Monday, October 02, 2017

Las Vegas concert "security"

Just look at the picture above and notice how safe those disarmed-by-law people seem to be. It must warm Nancy Pelosi's heart-like blood pump.

It has been reported that "security" was checking attendees for weapons as they entered the Las Vegas concert area.

Yeah, that worked. "Security". Theater. Magical thinking.

But the Mass Murderer Cheerleader Club is dancing in the blood of the dead and wounded, calling for more of what failed to save lives. As they always do. Anything these idiots propose would enable more evil losers to kill more people. It's the inevitable result of everything they cry out for.

Do I believe they have "good intentions"? Maybe. Some of them do. But others know enough to know exactly what they are advocating. They know where their path leads, and they don't care. They want it anyway.

Anti-gun "laws", rules, and policies NEVER make any innocent person safer, and sometimes make them less safe. Sometimes they lead directly to death.

In this case, the policies didn't make anyone safer, but didn't really contribute to the death and destruction, either. If you have a policy that doesn't help, but can hurt, you are stupid or evil-- maybe both-- to keep implementing it. You are definitely evil to advocate doing more of it, harder.

Yes, that's right: stricter "security" won't stop things like this, but will only make them easier to commit. "Security" could have made everyone strip and attend the concert naked after being probed, chemo-sniffed, and rape-scanned by TSA machines. It wouldn't have saved one life-- unless you count those who would refuse to be treated this way to attend a concert and went elsewhere.

Sometimes there's just nothing you can really do when some evil loser decides to kill people. But that's no excuse to keep doing the wrong things; things that never help and sometimes hurt.

Anti-gun bigotry is wrong. It is evil. It kills innocent people. Don't enable the bad guys by trying to restrict guns; fight back by refusing to be unarmed.

I know, pointing this out isn't nice. Sorry, but I'd rather be good than nice.

Thank you for helping support
Any subscriptions or donations are greatly appreciated!

Follow me on Steemit


  1. "In this case, the policies didn't make anyone safer, but didn't really contribute to the death and destruction, either." - I thought the same thing before reading about a veteran in the hotel who heard the shots and helped lead the police to the shooter. If he had been armed and hadn't waited for the "authorities", it's likely many lives could have been saved.

    1. Yeah, I had thought about something like that. In this post I was thinking more of the people entering the concert, but of course people in the hotel were also "legally" helpless.

      It would be better if everyone were armed ALL THE TIME, without exception, as it would limit what bad guys could get away with, and for how long.

    2. And I've been reading that it took 72 minutes for cops to show up. A universally armed population would have been there almost instantly.