Previous Post
Next Post

It’s happened again, another lone nut-job has murdered innocent citizens. No I’m not going to add to the infamy of this piece of human debris that is for some inexplicable reason still stealing oxygen from our planet. This week I add one more to the innumerable reasons why I am glad I don’t subscribe to cable television: 24/7 non-stop Useless Horror. The never-ending news cycle depicting every aspect of the terrorist act committed in Aurora, Colorado serves no purpose but to horrify the citizenry and make them feel helpless. I suppose I should amend that statement; the terrorist act does serve a purpose for left-leaning politicians who feel that the peasants would be better off if disarmed. Or, is it the ruling class who is better off if the peasants are disarmed? . . .

Useless Horror

Is it cold or crass to refer to the incessant media coverage as Useless Horror? I think not.  What use, other than to boost woefully low television ratings, does the story serve? Will the talking heads on network TV bring in experts to offer up positive solutions? Unless the answer is civilian disarmament or to increase the ever-expanding police state, the answer is sadly ‘no’.

Even a Fox News commentator hammered on the fact that the killer “…had no hunting license, no concealed carry permit…and no ties to the police or military.  Yet he was in possession of a semi-automatic rifle, a tactical shotgun and two handguns…and thousands of rounds of ammunition.”  The unspoken inference was, why should someone with no direct ties to the police or military be allowed to possess such weapons and ammo?

Slow-Learner Syndrome

Amidst the clamor from the left that this incident proves the need for citizens to be disarmed, few have mentioned that the citizens in that theater were already disarmed. By local ordnance it was “unlawful to carry a concealed dangerous weapon” in Aurora. Over and over again we bear witness to the abject failure of gun free zones. And yet, like the clinically insane, they keep doing the same thing, all the while expecting different results.

The answer from the elitist ruling class and the useful idiots in their camp is always to address criminal horror by punishing the innocent. Hundreds of thousands of lawful American gun owners are now to be punished for the acts of the lawless and cowardly.

Despite the overwhelming evidence to the contrary, we’re treated to so-called expert advice that we must “be reasonable” and accept even greater limits on our liberty for the empty promise of an intangible security. Whether it’s an individual city, a state, or a whole country, every time the law-abiding give up their arms they become an endless supply of victims to vermin who operate quite happily outside the law. There’s no shining example of a disarmed populace that enjoys a crime-free life – quite the opposite.

The Ultimate End Game

Facts, however, have no bearing on feelings. Feeling good and saying things that sound “reasonable” are where the social elitists put all of their emphasis. This situation is no different than the endless failures of socialism and communism worldwide. Despite the demonstrated failure of these policies, they are polished up and disguised as new ideas to be tried again and again.

The cruel joke on the people is the fact that deep down in their black and rotten souls, the social elitists know full well that their policies are failures. They’re well aware that disarming people does not in any way make them any safer or society any more crime-free. For them, it’s the end game that’s most important – disarmament and subjugation. An armed populace may be guided, led astray and even occasionally corralled, but they can never truly be ruled and dominated.


How do you convince a populace to willingly be disarmed? There are several steps; they include ignorance, distraction, and guilt. The campaign of ignorance began decades ago with a woefully inept education system – a system that places artificial self-esteem ahead of actual achievement. The more ignorant of common law and the rights of the individual they are, the easier it becomes to dissuade people from exercising those rights. With no understanding of history, the ignorant see the world only from the narrow view of today.


Distraction takes many forms. Pop-culture filth and vapid rubbish are put forth as entertainment. Rather than inspire thought and understanding, the pop culture media has devolved into baser grunts and moans. The language is butchered and lowered to a sub-elementary level. Deviants, thugs, and reprobates are held up as cultural icons. The impressionable generations are encouraged to be shallow and self-centered.

If the citizen can’t be distracted by pop culture filth, their attention is diverted to other vapid subjects. Topics of cultural dissension such as racism, homosexuality, global-warming, et al. are given non-stop promotion and publicity so as to keep the masses arguing amongst themselves – and therefore distracted. Far too many citizens willfully fall into this trap.


Finally, when the stubborn citizens – the ones who have managed despite the odds to educate themselves and who have turned off the cultural rot – are encountered, they’re bombarded with guilt. We have borne witness to an orchestrated guilt campaign now referred to as “Fast and Furious”.

With absolutely no regard for the lethal consequences of their actions, those charged with protecting the lives of the innocent instead fed arms to those who they knew would use them for evil purposes. When discovered, those in charge of the fiasco claimed ignorance, good intentions and hid behind the all-purpose excuse, “mistakes were made.”  Why would they do this? It is simple: to force guilt upon those who stubbornly refuse to surrender their liberty.

The Useless Horror supplied non-stop after every criminal act that includes a firearm serves the purpose of the elites. That purpose is to shame those who have escaped the ignorance and distraction traps. Guilt’s a powerful ally to the ruling class elite who view the independent-minded citizen as a roadblock to their conquest.

A Refuge and Fortress

The blissfully ignorant and naïve are lost. They refuse to believe or accept that there are those who desire to keep them uneducated, distracted, and hobbled by guilt and shame. Charles Baudelaire (not Kevin Spacey) once wrote that the greatest trick the Devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn’t exist.

If, however, you have the clarity to realize the triple threat, you can and indeed should gird yourself against these attacks. Educate yourself and your family in not only the law and the constitution that enumerates your God-given rights, but in history, too. Consider the fate of all societies that willfully allowed themselves to be disarmed for the hollow promise of security.

When the seductive mistress of distraction surfaces to steal your attention away from the threats to your liberty, you must steel your mind against it. View each and every topic that’s thrust upon you by the sycophant media with a jaundiced eye. Beware the trap of distraction that robs you of objectivity and entices you to turn on your fellow citizen.

Suffer not from guilt and shame. Refuse to allow the actions of the evil to lull you into submission. Genuine safety and security doesn’t come from capitulation or surrender. It’s a sad comment on the current state of affairs that those who follow this advice are so woefully in the minority.

Take hope – by all accounts it was as few as one third of the populace that led this nation through more than six years of painful revolution. The end result of their suffering was the greatest nation the world has ever known, a beacon of liberty and a shining example for all freedom-loving people on Earth. The light has dimmed and it’s fading, but it hasn’t yet been extinguished. As long as you draw breath you have the power to keep that fire burning. Or, as so many of your neighbors do, you can simply watch “Dancing with the Stars” and let the light die out forever.

Previous Post
Next Post


  1. Good article, just a small nitpick: concealed carry is not illegal in Aurora, you just need a CO CCW. Open carry is banned in the city and county of Denver (despite our preemption law, Denver sued and someone in the CO SC decided it didn’t apply…)

    • One justice was unable to hear the oral argument so was recused from the decision resulting in a 3-3 tie that left the lower court decision in place. The justice who was recused, it is believed, would have voted to overturn the lower court and Denver gun owners would have won. Since that case the Colorado Supremes have been pretty good on gun rights and there is some hope that Denver will be brought into line on the preemption statute eventually.

  2. By local ordnance it was “unlawful to carry a concealed dangerous weapon” in Aurora. Over and over again we bear witness to the abject failure of gun free zones. And yet, like the clinically insane, they keep doing the same thing, all the while expecting different results.

    The law has changed in Colorado. No local ordinance in the state of Colorado carries the force of law or is repealed when it conflicts with the right of the people of this state to keep and bear arms, carry concealed, etc. The intent of the legislature in making this correct today is so that you can travel freely in the state with your concealed handgun and not have to double check every time you enter another county, city, municipality, or potential gun free zone. The City of Denver was notorious for being in conflict with State law. Now, they are just in conflict with high cap magazines, which you can own and legally possess anywhere else in the state except Denver. Yep, your 25 round .22LR magazine for your 10/22 is illegal in Denver, unless you are just passing through. Wouldn’t want to test that theory though.

    Private Business Owners – yes, they can post no gun signs, but they do not have the force of law here. If you are caught with a concealed carry weapon, then you can be asked to leave, and if you refuse, then you can be arrested and charged with trespassing.

    I will take that chance thank you or just simply not go into a gun free zone if I can at all help it.

    Very sad state of affairs.

    • “Yep, your 25 round .22LR magazine for your 10/22 is illegal in Denver”

      Firearms that use .22 rimfire ammunition are specifically excluded from Denver’s definition of “assault weapon”.

      DRMC 38-130(c)(2)

      • Not to mention that Colorado doesn’t allow local laws to override state laws (as he mentioned earlier), so yes, it would be an inconvenience, but the profits from the lawsuit would be worth it, not to mention that the state would finally crack down on Denver.

        • CO’s courts have let some local ordinances stand; e.g. Denver’s ban on open carry and their “assault weapons” ban. Apparently, those are OK because the state never expressly legislated on those topics. For example, since there’s no state law expressly allowing “assault weapons”, Denver’s ban doesn’t conflict with any state law.

        • Correction to my 11:43 post…

          Denver’s “assault weapons” ban was OK’d by the court because it was a “local concern”, overriding CRS 29-11.7-103.

        • I’m sure any decent lawyer could rip that to shreds. You can’t claim that local laws can’t trump state laws and then allow a local law to trump state law for any reason.

  3. Great post. I hope everyone votes this fall and helps others vote to help reverse some of the stupid discussed in the post. Getting involved and having an alternate voice in your community also helps.

    • Gun owners are torn between two competing values: the right of private property owners to control who and what comes onto their property, and gun rights in general. The way out of the dilemma is for the law to make a distinction between “private” private property and semi-public private property. The former is your home and the latter is a business that invites the public at large onto its property, such as a theater, shopping mall, big box store, or any other commercial establishment where large numbers of people are invited to gather without any screening of who they are or what their purpose might be. Concealed carry laws [and Constitutional carry laws] could be reformed to state that CCW holders [or others where carry w/o a permit is allowed] have a right to carry in those places.

      • I’m not torn at all… “concealed means concealed.”

        As long as signs don’t carry the weight of law (they don’t in my state)…. I don’t look for them nor notice them if they are there.

      • if a business wants to forbid possession of firearms concealed or not by licensed carriers they should assume liability for the safety of patrons. The sign/rule/request opens them up to responsibility and they should buttress that sign with another that says we are patrolled by uniformed or plains clothes security for your protection.
        They can then get insurance for liability in the event of an “event” should they decide security is too much hassle.
        But the notion of being disarmed as being safer has been dispelled. Patrons also have the option not to patronize any business that would required them to be disarmed while on premises.

  4. The never-ending news cycle depicting every aspect of the terrorist act committed in Aurora, Colorado serves no purpose but to horrify the citizenry and make them feel helpless.

    You forgot the other purpose—to completely validate the scumbag’s motivation. I have to wonder what would happen if the media would stop giving these…things, a pedestal.

    Yes, I know, it’ll never happen. But what if it did?

  5. … Or, is it the ruling class who is better off if the peasants are disarmed? . . .

    The constituents of that ruling class (progressives, the MSM, governmentalists, authoritarian collectivists, etc.) have never been in a better position, or had better timing, to make the case for more gun restrictions. But The People don’t think so.

    Gun and ammo sales are at record levels. The louder the gun-grabbers scream from the rooftops, the more people want something from which to pry their cold, dead hands.

  6. Excellent article. I do want to make one small point. The gun grabbers truly believe that if everyone but the police were disarmed, things like this would be less likely to happen. Sure, the real criminals could always obtain guns, but crazy nutjobs like this guy might not have been able to. Itbis an argument made over and over especially by the noisy dwarf in NYC. He claims that even with NYC’s draconian gun laws, bad guys simply buy their guns in another state and bring them in. That’s why he wants to eliminate them everywhere.

    The argument is bullshit for a whole variety of reasons, but it’s worth keeping in mind when you are educating your fellow citizens on their rights. You need to be able to counter this argument, which on the surface might appear “reasonable” to the uninitiated.

    • The gun grabbers truly believe that if everyone but the police were disarmed, things like this would be less likely to happen.

      Honestly, I don’t think that’s it for most of them. The motivation is that a collectivist society and the right to bear arms are fundamentally opposed. A collectivist society relies on using force to make people do as the ruling elite say, whereas an armed person cannot be forced to do anything – they obey because they choose to, since they have the means to resist if they so desire.

  7. Given that law enforcement shows up after the excitement is over in every “gun-free zone” mass shooting, the obvious lesson seems to be that training and arming the potential victims is the only “common sense” approach to the problem.

  8. i already boycott cable and satellite tv. for many reasons. but primarily the money i save can be put to better uses at the gunshop and range. f–k cnn.

  9. Well said. My leanings are more liberal and I have several receipts from my local fun stores, and I’m happy to live in a free state with legal carry options. OMG! A liberal with guns who believes the amendments apply to everyone!

    • Good for you. In some respects, I’m on your side of the spectrum. The key point is that rights shouldn’t be seen as a partisan issue. We all have to support basic rights.

  10. So the solution to stopping gun violence is…more guns? Better start clearing some room on your mantlepiece for that Nobel prize, slick.

    And as for the hypocrisy of decrying talking heads and the media frenzy whilst making the what? 25th post? 50th post? About this incident on this site well, thanks for the chuckle at least. Throw in some jingoism, many unsupported claims passed off as truth, the laughable idea that some “God” gave us any rights, and a touch of vapid patriotic BS at the end and you have a real winner of a post that told us exactly nothing in oh so many words.

    • I’m going to attempt to be more respectful in my reply to you than you were to us.

      1. Let’s recall that Obama was given the Nobel Prize for Peace, and what did he do? He gave a speech. As David Brooks joked, one wonders why he didn’t sweep the medals that year, since he gave speeches on science, the economy, and so forth.

      2. No one has a solution for preventing this kind of shooting incident that doesn’t involve creating a totalitarian state. In such a state, you might find yourself having reached the breaking point of what you could tolerate.

      3. The articles here sometimes are sensational, but the comment section is open for discussion. Feel free to participate. Feel free to present a contrary opinion.

      4. What, in your view, is the source of our rights? I’ve seen people argue that we get rights from consensus, but these are the same people who get angry when gays can’t marry and women can’t get abortions thanks to constitutional amendments in their states. By the way, I support gay marriage and abortion rights, precisely for the same reason that I support gun rights. I argue that we have basic rights by virtue of being human. It’s irrelevant to this discussion as to where those rights came from. We have rights.

      • “I’m going to attempt to be more respectful in my reply to you than you were to us.”

        Why? Are those who would take away your rights and render you unable to protect yourself and your family deserving of any respect or consideration?

    • hmmmmm, aren’t you from england? still live there? if so, you gave up your freedom years ago for a false sense of security. ccctv everywhere and i recall a government spokesman replying to a citizen who was upset because a camera could look into his home. “if you’re not doing anything wrong, why should you care?” that may be the world you want, but itisn’t what i want and i still have free will.

    • I dunno, for gun grabbers the solution to the fact that gun-free zones utterly fail is to…you guessed it…make more gun free zones. And guess what, it still utterly fails.

      Or, look at the fact that states with looser gun laws and conceal-carrying citizens have had their crimes rates drop or at the very least not rise. Go look up Chicago, Washington DC, and LA and tell me if you think restricting guns more is the solution.

      Didn’t think so. But have fun in your fantasyland.

  11. I will not name this murderer by name. Needless to say I am spending my Sunday watching the Olympics with my son, not obsessing on News.
    To that end however I personally feel that all of this, and the resulting demand to disarm from government has had the opposite affect. It doesn’t mean we are winning, but it does mean that folks are seeing a possible loss of a right and deciding now to exercise it.

  12. You know the Bible says come let us reason together to find TRUTH, notice how fast you get attacked if only pointing out how a few facts just do not somehow FIT, I can not count the number of times I have been attacked, over very minor items, and because I could think outside the box, you are a tin hat nut,,, I would and will that we should call into question all things ,, TRUTH never hides . It waits to be accepted…

  13. Debate the legal points all you want but the fact remains that the audience members agreed to be disarmed and willingly allowed themselves to be gathered together in a small dark room, depending on thier Liberal Overloards for thier protection, safe in the knowladge that “There are no Terrorists” they were in a state of disbelief as they were gunned down by a single mad-man who pre-planned thier murder and KNEW his victims had been rendered helpless by the very goverment they relied on.

  14. I find myself reluctantly agreeing with the article. I found myself shrugging and commending the writer. As a whole piece I did not enjoy what was written. I hope Paul sees the irony in belittling others for be guilted into their behavior.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here