Oh no! Not this crap again.

Paul Helmke, a contributing writer to the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence Blog, and officer of same, wrote a piece of propaganda that would even impress Joseph Goebbels. In fact, without even reading any of his other work I could probably say that as propaganda, they are all just as good. As an aside, I just noticed that Goebbels and Goering have only one word between them in my dictionary. If that has no significance for you read Inside the 3rd Reich.

Back to Paul Helmke. Paul's latest treatise seems to be about how well the Brady Instant Background Check system protects us by having denied 135,ooo dangerous people the ability to purchase a firearm in the last year and from one dangerous person in particular. You should go and read the entire article and then come back here.

http://www.bradycampaign.org/blog/?p=684

Did you read it? Good. Now, I concede that in the one case of Mr. Drew Douglas Grant, whose real name is Andrew Golden, that everything worked like it was suppose to. I think you would agree as well. However, where Mr. Helmke wanders into the deep end of deceit and lies, which is where the entire venture called The Brady Campaign originates, is his insistence that all 135,000 persons denied to purchase a firearm are really the dangerous persons he thinks they are or, rather who he wants you to think they are.

You see, not all Brady Denials are because Joe Criminal, who just got released from Sing-Sing for murder, went into a gun store and tried to buy a gun from a federally licensed firearm dealer and got denied because his background check failed. In this context James Jay Baker, Wayne LaPierre and Richard Gardiner, all spokesmen for the NRA, are correct in the statements they made that Mr. Helmke seems to be calling them on simply because he now has proof that at least one convicted killer did in fact attempt to apply for a concealed carry permit and got caught. Not the same thing as getting denied a gun purchase at a gun store but the background check for a concealed carry permit is the same as that for a gun purchase. Plus the investigation for a concealed carry permit requires checking fingerprints against the FBI finger print database.

Did a light just turn on in your head?

Question 1. Did Mr. Grant already possess a firearm and was just seeking a permit to carry it on his person? If so, did Mr. Grant already "pass" an instant background check to purchase the gun? Or was the gun acquired by other means? In any event Mr. Grant's scheme ended in disaster not because of the Brady Instant Background Check but because of the fingerprint analysis portion of his concealed carry permit application.

Question 2. Does Mr. Helmke realize that it was not the Brady Instant Background Check that busted Mr. Grant? If so, why does he go on and on and on trying to convince you that the Brady Instant Background Checks are all that stand between you and certain death?

I cannot say I know the answers raised by Question 1. But, for Question 2 I can speculate that Mr. Helmke is purposely being deceitful in order to get you to believe things that are not completely true.

Even I, after first reading the article, thought that Mr. Grant's scheme ended with a negative result from a Brady Instant Background Check. I had to read it more than once to realize the trick Mr. Helmke played on me. If you look around the Brady Campaign web site take a few notes and try to substantiate some of the claims they make, especially their statistics. They seem to be a little vague in their sourcing so you may have a hard time of it. I know I did.

After the Election

It's after the election, Obama got himself elected and now what? Probably nothing much since he is inheriting a complete cluster fuck but I guess he'll just love it since it was brought to us by the Democratic Party anyway. The Mother of All Bailouts has already been extended to the auto industry and since I haven't heard much more about any of it I guess the Bailouts worked. Or did they? I just don't know.

Israel is kicking butt in Gaza. I say more power to them. The last I heard anything they were considering a 48 hour recess. I say press on.

Anyway firearms sales in this country are up, way up. I got my Hi-Powered Semi-Automatic Assault Weapon Rifle Gun That No One Needs Anyway, because I need it in case Obama gets elected and signs into law a ban on Hi-Powered Semi-Automatic Assault Weapon Rifle Guns That No One Needs Anyway, back in October before the election on just a hunch Obama would get elected. Now everyone is out to get them a Hi-Powered Semi-Automatic Assault Weapon Rifle Gun That No One Needs Anyway before the next ban on Hi-Powered Semi-Automatic Assault Weapon Rifle Guns That No One Needs Anyway is made into law.

I know, you're thinking no one is going to take your guns away. But I know better and so should you. I know, you're thinking it's not that important. But I know better and so should you. Did you know that in the last 100 or so years, governments, not citizens, killed over 170,000,000 men, women and children through various means. This does not include soldiers killed in combat. It only includes civilians who were killed by a government entity. They were killed by such means as "being shot, beaten, tortured, knifed, burned, starved, frozen, crushed, worked to death, buried alive, drowned, hung, bombed from the sky or killed in any other myriad ways governments have inflicted death on unarmed, helpless citizens." Source: The Seven Myths of Gun Control by Richard Poe, paper back edition copyrighted 2001, Three Rivers Press, New York, page 21.

But first, they all had to be disarmed. So the next time you hear a politician pushing for a new law that has anything to do with restricting or registering firearms or firearms owners, ask yourself, why? And remember what you just read and gun control means controlling you, not guns.