Connect with us


The Dangerous Ways Criminals Can Gain Entry To Your Home

Here’s a scary fact: most robberies, assaults, murders, and rapes occur inside of the home. And many of them are a direct result of criminals exploiting the extremely vulnerable parts of your house.
The sad truth is that every single home has areas that criminals can easily get into. And, without the proper protection, many homeowners are basically waving a white flag to burglars, inviting them in to steal their hard-earned valuables and assets.
True, many people use home security systems in order to feel safe from bad guys. However, what fails to register with most people is that, more often than not, police aren’t able to get to the scene of the crime fast enough to stop the criminal from breaking in. So, in many cases, the cops show up too late – after all the valuables are gone, and/or after everyone is dead.
Not to mention, warning signs showing that there’s a home security system in place often entices burglars even more. It’s like these signs are saying, “We have lots of expensive stuff in here we care about protecting!”
For this reason, the end goal shouldn’t be so much to stop the burglar in their tracks, as much as it is to prevent them from even attempting the burglary in the first place.
And, to do that, we’ll need to be aware of…

The Dangerous Ways Criminals Can Gain Entry To Your Home


The Front Door

This may be the most obvious point of entry, but it’s also extremely common. It’s easy to slip into the realm of thinking that no criminal would ever be audacious enough to just waltz through the front door.

However, it’s shocking how often this happens – all because people forget to lock their front doors. In fact, as much as 32% of home entries occur through an unlocked door. Not to mention, burglars with a good amount of experience know where to find that spare key you’ve been hiding.

And, keep in mind that homes with large features covering part (or all) of the doorway are the most vulnerable to theft.These include large trees, decorative overhangs, shrub walls, etc. Criminals know that, if they hide behind these objects, nobody will be able to see them from the street.

Plus, if all else fails, thieves can simply remove the door off its hinges, or kick it in. This is also a fairly common occurrence – especially seeing as a whopping 40% of break-ins are because of forced entry.

Here are 5 Simple Ways to Make Your Front Door a Hardened Barricade


Windows are easy to overlook for most homeowners. That’s because most people don’t expect a robber to attempt to break into one of these. And so many people leave them unlocked, or even open – especially during the warmer months.

Not to mention, windows in older homes are exceptionally vulnerable to theft, since they’ve been worn down and weakening over the last few years. This makes them incredibly easy to break into – even if they’re locked.

And, when you think about it, the sound of breaking glass isn’t typically loud enough for neighbors to hear – especially when they’re inside their homes. In fact, it’s been proven that if people hear this sound (or, say, the sound of a gun shot), they’re much less likely to react, since their brains will trick them into thinking the sound is something “normal.”

And, although it may seem like a good idea to have a privacy fence or tall trees/shrubs around your windows, this is actually just providing a barrier for a thief to hide behind when they’re attempting to get into your home.

Side Doors & Specialty Doors

Just because you’ve barricaded your front door doesn’t mean a criminal won’t attempt to use every other door in your home. This includes garage doors, side doors…even skylights.

Back and side entrances are also extremely susceptible to burglary, since criminals can sneak into these areas (which often are hard to see) without much attention. Homes with large side yards (and houses next to alleys) are especially vulnerable to these threats, since robbers have easy access to the back of their property.

Not to mention, specialty doors (like french doors and sliding glass doors) are also a huge concern. They may look nice from the outside, but they have unique weaknesses that make them extremely vulnerable to break-ins.

For instance, french doors have a lot of small panes of glass. This makes it easy for a robber to break one without causing too much noise. They can then slip their hand in, and unlock those locks you’ve so carefully put on.

Plus, many sliding doors may look impenetrable, but they can be forced open with the use of just one screwdriver. It’s that simple.

When it comes down to it, no home is truly safe. At least, not without the proper protection in place.

Luckily, you can use basic tools in order to make your home an impenetrable fortress. And you can learn how to do it for FREE with our Bulletproof Home Security Guide.

The safety of yourself and your family should be your top priority. And, if SHTF, you’ll need to have all your hard-won assets on hand to keep them alive and healthy. Click here to discover how to protect your home from intruders!


Former Democrat Tops NH Trump VP Poll


In an electrifying and unexpected development, a new poll from the University of New Hampshire Survey Center reveals that former Rep. Tulsi Gabbard of Hawaii tops the list of preferred running mates for former President Donald Trump. This strategic choice underscores Trump’s commitment to broadening his appeal and strengthening his base with an unconventional but highly effective candidate.

Tulsi Gabbard, who initially ran for the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination, courageously left her party two years later to become an independent. Now, she emerges as the favorite among nearly a quarter (24%) of New Hampshire voters who are not supporting President Biden. Gabbard’s ability to connect with a diverse electorate and her staunch opposition to the far-left agenda make her a powerful ally for Trump.

Gabbard’s support stands seven points ahead of biotech entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy, indicating a strong preference for Gabbard’s unique blend of political independence and principled leadership. This shows that voters are looking for leaders who are willing to stand up against the establishment and fight for American values.

Ramaswamy, along with other notable figures like Sen. Tim Scott of South Carolina and Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, have endorsed Trump, yet Gabbard’s lead suggests a deeper resonance with voters seeking a fresh and unifying voice. Her conservative principles, military background, and dedication to freedom and the Constitution make her an ideal running mate for Trump.

Trump’s consideration of Gabbard is a testament to his strategic thinking and commitment to broadening his appeal. Gabbard, a veteran of the Iraq War and an officer in the Hawaii National Guard, brings a wealth of experience and a compelling personal story as the first Samoan-American elected to Congress. Her transition from a progressive Democrat to an independent has been marked by her steadfast dedication to fundamental freedoms, resonating with many conservatives who feel disenfranchised by the current political climate.

In a Fox News town hall in February, Trump hinted that Gabbard was on his short list for running mates. Her praise for Trump, acknowledging his resilience and willingness to fight against the Washington establishment, underscores a shared commitment to challenging the status quo and defending American values against the encroachment of socialism and government overreach.

Gabbard’s familiarity with New Hampshire, a crucial swing state, adds another layer of strategic advantage. Her presence in the state during her 2020 presidential run and her support for Republican candidates in 2022 have cemented her popularity among voters who are tired of the same old politics and crave genuine change.

By considering Gabbard as a running mate, Trump demonstrates his ability to think outside traditional party lines and appeal to a broader coalition. This bold move could be the key to uniting the nation behind his campaign, bringing together a diverse group of voters eager for a leader who prioritizes American values and freedoms.

As the 2024 election approaches, the prospect of a Trump-Gabbard ticket promises an exciting and dynamic campaign. This powerful combination of leadership, experience, and dedication to conservative principles is poised to capture the imagination and support of Americans from all walks of life, ensuring a strong and united front against the progressive agenda threatening our nation’s future.


POLL: Would you support Tulsi Gabbard for VP?


Continue Reading


SCOTUS Sides With “Three Strikes” Laws in Support of Second Amendment


In a landmark decision, the Supreme Court ruled 6–3 on May 23 in favor of the federal government in a case pivotal to the enforcement of a federal three-strikes gun law aimed at ensuring repeat offenders are appropriately penalized. This ruling reinforces the principle that those who repeatedly break the law, particularly with violent felonies or major drug offenses, should face stringent consequences, thereby protecting law-abiding citizens’ Second Amendment rights.

Justice Samuel Alito, a stalwart defender of constitutional principles, authored the majority opinion in Brown v. United States, consolidated with Jackson v. United States. In a remarkable alignment, the decision saw a blending of ideologies, with one liberal justice joining the majority and a conservative justice siding with the dissenters. This highlights the importance and clarity of the case beyond traditional ideological divides.

Federal law rightly prohibits convicted felons from possessing firearms, and the Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA) of 1984 was a significant step to address the disproportionate number of crimes committed by repeat offenders. The ACCA mandates a 15-year minimum sentence for individuals found guilty of illegally possessing a firearm if they have three or more prior convictions for serious drug offenses or violent felonies committed on separate occasions.

The recent Supreme Court ruling ensures that the severity of the law remains intact. It emphasizes that sentences under the ACCA should be based on the laws in effect at the time of the original convictions, maintaining the law’s integrity and original intent to deter habitual criminals. This is a win for those who believe in the Second Amendment and the rule of law, ensuring that dangerous individuals are kept from undermining our right to bear arms.

Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Clarence Thomas, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett stood firm in the majority, reflecting their commitment to upholding strict penalties for career criminals. Conservative Justice Neil Gorsuch joined parts of the dissent, showcasing the robust debate within the court. Justice Elena Kagan and Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, known for their liberal leanings, also contributed to the discourse.

Justice Alito’s opinion clarified that the ACCA’s requirement for a 15-year mandatory minimum sentence remains for those convicted of illegal firearm possession if they have a history of serious drug offenses or violent felonies. The definition of a “serious drug offense” includes state crimes that carry a maximum sentence of at least 10 years and involve a controlled substance as defined by the Controlled Substances Act.

Alito highlighted that state crimes qualify as serious drug offenses if they involved a drug listed on federal schedules at the time of the original conviction, not based on any subsequent changes to those schedules. This prevents loopholes that could otherwise allow habitual offenders to evade justice based on technicalities, thus preserving the stringent measures intended by the ACCA.

The government’s interpretation aligns with the ACCA’s objectives, focusing on the inherent risk and seriousness of certain offenses likely committed by career criminals. This approach ensures that those with a history of significant drug or violent offenses face enhanced penalties, protecting society and upholding the sanctity of the Second Amendment by ensuring firearms do not end up in the hands of dangerous individuals.

Justice Jackson’s dissent argued for applying the drug schedules in effect at the time of the federal firearms offense, a perspective that the majority rightly found unconvincing given the ACCA’s clear intent and context.

This ruling follows the Supreme Court’s unanimous decision in March 2022’s Wooden v. United States, affirming that multiple convictions from a single criminal episode do not count as multiple under the ACCA. The current deliberations on Erlinger v. United States, which question whether a judge or jury should decide on the application of enhanced sentencing, continue to underscore the Court’s dedication to ensuring fair yet firm justice.

In summary, the Supreme Court’s decision is a significant victory for the pro-Second Amendment community, reinforcing the importance of strict penalties for repeat offenders. This decision ensures that the rights of law-abiding citizens to bear arms are protected by keeping firearms out of the hands of those who pose a danger to society.


Supreme Court: Illegal Immgrants Can Be Detained Without Bond

POLL: Do you support this ruling by the Supreme Court of the United States?


Continue Reading


HILARIOUS: Biden Not On the Ballot in Ohio… Yet


In a delicious twist of irony, President Biden—who has tried to block former President Trump from appearing on ballots in several states—might himself be excluded from the Ohio ballot come Election Day. Ohio Secretary of State Frank LaRose issued this hilarious warning on Tuesday, showcasing yet another instance of Democratic incompetence and hypocrisy.

Despite receiving weeks of warnings from LaRose’s office and the state legislature, the Ohio Democratic Party has hilariously bungled their way into potentially disqualifying Biden from the ballot. LaRose, a Republican, pointed out that the Democratic Party has yet to offer any solution that complies with existing law.

Ohio’s election law requires parties to certify their presidential candidates at least 90 days before Election Day. But in a move that screams “amateur hour,” the Democratic Party plans to certify Biden at its national convention in Wisconsin on August 19, just 75 days before the election—blatantly flouting the law.

“I’ve said from here to Colorado that it’s in the best interest of voters to have a choice in the race for president. I’m also duty-bound to follow the law as Ohio’s chief elections officer,” LaRose stated, barely containing his exasperation.

“As it stands today, the Democratic Party’s presidential nominee will not be on the Ohio ballot. That is not my choice. It’s due to a conflict in the law created by the party, and the party has so far offered no legally acceptable remedy,” he continued, likely shaking his head in disbelief.

“The Ohio House speaker said today there won’t be a legislative solution, so I’ve sent a letter to Ohio Democrats’ chair seeking (again) a solution that upholds the law and respects the voters. I trust they’ll act quickly,” he finished, probably chuckling at the absurdity of it all.

Ohio Democrats previously floated the idea that Ohio could accept a “provisional certification” for Biden’s candidacy, but LaRose quickly shut down this laughable suggestion, pointing out that state law makes no such allowances.

LaRose emphasized that either the state legislature must change the law to allow Biden’s certification, or the Democratic Party must get its act together. Ohio House Speaker Jason Stephens, another Republican, bluntly stated that lawmakers won’t bail Biden out. “There’s just not the will to do that from the legislature,” Stephens told reporters, likely with a smirk.

Even Democratic Ohio House Minority Leader Allison Russo couldn’t hide her frustration with her own party’s ineptitude, stating, “We’ve seen the dysfunction here in this place. And I think we’ve seen that folks have not been able to put aside partisanship and hyper-partisanship and infighting.… I think at this point, you’re probably going to see either, you know, some sort of inner party effects or perhaps court action.”

Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine assured voters that Biden would be on the ballot come November, arguing that if the legislature doesn’t act, then it’s “going to be done by the court.”

Ohio Democrats have yet to respond to LaRose’s Tuesday letter. The irony of Biden’s predicament—potentially being excluded from the ballot while having sought to exclude Trump—is nothing short of poetic justice. This fiasco is a fitting testament to the chaos and mismanagement that has become the hallmark of the Democratic Party.



POLL: Will Biden be the Democrat nominee in November?


Continue Reading