Donkey Kong (Game Boy)

Donkey-Kong-TitleDo I really need to introduce this? It’s Donkey Kong, but on the Game Boy. Warning: some changes were made when porting from Arcade to Game Boy.

You play as Mario in the archetypical battle of man vs. damn dirty ape, because this one Donkey-Kong-Mariowon’t keep his stinkin’ paws off your maybe girlfriend (it’s assumed, until Mario later trades in this generic-lady-being-kidnapped-by-a-monkey for a princess-being-kidnapped-by-a-lizard. Based on the character art for her in Super Mario Odyssey, we know Mario’s girlfriend from Donkey Kong went on to strangle cats). You have to hop and climb your way through the stages to rescue her.

Of course the 4 stages you get are based on the arcade, though I’ve read they were scaled back a little to fit on the Game Boy. I wouldn’t know, I’ve only played Donkey Kong on two non-consecutive Atari systems and the Colecovision. I had the e-Reader version but I haven’t touched it in 15 years and probably lost most of the cards.

Donkey-Kong-25mAnyway, unlike the other iterations of Donkey Kong I’ve played, there is a timer on these stages. Once you’re past the 4 from the arcade, you go on to another 93 stages. I didn’t count; I had to rely on the internet to tell me. They predictably ran out of ideas along the way and repeat the first stage, but with a different art pattern (castle instead of construction project). Some stages also allegedly came from Donkey Kong Junior, who himself appears in this title to help his pep-pep.

The stages get more complex as you progress. Your main task after the first four, aside from in the boss battles, is to move a key from one part of the stage to another, similar to some levels in the American Super Mario Bros. 2. Each stage after the first four and excluding the boss fights also give you three items dropped by your girlfriend: her purse, parasol, and hat. It’s worth the trouble to collect all three of them in each stage, as doing so gives you a chance to get more lives in one of two minigames. One is a slot machine, the other is best likened to a roulette wheel or wheel of fortune. If there is a pattern for when you will get a certain minigame, I don’t know it.

In addition to more stages, Mario has more moves. He can swing from a thin line (a tautDonkey-Kong-Stage-1 rope or power line). Another one of the new moves would go on to show up in Super Mario 64 in a modified form- when he leaps onto his hands and then bounces very high. He can do that either stationary or in motion. He can throw barrels like Dash O’ Pepper, and when standing on his hands he can even stop barrels from hitting him, and then throw them afterwards. We also have the opportunity to see Mario swim. I was hesitant at the first such occasion, since in the original versions of Donkey Kong any fall into a pit meant death. I assumed the water pits were the same, and was pleasantly surprised when they weren’t.

Just like Mario’s Picross, Donkey Kong is enhanced when played on the Super Game Boy. Unlike Mario’s Picross, it really is enhanced. You get more than just a unique border- stages and maps are colored. Donkey Kong and your girlfriend are sometimes colored. Mario… either changes his race (it is fluid you know) or gets jaundice. While I enjoyed the SNES’ presentation, portability was needed for me to complete this game.

Most of the time, things are not so difficult. At least for me. However, there were some stages (such as the final boss) that definitely qualified as difficult. But it’s not as difficult as its successor, Mario Vs. Donkey Kong. Very similar in gameplay- no doubt in part because originally it was to be a remake of this game- but with a much greater difficulty level. I got stuck somewhere in there over a year ago and never looked back.

Donkey-Kong-Game-Boy-CartridgeUnlike Mario’s Picross, I have some criticism here- Nintendo seems to have run out of boss ideas the year this game was released, 1995 (despite the release date, this game is usually referred to as “Donkey Kong ‘94” because that was its title in development). The final boss battle has Donkey Kong taking a super mushroom or two and growing to gargantuan size. Basically, this is the Gamma battle from Mega Man 3, or the Wily battle from Mega Man IV. Donkey Kong’s head sits in the middle, and he attacks with his hands. But that’s not the real reason I cried foul. In 1995, we have another battle where a traditional Mario villain is supersized and mostly in the background: Bowser. This was the year Super Mario World 2: Yoshi’s Island came out. And the villains are fought in a similar way too- chucking objects at their heads. Why couldn’t we have had a gigantic robot Kong of steel instead?

The game passes the time. The puzzle elements kept me coming back, because I didn’t want to be outwitted by yet another Mario Vs. Donkey Kong-style game. I managed to wrap things up in a week or two of intermittent playing, if that is in any way useful for gauging how long it would take to beat the game. At least you come away from this with more knowledge than I had going in- this isn’t a straight port of Donkey Kong to the Game Boy. Yes, I did think that when I saw it in the store (used, no box, no manual, two excuses).

Advertisements

Midterm Machinations

800px-Joe_Kennedy_III,_115th_official_photo

“You have people putting forth the narratives and seeing whether they resonate, testing them out and seeing what we can do to build the constituencies.” – Congressman Joe Kennedy III (D-MA). discussing the 2018 midterms.

With the midterms coming up, both parties are honing their strategies for winning. The only real Republican strategy for 8 years, even after winning elections, has been “we’re not Obama” and subsets thereof (“we’re against Obamacare”, for example) so it’s safe to brush them aside and focus on Democrats. Their strategy in 2016 was “you’re sexist if you vote against us” (don’t bother disputing, the evidence is right there, and this is a charge lefties in 2008 levied against the very man who the Left would now describe as noted feminist Barack Obama) and “you’re racist if you vote against us” (a charge lefties in 2008 levied against who they are now saying is noted unracist Hillary Clinton), which led to a bizarre circumstance in 2016 where people who did not vote for

ap_525971738662.jpg

Probably the only time that you’ll be told not voting for a rich white person is a racist act. – Image from the Associated Press

old, rich, white, and racist (even according to the Left) Hillary Clinton were said to be racist against blacks. Falling from that height of absurdity, Democrats appear to be rolling out new election strategies.

What I don’t understand is why Democrats are so upset. A: this confirms their narrative that the whole country is racist. B: why would they want a candidate who appealed to all of these racist people? It’s obvious- Democrats lost because they’re more decent than the rest of the country. Run with it guys! Whatever lets you sleep at night. It’s not like this is the first issue you folks claimed to be superior to the masses on.

You Will Kill People

That’s right, if you support Republicans you will kill people. This started softly with gun control where it could be argued there was a more literal truth present (except right now they’re championing gun control in the wake of the Florida school shooting, which we’ve learned was caused by gross negligence both on the part of the school because of Obama regulations, on the part of law enforcement for not listening to tips about the guy (maybe the FBI just doesn’t like Florida?), then law enforcement again for literally standing around while the shooter killed people. The same law enforcement the Left say we should rely on instead of our own firearms. If the current system wasn’t rife with incompetence typical of liberal big government systems, then the Left wouldn’t have yet another shooting caused by government incompetence to exploit.), then expanded to healthcare reform (even though at the end of the day Democrats’ Obamacare was

cuban-firing-squad-the-real-cuba

Pictured on the left are two typical Republicans. Oh wait, this is from liberal paradise Cuba under what the Left claims was the benevolent guidance of hero Fidel Castro. Image from TheRealCuba.com

designed to kick people off their insurance plans, still gave insurance companies loopholes for discriminating against pre-existing conditions, isn’t really giving much of an increase in coverage and definitely not giving much of an increase in quality coverage, all while giving Congress a sweet savings on healthcare and giving insurance companies a big payday) where maybe it was but maybe it wasn’t true, and finally when midterm-clinching tax reform was on the table Democrats insisted that this too would kill people. Granted, thanks to the liberal love of Big Government the IRS does have a death squad, but they weren’t an aspect of the GOP’s tax plan. Besides, tax reform ended up putting money into people’s paychecks. How can giving the average person $1000 worth of crumbs as millionaire Pelosi phrased it, which the average person can’t do anything with because $1000 is worthless to struggling families according to former DNC (friend of the working class) Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman-Schultz (granted, she was $972,000 in debt in 2014 and in 2015 was worth $106,507 so $1,000 really is a crumb to her), possibly kill them anyway? How is it any worse than the tax breaks the aforementioned friends of the working class gave the average American when they were in power, which amounted to at least -$695 last year.

 

You Are Supporting Russia

obama_stern-face

He didn’t want to put the cart before the horse, he didn’t have a strategy yet on dealing with Russian interference. Image from evil.news

This came up briefly in 2016, but really took off later on (I wonder how Democrats reconcile who they are on record calling one of the greatest Presidents ever, Obama, saying that no one seriously believes the elections can be rigged with the current Democrat party line where every liberal must seriously believe that the elections were rigged). Ever since the Left seized onto that excuse, which repeatedly has been shown to bear no weight (even assuming the Russian government was involved), the Russians have been EVERYWHERE.

They interfered in the Virginia gubernatorial elections, are preparing to interfere in the 2018 races, and are even accusing noted SJW George Takei of sexual assault. They’ve spread fear at the University of Missouri, according to Mother Jones in their item “Donald Trump Joins With Russian Bots To Trash Mark Warner On Twitter” Russian bots spread

Skull-Man-Russian-Bot

Pictured above is an example of a Russian ‘bot, constructed by one Dr. M.S. Cossack. Image from megaman.wikia.com

accusations that Sen. Mark Warner (D-VA) colluded with… Russia (kind of shooting themselves in the foot there), were the major force behind the Democrat-damaging Nunes memo being released, blamed Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) for shutting down the government in January, helped back Sean Hannity in a feud with Keurig, and after the Florida shooting the Russian bots leapt to the defense of the 2nd Amendment. Russia’s been BUSY! As has been pointed out elsewhere, Russia suddenly being the enemy after 100 years of liberals supporting them is a heel-turn only rivaled by Hulk Hogan’s. I’d be remiss if I didn’t mention all of the times before and even AFTER the 2016 election that liberals and their anti-Trump friends who scream Trump is a traitor for colluding with Russia had themselves colluded with Russia. I bet the media will blame Russian bots for that too, just like the Washington Post will blame Russian bots for why the Post reports both that Russian bots did and didn’t impact the 2016 election.

Uh… if putting the interests of foreigners over the interests of the American people is treasonous according to Democrats, why are Democrats the ones refusing to enforce our laws and shutting down the government in an effort to help foreigners?

You Are Dividing The Country

Technically it’s true, but their consistent invocation of this tactic is an immediate and

2016-electoral-map-medium

Based on this map alone of the 2016 election’s outcome, I’d say that the blue guys were the ones dividing the country since there’s so few of them. Image from an article on medium.com (“The Most Disruptive Transformation in History”) in which they argue that only the blue areas should count in elections because liberals are smarter.

obvious undermining of any credibility they have when they declare themselves to be tolerant, compassionate, and open-minded. Just listen to the quotes in the links connected to “is” and “an” above: if you didn’t vote for the Democrat, you voted to divide people against each other. They characterized nearly half the voting population as being divisive, much akin to Hillary Clinton’s “deplorables” comment. Essentially, ANY form of dissension from the Leftwing narrative of the day, whatever that might be since it changes so damn often to the point of contradiction, is a malicious act aimed to divide the country. Nevermind that the same people accusing the GOP of being evil for dividing the country are the ones that say whites need to be silenced and should be hated and ostracized and are all racists anyway (it’s not just here, by the way), everyone who disagrees with the Left is deplorable, and everyone who isn’t a liberal is such a bad person that it’s ok to physically attack them. And they hope we die.

Like I said- technically it is true that thinking differently from the Left constitutes dividing the country, in an “if you oppose Stalin you are dividing the USSR” sort of way. In

gun-contol-joseph-stalin

Didn’t I just write about one of his video games?

a “not surrendering to the Nazis is dividing the world” kind of way. I had to put that second one in there because as it turns out Stalin isn’t really that bad of a guy according to the Left so they would actually agree that opposing Stalin was an evil act of division. Just ask, ironically, one of the people who was involved in accusing Trump of colluding with Russia if Stalin was such a bad dude. If you believe individuality is fine, as long as we all do it together (by law or force if needed) then you’re on the same page as the Left.

I suppose I could let my logic about liberals being the intolerant stand alone, but here’s some other reading on it. (I love this one’s opening line,  “groupthink can be harmful, regardless of how right you usually are”, a nice reassurance to the liberals reading it.)

Familiar Faces

You Are Sexist

Despite the DNC being run by men, passing over women and women of color when choosing their two leaders, despite Obama having a boys club and various liberals being caught paying women an unequal wage, and the repeated allegations of sexually-based offenses committed against women by Democrats and liberals in general, Republicans are the sexists. Despite the Left’s dedication to forcing women to wear hijab, either through pressure of political correctness or through the celebration of oppressive religious practices that they have not tolerated from other religions, we are told that Republicans are the sexists. Figure that one out.

You Are Racist

That’s still a thing, because Trump. They assure us that Trump is a racist, the GOP is racist, and thus all Republicans are racists.

You Are A Fascist

That’s still a thing, because Trump. They assure us that Trump is a fascist, the GOP is fascist, and thus all Republicans are fascists.

You Are <insert group here>phobic

That’s still a thing, because Trump. They assure us that Trump is an <insert group here>phobe, the GOP is an <insert group here>phobe, and thus all Republicans are <insert group here>phobes. (In 2014, I recall Attorney General Eric Holder saying that the GOP’s Voter ID efforts were designed to impact the young, old, and minorities, saying that these groups don’t vote for Republicans. Who the heck is left for the GOP to win elections with? In that same interview, Eric Holder also criticizes the GOP for deciding from the beginning that they’d oppose Obama… a game Holder is helping Dems play now. Just another point on the “Democrats would be praising it if they did it” graph).

Wasn’t That Fun?

There you have it. While the Left might find some real policy issues to disagree on and may even have a real solution that’s better than the Right, we’ll never know because their playbook is designed to avoid policy discussions altogether and instead supplant debate with ignorance and ad hominem attacks. Almost like they don’t really HAVE any policy ideas, just a strong visceral hatred of anyone that isn’t like them. Again, these are the leaders of tolerance. The same tolerant ones where 39% of their number say political opposition will strain a friendship, compared to the intolerant Right’s 13% rate (interestingly, the higher the liberal’s education, the more likely they feel it will be a strain, and also liberals are less likely to have close friends that are Trump supporters than Trump supporters are to have close liberal friends). What a happy indicator for this discussion to end on.

Even Happier

It seems sensible to predict what happens if Democrats win the House and Senate. They’ll never get enough votes to boot Trump out of the White House unless 12 Republican Senators defect (granted, it is likely since most of the Republican Senators were elected as warriors but turned out to be wimps once they actually took control of the Presidency, now using the filibuster as their flimsy excuse for inaction, and as we saw with Obamacare there are Republican senators more than willing to betray their base). So lacking that, what measures can we expect?

Well, in 2006 when they wanted to paint a clear path to victory in 2008, Democrats decided to set banks up to fail by forcing banks to accept subprime mortgages. They then blamed the (partly, because the Dems only took advantage of bad banking practices anyway) Democrat-created tragedy on Republicans (despite Republicans having warned about it) and swept the 2008 elections. Either that or instead of a conspiracy (conspiracy would explain why your anti-corporate saviors on the Left basically paid-off the banking industry for its cooperation. Hey look, if Trump colluded with Russia, if DC is still not a state because of racism, then the Left colluded with the banks! Don’t judge me!) the Left merely took advantage of the crisis they accidentally made. And of course, the other possibility is that Democrats will do what Republicans did under Obama- claim they can’t do anything at all until they get either all of the Senate or the Presidency, and make a bunch of token gestures that they would never follow-through on once they had power.

Pearls-Before-Swine-Stephen-Pastis-Banks-Fairy-Tale

Image from gocomics.com

Fattening The Absurdity

trigglypuff-urban-dictionary

A liberal. Image from UrbanDictionary

Liberals indisputably have claimed they are the rational ones. They’re the factbased, settled science ones. They don’t let emotion and instinct interfere. They’re the ones whose policies will make us healthier. So why are these so-called rational, scientifically-minded, health-conscious people abandoning that?

 

Elephant In The Room

Let’s start with fat people. Establishing my ethos (you allow it to impact your reasoning when liberals do it, so here I am too): I was obese for 9 years, then dropped to the “optimal weight”, then gained until I was “overweight”, then sort of straddled the line between “optimal” and “over” for the past 4 years. Except recently- I was a few pounds shy of obese for the last month, maybe a week or two longer. Certain issues kept me exiled at my parents’ house, and as is a well-known stereotype parents love to fatten their kids up. Just ask Jon Arbuckle. Oh yeah, exercise is a foreign concept to me and I love eating.

Now that I’ve established myself as a member of the fat group, thus depriving the reader of their own credibility should they accuse me of skinny-splaining, let’s get to the meat of the discussion. Princeton, one of those allegedly esteemed Ivy-league schools, held a dinner aimed at empowering “fat identified” students. This is exactly why an Ivy-league degree isn’t even worth being used as a napkin at that dinner. We have an obesity epidemic in this country, and the Left instead decides that sickness is health. Why?

Princeton’s Lewis Center for the arts also has a course designed to reveal how fat might “be a liberating counterperformance”. I mean, liberating in the sense of liberating the soul from the body after a heart attack, sure. Again, why are these kings of health, who by their own arrogant statements of superiority must acknowledge that obese lifestyles are harmful, knowingly and deliberately promoting said lifestyles?

Ivy Leagues aren’t the only place, of course, we can drop down to Bradley University and

Omar-Bradley-history

No relation to Gen. Omar Bradley, Image from history.com

their “The Body Project” which tells us it’s a-ok to be fat. This is using the same crude justification that leads people to think that half the population, including themselves, is gluten intolerant when really it’s half of half of half of half of half of half of the population (about 1% of the country). In fact, Bradley does worse than tell us “if you think you are, then you are and should get a doctor’s note”. Bradley tells us that you’ll die if you DO try to lose weight.

 

My weight dropped by 30 pounds in two months. My weight jumped by 20 pounds in two months. I’m still here! Wild weight fluctuations haven’t bothered my heart, however reading all this crap about SJW’s perverting science to justify their narcissism (“I’m perfect and you’re offensive and evil for saying otherwise”) is doing a number on my cardiovascular system!

Now we go from me to the general public. Obese award-winning comedian Sofie Hagen proves why the awards council made her a winner with her virtue-signaling attack on Cancer Research UK. CRUK has researched data showing that obesity is the second-most common source of cancer, under smoking. Sofie’s Choice was to cuss out CRUK for daring to present facts that demonstrated she led an unhealthy lifestyle and then proceeded to back up her attack with points that must have come from the aforementioned Bradley University. CRUK started this campaign because only 15% of people (in the U.K.? It doesn’t say) are aware that being fat can cause cancer. If tolerant, educated, open-minded liberals only interested in spreading truth and knowledge like Sofie had their way then this bit of knowledge would be buried and forgotten right next to the 100,000,000 people that liberal ideas like Communism killed in the 20th century.

I started with fat because (at least until the last 10 years when we started getting groups

Jabba-The-Hutt-star-wars

You are so beautiful as you are! Image from starwars.com

like NAAFA (yes, it is real) and being fat became a civil rights movement and forcing people to find fat attractive became a new form of brainwashing) it can commonly be agreed, even among liberals, that being fat is bad. Well liberals, this is where your ideology has brought us. Now you’re ironically not even allowed to force people to be healthy. Now Michelle and Barack Obama’s efforts to fight childhood obesity make them look like bigoted mass murderers to the Left. I just disagreed with the program because it had a one-size-fits-all solution that left kids who needed extra food starving, impacting student-athletes (this was either an effort to keep male students from exhibiting toxic masculinity through athleticism, or it was a failure by liberal scientists who think reality conforms to their models and throw out data contradicting it, at the expense of the public, much like Stalin’s agriculture program) and led to schools policing what parents gave their kids to eat thus interfering with parental decisions.

 

It’s More Than Fat

rei-ayanami-disarmed-neon-genesis-evangelion-aminoapps

Pictured left is Rei Ayanami: Pioneer of the transabled movement, or dedicated Chambraigne customer? You decide. Image from aminoapps.

If you have investment advice for how to milk these civil rights movements (their term, not mine) for all they’re worth, I’d appreciate it. Because I know a new one on the rise that’s sure to take flight. First was transsexual, then transracial, now we have “transabled”. These are people who have perfectly functioning body parts and want to cut them off. That’s different from transsexual in that transsexual’s exchange one for the other, transabled folks just lop their parts off altogether. Period. No replacement. And it’s not just changing from one version of a healthy human to another. They want to be WITHOUT feet, hands, arms, legs, things like that. We are being told to accept this and give them what they want. We are being told that, like obesity, these are conditions that should not be treated.

I thought evolution was settled science. “Transabled” as a normal thing that humans should accept flies in the face of everything that “settled science” tells us on evolution (survival of the fittest, anyone?). Unless there is an advantage to having a mental disorder (BIID) that makes you want to be part of one of the left’s victim classes. Maybe transablism is just an adaptation for humans to survive in the Left’s system of allocating privilege based on how victimized one can claim to be. Let’s be clear– my intent is not to be condescending and demeaning to people who have the disorder; I’m attacking people who say it should be encouraged rather than treated. What’s next, saying that if someone identifies as having cancer they should not undergo chemotherapy? Haven’t liberals attacked people who do that?

Will the Left not be satisfied until the entire population consists of fat people who are missing a limb and aren’t of the same race or gender they were born as? Let’s add icing on the soy cake and say they’re all gluten-intolerant too!

What’s Next?

Let me take a stab at the next group- ones with known, communicable medical conditions. In California, it used to be a felony to deliberately give someone HIV without their consent. Not anymore, because of political correctness or social justice or something. Maybe this will come full circle and hurt another leftwing agenda, by making it a civil right to put a bullet inside someone else right next to that HIV. Both are just as lethal.

The scientifically-minded Left that wants to keep us safe and claims that any policy is justified if it saves just one life is trying to make self-harm and ill-health acceptable and encouraged. And they’re winning.

The uncontested absurdities of today are the accepted slogans of tomorrow. They come to be accepted by degrees, by dint of constant pressure on one side and constant retreat on the other — until one day when they are suddenly declared to be the country’s official ideology. – Ayn Rand

Why?

That’s a good question. If the Left is as smart as they tell us, surely they know what the consequences of encouraging all of this will be. Are these failed social experiments? Are these efforts to weaken the Western world? Notice that we don’t see them imposing this kind of thing elsewhere in the globe, not even with behaviors that are just plain taboo and don’t involve physically hurting yourself. Look at gay rights- Indiana wanted to pass a bill that’s the same thing Connecticut has, but Indiana is called “homophobic” and other states and even corporations boycott them. Meanwhile, the very same liberals denouncing and boycotting Indiana are promoting havens of gay rights like… Saudi Arabia and Iran. You remember Iran right, where they are so woke that they force women to wear hijab as a sign of solidarity against Islamophobia? Them and their woke buddies in Saudi Arabia who legally execute people for being homosexuals in a culturally tolerant manner that we are not allowed to judge (how come only Americans aren’t allowed to be intolerant anyway? Leftwing news source Daily Beast in that article tells us that we must tolerate Iran executing gays and tolerate Iran’s different ideas on sexuality, yet the Left, if it had its way, would hang Republicans for being different!). It’s almost like the Left hates Western civilization and look for any way to hurt it, while in turn empowering oppressive regimes across the globe (even empowering regimes the Left itself acknowledges to be oppressive).

Or maybe the Left figures that if they take up every cause like this, and encourages everyone to treat whatever little quirk or disease they have as a civil rights issue, they will never lose an election again since everyone will be reliant upon The Party for their personal civil rights matter.

severed head

If President Trump were just a severed head, would that be enough victim points that liberals could no longer criticize him at the risk of being called “corpore-ists”?

 

Total Idiocy: Democrats and the obsession with Gun Control

I am going to start this off with a harsh truth, a very nasty but nonetheless true. Liberals like to claim groups like the NRA and legal Gun Owners are the problem with gun violence in this country. That is an egregious lie and a deflection of responsibility. And so here we go ahead with this bold statement of truth, if you support gun control it is YOU who have blood on your hands. You are responsible not just for the deaths of children in school shootings, you are responsible for the deaths of countless mothers, fathers, sons, and daughters who were killed by someone who illegally obtained a firearm because they were unable to exercise their legal right to bear arms and defend themselves.

Those of you for gun control will make your emotional arguments as to how I am wrong that just do not add up, and in the end, you will make character attacks and attempts to vilify me. And even some in the pro-second amendment crowd will say I am sinking to the level of the liberals who make these pleas to emotion. I frankly do not care, after so much death at the hands of total fucking retards who watch the same thing happen and push for more of the same policy causing it, I feel it is time to take the kiddy gloves off. You gun control supporters are remorseless murderers with your hands drenched in the blood of so many Americans who you shed crocodile tears for. And that isn’t like one of your pathetic pleas to emotion that have proven themselves to be deadlier than bullets, that is a statement of the reality of the situation backed by facts.

Gun Control Kills

Holocaust_Victims_gun-control

These are the original victims of Gun Control, the nearly 6 million people killed in the holocaust, and hardly any of them were killed by a bullet.

Gun Control is not about making people safer at all. Just look at Chicago and Baltimore, jurisdictions that have had some of the strictest gun control laws in the country and still do. I will, of course, explain later why this is, but the question now is why they still double down on these policies every time despite the fact they are clearly not working? To formulate one answer, all you have to do is look back at history and see who else touted gun control as such a glorious solution and why they did so. Look at the actual consequences of gun control and what atrocities it was used to commit and which heinous extremist groups committed them and you will begin to see reason #1 why gun control is dangerous and why we were given a right to bear arms.

 

gun-contol-joseph-stalin

Joseph Stalin and other dictators relied on new or existing Gun Control Laws to consolidate their power

In 1929 when Stalin declared all of the privately owned farms in the USSR state property he relied heavily on gun laws passed shortly after the 1917 communist revolution, laws that made it hard for anybody but party members to own firearms. And in Italy before Mussolini and his Blackshirts rise to power, the Italian government had banned Firearms and Canes to restore order, a move which left no resistance from those opposing the squads of Blackshirts and their formation of a fascist government. Most chilling of all, however, was the series of gun control laws passed by Adolf Hitler and the SS during the 1930’s. These laws placed heavy restrictions on gun ownership especially for jews and used a gun registry to identify and confiscate guns from Jews and other political opponents of the SS leaving them with no means to resist, the ultimate goal being the nearly effortless slaughter and terrorizing of Jews during the Kristallnacht incident. The moral of the story kids is that gun control is the go-to method which dictators and murders use to take control. Still feel safe calling for more restrictions? If you do then you are pretty retarded.

Just Like Weed

gun-control-pot-leaf

Even though marijuana is deemed illegal by the federal government, it is still easily obtainable and widely used across the US.

There is no coincidence that over the past 20 years as private gun ownership has risen, gun violence has been on the decline. Well there is one exception, while gun violence has been universally on the decline, there has been a sharp increase of shootings in so-called “Gun Free Zones”. This has a lot to do with the fact that only 6 percent of gun crimes are committed with guns obtained legally by the offender, an overwhelming 94 percent of the time guns used to commit mass shootings and other crimes were stolen and/or obtained through illegal channels. To put it in terms many of the jackass anti-gun hipsters can understand, it is a lot like how even though pot is illegal you dope fiends somehow get it. The law and threat of consequences did not stop you from obtaining the pot you freaks desire, it only stops the citizens who abide by the law. In the same way, gun control laws do not stop shooters like the Columbine shooters from illegally obtaining firearms and killing a ton of innocent people, it only ensures law-abiding citizens who are afraid of the consequences are easy targets for criminal psychopaths.

gun-control-NRA

The NRA promotes and protects the 2nd Amendment and encourages responsible gun ownership.

Oddly while groups that promote the legalization of pot never face criticism for drug addiction and violent drug lords (and rightly so because the connection is so loose you would have to be mentally retarded to make that connection), whenever there is a mass shooting in the US in one of those gun free zones where citizens cannot legally carry their firearms, the blame is stuck on the NRA. (Unsurprisingly that connection is always made by hysterical retards.) Much in the same way mature adults should be able to consume marijuana as long as they accept the consequences, the 2nd Amendment guarantees us the right to bear arms as long as we accept the consequences that accompany it. Unlike pot, of course, the consequences of not being allowed to carry guns is a lot graver. Our 2nd Amendment exists to allow us to protect ourselves from criminals and also from the possibility of individuals like Hitler or Mussolini coming to power and committing atrocities. Thus banning guns only makes us easy victims, not only to those who do not follow the law but potentially in a worst case scenario to our own government as well.

When facts don’t work, just cry a lot

gun-control-david-hogg

Looking like a badly tanned meth addict, David Hogg has been the lefts newest “useful idiot” to throw on-air tantrums for them since the tragic Parkland Shootings.

Facts are never on the leftists side especially not with the gun control debate, so rather than having a mature discussion they routinely pick an extremely stupid and easily manipulated poster child to throw a tantrum and cry so that other equally stupid people will get whipped into a frenzy while other easily manipulated people will get pulled into their meritless arguments or back down. After the tragic Parkland school shooting in which a cowardly sheriff’s deputy even refused to enter the school and stop the massacre, The left got its newest useful idiot in the form of the cowardly, childish, and incredibly deranged David Hogg. He represents another cute face and warped personality the left uses to make the argument an emotional one, using sickeningly fact devoid lines such as “2nd Amendment advocates are going to die out” (too bad there are going to be more of them than ever though since Gen Z is set to be more conservative than even the Baby Boomers.), and “The NRA controls Washington.” As usual, there is nothing of substance, not facts and only tantrums, but this is nothing new. The left always plays stupid games like this that blow up in their face.

wguns1

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., holds a gun magazine as she calls for a debate on gun control measures during a press conference on Capitol Hill, on May 6, 1999. (AP Photo/Khue Bui)

Remeber those warm New England summers? Remeber ice cold glasses of Lemonade on the porch? Remeber when Democrats passed an “Assault Weapons Ban” in 1994 that classified weapons as assault rifles based on cosmetic features that did not really enhance the performance of the gun and in fact made some harder to use according to experts? Well Peppridge Farms remembers, and Pepperidge farms isn’t gonna keep it to Pepperidge Farms self. But then again Peppridge farms ain’t no idiot, Pepperidge farms knows the term Assult Weapon is a made up term meant to scare idiots like the boogeyman scares children. Pepperidge Farms knows liberals lie about the “AR” in AR-15 standing for Assault Rifle so they can scare idiots. Pepperidge Farms knows it stands for ArmaLite, the name of the manufacturers. Now I better stop while I am ahead before I kill this Pepperidge Farms joke, but I think I made my point here, liberals cannot actually find a legal or factual basis for attacking the 2nd amendment so they always resort to misinformation and emotional arguments made to play upon fear or outrage in place of anything of substance.

It’s a Racial thing tho….

gun-control-nat-turner

During the Nat Turner Slave Rebellion of 1831, rebel slaves in the Democrat-Held State of Virginia massacred plantation owners.

Now honestly, I really feel that it is appropriate to submit the possibility that there is a racial component to the Democrats opposition to gun ownership as we have proven it is in no way about safety. As I have covered in the past, the Democrats have a long history of racism dating back to the decades before they founded the CSA. This made me remember the famous Nat Turner Rebellion, an 1831 rebellion where Nat Turner and a group of slaves killed 55-65 people, mainly Plantation owners. In the aftermath the Democrats went into a total frenzy, they made it illegal to teach black people to read and making it illegal for them to hold religious congregations without the supervision of a white preacher. Similar laws with widespread restrictions on the Civil Rights of black people were passed across the South and held their legacy for nearly a century in the form of Jim Crow Laws and other discriminatory policies. So it is entirely possible, in fact highly probable that Democrats still have some fear of black people or other parties of oppressed Americans exercising their 2nd Amendment rights in a way similar to Nat Turner. Gun Control isn’t just about taking Guns away since these laws are most prevalent in the cities I would say Democrats are especially passionate about keeping guns out of the hands of black people more than any other Americans.

Lots of reasons, None of them safety

Whatever the reason, secret ambitions to resurrect the fascist socialist order or fear that black people will rise up and kill them for their racist past, we know for sure that Gun Control has never been about safety. Gun Control only creates a set of easy targets for psychopaths with no regard for the law. The tragedies at Parkland, Sandy Hook, Aurora, Columbine, Charleston, Orlando, they all could have been avoided if just one teacher or churchgoer or movie usher or bartender were legally allowed to carry a firearm and could have stopped these insane shooters in their tracks. The blood of all these victims from the innocent school children to the club goers who were just there to dance, their blood is on the hands of the Democrats and their puppets who push the Gun Control policies that make easy targets for criminals and other despicable individuals. That is not what makes me angry though, what makes me angry is that these morally bankrupt monsters like David Hogg or Dianne Feinstein have no remorse for all the blood that is on their hands. They would rather blame the people looking for real solutions who promote responsibility and solutions that do not violate our civil rights. We can only hope though that they do not get their way and create a larger pile of bodies in their ignorant wakes.