Saturday, May 10, 2014

You like guns because you are insecure and incompetent

Letter: Insecurity drives gun advocates:

Aside from being a hunting tool and a defense mechanism, it seems for some that a gun is now a device to reduce or allay their fears and insecurity. Many, if not most, of those who support gun freedom and feel there is security in gun ownership seem to be afraid that someone is going to try and rob them, threaten their life or the life of someone they love, take away something that belongs to them or infringe on their rights.

This resultant belief and comfort is under the assumption of course that a gun will somehow make a difference and prevent a tragedy or unwanted event. Further, they don't seem to trust the government or the police to do the job.
(H/T: GunWire - 5/10/14)

Response #1:  To quote Dr. Leonard McCoy, of the Starship Enterprise:

    "Jim .. you're an idiot!"

Response #2 (somewhat longer)

Navy Sentry tried to shoot intruder, couldn’t find the Safety Switch!

Mahan sentry tried to shoot intruder, couldn’t disengage gun’s safety | News from Hampton Roads and Northeast North Carolina':
(May 08, 2014)
Norfolk, Va. – A watchstander on the destroyer Mahan raised her pistol to intruder Jeffrey Savage, but could not disengage the gun’s safety. Savage snatched the pistol and killed another sailor with it before other sailors shot the intruder.
About 11pm on Monday, March 24, 2014, a civilian named Jeffery Savage drove a 2002 Freightliner truck to the entry gate at the Naval Station Norfolk in Norfolk, Va.   He didn't have a worker's pass which allowed him entry to the base, but waved a "TWIC" ("Temporary Worker Identification Card"?) at the guard station and made hand motions indicating that he wanted to make a u-turn around the guard shack, suggesting that he wasn't trying to enter the base.

(Savage had been previously convicted of manslaughter in civilian courts, but was somehow able to acquire a TWIC.)

But when the guard nodded permission, Savage drove the semi through the entry point and onto Pier 1, where two U.S. Navy ships were docked:  The USS Comfort, a hospital ship, and the USS Mahan, a Destroyer.

After parking his truck, he walked past the hospital ship and then up the entryway to the Mahan.

Sailors watched Savage stumbling down the pier, at times talking to himself and other times screaming. Some remembered Savage flailing his arms. Savage walked to the end of the pier and looked into containers. He reversed and stopped briefly at the brow of the hospital ship Comfort before heading to the Mahan. Savage walked up the destroyer’s brow.

The gangway sentry, a MA2 (Master At Arms Second Class... US Navy ranking for military police who typically are assigned to sentry and guard duties, plus some other patrolling activities) attempted to direct Savage away from the ship.   When Savage continued his approach, the unidentified MA2 drew her service pistol (probably an M92) and when he changed his approach to a rush she attempted to engage him with direct fire.

She was "unable to get a shot off"  (see below the line) before he reached her.  Savage wrested her pistol out of her hands, and turned it in her direction with the obvious attempt to shoot the downed sailor with her own pistol.

Friday, May 09, 2014

You thought you knew how badly ATF was screwed up?

ATF retirement highlights questionable assignments under Jones, source claims - National gun rights |
 May 9, 2014
 The ATF supervisor, who oversaw the “Operation Fearless” Milwaukee storefront fiasco before being transferred to Phoenix is retiring, the Journal Sentinel reported Tuesday. Bernard “B.J.” Zapor opted to leave the bureau rather than accept reassignment to head the Newark office, the story reports.

Upper Management is again shuffling assignments in an attempt to force experienced senior field agents out.

Zapor, once in charge of the Phoenix field office (where he owned a home), has declined to accept a transfer to Newark.

Who could blame him?

His "Operation Fearless" ... which included buying guns from kids who attended school across the street from the 'pawnshop' operation set up to "sting" criminals who fence stolen firearms ... was widely criticized in the national press.

The resulting publicity made the ATF look bad; somebody had to go.

The good news?  
If the ATF forces out a senior field agent every time the agency looks bad to the press, it won't be long before there will be only one person on the ATF staff.

The bad news?
That single staffer will probably be Eric Holder.


Sure, it was a Home Invasion, but you shouldn't shoot them for THAT!

Another mother of another teen shot and killed in home break-in blames homeowner - Liberty Unyielding:
(May 09, 2014)
 “Now, kids, remember: If you break into a private home and someone there is armed, you risk getting shot.”  It’s not a typical piece of parental advice, but in view of the growing spate of home invasions by teenagers who end up on morgue slabs, maybe it’s high time it became one.
 The Merced (Calif.) Sun-Star identifies the most recent casualties as Steven Crider, 16, and, Michael Sambrano, 14, both of Sacramento. The two were shot and killed as they were exiting an upscale home shortly after they broke in around midnight last Sunday.
All this only proves two things:

  1. Beretta: "If you can't do the time, don't do the crime"
  2. Firecreek: "Any man worth shootin' is worth killin'"

Yes, they were kids.  Young and stupid.
Yes, they should have known better.
Yes, they probably didn't deserve to die.  But when you break into a home when you know there are people inside, the residents are justified in assuming the worst of intentions.  Just because you seem to be leaving the house, that doesn't mean you're not going to come back with a gun, or that there aren't more people with you.

For all the homeowner knew, you might be from Chicago.

UPDATE: May 24, 2014:

The American Thinker has an article discussing the ensuing 'justification' of the friends and family of the thugs.

A Good Case For "Hammer Control"

Police: Hammer Attack In Brooklyn Subway Station Was Not The First - CBS New York:
(May 08, 2012)
Straphangers are on alert after police said a suspect attacked a man with a hammer at a Brooklyn subway station.
The victim was staggered by a blow to his head.  Then the assailant robbed him of $140 and left, still hanging onto his hammer with both hands.

This not the first time it has happened, either.  CBS interviewed people in the subway station.

Money Quote:
“I think it’s horrendous. I think that there should be some type of safety protocol put in place so that people can be safe down here because that type of thing happening in a New York City subway station where it’s public is just ridiculous”
England, take note:

 You already forbid your subjects the possession of guns and knives.
Maybe it's time to add hammers to the list of "What We Should Ban This Week".

American "Gun Control Enthusiasts" take note:

A woman's work is never done.

Colorado Woman Can’t Get Her Gun Back

Colorado Woman Can’t Get Her Gun Back, Thanks To New Law - Daily Surge:
(May 09, 2014)
Colorado’s controversial new gun law requiring a background check for any transfer of a firearm has left one woman unarmed.
Sara Warren said Fort Collins police took her Ruger SR9, which she uses for personal protection in her job as a maid when visiting clients’ homes, after an accident required her to be transported to the hospital.
The police want to give it back, but a new universal background check law passed last year amid much controversy requires a Federal Firearms License background check.
Fort Collins police don’t have an FFL holder on staff.
And, the repercussions keep echoing in Colorado.

Yes, the legislators who pushed the draconian laws have been recalled.  But the law has not been repealed.

Warren isn't the only person to be caught in the Catch-22 style fiasco.   Many Colorado sheriffs have stated that they will refuse to arrest people for violating the unjust law, but this isn't an arrest; it's the return of impounded property and the lawmen's hands are tied.

Read the article to learn the temporary, awkward way the contretemps was resolved.   Yes, they did just what YOU would have done if you were the Sheriff.

Nigeria provides such INTERESTING email correspondents!

Most of us receive 'goofy' emails from total strangers, now and then.  I know I do, and I bet you get junk mail from surprising sources, too.

Today I received the most innovative junk mail (note that I am carefully ignoring the "S-word" indicative of tins of spicy meat from questionable sources).

Supposedly, a U.S. Army General .. a lady, no less!  has chosen me as her newest and most favorite Pen Pal.  Nothing new in the concept, but the approach is unique.


 Hi dear friend,

Hi dear friend, I'M LIEUTENANT GENERAL SUSAN J. HELMS. I am a UNITED STATE ARMY GENERAL. From united state of America. Am supportive and caring, looking forward to get a nice friend. I read your profile and pick interest on you. I will like to establish mutual friendship with you. Please let continue our conversation through my private email box. Here is my email adders ( I will introduce myself better and send you my picture as soon as i receive your mail.

Thanks and regards.

Never mind the actual email address ... I don't want to encourage "her".

Yes, the "Hi dear friend" phrase was the salutation, and immediately repeated in the body of the letter.  The inconsistent grammar, adolescent structure and awkward phrasing of the text are indicative of someone to whom English is not their native language.

Certainly, it is not the kind of letter that one expects to receive from a total stranger.  I am tempted to create a throw-away email address and reply, just to see how far the sender is willing to go in an obvious attempt to extort money from strangers.

I just wanted to provide another example of the strange letters one receives from Nigerian s* p* a* m* e* r* s; as a warning.  (As an example of how little it takes to pique my interest, perhaps.)

It probably doesn't need to be said, but I'll say it anyway.  If you receive a letter from such an unexpected source, do not reply to it.  These emails are typically created by a software program which inputs random email addresses.  If they receive a reply, that is their cue that they have found an active email account, and they will inundate you with requests for personal information (including bank account numbers) in an attempt to defraud you of your life savings.

Just .. be careful out there.

"I Will Not Comply!" - New Jersey

‘Gun for Hire’ Colandro asks how N.J. will afford 900,000 new felons - National gun rights |
Addressing the New Jersey Senate in Trenton Monday during a proposed magazine limitation bill hearing, “Gun for Hire” activist Anthony P. Colandro attempted to educate closed minds, earning, if not a change in heart from the rulers, at least an enthusiastic show of support from a number of citizen attendees. 

“I’m a lifelong resident of New Jersey, and up until today, not a felon,” Colandro told the politicians. “I realize that the majority of you here represent constituents who choose free stuff over freedom. 

 “Have you thought about the lost taxes and revenue when you have to start incarcerating 10,000 or 100,000 or even 1,000,000 law-abiding, taxpaying citizens, who are fed up with being pushed around with unjust laws that will do nothing to address the real crime issues and criminals?” he asked. “So if just only 19 percent of us legal gun owners stand with me, it will cost the state $550,000,000 a year to house us... Remember, this does not take into account the lost revenue when we, the previously law-abiding citizens, are no longer working and paying our taxes."
Oh, go to the EXAMINER website and watch the video.

What's the buzz?

All states allow handguns to be carried outside the home, but some are more restrictive than others. Gun-rights supporters said New Jersey’s law, similar to ones in Maryland, New York and elsewhere, make it nearly impossible for anyone who is not a member of law enforcement to get such a permit.
This trend (see "Colorado Lawmakers Ousted in Recall vote Over Gun Law", et al) by citizens of their states to refuse to 'comply' with the laws which their state legislators have enacted against their wish, is similar to one of my favorite "Citizen Noncompliance" movements; in trials, jurors may choose to "nullify" directions of the court and conversely make their own decisions about the outcome of a trial.   It's called "Jury Nullification", and judges don't like it; it means that the jury may think the defendant is 'guilty' of the crime, but they think the definition of the crime is invalid.

Or, for the ignorant among us (such as me) ... "it's stupid, so screw you arrogant bastards".

Under our Republican system of government, we elect representatives to make laws.  We hire policemen to enforce these laws.  We elect judges to confirm the laws.  But ultimately, We The People are (during a trial) called upon to convict our fellow citizens of an illegal act when they (our neighbors) decline to obey the laws.

That's what the folks in New Jersey are doing, now.  As are the citizens in several states (Connecticut, etc, who decline to obey laws inhibiting the Second Amendment of the Constitution), New Jersey citizens are publicly stating that they "Will Not Comply" with new laws which make felons of formerly law-abiding citizens.

Good For You, New Jersey!
I have received some negative comments (along the lines of: "Geek!  Get a GRIP!") in response to my post discussing  "Hi, I'm Bubba, give me a Coke and Fries".   I would like to respond to them.

I know about "Second Amendment" and "Open Carry" and all the rest.  I know you CAN legally walk into the front door of a Burger King (MacDonalds, Wendy's, etc.) with a shotgun or a rifle slung over your shoulder.

But .. should you?  What would the people in the restaurant think?

If you do that, is it unreasonable for the citizens to freak out?

I don't think so.

Why would you do that?

(To recap: the original article had some guys walk into a fast-food restaurant with their "rifles and shotguns slung over their shoulders.")

(And ... recent news suggest that this was not a bunch of guy coming home from a day of shooting; instead, it may have been a deliberate "Open Carry" demonstration".    Not helping, guys!)

Video here?

Someone posted a comment to the effect of  "Would you walk away from a $3,000 rifle sitting unattended in your car?"

Hell no!  I would have one of my buddies sit in the car and watch it!

Wednesday, May 07, 2014

"Domestic Abuse Victims" .. are not always wives

Timeline Photos - Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America | Facebook:

Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America MOMS HAVE THE POWER: American women represent 84% of all female firearm homicides in the developed world, but for years the NRA has fought against legislation that would keep guns out of the hand of domestic abusers. It seems the tide is turning. A recent article in The Economist stated that, “...the NRA’s sudden sympathy for domestic-abuse victims has something to do with the importance of female voters in this election year, and the advocacy of a gun-safety group called Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America":

There is a funny thing about "Domestic Abuse" charges, which are not always publicized.

Husbands are sometimes the victims of Domestic Abuse, too.  But when it comes to trial, the courts are loath to find for the husband instead of for the wife.

This leads ... not all the time, no, but sometimes .. to a miscarriage of  justice.

In Family Court, when the testimony of the wife contradicts with the testimony of the husband, the wife is most often believed by the judge.   The only exception is if the police have been involved, and their on-the-scene investigation reveals that the usual scenario of spousal abuse has been reversed from what is expected.

No, the abuse is not always physical. In fact, when a woman abuses a man (no matter what their legal relationship may be), the abuse is usually psychological.

Which cannot be covered up by make-up ... by men, or women.

There's a movie, broadcast in 1993, which dramatizes the plight of abused men:

Published on Oct 16, 2012On March 14, 1993, CBS aired "Men Don't Tell", a TV movie about domestic violence starring Peter Strauss and Judith Light. The twist: Strauss's character, construction executive Ed MacAffrey, was abused by his wife Laura, played by Light.
Based on a true story, it dramatizes the story of a loving husband, who is terrorized by the violent behavior of his wife. He had long endured the physical and emotional abuse heaped upon him by his neurotic wife.
"Men Don't Tell" was seen in 18.3 million homes, ranking third among the week's prime time broadcast, behind ABC's "Home Improvement" and CBS's "60 Minutes." Peter Strauss won a Golden Globe Award for his performance.
First telecast by CBS on May 14, 1993, according to a New York Times Story, "Men Don't Tell" was never rebroadcast on over-the-air television, reportedly because it incurred the wrath of several women's groups. Nor was it ever allowed to be released on VHS or DVD. Further, no other movie addressing this subject has ever been made, though 40% of the victims of domestic violence are men.

It has rarely been seen, because .. well, Men Don't Tell.
It's embarrassing to admit that your wife abused you.  That because you are not a violent man, your "loving spouse" will take advantage of your morals.  That she will taunt you to hit her, because she is certain that you will never do so.  That you are so confused by her violence, you don't know how to deal with the situation.

The video is a 90+ minute movie.  It may not be something you want to watch.

The movie is difficult to watch.  And all too often shockingly true.

"Hi, I'm Bubbah. Gimme a Coke and Fries, or ...."

Gun-rights activists say Fort Worth incident is overblown | Arlington | News from Fort W...:
(Arlington, Texas ... May 07, 2014)
Local gun-rights activists say too much fuss is being made over an incident last week in which some of its demonstrators, carrying shotguns and rifles, walked into a Fort Worth fast-food restaurant to buy soft drinks but were mistaken for robbers. 
Last week, employees at the Jack in the Box at Sycamore School Road and the South Freeway told Fort Worth police officers that “they feared for their lives” and locked themselves in a freezer for protection after seeing men they thought were armed with assault rifles enter the restaurant, according to a police report. 
Kory Watkins, a spokesman for Open Carry Tarrant County, said Tuesday that the men were carrying their firearms in a “nonaggressive fashion” and that they were at the restaurant only to buy drinks while waiting for a nearby gun-rights demonstration to begin. Within moments, police officers arrived to ask the men why they were there. 
“This was blown out of proportion. There was no robbery. The caller must have overexaggerated the situation,” Watkins said.

Cheeze and Rice!

If I was working at the Jack In The Box in Fort Worth, and these guys walked into the store?  I would have .. over-reacted.

You are armed like Storm Troopers and you walk into a Jaque de Boite expecting to get served like anybody else?

Let's get real.

How would the employees know you weren't intended to rob the place and murder everyone in the joint?

When you are packing shotguns and rifles, and walk into a commercial property, what else do you expect the employees to think?

I don't care who you think you are, or what your rights are; you are armed with shotguns and rifles, and you think the employees "overexaggerated" (sp) the situation"????

You guys, those of you who strutted around with your guns ... you are IDIOTS!  Are you so proud of your 2nd Amendment Rights that you forget that you are in a civilized community?  NOBODY --- armed to the hilt as you obviously were --- walks into a commercial establishment populated with folks who can't find A Real Job.

No, I take that back:  "NOBODY WALKS INTO A PUBLIC PLACE WITH EXPOSED RIFLES AND SHOTGUNS!!!!!"  Especially, when you are flashing Major Guns around, you cannot convince anyone that you are doing so in a "non-aggressive fashion".

They will not believe you.

Hell, *_I_* will not believe you!

You couldn't leave them locked in your car?  Or stay in the car with the rifles and shotguns, and send in somebody without a rifle or shotgun to put in your order?  Or go through the DRIVE-THROUGH, for crying out loud?   What did you expect the employees, to do;  serve you without comment?

They expect you to shoot the guy who throws popcorn in your face.  And rightly so!



You people have set back the Second Amendment by centuries.  You WILL read about how gun-owners are arrogant, insensitive, and abusive of your Second Amendment Rights.

The worst part about is is, at least as far as you YAHOOS are concerned ... they will be right!

Whomever you are, where-ever you live ...  I hope you are tried and convicted as felons.  I hope you serve time in jail .. not because you broke a law, but because will lose your Second Amendment rights; which you obviously do not appreciate.  You will not do your part to protect those rights. by cherishing them and being respectful of folks who don't agree with you.    You are the kind of people who just can't understand, or respect, your God-given rights. You don't f*cking DESERVE them!

The people who locked themselves in the cooler did the right thing.

You ... did not.

Hillary says 'gun laws need to be "reined in"

Hillary Clinton: 'Fully Licensed, Fully Validated' Gun Owners Can't Be Trusted:
(May 07, 2014)
On May 6th, Hillary Clinton gave a speech at a National Council for Behavioral Health conference in which she suggested that "fully licensed" and "fully validated" gun owners cannot be trusted to make sound decisions regarding gun usage.
According to Politico, Clinton's said:
"At the rate we're going, we're going to have so many people with guns everywhere, fully licensed, fully validated, in settings where [one] could be in a movie theater, and they don't like someone chewing gum loudly or talking on their cell phone and decide they have the perfect right to defend themselves against the gun chewer or cell phone user by shooting. 
As Breitbart News reported, Clinton also criticized lenient gun laws in her May 6th speech. Saying the idea "that almost anyone can have a gun anywhere at any time" has "become almost an article of faith." She suggested that this is not beneficial and that gun laws need to be "reined in."
Rank this right up there with "Hillary-Care".

It's difficult to believe that a politician would be so up-front about their anti-Second Amendment stance.

... oh, she's a Democrat.  Never mind.

THIS is the only reason why Conservatives have been willing to stomach the egregious Obama administration;  it could have been worse, it could have been Hillary with a phone and a pen.

It appears that the Democratic Party has no better candidate for the 2016 elections than Hillary.   She is 'electable', and she definitely toes the party line.  In fact, she defines it.

So, buy your 5" plastic tubing, dig some holes in the garden in your back yard.  Bury your guns before HillaryCare II drops on your head like a ton of bricks.

It will happen during the next Presidential Campaign that you WILL hear about the retired Police Captain who capped Popcorn Guy in a movie theater.  NOBODY who supports the 2nd Amendment accepted his irrationality, but he will be the Poster Boy for dumb-shit gun owners.

Who will the Republicans run against her?


Oh, sure, there will be a candidate .. but he will be a Candy Ass who is trying to segue the powerful Democratic Machine.   It won't happen.  Democrats can point at a few oddballs who were Over The Hill, and their talking points were be more powerful.

What can Republicans point at?  Bengazi?  Obamacare?   It doesn't matter.

America has reached that point in history where the electorate can vote for the party who will give them the most free benefits.   They are the party of entitlements; they can .. and will .. buy the election.

Who will pay for those benefits?

You will.

Oh .. when you bury your guns?  Be sure to bury as much cash as you can accumulate between now and then.

Your neighbors will want to take it from you, if it's still in the bank.

Just saying.

Economic Pressure on 2nd Amendment: "Lost Boys"

Powerful Anti-Violence Film Wants You to Unload Gun Companies From Your 401(k) | Adweek:
(May 06, 2014)
Unload Your 401(k), a powerful three-minute film from Grey New York, takes aim at a new target in the debate over guns in America: the pocketbooks of firearms companies.
The video supports, a site where consumers can find out if their retirement portfolios include gun manufacturers. A coalition of 20 organizations, led by Campaign to Unload and States United to Prevent Gun Violence, is behind the initiative.
The film doesn't waste time trying to persuade gun rights advocates. Instead it makes its appeal to those already passionately opposed to gun violence, and perhaps those on the fence, imploring them to take action. The case for divestment, a tactic that played a role in ending South African Apartheid and changing U.S. tobacco policy, is mainly made by the parents, relatives and teachers of young people killed and maimed at by gun violence.
"They're making money off the backs of dead people," says Lori Haas, whose daughter was shot at Virginia Tech. "I just can't tolerate it. And I won't let my money support it."
"This industry is not going to respond to moral sentiments, that's clear," says Eric Milgram, the father of two Sandy Hook survivors. "They will respond to economic pain."

Unfortunately ... these outraged people are setting their sights on the wrong people.  Firearms Manufacturers are not the source of Gun Violence; the criminals and the madmen who think it's a good idea to go kill a bunch of innocent people are the source.

And it's not "gun violence".  It's "Violence".  Witness the recent outbreak of murder in China, Canada and the United States of America where knives were the sole instrument of murder.

The sad fact is, madness will occur no matter what instruments are available.

These well-intentioned people are driven by passion and emotion .. hysteria.  They see their fellow citizens, and their children, being cut down and they choose the only 'villain' with big pockets; the people who make the guns.

They could attack.. oh, say "Buck Knives" (as a random sample) as easily.  But they don't.

It's not the manufacturer who is responsible.  It's not the dealers.  It's often not even the end-user ... the people who bought the guns.

It's the sad, mad or bad man who wants to get his name in the papers and go out with a BANG! who is directly responsible for the murder and mayhem.

Who is responsible for the murders?

Oh, it's the people who are railing against firearms manufacturers.  It's the people who are up in arms (figuratively) against the people who are up in arms (literally).  These protestors are JUST like the legislators whom they elect.  They have found that it is easier to blame the gun, and the people who make the gun, than to accept that the problem of "Gun Violence" is not about guns;  it's about Violence.

It's not a Legislative problem.  It's a Societal problem.

We have Lost Boys out there, who know no better way to express their rage than to commit violence against their fellow citizens than explosively.  They may have been taught better, but they were too far gone to respond to the best efforts of their family, their psychoanalysts, their religious leaders, or their legislators.

Because .. until we address the societal ills which make a boy a murderer, we won't stop the killings.

But that's too hard.    Let's just blame the gun makers.  It doesn't actually help, but it allows us to express our OWN rage without actually ... you know ... killing anybody?

So far.

CA Microstamping vs NSSF

Shooting Wire:
(May 07, 2014)
NEWTOWN, Conn. -- Oral arguments, originally scheduled to be heard Wednesday in Fresno Superior Court, have been postponed until May 14 in the lawsuit brought by the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) and the Sporting Arms and Ammunition Manufacturers' Institute (SAAMI) on behalf of their members against the State of California to prevent enforcement of the state's microstamping statute.
 The state statute being challenged was enacted in 2007, but not made effective until May 2013, requires that all semiautomatic handguns sold in the state not already on the California approved handgun roster incorporate unproven and unreliable microstamping technology.
 Under this law, firearms manufacturers would have to micro laser-engrave a gun's make, model and serial number on two distinct parts of each handgun, including the firing pin so that, in theory, this information would be imprinted on the cartridge casing when the pistol is fired.
 "There is no existing microstamping technology that meets the requirement of this ill-considered law. It is not technologically possible to microstamp two locations in the gun so that required information imprints onto the cartridge casing. It is not even possible to consistently and legibly imprint on the cartridge primer the required identifying information from the tip of the firing pin, the only conceivable location for such micro-laser engraving, said Lawrence G. Keane, NSSF senior vice president and general counsel.

We have repeatedly spoken out against Microstamping since 2007, and for exactly the reasons why the NSSF is not protesting enactment of the law in California (and in New York).

All states which have imposed this illegitimate restriction on firearms are aware that the technology is unworkable.  They don't care.  Their justification is that it will 'help solve crimes'.


They imposed this unreasonable restriction of firearms specifically because it would make it more difficult for legitimate and legal firearms purchasers to buy guns.

Gun makers don't want to be held accountable for the efficacy (or lack of) of the technology if they attempt to apply it to their production process.  They are aware that:

  • the process will not necessarily be accurate in tracing the firearm which last fired a cartridge
  • if the cartridge imprint is illegible, it will be deemed the fault of the manufacturer ... not the fault of the technology; manufacturers face legal consequences
  • the accountability process may not necessarily lead to the current possessor of the subject firearm
  • any unproven technology is chancy at best, misleading in general, and subject to interpretation at worst
This is just one more arrow in the quiver of anti-gun state legislatures to compromise the Second Amendment Rights of their citizens.  They sit smug in their homes tonight in the sure and certain knowledge that they have stuck it to the "purveyors of instruments of distruction" ... the people who make and sell guns.

Sneaky, underhanded charlatans that they are, they profess to know better than their constituents that what is to be done for their own good.

It makes them look good to their gun-hating constituents, and they don't care about the "shall not be abridged" thingie. 

(Just one more reason why I'm glad I moved back to Oregon from California in 1976!_

"End Run" on Registration?

ATF quietly laying groundwork to expand multiple rifle sales reporting - National gun rights |
(May 6, 2014)
A little noticed and virtually unreported April 15 notice posted in the Federal Register suggests the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco Firearms and Explosives intends expanding the multiple rifle sale requirement currently imposed on four border states (Arizona, California, New Mexico and Texas) to all states.
David Codrea of The Examiner goes on to quote:

“The purpose of this information collection is to require Federal Firearms Licensees to report multiple sales or other dispositions whenever the licensee sells or otherwise disposes of two or more rifles within any five consecutive business days with the following characteristics: (a) Semi automatic; (b) a caliber greater than .22; and (c) the ability to accept a detachable magazine.["]

David Codrea of The Examiner goes on to quote:
This text suggests that ANY time ANY dealer sells 2 or more rifles during 5 business days, a report must be filed.

Subsequent text suggests that reports must be filed only when 2 or more rifles to a single buyer ... which sounds more likely.



If you don't understand the logic of this rule, you're not alone; if you do understand it, perhaps you can explain it to me.

All sales by a dealer are already reported, under current gun laws.  So the ATF doesn't get this information from the reporting agency, right?  The only purpose of current reporting regulations is to insure that firearms are not sold to 'illegal' buyers (eg: convicted felons, crazy people, terrorists).  And then details of the sales records are deleted from federal databases within a few days.   Although, of course, the dealer is required to maintain sales records.

It sounds to me as if there are no 'perishability' requirements in this regulation.  Note that this is not a FEDERAL LAW, it's an administrative regulation.   The difference is, there is no congressional oversight.   The upshot of which, there is no requirement for ATF to delete the records because, presumably, the purchases were entirely legal.

Now, however, if (for example) I go buy a lever-action in .38 caliber and one in .44-40 from the same dealer in the same week, the ATF will have a permanent record of my guns.  Which is, to all effects and purchases .... registration.

Can you say "None Of Your Business", children?

I knew you could.

Tuesday, May 06, 2014

Chicago Weekend Shootings: 29

29 More People Were Shot In Chicago This Weekend, and the Media Barely Covered It - PolicyMic:

The news: That "Chiraq" moniker is going to stick around for a while longer. After a particularly deadly April, Chicago is keeping up its disturbing streak of gun violence: At least three people died and 26 were wounded in the first weekend of May alone, followed by several shootings in the city on Monday and Tuesday as well.
 Twenty-nine people shot might not sound like much in a city of 2.7 million, but considering that gun violence roughly kills 32 people and wounds 140 everyday across all of America, that's a startling statistic, and one that's barely been reported by most mainstream media outlets.
 Chicago's gun violence is turning into a regular event each weekend. But just because this seems like a familiar story doesn't mean it's any less worthy of media attention.
What is going on?
Chicago's problem with gang violence is nothing new, but there's been a worrying spike in the past several months. According to the Chicago Tribune, there have already been close to 600 shootings since the beginning of 2014 alone. That's a slightly better figure than the 2,185 shootings that took place in Chicago last year, but if you look at the month-to-month analysis, April was particularly brutal.
I've been reporting Chicago shooting "weekend" shooting statistics for .. what .. a month now?  It has come to the point where I cringe to check Chicago-land news, because I know what the headlines will say:


The only thing that changes is the values of "XX" and "YY" ... but you know these variables are always going to be gruesome.

Why?  To quote the article: "WHAT'S GOING ON?"

Gang Violence.

No, no no no.  That's not answer.  That's not the problem.

That's the symptom.

Here's what's going on:

(1) young people growing up in single-mother homes.  There is no paternal role-model to teach them "how to be".   The so-called "adults" who sired and gave birth to these children never accepted their responsibilities to actually "parent" their children.

(2) The fathers were the same way; they never knew how to be A Man, and did not accept their responsibility for their progeny.   They came, they saw, they conquered ... then they left.  They probably received the same lack of guidance from their paternity.  (I am NOT going to call them "Fathers"; fathers have too much self-respect to abandon their progeny.)

(3) The mothers may or may not have tried to do the best they could for their children .. but establishing the best moral values for their children may have not been their first priority.  They were probably doing as well as they could by finding governmental services to support themselves and their children.  What is better?  To work and support your children, or to stay home and raise them?

(4)  What do the children learn?  Unfortunately, they find themselves in a culture of violence.  They have few, and little example of responsible action to guide them.  What they see in their neighborhood is that the people who commit violence without conscience seem to prosper.  Respect for the law is a laughable concept; only fools respect a set of laws which invalidates the only livelihood which gives them a liveable wage ... selling drugs and stealing.

(5) The mothers may work hard to earn a living; set an example for her children; try to instill moral values. But the children see the drug dealers on the corner; there's a fancy car, women, money ... compare that to the financial and moral poverty.  What course would you embrace?

The answer isn't Government Assisted Living.  It isn't Child and Family Services.  It isn't, in fact, the Government at all.

It's the Fathers, who have learned no values from their fathers.

It's their mothers, who take what affection they can find; and need it, because they are on their own unless they can find a man to be a "father" ... or a "husband" ... if only for a short time.  It's a basic need; we can't put the blame on them.

St. Jo Cops get MRAP

Officers say public safety is main reason for armored vehicle - St. Joseph News-Press and FOX 26 KNPN: Local News:

[MRAP = "
After local law enforcement unveiled a donated 36,000-pound armored vehicle, the St. Joseph/Buchanan County Special Response Team believed the expanded armored fleet is needed for the safety of Buchanan County.

Last week, the Sheriff’s Department received a $700,000 Mine Resistant Ambush Protected Vehicle, or MRAP, through a military surplus program. The large, demilitarized vehicle was decommissioned and became a part of a U.S. Department of Defense program that designates vehicles available to local law enforcement across the country. 

And people wonder why anyone would need a gun that holds more than X-number of rounds?

"Anything that is moral for a group to do is moral for one person to do."(Robert A. Heinlein: "Podkayne of Mars".
" If you use sportsmanship on a known scamp, you put yourselrf at a terrible disadvantage."(Robert A. Heinlein: "Red Planet")

We approve!

Open Letter to Margaret Carlson, Liar

Carlson: Will NRA ever get the message? | The Columbian:
(May 04, 2014)
Second Amendment absolutists complain that gun-control advocates are an out-of-touch elite seeking to destroy the way of life of real men who pack heat, pass weapons on to their sons, and are a rampart against government tyranny. It’s dangerous out there. 
At the National Rifle Association’s convention in Indianapolis last weekend, Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre warned his members that their lifestyle was under assault. “I have never seen it on edge the way it is now,” he said. “If it’s going to be saved, it’s in our hands. It’s in your hands.” 
There’s no better venue than this gathering to experience the pain and joy of gun owners. To those not steeped in guns, the exhibition hall with weapons arrayed as far as the eye can see is a frightening display. It is also a place where the young and female are pursued. Kids are encouraged to fondle semi-automatics and take virtual target practice. Women have their own events, including one that features the latest fashions for heat-packing ladies. You don’t want your Glock to add 10 pounds.
The NRA’s 4 million members don’t seem to feel an obligation to understand the 90 percent of Americans who say in polls that they would like to see universal background checks for gun buyers.
“It’s a cultural thing,” Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., told me. He said his “A” rating from the NRA helped the background check legislation he introduced last year with Sen. Pat Toomey, R-Pa., get as far as it did. 
Manchin is still using that crossover cred to try to find the five Senate allies he needs to get the bill up for a vote again. He can’t explain to me those gun owners who will listen only to Ted Nugent (who gave a speech), or those who cheer stand-your-ground laws (there was a session on how not to have any post-traumatic stress should you shoot someone). 
It would be a valuable cross-cultural field trip for LaPierre to take a look outside the hall, where representatives of the 90 percent were gathered. The moms at the gates gladly would have pointed out to him that 82 people die every day because guns fall into the hands of non-law-abiding citizens, curious children, the mentally ill and the suicidal. 
These groups just put up a series of gripping ads showing the murderous downside of readily available firearms and have issued a report titled “Not Your Grandparents’ NRA.” It traces the gun-rights lobby’s move away from hunting and marksmanship to defending the rights of felons and terrorism suspects to buy firearms and take them everywhere. 
The NRA spends $20 million a year to scare lawmakers into doing their bidding. For the first time, the other side will be spending more. What a great day it will be when LaPierre has to understand that. 
Margaret Carlson is a Bloomberg View columnist.

 - - -

[Apparently, The Columbian requires a FaceBook ID to comment.  I don't use FaceBook; I don't care for "Social Media".   So I've responded here.]

Dear Ms Carlson,

I disagree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.

That's why we have a Second Amendment; to defend all the other amendments ... including your right to say hateful things about good people.

(Oh, you don't think they're "good people"?   Well, I do.  I'm offended by your speech.  But it is your constitutional right under the First Amendment of the Constitution to demean "my people".)

I object to your use of the term: "Second Amendment absolutists".   The term implies intransigence, arrogance and a lack of social awareness.  That does not accurately describe the community of people who enjoy the shooting sports, and who value their RIGHT (not whim) to defend themselves, their homes, and their "way of life".   You have a "way of life", too, and it's not that far from mine.  It's just that I don't like soccer.

You feel free to denigrate one of the spokesmen for my way of life - the Executive Vice President of the National Rifle Association - and his statements at the 2014 NRA convention.  Your attack on our constitutional rights serves as a good example to justify his remarks.

You also denigrate the membership of the NRA.  Really, Ms Carlson, I understand that his statements offend you.  Don't you think that he might just be justified is saying that MY lifestyle is under assault?

You are writing under the aegis of the First Amendment.  You think that is reasonable.  I own firearms under the aegis of the Second Amendment.  Do you honestly think that one is more reasonable than the other?   Why do you think that the 2nd Amendment immediately follows the 1st amendment?  Were our founding fathers sane and reasonable the first thing in the morning, and then they morphed into buffoons in the afternoon?

You speak about the NRA gun show as if it was a gathering of trolls.  Admittedly, their interests are not yours.  Have you ever been to a Car Show, where new (or "classic" models of automobiles are exhibited?  Men almost salivate over cars, but that's okay.  Never mind that ten times more American citizens are killed by automobiles than by firearms.  That does not figure in your world view ... after all, people got to drive, don't they?

However, a driver's license is not protected by the Constitution of the United States of America, since September 17, 1787.   The right to Keep and Bear Arms ... is.

Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics:

The most egregious remark is in your 7th Paragraph:

It  [“Not Your Grandparents’ NRA.”] traces the gun-rights lobby’s move away from hunting and marksmanship to defending the rights of felons and terrorism suspects to buy firearms and take them everywhere.

No responsible gun owner in this country has ever "championed" the (non-existent) "rights" which you profess!   We live here, too.  We don't want armed felons ... these are exactly the kind of people who cause us to champion the rights of honest, law-abiding citizens to carry weapons!  And when you're shopping at your local mall, and one of these "felons" start shooting at you with one of their illegal guns, you might wish that the "GUN FREE ZONE" announcement on the mall entrances had been ignored by a licensed gun owner.  See: Clackamas Mall Shooting.

The NRA spends $20 million a year to scare lawmakers into doing their bidding. For the first time, the other side will be spending more. What a great day it will be when LaPierre has to understand that.

We understand that you are "a Bloomberg View columnist", Ms Carlson.  When you are airing all the public financial disclosures of the NRA, with the unspoken insinuation that the legal organization has "big pockets", you should be aware that the same accusation should be levied at you ... personally.

And remember also that the NRA is financed by its member dues at $25 dollars a year per member.

This is not the same as being a hired shill for a billionaire, whose motives are suspect at best.

Margaret Carlson is a Bloomberg View columnist.
I disagree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.

Even if you have benefited financially from Michael Bloomberg for being his toady.

Monday, May 05, 2014

Ret. Marine Absolutely Owns CNN Anchor On 2nd Amendment - "Unconstitutional Laws Aren't Laws" - YouTube

Ret. Marine Absolutely Owns CNN Anchor On 2nd Amendment - "Unconstitutional Laws Aren't Laws" - YouTube: Published on Jan 6, 2013 **HELP SPREAD THIS VIDEO AND MESSAGE!** Please Visit: For Web Hosting or Design from a Liberty-minded company, visit and use coupon code: MatLarson10 for 10% off any service or product. Category News & Politics License Standard YouTube License

Innocence of Muslims Full

RE : Innocence of Muslims Full Movie - Prophet Mohammed Biography - YouTube:
Published on Sep 16, 2012
This video does not belongs to me
Innocence of Muslims Full Movie - Prophet Mohammed Biography
This is a programme aired on History channel about the life of Prophet Mohammed.
Innocence of Muslims is the Muhammad Movie by Sam Bacile that caused Muslims to kill United States ambassador, J Christopher Stevens. The anti Islam video claims Islam is a lie and Mohammed was a pedophile. Reviews of the Muhammad Film have ranged from "Disgusting" to "the riot laugh of the summer." All rights to Sam Becile or w
hoever made this film 
um, this is a PBS-type justification of a religious bias.    I watched the whole thing, and it sounds really, really reasonable.

Except for the "Honor Killing" thingie.

 Funny that the discussion didn't mention how the original concept didn't mention that you can kill your wife/daughter/girlfriend if you don't think she's acting the way YOU think she should.

You don't see a problem here?


"Honor Killing:" Not Acceptable in America!

British Muslima: 'Still alive' while boyfriend beheaded her with kitchen knife - Wilmington Conservative |

April 2, 2014 "She like me but I raped her ..." An 18-year-old woman in the North of England was recently discovered by police decapitated apparently at the hands of her boyfriend, and a jury was just told by prosecutors that she was still alive as her murderer carved her head off with a kitchen knife, as reported by both The Sheffield Star (of Great Britain) and the news portal on April 2, 2014.

I'm reluctant to report this kind of thing here, for obvious reasons.  It's gruesome, it's subject to misinterpretation ("Gee, The Geek is inflicting Western values on Eastern cultural values!"), and it probably sounds like I'm saying "This Is Wrong!" when I don't really understand the cultural background.

(Photo courtesy publishers of the original article)

Well, it's not up to the Western Culture to pre-judge the actions of members of the Eastern Culture.  They have their ways of dealing with family values ... and we have ours.

Confessing to "manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility" but denying the more severe murder charge, Aras Hussein, 21, a native of Iraq, was apparently the beau of the murdered girl.
Far be it from me to prejudge the boyfriend of this girl ... apparently, he had not proposed marriage or the news story would have identified him as the "affianced" of the girl.

But  still, he murdered her in the most gruesome imaginably way because ...


What is WITH people who kill the people they supposedly love, because that person doesn't look or act the way their murderers think they should look or act!

Clooney's Hottie; socially unacceptable chick fliks

George Clooney Engaged to Amal Alamuddin – Fashion Style Magazine:

Long Hollywood’s most eligible bachelor, George Clooney looks to be settling down at last – a source confirms he is engaged to Amal Alamuddin.

I'm sure there's some socially redeeming purpose here, but I don't know what it is and I don''t care.

The photo speaks for itself.  Or not.

As I said .. I don't care.

Sunday, May 04, 2014


Kerry: US will aid in hunt for kidnapped Nigerian schoolgirls | Fox News:

Secretary of State John Kerry vowed the U.S. will help Nigerian officials in their hunt to find hundreds of Nigerian schoolgirls kidnapped by Islamic militants last month. “The kidnapping of hundreds of children by Boko Haram is an unconscionable crime,” Kerry said Saturday, according to The Washington Post. “We will do everything possible to support the Nigerian government to return these young women to their homes and hold the perpetrators to justice.”

John Kerry To The Rescue!

Our sympathies to the families of the kidnapped Nigerian schoolgirls.

If John Kerry is in charge of the efforts toward their rescue, then we can assume that they are lost for all time.

This self-serving political nincompoop couldn't marshal an effort to find his own fanny with both hands, his wife's fortune, and a platoon of Swift Boat commanders to help him.   Let alone a multi-national attempt to find and rescue hundreds of African children.

It's bad enough that we must accept his so-called "leadership" as Secretary of State.  He is the worst possible choice for that job, even considering his predecessor Hillary Clinton (see: "Bengazi")

It's despicable that America the American President has chosen him for such an important job.  Bad enough that he leads our nation's diplomatic community, but that he is the choice for such a worthwhile effort?

Please, President Obama, quit appointing incompetents to one of the world's most important positions.

Do it for us.  Do it for them.  Replace Kerry.

If it saves just one child ....