Today, I placed my Glock Model 21SF .45 cal. automatic pistol with laser on the table right next to my kitchen door. I left its clip beside it, then left it alone and went about my business.
While I was gone, the mailman delivered my mail, the next door neighbor mowed the yard, a girl walked her dog down the street,and quite a few cars stopped at the "stop" sign near the front of my house.
After about an hour, I checked on the gun It was quietly sitting there, right where I had left it. It had not moved itself outside. It had not killed anyone, even with the numerous opportunities that had been presented to do that. In fact, it had not even loaded itself.
Well you can imagine my surprise, with all the hype by the Democrats and their propaganda media, about how dangerous guns are and “How They” kill people. Either the media is wrong, or I'm in possession of the laziest gun in the world.
The United States is 3rd in murders throughout the world. But if you take out just 5 'left-wing' cities:Chicago, Detroit, Washington DC, St Louis and New Orleans--the United States is 4th from the bottom, in the ENTIRE world, for murders.
These 5 cities are controlled by Democrats. They also have the toughest gun control laws in the USA. It would be absurd to draw any conclusions from this data, right?
Well, I'm off to check on my spoons. I hear they're making people fat. _________________________ Comment: I believe it's the cultures that are to blame for the gun crime. I believe Dallas, Ft. Worth, Houston, San Antonio, and Austin probably have more guns per capita than any of the aforementioned cities. We have gun crime, but it pales in comparison the the errant cities above. Even New York's gun crime has been reduced. I believe New York accomplished this with attempts of unifying the population. They are all now New Yorkers. However, the errant cities above seem to still be involved in tribal warfare. The Texas cities are, for the most part, all American, then Texas. Sometimes in reverse order. I support homogenization of the cultures, however so long as splinter groups refuse to integrate or assimilate into the American culture, we will continue to have gun crime. So long as these "splinter groups" conduct warfare with all other different cultures, we will continue to have gun, baseball bat, knife, and tire tool problems. Background checks looking for unstable personalities or felony crime histories are okay, provided they are judicious. Let the law abiding citizens continue to benefit from the 2nd Amendment.
To disarm law abiding citizens and place them at the mercy of gun carrying criminals (who don't comply with gun control legislation) is perhaps stupid.
I have just read an article from the CoStar News, written by Candace Carlisle, and published in the March 14, edition. It was informative, but by the time I read it, it was already old news. The article was accurate, however the mention of Bayside Land Partners, an entity owned by Kent Donahue, as one of the two defendants of the Rowlett lawsuit, could cause some confusion.
The common knowledge was that Kent Donahue was fired as developer before the "new" Bayside was presented. If he was no longer involved in Bayside, how could he be sued? Furthermore, if he was being sued, it would be easy to think he must be part of the "bait and switch."
One of Kent Donahue's companies, Bayside Land Partners, has a proprietary interest in Bayside, the development. The other partner was Bayside District Partners. I have never read the partnership agreement, therefore I don't know the particulars. However, it is reasonable to conclude that Donahue's company did not have the clout in the partnership to combat his dismissal as the developer. That muscle belonged to the other partner, Bayside District Partners. However, even though Donahue was dismissed as developer, it did not extinguish any portion of ownership of Bayside. The ownership remained intact.
Therefore, when Rowlett sued the owners of Bayside, they had to sue ALL the owners, including Donahue's company. Even though Donahue was not a part of the "bait and switch" his company still had a proprietary interest. Clearly, that interest wasn't sufficient to protect him from dismissal.
The problems with Bayside did not materialize until AFTER Donahue's departure as a managing partner. But, his company still had to be sued as an owner of some (unknown) degree.
Since Donahue's company was mentioned in the lawsuit, it would be easy to conclude he was guilty of some wrong doing. That has a reflection on his character if the situation is not understood. Then, the FACEBOOK INTELLECTS flood the social media with unsavory and untrue insinuations. Folks, that ain't fair. It's piling on when you don't even know what you're talking about.
That situation is happening now in Rockwall. Donahue is petitioning the City Council for a rezoning that would allow a higher density on a piece of residential land. I have read some Facebook strings whereby it is implied that his character is suspect because of Bayside. Apparently, Rockwall has FACEBOOK INTELLECTS just like Rowlett.
I'm all for punishing the guilty, but not the innocent. Once again, know what you're talking about before shooting off your mouth. It's a sign of good character. No one is perfect, including me, but I try to understand the facts before offering an opinion. If I screw up, it isn't because I didn't try to ferret out the facts.