Quote of the day—Publicoloa

The only reason we have background checks in the first place is so some politicians could get votes or funding, and so government had a mechanism of denying folks a Constitutionally enumerated Right. It does no practical good in keeping people with evil intent from causing harm or even acquiring weapons while it burdens and prevents the Rights of people who intend only good from having the best means of self defense.

Publicoloa
January 6, 2015
The Wrong People
[It’s a bit long but there is some very good information in this post.

See also my post on background checks.—Joe]

This is what they think of you

Via a tweet from Linoge we have this:

.@OfficialJackson 12 slaughtered in Paris w/ a spoon? fork? knife? fist? NO, a “MODERN SPORTING RIFLE” #NRAExtremism

NRAExtremism

Also about three hours later using the same image:

.@foxoutdoors This guy on an American street is just another #OPENCARRY Patriot (until he pulls the trigger). #NRAAM

This is what they think of NRA members and I presume nearly all gun owners.

Quote of the day—Steve

Guns and ammunition need to be regulated on performance and capacity and not styling cues. Limiting weapons to single shot breach loaders would keep the second amendment happy (and save a bunch of lives).

Steve
December 17, 2014
Comment to Why Shooting Victims Can’t Win Lawsuits Against Gunmakers
[Don’t ever let anyone get away with telling you that no one wants to take your guns.—Joe]

Achtung, Juden! Das ist Verboten!

In processing a customer order today, we got a “Service Not Allowed” message from our credit card merchant services bank. They’re the ones who handle all of our credit and debit card transactions. We called them to find out what this message means, because we’d not seen it before. Well, they were by this time quite familiar with the “problem”. The problem is MBNA, in this case, who issued the card to our customer, DOES NOT ALLOW TRANSACTIONS WITH GUN RELATED BUSINESSES.

If you’re doing any business with MBNA, you’d best give them a jingle, and DO NOT FORGET this. This sort of thing seems to be on the rise, and it will get worse unless we push back, soon.

Update, Jan. 7, 2015; The customer called his bank, assuming the “Service Not Allowed” was due to a late payment on his part. As I explained to him several times; we were told by our Merchant Services bank that it was due to MBNA policy, and that our Merchant Services people were quite familiar with said policy as they’d had to deal with such denials many times previous. The customer only repeated what he’d said about a possible late payment. In any case, the transaction, on the same card, was approved today. All I can make of it, given what we were told by Merchant Services, is that MBNA will cave without comment or discussion once they’re called on it. From what commenters are saying, the practice of denying transactions may be random, or it may be targeted toward individual customers or vendors. Without more information I have no way of knowing. This would all seem quite unbelievable, except for what we already know about the recent IRS targeting, Fast & Furious, the attempted intimidation of Sharyl Attkisson and others, and other insidious pranks aimed at the perceived enemies of Progressivism.

SAF launches firearms training division

The Second Amendment Foundation is getting into firearms training:

BELLEVUE, WA – Following a year of organization, the Second Amendment Foundation Training Division (SAFTD) has embarked on the development of a program specifically directed at training the new and inexperienced shooters in the defensive use of pistols, shotguns and carbines.

In early 2014, experienced trainers from throughout the country were recruited to act as the core of SAFTD and to begin the development of a number of foundational courses. Initial offerings include MOI – Methods of Instruction, Defensive Handgun 1, Defensive Handgun 2, Defensive Shotgun 1, Defensive Shotgun2, Defensive Carbine 1 and Defensive Carbine 2 in addition to instructor level course work to train a national cadre of firearms instructors to offer SAFTD courses throughout the nation.

All of the courses offered are presented with the defensive use of the individual firearm in mind. While familiar foundational material is presented, additional defensive topics and activities are included such as firearm selection, holsters, use of force, discussions about AOJP – Ability, Opportunity, Jeopardy, Preclusion – Disparity of Force and much more. All Level 1 courses are introductory and foundational. All Level 2 courses take the student’s foundational skill set and builds it into a more comprehensive defensive shooting level.

These courses will be the introductory set rolled out through the Spring and early Summer of 2015. The national introduction of the SAFTD courses will be held at the Shot Show in Las Vegas in late January. Initial instructors will be trained beginning in February. Initial student level coursework will begin in mid-March. All coursework will be scheduled via SAFTD’s website with all available courses and regional trainers being listed along with full course descriptions and full bios of all certified SAFTD instructors.

Instructors will need to attend SAFTD’s MOI course – as well as completing periodic Continuing Education, the course they wish to be certified to teach and the instructor version of that course while achieving passing scores of 90% on all written exams. At the end of the instructor course, they will shoot a qualification course requiring a passing score of 90%. Instructors must also have a First Aid certification from a recognized organization as well as having certified instruction in CPR and the use of an AED.

In addition to the core offerings SAFTD will also be offering a Situational Alertness for Everyone (S.A.F.E.) course which is designed to teach the student to develop and adopt the situational awareness mindset while at home, at work, on the road, traveling, on the phone etc; and teaches how to make your home safe and less attractive to would be robbers and home invasion.

SAFTD will also be offering a Women’s Program. The SAFTD Women’s program was developed by women for women and addresses the specials needs of women, their firearms, security and special concerns with carrying a firearm both on and off-body. Initially our Women’s program will consist of Women’s Defensive Handgun 1 and 2 but will eventually lead to a full women’s program starting in early 2016 including State Chapters and State Leaders for each state.
We are excited about our program. We strongly believe it fills a significant gap in what is being offered to a new defensive firearms student. We look forward to meeting you all at Shot Show and in the weeks, months and years to come.

About SAF Training Division:

The mission of the SAF Training Division (SAFTD) is to fill a long standing void in the national training community, by producing a program that is based on enabling law abiding citizens to protect themselves and their loved ones through solid defensive training! Our primary responsibility is to the student and our primary allegiance is to our instructors! We know that we need to support our instructors and their respective businesses, their livelihoods depend on it! By supporting our instructors and providing them with different revenue streams and a responsive organization, we enable our instructors to give a first class experience to the public! For more information, visit saftd.org.

The Second Amendment Foundation (www.saf.org) is the nation’s oldest and largest tax-exempt education, research, publishing and legal action group focusing on the Constitutional right and heritage to privately own and possess firearms. Founded in 1974, The Foundation has grown to more than 650,000 members and supporters and conducts many programs designed to better inform the public about the consequences of gun control.

I’m not sure what to think of this. SAF has been doing well in the courts and I expected donated money would continue to fund and win cases against repressive firearms laws. Does this mean they are using those funds to compete with the NRA training division?

On the other hand NRA training has traditionally been weak in firearm training for personal protection. It took many years for them to get a minimal set of personal protection classes fielded. If SAF could meet this need more completely and with greater agility then that could help change the culture by getting more people into shooting.

Quote of the day—Guest

You … keep yourself armed to the teeth and have committed yourself to death, mayhem, and destruction. You are thoroughly corrupted and your ilk has caused the deaths of these poor young kids at Sandy Hook that you call “so called dead children.” You are depraved, paranoid, and heartless. Wrap yourself in your warped misunderstanding of the 2nd Amendment as you polish your weapons waiting for more innocent blood to be spilled because of your irrationality and murderous ideology.

Guest
December 16, 2014
Comment to Why Sandy Hook Victims Won’t Win Their Suit Against Bushmaster
[Don’t ever let anyone get away with telling you that no one wants to take your guns.

When people think this of gun owners taking your guns away will only be a “good first step”. People like this will claim they are being merciful when they send you to the extermination camps.—Joe]

Quote of the day—THE NYCEO

Listen you nuts….go get that surgery to enlarge your private parts so you can put the assault rifle down. Enough is enough.

THE NYCEO
December 15, 2014
Comment to Bride, groom bring out the big guns during Washington state rally opposing universal background checks
[It’s another Markley’s Law Monday!—Joe]

Quote of the day—Me

The good-intentioned think that they are being a sort of saint, when really they are just arrogant meddlers.

Me
December 24, 2014
Perils of the well-intentioned
[No, not Joe Me, but another blogger.

This is my model of many, perhaps even most, anti-gun people. Particularly the casual supporter of restrictions upon our specific enumerated right to keep and bear arms. They have good intentions but they are unwittingly attempting to enable evil. They think they know best when really they don’t even begin to understand the subject material.

This reminds me of many other quotes of a similar nature. Such as perhaps the most famous:

If I knew for a certainty that a man was coming to my house with the conscious design of doing me good, I should run for my life.

Henry David Thoreau
(1817-62), U.S. philosopher, author, naturalist.
Walden, “Economy” (1854).

Or Daniel Webster:

Good intentions will always be pleaded for every assumption of authority.   It is hardly too strong to say that the Constitution was made to guard the people against the dangers of good intentions. There are men in all ages who mean to govern well, but they mean to govern. They promise to be good masters, but they mean to be masters.

One could claim this one is older and better known:

The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

And superficially they would be correct. But the original meaning is quite different than what we have in the current context.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Mike Vanderboegh

Refusal is a weapon. It is a weapon that has been used to good effect in this country since the time of the Founders. Michael Bloomberg’s Rules are negated by the Law of Unintended Consequences. And looking back on the past two years of expensive laws and craven legislators bought and sold that all of his “victories” required, Bloomberg must be wondering this Christmas why it is that someone crapped in his stocking. He should be celebrating. Instead he has been frustrated, as the Founders intended, by the refusal of the armed citizenry of the United States to bow down to him and his tyrannical kind.

Mike Vanderboegh
December 23, 2014
Refusal as a weapon. There is NO unconstitutional law that Mike Bloomberg can buy that we cannot nullify with armed civil disobedience.
[Refusal worked for Rosa Parks. Refusal worked for Canadian gun owners. If we play our cards right refusal will work for us.

And a very Merry Christmas to Bloomberg and his ilk.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Brian Keith

Our community must hear us proudly declare that we own guns.

It may make some of our fellow citizens uncomfortable. But so can two guys walking down the street holding hands. Our owning guns is not subject to their discomfort.

It may make some of our fellow citizens nervous or upset. But so can an interracial couple sharing a kiss in a park. Our owning guns is not subject to their emotional state.

Brian Keith
December 13, 2014

[This was part of his speech at the #IWillNotComply rally in Olympia.

See also my comments to his QOTD here.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Jacob J. Rieper

They long ago gave up any semblance of being a civil rights organization and do little now but make excuses for violent, antisocial members of society. They cry racism where none exists in hopes of intimidating their opponents and diverting attention away from the real issues. What was the response from the NAACP when protestors were calling for dead cops at a rally a week ago? Dead silence. Why should anyone take them seriously after that?

Jacob J. Rieper
NYSRPA Vice President
December 22, 2014
NAACP Calls for More Gun Control in Wake of NYPD Shootings
[I have nothing to add.—Joe]

SAF sues to derail Washington State gun control initiative 594

Full article here.

The Second Amendment Foundation has filed a federal lawsuit in U.S. District Court in Tacoma, Wash., that challenges the constitutionality of portions of Initiative 594, the billionaire-backed 18-page gun control measure passed by voters Nov. 4 that could be the most important election issue of 2014.

“The broad and poorly constructed restrictions in I-594 render the enactment unconstitutional,” the lawsuit contends. So far, the complaint notes, the plaintiffs are not aware of any arrests, citations or prosecutions since the law took effect.

At the Olympia demonstration, hundreds of gun-toting activists either participated or watched as unloaded firearms were swapped back and forth under the eyes of onlooking State Patrol troopers.

“Shortly after I-594 passed,” the complaint says, “the Washington State Patrol, through its spokesman Bob Calkins, announced that the agency was not planning any arrests or citations of individuals planning to protest the passage of I-594 by trading firearms amongst themselves without subjecting the changes in possession to background checks.” Calkins at the time said, “We don’t think that we could prove that that’s a transfer.”

Help Undo the Damage of I-594!

Via email:

WASHINGTON STATE GUN OWNER ACTION ALERT

Email not displaying correctly?
View it in your browser.

 

Protect Our Gun Rights

Help Undo the Damage of I-594!

 

I-594 – Rally for Your Rights
January 15, 2014
9 am – Rally On Capitol Building Steps
11 am – Meet With Elected Representatives

 

CORRECTIO: Sorry about the mix up in the previous email! The correct link for locating your legislator is: http://app.leg.wa.gov/districtfinder/, (no www).

On January 15, 2015 starting at 9 a.m. a coalition of local and national gun rights groups will host the first 2015 Legislative Rally against I-594 on the front steps at the Washington State Capitol Building in Olympia.

The grassroots event will include hundreds of supporters of the Second Amendment rights with speakers Adina Hicks (Executive Director, Protect Our Gun Rights), Rick Halle (National Coordinator, Gun Rights Coalition), Paige Biron (President, Pink Pistols of Seattle), Alan Gottlieb (Founder, Second Amendment Foundation), Joe Huffman (Boomershoot), Bill Burris (WAC Board member, WSLEFIA Spokesperson), Rep. Brian Blake, and others that will kick off a day sharing the concerns of Second Amendment supporters with legislators throughout the Capitol campus.

After the rally, attendees are encouraged to visit their individual legislators to educate them about the many flaws of I-594 and promote other firearms rights issues.

For help scheduling meeting with your legislator, please call Adina Hicks of POGR at (425) 351-4088.

Business casual or formal attire is the norm on the capitol campus when the legislature is in session. Our aim is for gun owners to make their voices heard and petition their government for redress of grievances, not to put on a sideshow for the media to easily twist.

Help will be provided at the rally to those unsure of who their legislator is and how best to meet with them. In the meantime you may locate your legislator by going to http://app.leg.wa.gov/districtfinder/.

You may also contact your representatives via the legislative hotline at 1-800-562-6000 to educate them on the facts.

We will have many other announcements to follow in the weeks to come.

To support the activities of Protect Our Gun Rights your contributing membership and support is necessary to continue our important work. Please help today!

 

WWW.WAGUNRIGHTS.ORG

 

 

 

 follow on Twitter | friend on Facebook | forward to a friend 

Paid for by:  Protect Our Gun Rights
Not authorized by any candidate or candidate committee.

Protect Our Gun Rights
12500 NE 10th Pl.,
Bellevue, WA 98005

Protect Our Gun Rights
Tel: 800-486-6963
Fax: (425) 451-3959

wagunrights@liberty.seanet.com

 

This is how you measure racism?

From this “study” claiming to show that gun ownership is positively correlated to racism we find this is how they measure racism:

1.   It’s really a matter of some people not trying hard enough; if blacks would only try harder they could be just as well off as whites.        

<1> Strongly agree
<2> Somewhat agree
<3> Somewhat disagree
<4> Strongly disagree

2.  Irish, Italian, Jewish and many other minorities overcame prejudice and worked their way up.  Blacks should do the same.

<1> Strongly agree
<2> Somewhat agree
<3> Somewhat disagree
<4> Strongly disagree

3.  Some say that black leaders have been trying to push too fast.  Others feel that they haven’t pushed fast enough.  What do you think?   

<1> Trying to push very much too fast
<2> Going too slowly
<3> Moving at about the right speed

4.  How much of the racial tension that exists in the United States today do you think blacks are responsible for creating?                       

<1> All of it
<2> Most
<3> Some
<4> Not much at all

5.  How much discrimination against blacks do you feel there is in the United States today, limiting their chances to get ahead?

<1> A lot
<2> Some
<3> Just a little
<4> None at all

6.  Generations of slavery and discrimination have created conditions that make it difficult for blacks to work their way out of the lower class. 

<1> Strongly agree
<2> Somewhat agree
<3> Somewhat disagree
<4> Strongly disagree

7.  Over the past few years, blacks have gotten less than they deserve.

<1> Strongly agree
<2> Somewhat agree
<3> Somewhat disagree
<4> Strongly disagree

8.  Over the past few years, blacks have gotten more economically than they deserve.

<1> Strongly agree
<2> Somewhat agree
<3> Somewhat disagree
<4> Strongly disagree

Wow! And here I thought racism was an biased view of someone because of their race which was unsupported by, or in spite of, data. Nearly all of the questions can be answered by appropriate research. Asking these questions tells us nothing about real racism. It may well be that someone knows the factually supported answers to these questions and nearly maxes out as a racist.

For example; Imagine the survey was attempting to measure racism toward Asian women and they asked to agree or disagree with the statement, “Asian women are underrepresented on United States professional basketball teams because of racism.” The only bias that could realistically be measured is if the answer was in agreement with statement since:

  1. Statistically Asian women are shorter than average.
  2. Height is a big advantage in basketball.
  3. Both of the above conditions are well known.

In general there are three conditions which must be met before racism measurement survey can be valid:

  1. The factually supported answers align with the biases of the creators of this test.
  2. The person taking the test knew the factually supported answers.
  3. The person taking the test answered the questions in a way that was not factually supported.

If any of the conditions are not met then the survey results are invalid. I am virtually certain the second and third conditions are false for the vast majority of people being surveyed and I suspect the first condition is as well.

There can only be one correct conclusion from this. I must be a racist.

Quote of the day—Bill Hooper

A Nation Practically Owned and Run by the N.R.A. and Walmart,which has countenanced the Fascist W regime ,and where Jeb Bush is a likely Presidential Candidate DESERVES Gun-toting Dogs on a Rampage.

Bill Hooper
December 18, 2014
Comment to Dog shoots man: Accidental shooting injures man
[H/T to Paul Koning.

Disregard the factual errors and hypocrisy of claiming President Bush was Fascist with no mention of President Obama. This is what they think of us. You and I DESERVE to be shot.

Why are progressives so violent? Oh, Now I remember. It’s in their nature.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Darth @DarthNihilus1

@EndNRA @jgrubb62190 @AWorldOutOfMind I see a man making up for his micropenis with a gun, in a bedroom that proves he doesn’t have a woman.

Darth@DarthNihilus1
Tweeted on December 11, 2014
This was in reference to this picture:
DarthMarkleysLaw
[It’s another Markley’s Law Monday! Via a Tweet from BFD ‏@BigFatDave.

My response was, “And what do you see here?”—Joe]

Quote of the day—kglnyc

You NRA scum are pure evil — PURE EVIL.

kglnyc
December 18, 2014
Comment to Why Sandy Hook Victims Won’t Win Their Suit Against Bushmaster
[And what do most people believe should be done with “pure evil”? Do you think people who believe “NRA scum” are pure evil don’t want to take your guns? Don’t ever let anyone get away with telling you no one wants to take your guns.

The price of liberty is eternal vigilance of people like this. Failure to pay this price will result in servitude and death for millions of innocent people.—Joe]

Quote of the day—AM

The only way this isn’t blatant hypocrisy is if the Left has denied even basic humanity to the Right. So that conservatives aren’t human, and thus not deserving of human rights. Which makes sense considering how many, “we’ll have the police round you all up and kill you” comments have been thrown at “gun nuts” over the years.

Progressives, still looking to blame someone else and implement their final solution.

AM
December 24, 2014
Comment to Their humor is very telling
[I have nothing to add.—Joe]

If you use MasterCard

Burn their cards and send them the ashes. Because they should be prosecuted.

Update: It’s also possible, I was thinking after posting this, that it was wishful thinking on the part of Mark Glaze, or it was some MasterCard flunky that didn’t have power to promise anything.

Quote of the day—Defens

ubu would enter a museum of Nazi artifacts and comment on the delicacy with which the lampshades had been stitched.

Defens
December 24, 2014
Comment to Their humor is very telling
[I have long been pleased to have ubu52 comment on my blog and have invited her to attend Boomershoot to meet friends and others in the gun culture. I always viewed her as mildly anti-gun but with good intentions. My model for her was that she understood the facts and the logic of the gun rights movement but had trouble getting over some emotional hurdles into real acceptance. I appreciated her “keeping us honest” when we would get a little carried away with conclusions not fully supported by the evidence. It was “fear” of her calling me on something that would cause me to do a little more research before stating something I wasn’t totally sure of.

My model of her totally changed last night after I read a comment from her about a fiction, extremely graphic, story about someone engaging in degrading, casual sex with Ann Coulter. Her comment was:

The writing is brilliant, creative and professional. No editing required. No surprise, it was written by someone in LA because there are so many professional “creatives” here.

You may not like it because it doesn’t match your core beliefs, but the writing is brilliant.

This blew apart my previous model for her. I’m not sure what to think now but whatever model Defens is using is consistent with the known data.—Joe]