Oct
05
2017
0

#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!
(more…)

Jan
05
2016
0

#KosKids: We Often Repeat Ourselves

I like to start a feature where I take a look at the distorted views of the clinically insane. Or more commonly known to us on the right-side of the blogosphere, as the KosKids. They are the dedicated and brain-dead followers of Markos Moulitsas, and they have bought some prime real estate at the bottom of the rabbit hole. This feature will take a look at how far down they have gone. I am going to link them, but I beg you don’t click on them.

Today’s theme is going over stuff I have already gone over here on my blog. Off we go!

If Islam Is To Be Reformed, This Has Got To Stop

In this article by a, leftprogressive, we find that this person …actually agrees with me? Wait, what?!

I recently came across an article by Rana Elmir, the president of the Michigan chapter of the ACLU, in which she explains why, as a Muslim, she refuses to condemn Islamic terrorism. It is, without a doubt, the most disappointing and frustrating thing I’ve ever read by a moderate Muslim. Replete with mealy-mouthed excuses, false victimhood and mind-boggling denial of one’s moral and civic responsibilities, it is the epitome of the attitude that non-Muslims fear the most in the Islamic response to Islamic terrorism.

I am breaking one of my own rules to blockquote that section for prosperity. This person basically gets were I get using Liberal SJW Logic. However he/she is getting savage in the comments section. The person included a poll and the choice of “Muslims have no obligation to condemn, and the diary is bigoted.” has 54% of the vote, so you know they do not share leftprogressive‘s opinion. I would not recommend reading the comments, because it is just a bunch of mental farting.

One woman’s journey to cure Alzheimer’s ends with Hillary

This is Hillary Clinton’s “Halt The Rise Of The Oceans” moment that is developing as we speak. KBowe is holding Hillary Clinton to an impossible promise. Alzheimer’s a form of dementia and not really “curable” unless we can reverse aging. I already covered this, but Ben Shapiro throws cold water any “cure” coming out of the government:

It’s unclear whether government funding helps come up with treatments for disease. The government’s treatments, at best, amounted to somewhere between 9.3 percent and 21.2 percent of all new drugs approved from 1990 through 2007, according to a study by the New England Journal of Medicine. That means the vast majority of pharmaceutical treatments come from the private sector – and those private sector companies have to challenge the state-run hierarchy at the Food and Drug Administration, which is extraordinarily costly. Public-sector research institutions (PSRIs) come up with great solutions – but it’s private companies that then utilize those solutions to come up with far more effective drugs.

One more thing I forgot to mention on my last post on the subject: Will KBowe hold Hillary Clinton personally responsible if a “cure” is not found?

White House Unveils Common Sense Executive Actions on Guns

This post, by ericlewis0, is not really a blog entry as it is just copying wholesale the Obama Admin talking points on the new executive order/executive action on restricting your self defense rights. It is an uncritical look and just sums up with “This Is Good! Guns Bad! Down With NRA!” nonsense. This person doesn’t even go into the fact that every one of the GOP candidates said they will undo this executive order/executive action on day one.

You would not believe the amount of contempt I have for these brain-dead liberals/progressives on the Daily KOS. With the possible exception of leftprogressive, not a single one can think critically or make a coherent argument. However I am of the opinion that you should often read what the other side has to say. You can not live 24/7 in the echo chamber.

Well, see ya’ later!
(more…)

Jan
01
2016
0

#GunSense: New #GunControl #ExecutiveOrder/#ExecutiveAction …Does Nothing!

The President has been mulling issuing an Executive Order/Executive Action to a myth of a loop-hole for some time now. We have been holding our breathe waiting for this order to come down in order to force everyday people into a background check if this is a person-to-person sell of a gun. While the details have yet to emerge, we are now getting a good idea of what we are in for in the near future. After some time thinking about this, the brain trust is going to-

-make a clear distinction between gun collectors and gun sellers. Under current law, background checks are required for anyone buying a firearm from someone “engaged in the business” of selling guns (like a federally-permitted gun store or dealer). Sales made out of a person’s private collection, many of which are done online, are not subject to background checks.

The president could order a threshold be established such that anyone selling a certain number of guns annually would no longer qualify as a collector but also as someone “in the business” of firearm sales. Those buyers would then be subject to background checks.

Adopting this proposal would not eliminate the so-called “gun show loophole”…

Okay, there is a lot to unpack here. Let’s start with the obvious fact CBS debunks the “gun show loophole” myth. They first admit most private citizens who want to sell their guns, do it online and not at gun shows. While I do not know much about gun collecting, I do know a little about collecting in general. The whole point of collecting, is to COLLECT! They are not in the business of whatever the opposite of collecting would be. Most collectors I know would be hard pressed to trade or even sell their collection. There are only a few reasons why someone would give up their collection:

1) Hard press for money. Whether they need the money for food, bills, or a valued prized. They could also sell their collection for charity work.

2) Loss interest. Collecting is a hobby and someone could lose interest in their hobby. This has happened to me.

3) Dies. They could pass on their collection, which in turn should be allowed to be liquidated by the new owner.

There are problems with setting thresholds and we painfully learned them in ObamaCare. This Executive Order/Executive Action reeks of the 30-hour week requirement in ObamaCare, which had employers turn around and just cut everyone’s hours.

If you set it to high, then it does nothing. Most normal people I know, have one to five (max) guns. If you set the threshold at 25 for example, then most people can sell half a dozen guns without blinking an eye.

If you set it too low, people will just skirt around it by just selling their guns at a slower pace. You might also have the awful consequence of making criminals out of normally law-abiding citizens by accident. If the Obama Administration is making this whole “threshold” thing out of whole cloth, then the first person who gets snagged by this can likely get this thing toss as being unconstitutional or even overturned by the next president. And how, pray tell me, are you going to find out someone sold over their threshold before something happens?

See, I can go on-and-on with the amount of holes I can poke in this executive order/executive action. The important note in all of this, is that it solves nothing. I dare you to explain to me how this would have stop any of the shootings. All this will do, is possibly make otherwise law abiding citizens fearful of the federal government. For my law enforcement friends who would love to enforce this awful executive order/executive action, please do not break into the wrong goddamn rec room.

Well, see ya’ later!
(more…)

Dec
08
2015
0

#GunSense: The #ACLU’s Outright #Hypocrisy Is Awful

The ACLU’s outright hypocrisy is awful and downright breathtaking. The mental gymnastics going on inside the ACLU brain trust right now is monumental in scope:

The American Civil Liberties Union is taking no position on legislation that would bar people from buying guns if they are on the federal government’s no-fly list – a list that the ACLU has spent the past five years arguing is unconstitutional.

(H/T: Moe Lane) Oh come on. This should have been an easy lay-up for these guys. Stuff like this nonsense is why I never call the ACLU by the full name, because until they fight for all civil liberties, then they are just a left-wing hack group. At least the NRA is consistent.

In fact, the ACLU used to be against using the watch lists to restrict gun purchases:

Notably, in 2010, the ACLU testified against “the use of terror watch lists to screen gun purchases,” writing that the “deeply flawed” terror watch list process led the group to conclude, “Given these problems, we do not believe that anyone should be deprived of the right to purchase a gun, or the right to fly, or any other benefit of membership in civil society based solely on placement on a terror watch list.”

The ACLU has since back-pedaled, because now they have since changed their minds about the No-Fly List at break-neck speed:

There is no constitutional bar to reasonable regulation of guns, and the No Fly List could serve as one tool for (Gun Control), but only with major reform.

Their idea of “reform” includes due process to get off the list, not due process to get on the list. They no longer find the “No-Fly List” unconstitutional for some reason. This is because their living God and Messiah now wants to use the No-Fly List to ban people from buying guns.

And yes, Syed Farook and his wife, Tashfeen Malik, were never on any watch list. If we would have ban people on the No-Fly List from buying guns before this happened, then nothing would have changed.

Philip Bump made a joke that went over some people’s head. I think it is a good joke because there’s truth to it. Philip Bump goes on to think of it as a bad joke, but not enough to actually delete the tweet:

The point of the joke — which I very quickly realized was lost on some, making it a bad joke — was that the no-fly list is a secret list that uses secret criteria to determine who finds a home on it. …

An example of under-reporting was easy to come by: The shooters in San Bernardino. It’s not clear that there was a way to definitively identify the married couple as being a public risk ahead of time, but it is clear that they weren’t identified as such. There will always be people who are not identified in advance, making the list necessarily incomplete.

The San Bernardino attack also demonstrated the risk of over-inclusion. At least one news outlet confused the male shooter — Syed Rizwan Farook — with his brother, Syed Raheel Farook. “They have the same name except for the middle name,” Sparapani pointed out, meaning that including a “Syed Farook” on the list might block either from flying. (The shooter’s brother is a decorated Navy veteran.) There’s also the challenge of converting Arabic names into English writing. Consider the former leader of Libya, Muammar Gaddafi. Or Qaddafi. Or Gadhafi. Do you put all three names on the list? Get the letters wrong, and some people will be banned who shouldn’t be.

I am going to come out and lay some hard truth for you: Flying is not a civil liberty. I know I have broken your walled in safe space, but you need to hear this right now. You do not have the right to fly. Where in the Constitution is there a clause for a right of transportation, because I have yet to find it. Sure if you want to get anywhere, you can drive or take a boat and generally it will take you longer. Get over it, life is not fair. Cry me a river.

However the right to be armed is a civil liberty. Just saying.

Well, see ya’ later!
(more…)

Dec
06
2015
0

#GunSense: #GunControl = #PoliceState …Enough Said

The Left On Gun Control

I want to start off with that I have nothing against individual police officers in general. This is not about them. There may be bad apples within their ranks, but I respect your service.

No, this is about the left talking out their mouths and ass at the same time.

Look at the “Black Lives Matter” protests. Their main gripe is the police have too much power. They hate the police. In fact, one of their main chants “Pigs In A Blanket, Fry ‘Em Like Bacon!” is well known. Once liberals got back in power in NYC, they stopped the Stop-And-Frisk policy over there.

They also hate guns. I do not have to link or quote much in order for you to get the picture. You can not throw a stone at Daily Kos without hitting a gun control article. They want to use the power of the state to take away your guns. In fact, they will need a huge police state to enforce gun control. Ross Douthat paints the picture:

The best analogue is Prohibition, which did have major public health benefits …but which came at a steep cost in terms of police powers, black markets and trampled liberties.

I suspect liberals imagine, at some level, that a Prohibition-style campaign against guns would mostly involve busting up gun shows and disarming Robert Dear-like trailer-park loners. But in practice it would probably look more like Michael Bloomberg’s controversial stop-and-frisk policy, with a counterterrorism component that ended up heavily targeting Muslim Americans. In areas where gun ownership is high but crime rates low, like Bernie Sanders’ Vermont, authorities would mostly turn a blind eye to illegal guns, while poor and minority communities bore the brunt of raids and fines and jail terms.

See, this is what gun control will look like. It will be a police state to enforce gun control. The left wants gun control because then they will then be the ones in control.

Now before you get all high and mighty on me about legalizing of marijuana, I want to point out a that there is a difference between getting high and self-defense. Getting stone is not a constitutional right. We have other non-additive anti-inflammatory and pain-killing drugs. I have seen people’s lives ruined using drugs. When the government gets out of control, I can’t throw marijuana at them in self-defense. I also find it morally repugnant to grow the government with taxes from additive marijuana. To keep and bear Arms, is a right. I have seen countless stories where armed people have saved their, or other people’s lives, with a gun.

Well, see ya’ later!
(more…)

Oct
15
2015
1

The Swamp #44

Gun Free Zones Kill

The Swamp #44: #GunControl, #SmartGuns, #GunFreeZones, @bandlersbanter Guest!

Today me and Kat talk about Gun Control. We also talk about mental health issues and, while it is a good debate to have, linking it with gun control is tricky business and warrants more debate. Then we discuss why those “Smart Guns” are really dumb. Then Aaron Bandler joins us and we all talk about those deadly Gun Free Zones. But before you listen, check out my Patreon Page!

Reads:

Asperger’s Syndrome, The Second Amendment, and The Value of Life. by Kat

NOHO SHOOTOUT GUN SHOP GOES BANKRUPT by Brent Hopkins

Obama Prepares to Unilaterally Take Your Guns by Aaron Bandler

“Gun Free Zones” Cartoon

Project Child Safe

Well, see ya’ later!
(more…)

Oct
14
2015
1

#GunSense: Why #SmartGuns Are Dumb

Since the gun debate has heated up, I have seen people posting in the #SmartGuns these days. I want to go over with the Left again, why smart guns are a dumb idea.

Lowell Ponte of Newsmax fires off a couple questions asking the gun control/smart gun advocates to answer:

What if the battery powering your gun’s computer chip has gone bad?

What if your trigger must confirm your fingerprint, but the fight to defend yourself has left your finger dirty or bloody?

What… if you need to use someone else’s “smart gun” in an emergency?

What if in your absence a spouse tries to defend herself, or himself, with your smart handgun programmed so that only you can fire it?

These are uncomfortable questions for the gun control/smart gun advocates, because there are no good answers. Lowell Ponte also points out three other points that I will go over myself.

Ponte notes that the “smart gun” Amatrix iP1 .22 goes for $1,399 and the wrist armband that goes with it is a whopping $399. Just like driverless cars, the average American will be priced out of owning a handgun in order to protect themselves. Only the super rich or the government will be able to afford them.

If we switch over to “smart guns” that use computer chips, anyone equipped with EMPs and electronic-neutralizing devices can easily disarm you.

Lowell Ponte’s last great point needs to be address:

A California smart gun start-up named Yardarm… has developed a technology so that “Users can even remotely disable their weapons.” If owners can do this, who else can?

I know, right? Smartphone tech is getting more advanced, but people are still dumb. Liberals also say they are worried about the NSA hacking into their personal lives, yet having a hackable gun is somehow a good idea?

Speaking of criminals, I dare you ask several of them if they would want to use a smart gun. I am sure any criminal worth his salt would not be using a “smart guns” themselves. I bet you anything they would rather equip themselves with the EMPs and electronic-neutralizing devices.

Kenneth W. Royce wrote that “no defensive firearm should ever rely upon any technology more advanced than Newtonian physics. That includes batteries, radio links, encryption, scanning devices and microcomputers.” I agree completely. Basically, smart guns are dumb because they would unreliable. Too many things can go wrong with them. I think gun control advocates knows this and that is why they push it.

Well, see ya’ later!
(more…)

Oct
02
2015
0

#GunSense: New #WarOnChristianity Wants To Leave You Defenseless

“Once is happenstance. Twice is coincidence. Three times is enemy action.” -Ian Fleming

Nine people are dead after an attacker opened fire in a historically black church in Charleston, S.C. Wednesday night. “This is an unfathomable and unspeakable act by someone filled with hate, and with a deranged mind,” Charleston Mayor Joseph Riley said in a press conference Thursday morning.

Okay, this is clearly happenstance. The Charleston church was a soft target and gun free zone (more on that later). So this could have been a one time deal. The asshole here was racist and this was a black church, so of course they are Christians.

A gunman singled out Christians, telling them they would see God in “one second,” during a rampage at an Oregon college Thursday that left at least nine innocent people dead and several more wounded, survivors and authorities said.

“[He started] asking people one by one what their religion was. ‘Are you a Christian?’ he would ask them, and if you’re a Christian, stand up. And they would stand up and he said, ‘Good, because you’re a Christian, you are going to see God in just about one second.’ And then he shot and killed them,” Stacy Boylen, whose daughter was wounded at Umpqua Community College in Roseburg, Ore., told CNN.

Is this a coincidence? Another group of Christians murdered? Again, soft target and a gun free zone.

I am sensing a pattern here. Christians are being murdered in deadly “gun free zones” and the best answer that any liberal/progressive has to offer, is to-

vent righteous indignation, then look around for someone to blame for a problem that almost certainly has no legislative remedy. Congresses under control of both parties certainly haven’t found any, and none of the proposals that percolate out in the minutes after a publicized shooting incident turn out to apply when all of the facts finally come out.

The only hint of a policy from anyone came from Obama, who praised Australia for their reaction to a mass shooting, and that solution was a massive firearm confiscation program.

What a surprise. The guy who thinks most law abiding citizen clings to guns and religion, wants to confiscate your gun and leave you completely defenseless. Self-defense or the Second Amendment doesn’t matter to Obama. If it were up to him, Obama would confiscate your means of self-defense right now.

I find it paradoxical that those who want to cancel out the Second Amendment, are the loudest to complain about a police state when talking about our current law enforcement officers. If we confiscate all the guns from law abiding citizens, then we will demand a larger police presence. Or haul you into big cities against your will, for “your protection” of course.

Do we need Ian Fleming’s “enemy action” before we ourselves take action? Christians are now being targeted and others now want us to be easier targets. I am all for forgiveness and turning the other cheek, however I don’t think Christianity was supposed to be a suicide pack. If it is a suicide pack, then the first Christians would have died with Stephen than flee Jerusalem. I reject the idea that just because you are a Christian, you can’t fight back to save your life or another’s life.

Before I close this up, I want my fellow liberal/progressive to answer me this question honestly: You’re a criminal. Laws do not matter to you and have many guns yourself. Two towns lay before you. One town has a “shall issue” CCW permitting, no “gun free zones” anywhere, and at least one gun shop. The other town has a “may issue” CCW permitting, “gun free zones” in a couple places (churches, schools, and a movie theater), and no gun shops in sight. Which town do you moved to?

Well, see ya’ later!
(more…)

Aug
26
2015
1

#GunSense: You Don’t Need A Gun To #Murder People

First, I like to offer my prayers for the families and friends Alison Parker and Adam Ward, as well as my unending hope they had their peace with God before the end. I also hope for the quick recovery of the third victim. My prayers for her and all of her family as well.

Second, I have watched the video of the murder. I will not embed or link it here, but I will describe it as best I can. Alison Parker was all smiles and having a nice talk about tourism. Then the shots ring out. Adam Ward turns as he falls to the ground, catching a glimpse of the murderer. We might even see some of his blood. Adam Ward did not make a sound. The third victim also doesn’t make a sound. However Alison Parker does not stay quite, at all. Parker screams and screams and yells “Oh My God!” just as the feed is cut off. That was the real screams of woman being murdered.

This is why we have the Death Penalty, people. I really want someone to defend “Life Without Parole” for this guy. In fact, I’d like to see this guy get the firing squad. Wouldn’t that be poetic justice for this wonton death and destruction?

With that all out of the way, I already hear the calls for “gun control” spring up. You don’t need a gun to murder people. To blame the gun, would be like blaming the rope the KKK used to hang people. The 9/11 Hijackers also didn’t need guns. If this monster didn’t have a gun to commit the murder, the monster could have a knife to stab these people. Or a blunt object or his hands to beat them to death. Or a bomb to blow the TV station. Or a car to run a WDBJ van off the road.

Do I want to see a world without guns? Yes, absolutely! I look forward to the day when we no longer have them. However for every story I hear of someone being murdered with a gun, I hear two or three stories about an armed person defending themselves with a gun. Guns are not evil or good, they just are. To unilaterally disarm the law abiding good people of this world of their best means of self-defense is just wrong. The bad guys do not care about gun control or gun free zones.

Gun control isn’t about controlling guns, but about controlling people. It is about making people dependent on the government and/or police state for their safety.

Well, see ya’ later!
(more…)

Dec
04
2014
0

About That Funny As Hell @Explosm Video

Ok, nothing is going to make sense until you watch the video. Just as a warning, not safe for work or little ones:

Now I am only going to talk only about the Star Spangle Bastard segment, so I only embeded that part. If you want to watch the whole video, go here.

I want to first start out by saying that this is funny, REALLY funny. No Gun Rights activist with a sense of humor should honestly be offended by this video. I was laughing my ass off by the end. In fact, it showed a few things right about gun control:

  1. In Common Law, the Fleeing Felon Rule permits the use of force (including deadly force) against an individual who is suspected of a felony, poses a threat of serious physical harm, and is in clear flight. Force may be used by the victim, bystanders, or police officers. The bank robbers all came in with guns and the Star Spangle Bastard had every reason to believe that the fleeing criminal posed a physical threat to other people. Thus the Star Spangle Bastard was not arrested and the left-wing MSM vilified him, yet honored the criminal. Very subtle there.
  2. Getting rid of all guns won’t stop wars. To be brutally honest, there were wars before guns. We’ll just rediscover old ways of warfare.
  3. Even if guns are magically wisk away, it won’t stop criminals. Again, they committed crime long before guns. We still have strong-arm crime even to this day.
  4. Gun Control advocates will lose in the end, just like in this video.

What the video got wrong:

  1. Every Gun Rights advocate would be appalled by Star Spangle Bastard’s gun use. This is just a false characterization by the left of the avarage Gun Rights advocate.
  2. Every Gun Rights advocate knows the Second Amendment is there, for the people, to protect the rest of the Bill Of Rights.

The other stuff is open to interpretation, but very amusing video neverless. The only reason that we shouldn’t be angry over this video, is that the gun control arguments presented here are strawmen and can be easily dismissed in any debate. We should see this as the beginning of the conversation and not the end. Check out my podcast on the subject.

Well, see ya’ later!
(more…)

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