Important headlines for April 26th – Guns for good & Common-sense travel
Bottom Line: Stories you shouldn't miss and my takes on them
WATCH: Woman pulls gun on would-be robber, saves husband, family says - Palm Beach Post
Hot Take: Kudos to the Palm Beach Post for sharing a story about the successful defensive use of a gun. As the Clinton administration and later FSU discovered there are between 1.5 million – 2.5 million examples per year just like that one. But when was the last time you heard about any? It's a proven fact that more lives are saved by defensive use of guns than taken by legally owned ones, but those facts are conveniently lost by the crowd driven more by emotion, ignorance and a slanderous agenda than the wellbeing of honest law-abiding citizens that simply want the ability to do what this woman was able to do. That dangerous agenda includes at least 28% of Americans who would have preferred that the robber would have been able to have his way with that woman and that family. That's because the radical ignorance includes 28% who'd repeal the 2nd amendment and the right to bear arms for private citizens.
Trump Travel Ban Looks Poised for Victory at Supreme Court Greg Stohr, Bloomberg
Hot Take: Let's take a step back in time for a moment. It's a moment when Donald Trump isn't the President and the issue isn't specially a travel ban he's issued that's politicized. Now let's address a couple of questions with clarity and intellectual honesty.
There are people without provable documentation or verification who want to enter the United States.
Should we A: Allow them entry? or B: Not allow them entry?
Next question.
82% of foreigners of a particular religion are unimpacted by a given decision
Is that A: Evidence that a religion was targeted by that decision B: Not conclusive of religious targeting?
Now, let's return to the issue of the day and deal with a dose of reality. We can't fly without verified ID. Why the hell would it ever be acceptable for someone to enter the US who isn't held to at least that standard? Secondly, not only are more than 80% of the world's foreign Muslim population not impacted by the travel ban. There wasn't one country included in the original ban that wasn't on a terror watch list from the Obama Administration. Was the Obama administration biased against Muslims? Ok course the administration is poised to win. It's outrageous that this reached the high court. It's shocking how far gone politicos and justices on the left are to bring us to this point. It's not acceptable. It's wrong and indefensible.
Until tomorrow...