Wayne La Pierre, Exec. VP of the NRA hit the nail on the head when he said the President is exploiting the deaths of young children to continue his effort to disarm law-abiding Americans.  The White House was outraged by such accusations… but the facts speak for themselves.

More children are killed in automobiles, by sudden infant death syndrome, by child abuse and neglect in a year than are killed by guns. There are approximately 137 deaths a YEAR of young children by guns, as opposed to the 13 per DAY the President keeps claiming.

If Wayne’s claim is not accurate, why was Bill not at the grave site of the young 13-year-old boy molested and strangled by two homosexuals in his own home state having to look his parents in the eyes and explain why he is so pro-gay? Why wasn’t he at the grave site of the young girl in Jacksonville, Florida who was bludgeoned to death and molested by a 14-year-old boy who had just downloaded hard core pornography from his computer, having to look her parents in the eyes and explain why he does not support Internet blockers for kids?

Wayne is right . . . .Clinton’s politically orchestrated concern for Kayla Rolland is nothing more than grandstanding on the grave of a little girl who was a victim of gun and drug laws not being inforced now, and a breakdown in the American family.

Wayne is right to call Clinton and Al Gore on their shameless posturing for political purposes. I wonder if the Republicans on Capitol Hill will show this much spine?

Have you noticed that since the Moms on the Mall rally against guns, and all the coordinated effort to feature Rosie O’Donnell on the cover of every national magazine simultaneously has finally subsided… that the gun issue is dead?

It’s very difficult for them to keep the ruse up with almost every high profile crime since that time, featuring knifes, billy clubs or fists. But why did it die out so quickly if that is really the view of all these grassroot women who, of their own effort, made their way to Washington, D.C. to make a heart felt point that they hate guns?

Well, could it be because it wasn’t grassroots at all but was totally orchestrated by millionaires, Hollywood celebrities, and media moguls to make us all think this was? Most Americans may have been born at night… but they weren’t born last night.

They know a snow job when they see it, and they know a propaganda rally when they see it. But what we should learn from this is that the left knows how to stage a rally that has the appearance, smell, feel and taste of grassroots… but all that’s missing is the fertilizer.

And that is you the citizen, who they are counting on to be dumb enough to fall for the ploy.

Gun control advocate, Rosie O’Donnell, feels that the rest of America is a very dangerous group, not to be trusted with guns.

We are so dangerous that only she should have a well-armed body guard to protect her kids who are more precious than everyone else’s.

OK, nothing new… it didn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out that the well orchestrated PR campaign to disarm Americans called the Million Moms on the Mall was designed to intimidate and manipulate. The spokesmen didn’t realize that America would be watching their actions and actually hold them accountable to their words. This inconsistent thinking on a civilian level was reflected to me the other day from a global military perspective.

A Wing Commander of the Air Force introduced himself as a fighter pilot and then proceeded to say that the second Amendment has been misinterpreted… that it doesn’t mean the individual has the right to keep and bear arms.

The hypocrisy was as obvious as that of Rosie’s, but what was very scarey about this encounter is that he has sworn to defend the constitution, and is given armed aircraft to do it.  But he doesn’t even know what the constitution says.

So is it ignorance or hypocrisy that is driving this agenda? Either way, it sends a clear message to all citizens that the ones with guns are trying a little too hard to make sure the rest of us don’t have them.

It was reassuring to see our President debate the merits of an American missile defense system with Russian President, Vladimir Putin. He said that allowing Americans to defend themselves against foreign aggressors was not a threat to strategic stability and mutual deterrence… in fact it would have the opposite affect.

Putin has adopted the Rosie O’Donnell theory of national defense. Because he can’t trust anyone else with a gun to defend and protect their borders, their homes, their children in school, he must be the only one that is allowed to have weapons, because only he and his can be trusted with them.

He sees a defense system, like Rosie sees a gun in a private home: they can’t trust that it won’t be used offensively. Well, it won’t if he respects borders, and locks on front doors.

A missile defense system is like a lock on a front door and a strong defense system is the knowledge the would-be aggressor has to be deterred from breaking into that well-defended house… or well-protected country.

If our leaders applied the same principle to arms control and the national defense as they do to the average citizen, Clinton would have signed a statement agreeing to everything Putin requested.

He didn’t because maybe he understands that disarming invites aggression nationally, and personally.

I thought it quite interesting that on the weekend of the Million Mom March, the icon of liberation, Nelson Mandela, made statements that better illustrated the opposing view than any counter march could have.

The opposing view to the anti-gun Moms, whose only concern for child safety is suspiciously limited to guns, have stated that their main goal is to preserve the Constitution, specifically the Second Amendment.

The “moms” were hung up on the word “well-regulated” as being the delete button for the Amendment, when they conveniently forget that the first 10 amendments to the constitution specifically and purposefully deal with rights reserved to the citizen NOT the state.

Well-regulated was what Washington did when he identified the back woods boys who were sharp shooters, but had no formal discipline to work together as a cohesive unit to overthrow the tyranny of the existing controlling government.

Ironically, Nelson Mandela is giving us a very current example of how that well-regulated militia should work against the oppressive regime of Mugabe in Zimbabwe.  He has called for the citizens to take up arms and oppose the tyranny through armed insurrection, and the only way that such opposition can work is if they cooperate and work together as a militia formed of citizens, well-regulated from within their ranks.

So Nelson Mandela, who was prevented from having a gun, to protect his life and to fight for equality understands the importance of the rights of citizens, in order to form a well-regulated militia, to have the right to keep and bear arms.

The greatest fear that any totalitarian group has is that people start thinking for themselves and have a foundation of absolutes, balanced information resources, and courage to express their views.

Most Americans don’t like to be lied to, intimidated, or coerced by elitist rhetoric that assumes we don’t know what is best for ourselves and our families.

So the women, referring to themselves as “Moms on the Mall,” need to know that of all the jobs in the world that a woman has, that is one she doesn’t need a spokesman for.

And for as many moms you have that many parenting styles. If they choose to keep their children away from firearms that is their choice. Much like it is my choice to keep my children from anything I think is harmful and offensive to them, or me.

But did you know that approximately three million kids are abused by their parents yearly, resulting in over 1000 deaths and 70% of the abusers were moms?

Ironically that is almost the same figure as children killed by firearms. So, should we put a trigger lock on moms? Women… think for yourselves!!!

This is Nina May for the Renaissance Women supporting a woman’s right to choose to own guns.

A little boy was the victim of random violence in Alexandria, Virginia by a knife-wielding man. It is interesting that the President didn’t attend the funeral which was only a fifteen minute drive from the White House.  Maybe it is because he doesn’t think knives are as dangerous as guns and doesn’t support a three day waiting period to purchase a knife at a knife show.

Those who accused him of politicizing the death of Kayla Rolland were soundly criticized and ridiculed by the press, the gun-control advocates, and every individual who is shocked when someone in this country dares speak the unvarnished truth.

If it was not about grandstanding for political purposes, and if Kevin Shifflett’s life is as precious to the President as Kayla’s, then why was he not in attendance at that funeral? Why was a representative not sent? Why wasn’t there a press conference to express outrage at random violence and dangerous weapons such as knives?

For me to say this is outrageous? No this is called the truth. To attend a little girl’s funeral who was killed by a gun, pretending you care, while ignoring the brutal death of a little boy stabbed to death by a knife… now that is outrageous!

As long as I can remember growing up, my parents kept a loaded gun by their bed. My three brothers and I were told never to touch it unless we were given permission to, for example during target practice. And guess what?  We never did.

They also told us not to put metal objects in wall sockets, not to touch a hot stove, not to play outside when it was lightening, not to ride our bicycles in front of cars or play in the street.

So what kept us from playing with the gun? Probably the same thing that kept us from sticking knitting needles in wall sockets. We knew we could die… or get killed by our parents if they found out we did.

The threat of death was a huge deterrent, and the fear of disobeying our parents was a common condition shared by all kids our age.

Back then, parents were the adults and actually taught kids right from wrong. The school reinforced their influence, they didn’t countermand it. The community shared the same believe system of respect, honor, integrity, and consequences to actions.

Guns have never been the problem until the social engineers, who jumped the tracks of common sense, needed to blame their morally bankrupt ideas on something besides a warped agenda.

In 1998 there were 41,200 deaths caused by cars. 16,000 people died as a result of falling down.  8,000 were poisoned, 4,000 drowned, 3,700 burned… 900 were accidentally killed by a firearm.  900 . .. not the 41,000 killed by cars. Why don’t we hear about a big move to ban cars?

Almost 40% of these deaths were caused by an alcohol-impaired driver. Why don’t we hear about banning alcohol?

Of the ten leading causes of deaths in America, death by gun is not even listed. Topping the list is heart disease, usually caused by fatty foods and high cholesterol. Should we ban all of these?  Cancer, number two on the list, is caused by everything from the sun to artificial sweeteners.  Should we ban all of these?

More facts: A gun kept in a home is 216 times more likely to be used against a criminal than cause the death of an innocent. Women in America use handguns 416 times a day against rapists, and every 13 seconds an American uses a gun in self-defense.

Look at this in comparison to Australia one year after banning guns altogether.  Homicides are up 3.2 percent, assaults are up 8.6 percent, ARMED robberies are up 44 percent. That means, the bad guys still have the guns and the good guys are still the victims.

In Victoria alone, homicides with firearms are up 300%. There has also been a dramatic increase in break-ins and assaults of the elderly. Australian politicians are having a difficult time explaining this after spending $500 million in “ridding society of guns.” Emotions run high on this issue .. .but the facts speak for themselves.

Many people who are neutral on the issue of gun control, ask what’s the big deal about the government registering guns.

Dr. Stephen Halbrook offers an historic perspective to help answer that question. “On November 8, 1938, The New York Times reported that ‘The entire Jewish population of Berlin had been “disarmed” with the confiscation of 2,569 hand weapons. Any resisters were shot immediately. Thousands of Jews were taken away. Searches of Jewish homes were calculated to seize firearms and assets and to arrest adult males.’

It was self-evident that the Jews must be disarmed before the extermination could begin. Finding out which Jews had firearms was not too difficult. The liberal Weimar Republic passed a Firearm Law in 1928, [ten years before this], requiring extensive police records on gun owners. Hitler signed a further gun control law in early 1938.”

So in light of the very hostile speech against the “religious right” by certain presidential candidates from both parties it serves us well to remember history. That, coupled with the insistence by these same people that guns be registered or banned is cause for concern. A concern that our Founding Fathers obviously shared.

This is Nina May reminding you that history can teach us a lot . . . if we are willing to learn.