Scissors and Blood Dancers

A lot of attention has been given to the recent Department of Homeland Security PSA on how to survive a mass shooting.  It seems that DHS feels that a pair of scissors is an optimum defensive tool against a goblin intent upon massive destruction.

S.A. Miller of the New York Post wrote Homeland Security has advice for confronting mass murders: scissors.

I am sure that you have seen plenty of commentary on this DHS video.

There is one thing in the article that really touched a nerve with me.

The video is part of the Obama administration’s ongoing campaign to reduce firearm violence in the wake of the horrific mass murder last month of 20 children and six teachers in Newtown, Conn., said a Homeland Security official.


Homeland Security has operated an active-shooter preparedness-training program for years, and the “Options for Consideration” video was in production prior to the Dec. 14 shooting in Newtown.

The video was released to coincide with President Obama’s sweeping proposals to curb gun violence in America, said the official.

The video, along with the AWB, was completed and ready to be released.  They were just waiting for the right "crisis".  This is why we consider many of these Anti's to be "Blood Dancers".  They wait in anticipation of mass killings, hoping that one happens soon so they can put forth their pet project.  While the blood was still wet on the walls in Connecticut, Senator Feinstein's office was in full battle mode, happy that they can finally, maybe, get an AWB on the Senate floor.  Same thing with the Brady Bunch.  The canned emails were written and ready to go.  They just had to add a couple specifics and the revenue generation push was a go.  None of these Anti's care about the families of victims.  They don't care about trying to curb the violence.  They see a tragedy and they see an opportunity to further their cause, make money and get their faces on the news.  Blood Dancers, dancing in the blood of our children.

A Reply From Senator Cornyn

I have been writing my Congress Critters via email and fax quite a bit lately to express my views on all the proposed gun control legislation that is on the books and in progress. 

My most recent communications have concerned the potential of mandatory background check legislation being submitted by Senator Tom Coburn and the Anti Gun Democrats.  I see mandatory background checks on all private firearm sales as being the "compromise" that actually makes it into law this year.

The following is Senator Cornyn's reply to my latest email:

Dear Mr. Rost:


Thank you for contacting me regarding federal firearms laws. I appreciate having the benefit of your comments on this matter.

As a strong proponent of the Second Amendment, I believe it is essential to safeguard the law-abiding citizen's constitutional right to own and use firearms designed for legitimate purposes such as hunting, target shooting, collecting, and self-protection. Restricting this right runs counter to the intent of our Founding Fathers, who expressly guaranteed that citizens would retain the right to keep and bear arms.

It is encouraging that the Supreme Court has upheld the will of our Founders and re-affirmed the ideals our country was established upon. The Supreme Court's decision in District of Columbia v. Heller provides a greater guarantee that Americans' Constitutional rights remain secure from federal government intrusion. I was proud to sign an amicus brief to the Supreme Court in that case stating an individual’s right to bear arms is fundamental. This historic ruling continues to have implications far beyond the District of Columbia. In 2010, the Supreme Court decided in McDonald v. City of Chicago to strike down the arbitrary gun ban in Chicago—and thereby affirm that the Second Amendment safeguards against state and local encroachments on the fundamental right to keep and bear arms.

As a former Texas Supreme Court Justice and Attorney General, I have firsthand knowledge of crime-fighting policies that work, and I believe that citizens' Second Amendment rights should not be restricted because of the actions of criminals. Rather, we must focus our attention on the source of violent crime: criminals who use firearms to commit crimes. I believe that strictly enforcing the law—and meting out tougher sentences for career criminals and those who use firearms when committing crimes—will reduce crime more effectively than gun or equipment bans, which primarily serve to take firearms away from law-abiding citizens.

I appreciate the opportunity to represent Texans in the United States Senate, and you may be certain that I will continue working with my colleagues to protect our Second Amendment rights. Thank you for taking the time to contact me.

Sincerely,

JOHN CORNYN

United States Senator

517 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
Tel: (202) 224-2934
Fax: (202) 228-2856
http://www.cornyn.senate.gov

A very good canned response, and I am certain that Sen. Cornyn will do what he can to oppose an Assault Weapons Ban and any magazine capacity limit legislation.  What was not mentioned in this email was any mention of opposing or supporting mandatory background checks.

It appears that there is a strong opposition to an AWB and magazine capacity limitations on the Hill.  It also appears that universal background checks are on the table.

Please write your Congress Critter and let them know that you oppose any legislation that hinders the private sales of firearms.  Let them know that mandatory background checks can only be accomplished with universal firearm registration and that we will not register our guns.  Be as forceful as you are comfortable, but let them know that you do oppose mandatory background checks on private firearm sales.

If you happen to support mandatory background checks, leave a comment.  Let us have some reasonable discourse.  Give me a chance to show you the error of your position.

Cabela's New Ad Campaign...

...is pretty effective.

Now if only the ammo fairy would come and fill their shelves.

The DC Ski Mask Ban

Criminals in Washington DC are using ski masks to 'mask' their identity.  The DC police just can't seem to get a handle on the situation, so something must be done.

From Andrea Noble of the Washington Times:

Ski masks, a fashion accessory to crime in D.C., may soon be illegal


...after reports of robberies committed by men wearing ski masks. The frequency of the robberies also has caught attention of police, who say one neighborhood crew is frequently purchasing masks at a local sports store for the express purpose of committing robberies.

"They clearly are a problem. Otherwise we wouldn't see it being mentioned in all the reports."...

The focus of the article is on the ski masks, and there really is no major effort in DC to ban ski masks, but the fact that it is being talked about shows just how ridiculous some of the discussions can get. 

One interesting factoid from the article, wearing a ski mask during the commission of a crime is a crime in DC.

D.C. law already ban individuals — ages 16 and up — from wearing masks in public under certain circumstances, such as while committing a crime or with “the intent to intimidate, threaten, abuse or harass any other person.” But prosecution under the law appears infrequent.

It seems criminals pay attention to ski mask control legislation just about as well as they follow gun control legislation.  Heck, the article even mentions a "two striker":

...two black men wearing ski masks got out of a gold Honda Accord and held a woman at gunpoint to steal her purse.

Head on over and read the article. some of the comments are well worth the time.

Senator Cruz at the Senate Judiciary Committee Hearing on Guns

In case you missed it, here is Senator Ted Cruz in the Senate Judiciary Committee Hearing on Guns.

Senator Cruz is making me very proud of the fact that I did financially support his campaign, and vote to make him our newest Texas Senator.

Police Departments Affected by Ammo Shortage

The ammo shortage is starting to affect some of the smaller police departments.  Erin Jones of KTEN reports:

Local Texas Law Enforcement Affected By Guns and Ammo Shortage

..."Last week one of the largest distributors of ammunition stated that they've sold the same amounts in the last two days as they've sold in the past seven years," Van Alstyne Chief of Police Tim Barnes said.

This news falls in line with what my normal ammo retailers have been telling me.  The pipeline is once again empty.  This looks to be even worse than the ammo drought when Obama was first elected, and the recovery will probably take even more time:

It's kind of a perfect storm. In the past 20 years there's never been an issue of getting ammunition. In times past we would place an order and it would be in within two to three weeks," Barnes said.

Right now suppliers are telling the Van Alstyne Police Department orders could take up to a year to ship...

A year for the LEO"s to get their ammunition orders delivered means that pipeline is pretty dry.  When people started buying up the AR's a friend purchased the last one Cheaper Than Dirt had at the time, the only problem was he could find no ammo.  I loaned him a couple hundred rounds and he has not been able to find any to repay me.  A couple hundred rounds is not really that big a deal, but the way things are going now I doubt I'll be able to do the same again any time soon.  Maybe when things settle down a bit folks will start needing some cash and some of that ammo in closets will end up back on the market.

Machine Gun Fire in the Skys Over Miami and Houston

Last week CBS reported Black Hawks Used In Military Training Exercise In Miami, and yesterday ABC reports Army drill scares residents on Houston's south side.

It appears that these were both multi-agency live action exercises that included the use of blank ammunition.  You have to wonder why the military is performing these types of exercises in urban areas in and around major metropolitan areas.

They are doing these exercises at a time when trust in the .gov is at lowest in my memory, and when such exercises would raise the most eyebrows.  There are mock up towns on .gov land far from the public eye that they could have used, so why Miami and Houston?

Interesting times.

NYC Police Commissioner Admits That Assault Weapons are Not the Problem.

Not really but...

Raymond Kelly is NY City's Police Commissioner.  Raymond Kelly wrote an editorial for the New York Post titled "Scourge of NYC’s streets".  Raymond Kelly is rabidly against the possession of firearms by anyone but an individual employed by law enforcement. I found this editorial quite strange, in Commissioner Kelly's rant against guns, he makes all of our points for us.  The editorial begins with a comment that has no bearing on the gun control debate and goes downhill from there.

While assault rifles serve no legitimate hunting purpose, and their ban would be a welcome advance after the Newtown slaughter, illegal handguns remain the weapon of choice for killers and other criminals in New York City.

First he states that assault rifles serve no legitimate hunting purpose.  You and I both know he is not talking about assault rifles, but rifles covered in the new AWB.  We also understand that it does not matter if they serve a hunting purpose or not, gun control is not about hunting.  I could take this opportunity to provide many examples about how AR platform rifles are used for hunting, but it really does not matter to this argument.

What is interesting about the above quote is the admission that "...illegal handguns remain the weapon of choice for killers and other criminals..." 

The commissioner goes on to state:

Ninety percent, or 2,493, of the 2,779 illegal firearms seized from suspects in arrests in the city last year were handguns.


By contrast, a total of 77 assault weapons were seized in arrests in the city, less than 3 percent of the total.

In only three of nearly 1,400 shooting incidents last year were ballistics associated with assault weapons.

There you have it, from the pen (so to speak) of NY City's Police Commissioner himself.  Assault Weapons as defined by Senator Feinstein are not the problem.

3 out of 1400 shooting incidents involved assault weapons.  That is pretty much the definition of statistically negligible.

So tell me again why it is so important to ban these firearms that are not used in shooting incidents?

The commissioner goes on to further demonize handguns and any free states that are close to New York.  He pretty much blames NY City's violence issue on Virginia, Pennsylvania, Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina and Florida.

Criminals illegally acquire guns in these states, illegally transport them into NYC, illegally sell these guns to other criminals who use them in crimes (which by the way are illegal) and the only way this police commissioner can come up with to address this issue is to write more laws.  Yep, that'll work.

One last thing I found telling in this article:

We’re also focused on violence-prone street crews...

So the ultra violent street gangs who import drugs, run prostitution rings, illegally import firearms and run protection rackets are now "street crews"?

Maybe it is time to stop being so politically correct and start attacking crime at the source.  Leave the rest of us the hell alone.
You should go over and give the editorial a read.  This man is in a position of authority in one of the largest cities in the world, might be helpful to know how these Commissars think.

Question

Are the books Animal Farm, Fahrenheit 451, or 1984 still required reading in our high schools?

Contacting Congress Critters

Faxing is a very effective way to contact Congress Critters.  It puts paper in hand much faster than snail mail and does get the message to Representatives of districts other than the in which you live.

I have found an online fax service to be very helpful for all of my personal and political faxing needs.  The service I use is MyFax and I am very happy with the cost and quality of service.

Notes From the Sidebar

David comments on yet Another Bloodthirsty Gun Owner.  This time it's an armed wheelchair-bound Vet who uses a firearm to defend life and home.

The Bayou Renaissance Man has found some Relics of a long forgotten war.  There are some very interesting images of the Ho Chi Minh Trail in Laos.

Let’s talk about background checks. Yes, we really do need to start focusing on potential mandatory background check legislation now that some prominent Republicans are starting to support this type of legislation.

The Old NFO has one example of a pro-gun argument that doesn't rely on "It's in the Constitution!" that effectively makes our point.  More Equal time... delves into the facts about the pre and post Australian gun ban statistics.  One that I found especially interesting is "Australian women are now raped over three times as often as American women."  Disarming the law abiding increases the victim pool for the violent.

Traction Control notes that Michael Bane Points Out “A Brilliant Article …” An excellent read.

Speaking of Michael Bane, the old coot things that The New World Sucks.  Codger keeps reminiscing about the good old days, way back in October of last year.

If you are looking for Sources on Original Second Amendment Meaning, History, Purpose, and Intent, there really is not better place to go than David E. Young's On Second Opinion Blog.

Brigid writes a moving post On Waiting - A Story of Adoption.

The Carteach posts a review of a Dragon Leatherworks Gunbelt..... Next to a quality holster, your belt is an indispensable part of your carry rig.  Quality counts.

Frank, a new contributor to The Firearm Blog, introduces himself with 40 Years of Gun Wisdom in 5 Easy Lessons. I am looking forward to reading more of what Frank has to share.

The LawDog offers A repost of his "Gun Control Cake" essay.  If you did not catch it the first time, head on over and read it now.   

Mike points out that there is a Direct Link Between Algeria Attack that Killed 3 Americans and Libya Attack that Killed 4.  Amateur hour at the State Department and in our Administration is helping to create this escalation of chaos.  A Republican President would have been forced to resign in embarrassment by now.  

Say Uncle refutes Noted Gun Expert Carolyn McCarthy: It’s Too Hard For Women To Use AR-15s.  He has some nice video to help make his case.  

And last, but not least, Murdoc offers a warning about The Stephen King eBook ‘Guns’.  If you want to put money in the pockets of the Brady Bunch, buy the book.

Are You a Hunter or Sportsman Who Supports the New AWB? Well I Have News For You.

I keep seeing these editorials and comments to the news that indicate the writer is a hunter, sportsman or gun enthusiast who supports the Second Amendment, but... The commenters then go on to give their support to Obama's "common sense" gun control efforts.  If you are one of these Quislings who purport to support both the Second Amendment and an Assault Weapons Ban, you are giving the Antis' the keys to your gun safe also.

Here is a nifty little tidbit from the Assault Weapons Ban of 2013.  Part of the definition of a banned assault weapon is:

A semiautomatic version of an automatic firearm

Did you catch that?  Any semi auto version of an automatic firearm is covered under Feinstein's new AWB.

 

Is your gun exempt?

 

Not if it is a version of John Moses Browning's greatest creation.  The M1911.  The 1911 is not specifically exempted so is banned as a semiautomatic version of an automatic firearm.  Yes, Colt did develop a fully auto M1911A1 back in the '30's.  John Dillinger was quite fond of his.

 

So what if your particular pet firearm is specifically exempted, how much do you think it would take to remove that exemption?  Once the ban is passed, tightening it up will be no effort at all.

 

We really do have to stand together to defeat all of the proposed gun control legislation, each and every bit of it.

 

H/T to Robert Farago for coming up with the text to the new AWB

Senator Coburn Working With Anti Gun Democrats

Senator Tom Coburn, Republican from Oklahoma, is working with the Anti's on the first piece of anti gun rights legislation to hit the Senate. 

Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) is working with Democratic senators on a bill that would mandate background checks for all gun buyers, with some limited exceptions.

Ed O'Keefe has posted in the Washington Post that "Tom Coburn talking with Democrats about background check bill"  One of the Dems that Senator Coburn is working with is Chuck Schumer, a rabid Anti.

This is what I have been afraid of from the start of this latest assault on the Second Amendment, the compromise that gets passed instead of the Big Bad Bill that everyone is fighting against.  A bill like this gives Congress Critters who allegedly support our rights an idea that they can pass something that won't piss us off too awful much, and make the Anti's happy that the next goal of their agenda has been achieved.

The article quotes Sen. Coburn as saying:

"If you transfer your car, you have to have a license to transfer, it has to go through that. That’s a responsibility of freedom. I have no problems with us making sure that we don’t allow guns to get in the hands of either felons, or people who are a danger to themselves or other people. … I’m willing to work with Manchin and Schumer on that, and going to.”

First, there is no innate human right to own a car.  Second, what is he talking about needing a license to transfer a car?  Are these politicians really that ignorant of life in America? 

Does anyone really think that requiring law abiding American citizens to go through a background check to transfer a firearm between family and friends will do anything at all to keep firearms out of the hands of violent felons?  Criminals steal guns.  Criminals buy guns from other criminals.  Criminals are kind of known for breaking the law, hence the term criminal and felon.

Mandatory background checks will not keep guns out of the hands of criminals.

Mandatory background checks will prevent someone from purchasing a firearm as a gift for a family member.

Mandatory background checks will do nothing to address violence or the violent.

Mandatory background checks will interfere with the passing down of family heirlooms from on generation to another. 

How many non violent criminals will a mandatory background check law create?  I see a very large swell of civil disobedience as the otherwise law abiding choose to ignore this new law.

And last, but not least, how is the .gov going to enforce this law?  There are 10's of millions of firearms in the hands of American citizens.  In free states, the .gov has no idea who owns what.  Just think for a second of what the .gov will have to do to try and bring us into complience.  At a minimum there will have to be registration.  Inspection will most likely come after registration.  Firearm owners will have to submit to random, unannounced and warrant less searches to ensure they only own the firearms that are in the registry.

Mandatory background checks are going to be portrayed as "reasonable" and "common sense" when they are neither.

Contact Senator Coburn, let him know that we will not abide by any new firearm legislation coming out of the Senate and that we will remember those who actively work against us.

Washington D.C.:

172 Russell Senate Office Bldg.
Washington, DC 20510
Main: 202-224-5754
Fax: 202-224-6008

Tulsa:
1800 South Baltimore
Suite 800
Tulsa, OK 74119
Main: 918-581-7651
Fax: 918-581-7195

Oklahoma City:
100 North Broadway
Suite 1820
Oklahoma City, OK 73102
Main: 405-231-4941
Fax: 405-231-5051

Quote of the Day

From Michael Bane:

Anyone who says they have a "middle path" in this fight means they're either stupid as a sack of rocks or that they think we are as stupid as a sock of rocks.

Michael is referring to the "I'm a hunter, but..." or "I'm a gun enthusiast but.." anti gun propagandist.  There has been a crap load of these quisling types hitting the editorial pages of late.  Michael gives us some more fodder for opposing these Fudds.  Give him a read.

AR-15/M4 Suitable for Personal Defense? DHS Thinks So

Last Summer the Department of Homeland Security submitted a Request for Proposal to supply 7000 rifles to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).

The scope of this contract is to provide a total of up to 7,000 5.56x45mm North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) personal defense weapons (PDW) throughout the life of this contract to numerous Department of Homeland Security components. This Statement of Work delineates performance criteria and testing to be used for the evaluation of the firearm.

 Note that DHS is looking for "personal defense weapons".  What are considered personal defense weapons for employees of our Department of Homeland Security?

3.0 REQUIREMENTS AND TESTING STANDARDS


3.1 General. DHS and its components have a requirement for a 5.56x45mm NATO, select-fire firearm suitable for personal defense use in close quarters and/or when maximum concealment is required. Only one specific nomenclature firearm from each Contractor shall be submitted for solicitation testing and considered for contract award.

So a short barrel M4 or M-16 is suitable for personal defense if the operator gets his check signed by Uncle Sam, but the semi-auto standard length firearm is not suitable for the rest of us?

And what magazines are necessary for personal defense?

3.21.2 The magazine shall have a capacity to hold thirty (30) 5.56x45mm NATO rounds.

If you read through the RFP you will see that DHS has determined that pretty much every feature on Feinstein's AWB list is necessary for a good personal defense weapon.
 The hypocrisy, it hurts.

HSCEMS-12-R-00011 Section C

Further background can be found here.

H/T to Firehand

Anonymous Hacks US Sentencing Commission

It seems that our Federal .gov is stepping on every ones toes these days.  Anonymous is stepping back.

Anonymous hacks US Sentencing Commission, distributes files

Summary: Late evening Friday, January 25, U.S. Sentencing Commission website was hacked and government files distributed by Anonymous in what the group calls "Operation Last Resort."

Head on over to read the article for background and the Anonymous video release with transcription.

The statement from Anonymous starts out with:

Citizens of the world,


Anonymous has observed for some time now the trajectory of justice in the United States with growing concern. We have marked the departure of this system from the noble ideals in which it was born and enshrined. We have seen the erosion of due process, the dilution of constitutional rights, the usurpation of the rightful authority of courts by the “discretion” of prosecutors. We have seen how the law is wielded less and less to uphold justice, and more and more to exercise control, authority and power in the interests of oppression or personal gain.

Spot on, and this trend does seem to have really increased over the last few years.

In this day of indefinite detention of American Citizens, warrantless wiretapping and the suppression of free speech, the demands of Anonymous seem very reasonable.

However, in order for there to be a peaceful resolution to this crisis, certain things need to happen. There must be reform of outdated and poorly-envisioned legislation, written to be so broadly applied as to make a felony crime out of violation of terms of service, creating in effect vast swathes of crimes, and allowing for selective punishment. There must be reform of mandatory minimum sentencing. There must be a return to proportionality of punishment with respect to actual harm caused, and consideration of motive and mens rea. The inalienable right to a presumption of innocence and the recourse to trial and possibility of exoneration must be returned to its sacred status, and not gambled away by pre-trial bargaining in the face of overwhelming sentences, unaffordable justice and disfavourable odds. Laws must be upheld unselectively, and not used as a weapon of government to make examples of those it deems threatening to its power.


For good reason the statue of lady justice is blindfolded. No more should her innocence be besmirked, her scales tipped, nor her swordhand guided. Furthermore there must be a solemn commitment to freedom of the internet, this last great common space of humanity, and to the common ownership of information to further the common good.

These are demands that I can support.  If any of the proposed gun control legislation makes it into law, the Justice Department will have to be very creative in how they come after us and due process will not stand in their way.

Earlier this month Anonymous did respond to the Obama gun control policies.

As one very smart person once said, "The enemy of my enemy is my friend".

The AR-15 Isn't For Women, McCarthy Says So

Carolyn McCarthy proves once again that she knows absolutely nothing about the firearms that she is so intent upon keeping out of the hands of law abiding citizens.

 

PIERS MORGAN: I have an interview coming up with two young women who wrote a piece in which they said they wanted the rights of the AR-15 weapon at home because they feared they would be attacked and they wanted a gun that would guarantee they would murder or would kill their attacker. How do you respond to that particular argument, which is they believe under their second amendment right they should be allowed an AR-15?

CAROLYN MCCARTHY: I will tell you, if you talk to professionals, hunters and certainly sportsmen, they’ll tell you that’s not the gun to use. A rifle is more accurate. It’s certainly easier for a woman to be able to do that.

#1 - An AR15 is a rifle. 

#2 - Who give a rats ass what hunters and sportsmen think about what gun to use to defend your family and home.

#3 - It really is quite funny that on the day the Administration announces that it will by directive send women to the front lines of battle, this idjit states that women can't handle an AR15.

Well, Biden did say that they would be better off with a shotgun.  I guess the improved accuracy and reduced recoil of a 12 ga...

These are the folks who would use the full force of the United States .gov to remove the most efficient tools that we have available to defend ourselves.

H/T to the Washington Free Beacon

History and Founders Intent

Are you interested in the history of the Second Amendment?  Do you think it is important to understand the founders intent when they were writing the Second Amendment and including it in the Bill of Rights?  If so then you will be happy to know that David E. Young, one of the foremost authorities on this subject, is back to blogging.  On Second Opinion Blog is David's portal to sharing his wealth of information with the rest of us.  His post  "Second Amendment Intent / Right to Keep and Bear Arms Explained" is a good starting point on your quest to delve in to the history of the Second Amendment.  As David has said:

The facts of American history can end the never-ending dispute over Second Amendment intent, but only if they are understood and deployed to undermine and counteract the error based belief system of gun control proponents.

Head on over and learn some facts, facts that have helped the Supreme Court rule in favor of our right to keep and bear arms.

Gun Control - It's What You Do...

...when you don't have the intestinal fortitude or intelligence to face the issue of violence head on.  Feinstein announced the submittal of her latest and greatest Assault Weapons Ban today in a presser that has made all the news.  So far as I can tell, the actual text of the bill is not yet available for us common folk to read, all I can find is the bill summery on her website.

Basically the bill bans 157 firearms by name (these must be the especially evil Evil Black Rifles), and many others based upon what she considers a "military feature".  All AR's, all AK's and all Thompsons are banned by name.  She left off KRISS, but gets them with the 'military feature' ban.

What are these military features?

All semiautomatic rifles that can accept a detachable magazine and have at least one military feature: pistol grip; forward grip; folding, telescoping, or detachable stock; grenade launcher or rocket launcher; barrel shroud; or threaded barrel.

All semiautomatic pistols that can accept a detachable magazine and have at least one military feature: threaded barrel; second pistol grip; barrel shroud; capacity to accept a detachable magazine at some location outside of the pistol grip; or semiautomatic version of an automatic firearm.

All semiautomatic rifles and handguns that have a fixed magazine with the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds.

All semiautomatic shotguns that have a folding, telescoping, or detachable stock; pistol grip; fixed magazine with the capacity to accept more than 5 rounds; ability to accept a detachable magazine; forward grip; grenade launcher or rocket launcher; or shotgun with a revolving cylinder.

Plus "All ammunition feeding devices (magazines, strips, and drums) capable of accepting more than 10 rounds.

There is absolutely nothing on this list that does anything to address violent crime.  There is nothing on this list that will make a bit of difference to a goblin that wants to shoot up a school, or an ultra violent criminal who uses violence as a means increasing his power and supplementing his income.  If you want to stop violent crime, you need to stop the violent criminal.   

Senator Feinstein represents California.  We have a lot to thank California for when it comes to violent crime. The Los Angles area is the birthplace of many of our ultra violent street gangs. The Crips, the Bloods, SUR 13 and many others come from this area.  This gang culture has spread to every major city in the country along with most smaller ones.  So what has California done to stop this spread of violence?  Why they have gang summits, they start after school programs, they talk about this and they talk about that.  The prisons have a rotating door for even the most violent and the inner city schools are nothing more than gang recruiting depots.  This AWB that Diane Feinstein has introduced does nothing to address the gang issue, or the violent criminal issue.  Diane Feinstein refuses to address the root causes of our violent crime and refuses to do what is necessary to put a stop to violent criminals.  Instead takes what she believes is the easy path, the path that will accomplish nothing.  

I see legislation like this even locally.  We have an increase in the number of stolen cars.  Instead of finding and shutting down the chop shop or the gang that is running these cars down to Mexico, the city passed a law outlawing warming up your car in the morning or leaving it running to keep the AC on while grabbing a quick something at the store.  Yes, leaving your car running is stupid, but until lately not criminal.  It is easier for the police to ticket us than it is to stop the criminal.  Another example is graffiti.  the homeowner can receive a larger fine for not promptly removing graffiti than the juvenile graffiti "artist" may receive for painting it in the first place.  Again, it is just easier to punish us than stop crime.  

There is another thing that really irks me about this bill.  Some folks are exempt.   Listed in the exemptions is "...and retired law enforcement"  Why?  So even retired LEO's are better than us common Citizens?  Yes, I know, this exemption was put in to appease the Law Enforcement Associations that came out in support of this bill. They are not affected by it, even after retirement. 

If this bill is passed, and the ultra violent remain ultra violent and the criminals keep on keeping on, what's next?  The obvious answer is more bills, more restrictions on law abiding gun owners until there are no longer any more gun owners who can call themselves law abiding.  

One last thing.  They keep saying this is not confiscation.  The bill summery indicates that magazines with a capacity of over ten rounds will not be transferable.  If you can't legally transfer them, then the .gov will end up with them.  Sounds a whole lot like confiscation to me.

The Latest Magazine Ban Legislation

H.R. 138, a bill to "To prohibit the transfer or possession of large capacity ammunition feeding devices, and for other purposes" now has 48 cosponsors and a companion bill introduced by Frank Lautenberg in the Senate.  This bill has started to gain some traction in both the Congress and the Media.  It is being portrayed as "Common Sense" and they keep referencing a Washington Post / ABC Poll that supposedly indicates that 65% of Americans support legislation restricting magazine capacity.  If this polling data is anywhere near accurate, we have our work cut out for us.

This is a short bill so I can post it in its entirety here:

H. R. 138

To prohibit the transfer or possession of large capacity ammunition feeding devices, and for other purposes.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

January 3, 2013

Mrs. MCCARTHY of New York (for herself and Ms. DEGETTE) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

A BILL

To prohibit the transfer or possession of large capacity ammunition feeding devices, and for other purposes.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,


SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the `Large Capacity Ammunition Feeding Device Act'.

SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON TRANSFER OR POSSESSION OF LARGE CAPACITY AMMUNITION FEEDING DEVICES.

(a) Definition- Section 921(a) of title 18, United States Code, is amended by inserting after paragraph (29) the following:

`(30) The term `large capacity ammunition feeding device'--

`(A) means a magazine, belt, drum, feed strip, or similar device that has a capacity of, or that can be readily restored or converted to accept, more than 10 rounds of ammunition; but

`(B) does not include an attached tubular device designed to accept, and capable of operating only with, .22 caliber rimfire ammunition.'.

(b) Prohibitions- Section 922 of such title is amended by inserting after subsection (u) the following:

`(v)(1)(A)(i) Except as provided in clause (ii), it shall be unlawful for a person to transfer or possess a large capacity ammunition feeding device.

`(ii) Clause (i) shall not apply to the possession of a large capacity ammunition feeding device otherwise lawfully possessed within the United States on or before the date of the enactment of this subsection.

`(B) It shall be unlawful for any person to import or bring into the United States a large capacity ammunition feeding device.

`(2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to--

`(A) a manufacture for, transfer to, or possession by the United States or a department or agency of the United States or a State or a department, agency, or political subdivision of a State, or a transfer to or possession by a law enforcement officer employed by such an entity for purposes of law enforcement (whether on or off duty);

`(B) a transfer to a licensee under title I of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 for purposes of establishing and maintaining an on-site physical protection system and security organization required by Federal law, or possession by an employee or contractor of such a licensee on-site for such purposes or off-site for purposes of licensee-authorized training or transportation of nuclear materials;

`(C) the possession, by an individual who is retired from service with a law enforcement agency and is not otherwise prohibited from receiving ammunition, of a large capacity ammunition feeding device transferred to the individual by the agency upon that retirement; or

`(D) a manufacture, transfer, or possession of a large capacity ammunition feeding device by a licensed manufacturer or licensed importer for the purposes of testing or experimentation authorized by the Attorney General.'.

(c) Penalties- Section 924(a) of such title is amended by adding at the end the following:

`(8) Whoever knowingly violates section 922(v) shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 10 years, or both.'.

(d) Identification Markings- Section 923(i) of such title is amended by adding at the end the following: `A large capacity ammunition feeding device manufactured after the date of the enactment of this sentence shall be identified by a serial number that clearly shows that the device was manufactured after such date of enactment, and such other identification as the Attorney General may by regulation prescribe.'.

Note in the bolded section that this legislation does not just cover detachable magazines.  This legislation covers any magazine that even has the potential of holding more than 10 rounds with the exception of attached tubular .22 cal. magazines.

Also note that magazines (and firearms with attached magazines with the potential to hold greater than 10 round) that are owned at the time the legislation becomes law are grandfathered in, and that they are not transferable.  This means that you can not sell, trade or bequeath your private property.

The legislation attempts to buy off the police organizations by excluding retired LEO's from this ban.  That exclusion is a kick in the teeth to every other American citizen.

This law will do absolutely nothing to curb violence.  The criminal element who buy, sell and steal firearms are not going to start restricting magazine capacity.

This law is unenforceable.  There are 10's of millions of standard capacity magazines in private possession right now.  No registration, no serial numbers, no proof of who owns what, when or where.  The tax dollars that would be necessary to attempt to enforce this law, and prosecute anyone arrested under this law would be prohibitive.

This law will reduce a citizen's ability to defend themselves.  Yes, it may very well take more than 10 rounds to defend your family and yourself from a goblin or a group of goblins.  Why do you think LEO's carry sidearms with standard capacity magazines?  They know that during conflict the more the better.  If a police officer needs more than 10 rounds on hand to defend himself, then I need more than 10 rounds to defend my family.  This my friend is why magazine capacity limitations infringe on my human right to defend myself and my family from harm.

The law won't work.  The law is not enforceable.  The law limits my ability to defend my family and my home.  This law needs to be defeated.

The CIA Gets a Pass

The Washington Post published an article today that  goes to show how numb we American citizens have become to our .gov breaking the rules.  Major violations of the Constitution are just an interesting paragraph in an article about the CIA and drones.  Just the title of the article should catch everyone's eye and make us take note. CIA drone strikes will get pass in counterterrorism  ‘playbook,’ officials say.  The title pretty much covers the story.  The Administration has developed a 'playbook' that is supposed to govern when and how we use drones to assassinate people, and the CIA doesn't have to play by the book. 

Yes, you did read that correctly.  Now if you have been keeping up with the drone news, you pretty much already knew this.  What surprises me is just how blatantly open they are about it now, and that they have no fear of reprisal of any kind.  If you are in Afghanistan or Pakistan, and someone puts your name on a CIA list, drone operators are instructed to kill you and anyone around you.  American citizen?  No matter, just as dead as the next name on the list.

The CIA is exempted from following the rules outlined in the playbook:

U.S. officials said the effort to draft the playbook was nearly derailed late last year by disagreements among the State Department, the CIA and the Pentagon on the criteria for lethal strikes and other issues. Granting the CIA a temporary exemption for its Pakistan operations was described as a compromise that allowed officials to move forward with other parts of the playbook.

Right now the CIA does not even have to know who they are killing, just that whatever is happening looks suspicious.

The discussions surrounding the development of the playbook were centered on practical considerations, officials said. One of the main points of contention, they said, was the issue of “signature strikes.”


The term refers to the CIA’s practice of approving strikes in Pakistan based on patterns of suspicious behavior — moving stockpiles of weapons, for example — even when the agency does not have clear intelligence about the identities of the targets.

Here is where it gets scary.

Among the subjects covered in the playbook are the process for adding names to kill lists, the legal principles that govern when U.S. citizens can be targeted overseas and the sequence of approvals required when the CIA or U.S. military conducts drone strikes outside war zones.

They have already killed American citizens with drone strikes, and they will continue to do so.  Why do they assassinate American citizens without the due process afforded by the Constitution?  Well, because they are Terrorists. Yep, Terrorists.  Since they are Terrorists who just happen to be American citizens, killing them with a drone strike instead of giving them a court trial saves the American tax payer a dollar or two.

No big deal, except for the fact that there are a few in our War Colleges and the Administration who use the term Terrorist when referring to folks like us, folks who take an active part in supporting the ideals of the US Constitution.  The most recent study labeling Patriots as Terrorists comes from West Point's Combating Terrorism Center.  This study is called "Challengers From the Sidelines - Understanding America's Violent Far Right". Who makes up the "Violent Far Right"? The author lists three groups.  "...a racist/white supremacy movement, an anti-federalist movement and a fundamentalist movement." It looks like they cast a pretty large net here, but not really.  In defining the three groups, the author lumps the fundamentalists in with the white supremest. "Lastly, the fundamentalist stream, which includes mainly Christian Identity groups such as the Aryan Nations, fuse religious fundamentalism with traditional white supremacy and racial tendencies" So we have the anti-federalists sandwiched in between two white supremacy categories.  Who are these anti-federalists?

They also espouse strong convictions regarding the federal government, believing it to be corrupt and tyrannical, with a natural tendency to intrude on individuals’ civil and constitutional rights. Finally, they support civil activism, individual freedoms, and self government.

 Yep, you did read that correctly.  Catch a chill yet?

This was not the first article of its type to come out of a war collage, just the most recent.  Heck, the Department of Homeland Security commissioned a study that indicated that the political Right was more of a threat to the United States than Islamic Extremism.
So, it is ok to assassinate American citizens just because someone in political power states that they are terrorists?  One has to wonder when the first drone strike is launched within US borders?  Maybe they won't use drones, just an FBI hit team with a kill list.  Can't happen here?  Who would have thought we would assassinate Americans over there?

Notes From the Sidebar

Links to a few posts from my friends on the sidebar.

John over at the Texican Tattler has comments about all the Rantin' and Ravin'! going on during this latest episode of the gun control debate.

The Firearm Blog  Shows us the new KRISS Multi-Caliber K-10.  I am a very big fan of the KRISS and am looking for a way to get one into my safe so new news from KRISS is always interesting to me.

Old NFO asks Did anybody else see this one???  He is talking about H.R. 226, a bill - To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow a credit against tax for surrendering to authorities certain assault weapons. First I've heard of it also.

Peter, the Bayou Renaissance Man, has an excellent commentary on The struggle for gun rights - and for America.  In this article Peter points out that "Unfortunately, our opponents flatly disagree with Mr. Adams, and with us.  To them, the Bill of Rights is not only fully negotiable;  it's actually irrelevant in terms of politics.  It's an anachronism, something out of the past like the dinosaurs - and just as dead.  This is precisely why they proclaim, loudly and frequently, that the Constitution is a 'living document', to be reinterpreted according to the understanding of the modern world rather than cast in stone.  That also means they don't need to go to all the trouble of generating a Constitutional amendment, and having it approved - they can simply alter the way they understand and apply the document." Head on over and read the rest of his commentary, it is well worth your time.

Brigid shares thoughts and a story in Tools that Bind, Tools that Free. 

My old friend Fits makes me want to break out the prints for the .22 Gatling gun I've always wanted to build with his story from San Juan Hill, Arms In Battle: The Gatling.

Tam shares a poem and some solid comments on mandatory background checks in
It's Fun Show Time!

Because YOU are reading THIS is an empowering essay on truth and freedom found over at To Which I Replied.

The LawDog answers A question from a Gentle Reader: "And yet these sorts of atrocities are happening more and more. What is currently being proposed seems like over reaction on both the anti and pro gun sides, but what would you suggest?" You will just have to head on over if you want to read LawDog's answer.  What, you haven't clicked the link yet?

Mike notes that Obama's Gun Control Orders Ignore Larger Problem of Gang Violence.

Torrance highlights Obama's next drone war with Gold Digging: Will Mali be Obama’s Afghanistan? A well researched and written glimpse of what's next in the War on Terror.   The above is just a taste of some of the great information you can find by browsing the links on the sidebar.

T.L. Davis's Open Letter to the President

David Codrea points to an open letter penned by T.L. Davis.

Open Letter to the President Barack Obama

This letter is well worth your time.  Read it, think about it, let me know your thoughts and then share it with your friends and family.

Happy Gun Appreciation Day

This is the gun in my safe that I appreciate the most. It is my Grandfathers Winchester Model 94 - 30 WCF.

It is not the best picture, but it is an awesome rifle. My Grand Dad, William Wallace Cook, carried this rifle in a scabbard when he was a ranch hand in Montana and California. It was in the cab of his Combine when he followed the wheat, and it was his go-to gun if ever needed to defend home and family. This is one of our family heirlooms that I will pass down to my kids and grand kids. One day, when I have the extra cash laying around, I will send this rifle off to Turnbull Manufacturing for a full restoration.  A Turnbull full restoration is a good chunk of change, but well worth it for an heirloom firearm.

I want to be the one who determines who I pass my family heirlooms off to.  It does not matter if that heirloom is my Great Grandmothers knot work, my Grandfathers Model 94, my favorite tools, or even an AR15 that I happen to find special.  The .gov has no business interfering in my decisions about who I leave my private property to.  When you hear Obama and the Anti's talking about Universal Background Checks or Closing the Gun Show Loophole, they are talking about inserting the .gov into the transfer of private property between two free citizens.  The Death Tax has all but killed off the successful family farmer, and a universal background check will break the tradition of passing down family heirlooms for many families.

What's With all the Hammer Violence?

Hammer violence seems to be becoming an epidemic these days.

From The Smoking Gun: Run On Guns Has Now Forced Poor Robbers To Stick Up Banks At Hammerpoint

And also locally via NBC 5: Robber Beats Dallas Clerk With Several Hammers


It shouldn't be long before the White House directs the CDC to study the causes and effects of hammer violence and asks our doctors to quiz us on how many hammers we own and exactly where we keep them.  Anyone can walk into pretty much any general merchandise store in the country and purchase a hammer without even having to show ID or proof of age.  Hammers are everywhere.  I haven't seen any studies, but from my own experience I can pretty much deduce that most households in America own at least one hammer.  What are we to do?

A Good Defense is a Strong...

We Gunnies have been content with the status quo for far too long.  Only when the Anti's make a direct attack on what we see as our current rights do we mobilize to defend those rights.  We cannot always play defense.  No military, team or cause can win long term without going on the attack.  If we always wait for the Anti's to make their move, the Anti's will be the only ones to score.  Each score for the Anti's further erodes our rights.  We need to go into attack mode.  We need to strive to overturn laws that restrict our natural rights at both the state and federal level.  The Anti's are launching the largest and most aggressive assault on human rights in recent American history.  We need to fight back by doing more than play defense.

When they submit Assault Weapons Ban legislation, we submit legislation to repeal the Gun Control Act of 1968.  When legislation is submitted to regulate magazine capacity, we move to remove silencers from the NFA (National Firearms Act) and amend The Firearm Owners Protection Act of 1986 to allow the sale of machine guns manufactured after 1986 to civilians.  Background checks on every firearm transaction? Only if passing that same background check is a requirement for all federal elected officials and employees to maintain employment, we repeal the Lautenberg Amendment, ensure that the rights of our military returning from war are not restricted due to treatment for PTSD, and that minimum sentences of at least 15 years w/o parole are applied to all violent gun related crimes.

The Anti's attack, we go on the defense.  We organize and defend.  We worry if this is going to be the time they succeed in turning us into felons with the stroke of a pen.  It is well past time we went on the offencive and started regaining ground lost over the last eight decades.

Come on Over to Texas

Jim Forsyth via Reuters reported that "Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott has a message for New York gun owners: Come to Texas, and bring your guns with you."

This is really pretty funny.  Shortly after NY passed the most draconian (I know, been using that word way too much lately) gun laws in the nation, our AG started a Face Book, print and electronic ad campaign.  Here is one of the images he is using on FB:



I posted an idea on FB the other day about a great new business opportunity brought about by the new NY gun laws:

Out of state firearm storage. Live in a state run by Quislings who don't trust law abiding citizens with guns? Want to ensure your heirloom firearms stay in the family? For a low monthly fee you can store your guns in the free state of Texas. Air conditioned, secure, and private firearm storage available. Your firearms will always be available for in person pickup by you or your representative. In the event of the Zombie Apocalypse, you will have 10 days to get here before you guns are used to help save humanity.

You know, the more I think about it, the more this sounds like a very reasonable business opportunity.

One quick note for all y'all coming to Texas from repressive coastal states.  Please either stay out of the voting booth or vow to never vote for the same crap that destroyed the states you are leaving.  Thanks.

Edit: Rick is kinda ruining my evil capitalistic plans by offering free storage to NY gun owners.  How the heck am I ever going to become a 1%'r when do-gooders keep offering my viable options for making mega dollars for free?

Magazine Clips Illustrated

A great illustration of magazine clips, what is ok and what is not.

Thoughts From Today's Anti-Gun Proposals From Our President

Took an earlyish lunch at work today and watched the Dog and Pony show put on by the Obama/Biden public relations team.  I have to hand it to President Obama, he sure can speechify when he wants to.  Hair was tented the proper shade of grey to portray the fatherly image, face well made up and properly stern looking for the occasion, and all the appropriate props for such a momentous occasion. Yes, this was a momentous occasion.  The President of these United States asked us to forgo our natural right to self defense.  He basically demanded that we give up the most efficient tools available to defend ourselves, our families and our property.  Obama said over and over again that this was just "common sense" and that we needed to "do it for the children".  Hell, he even brought out the old "if it saves just one life" bit.  The teleprompter failed at providing new material.  You would think that the PR firm that did such a good job of setting the stage could have come up with something new.

So what did our President propose today?  Like I said, the same old BS.  Obama called for a new and improved Assault Weapon Ban and limitations on magazine capacity.  I left my notes at work so don't have his exact words handy but he said something along the lines of "...weapons that belong in the theater of war do not belong in a movie theater."  Like I said, I don't have my notes but that is close enough.  I tell you what, if you sent our military into battle with AR15's, they might be a little pissed.  Outgunned and pissed.  We keep beating this drum, and the media keeps ignoring us.  AR15's and the civilian versions of all other military style firearms are just that, civilian versions.  Look alike guns that function the same as any other semi-auto firearm out there.  AR15's are neat because you can personalize them like the old Chevy 327.  Everyone makes aftermarket parts for the AR15.  Why are so many aftermarket parts available?  Because the rifle is so popular.  The detachable magazine makes it a very efficient life, home and property defence weapon.  Not so easy to truly master, but easy enough to become handy with.  Our President also wants to limit magazine capacity to 10 or less rounds.  I do believe that pretty much every modern day semi-auto handgun, with the exception of a few "slim" models, smaller than .45ACP comes standard with magazines with greater than a 10 round capacity.  Why is that?  Well it is for the same reason that our police forces like to carry smaller caliber handguns with higher capacity, more available firepower = more chances that you will survive a gun fight.  Magazine limitation laws will not stop violent crime.  There are literally 10s of millions of standard capacity magazines in circulation right now.  Criminalizing these magazines will only transfer a large number of them into the hands of criminals, and reduce the ability of the law abiding to defend themselves.

Next on the list is the call to criminalize the private sale of firearms.  One of the tenants that Americans hold dearest is our right to private property.  I have firearms that have been in my family for three generations.  I want to choose who I leave these heirlooms to.  I am a free citizen of these United States.  If I choose to sell a firearm to a friend, it is no business of the .gov.  At one time I held a Top Secret security clearance.  I have had several FBI background checks for both civilian work and for my Texas CHL.  That really does not matter because as a citizen, I have the right to dispose of my private property as I wish.  The criminal element will ignore magazine limitations just as they ignore all laws.  I do believe that many current law abiding citizens will become criminals with the stroke of a pen if this type of legislation ever became law.

The last bit of legislation that I recall Obama demanding is a strengthening of laws against straw purchases (someone purchasing a gun for someone who can not pass a background check).  The laws we currently have on the books are pretty onerous, but they can be improved.  The only problem is that they are not often enforced.  I also find it very ironic that the same Administration and Justice Department that facilitated the transfer of well over 2000 of the exact same guns that they want to ban to the ultra violent Mexican Drug Gangs fairly ironic.  Seriously folks, the Fast and Furious program that was instituted by the Justice Department resulted in the deaths of over 300 Mexican citizens.  These guns were used to kill kids, beauty pageant winners, civil authorities and an American Border Patrol Agent or two.  The criminals who did this are going to lecture me about gun laws?  I don't think so.

We also learned today that the inferred 19 Executive Orders to be signed by Obama became 23.  On a positive note, these EO's were not nearly as onerous as what was leaked via trial balloon the past few days before this presser.  I promised a friend that I would comment on the EO's this evening, but I do owe my lovely wife some time.  Also, there are some very good thoughts on these issues here, here and more on my sidebar.  The only thing I can add is on EO 15 - Direct the Attorney General to issue a report on the availability and most effective use of new gun safety technologies and challenge the private sector to develop innovative technologies. Look for a push to require smart gun technology and micro-stamping. Two horrid ideas that I will Fisk when they pop up.

You know what you have to do.  Contact your Congress Critter and give them the support they need to oppose this legislation. Do it today.  Obama did a good job of calling out the Anti's during this midday event.  We have to do a better job of countering both the Administration and the Media.

Tomorrow

Tomorrow is the day our Illustrious Leader will surround himself with children as he announces the proposed anti gun legislation he wants to sign into law, and the 19 or so Imperial Proclamations he will put into place via Executive Order.  I'm half tempted to take off from work tomorrow just to watch Obama as he hammers away at the cornerstone of our freedoms.  How far will he go with his latest EO's?  Will he add semi-auto rifles to the NFA and require a Form 4, $200 and ATF approval for each gun?  Will he just outright ban the purchase of any semi-autos until legislation can be written and passed into law that suits his fancy?  I don't know, but I do feel a chill coming from the Hill and it has nothing to do with the weather.

New York just passed the most draconian of anti-gun laws in this country.  These are laws that just 6 months ago we would have thought impossible to get passed, even in NY.  What's worse is the fact that it was Republicans that made this possible. Granted, most Texas Democrats are a bit to the Right of NY Republicans, but still...

The speed in which Coumo accomplished this fiat will give the Administration the idea that the same can be done nationwide. 

Tomorrow will come, let's see what it brings.

The War of Words

I think we've lost it.  While we quibble over the definition of Assault Rifle or the difference between a magazine and a clip, the Anti's are garnering public support for draconian anti-gun and anti-freedom legislation.  Do you honestly think that the  President of the United States, or Eric Holder (Head of the Justice Department for crying out loud) don't know that an AR-15 is not an Assault Weapon?  The Anti's have been at this for decades.  Josh Sugermann and the Brady Bunch know the difference between a clip and a magazine just as well as you and I.  I'll bet they get a chuckle each and every time one of us call them out on the misuse of terms.  We argue over terminology, they use soundbites to turn the Orwellian public against us.

It may help our cause to explain these issues to less educated gun owning Americans, but it really does us no good in the grand scheme of things.  The same uninformed public that Voted Obama into a second term as POTUS will enable him to get a large chunk of the legislation he is after.  They don't care if the gun on the news is a full auto BAR or a poodle shooter semi auto.  All they see is the Evil Black Rifle.

Obama does not have to run for election again.  Obama could care less about the political future of anyone on the Hill, he will throw them all under the bus to accomplish his goals.  Obama has spent a good chunk of his adult life fighting against the Second Amendment.  Fast and Furious was a gun control gambit.  Our Justice Department facilitated the transfer of well over 2000 firearms from American gun shops to Mexican drug gangs.  The increased violence on the Mexican side of the border was to be the impetus for stricter gun control laws here in the United States.  Over 300 people have been killed by ultra violent goblins using these guns, many thousands live in fear of these drug gangs.  Two things hindered this plan to use the violence in Mexico as a cause to restrict our rights.  First Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry was killed by thugs using Fast and Furious guns, and second, Bloggers David Codrea and Mike Vanderboegh forced this issue into the public eye.  Do you think an Administration and a Justice Department who would do something as atrocious as Fast and Furious would hesitate to use any other means at hand to take our guns?

So stop bemoaning the fact that the media calls your AR-15 an Assault Weapon, embrace the fact that it is an Evil Black Rifle and stand up for your rights no matter what they call it.

Why Does Anyone Need an Assault Rifle

This 6 minute video pretty much says it all.

Wyoming House Bill 104

Wyoming H.B. 104, a Firearm Protection Act, will be an interesting one to follow.

H.B. 104 is "AN ACT relating to firearms; providing that any federal law which attempts to ban a semi-automatic firearm or to limit the size of a magazine of a firearm or other limitation on firearms in this state shall be unenforceable in Wyoming; providing a penalty; and providing for an effective date."

From the bill:

(d) Any federal law, rule, regulation or order created or effective on or after January 1, 2013 shall be unenforceable within the borders of Wyoming if the law, rule, regulation or order attempts to:

(i) Ban or restrict ownership of a semi-automatic firearm or any magazine of a firearm; or

(ii) Require any firearm, magazine or other firearm accessory to be registered in any manner.

This bill amends Wyoming Statute 6-8-405. Offenses and penalties; defense of Wyoming citizens, also known as the "Firearms Freedom Act".  This is the infamous Wyoming law that makes it a crime to enforce Federal firearms law against Wyoming residents who own firearms that are manufactured in Wyoming.  The Firearms Freedom Act was signed in to law and is now in the Ninth Circuit.

So, right now Wyoming law states that a Wyoming firearm manufacturer can produce fully automatic firearms and sell them to Wyoming residents without filing paperwork with the ATF.  Problem is, until the courts clear this up, owning an unregistered fully automatic firearm will still most likely get you tossed in prison for a long time.  On a positive note, your name will end up as a plaintiff when the case goes to the Supreme Court.

Anonymous Has Responded...

...to the Obama Administration gun control policy.



A 6 minute video that is worth your time to watch.

Three Men Who Can Stop Gun Control Legislation

The Talking Heads of the news media are doing a bang up job of inferring that there is wide spread support for additional gun control laws.  It appears that the memo has gone out and they are no longer using the words "gun control" much any more.  The new terms that the Administration and the Talking Heads are using are "Gun Safety Legislation".  That sounds so much better.  Gunnies have been effectively promoting gun safety for a very long time.  The problem is that proposed gun safety legislation has absolutely nothing to do with gun safety.  The proposed "gun safety legislation" is about restricting our rights to arms, banning firearms, and eventually will lead to gun confiscation.  There is no legislation in Congress regarding gun safety that is worthy of support by anyone who values their freedom.

The Talking Heads are outlining the agenda for the Administration.  The news shows are hinting that maybe an Assault Weapons Ban is not feasible this time, but a compromise is in the works that includes restrictions on magazine capacity and the criminalization of private firearm sales. This legislation has to be stopped, and stopped quickly.

If you have not done so already, contact your congress critter and let them know that you oppose all of the proposed gun control legislation.  If your representative has a decent NRA rating, remind them that the NRA's support helped put them in their current position.  If your representative has an anti-gun history, contact them anyway. Our views need to he heard by everyone on the Hill.

If your representative is a Republican, remind them that the Republican Party Platform firmly supports the Second Amendment and our right to keep and bare arms:

We uphold the right of individuals to keep and bear arms, a right which antedated the Constitution and was solemnly confirmed by the Second Amendment. We acknowledge, support, and defend the law-abiding citizen’s God-given right of self-defense. We call for the protection of such fundamental individual rights recognized in the Supreme Court’s decisions in District of Columbia v. Heller and McDonald v. Chicago affirming that right, and we recognize the individual responsibility to safely use and store firearms. This also includes the right to obtain and store ammunition without registration. We support the fundamental right to self-defense wherever a law-abiding citizen has a legal right to be, and we support federal legislation that would expand the exercise of that right by allowing those with state-issued carry permits to carry firearms in any state that issues such permits to its own residents. Gun ownership is responsible citizenship, enabling Americans to defend their homes and communities. We condemn frivolous lawsuits against gun manufacturers and oppose federal licensing or registration of law-abiding gun owners. We oppose legislation that is intended to restrict our Second Amendment rights by limiting the capacity of clips or magazines or otherwise restoring the ill-considered Clinton gun ban. We condemn the reckless actions associated with the operation known as “Fast and Furious,” conducted by the Department of Justice...

Right now there are three men who can put a stop to any gun control legislation.  These men need to hear from us, they need to know that we support their efforts to stop this legislation.

First is Congressman Lamar Smith from Texas.  Representative Smith is Chair of the House Judiciary Committee.  All of the proposed gun control bills that have been submitted to Congress are in this committee.  Representative Smith can prevent these bills from ever leaving the Judiciary Committee.

To contact the House Judiciary Committee call 202.225.3951. It appears that they no longer have an electronic contact page on the web site and the old contact page has been removed.  So we have to use snail mail.

House Judiciary Committee
2138 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515

The anti gun bills currently in the Judiciary Committee are H.R. 21, H.R. 34, H.R. 65, H.R. 117, H.R. 137, H.R. 138, H.R. 141 and H.R. 142. 

Next is Eric Cantor, the House Majority Leader.  As Majority Leader, Representative Cantor has influence on the Hill and can influence members to support the party platform.

To contact Congressman Eric Cantor as Majority Leader, you can use this contact form, call  202.225.4000, or fax his DC office at 202.225-0011.

The snail mail option is:

Congressman Eric Cantor
303 Cannon Building
Washington, DC 20515

And finally is John Boehner, Speaker of the House.  As Speaker of the House, Representative Boehner can keep gun control legislation from getting to the House Floor for a vote.  If John Boehner gets some backbone, he can put a stop to all this assault on our rights.  Let's help give him that backbone.

To contact Congressman John Boehner as Speaker of the House, you can use this contact form, call 202.225.0600, or fax 202.225.5117.

The snail mail option is:

Office of the Speaker
H-232 The Capitol
Washington, DC 20515

These three men can put a stop to any and all gun control legislation that reaches Congress.  The Anti's and the Administration know this.  These men are under an extreme amount of pressure from the Administration, the Justice Department, the News Media and the Anti's to "do something" about guns.  We need to give them the support they need to stand against this pressure and for our natural right to self defence.

I'm fortunate to be in a position to be able to pick my 1st grade Granddaughter up from school on my way home from work.  We have an after school snack, do her homework and hang out until her Mom picks her up after dinner.  Six Flags is having a promotion that gives tickets to complete 6 hours of "for fun" reading.

My Granddaughter really likes Six Flags, she'll have that 6 hours done in no time.

Eight Anti-Gun Bills That Have Been Submitted to the House of Representatives

Lost in all the media hype of Dianne Feinstein's new AWB and the possibility of the Administration using an Executive Order to implement new gun control regulations are the 8 new anti-gun owner bills that have been introduced in the House.

Representative Carolyn McCarthy has submitted 4 separate bills.  Rep. McCarthy's husband was shot to death in 1993 and now she is the first to dance in the blood of new victims of violence. 

H.R. 137, a bill "To ensure that all individuals who should be prohibited from buying a firearm are listed in the national instant criminal background check system and require a background check for every firearm sale."

This bill would criminalize the private sale of firearms.

H.R. 138, a bill to "To prohibit the transfer or possession of large capacity ammunition feeding devices, and for other purposes."

The text of the bill is not yet available so we really don't know what she has added to previous versions of her magazine ban bill this go around.  Old iterations of this bill limited magazine capacity of all firearms to less than 10 rounds.

H.R. 141, a bill to "To require criminal background checks on all firearms transactions occurring at gun shows."

Again, the text is not yet available.  This is just a feel good bill for the Anti's.  All firearm transactions that take place at gun shows do so under the same federal and local laws as transactions anywhere else.  This is nothing but smoke.  H.R. 137 would do away with private transactions totally so all sales would have to go through an FFL.

H.R. 142, a bill to "To require face to face purchases of ammunition, to require licensing of ammunition dealers, and to require reporting regarding bulk purchases of ammunition."

No text yet available, but from the title of the bill we can deduce that mail order sales of ammunition would be verboten if passed.  It also looks as if purchasing ammo for a day of hard training at the range would get your reported.

McCarthy is not the only Anti in the House.

H.R. 34 and H.R. 117 are bills requiring firearms licensing and H.R. 65 which would raise the eligibility age to carry a handgun from 18 to 21.

More laws, more restrictions that will have zero affect on violence or the violent.

H.R. 21, a bill titled "NRA Members' Gun Safety Act of 2013" is not endorsed by the NRA at all.

This bill would criminalize the private sale of firearms, require that theft of a firearm be reported within 48 hours, and require states live Vermont to follow a minimal federal requirement for allowing citizens to carry a concealed firearm.

The very title of this bill makes is especially insidious.  This is one to keep an eye on.  I understand that there are Fudds that that actively support this legislation.

All the above bills are introduce in committee in the House.  John Boehner is, as you know, the Speaker of the House.  Right now, the most effective way to oppose this legislation is to contact Speaker Boehner and let him know that we will not accept any of these proposals.

If you have an extra minute or two you might want to let the House Judiciary Committee know that we emphatically do not support H.R. 21. 

1/12/13 - Edited post.  The text is now available for all of the above bills.  I changed the links to jump to the bill text.

It is Time to Dust Off The Old Blog...

...and start posting again.  The Anti's have embark upon a full frontal assault on our rights.  They are emboldened by the fact that they have an anti-gun president who is not worried about re-election and has no real loyalty to his party members who may want to be re-elected.  Obama has proven that he will do what Obama wants to do, period.

The Second Amendment is under attack from all sides.  The Media, the Administration, the Justice Department, the Anti's in Congress and the Fudds are all slobbering at the bit to impose a new and improved Assault Weapons Ban and a nation wide firearm registration upon us.  Banning private sales of firearms and even confiscation are also on the short list of what this Administration wants to accomplish in the very near future.

To all this, I say fuck 'em.