Turns out the California county with the most concealed carry licenses has a lower homicide rate than LA County, where it’s easier to win an Oscar than get a CHL.
Cam Edwards @CamEdwards
Tweeted on July 16, 2019
[Reference article, also by Edwards, is here.
Just another data point demonstrating that anti-gun people lie. It’s part of their nature.—Joe]
Via Chris Rawls:
The answer to the question depends on who you are asking if it has sunk in with.
For decades it has been obvious to gun owners who follow the gun control debate “these people” are evil. They lie, they defy clear constitutional intent, they imply they want to reduce crime but it’s abundantly clear that is not the real reason, they insist on banning “assault weapons” even they are only very rarely used in crime, and tell us there is no slippery slope but always come back for more after every victory they achieve.
I think the hard cord Democrats know who they really are. They are for the power. For people to mock and disrespect them creates an incredible urge to destroy even children associated with restricting their access to power. These people have to “know” what they are that they would murder children on their path to power. But it is a small price to pay because those who would restrict their access are not really human. They are deplorables.
The question is, “Does the set of people who are mostly apolitical know who these people really are?” I wish it were true. But I’m not yet convinced they are.
I want to change the conversation. I’m tired of people saying “things will never change.” I’m tired of walking on egg shells. After Sandyhook, if that’s where you’re at, you’re wrong.
SAY IT BOLD:
WE WILL TAKE YOUR ASSAULT WEAPONS.
Nate McMurray (@Nate_McMurray)
Tweeted on June 26, 2019
[Who is this “we”? Most cops are opposed to that idea.
I would like to suggest McMurray get a little practice in before he goes nationwide with that plan. I’d like to suggest he stop in at my place in Idaho sometime so I can give him a lesson or two.—Joe]
Dunno …
My (point) is that guns are for those with tiny penises.
And that they’re for people who want to kill w/o any skill.
#AnyIdiotCanShoot
Mark in Minnesota @mark_casper_usa
Tweeted on July 7, 2019
[It’s another Markley’s Law Monday!
H/T to less fat Dave @BigFatDave.
Oh, and he blocked me. I find that very telling. His ideas can’t stand up to even the most casual of criticism.—Joe]
Some ignorant anti-gun people seem to think the AR in AR-15 means “Assault Rifle”. Some trolls deliberately say that just to get people worked up and to waste their time.
I’d like to definitely set the issue to rest with this post. The AR in AR-15 does not mean “Assault Rifle”.
Here, for present day applications, is the definitive definition of what AR means (given appropriate legal constraints):
H/T to Phoenix @Phoenix81977532.
Here in the United States, where we have the Second Amendment as the cornerstone of our Bill of Rights, anybody who seriously believes the citizens will line up to just hand over their guns may be too delusional to be president.
Alan Gottlieb
CCRKBA Chairman
July 8, 2019
DEM. CANDIDATES SHOULD TAKE LESSON FROM NEW ZEALAND, SAYS CCRKBA
[Mostly correct. It should be expanded to say the equivalent of, “…is too delusional to be elected to any political office.”—Joe]
You might notice that something seems off about a Democratic state senator sponsoring a bill loosening firearm restrictions, that law speeding through a Democrat-controlled legislature, and then a feverishly anti-gun governor stamping it with approval. The city knew a change in state law to preempt the city gun law, something the anti-gun crowd has consistently fought against, was the only way to strengthen the city’s mootness argument. This is merely a case of the city and state colluding to keep the Court from settling the matter once and for all.
Matthew Larosiere
July 11, 2019
New York City’s Dishonest Attempt to Squelch a Gun-Rights Lawsuit
[Of course they are being dishonest! It’s an essential part of the anti-gun culture.—Joe]
I like this:
Today, Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) and Firearms Policy Foundation (FPF) announced the filing of an important amicus brief in the federal Third Circuit Court of Appeals in the criminal appeal of U.S.A. v. Raphael Hunt-Irving, which challenges the federal lifetime ban on firearm possession by even non-violent felons. The brief was authored by FPC attorney and Legal Fellow Joseph Greenlee, a Second Amendment expert and historian. A copy of the court filing can be accessed at www.firearmspolicy.org/legal.
This isn’t a really big deal like challenging the laws on suppressors or bans on modern sporting rifles but it is a low hanging fruit that, potentially, can be used to get more precedent established in our favor. After winning a bunch of these battles winning on the big issues will be more likely.
My employer (by matching dollar for dollar my donations) and I are giving FPF money each month.
As the Pink Pistols motto says, “Armed gays don’t get bashed.” And whilst LGBT people are still victims of violence at a much higher rate than the general public, the community as a whole and notable members of it are beginning to fight back.
From training in self defense and carrying concealed to supporting LGBT-friendly gun stores and shooting ranges, there is a rise in gun-carrying LGBT people who are learning to protect themselves and those they love.
Alex of Ammo.com
Self Defense for LGBT: Self-Protection and Concealed Carry (CCW) for the LGBT Community
[It’s a good post. There was a lot of detailed history of LGBT rights, some of which I didn’t know about. And I thought I was pretty up to speed on that sort of thing. And the self-defense advice was good too, regardless of your sexual orientation.
A lesbian couple I know has been talking about going to the range with me to get some training. I keep saying that they just need to pick a day and time. I suspect it will happen before the summer is over. I wish there were more LGBT people getting on the pro self-defense side of the political aisle. Being a perpetual victim is not healthy for them or society.—Joe]
Even for those who fail to acknowledge that the existence of rights is not subject to public sentiment, making the issue a cornerstone of their campaigns it doesn’t seem to be working. Does that mean that Second Amendment supporters can call an early win? Certainly not. But perhaps we can take some comfort in knowing that gun control may not the slam-dunk that Democratic candidates – and much of the media – believe it to be.
NRA-ILA
July 8, 2019
Recent Poll Shows Gun Control Not as Popular as Some Would Like to Believe
[Gun control isn’t a slam dunk. Claims of “90% of people what background checks” and other outlandish claims are garbage. But it’s popular enough we have to put up some stiff resistance to hold our ground.
Do what you can. Donate money and/or time to pro Second Amendment groups. Come out of the closet as a gun owner. Take a new shooter to the range. Get people interested in the shooting sports. Contact your representatives and politely tell them what you think of restrictions on our specific enumerated right to keep and bear arms.—Joe]
What were we fleeing that was so horrible? Communism. We weren’t fleeing global warming, or capitalism-created poverty, or any of today’s tear-jerking, media-popular reasons. We were fleeing communism. The same communism that is being played out daily in Venezuela. The same communism that some historically illiterate politicians are embracing. The same communism that the American academic scene has become orgasmic about. The same communism that the black hooded thugs of ANTIFA want to shed blood over. Communism, socialism, or what ever the next deceptive name its given is all the same, a poison to the human spirit that we will refuse to ingest.
What exactly is communism? Before anyone even suggests they know the answer to that, they must set down their experience in the matter. Having an advanced degree from some left-leaning university doesn’t count. Nor does it count if all you did was read a book by some alcoholic writer extolling its virtues. And if the only reason a political group is adopting communist ideals is that communism directly contradicts the American President and what he represents, then that person is not only a traitor to America, but the worst kind of deceiver known to mankind.
Just like only a Holocaust survivor’s words can accurately describe the evil of Hitler’s Nazi machine, the only person that can talk with credibility and authority on the nature and reality of communism is one who has lived it in person firsthand.
Communism stifles the human spirit by denying everyone the opportunity to excel and better themselves. It confiscates what it considers “excess” from those who build things, and keeps it for its own purposes. Communism forces everyone to become servants of the government by nationalizing industry (that means they come and take your business), confiscating wealth (they go to the bank and physically take your money by force), indoctrinate the young through the educational system (they make little communists out of your kids), and require children to inform on their parents. They ration food, water, medicine, and fuel. They regulate religion until they can eliminate it.
And for those who suggest that what is happening is wrong, they have squads of armed communists that will find such people and kill them. Sometimes the murders will be through horrific tortures, or public street executions to send a message. Other times, by simply snatching them up and throwing them in a cell for years without any hope of reprieve.
Those who have lived under communism, and seen its result, feel about it in the same way that Jews feel about Hitler and his Nazi machine. And yet, while nobody is suggesting we give Nazism another shot, some are suggesting that very thing about communism.
…
…to the communists among us, a warning. No matter what you do, think, or accomplish. At some point the answer will be clear from those of us who know what communism is and leads to. Never again. I think you know what that means.
Gabriel Suarez
July 5, 2019
AN OPEN LETTER TO AMERICA
[H/T to Adam McIntosh.
I have nothing to add.—Joe]
I’m all about diversity. Let me share a little bit of it with you.
I found this on Gab via Jan Conboy @javelina:
My bullet collection is far more diverse than this but I don’t have a good picture of it.
I have this to keep some of the mud out of the hitch on my SUV:
I received this shirt on Friday from Maj Toure @MAJTOURE:
And from 13 years ago:
Via Dana Loesch:
Liberals Unable To Pass Background Checks Necessary To Buy The Guns They’ll Need To Take Guns Away From Law-Abiding Gun Owners is satire, but most of the points are completely valid. For example:
“And I know it’s gonna work,” Harris said, “because we’ll be taking guns away from law-abiding citizens. Obeying the law is what they do. It’s not like we’re trying to take guns out of the hands of criminals.”
Fast and Furious was a Justice Department program that allowed assault weapons — including .50-caliber rifles powerful enough to take down a helicopter — to be sold to Mexican drug cartels allegedly as a way to track them. But internal documents later revealed the real goal was to gin up a crisis requiring a crackdown on guns in America. Fast and Furious was merely a pretext for imposing stricter gun laws.
…
Team Obama conspired to derail investigations into who was responsible by first withholding documents under subpoena — for which Holder earned a contempt-of-Congress citation — and later claiming executive privilege to keep evidence sealed.
But thanks to the court order, Justice has to cough up the “sensitive” documents. So far it’s produced 20,500 lightly redacted pages, though congressional investigators say they hardly cover all the internal department communications under subpoena. They maintain the administration continues to “withhold thousands of documents.”
Paul Sperry
May 21, 2016
The scandal in Washington no one is talking about
[Via Say Uncle, Miguel.GFZ, and Andrew Branca.
Will the criminals finally be brought to justice?
Check out the date on the quote. That was over three years ago. So the answer is, almost for certain, no.—Joe]
It’s very slow going but the courts are giving us wins:
Today, New Jersey Second Amendment Society received Judge Hurd’s order denying NJ’s motion for summary judgement, granting NJ2AS’ motion for summary judgement, and subsequently ordering the State of NJ to provide New Jersey Second Amendment Society with unredacted copies of Attachments A, B and C to the 2005 New Jersey State Police Firearms Applicant Investigation Guide within 30 days.
It has been 8 years since we first filed our lawsuit to gain access to the guide.
I remember listening to Alan Gura talk a year or so after the Heller decision. He said something to the effect of, “Don’t expect this to change anything overnight. This is just the start of something that people will still be working on 20 years from now.” That it took the New Jersey Second Amendment Society 8 years to get access to a few pieces of paper is very telling. The anti-gun forces really, really don’t want the public to know what they really think about, and how they treat, the Second Amendment.
It’s been 11 years since Heller and with the current rate of progress it looks to me like it could still be another 20 years before we might accomplish something that I might consider approaching an acceptable victory over the forces of evil.
Liberty Defense is developing Hexwave, a new disruptive technology that was exclusively licensed from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) uses 3D radar imaging and artificial intelligence to detect concealed weapons in urban settings.
…
Hexwave could be the next technology that replaces X-ray machines, such as for scanning bags in airports or other venues, and it also provides 3D scans of a person’s exterior as where X-ray can only provide 2D scans.
“Hexwave provides 3D imaging at a rate that is in real time — it can assess for threats while the person is still walking, which means it is well suited for higher, faster throughput,” Riker told VentureBeat.
The urban security market by 2020 to 2025 in North America is set to increase by 33%. The new 3D detection machine can revolutionize security at indoor high traffic crowded areas, like schools, malls, hotels, and places of worship, and protect outdoor high traffic areas, like airports, sports venues, government buildings, and bus/subway stations.
Will this sneak by the Fourth Amendment? If used in a common access public place, does this constitute an unwarranted search? The courts danced around the Fourth Amendment issues when doing searches at airports by saying, in essence, “You can still drive, ride a bus, and walk without being searched hence you are consenting to these searches.”
Also of great concern is the often used phrase “concealed means concealed” will no longer be true. Statists will use this technology to claim you don’t need to have a gun to protect yourself because they have the ability to prevent bad guys (everyone except agents of the state) from having a gun. While individual and groups of criminals are of obvious concern and a reasonable justification for private ownership and carry of self-defense firearms that isn’t the primary reason we have the Second Amendment. The primary reason is defense against the state. This technology could tip the balance in favor of dependency of the state for personal protection. This leading to inability to justify in the public eye the private carry and eventual ownership of firearms. This, of course, puts people at great risk of wholesale slaughter when our government goes completely rogue:
Via Boomstickbiker @Boomstickbiker:
I could see this having potential for some home defense situations but in the more general case I’m going to stick with semi-auto small arms.
The only reward for putting up with craziness is more craziness.
Thomas Sowell
March 6, 1999
THOMAS SOWELL: Back again – random thoughts
[Barb and I have decades of experience with this on a personal level. And we all are seeing the clear and irrefutable truth of this in the political arena. We see it in economics, immigration policy, and especially with our specific enumerated right to keep and bear arms.
The only way to deal with crazy is to not tolerate it. In many cases it is quite surprising how quickly they can put on a semi-rational face when you just say “No!” and have the means and will to enforce it..—Joe]
