For liberals facts are never really important. “Truth” to liberals like Democrat New York City Congressman Jerrold Nadler is what he “feels” it is. Nadler has said: “Hunters don’t use large ammunition clips, and as far as self- defense, I mean who are you defending yourself against? If you’re defending yourself against a robber… two or three or four shots should be enough—period.”
It’s a safe bet Nadler has never faced an assailant fueled by adrenalin drugs and alcohol. That doesn’t matter, of course, since no one will ever challenge Nadler on his supposed knowledge of the danger presented by people who are psychotic and drunk – “period.”
The “period” at the end of Nadler’s pronouncement is the classic liberal dismissal of anyone daring to disagree with their use of “feelings” as facts.
Nadler’s fantasy about real shooting combat brings up the death of New York City Police Sergeant Edward J. Johnson.
On January 8, 1960 Sergeant Johnson and his driver were on patrol in the Bowery district of lower Manhattan. The area was dotted with dozens of soup kitchens that catered to the skid row drunks and mental patients that freely walked New York’s streets.
Johnson responded to a call of a man with a knife who was menacing the staff and clients one of those soup kitchens. When Johnson arrived another team of cops was already on the scene and attempting to subdue the man in a narrow hallway. He was clearly a drunken paranoid schizophrenic. He had a 16 inch bread knife and was not giving it up.
At some point the man lunged at Johnson and all four cops started shooting from less than seven feet away. They fired 24 shots hitting him 16 times. Four of the shots should have killed the drunken psychotic instantly. One cleanly severed his spinal cord; another went through his heart. None of those shots killed him fast enough to stop him from plunging his knife into Sergeant Edward Johnson’s heart. Johnson died at the scene. The drunken psychotic died seconds later; but way too late.
Jerrold Nadler is a jackass; but he “feels” the right way about guns so that’s good enough – period.
Please share this post with your friends and comment below. If you haven’t already, take a moment to sign up for our free newsletter above and friend us on Twitter and Facebook to get real time updates.
Follow @WestJournalism
Loading ...
Send him this -
The Founders – Framers – Ratifiers gave us the second amendment so that no government could violate our RULE – BY – LAW and not install a RULE – BY – MAN [dictatorship] government which I am sure we are heading towards and all three branches of government usurp powers everyday. Let us post this where ever we visit and send it to family and friends it must go viral.
The actual words of the 2nd amendment as follows allows us to BEAR – cannons, rockets, bombs, grenades, mortars and ALL other weapons of “WAR” plus all types of guns.
Amendment 2 – Right to Bear Arms
Back | Table of Contents | Next>>
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
Notes for this amendment:
Proposed 9/25/1789
Ratified 12/15/1791
Note
1828 Definition
‘ARMS, n. plu. [L. arma.]
1. Weapons of offense, or armor for defense and protection of the body.
2. War; hostility.
Arms and the man I sing.
To be in arms, to be in a state of hostility, or in a military life.
To arms is a phrase which denotes a taking arms for war or hostility; particularly, a summoning to war.
To take arms, is to arm for attack or defense.
Bred to arms denotes that a person has been educated to the profession of a soldier.
3. The ensigns armorial of a family; consisting of figures and colors borne in shields, banners, &c., as marks of dignity and distinction, and descending from father to son.
4. In law, arms are any thing which a man takes in his hand in anger, to strike or assault another.
Please keep in mind that the Founders said what they meant and meant what they said in the Constitution and provided us a method to correct errors –
THE ARTICLE V AMENDMENT – http://fundamentalrefounding.ning.com/forum/topics/your-real-second-amendment-rights?commentId=6483638%3AComment%3A67175&xg_source=msg_com_forum
THIS JERK OFF HAS THE BRAINS OF A PISS ANT
He may well have the brains of a “piss ant”. BUT, what about the the brains of those that elected him, hmmmmm? After all, he does “represent” a portion of NYC.
Obama doesnt care what he’s called…. he knows he’s in the ‘driver’s seat’………
Nadler Please do everyone a favor and jump off the Brooklyn Bridge.
How many bullets would you want in your clip if 5 bad guys were coming at you with 50 round clips in their ILLEGAL WEAPONS?
@ mamamtigger,
I’m afraid that would only add to the already on going polution problem.
Nagler jump off the B bridge? Whaddya trynna do? Cause a tsunami???!!!
AND in the example cited, did either of the officers fire more than 4-6 rounds into the charging buffalo?
IN any event all the shots fired and all the bullets that struck homey didn’t save the sergeant’s life. They should have shot him MORE times.
What does Nadler know about this to make such an idiotic comment? Is he trying to jump on the gun ban bandwagon? Please! All he is really doing is sghowing us how dopey he is. He may be a swell guy, but he knows NOTHING about this subject. Four shots? No. You shoot until the threat stops – however many that may take. The poor woman in the attic fired 6 shots, hit the burglar 5 times and he was still able to drive himself to a hospital. What if there had been 2 or more burglars? She would be in a world of trouble. THAT’s why an ammo magazine 7 round limit is not practical. In fact the whole assault weapon ban is silly, starting with the definition. A rifle with a detachable magazine with any ONE military feature: (?) All military rifles have a bayonet lug. Then it goes on- pistol grip, folding or telescoping stock, grenade launcher, flash hider, blah-blah-blah. They left out the one and only feauture that is the true mark of an assault weapon: selective fire capability, and those weapons are already (1934) so severely restricted that they are banned for all practical purposes. This law is a bad law. All it bans is “ugly guns” that have an exterior similarity to assault weapons. These civilianized models have been in circulation since 1963! There IS a legitimate purpose for these guns: self-defense, competition, recreational target shooting and small game hunting (NOT deer). Yes-keep the bad people from getting them, but don’t ban them.
If Nadler had any brains, he would be more dangerous then he is!!!!!!!!!
Coldcowboy:
Didn’t you get the message…………….Politicians aren’t required to have brains.
Nadler is another liberal Jewish politician that will sell his own people out (with the rest of us), like a Jewish kapo (George Soros) did with the Nazis. Nadler doesn’t get it, and never will. He must have not read his history lesson when they talked about what happened to his own people, the Jews, in Nazi Germany in the 1930s and 1940s when the Nazis implemented the 1938 Nazi Weapons Law banning all guns to Jews and only allowing them to card-carrying members of the Nazi Party.
Nadler is also voting on the 1968 US Gun Control law (and amendments) that were lifted word-for-word verbatim from the 1938 Nazi Weapons Law. For a detailed analysis of how this happened, you can get the book “Gun Control: Gateway to Tyranny” at the Jews for the Preservation of Firearms website (jfpo.org).
Any politician or public official, that took an oath to uphold, support & defend the U.S. Constitution, who proposes, enacts, administers or enforces the U.S. Gun Control Laws is enforcing the Nazi Weapons Law, and is therefore guilty of felony Official Misconduct, as well as Treason & Sedition.
Felony Official Misconduct convictions will destroy their careers. If convicted of Treason & Sedition, politicians supporting gun control/gun bans like Nadler, Schumer, Feinstein, and evey NYC Mayor Bloomberg, would be executed for Treason & Sedition.
Hey,
Nadler!
Ammo is getting hard to come by.
Please send me your extras…..
PS… TERRIFIC campaign slogan!.
Hurry up. send ammo BEFORE you lose your reelection
Nadler is a fool. Age has not improved his abilities. Too bad the voters don’t pay attention.