FCC hits Radio Station Owners who carried Alex Jones with $15,000 Fine

By Yaron Steinbuch, New York Post                                                August 16, 2018

The Federal Communications Commission has lowered the boom on conspiracy theorist Alex Jones’ flagship radio station, which also was hit with a $15,000 fine that its owners are refusing to pay.

A lawsuit filed this week in US District Court in Austin, Texas, accuses Liberty Radio of operating at 90.1 FM without federal authority since at least 2013, according to the Austin American-Statesman.

In place of the pirate station’s offerings, religious programming aired on the frequency Wednesday.

The station, which stopped being transmitted over the air in December, has been streaming online and via a call-in “listen line,” a check of its website txlr.net showed.

FCC officials from Houston went to the Austin area to investigate 90.1 FM after the agency received a complaint, the newspaper reported, citing court documents.

Using high-tech equipment, the agents traced the signal to the Orchard Plaza apartments at 1127 and 1205 E. 52nd St. in East Austin, where the radio was being operated out of a maintenance or utility room.

Until late last year, the complex — subject of several city nuisance violations — had been owned by an entity linked to Walter Olenick and M. Rae Nadler-Olenick, who are listed as the two defendants in the federal lawsuit over Liberty Radio, according to records.

According to a letter the FCC entered as an exhibit in the lawsuit, the Olenicks refused to pay the fine or recognize the agency’s authority, saying they would consider its agents as trespassers if they return.

A message the Associated Press left with the Olenicks wasn’t returned.

READ THE REST OF THIS N. Y. POST STORY  HERE

Published on August 16, 2018 at 11:08 am by Ron Robinson

Comments

August 16, 2018 - 1:19 pm

obiwan

Jones has disavowed any involvement with this station in a recent video. It’s likely that an overenthusiastic supporter was operating it illegally. Jones makes his programming available to anyone that wants to redistribute it so he might not even have known about it.


August 16, 2018 - 8:57 pm

13

If I were even a bit suspicious of the motives behind the FCC and Zuck and the MSM and the HRC one world order bunch, I would say that Alex Jones is starting to get to close to the truth. Oops, I guess I just said that.


August 16, 2018 - 9:42 pm

Zebb

In what sense is this Jones’ station?

If the FCC was after Jones, a small fine to a station that he denies a connection with seems like small potatoes.


August 17, 2018 - 5:04 am

oh brother

More completely fake and downright misleading news. This station had nothing to do with Alex Jones. Nothing. It was a micro broadcast facility that might have carried his show, but it had nothing to do with Jones. I have an FM transmitter attached to my computer, so my neighbours supposedly could tune in to whatever I am listening to but it hardly counts as a broadcast since it barely reaches the next street. Does this means that Jones owns my “station” ? According to corporate media, yes. Is it any wonder that I don’t believe one word that comes out of corporate media anymore.


August 17, 2018 - 6:55 am

obiwan

This story has been totally misrepresented. Jones has no connection to the station other than them rebroadcasting his content. If some other pirate radio station played all Beatles records would the headline be “FCC hits Beatles’ radio station with $15,000 fine”?


August 17, 2018 - 8:38 am

Ron Robinson

Your points are well taken. My mistake was copying the headline from the New York Post, which is not exactly a left-leaning news outlet. I took the header to mean it was the station that carried Jones, and did not mean to imply ownership. Apologies it was not clearer.


August 17, 2018 - 10:31 am

obiwan

Really appreciate the clarification and totally understand how it happened but it’s a very important distinction. The corporate MSM seems to be engaging in a very co-ordinated smear campaign against Jones and you really have to ask yourself why? Is he that much of a threat to their business? I don’t wear a tinfoil hat and am not interested in elaborate conspiracy theories nor do I like inflammatory rhetoric but there’s real news on infowars that you can’t find in MSM.
The one lesson learned since Trump entered the political arena is the corporate MSM cannot be trusted. They used to be much more subtle in pushing their corporate agenda but they’ve gotten so blatant and arrogant that it’s painfully obvious how biased they are. The same goes for social media and large tech companies. For too long they’ve gotten away with digital “murder” and it’s just emboldened them to become even more arrogant. Until they clean up their act or there are more transparent options social media is dead to me.


August 17, 2018 - 12:04 pm

Emery Lane

FCC shuts down Alex Jones’ pirate flagship radio station

AUSTIN, Texas (AP) – The Federal Communications Commission has shut down a pirate radio station that served as the flagship outlet for conspiracy theorist Alex Jones.

The Austin American-Statesman reports the FCC also has fined the station’s operators $15,000 – a fine the FCC says in a lawsuit the operators are refusing to pay.

The lawsuit filed in federal court in Austin alleges Liberty Radio operated on a channel without a license since at least 2013. The lawsuit names as defendants Walter Olenick and M. Rae Nadler-Olenick.

Content Continues Below
Court documents show the FCC had tracked the transmissions to a 50-foot tower at an Austin apartment complex owned by an entity linked to the Olenicks.

A message left with the Olenicks wasn’t returned. According to a letter the FCC entered as an exhibit in its lawsuit, the Olenicks refused to pay the fine or recognize the FCC’s authority, saying they would regard its agents as trespassers should they return.

According to a message on the outlet’s website, Liberty Radio stopped airing in December but continues streaming online.

Jones has faced troubles in recent months, most notably a defamation lawsuit arising from his false claim on his Austin-based “Infowars” program that the parents of one of the children killed in the 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre were perpetuating the massacre story as a hoax.

Most social media platforms have banned Jones from their channels for violating their prohibitions of hate speech. His program also has been removed from the music streaming services Spotify.

___

Information from: Austin American-Statesman, http://www.statesman.com

Copyright 2018 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not b


August 18, 2018 - 9:21 am

obiwan

All the above article proves is that you can’t trust the Associated Press or the newspaper they are quoting. Yesterday numerous MSM outlets issued corrections to the original story that made it clear Jones had nothing to do with running the pirate station. I suspect some of them did so because they realized that Jones could sue them, something Jones should consider. No one should trust anything the corporate media prints or broadcasts. We are being fed a steady diet of corporate propaganda on both sides of the border that is a threat to our democracy. Politicians that are supposed to be working in the best interests of voters have been co-opted by corporate interests and they’re selling us out.


August 18, 2018 - 9:24 am

Zebb

I’m not sure why Jones is even in the headlines for this. He is irrelevant to the FCC action. Seems like a fake news attempt to generate sympathy for him.


August 18, 2018 - 9:56 am

obiwan

A good example of how politicians of all stripes no longer work for the people is ride sharing. The Liberals said they were going to allow it yet they never did. The NDP said “vote for us and you’ll have it by the end of the year” and they are not allowing it. The Greens say they are in favour of ride sharing and could bring down the government and are doing nothing. No political party is willing to follow the wishes of the electorate because they are ALL beholden to corrupt and what should be illegal practices by the taxi industry. The corporate media has similar power over ALL political parties because they have the power to shape the narrative. Have you read any stories in the corporate media about the 6th richest family in Canada the Saputo’s? They have become billionaires off of the government controlling who can produce and sell dairy products in Canada. The Saputo’s have made so much money in Canada they are now investing it in other countries and have become a global firm. The majority of Canadians hate Trump and yet he’s the only one trying to do something about ridiculous tariffs that allow the Saputo family to get obscenely rich at our expense. Of course Saputo is also a large advertiser so don’t expect the corporate media to report on their cosy little racket.


August 18, 2018 - 11:35 am

Les H.

obiwan,

The absurdity of Canada’s supply management over our dairy, eggs and poultry only shows the small mindedness and socialistic bent of all too many Canadians and our politicians. First off let me be clear up front, until recent years and for well over half of my adult life I was a blind supporter of supply management, CBC radio and other liberal brainwashing worked on me for such time. I think I like many Canadians just bought into it and accepted the fact that we paid more for said products to control quality (in reality that is not empirically true) and quality of life of our farmers who we tend to see as all just mom an pop operations. IE: the median family income of Canada is about $70,000.00. The dairy, egg and poultry farmers in Canada earn between $150,000 and $190,000.00 after tax income. So in essence a majority of Canadians PAY about 3 times more for dairy, eggs and poultry as opposed to our US neighbours yet we earn well below the average after tax income of these 13,000 or so farmers in supply management. The poor and less off supporting the higher class by govt. fiat. ABSURD!!!!

This beholden to supply management is so typical of Canadian small mindedness. Remember modern supply management in dairy, eggs and poultry did not really exist prior to 1971 in Canada. Our farmers more or less competed for market share. Yes you had some local cooperatives and such but it was much more free market in these areas.

Our oldest and longest supply management was our Wheat Marketing Boards and yes for decades our wheat was brought to market by the heavy hand of said boards. When the Wheat Marketing Boards were rolled back and disbanded many naysayers cried our that farmers will all go broke. THAT DID NOT HAPPEN! Wheat and grain farming got more competitive and more varied.

Pandering to dairy, poultry and egg supply management and farmers is so idiotically Canadian. These 13,000 or so farmers, about 7% of all farming in Canada and the corrupt businesses who built wealth on the backs of socialist marketing boards costs us as families money and costs our nation what could be better GDP.

So these farmers sell their wares to a market of 36,000,000 where under a free(er) trade set up they could for one easily sell more to a greater market of 320,000,000 just a few miles to the south of us. President Trump is 100% right on our corrupt supply management system. We as Canucks stand to be better off by getting more and freer access to 320,000,000 Americans than they can to our 36,000,000 Canadians. BUT WE ARE TOO DAMN LAZY AND SMALL MINDED!!! IT’S OUR NATIONAL LAMENT!!!

Oh I hear from naysayers, “But, but , but if our market is open the US farmers will just flood our farmers out of business.” BULL SHIT!!!!! International trade rules provide mechanisms to prevent and/or punish those who DUMP! It only requires proper judicial enforcement of such. But our dairy, egg and poultry farmers will under competition be able to sell their wares to not only 36,000,000 Canadians but over night (well after some sort of time period to ease and phase out our marketing boards) to 320,000,000 Americans and other international markets. These farmers can expand operations to make more profit, YES THEY WILL HAVE TO COMPETE!!! and not just sit back on socialistic marketing boards.

Yes, rules will have to go after US subsidies of their various agri businesses too. President Trump is a true believer in free(er) trade and is all about getting to as close to real reciprocal free trade as he can and he does not want subsidies as such propping up US agri business too.

In ending the major political parties in Canada all actively to stubbornly support supply management in including Scheer’s Tories. In fact the Liberals and NDP will seemingly sacrifice our much larger automotive manufacturing sector and also our much larger gas, oil and coal industries to prop up a corrupt supply management system notably in Quebec. Only Maxime Bernier appeared to be vocal about phasing out supply management. That said with Trump continuing to win and he will serve TWO terms, Scheer is our best though reluctant bet to better deal with supply management and other trade / NAFTA issues with The USA.


August 18, 2018 - 12:19 pm

BMCQ

Obiwan

Les H

Two excellent, informative and thought provoking Posts!

I hope that people take the time to read both your Posts and I hope they get informed.

Media is bending over backwards to hide the facts from the Great Unwashed and it could not be more important for the Public to be informed than between now and the next 2019 Canadian Federal Election.

You are correct, Scheer is our best hope but the Party need to somehow get him out of “The Witness Protection Program”, we cannot risk another Term of PM Justin and his Minions.


August 19, 2018 - 11:15 am

Les H.

Remember folks Trudeau said he is Canada’s FIRST post-national PM. He is a traitor to our nation including our long and colourful history. A history and nation that has been and is a part of the greater western developed world. As a pillar small as we may be, we give support of WESTERN values in our Canadian way.

Others have been and are welcome to come but leave your social, tribal, political and religious issues at your previous nations as sadly for many of you , most come from crap hole nations/societies or you all would not have left to come to the western world including Canada. If you come here to bring your issues and often backward values to try to make us into what was/is your crap hole nations 2.0 then please stay away.


August 20, 2018 - 9:59 am

obiwan

Trudeau would be a camp counsellor if his last name was any different. He’s just a puppet controlled by the couple of dozen powerful families that actually pull the strings in Canada. Surprisingly the Globe and Mail reported that a woman in Quebec shouted questions at him about who’s going to pay for all the illegal border crossings from the US into Canada. His response was to call her racist. The powerful want immigration both illegal and legal since it benefits their interests. Illegal immigrants help keep wages down and that’s a key consideration. You usually don’t get to be a billionaire unless you employ lots of people. Wages are one of your biggest expenses and anything you can do to depress them is more money in your pocket.


August 20, 2018 - 10:45 am

obiwan

You’ll often hear that immigrants are great for the economy and to a certain degree that’s true. If you let in a hundred thousand new people they all need a cel phone, Tim Hortons, groceries, toothpaste, entertainment and maybe some Old Navy t-shirts. Who benefits? Multinational corporations. Those hundred thousand immigrants add to the labor pool and help to keep wages down. There is no downside to immigration for corporations because they get more customers and potential workers. However all the costs associated with immigrants are paid for by taxpayers. The new schools, community centres and hospitals that you have to build to accommodate them. Some immigrants are going to need social assistance in the form of ESL and job training. Some will even engage in criminal activity requiring more police and courts. The good news for corporations and their shareholders is that none of this is their problem. They get to skim off the benefits of immigration without any of the costs. When taxpayers question this lopsided arrangement they are called names and shouted down by a corporate media that’s also benefiting from the extra readers and eyeballs. .


August 20, 2018 - 11:01 am

Les H.

When a liberal, socialist, cultural-Marxist, feminist and/or SJW calls you a racist, sexist, misogynist, Islamophobe or homophobe etc. you then know they have conceded any argument or discussion. Consider being called such by these loonies who in of themselves being the true racists, bigots, sexists and such akin to being called STANLEY CUP CHAMPIONS after you win said cup.

They toss out their idiotic word salad to any persons who dare challenge their FE FE FEELINGS and their wacky leftist idealism. They in essence PROJECT by such calling out to you their own bias against people. It is a most pathetic attempt at debate… HELL IN REALITY THEM TRYING TO SHUT DOWN DEBATE!

I heard our idiot PM call out said lady from Quebec who only challenged him on his lunacy of refugees, COUGH COUGH THEY ARE NOT! but are illegal aliens, by him calling her OH NO TO MY SURPRISE A RACIST!!! SCREW YOU TRUDEAU!

Defending 151 years of Canada’s values, laws and tax monies spent on this subject but not only the subject of illegal aliens, is not racist but being diligent and PROUD OF BEING A CANADIAN! Our history and values matter you jerk PM. Many men fought and died to protect such. Many citizens of all aspects of Canadianna lived/live to preserve such values.

WE ARE NOT A GLOBAL WELFARE OFFICE! WE CAN’T SOLVE ALL THE WORLD’S PROBLEMS! Not even the mighty USA can. LEGAL, VALUE ADDED IMMIGRATION by people who want to contribute to Canadian society and our values, who want to become a part of our national fabric and who want to better their lives and leave their all too often backwards ideals and ways behind is the type immigration we all should want and deserve.

BEING CANADIAN MATTERS! IT HAS INORDINATE AMOUNT OF VALUE! It is not just as damn passport, citizenship card or birth certificate. Our anti-Canadian, virtue signaling PM may in essence hate Canada and may in delusions think he is a post national PM. Him and any others who think and feel as he does can all go walk off a short pier.

Canadians are even if slothfully waking up and will fight back. Screw, Marxism, Socialism. liberalism, feminism and any other anti-western, anti-liberty ism’s.


August 20, 2018 - 1:49 pm

obiwan

The root of the problem is an uneducated electorate. They are fed a steady diet of propaganda through the entire education system and also a state run broadcaster. The mainstream media is virtually all controlled by large corporations who are feeding the public a narrative that suits their business interests. The average Canadian is clueless and having a hard time keeping their head above water. They haven’t had a real wage increase in twenty plus years and their kids see a lousy future ahead. Media is very powerful and as long as a few families control it nothing will change. The fact that Canadians in 2018 tolerate the CRTC meddling in what they can and can’t watch or listen to is a testament to how well they’ve been brainwashed.


August 21, 2018 - 12:36 pm

Les H.

Listening to an excellent 1 full hour segment with Michael Smythe filling in for CKNW’s libtard Simi Sara Tuesday Aug. 21 on firearms and the idiocy of Montreal and Toronto Mayors and on most anti-gunner politicians and bureaucrats.

He and his gun rights guest accurately discussed current gun laws in Canada and what are the REAL GUN ISSUES!!! ILLEGAL FIREARMS USED BY CRIMINALS AND TERRORISTS!!! Lawful gun owner in Canada and even in the USA are NOT the problem but are LOW HANGING FRUIT used by ignorant and arrogant WE KNOW BETTER anti-gun politicians.

Criminals and terrorist DO NOT GIVE A RATS ASS CARE ABOUT GUN LAWS!!! Canada’s gun law are already quite strict. They only punish lawful citizens. Disarm citizens and you have only the lawless with guns and a good chance and ego, we know best driven government using its guns to keep citizens corralled. WAKE THE EFF UP FOLKS!

If you feel lawful citizens should not have guns then you are against firstly women and weaker people and in fact all lawful persons from being able to choose to protect themselves, family and and property.

Ie: A 5’2″ 120lb female has physically NO CHANCE protecting herself against a typical male let alone one who is 6’2″ 220lbs. But if she legally has a gun and is prepared to properly use it she can take down said male perp.

Another example a 75 -80 y.o. retired male no matter how strong or fit he may still be will have little chance physically against a younger male thug. But if he has a legal firearm and is prepared to use it he has the equalizer or even edge over any thugs.

The cliched phrase says, “God created man, Smith and Wesson made man equal.”

To rely on 911 and police to stop an and all violent attacks, break ins or such is silly. A good cop is mere minutes away when you may need him in seconds. If said attack and possible homicide happens the cops will arrive to maybe help get you to the hospital if you are not yet dead, but more so to draw a chalk line around your lifeless body, THINK ABOUT IT!

Then we hear the IDIOCY of saying legal firearms owners should be required to keep their hand guns locked at their local shooting range(s). ARE YOU F**KING KIDDING ME! Imagine metropolitan city areas having say just oh for argument sakes1000 lawful hand gun owners and they each must keep their hand gun or hand guns locked at the gun range. Say a minimum average of 2 guns per legal gun owner, that will be 2000 hand guns LOCKED IN ONE CENTRAL AREA! For God sake the criminal element will if wanting too, scope out, size up the storage of said hand guns, maybe working or volunteering at such ranges to get a good gauge of such and ONE DAY MAYBE BREAKING IN AND STEALING THESE 2000 hand guns! I can’t believe CKNW’s Bruce Allen’s editorial had him say this idea of hand gun storage was a smart idea.

No, lawful hand gun owners should keep their hand guns properly stored in their own homes to decentralize such storage for better reduction of possible break ins and theft. Bruce Allen in his editorial must have fallen on his head to want hand guns stored only gun ranges.

I thought Bruce Allen was for more smaller government and conservative with more libertarian ideals, I guess I was wrong. 🙁


August 21, 2018 - 2:38 pm

13

Les H
Allen is NOT always right. He has this one wrong. The Toronto shooter IS a terrorist.
Please give us the stats on how many licensed gun owners comit crime
Let’s not forget the top RCMP boss told us that Canadian Tire was supplying ammo to gangsters. The idiot cop did not know you need a pal to buy ammo


August 22, 2018 - 2:16 am

Les H.

I know I’ve hi-jacked this thread but only to continue my thoughts on guns, gun legislation and gun control, so if I may?

Just a quick note until recent years I was very much an anti-gunner, notably the idiot lunacy of anti-hand guns and so called assault weapons. So this libtard idealism did once plague my mind. Yes, I self-righteously thought I knew better about gun control and more trusted the idiots in government and gun grabbing bureaucrats and police.

My questions to anti-gunners, notably anti-handgun and anti-so called assault weapons (even though real assault weapons have been illegal in Canada and the USA for decades).

Here goes:

1: Do you believe citizens have the right to defend themselves, their families and their property?

2: If you believe in personal defense what means of defense do you feel is appropriate to your ideals?

3: If you do not believe in personal defense of oneself, family and property how do you believe one should be protected from those who may wish to do harm to oneself, one’s family and property?

.
.
.
.
.

Ok you all have had time to answer these questions, so I’ll give my input on each.

1: Of course in any civil society one must and should be expected to defend themselves, their family and their property, if not then the civil and lawful citizens will be at the behest of the criminal minds including possible criminal government minds.

2: What ideal of defense should one be allowed? My answer the best, most deterring and most equalizing or in giving one an advantage over a perpetrator, thug(s) or other criminal(s). Anti-gunners, would you be ok if a thug broke into a person’s home or business to rob and or do physical harm to said person or persons in home or business if said defendant attempted to use a club, bat, pipe, or knife to try to defend their property and/or oneself or others against said thug?

Why would you be ok if one took a bat and crashed it over the head of a thug who may mean to hurt or kill the defendant and possibly others? Substitute club, pipe or knife for same effect.

Said weapons in defense can harm or kill the intruder/thug. But unlike a gun these weapons require more work, closer in action and have a higher probability of the defendant being disarmed, notably if the defendant is a female, an older or more disabled person or just a smaller man. Then said bat, club, pipe or knife could be used on the defendant by the perp.

A legal and properly displayed and maybe used firearm, hand gun and in reality the best home defense gun is a sporting rifle like an AR-15 or Sig Saur semi-automatic rifle, is the greatest equalizer at worse or advantage giver at best for a person to defend themselves, family, others and property. US Govt stats tell that the defensive use (from just showing it to maybe even using it ) of a firearm on a thug protects on average 200,000 women from being assaulted and /or raped EACH YEAR in the USA and protects all Americans in defensive display and use between 500,000 to 1milion times per year from violent use against them.

So why are many anti-gunners ok with a person maybe clubbing or stabbing a thug maybe to even to death which is harder to do and more likely to fail than a defendant properly using legal firearm for said defense?

In most cases I ‘d say a person pulling out a hand gun or a rifle and just pointing it at a thug will cause the thug to run away. I hear you anti-gunners yelling out, “But, but, but what if the perp has a gun too?” Um, if said perp has a gun, it’s better for me to have a gun in defense than a club, bat, pipe or knife, or nothing, DON’T YA THINK!!! At worse my gun is an equalizer.

3: Ok now to you bleeding hearts and pacifists, who feel we do not have a right to defend ourselves, families or property, what should we do if a threat arises? You bleeding hearts say, “Call 911 and get the cops to come.”

Bwha ha ha ha… A thug trying to break into your home meaning to do harm, steal, beat, rape, abduct, kill etc. The 5-10 minutes you may wait for the cops to show up may be 4-9 minutes too slow. Oh you can ask the thug to wait outside for 5-10 minutes, I doubt he will comply.

Oh I hear ya calling out, “But, you can go and hide in another room or maybe try to escape.” Jeez you bleeding hearts are all the same (remember I too was once a libtard, bleeding heart) So my answer is this, the strongest doors to your home are your exterior doors, if the thug and BTW maybe he has partners too can break in through your exterior doors in say 20-30 seconds, how do you all think your bedroom or bathroom doors will stand up?

Escape, maybe but what if its not just one, but two, three perps and you are not sure if escape from another door is possible? FIREARMS MAY NOT GUARANTEE 100% SECURITY TO ANY THREAT BUT WILL GIVE THE USER THE BEST CHANCE!

What if you are about to be violently mugged, a carried gun will give you best chance.

What if you are woman in an under ground parking lot and about to be physically assaulted or raped, a carried gun will you the best chance.

What if you are a dude or a couple and you are in a car broken down on dark or quiet road and some bad guys decide you are fresh bait, a carried gun will be your best chance.

What if you are dude or a dudette at 1:00-2:00am with the munchies and go to a 7/11 and it just happens to be armed robbed with you inside, a carried gun will be your best chance.

I know, I know most of us never had to and may never deal with any of these potentially violent situations. But none of us have crystal balls and IT DOES HAPPEN, more often than you may think. Firearms for home, business and/or self defense are THE GREAT EQUALIZERS!

Funny how we think in that most of us have never had a violent act upon us on the streets or in our homes, so we may shrug off points I made above as just silly paranoia, BUT! look at it this way, the same liberals, bleeding hearts and such who shrug off the power of legal firearms for defense will often if not always say when buying a car, buy the one with the most or best safety features and often size for the feeling of greater safety, yet most of us have yet and may not ever get into a crash serious enough to need said safety features… BUT WE DON’T CALL THAT PARANOIA!!!


August 26, 2018 - 7:26 am

13

Hi LesH. I agree whole heartedly with your gun control thesis. I doubt that cracking a bat on some intruders skull is any more acceptable to the moron sjw crowd as would be shooting an intruder.
Having said that if the law abiding gun owner is just that the bat is next to the bedside or by the door. (Not a good idea as you have now armed the intruder at his/her point of entry. The home owner (renter) has his rifle locked in a gun safe and the ammo locked in another location. In the case of a handgun it is likely locked in a case in a safe with a trigger lock applied .So in order to defend your family with a gun you are likely breaking the law anyways.
Either way in this day and age once you have shot or killed the intruder with an aluminium Louisville Slugger or a Colt or a Remmington in our great country you are now the guilty one not the dead intruder. You had better hope and pray that you end up infront of the rare judge that doesnt subscribe to the Justin Trudeau diversity crowds set of ideals


August 27, 2018 - 2:43 am

Les H.

Yes, Canada is a cucked nation on laws over personal and property defense. The USA has it more right, stand your ground, Open Carry or Concealed Carry etc. All make it your right and obligation to defend yourself, loved ones and property in the USA.

The US gun rights are not really or only just about gun rights but the ability for one to lawfully have the necessary tools one may feel they need to give protection to themselves, loved ones or property. No it does not mean OPEN SEASON. Laws are still laws in the USA. Some yahoo who tried to break into your home or business and out of fear of you and your gun then runs away, and you still unload a magazine into his back, WELL YOU ARE LIKELY UP SHIT CREEK EVEN IN THE USA!

But the USA has it right and if I may use a current story, Mollie the young girl murdered in Iowa by the illegal alien, had she lawfully owned and carried a hand gun if said illegal alien harassed her, she could have pulled her gun out and first threaten to use it on the jerk. Odds are the showing of said gun would have seen him run away and stop harassing her. But if he was still cocky enough and forced himself in a more aggressive way, Mollie in my story here had the GREAT EQUALIZER and could have unloaded a few rounds into the jerk, and she’d stand a good chance if being alive today.

Oh yes I hear the anti-gunners retorting back to me, “Um if Mollie had said hand gun, the thug could have had a chance to disarm her of it and then use it on her.” I use to think much like this with the idiot anti-gunners, I virtue signaled with the best of them.

Um, ok, SO WHAT!!!??? The asshole KILLED a defenseless Mollie anyways, so if she had a gun, she then would have had a fighting chance. Anti-gunners would want to have denied her and others of said chance to use the best tool appropriately in defenses, a FIREARM!

Quite simply lawful gun owners who have and keep the responsibility to own, train and use a firearms, have the best chance to save oneself, family and others from a violent attack.

I say anti-gunners are so because THEY ARE SCARED OF GUNS and as such feel it’s their right to have you, me others not lawfully have them for protection. Nobody who supports the lawful right to have firearms say ALL PEOPLE MUST HAVE GUNS! But they state nobody should tell a lawful gun owner to NOT have guns.

Plano Texas has a bylaw that states all citizens of Plano must have a legal firearm in home. As a result Plano is among if not the lowest in violent crime rates city in the USA.

The USA has gun rights 100% correct, Canada much like many of our weak, virtue signalling peers has it more wrong. I should have the right to USE the best defense items I feel comfortable in having to protect myself, family and property. PERIOD STOP!

Any persons against guns being used for self protection then by such HATE WOMEN and any persons who may be weaker than any potential thugs. Lawful firearms ownership is THE GREAT EQUALIZER.

An AR-15 type sporting rifle is the best home defense weapon as it requires TWO hands holding it and dealing with recoil, thus making it more accurate shooting gun over say a standard hand gun. Also an AR type gun has larger capacity, up to 30 rounds per magazine over most hand guns which are between 6-15 rounds. OH YEAH EXCEPT FOR IDIOT CANADA WHICH BY LAW FORCES AR-15 TYPE OWNERS TO USE ONLY 5 ROUND MAGAZINES, F*#K ARE WE SO CUCKED HERE IN CANADA!

Out in public or in ones car a good hand gun is your best bet for safety.

Finally, the story of the USA’s WILD WILD WEST was not so wild. Citizens back then were responsible for self defense, family defense, farm/business defense etc. Sheriffs, Deputies and/or Marshalls rarely STOPPED CRIME back then. They enforced laws but more so carried out justice. If a violent crime was committed they often enacted a posse to go after the criminal perps and/or instituted bounty on them. The wild wild west was actually quite orderly. Less violent crime than in most US inner city areas today.


Leave a Reply

Text Groove for Radio