Quote of the day—Dave Workman

Wisconsin would not be in its present situation had it not been for anti-gun former Gov. Jim Doyle, a Democrat. He twice vetoed concealed carry legislation that had been supported by most people on both sides of the issue that would have included permits. His actions have resulted in something of a civil rights backlash, with many gun owners now pushing for full carry rights without a permit. It’s essentially payback for Doyle and a handful of Democrats who refused to override his vetoes. If Wisconsin’s Legislature adopts constitutional carry, the blame, or credit depending upon one’s perspective, lies at Doyle’s feet and nobody else’s. He had two chances to be “reasonable,” as the gun control crowd always puts it, and he blew them both.

Why this is important to gun rights advocates in the Pacific Northwest should be obvious. Washington has one of the strongest state constitutional right-to-bear-arms provisions in the nation. Open carry has been legal here since before statehood, as noted yesterday. CPLs were not required until 1933. We can carry right now in the Capitol and legislative office buildings, a fact that gives gun prohibitionists heartburn. A growing contingent of Evergreen State gun owners think we ought to return to the “good old days” and point to Alaska, Arizona (which has a state constitutional provision identical to Washington’s) and Vermont as examples of properly minimal gun regulation.

If Wisconsin adopts, right out of the gate, a constitutional carry measure where no concealed carry provision existed previously, then 2012’s legislative session in Olympia just might see the same proposal. In an election year, that could create a degree of political discomfort for lawmakers who do not care to rile this state’s activist gun owners.

Dave Workman
May 26, 2011
WI panel OKs gun bill; columnist shows bankruptcy of anti-CCW mindset
[The repression of a group over a long period of time spawns resentment. This resentment can result in a demand for “justice” that far exceeds the original modest requests. For many decades gun owners have been treated as second and third class citizens instead of first class as have those that exercised other specific enumerated rights such as freedom of speech.

Those that lament our recent successes in our regaining the recognition of our rights should celebrate that we found success in the courts and the legislatures rather than through our method of last of resort. I suspect we were far closer to the breaking point than the other side realized. Hence our gains are far more modest than they really should be but there is the benefit of the gains being obtained without the shedding of blood. For that both sides can and should celebrate that the system is working.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Joss Whedon

The first thing I ever thought of when I thought of “Buffy: The Movie” was the little…blonde girl who goes into a dark alley and gets killed, in every horror movie. The idea of “Buffy” was to subvert that idea, that image, and create someone who was a hero where she had always been a victim.

Joss Whedon
Welcome to the Hellmouth DVD Commentary from Wikiquote.
[The idea of the right to bear arms is the same.

About 70% of the people in the firearms classes I have taught have been women. All of them were taking the class so they could get a concealed weapons license. I don’t consider them heroes. They are ordinary individuals exercising their natural rights.

We create people who can and will defend themselves against evil. We create a society of individuals who can, will, and must respect the sanctity of life and the dignity of others.

The Brady Campaign has a vested interest in the “little blonde girl” getting killed in the dark alley because that is how they perpetuate their organization. The more victims the more they can dance in the blood and the more donations they get. They create victims and call them heroes and experts. This has to stop. It has to stop with my generation and I intend to help make it so.—Joe]

Send the ATF a message

John Richardson has an easy way to send the ATF a message about the ATFs efforts to register multiple sales of certain rifles.

2011 MGM Junior Shooters Camp

From the USPSA:

Attention all Junior Shooters!

This year’s camp is going to be the best yet! This year the scheduled instructors include Phil Strader, Max Michel, Randi Rogers, B.J. Norris, Matt Burkett, and Manny Bragg! This year’s camp is going to be in Parma, ID on July 22nd – 24th. Price is $260 per junior shooter and includes lodging for the shooter and his/her guardian. All of our former sponsor are once again showing their support by donating prizes, cash for scholarships and Remington has even offered to provide each junior shooter with 500 rounds of ammo! For more information check out the camps website at www.juniorshootercamp.org. There is a limit of 60 shooters so get your entries in soon!

The camp is the weekend before the MGM Targets Grand Nationals Man on Man Shoot Off (modeled after the American Handgunner World Shoot Off) www.mgmtargets-grandnats.com. This will be a great vacation for families that enjoy shooting!

Camp Staff

Here is a story from the 2010 camp.

I wonder what the Brady Campaign has to offer the young to pick their sides in the war over gun ownership rights. Oh! That’s right. They just have sad stories and obvious lies to tell.

Quote of the day—Clark Aposhian

The Second Amendment is not about what I need. It’s about what I want — as long as I obey the law with it. If we start restricting everything to what we need, we are going to be a very boring society.

Clark Aposhian
May 27, 2011
Utah market shows a boom in military-style guns
[While correct this is a little bit weak. More forceful would be “The Second Amendment is not about what I need. It is about what the government is forbidden to do. The question of ‘need” is what must be demanded of the government and never the individual. It is a Bill of Rights. It is not a bill of needs.”—Joe]

I know people like this

Not only do I know people like this I am getting a new job because I cannot work with someone like this.


Via email from Barron.

Firearms Coalitions action alert

Via email from Jeff Knox:



From: The Firearms Coalition’s e-Update
Sent: Thursday, May 26, 2011 4:55 PM
Subject: [Fcalerts e-Update] Immediate Action Alert!


Immediate Action Alert . . . . FirearmsCoalition.org


Immediate Action Needed – Window Closes Tuesday!!


Copy the text of the email below or rewrite it in your own words and email it to:


oira_submission@omb.eop.gov


The comment period for the ATF’s proposed “temporary,” emergency regulation requiring firearms dealers to file reports every time someone purchases more than one semi-auto long gun was reopened, but that comment period closes this Tuesday, May 31.
During the last comment period on this gun owners were outnumbered by the prohibitionists.  That should NEVER happen!  We outnumber them 10 to one and our response to outrageous proposals like this should reflect that numbers advantage.
 
The ATF claims the reporting is necessary to combat the flow of firearms across the border into Mexico, but in light of the “Gunwalker” scandal currently being investigated in Congress and by the Justice Department Inspector General’s office, it looks like ATF is the problem, not the solution.


Some implications of the Project Gunwalker scandal are that ATF has already been receiving significant, voluntary cooperation from gun dealers in the border states, but that the agency has used that cooperation more to build inflate the numbers of illegally “trafficked” weapons as a way of justifying their existence.


Beyond the complications of Project Gunwalker, the idea of requiring reporting of multiple long gun sales is clearly in conflict with established congressional mandates and restrictions on ATF’s authority.  By attempting to push through this major regulatory change without congressional approval (which they could not get), ATF is seriously overstepping their legal authority.


Please copy and paste the following note into an email or write your own and get it submitted as soon as possible.  Also, please do the following: Cc info@FirearmsCoalition.org so we have some record of responses; Send copies to your Senators and Representative and ask that they send their own notes of opposition to ATF; Be sure to repost this Alert to all of your friends and every pro-gun forum you can find.  We must have an overwhelming response to this.
 
Sample comment:
 
To: oira_submission@omb.eop.gov
Subject: Oppose Regulation Expanding Multiple Sale Reporting
 
I am writing to oppose the Information collection action to register multiple sales of certain rifles with BATFE  from the 04/29/2011 Federal Register: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2011-04-29/pdf/2011-10355.pdf


This information collection is both illegal and unnecessary.


*  The action proposed is outside the statutory grant of authority to record information about multiple sales of firearms.  Title 18 U.S.C. § 923(g)(3)(A) specifically grants the authority to collect multiple sale information on handguns and revolvers.  Other firearms are excluded and there is no implied authority to extend this reporting requirement to rifles or any other type of firearm.
*  Analysis of the number of firearms seized shows that Mexico is being primarily supplied with firearms by South American countries, NOT the United States.  In fact, a STRATFOR report indicates that fully 90% of the firearms traced in Mexico are NOT coming from the United States, contrary to assertions in the mainstream media: http://wwwprod-1756134246.us-west-1.elb.amazonaws.com/index.php?q=weekly/20110209-mexicos-gun-supply-and-90-percent-myth.


Additionally, Wikileaks cables have shown the US Government is at least partially responsible for supplying Mexico from the United States: http://narcosphere.narconews.com/notebook/bill-conroy/2011/02/pentagon-fingered-source-narco-firepower-mexico.  These firearms are NOT from the US commercial market.


*  Source documents of the BATFE uncovered by US Senator Grassley and US Representative Issa show that BATFE has been complicit in supplying Mexican Narco-terrorist forces with firearms: http://www.scribd.com/doc/49971654/2011-03-03-CEG-to-DOJ-ATF.


*  ”FFL” holders are already required by law to respond to BATFE requests for information on firearms distribution pursuant to criminal investigations:  Title 18 U.S.C. § 923(g)(7).


*  The regulation contains no provision for the destruction of information collected, which establishes a nationwide registry of “certain types of firearms” as proposed. Because of this the regulation, as proposed, is illegal under Title 18 U.S.C. § 926(a).  ”No such rule or regulation … may require that records required to be maintained under this chapter or any portion of the contents of such records, be recorded at or transferred to a facility owned, managed, or controlled by the United States or any State or any political subdivision thereof, nor that any system of registration of firearms, firearms owners, or firearms transactions or disposition be established.”


There is a grave potential for this regulation to unduly burden citizens who are collectors or must obtain purchase permits at the local or state level to possess firearms. The proposed regulation does not say what the agency intends to do with the information but ostensibly it would be for criminal investigations. Subjecting law abiding gun owners to this type of investigation under the guise of “information collection” is an overt attempt to prevent them from exercising their 2nd Amendment rights to purchase and own firearms.
This regulatory action should not be approved.
 
 
# # #
 
Whether you use this specific language, edit it, or compose a letter of your own, please take action immediately!  Do not put off sending a comment!
Comments must be received by Tuesday May 31, 2011.
Repost — Repost — REPOST!!
Please Send Your Comments Immediately and cc to info@FirearmsCoalition.org.
 
Thank you for your Action!
Jeff Knox 
Director, The Firearms Coalition
www.FirearmsCoalition.org

Quote of the day—Susan Glick

The bottom line is that Florida’s concealed-carry law puts guns into the hands of criminals.

It is ironic that the gun lobby’s ‘model’ concealed carry law is designed to actually reward criminals who plea bargain, a practice that the gun lobby’s rhetoric routinely and vehemently condemns. Under the Florida law, Patrick Purdy, perpetrator of the 1989 Stockton, California schoolyard massacre, and the gun lobby’s poster-boy for the evils of plea bargaining, would not have been prevented from eventually obtaining a concealed carry license despite his previous arrests and convictions for drug possession, illegal possession of dangerous weapons, firing a pistol in a national forest, and resisting arrest.

Florida’s law has made it substantially easier for individuals with criminal records or criminal intent to go about armed. The findings in Concealed Carry: The Criminal’s Companion demonstrate that Florida’s concealed carry law is definitely a model one not to be followed.

Susan Glick
November 1, 1995
VPC Health Policy Analyst
New Study Shows Florida’s “Model” Concealed Carry Law Puts Guns Into the Hands of Criminals
[Note the date, 1995 before you get too wound up over this. History has shown the were demonstrable wrong on the “model one not to be followed” and their efforts to stop the shall issue concealed carry laws from steamrolling the nation were futile.

Even if we ignore the hints they prefer a system where accusations and not convictions are all that are required to deny a person their specific enumerated right to keep and bear arms they still have serious problems with their mindset. It may take few extra seconds to grasp but their basic premise is incredibly stupid. Almost any normal person would realize this within a minute after putting it down on paper. That they don’t recognize this shows how broken their mental processes are.

How can they possibly claim, “Florida’s law has made it substantially easier for individuals with criminal records or criminal intent to go about armed.”? Or “The bottom line is that Florida’s concealed-carry law puts guns into the hands of criminals.”? Do recreational drug users have any problem finding a supplier? Does anyone think that the criminal who wants a firearm will have trouble finding a supplier or tucking a gun into their waistband if they can’t get a concealed carry permit?

The anti-gun people have long demonstrated they have crap for brains and this is just one more example.—Joe]

Good old boys organization for California concealed carry

I was reading the appellants’ opening brief in EDWARD PERUTA, et. al., v. COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, et. al. and found some interesting material.

It turns out that if you are much more likely to get a concealed carry permit if you are willing and able to join the Honorary Deputy Sheriff’s Association (“HDSA”) – a private, civilian entity, wherein membership is achieved merely by being sponsored by a current member, passing a background check, making a “donation” and paying annual dues (see pages 10 and 11).

Sponsored by a current member, make a “donation, and pay dues? Imagine only getting permission to exercise your right to an abortion, free speech, practice your religion, or a jury trial if you could get “sponsored by a current member” and made a “donation”. If this were anything other than a gun issue you would hear the screams of racism and sexism from the other side of the continent.

The right to keep and bear arms is a specific enumerated right and it’s time these repressive governments get slapped down over it.

For more information on this case see Michel & Associates, P.C. web page on Peruta v. San Diego.

Quote of the day—John M. Snyder

The facts show the gun grabbers are out to lunch. The entire gun control movement is full of bananas.

A drop in violent crime rates does NOT correlate with a drop in gun purchase rates. It DOES correlate with an increase in firearms purchase rates.

John M. Snyder
Manager
Telum Associates, LLC
Arlington, VA
Crime Rates Drop as Gun Buy Rates Rise, notes Gun Law Expert
[So much for “gun availability” being a contributing factor to crime rates—Joe]

Quote of the day—Mad Rocket Scientist

I would just love to hear about one these RAIDS coming up short because the doors wouldn’t batter down and the windows just chipped instead of breaking. I can just imagine the SWAT team standing outside of the little bungalow they tried to force, a bit perplexed that they couldn’t get it, when grandma’s voice comes out of the intercom speaker by the door, “Can I help you?”.

Mad Rocket Scientist
May 24, 2011
I think I’m gonna start a business
[There are other outcomes that I have fantasized about which also bring a smile to my face. But implementations are not cheap and the risks are unacceptably high even though the deterrence effects would be “significant”. It also probably would require “entrapment” of the police by the homeowner which would be frowned upon by many.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Nicolo Machiavelli

For among other evils which being unarmed brings you, it causes you to be despised, and this is one of those ignominies against which a prince ought to guard himself, as is shown later on.

Nicolo Machiavelli
The Prince, Chapter XIV, That Which Concerns A Prince On The Subject Of The Art Of War
[The first half that sentence is sometimes attributed to Charlton Heston. It’s possible that Heston borrowed that fragment from Machiavelli or it’s possible that it’s improperly attributed to Heston. I haven’t bothered to track it down but I thought you should know.

It’s also important to point out that we don’t have recognized royalty as rulers in this country. This country was designed with a different model. A model where the ultimate power resides with the people and they grant certain enumerated powers to the government via the various constitutions.

Because of this difference in models between a society which has the ultimate power residing with the royalty and a society where the ultimate power resides with the people the proper analog of Machiavelli’s instruction in our country is that the people should be armed to prevent them from being despised by the government. And so it came to be that we have the Second Amendment to our constitution and similar, if not stronger, provisions in most state constitutions.—Joe]

Steel Challenge results

Today I shot in a Steel Challenge match at the Lewiston Pistol Club. With Boomershoot consuming my time for the previous couple of months and the timing of my visits to Idaho not coincident with the match schedules it has been a long time since I shot in a match.

I messed up one stage and that hurt my overall results badly:

May 22, 2011 Steel

Pendulum

Accelerator

Showdown Jr

Not that W

Smoke & Hope

Total Time

Roger (auto)

20.39

19.93

14.51

18.03

15.56

88.42

Roger (Revolver)

22.92

18.36

16.76

21.22

15.07

94.33

KW

20.65

19.93

20.24

19.56

17.1

97.48

Joe

26.8

20.37

16.8

19.61

15.49

99.07

Ernest

21.14

23.04

19.53

20.6

14.83

99.14

Bill

26.73

21.3

23.74

27.75

18.48

118

Roxanna

31.77

22.05

22.12

25.58

16.92

118.44

Mike S.

30.25

22.04

25.3

22.97

20.87

121.43

Robert

30.76

28.9

30.27

29.68

18.14

137.75

Erik

45.12

33.47

29.57

31.5

23.39

163.05

Mike G

73.82

31.51

25.68

27.66

20.8

179.47

Notice the top two positions are the same guy shooting an auto loader and a revolver? It just goes to show you it is the shooter/training not the gun that makes the biggest difference in the outcome of a shooting match. Also, I am pretty sure Roger is the oldest shooter. What does that tell you given that I am in my mid-50s?

I’m skeptical

The Brady Campaign as an organization as well as board members and top leaders have repeatedly said they don’t want to ban guns.

One should probably regard such claims with skepticism since Google reports there are 86,200 instances of the of the word “ban” on their website.

Bing reports only 48,200 instances. Well, okay then. I guess it’s not as bad as I thought it was.

Quote of the day—Zombie Shooters Association of America

So many Zombies, so little time.

Zombie Shooters Association of America
H/T Linoge.
[Guns are fun. Pass it on.—Joe]

Live blogging from the Boomershoot site

I’m doing some maintenance at the Boomershoot site. Lots of little things:

  • The oil in the generator needs to be changed (it’s warming up and charging the battery right now all charged!)
  • The O/S in my Wi-Fi access points needs to be updated (one done the other in progress)
  • The yellow jacket trap needed the bait replaced (done)
  • There is still garbage which needs to be hauled away
  • The bowling pin rack was hauled back to the shed (cousin Alan brought it down off of his hill—whoops! I was going to do that two weeks ago and didn’t make it out here)

Need to do some chronograph work and practice for the steel challenge match tomorrow while I’m out here too. And that reminds me that I need to pay a special someone for all the steel targets they brought to me at Boomershoot.

Quote of the day—Kieran Healy

I guess on Sunday when the #Rapture people feel really upset, we can’t console them by saying “Cheer up, it’s not the end of the world”.

Kieran Healy
May 20, 2011
[Via a retweet by Kris R.

On a more serious note—I should have updated my website www.whenprophecyfails.info. It still has a lot of great info on it. But I should have included info about this particular incident a week or two ago. I procrastinate too much.—Joe]

Boomershoot 2011 in time lapse

Notice the clouds of water vapor from the explosions in this time lapse video of Boomershoot 2011. The winds–they are a changing.

Quote of the day—Sarah Brady

The licensing debate is not about the right to own a firearm; it’s about responsible gun ownership, about safety, and about law enforcement’s ability to revoke the license of someone who becomes a danger to themselves or others. Additionally, a licensing system will ensure that gunowners understand their own states’ laws, from the regulations governing the carrying of concealed weapons to the responsibility for keeping loaded guns away from children.

Sarah Brady
Brady Campaign
January 28, 2000
STATEMENT OF SARAH BRADY RE: PRESIDENT CLINTON’S LICENSING INITIATIVE
[If a licensing scheme would “ensure that gunowners understand their own states’ laws” and presumably “preventing gun violence” then perhaps the government could license recreational drug (including cigarettes and alcohol) users and “revoke the licenses of someone who becomes a danger to themselves or others”. Or maybe licensing homosexuals, Catholic priests, and/or Muslims. Never mind that the right to keep and bear arms is a specific enumerated right and (probably) cannot be subject to a license while recreational drug use is not a specifically enumerated right.

Once the concept of licensing drug users proves its worth then we can talk about how effective licensing might be when applied to firearms. Don’t forget to do the arithmetic before you bring the topic up with me.—Joe]

The entire world is a battlefield

This may be reading too much into a few words but it bears watching. From Salon.com, “How many Americans are targeted for assassination?”:



Dozens of Americans have joined terrorist groups and are posing a threat to the United States and its interests abroad, the president’s most senior adviser on counterterrorism and homeland security said Thursday. . . . “There are, in my mind, dozens of U.S. persons who are in different parts of the world, and they are very concerning to us,” said John O. Brennan, deputy White House national security adviser for homeland security and counterterrorism. . . .


“If a person is a U.S. citizen, and he is on the battlefield in Afghanistan or Iraq trying to attack our troops, he will face the full brunt of the U.S. military response,” Mr. Brennan said. “If an American person or citizen is in a Yemen or in a Pakistan or in Somalia or another place, and they are trying to carry out attacks against U.S. interests, they also will face the full brunt of a U.S. response. And it can take many forms.”


See also Congress Proposes Bill to Allow Worldwide War … Including INSIDE the U.S.


It’s may be important to note that exercise certain, perhaps any, rights guaranteed by the Bill of Rights could cause you to be considered a “low level terrorist” and the DOJ, FBI, and JTTF will consider it justification to be watching you.


Via email from former co-worker Chet.