#GunSense: Ban #BumpStocks Discussion

After the Mandalay Bay Shooting in Las Vegas, I became slightly disturbed upon learning what bump-stocks were. They left me feeling really uneasy. The idea of something so simple can turn a semiautomatic into an automatic just didn’t sit well with me.

Like me, friend Jazz Shaw also never heard of these bump-stocks and he too doesn’t like them very much. While you should read the full thing, here is the main thrust of the article:

…I think we need to consider a ban on both bump stocks and these automatic fire conversion kits. (…)

Assuming you’ll allow me to get in a word edgewise after making that statement, permit me to expand on my reasoning here. The fact is that if conservatives truly want to maintain the brand of being supporters of the rule of law in a society guarded by constitutional law and order, we must recognize (even if you disagree) that fully automatic weapons are illegal in almost every instance. (We have a few exceptions which all require the highest level of background checks and federal scrutiny.) We can have a separate debate on whether such a ban is acceptable if you wish, but as things currently stand, that’s the law.

These conversion kits and bump stocks only exist for one reason, and that’s to allow a semiautomatic rifle to fire as a fully automatic model. You can pull out your amateur lawyer thesaurus (or professional copy for you actual lawyers) and try to talk your way around this subject, but there is no other purpose for these products to exist. If you accept that the law forbids the possession of fully automatic weapons in all but the most limited cases, then these products should also be illegal unless the purchaser already qualifies for ownership of a fully automatic weapons. For everyone else they should be banned.

Right on! Jazz made some really good points there.

However I did learn more about the subject at hand. As it turns out, bump-stocks (or sometimes called bump-fire-stocks) don’t turn semiautomatics into fully automatics. All bump-stocks do is simulate automatic fire. And yet I did not fully understand HOW bump-stocks simulated automatic fire, so my mind still wasn’t made up at this point.

Still very conflicted, I wanted to talk this out with someone. Nothing against Jazz Shaw, but I want to get a couple more opinions from other people.

Anthony Brian Logan hosts a show on YouTube and I wanted to get his take and this is how it went down:

Alright, you can stop laughing now. The line “A Bad Taste In My Mouth” was the only thing I could think of at the time.

Anthony gave me a lot to chew on. Then Jacob Wohl’s tweet sealed the deal for me:

This was the missing piece of info I needed to make up my mind. The bump-stock has NO mechanical parts or springs and is wholly dependent on the shooter to appear to be firing an automatic. While I must have read this explanation a dozen or so times, it took a document from President Barack Obama’s ATF to make me see the light of day. Thanks Obama!

Before I close-up, I do want to apologize to Jazz Shaw a little here. I was on the fence about bump-stocks when I first heard about them and his article push me on the “Ban Them” side (and I told him as much). After learning more about them and deep prayers, I can firmly say that I am on the “Don’t Ban Them” side (for now). I will hold no ill will against gun-rights conservatives who supports banning them, for now, because we are all still trying to wrap our heads around these things.

Should we ban bump-stocks? No. From what I’m told, they aren’t very popular to begin with anyway. You can’t aim for shit with a bump-stock and so you break the fourth gun safety rule* with them attached. For self-defense and hunting purposes, they suck. It is also not a mechanical conversion and still makes you do all the work. Personally, I honestly don’t see the value in them**.

The debate is just beginning. I, for one, look forward to having it.

Well, see ya’ later!


#MarshallMovie/@MarshallMovie Is Pro-#RapeCulture Joke

The upcoming movie, Marshall, is both sexist and misogynist.

In December 11, 1940, two truck drivers found Eleanor Strubing soaking wet and freshly rape. She named her attacker, chauffeur Joseph Spell, and he was quickly arrested. Joseph Spell even confessed. Then two MALE lawyers, Thurgood Marshall and Samuel Friedman, came swooping in and this is where the movie picks up:

Instead of showing the injustice of getting a rapist off, this movie is about “racism” or something.

I’m outraged! If Eleanor Strubing said she was raped, then she was raped! By depicting Joseph Spell, with his two very two MALE lawyers, getting off scot-free, is both misogynist and keeping alive the rape culture in America!

Of course, I am joking. While I would argue that Thurgood Marshall was a poor Supreme Court jurist, he was fighting racism in his own way and he was able to get an innocent man off fake rape charges. However making fun of the Oppression Olympics should be everyone’s duty.

I do have to say that the movie seems intellectually lazy. What is the message, that racism is bad? When is racism good? Will the movie address rape hoax?

While it would appear that racism is dying out (good!), it just goes to show that Rape Hoax is as old as time itself and isn’t going anywhere for now. Both rape and racism is evil, rightly so. However I have a dream when Rape Hoax is also consider just as evil as racism and rape.

Well, see ya’ later!


#TrumpAdmin: #POTUS @realDonaldTrump #Afghanistan Address Thoughts

I will be talking off the cuff with no links or anything, because I want you to know that these are my thoughts alone.

Tonight President Donald Trump will announce the Afghanistan strategy going forward. From observing President Trump’s speeches and foreign policy so far, I can only guess at what he’s going to do. However to understand Trump’s upcoming Afghanistan decision, we must look at the Trump Doctrine first.

Some people have mistaken his non-nation building “America First” rhetoric as a case of isolationist policy. Yet I don’t think I’ve ever heard President Trump say “isolation” or “retreat” when talking foreign policy. I think I can boil down the Trump Doctrine as such:

  1. America First: Does it serve America’s or our allies interest? On this point alone, staying in Afghanistan forever does not serve American interest. No one wants to stay in Afghanistan. However there our other considerations to make.
  2. No Telegraphed Operation Or Red-Line Retreats: Are we giving our enemies our plans and/or a timeline to wait us out? Say what you will about President Trump, he’s a student of history (or at least recent history). President Trump has been repeatedly critical of President Obama’s announcing of withdraw time-lines and major operations to the press (which only gets back to the enemy). I don’t think Afghanistan will be any different.
  3. Islamic Terrorism Must Be Defeated There, Not Here: Will this take the fight to Islamic terror away from our soil? Most defiantly. And thanks to President Obama’s fucking indifference to Afghanistan, not only is the Taliban still there but ISIS/ISIL too.

Base on the information and theses points, I don’t except a pullout and neither should you. However I do expect a overhaul of the policy/strategy and the setting of goals. President Donald Trump has been a “I will help you, help yourselves” kind of guy and I think this will be the new policy in Afghanistan going forward. We can’t let Afghanistan fall, but we can’t take care of them forever.

President Donald Trump is stuck between a rock and a hard-place. I do not envy him for one second. I pray that God gives President Trump the wisdom to discover right, the will to choose it, and the strength to make it endure.

Well, see ya’ later!

Written by BigGator5 in: Politics | Tags: , , , , , , ,

#TrumpAdmin: So, #JamesComey Is Corrupt As Hell!

Okay, let’s break down this CNN story for you:

1) The very real possibility existed that the Obama Justice Department couldn’t credibly investigate the corrupt as hell Presidential candidate Clinton.

2) An intelligence report generated by the fevered minds in Russia, obtain by the FBI:

…purported to show that then-Attorney General Lynch had been compromised in the Clinton investigation. The intelligence (report) described emails between then-Democratic National Committee Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz and a political operative suggesting that Lynch would make the FBI investigation of Clinton go away.

3) The FBI then finds said report. FBI Director James Comey reads report, concludes it is fake, then (in an effort to debunk the report) fulfills the prophecy written in the intelligence report and lets Hillary Clinton off the hook.

4) Then James Comey refuses to tell Congress that said report is fake.

5) No mention of Trump collusion, whatsoever. No mention that the WikiLeaks*/DNCLeaks emails are fake. No mention of Russians “hacking” voting booths.

*rubs eyes*

Look, of COURSE Russia was, and still is, trying to spread false information. That is what intelligence and counter-intelligence is all about. I’d be shock if they didn’t. However, this report wasn’t even released publicly:

Sources close to Comey tell CNN he felt that it didn’t matter if the information was accurate, because his big fear was that if the Russians released the information publicly, there would be no way for law enforcement and intelligence officials to discredit it without burning intelligence sources and methods.

So guess what, no one based their vote on this report! It never saw the light of day!! ARE YOU FUCKING KIDDING ME?!!!

You know what I think happened? I think Russia suspected someone was leaking info to the Americans. So they generate a fake, but believable, report and gave it to a select person or persons. Then likely forgot about it, since nothing came about over it.

I honestly think we give the Russians way too much credit. I am not defending the Russians and I could be wrong, but I’m just offering a more likely scenario. If the Russians wanted to use it against our election, they would have then just handed it to RT and be done with it. I don’t think they ever wanted this report to get out, since then they would have to explain how they have more DNC emails than WikiLeaks.

Which brings us back to FBI Director James Comey. So after reading this Russian intelligence report, instead of following the law and proving it wrong, Director Comey chooses instead let Hillary Clinton off the hook and proves it right.

Well, see ya’ later!


#TrumpAdmin: Minor Grumbling Post

Once upon a time, I was a Moderate Atheist Republican. When Obama was elected, I shifted to a Pelaoconservative Christian Republican philosophy.

Now, I did not and do not align with each group perfectly. Take my current political philosophy. According to Michael Foley:

“[P]aleoconservatives press for restrictions on immigration, a rollback of multicultural programmes, the decentralization of the federal policy, the restoration of controls upon free trade, a greater emphasis upon economic nationalism and isolationism in the conduct of American foreign policy, and a generally revanchist outlook upon a social order in need of recovering old lines of distinction and in particular the assignment of roles in accordance with traditional categories of gender, ethnicity, and race.” -(Unfortunately No Link) Michael Foley (2007). American Credo: The Place of Ideas in US Politics. New York, USA: Oxford University Press Inc. p. 318

The only thing I disagree with hardline pelaoconservatism is the isolationism nonsense. I direct your attention to three great articles (all at the American Greatness) that deal with this issue. We can be non-interventionist and anti-war, but we cannot hide from the world:

Please read these at your leisure. Highly recommended.

I do have some quibbles, but they are all very minor.

First up is entitlement reform. I think we need it, President Trump does not:

Office of Management and Budget Director Mick Mulvaney says President Trump removed elements of entitlement reform from a proposed budget. …Mulvaney said he presented the president with a list of budget options which included some changes to Social Security. “And he looked at one and said, ‘What is that?'” Mulvaney said. He continued, “And I said, ‘Well, that’s a change to part of Social Security.’ He said, ‘No. No.’ He said, ‘I told people I wouldn’t change that when I ran. And I’m not going to change that. Take that off the list.'”

But, like the guy said, he campaign on those issues and I voted for him knowing full well what that meant. At least President Trump went over his own budget before signing off on it.

But as the good Lord gives, he takes. President Trump came out in support of Ex-Im Bank:

Mr. Trump also made a full reversal from the campaign by stating his support for the U.S. Export-Import Bank. The president said he planned to fill two vacancies on the bank’s board, which has been effectively paralyzed with three open seats on its five-member board…

“Instinctively, you would say, ‘Isn’t that a ridiculous thing,'” Mr. Trump said of the Ex-Im Bank. “But actually, it’s a very good thing. And it actually makes money, it could make a lot of money.”

I’m not going to go fully into why the Ex-Im Bank is a bad, crony-capitalism boondoggle. Many on both the left and right want to see this monster brought down.

As much as I want to be mad at President Trump over these things*, I cannot. I knew I disagreed with Trump on some things that he was going to keep his promise on. I also knew that Trump would do an about face on some things that he promised to do.

You have to roll with reality. I’m not saying sell-out your values or compromise for the shake of compromise. I will still fight for entitlement reform and the end of the Ex-Im Bank in the now and future. If President Trump can accomplish 75%-80% of what he wants to do and I agree with, then I’m happy.

Justice Neil Gorsuch bought a lot of brownie points for me. President Trump is still strong on the illegal immigration front and reforming the government (like the EPA!). I do roll my eyes at him and grumble at Trump sometimes, but I see no reason to be MAD at this moment.

Well, see ya’ later!


#Ceres2525 By @MicheaLeeNelson Review

The Song “Turn Down For What” by DJ Snake and Lil Jon comes to mind with this book. It hits the ground running and doesn’t let up.

But I get ahead of myself. Micheal Lee Nelson asked for a review and I said sure. Then sends me the first two chapters to get a feel for the entire novel. First, a synopses:

Desperation is the father of invention.

In the year 2525, Ceres desperately searches for his parents, long held captive among the Galactic’s 500 colony worlds.

When he too is taken, forced to duel to save a slave with powerful secret abilities, he determines to fight his way to the top of the pirate ranks.

Can he justify this within his objective moral code? Will Ceres’ faith, his soul, survive?

As you can tell, this isn’t about Ceres, but a guy name Ceres. I was given the first two chapters to read. Micheal Nelson drops you in the action from line one and doesn’t give you time to really breathe (in a good way).

The first chapter deals with Ceres initial adventure to find his father and drops you in the action. The second chapter is a flashback to Ceres birth and why he was given that name, which is, of course, action packed.

Would I pick up the entire book? Yes, yes I would. If you are looking for a High-Energy Action Sci-Fi, then this is for you. Slam your favorite energy drink and get ready for a ride! Enjoy!

Well, see ya’ later!

Written by BigGator5 in: Personal | Tags: , ,

#TrumpAdmin: Why #PreetBharara Needs To Be Fired (A @JazzShaw Response)

I was reading Jazz Shaw’s excellent piece on why US Attorney Preet Bharara shouldn’t be fired along with 45 others President Trump and AG Jeff Sessions want to resign. Jazz gives several reasons:

  1. Preet Bharara took down (Democrat) Sheldon Silver and (Republican) Dean Skelos (Nice!).
  2. Preet Bharara is investigating the Clinton Foundation (Great!).
  3. Preet Bharara is investigating both NYC Mayor Bill de Blasio and New York Governor Andrew Cuomo (Very Awesome!).

Then I had an epiphany and realized those are exactly the reasons US Attorney Preet Bharara MUST be fired. There might be a good number of reasons to keep Bharara, but if Sessions had kept him, then Democrats would accuse the Trump Admin of keeping a Democrat head-hunter.

The Trump Administration cannot play favorites here. They would either have to keep the 46 politically appointed US Attorneys or get rid of them all. The (GW) Bush Administration did a selective firing once and look at how that turned out (despite it being totally legit). It saddens me, but part of “Drain The Swamp” is about not doing politics as usual.

Again, I personally don’t have anything against Preet Bharara. He seems totally legit and honest broker. It honestly makes me sad to write this out. I hope he lands on his feet and thrives. However, as you well know, no one is indispensable. I am sure there are others who can carry on Preet Bharara’s good work.

Well, see ya’ later!

Written by BigGator5 in: Politics | Tags: , , ,

Make #Unions Great Again!

Ed Morrissey asks an important question, is President Donald Trump unlock the door to the unions for Republicans?

President Donald Trump – champion of Big Labor? …

Because of that meltdown in manufacturing, private-sector unions are a mere shell of their former selves. Most of the historical issues that drove them – wages and working conditions – have been pre-empted by government regulation, and mooted by the collapse of their sector. These unions see free trade as their bête noire, and know that Trump stands outside both mainstream Republican and Democratic circles in opposition to free trade, or at least in skepticism of it.

So yes, Trump has not only unlock the door, but has open the door and invited both sides to shake hands. How we continue this détente beyond Trump and secure the friendly union vote is entirely up to us. And we don’t have to abandon ideals, just sell the ones we have:

  1. Be Pro-Jobs And Pro-Business: Republicans are often painted as being too pro-business instead of being pro-jobs. As Tony Stark would say, is it too much to ask for both? Being pro-business and pro-small business, should be about creating more union jobs.
  2. Right-To-Work Opportunities: We can’t abandon Right-To-Right, because Freedom Of Association is a First Amendment issue. However we can sell it as a pro-growth measure that will lead to jobs and new union opportunities, such as finding work for people and labor for businesses. Union representation doesn’t need to be just on the job.
  3. Deregulation: Why would I join a union if government regulations already set my base pay and working conditions? Why should I pay union dues, when I already pay the government taxes to be my union? Big Labor is obsolete next to big government. Regulations on business weakens unions bargaining legitimacy. Deregulation will make unions relevant again by making big government irrelevant.
  4. The Public-Sector Union Enemy: I hate to pit people against each other, but if we want to create more private-sector jobs, we really need to paint public-sector unions as the natural-born enemies of private-sector unions. Private-Sector Unions has suffocated under big government (which is the truth) and we need to make that painfully clear.

That is my four-point plan in an attempt to Make Unions Great Again. It is not about being pro-Big Labor, so much as being pro-jobs. Where there are jobs, there are unions.

Well, see ya’ later!

Written by BigGator5 in: Politics | Tags: , , ,

#DeathRace2050 #Reaction/#Review Discussion

I just finished Death Race 2050. It’s crude, shrill, spastic, sadistic, has really terrible special effects (like Syfy terrible)…

…and a whole hell of lot of fun!

Let’s back up and talk about Death Race 2000.

There’s nothing wrong with Death Race 2000. It is fun and witty. However while it has biting satire, it doesn’t have a good message to back it up. “Fascism Bad, Freedom Good” is not that hard of a message. This movie doesn’t challenge me.

However Death Race 2050 not only has the biting satire, but it is also smarter than it actually looks. Sure it looks stupid on the surface, but it is really not. It takes aim the right, but it then it is completely non-PC too. Let’s take the main characters and break them down:

The Chairman of The United Corporations of America is the parody character of Donald Trump, but he is a globalist and is okay with putting people out of work.

Alexis Hamilton, the rebel leader, is actually working with the Chairman. The “resistance” (by being over-the-top violent and focusing on the wrong things) is actually helping Trump- …err, I mean the Chairman.

Jed Perfectus is supposed to be genetically-engineered athlete, parodying male masculinity. However this falls flat when standing next to Frankenstein’s real masculinity (more on him later). Even Perfectus thinks of himself as a sissy next to Frankenstein.

Minerva Jefferson is a Black Supremacist rapper, who turns out to be an educated intellectual who doesn’t believe what she preaches and is in it for the money. Proving that Racial Supremacy is intellectually hollow.

Tammy “The Terrorist” is a religious cult leader. However it turns out her religion is worshiping celebrity idols (much like we do today). At no point is there any criticism of Christianity.

An artificial intelligence self-driving car, ABE, goes bonkers and kills his own programmer.

Then there’s Frankenstein. If Roger Corman was making this movie to make fun of the right, Frankenstein is the beginning and end of the failure to convey this criticism. Where Perfectus projects masculinity, Frankenstein is male masculinity and he proves it by getting his job (the race) done. Frankenstein is so secure in his masculinity that he has a pet cat. Frankenstein does not like leaders or followers, only doers.

The world setting also lacks clear criticism of the right: Consumerism rules this world, but the right wants to get back to a manufacturing and build stuff again. Both the east and west coasts are wastelands. They paint fly-over country as dangerous because they have guns, but then they get to fight back (so win for fly-over country and gun rights!). Abortion and sterilization has not done anything for overpopulation. A public school sets aside several wheelchair-bound children for Frankenstein to kill, which he promptly kills the school administrators instead for their trouble. There is also not a single gay, bi, or transgender person in this movie (all are straight and comfortable in their gender).

If you are a liberal or progressive or social justice warrior, you are not going to like this movie. Sure it has nudity and fart jokes, but this movie is intellectually right-of-center.

If you are anywhere on the right, this will be a guilty pleasure for years to come. It may be campy as hell and you don’t want to let your kids watch, but I would recommend a watch or two.

Well, see ya’ later!


#ACA Watch: No #Omnibus #ObamaCare Replacement

I’m growing …concern… over the ObamaCare Replacement debate and it is all coming from the GOP.

Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) said there was “growing momentum” for replacing the Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare, the same day of its repeal.

This has troubled me the last few days. It was until just a few minutes ago that I finally put my finger on why: An Omnibus Bill, they are going to replace ObamaCare with TrumpCare. I could feel the warmth drain from my body as I had this thought.

I am not going to sit here and go over all the ideas that the GOP want to replace ObamaCare with. Some ideas I like and others, I just don’t like. However my main objection right now is an omnibus bill. I have several points on why I object to such a bill.

  1. Riders. If an omnibus was put together, there would surly be riders that have nothing to do with the subject at hand. Spending pet projects is the kind of corruption I not going to tolerate. They are tuck deep in legislation so that no one can find them, which brings me to my next point.
  2. Too Big To Read. Enough of the “We Have To Pass The Bill So That You Can Find Out What Is In It” nonsense! We have to be better than that! We have to be able to read it!
  3. Fixing Smaller Bills Is Easier. If we pass smaller bills or acts, then we can keep them all separate in passage. Every reform should be able to stand on its own. Then fixing and/or repealing each reform will be easier.
  4. TrumpCare. I don’t want TrumpCare. No one wants TrumpCare. I also don’t want to defend reforms I don’t like, just to defend things I do like.

You know, I can understand wanting to Repeal and Replace done at the same time. I get that, but we have got to do this right. Each reform in its own bill. You can still do this on the same day and have them take effect all at the same time.

If the GOP already plan to do this, great! Nothing to worry about. We can debate the individual reforms that come up. All I am saying, is no omnibus bill!

Well, see ya’ later!

Written by BigGator5 in: Politics | Tags: , ,

Theme: TheBuckmaker.com WordPress Webdesign
(Note: Website No Longer Works. Removing Link.)