Category Archives: Gun Rights

Quote of the day—Richard

Posted on by

I told my broker about 5 years ago, “I wish I had had $150,000.00 worth of rifles instead of all that stock.”

Richard
September 16, 2012
Comment to We Are Of Different Worlds.
[I don’t own nearly as many guns as many people I know. But I can’t think of any gun, except those with exceptionally heavy use, that might have gone down in value. Nearly all have gone up in value. I have a lot of ammunition components (and a far amount of factory ammo). All of it has gone way up in value. Investing in lead and copper has paid off. Not as much as gold and silver has but you can’t eat gold or silver. And you can’t defend yourself, your family, or your possessions with a piece of gold or silver.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Robert Steinbuch

Posted on by

Unlike guns, cars are not designed to be deadly — needless to say — but they are involved in the death of almost as many Americans in one year than were killed in the whole Vietnam War. If we were to prohibit the manufacture and sale of blue Honda Accords (an excellent vehicle, no doubt), then there would almost inevitably be a reduction in the number of deaths caused by blue Accords. The relevant question, however, is whether automobile deaths overall would go down — which under this limited example, they seemingly would not.

By analogy, the relevant question regarding gun-control legislation is whether it makes people safer or just shifts the allocation of resources within a marketplace.

Robert Steinbuch
September 14, 2012 (date it became public even though the article is dated September 17)
Gun control is a moving target: Most gun-restriction laws simply shift purchasers to different lethal weapons — with the notable exception of limiting magazine size.
[From reading the title and his introduction, “I served as a counsel to the Senate Judiciary Committee, attached to a U.S. senator who was one of the original co-sponsors of the Federal Assault Weapons Ban. I worked in the Senate when the act was up for renewal.” I expected something very anti-gun. It was much more factual and almost pro-gun.

I also like the comment from Lawrence Keane (do you recognize that name? You should!), “So it seems your point is that gun control is a failed social experiment? All the firearms misused by this criminal are commonly owned by law abiding citizens and protected by the Supreme Court’s Heller and McDonald decisions.”—Joe]

Quote of the day—Alan Korwin

Posted on by

Meet with me and a few select others for counseling that will truly get to the heart of the matter. Let’s get past the firing mechanisms, types of lead or brand name intrigues and into the real-world answers that can reduce or stop this sort of behavior and make our world more safe. Together we can fix this.

Alan Korwin
August 27, 2012
Whatever Happened to Waiting Periods for Guns?
[The Brady Campaign want to have, “a thoughtful conversation that explores real, effective solutions to our national gun violence epidemic”. But the problem is that every single one of the ideas proposed by the Brady Campaign for the last 40 years has proven to be unconstitional and/or ineffective in reducing violent crime.

It’s time to try some different ideas. I know Korwin. I know people at the NRA. I know people at the Second Amendment Foundation. These are some very smart people. I have met and talked to numerous people from the Brady Campaign and Washington Ceasefire. I wasn’t impressed. They were evasive, easily angered, and/or ignorant. We are better than this.

The media and politicians have been riding a dead horse for 40 years. You would think it would be obvious that it is time to get off and ride a fresh one. But it is irrational to expect people to be rational.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Suzanne Langland

Posted on by

I know that big money, special interests, the gun lobby and cowardly, greedy politicians are to blame. BUT, WHERE IS THE OUTRAGE FROM THE CITIZENS OF THIS COUNTRY? Too many issues have been allowed to be pushed aside in this country. We need to change this. I urge you to demand that guns be banned and a Felony penalty imposed on those who would reject a federal gun surrender ALL GUNS ARE MADE TO KILL. WHATEVER SIZE THEY ARE AND HOWEVER QUICKLY THEY DISCHARGE THEIR BULLETS.

Suzanne Langland
September 7, 2012
Facebook comment.
[Special interests? How many people own guns versus how many want guns banned? It would appear to me that the people that want guns banned are the “special interests”.

In any case it’s nice to have their real agenda out in the open. Do not ever forget that they want you defenseless and/or in jail.—Joe]

Beer guzzling hillbillies versus NYPD

Posted on by

Last Sunday the Lewiston Pistol Club ran a USPSA stage which mimicked the NYPD shooting at the Empire State Building. Here are the results:

Stage No:

4

Police at Empire State Building

Place

Name

No.

Class

Division

Points

Penalties

Time

Hit Factor

Stage Pts

Stage %

1

Adam

13

M

Limited

80

0

7.09

11.2835

80.0000

100.00%

R2

Mark

22

U

Production

78

0

8.32

9.3750

66.4687

83.09%

3

Robert

20

U

Open

79

0

9.46

8.3510

59.2086

74.01%

4

Mark

12

U

Limited

78

0

9.53

8.1847

58.0295

72.54%

5

Joe Huffman

5

B

Limited

80

0

10.05

7.9602

56.4378

70.55%

6

Velle

8

U

Production

78

0

10.27

7.5949

53.8478

67.31%

7

Jon

9

U

Limited 10

78

0

10.40

7.5000

53.1750

66.47%

8

John

4

C

Limited

78

0

10.89

7.1625

50.7821

63.48%

9

Brian

17

U

Open

76

10

9.62

6.8607

48.6424

60.80%

10

Don

19

A

Limited

80

10

10.32

6.7829

48.0908

60.11%

11

KW

3

C

Limited

80

0

11.88

6.7340

47.7441

59.68%

12

Tim

11

U

Limited

79

0

12.09

6.5343

46.3282

57.91%

13

Bill

14

C

Limited

79

0

12.39

6.3761

45.2065

56.51%

R14

Roger

21

C

Production

80

0

12.61

6.3442

44.9804

56.23%

15

Kevin

7

B

Limited

74

10

10.66

6.0038

42.5669

53.21%

16

Barron Barnett

1

D

Limited

79

0

13.48

5.8605

41.5509

51.94%

17

Erik

15

C

Single Stack

79

0

15.24

5.1837

36.7524

45.94%

18

Kami

10

U

Limited

80

0

16.48

4.8544

34.4177

43.02%

19

Roger

18

C

Revolver

80

0

18.16

4.4053

31.2336

39.04%

20

Ben

2

U

Limited

68

20

12.71

3.7766

26.7761

33.47%

21

Jodi

6

D

Limited

75

20

15.83

3.4744

24.6335

30.79%

22

Donald

16

U

Limited 10

80

0

50.31

1.5901

11.2738

14.09%

The bottom line is that a bunch of beer guzzling, uneducated hillbillies fired 352 shots hitting no-shoot (innocent bystanders) targets twice and had three misses. This compares to NYPD firing16 shots with nine innocent people injured and six or more misses.

There is at least one important difference. The police were facing a guy pointing a .45 at them. We were not.

Quote of the day—Friedrich Nietzsche

Posted on by

Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies.

Friedrich Nietzsche
[After dinner last night at the Gun Blogger Rendezvous several of us stayed up late talking. One of the topics was the inability of the anti-gun people to think logically. In many cases they claim to simple “know” the truth. Nietzsche was a pretty sharp guy.

See also this quote from Nietzsche.—Joe]

LAPD qualification results

Posted on by

I got the USPSA match results back for the modified LAPD qualification stages I designed. In order to conform with USPSA rules we actually made the courses much harder than what the police officers have to do. We always started from the holster. In most of the strings the police started from the low ready position. In one string the police start with the gun pointed at the target and their finger on their trigger. Even starting from the holster the allocated three seconds was more than enough for us draw from the holster and make the same shot the police make.

We put 22 people through the stages. 20 people passed with a 60% or greater. That is 90.9% passage. The best results were by Roger who scored 95.1%. Roger was shooting a revolver.

Winning

Posted on by

From Cabela’s lobby:

WP_000166WP_000167

I found this on the inside bottom of the box of shoes I bought:

WP_000168

From the gun email list at work (via Jeremy):

BuyHerDiamond

Quote of the day—Windy Wilson

Posted on by

Imagine the uproar if a politician announced that after consulting with the BATF and VPC, the proposed solution to the increase in rapes of women in the city was to have a curfew on women, and mandatory photo registration of every married male resident of the city!

Windy Wilson
September 7, 2012
Comment to No brainer.

No brainer

Posted on by

It always annoys me that the most stupid and most ignorant are frequently the most vocal. Case in point:

It seems that gun control should be a no-brainer. Our city and other communities across this country have recently seen the tragic results of the misuse of guns by ordinary citizens, including by young teens.

When I was a growing up in Baltimore people felt safe. We went out alone at night; I often went to the library alone after dark at age 10. We never heard about shootings. They seemed to be only in cowboy movies.

The availability of guns to any two-legged creature who could talk changed all that. It’s true that human beings can get very angry, perhaps even angry enough to kill. But if guns weren’t so readily available that anger might be expressed in less lethal ways.

I doubt that the Founding Fathers meant for anyone to lawfully carry a gun.

The “availability of guns” has not gotten easier in Baltimore anytime in the last 100 years so I can’t imagine when Jeannette Ollodart Marx grew up and guns were less available than they are now. I have to believe she is ignorant and/or stupid. This conclusions has further support with her speculation about the Founding Fathers not intending for nearly everyone to be able to lawfully carry a firearm.

It would seem that if she is sufficiently self-aware Ms. Marx should be intimately familiar with no-brainers.

Quote of the day—Mike Lillis

Posted on by

The Democrats’ approach to gun control is far too timid and needs a boost of courage to be effective.

Mike Lillis
September 2, 2012
Dem platform calls for gun control, but advocates pan language as timid
[H/T Say Uncle.

Bring it on.

Apparently Lillis doesn’t realize it we have been engaged in a fifth generation war against anti-gun people for over 40 years and we won. We are in the middle of mopping up spots of resistance. It’s helpful when they self identify so we can target them for political extinction.—Joe]

Quote of the day-Schwann Caomhanach‏

Posted on by

There are many more rights under far more pressure than any gun rights, yet you focus on these phallic symbols.

Schwann Caomhanach‏
Tweeted August 26, 2012.
[It’s another Markley’s Law Monday!—Joe]

New shooter report

Posted on by

I took a new shooter to the range yesterday.

The usual happened. Big smiles and almost uncontrolled glee:

WP_000108Corrected2012
Yes Kim, that is your bullet hole nearly dead center in the bull.

WP_000110Corrected2012
It’s nice to enable someone to accomplish something that gives them great happiness.

Can the Brady Campaign enable individual accomplishments that will provide a lifetime of pleasure? Despite their stated best of intentions the achievement of their goals would actually block such pleasures as well as the defense of innocent life and enable violent crime that will cause sorrow to the end of your days.

Take a non-shooter to the range, make Sarah and Jim Brady cry, and make the world a better place.

Quote of the day—Stu Ronaldson

Posted on by

We are not your citizens. The actual relationship is that you are our elected official. You answer to us. Apparently, you’ve lost a little perspective. The reason the founders included the 2nd amendment was so that, if necessary, we could remove politicians that lost perspective. Regardless of your personal delusions, Mr. Pawlowski, Allentown is not your little kingdom where you can wave a scepter and institute what you want, when you want.

In America, Mr. Pawlowski, the people and the Constitution are in charge.

Stu Ronaldson
August 28, 2012
The Left’s New Gun-Control Strategy
[I’ve said essentially the same thing before but in a more general sense. It probably is beneficial to be a little more direct to an individual politician that is getting a little too uppity. Good job Stu.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Brennan Bailey

Posted on by

Hollow points are evil because they’re made to inflict maximum damage upon soft flesh. Jacketed rounds are evil because they’re designed for military use, and penetrate armor. Lead rounds are evil because they poison our beloved vultures. Non-lead rounds are evil because they start fires and/or penetrate armor.

In response to concerns over the innate evilness of so much of their product line, in January of this year ammunition manufacturer ATK/Teksystems began investigating the possibility of crafting bullets exclusively from puppy love and rainbows, to be dubbed their new PLRB line of politically sensitive ammunition.

NYC Mayor Bloomberg has already moved proactively against this effort, expending a portion of his personal fortune to found a new PAC “Mayors Against Illegal Puppy Love And Rainbows”, however Mr. Bloomberg’s initiative has seen a rocky start, drawing harsh criticism from PETA after 5 of his PAC’s 11 founding members were convicted on charges ranging from cruelty to animals to felony sexual assault on a puppy, while the remainder of the fledgling lobbying group continues to be haunted by rumors of colluding with senior DOJ officials to operate a puppy porn ring.

The White House Press Secretary ended speculation on the President’s long silence on the controversy when he told reporters on Friday that “the President believes puppies and rainbows belong in the hands of soldiers”, and also asserted that although allegations of DOJ involvement in organized puppy abuse were absolutely untrue and unfounded, the alleged policy of puppy abuse was actually formulated under the Bush administration.

Brennan Bailey
August 28, 2012 11:13 AM
[Via the gun email list at work.

I have nothing to add.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Ruth Bass

Posted on by

All we have to do is stop selling guns to people who are potentially violent or totally whacky. Then our gun troubles would be over — only the sane and sensible would be armed to the teeth, ready to shoot only when it was sane and sensible to do so, whenever that might be.

People get training for all sorts of things, from muscles to job skills, so training must be the key to success. Gun show salesmen, gun shop owners and anyone else who sells weapons that shoot would be trained to recognize the dangerous and the demented and be authorized to “just say no” when such folks ask for guns or ammunition.

If we’d instituted these bans years ago, we would have avoided James Brady, Simon’s Rock, Columbine High, Aurora. And we would have saved any number of wives, husbands and state troopers. The no-gun people could be registered, just like sex offenders.

Ruth Bass
August 27, 2012
Gun control must mesh with the times
[At first I thought it was sarcasm or someone mocking the anti-gun position. But by the second paragraph I realized it wasn’t that at all. I felt I.Q. points being sucked into the vacuum by the third paragraph and last night after reading the entire article I barely stumbled into bed before falling into a coma.

There should be barricades in place a light-millisecond in all directions around that vortex of stupidity to prevent people with poor constitutions from having their brains sucked dry beyond any hope of recovery.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Boris Yellnikoff

Posted on by

If it wasn’t for sexual inadequacy the National Rifle Association would go broke!

Boris Yellnikoff
A character in the Woody Allen movie Whatever Works (2009).
Via a tweet from Linoge in response to a tweet from David Ali.
[It’s another Markley’s Law Monday!

You would think that if the “intellectuals” of this country wanted to have a discussion about the role of guns in society they could do better than this.—Joe]

Gun cartoon of the day

Posted on by

Sometimes a picture is worth a 1000 words.

gun-control

The inequity of compassion

Posted on by

Brady Campaign president Dan Gross wrote:

From the moment I started to get involved in the gun violence issue, I found the disproportionate attention given to our story also made me feel uncomfortable.
 
People seemed to care more because my brother was a white, upper-middle-class, young musician, shot at a famous landmark. A common theme began to emerge: “that kind of tragedy isn’t supposed to happen in places like that, to people like your brother.”
 
Over the years now, I have seen this same theme repeated. We seem to care more about certain tragedies, like suburban school shootings or psychotic shooting sprees in office buildings or malls or famous victims. Certain deaths seem to matter more.

“Certain deaths seem to matter more.”? Absolutely true. For example, self defense deaths are far more acceptable (sometimes even praiseworthy) than murders. Doesn’t Gross understand that?

The irony is that the Gross and his ilk are one of the worst in regards to “certain deaths seem to matter more”. I have long been critical of the Brady Campaign and anti-gun activists in general when they complain about “gun deaths” as if they were somehow more important that “fists and feet deaths” or “knife deaths”. And he complains “certain deaths seem to matter more” to the population at large? Wipe some of the soot off your face pal.

Gross goes on to say:

As a result, there is far too little focus on a shockingly common problem, that poses a far greater threat to all of us than most realize, and we fail to examine surprisingly simple and accessible opportunities to prevent it.

Absolutely true. And that is why we are working to get rid of all those gun laws that create victim disarmament zones. People have a right to defend themselves whether it is in their home, at work, or on the streets. Disarming potential victims is just wrong and just allowing people to use the best tools available for self defense will improve the odds for everyone. We agree there are “surprising simple and accessible opportunities” to prevent and stop criminal violence. Why does the Brady Campaign fight us on this? We are better than this.

Random thought of the day

Posted on by

If immediately after police officers accidently shoot nine innocent people while shooting just one bad guy is it “dancing in the blood of the victims” if private citizen gun owners point out the following?

A nationwide study by Kates, the constitutional lawyer and criminologist, found that only 2 percent of civilian shootings involved an innocent person mistakenly identified as a criminal. The “error rate” for the police, however, was 11 percent, over five times as high.

The study cited above isn’t exactly fair to the cops in the Empire State Building shooting. They correctly identified the bad guy. They had a bad situation with a lot of innocent people in the background. From the latest reports I have read at most ten shots out of 16 hit the bad guy. That is actually an above average hit rate for a self-defense shooting.

I think I could do better in those same circumstances but until you are actually staring down the barrel of someone else’s gun you don’t really know how well all your faculties are going to work when the rest of your life might be measured in milliseconds.