On Banning Bump-Fire Stocks…

What do you think, folks? Should we ban bump-fire stocks?

 Or should we ban the blitheringly idiotic, mentally unstable liberals and/or Demoncraps who keep murdering people en masse?
 
Perhaps we should ban the Mudstream Media that continues to poison their brains with worthless crap that simply isn’t true.
 
We could ban Hollywood for giving these mass-murderers the ideas in the first place.
 
Maybe we ought to imprison the communist teachers who FAILED to teach our kids proper, helping them learn things like, “On my honor, I will do my best. To do my duty to God and my country and to obey the Scout Law; To help other people at all times; To keep myself physically strong, mentally awake and morally straight.”
 
But banning bump-fire stocks? What’s next, guns in general? Knives? Quarter-staffs? Socks full of pennies? Spears? Rocks?
 
I mean, seriously… Are you going to ban ROCKS? Because, as you know, there was a guy who was murdered less than a quarter mile away from where I lived. He was murdered in the parking lot of a sports bar when someone hit him over the head with a ROCK.
 
So, go ahead. Ban rocks. This is, however, the ROCKY Mountains, so it’s going to take you a few hundred (if not tens of thousands) of years to get rid of all the rocks.
 
Until you do, I think I’ll keep my knives, guns, and anything else I damned well please, thank you very much.

Mass Shootings and Random Acts of Violence

I’ve long been a strong advocate of an armed populace as the best means of self-defense. I also believe it is by far the best deterrent and way to stop both mass shootings and terrorist attacks involving firearms.
 
Back when I first became interested in the topic of mass shootings, however, there weren’t as many, and at least here in America. It was largely relegated to the occasional insane person run amok. Aside from 9/11, we did not yet have to worry Muslims conducting their own mass shootings in the name of terrorism.
 
Now we do, and it looks to get a whole lot worse before it ever gets better.
 
Society has several tools available to deter terrorism and mass shootings:
 
– Intelligence (costly, even when highly focused)
– – requirements
– – planning and direction
– – collection
– – processing and exploitation
– – analysis and production
– – dissemination
– Security (the physical deterrence and protection of people 
– – Law enforcement (federal, state, county, and local)
– – Personal protection (planning, training, and weapons)
 
So, should we make it more difficult for people to obtain guns?  Should we reduce magazine capacities?  Increase background checks?  Reduce calibers?  Limit ammunition capability?  Create more “gun-free” zones?  Mandate the use of “smart” guns?  Increase waiting periods?  Ban certain types of firearms based on their appearance or general level of public trepidation?  Put a cop on every street corner?
anti-gun desperation
No.  NONE of these measures has proven effective in either deterring or stopping mass shootings or random acts of violence, and most of them significantly increase the cost of obtaining a firearm to the average law-abiding citizen who seeks protection.
By far the most immediate and most effective deterrent against both mass shootings and random acts of violence, whether the result of insanity or terrorism, is a well-armed general populace comprised of law-abiding U.S. citizens who are both properly armed and well-trained.
 
The greatest threat to our security comes not from the lunatics and terrorists, but rather, from those second-guessers, the Monday-morning armchair quarterbacks who are NOT well-trained (if at all) yet who for whatever blitheringly idiotic reason feel like they’re *somehow* qualified to force their opinions down the throats of an otherwise free and well-trained general populace, usually in the form of ideas that sound good but either do nothing or actually do more harm than the harm they’re supposed to address.
mass shootingsThroughout history, a well-armed/trained populace has always been the most effective deterrent and counter to mass shootings and random acts of violence.

Got Murders and Violent Crime? ARM YOUR LAW-ABIDING CITIZENS. IT WORKS.

Letter to a message forum I frequent…

I can’t tell you how often I’ve logged in here over the last year only to see that no Hot Topics thread has been active since the last time I logged in, which, over the last year, has been of much longer duration (less than 1 in 5) since that of previous years (at least 4 in 5).

Not that I actually want a Hot Topics issue to rear its head every time I turn around, so, perhaps I should be grateful…

Regardless, the problems with crime that we continue to experience continue to be a problem for precisely the same reasons, at least partially:

A. By far, there’s not enough armed law-abiding citizens compared to the criminal population as a whole.(1)

Thankfully, I think a lot of these issues lost steam after Black’s judgment in Alamogordo. I think they lost more steam after Heller and McDonald. I think they lost even more steam after the 2012 election, where the American electorate made a significant switch, not only to having conservatives in both the House and Senate, but more towards that in many state governments, as well. That trend continued in 2016, to the point where we have the most conservative majority of elected and appointed representatives in each and every office throughout America ever except one: The top 1,000 most populous city mayors. Liberals still hold a majority in that area, almost certainly due to Bloomberg’s concentration effort (million$ if not billion$) in his Mayors against guns effort.

The most interesting this about that effort is that despite the fact that population size only correlates with gun violence across the top twenty to fifty cities, all 1,000 of them surged. Obviously, a lot of citizens of even the bottom half of that 1,000 list identify with the largest ones with the most problems.

Quite frankly, I don’t know why. If I lived it a big city, I would not EVER aspire to have anything to do with any of these categories:

Category 1: The Most Dangerous Cities in America ([URL=”http://www.kare11.com/news/the-most-dangerous-cities-in-america/328232115″]KARE 11, Minneapolis/St. Paul, MN, October 1, 2016[/URL]), by Violent Crimes per 1,000 and 2015 murders (strangely enough by violent crime, first, and only then by murder rate):

1. St. Louis, MO: 1,817 / 188
2. Detroit, MI: 1760 / 295
3. Birmingham, AL: 1,746 / 79
4. Memphis, TN: 1,740 / 135
5. Milwaukee, WI: 1,596 / 145
6. Rockford, IL: 1,583 / 19
7. Baltimore, MD: 1,536 / 344
8. Little Rock, AR: 1,485 / 32
9. Oakland, CA: 1,442.5 / 85
10. Kansas City, KS: 1,417 / 109

Category 2: The Most Dangerous Cities in the United States ([URL=”http://www.worldatlas.com/articles/most-dangerous-cities-in-the-united-states.html”]WorldAtlas, 2016[/URL]) (Violent Crimes per 100,000 people for cities with over 250,000 people):

1 Detroit, MI 1,988.63
2 Memphis, TN 1,740.51
3 Oakland, CA 1,685.39
4 St. Louis, MO 1,678.73
5 Milwaukee, WI 1,476.41
6 Baltimore, MD 1,338.54
7 Cleveland, OH 1,334.35
8 Stockton, CA 1,331.47
9 Indianapolis, IN 1,254.66
10 Kansas City, KS 1,251.45

This list roughly agrees with the previous one, so let’s proceed to the third, which measures MURDER ([URL=”https://www.neighborhoodscout.com/top-lists/highest-murder-rate-cities/”]Neighborhood Scout, 2016[/URL])

The countdown for the Top 30 Murder Capitals of America:

Rank City
30 Chicago Heights, IL
29 Baton Rouge, LA
28 Buffalo, NY
27 Hattiesburg, MS
26 East Chicago, IN
25 Birmingham, AL
24 Desert Hot Springs, CA
23 Compton, CA
22 Myrtle Beach, SC
21 Fort Pierce, FL
20 Harvey, IL
19 Bridgeton, NJ
18 Flint, MI
17 Rocky Mount, NC
16 Pine Bluff, AR
15 Petersburg, VA
14 Newark, NJ
13 Baltimore, MD
12 Harrisburg, PA
11 Jackson, MS
10 Wilmington, DE
9 Trenton, NJ
8 Riviera Beach, FL
7 New Orleans, LA
6 Camden, NJ
5 Detroit, MI
4 Gary, IN
3 St. Louis, MO
2 Chester, PA
1 East St. Louis, IL

No additional details given.

(1)This is a change from what I’ve previously said. However, I’ve since identified a very decided difference the ratio of (A) armed law-abiding citizens to (B) armed criminals with respect to both the per capita rate of violent crimes and murders. Thus, we can definitively state two near iron-clad axioms at this point:
1. States where the ratio of (A) armed law-abiding citizens to (B) armed criminals is higher will have a distinctively lower per capita rate of both violent crimes and murders.
2. States where the ratio of (A) armed law-abiding citizens to (B) armed criminals is lower will have a distinctively higher per capita rate of both violent crimes and murders.

Given the fact that these correlations are not only strong, but are using rates based not on everyone in the entire population, but those individuals in the population who are either actually using firearms to commit or to stop crimes, these statistics very strongly support, in Kennesaw, GA style, measures to adequately arm and fully train your average law-abiding citizen.

Where is Our Enemy?

Contrary to popular misconception, I do NOT hate all Muslims. In fact, I don’t hate ANY Muslims.
 
I DO, however, “hate that which is evil and cling to that which is good.” – Romans 12:9
 
This begs the question, “What is evil?”
 
As Justin Tolomeo, acting special agent in charge for the Federal Bureau of Investigation in Phoenix, said in a statement: “People who are plotting to death to Americaharm America and Americans are no longer a world away.” According to a variety of sources ranging from several within our federal government to various security think tanks, somewhere between 3% and 30% of Muslims currently in the United States would take innocent American lives given the right opportunity. Tens of thousands of Muslims were certainly observed cheering in the streets when Muslims attacked all Americans on September 11, 2001.
 
I’d call that evil, and encourage you to remember that such evil is already here in America, among us.
 
So what are we to do? Kill them all? If we did that, America would probably not survive the ensuing global backlash.
 
I would love to be able to differentiate between the good ones and the bad ones, but that’s just not possible. The problem involves taqiyya, the Islamic practice of deceiving your enemy. They’re apparently very good at it, having fooled the American government many times, including at the security checkpoints leading to those four fateful flights on September 11, 2001, eluding security at the Boston Marathon, attacking our recruiting centers, our hospitals, and many more.
 
When your enemy is inside your borders, and there’s no way to discern the difference between your enemy and a peaceful Muslim neighbor until it’s too late, what is an honest, law-abiding American citizen to do?
 
Remember, we didn’t start this war. Islam waged war against the rest of the world for 400 years before the Western world throughout Europe grew Jihad is their dutytired of the bloodshed and mounted a counter-offensive we know as the Crusades, kicking their butts back to the Middle East. It has only been in the last century, with a boldness and wealth resulting from oil, that they have resumed their global conquest.
 
So, again, what’s an honest, law-abiding American citizen to do?
 
Buy a firearm. Make sure it’s good, simple, and reliable. Get the best training possible. Know how to use it, when to use it, where to use it, and just as importantly, when not to use it. Train often, carry it with you whenever possible, and be ready at a moment’s notice.
 
Just remember this: Islam knows no bounds, and Muslims can be unbelievable cowards. They have often strapped bombs to their children, much like this smiling young girl, to do their dirty work for them.
American Muslim Girl
So good luck, God bless, and Carry On.

Quantico, our Second Amendment, and Reality

In the latest episode of Quantico, a (very) fictitious portrayal of life for new FBI field agent recruits at Quantico, an equally fictitious Senatorial Bitch gave a short speech that is all too real in our nation’s capital: “I’d like to acknowledge the brave men and women who defend our campus today. That includes one of our own, Trainee Perales. Three-hundred and thirty. That’s the number of mass shootings in this country in 2015. An average of almost one per day. I am tired of this. And you should be, too. You are being trained to carry a weapon, to respect the power of a gun, to understand that it is a privilege to be earned, not a right given to anyone who…”
 
The Senatorial Bitch was cut off by a disapproving stare from her son, a member of that class. He knew better.
 
So do we.
 
Our right to keep and bear arms is NOT a “privilege.” If is an ABSOLUTE right, one given by God himself, and reflected in our Bill of Rights as applying universally, without encroachment. That’s the way our Founding Fathers wrote it, and clearly with that specific intent, as they certainly wrote other limitations into both our Constitution and our Bill of Rights.
 
But not into our Second Amendment. That “…the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed” is absolute.
 
That’s as it should be, for the moment one allows ANY encroachment on the tiniest issue, they tip that slippery slope towards allowing encroachment on all issues until the right no longer exists AT ALL. This is WHY our Founding Fathers rendered this an absolute prohibition in its final form. They knew that some day, power-hungry people who are ignorant of what it takes to maintain freedom, or worse, those who specifically attack it, for whatever reason, would, and rather incessantly, whittle away at our freedoms.
 
As for me, I learned how to shoot when I was nine, at the hands of a Navy officer and a former Army officer. I received additional training from accomplished hunters in my early 20s, and formal training throughout my own career as an Air Force officer beginning in my mid-20s. I qualified at the expert level on every military weapon system on which I trained, including the M-8, the M9, and the M-16.
 
I am the first to tell you that one does NOT have to be in the military to become a firearms expert! All it takes is an appreciation for firearms in general, some self-discipline, and the desire to learn and improve.
 
My point is that the Senatorial Bitch’s idea that only FBI agents and other law enforcement types are qualified to use firearms in an active shooter situation is totally, 100% BOGUS. It’s elitist bullshit, designed to create a class situation separating the haves from the have-nots.
 
DO NOT BELIEVE IT!!!
 
I firmly believe everyone in the U.S. who has NOT demonstrated a clear reason as to why they should not be allowed to keep and bear arms SHOULD be allowed to keep and bear arms, and I fully support Constitutional Carry via either open or concealed means, your choice.
The Reality Is that EVERY U.S. citizen’s right to keep and bear arms is Constitutionally protected.  Sadly, the reality is also that far too many self-appointed watchdogs get this horribly wrong.

“Arms,” not “Firearms” – Why Details Matter

Our Second Amendment never limited the term “arms” to just “firearms.” Our Founding Fathers knew this well, as period writings clearly show that “arms” is the shortened form of “armaments,” of which “firearms” was only one type, and only used when references to “arms” was limited by type to firearms.

When you enter the term “armaments” into Google Images, here’s what you get:

arms

 

I think this makes it abundantly clear what that the term “arms” used as the shortened form of “armaments” in our Second Amendment, is most certainly NOT limited to “firearms.”

In fact, here’s a complete list of infantry arms used during the American Revolution:

Firearms include the Flintlock Musket, commonly known as the Brown Bess, the Long Rifle, the Pattern 1776 Infantry Rifle, the Ferguson Rifle, the Charleville Musket, and a number of various pistols.

Other Arms include the bayonet, hatchet, tomahawk, swords, cutlass, sabres, hunting swords, knives, and pole arms (pikes, spears, halberds, partisans, and spontoons), and various cannon.

ALL of these weapons mentioned above are ARMS, the same word used in the Second Amendment.  Only some of them are “firearms,” a subset of arms consisting of mostly hand-held weapons that employ burning powder to launch a projectile down a tube.

Merriam-Webster Dictionary: armaments : military weapons that are used to fight a war, i.e. “arms”

Wikipedia states:  “A weapon, arm, or armament is any device used with intent to inflict damage or harm to living beings, structures, or systems.”

“…the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” – Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution

Our Founding Fathers WANTED the people of our great nation to have “military weapons that are used to fight a war,” and for damned good reason.  If their right to keep and bear arms was infringed in ANY manner, then an unscrupulous federal government could then employ force to compel them to give up their freedoms.

Our federal government has long since crossed the line of using force to compel We the People to do is bidding, instead of the other way around, where our federal government used to serve the interests of the people without infringing on anyone’s Constitutional rights.

Our federal government uses other forms of force against our will:

Fiscal, primarily through the IRS, but also by withholding federal tax dollars earmarked for things like highways if a state refuses to kowtow to some federal mandate — usually well beyond the fed’s authority to even consider such a mandate much less attempt to shove it down a state’s throat.

Land, primarily through the BLM.  Countless of ranchers that used to actually own their land have had to forfeit their land in order to avoid prison.

Economic, primarily through the EPA and the SEC, but many federal authorities jump on this bandwagon, forcing organizations to stop doing business if their business doesn’t support the fed’s way of thinking.

This un-Constitutional crap MUST STOP, America.  Write your Congressman.  Arm up.  Do NOT let them take our hard-won freedoms!

Court Rules People Have a “Fundamental Right” to Own Assault Weapons

OUTSTANDING!

From the article…

In a major victory for gun rights advocates, a federal appeals court on Thursday sided with a broad coalition of gun owners, businesses and organizations that challenged the constitutionality of a Maryland ban on assault weapons and other laws aimed at curbing gun violence. 

A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit said the state’s prohibition on what the court called “the vast majority of semi-automatic rifles commonly kept by several million American citizens” amounted to a violation of their rights under the Constitution.

Well, almost outstanding.  The judge seriously erred when he said, “In our view, Maryland law implicates the core protection of the Second Amendment — the right of law-abiding responsible citizens to use arms in defense of hearth and home.”  That’s not quite the “fundamental right” our Founding Fathers penned into the Constitution via our Second Amendment.

Chief Judge William Traxler erred when he limited the scope of understanding to “in defense of hearth and home.”  A “hearth” is the floor in front of a fireplace, where families of old would gather for dinner, usually cooked over that fireplace, and while away the evening hours basking in its warmth, discussing the day, and playing.

Our Second Amendment knows no such bounds, either on location or type and size of arms.

The Constitution states that all ratified amendments become a part of the Constitution.  Thus, the Constitution states “the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”

This prohibition against the right of the people to keep and bear arms is absolute.  It’s application isn’t limited to a specific government entity.  It applies to everyone.  Furthermore, it’s scope isn’t limited, either.  For example, it’s not limited to “hearth and home,” but rather applies every where a free man may travel.

It’s not even limited to “firearms.”  Our Founding Fathers chose the term, “arms,” even though knew exceedingly well that the term “firearms” was a type of arms that used a rapidly-burning powder to discharge a projectile.  A sword is also a type of arms, as is a club, mace, hatchet, machete, and knife.  They are all “arms.”  Thus, any restriction — infringement — on their size, length, weight, caliber, action, mechanism, or capacity constitutes an infringement, and an un-Constitutional one, at that.