Category Archives: Gun Rights

It is What Socialists and Communist Do

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

This hotline is nothing more than a page out of the Stasi playbook – encouraging children to spy on their own families. This is a dangerous step toward weaponizing children in households for the left, and an outrageous government overreach under the guise of public safety.

Rep. Angela Rigas
R-Caledonia
Michigan legislature creates tip line for students to anonymously turn in parents for ‘improperly’ stored guns – The Midwesterner

I know China did the same sort of thing. I expect all socialist and communists weaponize everything they can to acquire and keep power.

Free Speech and Guns are Essential

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

The dangers of werewolves and socialists make the ready access of information and guns critical to our survival. And, conversely, the repression of this access is critical to the spread of socialism and werewolves.

The First and Second Amendments. They are not just good ideas. They are the law.

A Good Start

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

Inadvertence and ignorance of the law by government is no more of an excuse for violating civil rights than when a citizen ‘inadvertently’ violates the law and is arrested and prosecuted. I will begin drafting my Complaint seeking relief, including personal fines against the city officials under whose jurisdiction this knowing and willful enactment occurred. You may want to inform the relevant officials that they are not allowed to use tax dollars to defend themselves from such liability, and that any fine assessed will be personally payable by them, to alleviate your concerns about tax dollars.

Eric J. Friday
General Counsel of Florida Carry, Inc.
September 28, 2024
Florida Officials Who “Inadvertently” Banned Guns Prior to Hurricane May Pay – The Truth About Guns

Remember, a couple weeks ago, when a small town in Florida decided to suspend the 2nd Amendment because of the hurricane? The quote above is the response after the town apologized and said they hadn’t prosecuted anyone for violating their illegal order.

It’s not a criminal prosecution, but Florida law does say the government officials responsible for an illegal ordinance can be personally fined for their illegal acts. I hope other politicians pick up on this clue.

It is a good start.

Plausible Hypothesis

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

Their panic is because this would lead to the final demise of their hopes of full gun bans someday.

That hope was tied to demographic decline of white men, the biggest gun-owning group. If women and people of color are also gun owners at growing rates, that dream dies.

Kostas Moros @MorosKostas
Posted on X on October 11, 2024

This was in response to this:

Funny how anti-gunners make jokes about gun owners being all white men and then freak out when they see gun companies marketing toward people who aren’t white men

Rob Romano @2Aupdates
Posted on X October 11, 2024

Kamala Harris announcing she owns a gun is another data point in favor of this hypothesis. She and/or her handlers see the writing on the wall and have decided it is time to be less openly hostile to gun ownership.

We Can Line All Those Guys Up and Shoot ’em

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

We can line all those guys up and shoot ’em. And they clearly don’t understand the way the world works.

Phillip Lowcock 
October 9, 2024

Via a post on X from Chuck Petras @Chuck_Petras.

Violence. It is their language. It is what they think they can do. It is what they do.

See also:

I find it “interesting” that in the video he clearly says, “… we can…”. But in the msn.com, Newsweek, cjonline.com, and ksnt.com articles they “quote” him as saying, “…we could…”. Other articles don’t provide any quotes at all. They just say “Lowcock made some remarks about some men.”

What bias in the mainstream media?

Perhaps you really can’t hate the media enough.

Arming Up

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

There has been a surge in the number of liberal Americans owning a firearm, according to new gun ownership data from the University of Chicago’s NORC research group cited by The Wall Street Journal.

According to WSJ, a world that has long been the domain of the white conservative male is being adopted by a growing number of Democrats who are ditching their scruples and getting themselves down to the local gun store.

Given this growing trend, it is hardly surprising that presidential candidate Kamala Harris has repeatedly drawn attention to how she and her running mate Tim Walz are both gun owners.

thedailydigest.com
October 8, 2024
Is soaring gun ownership among Democrats linked to US political polarization? (msn.com)

In general, this is good for gun owner rights issues. The more gun owners the more votes we get against restrictive gun laws. That’s fine, but the question I have is, “Why now?”

This is one of the answers given in the article:

Michael Ciemnoczolowski, a dyed in the wool Democrat from Iowa, interviewed by the news outlet, said that he was anxious about various unsettling trends that included a rise in armed right-wing extremists.

This chimes with what Professor Deana Rohlinger, a sociology professor at Florida State University, said in Newsweek – that rising gun ownership amongst Democrats could well be linked to the increasing political polarization in the US.

“For some, a gun purchase may be the result of their read on how increased political tensions and divisiveness in the US might play out,” Rohlinger told the news site.

There are other suggested reasons. But I have to express my concern that a big component is those 10% of Americans who say they believe political violence is justified to prevent Trump from becoming president again.

My underground bunker in Idaho is not going to be ready in time.

Knowledge is Power

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

Via a post on X from Chuck Petras @Chuck_Petras.

I suspect this may only work for very low-pressure cartridges such as .22 LR. And there may be some accuracy issues for the first few shots.

SCOTUS to Hear a New Gun Case

Posted on by

There are lots of good cases for SCOTUS to review. I wish an “assault weapon” ban were on the docket and eventually, perhaps incidentally with the “assault weapon” case, get NFA thrown out. The serial number/home build guns issue is being heard and is almost certain to go our way. Eventually I can see the background checks being dropped and being able to order guns online without an FFL. After all, FFL’s are not part of our history and tradition of gun laws.

In the meantime, this is probably a higher priority case than any of the above, even if it is a distraction from the individual rights cases:

Supreme Court Agrees to Hear ‘Business-Crushing’ Gun Case (msn.com)

The United States Supreme Court will hear case about whether Mexico can sue Smith & Wesson Brands Inc. for facilitating sales to people connected with Mexico’s drug cartels.

On Friday, the justices agreed to hear Smith & Wesson’s case seeking to dismiss the lawsuit filed by the Mexican government. Mexico sued the gun maker and is asking for billions of dollars in damages and new gun-control measures. It’s the first suit by a national government against the gun industry, and one that Smith & Wesson warn could completely decimate their industry.

In a letter addressed to the Supreme Court clerk on August 8, a lawyer for Smith & Wesson Brands said the company is protected from a 2005 law that provides liability shields to gunmakers.

…

In the lawsuit, Mexico alleged the manufactures and distributors were helping the purchase of their firearms by dealers who were known to supply the drug cartels. It also is claimed that the companies did not make changes, such as installing safeguards or making gun serial numbers harder to tamper with, that could make the guns less likely for criminal use.

I have to wonder why former President Obama and former U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder are not named in the lawsuit. Holder was found to be in contempt of Congress for his actions in this case. They are the people that forced the gun dealers to sell guns to the Mexican cartels.

But I don’t wonder long. The likely reason is that Operation Fast and Furious was a ruse to generate a means to bring down gun dealers and manufacturers.

False Hope or a Neutered SCOTUS?

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

A group of state legislators, local politicians and nonprofits on Tuesday launched a national coalition that hopes to circumvent the congressional stalemate on gun reform by pressing for violence prevention efforts at the local level.

The coalition, Legislators for Safer Communities, aims to capitalize on the shifting politics of gun reform by focusing more attention on state legislatures, where violence prevention advocates have scored their biggest wins in recent years.

Roque Planas
September 17, 2024
State Lawmakers Have Gun Reform Strategy | HuffPost Latest News

I have to wonder about something which is not mentioned, the courts. The really active gun owner rights groups are getting more done with fewer people and fewer dollars in the Federal courts than they can in the state legislatures. They don’t have to fight the same fights every year in every state.

Are the anti-gun people just trying to keep the money coming in by giving their supporters false hope? Or do they believe the Democrats are soon going to neuter SCOTUS and reverse our wins?

All Your Rights Violated, All the Time

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

We’re going to require responsible behaviors among everybody in the community, and just because you legally possess a gun in the sanctity of your locked home doesn’t mean that we’re not going to walk into that home and check to see if you’re being responsible and safe in the way you conduct your affairs.

Kamala Harris
2007
Commentary: On the Second Amendment, Harris shoots herself in the foot — again (msn.com)

Using the 2nd Amendment as sort of a canary in the coalmine seems to work well. If they won’t respect the 2nd Amendment, why should you expect they will respect any other rights? And, of course, once they have sufficiently infringed upon the right to keep and bear arms you don’t have the means to effectively push back when they infringe all your rights all the time.

There Are Many Answers

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

There is but one answer to be made to the dynamite bomb and that can best be made by the Winchester rifle.

Theodore Roosevelt
1887
Did Teddy Roosevelt Say the ‘One Answer to Terrorism’ Is a Winchester Rifle?

Via an email, which had “terrorism” instead of “the dynamite bomb” in the quote, from pkoning.

While it captures the appropriate sentiment succinctly, it is not all that accurate these days. It appears to me that Israel is doing rather well in their fight against the terrorists/dynamite-bombers in their neighborhoods while using few, and perhaps zero, Winchester rifles. As was reported in a briefing at work last week:

They compromised the supply chain and delivered pagers with explosives to Hezbollah leadership. They blew them up almost simultaneously. Hezbollah then went to walkie-talkies and those were blown up. When Hezbollah then assembled in a single building for face-to-face communication, they blew up the building.

This will be studied and admired for years to come as one of the most creative, complex, and well executed operations in the history of warfare.

Precision guided bombs, M-4s, M-16s, tanks, and hand grenades have been delivering some very authoritative answers as well.

Whatever you think of their religion, ethics, and/or political behavior, they have certainly demonstrated if you don’t respect them, you risk coming to fear them.

I hope gun owners don’t have to teach similar lessons to those who fail to respect us and our rights.

Specific Types of Government

Posted on by

Via Chuck Petras @Chuck_Petras and Fight With Memes @fightwithmemes

Totally true.

A Specific Enumerated Right–VOID by Passing Hurricane

Posted on by

Via a posts on X by Chuck Petras @Chuck_Petras and Bryan LaFonte
@bryanlafonte:·

There are few other situations where you would need defensive weapons more than when the social structure has been ripped apart. Either this is either mind boggling stupid or deliberate enabling of criminals.

I hope he enjoys his trial.

Travel Warning

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

JPFO is issuing a travel warning to Jews and other 2A supporters and urging an economic boycott for Middlesex County, Massachusetts after Newton Police arrested Scott Hayes for defending himself from a violent, antisemitic attack.

Scott Hayes was peacefully exercising his rights protected under the First Amendment with a small group of people in the town of Newton, MA. A person in the group was carrying an Israeli flag when a man began yelling antisemitic remarks at the group from across the street, calling them “sick” for supporting Israel.

After a few words were exchanged, the man charged across the street, tackling Scott Hayes to the ground and attempting to wrap his arms around his neck in order to cause even more harm than he had already done. At that point, Mr. Hayes exercised his natural right to defend himself, pulled out a gun and shot the assailant in the abdomen. After freeing himself from the man’s clutches, Scott retreated and attempted to get his assailant medical attention. The assailant is expected to survive.

Mr. Hayes was arrested by the Newton Police who sought and obtained a criminal complaint against him for assault and battery with a dangerous weapon. The District Attorney is pursuing charges against Mr. Hayes for having defended himself against a violent antisemitic attack. While many state officials in Massachusetts have, for years, been enemies of the Second Amendment, this latest event is a record-breaking atrocity even for them. State actors actively defending violent antisemites while leveling criminal charges against those who defend themselves against them, sends up a warning for all Jews to steer clear of Massachusetts, if at all possible, especially Middlesex County. Antisemitism is on the rise and now we have state officials in Massachusetts formally and proudly defending it.

Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership
September 19, 2024
Middlesex County, Ma. Defends Violent Antisemitism (jpfo.org)

I think it would be easier to just stay out of all of Massachusetts, New Jersey, and New York City until Federal prosecutors start charging and convicting the rights hating police and local prosecutors. Without prosecutions it is going to take a new generation to change the mindset of the criminals running these locations.

No Respect

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

She pointed to some state laws that protect individual privacy as obstacles preventing law enforcement officials from adequately responding to background checks, and said her office was currently working with state legislators to push for changes that would lift such restrictions.

Haley Bull
September 22, 2024
President Biden plans to sign new executive actions aimed at reducing gun violence (msn.com)

Of course! Since they are infringing upon one specific enumerated right, they may as well infringe on two at the same time. Shoot, why not infringe on a bunch more at the same time. Why not throw people in jail if it is rumored they are thinking of buying a gun. Presume they are guilty and give them “due process” by an opportunity in court to prove they were not going to buy a gun to use to murder babies in hospital nurseries.

Also note this item from the same article:

In 2024, the gun background check system helped block more than 4,600 gun sales to people convicted of misdemeanor crimes of domestic violence, according to the report. To date, the Department of Justice has charged more than 500 defendants with violating provisions under the law, and the expanded background check provision has kept guns out of the hands of nearly 900 young people who shouldn’t have them, federal officials said.

Notice the metric they use for the usefulness of the law. It is not a reduction in the crime rate. It is the number of people prevented from purchasing a gun from a FFL.

Their object is not making the general population safer. It is preventing the general population from purchasing firearms.

These people have zero respect for individual rights of the people.

Prepare appropriately.

On the Brink of Destruction

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

More than 1,000 zombie knives and machetes have been surrendered to one police force as new legislation banning them becomes law.

Avon and Somerset Police said the weapons had been handed in to 15 surrender sites across the region and urged people who still had them to turn them in.

Sarah Turnnidge
September 24, 2024
More than 1,000 zombie knives surrendered (msn.com)

We have “ghost guns” and in England they have “zombie knives”.

As brought to my attention by Hannah Hill @hannahhill_sc this is incredibly on point:

The right of self defence is the first law of nature: in most governments it has been the study of rulers to confine this right within the narrowest limits possible. Wherever standing armies are kept up, and the right of the people to keep and bear arms is, under any colour or pretext whatsoever, prohibited, liberty, if not already annihilated, is on the brink of destruction. In England, the people have been disarmed, generally, under the specious pretext of preserving the game: a never failing lure to bring over the landed aristocracy to support any measure, under that mask, though calculated for very different purposes. True it is, their bill of rights seems at first view to counteract this policy: but the right of bearing arms is confined to protestants, and the words suitable to their condition and degree, have been interpreted to authorise the prohibition of keeping a gun or other engine for the destruction of game, to any farmer, or inferior tradesman, or other person not qualified to kill game. So that not one man in five hundred can keep a gun in his house without being subject to a penalty.

St. George Tucker
Blackstone’s Commentaries 1:App. 300
1803

England and the US have certainly lost much of our liberty, and we are in danger of losing more. It is time to take it back.

Projection

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

Broooooooo y’all proving u have small dicks. I know how to stop gun violence. Pay for trumpnecks to get penile enlargement.

Inmate #P01135809 @iryterong
Tweeted on June 9, 2022

It’s not only another Markley’s Law Monday, it is another science denier (see also here)!

Interesting projection. In prison, peopled identifying as Democrat outnumber all others combined by a factor of 2:1. And a huge percentage of violence crime is committed by people using a gun is in deep blue cities.

One has to wonder if the small dick insult is also a projection.

In any case, as Dan recently wrote:

Expecting logic, facts and reason to be part of the “gun grabbing” agenda is a fools errand.

Because Racist or Because Dangerous?

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

Is that law evidence that [the] government has the power to ban dangerous people from possessing firearms, because people thought that African Americans and other racial minorities were dangerous?”

Adam Winkler
UCLA Law Professor
September 21, 2024
The Supreme Court expanded gun rights. That could complicate the Trump assassination attempt case. (msn.com)

Or is it evidence the gun banners are going to face and admit the racists origins of the laws they want to inflict upon us? Interesting questions.

It will be entertaining to watch their tap dance.

Gunning for the Second Amendment

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

Harris and Walz can tout their status as gun owners and tip their hats in false homage to the right to keep and bear arms as often as they wish. It’s all subterfuge.

They’re still gunning for the Second Amendment.

Amy Swearer
September 19, 2024
Commentary: Harris and Walz: Gunning for the Second Amendment (msn.com)

Anti-gun people lie. It is an integral part of their culture.

Another tidbit from the same article I found interesting:

In 2008 Harris joined an amicus brief defending complete bans on the possession of handguns and advocating for a 20th century revisionist view of the Second Amendment that renders it little more than a superfluous authorization of state National Guard units.

A complete ban? I wonder if that was before or after Heller. The distinction may be important at her trial.

Doing Battle Against Idiots

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

During cross examination of Ronkainen, the state drilled into the difference between military spec and civilian firearms when considering pounds of pressure to pull the trigger. For military, Ronkainen said the pounds of pressure is higher, or around 6 lbs of pressure, to ensure there is no unintentional trigger pulls. For civilian firearms, the pressure could be as low as 2.5 lbs of pressure.

When the state asked if that means it would take 90 lbs of pressure to fire a 30 round magazine from a civilian firearm, the plaintiffs objected saying that was wrong. The state said it wanted to show the difference in level of fatigue in rapidly firing a civilian firearm versus a military firearm. Ronkainen said that is immaterial.

“I’m not sure the defense understood what a trigger pull was, but overall with what they got I think they did as well as they could,” Maag said.

Greg Bishop
September 17, 2024
Distinction of military, civilian firearms made during Day 2 of IL gun ban trial (msn.com)

If I had been asked that question while on the stand, I would have been tempted to ask for a higher IQ idiot to do the cross examination. I would further explain that this lawyer had just demonstrated such a profound level of ignorance and/or stupidity that I doubted there was sufficient common ground for me to realistically establish communication.*

This is the level of ignorance and/or stupidity that we are up against and yet they manage to win many of these battles.

It’s like debating an idiot. It is an unfair contest because they drag you down to their level and win via having vastly more experience.

* Once, at a party, I witnessed two friends of mine meet each other for the first time. One was a multimillionaire from numerous successful startups with a PhD and currently working on creating a state-of-the-art quantum computer. The other was a sweet lady who had a little too much to drink and even when sober was… not the sharpest knife in the drawer.

I kept as straight a face as I could as the PhD tried to establish some sort of communication. It went on for several minutes without a connection and he finally gave up.

As Barb and I went home after the party I told her I had watched as PhD and the lady talked to each other. Barb’s response was something like, “OMG! I would have loved to have seen that.”

I’m pretty sure there have been studies done which show that when the IQ difference is more than about two or three standard deviations apart, without sufficient training of the higher IQ person, it becomes almost impossible to communicate.