry handguns beginning in January, law enforcement agencies are hurrying to train their officers on the intricacies of the law and to devise protocol for inquiring about a gun owner’s open-carry permit.

Officials from agencies across Texas said they are bracing for an uptick in emergency calls from residents who might become concerned because they are not used to seeing people openly — and legally — carrying a handgun.

“I think the public has a perception that if someone is carrying a firearm openly into a shop that they will be arrested,” said Officer Joseph Gamaldi, second vice president of the Houston Police Officers Union. “This a huge concern for us. We are preparing for a significant increase in calls for carrying guns.”

Clearly, that will occur.  The dicier question is this: how and when will cops contact those who openly carry a firearm?

Emily Taylor, an independent program lawyer with the firearms legal defense program Texas Law Shield, said she has conducted more than 40 trainings for law enforcement agencies on the topic since the open-carry legislation was signed. Among the most frequent questions she hears from law enforcement are inquiries about how a handgun must be holstered to be in compliance with the law and when an officer can stop and require a person to display an open-carry permit.

“Officers have a lot of legitimate questions, like does the holster have to be worn on the body?” she said, noting that the statute does not explicitly answer the question.

There is also some debate across agencies as to whether officers have the right to approach anyone they see openly carrying a handgun in order to determine whether they are properly licensed. Ms. Taylor said she interprets the law to mean that officers do have that right.

Here’s the bit that few are examining, however:

First, you have to be licensed.  Two, you must carry in a shoulder or belt holster.  Third, private businesses can tell you to leave because it is their property, not yours.  Here are more considerations.  You cannot carry in the courts, polling places, jails and prisons, racetracks, schools, and prohibited areas in airports and bars.  Or places that are lawfully posted for no carry according to Texas law.

When I was in Patrol as a deputy and as a Sergeant, I wore a marked uniform, drove a marked car and carried necessary equipment on my belt and in my unit.  I also wore a bullet resistant vest.  It wasn’t bullet proof and neither are you.

When I was in Detectives, wearing plain clothes, I seldom carried openly; usually only on scenes where I was going to be there for a period of time.  I did not carry openly otherwise in public, opting to wear a coat or blazer.

Instead, I preferred the element of surprise, and the element of not pushing the proverbial envelope.

Further, cops are disarmed many times a year.  Recently, in my area, a CHP officer was attacked during a freeway encounter.  It took four cops to assist and keep the suspect from disarmed the CHP officer.  All the officers were well trained by their agencies according to POST and, moreover, were at least as large or larger than the suspect himself.  One assisting Placer County sergeant was substantially larger than the suspect.  From the AuburnJournal.com:

Law enforcement officials were keeping a close eye Tuesday on Victor Manuel Hernandez, who tried to disarm an officer Monday. The suspect was placed on suicide watch at Placer County Jail. Hernandez, 28, was arrested Monday morning after trying to take a pistol from Officer Larry Olveda of the California Highway Patrol.

Officers arrived at the scene of a crash on westbound Interstate 80 near the Elm Avenue off-ramp to assist Sgt. Mark Reed, of the Placer County Sheriff’s Department Monday morning around 11 a.m. Within moments of making contact with the driver of a smashed maroon Chevy, Olveda found himself involved in a potential life-or-death situation as Hernandez attempted, unsuccessfully, to take Olveda’s gun. This time, no one was injured. “Easily the suspect or one of the officers could have been killed,” said Steve D’Arcy, under sheriff for Placer County. In the past six months five CHP officers were killed in the line of duty and if not for the quick action of multiple law enforcement agencies Monday there could have been one more.

“There were Placer County sheriff’s deputies, local police, CHP and two detectives from another agency stopped and the paramedic who all helped get this guy under control without anyone being injured.” Mike Peters, of Auburn, is retired from the Sacramento Police Department after a 26-year career. He said Tuesday he knows all too well what Olveda was going through. “I’ve been in that exact situation before, but it was just me and the suspect, no witnesses, no photographer,” Peters said. When his case got to court it was Peters’ word against the suspect’s. “With a photographer on the scene it’s a done deal,” Peters said. “It’s absolutely phenomenal that the photographer was there.” Dan Kirkpatrick is an instructor at the CHP Academy in West Sacramento and requested some of the photographs that ran in the Auburn Journal for his class. “The incident is a perfect example of someone trying to disarm an officer,” Kirkpatrick said. ‘The main thing is to make sure the gun doesn’t leave the holster. What you see in the photo is textbook.”

Both officers involved in the scuffle were back on the job Tuesday. Reed said the entire event unfolded quickly. “You don’t have time to think,” Reed said. “Your instinct is to end the threat and I think officer Olveda did an outstanding job with his gun retention.”

Reed said that as soon as he made contact with Hernandez he knew something was amiss. “He immediately was acting strange,” Reed said. “I had a pretty good idea that the fight would be on.” Officer Kelly Baraga, spokeswoman for the CHP’s Newcastle office, said Tuesday that in light of five officers killed in the line of duty recently, a traffic stop or crash scene is no longer routine. “A lot of us have a heightened sense of awareness because of recent shootings,” she said. “We’re definitely not complacent and know every stop has the potential of becoming violent.”

The event began to unfold just before 11 a.m. Monday when Rodriguez, driving a maroon Chevrolet sedan westbound on Interstate 80, crashed into the right guardrail near Elm Avenue, bounced off and slid into the center divide, officials said. Firefighters were in the process of accessing the driver’s injuries and treating him when he began to fight and reach for Olveda’s gun. Fortunately, for all involved, no one was injured. “This could have happened anyplace, and I think you’d see every officer in the area respond,” D’Arcy said. “Cooperation is not unique, here it just happens on a regular basis.”

GG1 GG2 GG3 GG4 GG5 GG6 GG7I had an individual go after my own firearm while I was on a call by myself in the 80s — and had no initial evidence to expect the person to do what he did.  I am therefore well-versed in the “oh shit” feeling involving an attempted disarming.  When that occurs the gloves are off.  All of them.  It was a report call.  I was a solo officer.  I had no clue what was coming until the last moment when I happened to look directly into his eyes.  Some day I may write about that event.

Am I against carrying a firearm?  Not at all.  Those who can, should.  Training is important, highly important.  Comfort, confidence and competency is important.

But should you carry openly?  Lets put it this way: in my youth, much stronger (I could bench 300 pounds in Patrol and Detectives) and more consistently trained and more conscious of my surroundings and with officer survival paramount in my mind, I could have but didn’t.  I didn’t then and I wouldn’t now.

This will make me unpopular with the open carry “we’re going to do it because we can” cadre.  Oh well, so be it.

Anyone who knows me and reads my blog realizes that I am a massive supporter of the Second Amendment and, further, that I am an Oathkeeper.

That said, I also believe that good Americans have to be smarter, savvier and more judicious than the current iterations of our various governments, than the criminal class surrounding them, and those persons who want another excuse to disarm America and further, to actually confiscate guns.  You think that can’t happen in the US?  Go here; it’s already an issue.

We have to craftier than the Leftist gun grabbers.

Because we can do a thing, should we always do a thing?

All I’m saying is: be smart.

BZ

 

The idiocy of Leftists

First, the Tweet:

Second Amendment Tweet From BoukobzaYes ladies and gentlemen, besides being unable to spell, this unknown individual who deserves no more attribution has no idea whatsoever how the world and the nation actually functions and appears to be completely ignorant of our founding documents.

Not that I would expect someone making such ridiculous statements to be other than a fairly recent public school product.

BZ