Category Archives: gun grabbers

gun grabbers, Uncategorized

[Update 3] – I’m fairly sure that “iPhone gun” is a hoax

9 Comments

You’ve seen the hype over the Ideal Conceal “phone gun.” Who hasn’t?

But I’ll bet you haven’t seen a photograph of it. Every picture I can find is a computer-rendered image taken from the company web site.

Like this one:

ic-pocket-street

Now look closely at that hand gripping the “gun.”

ic-pocket-street-closeup

Try it yourself. Hold your phone (or paperback book, or any rectangular thingie) by the corner like that. It’s a poor photoshop. Even the street scene.

stock-photo-dark-street-in-tel-aviv-israel-38249383

Look familiar?

I emailed Ideal Conceal (and why do you suppose he’s using Gmail, instead of a more professional-apppearing idealconceal.com email address?) to ask for a photograph of the actual prototype; the idea being to establish that a real, physical product exists. Or not.

Kjellberg sent two more renderings. No photographs. Interestingly, the two image files are named “phun-gun-img-003e.jpg” and “phun-gun-img-004b.png.”

Phun = Fun? How professional.

When I pointed out that I wanted a photograph as a response to those who doubt the existence of the Ideal Conceal, he replied:

Unfortunately we don’t have a prototype that we are showing to the public. I have told every news agency and persons who contact us that info.

We will be releasing video etc when it is ready.

Doubters with doubt….

Thanks Kirk Kjellberg

Kjellberg  claims he’ll be building these guns. That’s real interesting, because the ATF only shows Ideal Conceal having a Type 01 dealer license. More interesting is the address given for Ideal Conceal: 4300 SCHOOL BOULEVARD

It’s currently up for sale, according to that link. An office building, not a factory.

A whois on the domain idealconceal.com shows:

Updated Date: 29-jan-2016
Creation Date: 16-aug-2015
Expiration Date: 16-aug-2016

A one year registration? Expiring before he plans to start shipping in October?

Whois also shows a different street address than that in the ATF records: 9127 Highway 25. I doubt that he’s manufacturing an oversized, stupidly designed derringer there, either. Since he claims he’s already taken 4,000 preorders, he’d better find — and equip… and man — a factory fast.

Especially if he’s taken money in advance on those preorders, someone might want to talk to the Minnesota Attorney General about potential fraud.

Or not. Maybe he isn’t accepting payments yet.

So if it isn’t a financial scam, what might be motivating the guy?

kjellberg-fb

Thanks to Mitchell Boone for finding that F******k post. If you’re having trouble reading that, it says:


Kirk Ennis Kjellburg
December 19, 2012
Dear Gun Lovers, let me introduce you to playground rules. When enough stupid kids can’t play say king of the hill nicely, they take away the hill. Use your brain, somehow this has to stop. Shouting for gun rights when the bodies of 20 children lay dead is about as selfish as it gets…

Yep. He wants to punish everyone who didn’t do it for the actions of Some Asshole who killed his mother and stole her guns to go on a rampage. Some pro-gun advocate.

I think we’re looking at the same sort of anti-RKBA action as the bogus RNC open carry petition. An attempt to embarrass gun owners and make us look bad.

Perhaps my guess is incorrect. If Kjellberg wishes to correct any misconceptions, I’d like him to answer some questions, and provide a little data.

Unless and until we hear from Kjellberg, I certainly wouldn’t advise anyone to preorder an Ideal Conceal pistol.

Update, 4/12/16: Aha! I found an article that I missed in the last round.

“Right now there isn’t a firing prototype all I have is a plastic model of it so once there’s a firing prototype people will feel more comfortable about how it deploys, how it shoots and that kind of stuff”, said Kjellberg.

I was right: No prototype; just a nonfunctional plastic model. Since he claims he’ll be shipping in five or six months, that motivational speaker/claims adjuster/microwave salesman better hurry up and get a manufacturer’s license, not to mention someone capable of designing a working gun since his LinkedIn page doesn’t suggest any engineering experience or training.

And no, Kjellberg has not contacted me to answer any of the above questions.

Update 2, 4/14/16: Kjellberg is now admitting that he is not a licensed manufacturer.The current story is:

“He isn’t properly licensed to manufacture such a weapon, though, so he connected with a friend at a Big Lake engineering company that has federal clearance for weapon design.”

I see three type 07 FFLs in Big Lake:

Interestingly, Bondhus Arms is marketing its own .380 concealment pistol, the CL380.

bondhus-arms-cl380

While there does seem to be a working prototype, and they have a real approved patent, it doesn’t seem to be for sale yet (“later this year”). I wonder if Bondhus Arms would actually build its competitor’s .380.

I’ve sent messages to MPI and Bondhus asking if they are the manufacturer Kjellberg mentions. I’ve also contacted the ATF with some general inquiries (AOW, etc.).

Nope; nothing from Kjellberg yet.

Update 3, 4/15/16: Still nothing from Kjellberg. But the ATF responded. A company has problems when it’s response time is worse than a federal bureaucracy.

Basically, since Kjellberg doesn’t have even a prototype, and apparently hasn’t submitted anything to the ATF, they couldn’t answer most of my questions. I got the extremely vague answer I expected.

Mr. Bussjaeger: Thank you for your inquiry and concern in regards to the pistol that appears to be a cellphone. As ATF understands it, the proposed manufacturer of this firearm does not even yet have an operable prototype. If the company chooses, it can submit to ATF for determination the classification of the firearm. The ATF enforces two primary Federal firearms laws: the Gun Control Act (GCA) and the National Firearms Act (NFA). Based on the information ATF currently has on this proposed firearm, it would be lawful to manufacture under the Gun Control Act (GCA). So, to address your concerns: Based on what ATF knows of this proposed firearm at this time, it would be both lawful to manufacture and own/possess under Federal firearms laws. Again, ATF’s responsibility is to enforce Federal firearms laws as they exist and as stated, based on what ATF currently knows about the proposed firearm it would be lawful under current Federal firearms laws. Thank you.

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail
authoritarian swine, gun control, gun grabbers, guns

Merrick Garland on gun rights: Not just no, but HELL NO!

2 Comments

garlandThe Zelman Partisans strongly opposes President Barack Obama’s nomination of Judge Merrick Garland to the United States Supreme Court.

This is not just because a new Supreme Court Justice should be nominated by the next President of the United States – no matter who wins that office – and not someone who is committing a “hit-and-run” on the Supreme Court on his way out the door with the rest of the nation left to deal with the consequences for years to come.

This is not just because the American people should have the opportunity to express their views on the next Supreme Court Justice at the ballot box by their choice of POTUS.

This is because Merrick Garland would be a steadfast, true voice that would tip the nation’s highest court in the direction of total destruction of our gun rights.

Erich Pratt, executive director of the group Gun Owners of America, said Mr. Obama chose a “radical leftist” in Judge Garland despite promises to nominate a consensus candidate.

“He supported the D.C. gun ban in 2007, thereby showing he opposes self-defense and opposes the right to keep and bear arms,” Mr. Pratt said.

That 2007 case, Parker v. District of Columbia, ultimately became the landmark Supreme Court case District of Columbia v. Heller. Before it reached the high court, it was heard in Judge Garland’s circuit, and a three-judge panel ruled that the D.C. handgun ban was unconstitutional. Judge Garland wasn’t part of that decision, but he did join three other judges in trying to have the full court get a chance to overturn the ruling.

National Review digs further into Garland’s anti-gun views.

Garland voted… to uphold an illegal Clinton-era regulation that created an improvised gun registration requirement. Congress prohibited federal gun registration mandates back in 1968, but… the Clinton Administration had been “retaining for six months the records of lawful gun buyers from the National Instant Check System.” By storing these records, the federal government was creating an informal gun registry that violated the 1968 law. Worse still, the Clinton program even violated the 1994 law that had created the NICS system in the first place. Congress directly forbade the government from retaining background check records for law abiding citizens.

Garland’s lack of respect for the people’s fundamental rights is unacceptable. The Obama Administration was obviously a failure at implementing much of the gun control plans it was pushing, even though it consistently used every tragedy to its advantage.

So now Barack Obama is trying to preserve his statist, anti-gun legacy by nominating a Supreme Court Justice who would do it for him.

No. Just no!

Barack Obama has already foisted one obviously biased Justice on the rest of us – a Justice whose support for ObamaCare was well known, and who did not recuse herself when King v. Burwell was argued in front of the Supreme Court.

We certainly don’t need another Justice whose grasp on the Constitution is tenuous and definition of “objectivity” only involves issues with which he agrees.

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail
gun grabbers, You can't fix stupid

Rational Discussions

5 Comments

” If you carry a gun in public you are a terrorist. Period. There is no other way around it, because you are using the gun to intimidate in the name of feeling “safe.” But you know what? Your “safety” is a threat to every other person. Every other person. Shouldn’t that scare you? Oh, and they won’t be telling you when they are about to take you out.”
– Daniel Carr, commenting on the Moms Demand Victims F******k page, who has the most appropriate profile picture on FB

Armed = Terrorist. Period.

Like this guy. Or 8yo Alexis. Or this pregnant woman.

My “safety,” Mr. Carr, is only a “threat” to someone credibly threatening me with death or bodily injury. If you consider me a threat to you, I’d like you to explain why you’re planning to kill me.

The victim disarming rights-violators frequently claim that we need to have a rational discussion about guns, and whine that RKBA proponents won’t listen to them. This is why: their idea of “rational” is a display of a pathological fear of inanimate tools. They fail to realize that universal preemptively-prove-your-innocence backgrounds checks are not going to be conducted by the 70% of criminals who get their firearms through illicit transactions, nor that they cannot even be required to do so.

The victim disarmers cite research that claims to have studied the laws that best correlate with lowered gun deaths, and conclude that firearm identification (whether through ballistic fingerprinting or microstamping) would help lower deaths by 90%, even though only two states have even had ballistic fingerprinting databases, and one of those gave it up after 15 years of it never leading to a single arrest (and no one has microstamping yet). We are expectedly to “rationally” accept a study that literally cannot support the conclusions it drew because the data is nonexistent or directly contradicts the claim.

To the victim disarming blood dancers, it is rational to believe that surveys in Washington state showed that 90% of the people wanted universal PPYI checks, when less than 60% would actually vote for it.

We are to accept as “rational” the idea that a convicted felon on probation, under a restraining order, who obtained his gun via an illegal straw purchase, and killed 3, and injured 14 would have been stopped by universal PPYI checks.

Two blood dancers from Sandy Hook Promise gave statements to the New Hampshire legislature that it would be “rational” to believe that universal PPYI checks would have stopped that school killer, who obtained his weapons by killing his mother in her bed and stealing her guns.

It is supposed by the people-controlling gun grabbers to be “rational” to ban steel pipe, sheet metal, blocks of metal, nails, springs, rivets, iron oxide and aluminum, and even plastic bags to stop gun violence.

It would be “rational” to lift a nonexistent ban on gun violence research.

“Rational” discussion would accept that gun deaths are increasing, and are caused by the increasing number of guns, when the rate of gun deaths is at the lowest level in decades (while guns per capita is at a record level).

“Rational” discussion by the gun controllers’ standard means accepting delusion over reality.

Let’s have that rational discussion just as soon as your doctors get your medications balanced.

Ed. note: This commentary appeared first on TZP’s weekly email alert. If you would like to be among the first to see new commentary (as well as to get notice of new polls and recaps of recent posts), please sign up for our alert list. (See sidebar or, if you’re on a mobile device, scroll down). Be sure to respond when you receive your activation email!

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail
authoritarian swine, gun grabbers, Media, You can't fix stupid

“Hey, Moron”

8 Comments

EJ Montini hates it when people tell him the truth.

He is a moron, at least when he babbles about victim disarmament.

Montini: “Hey, moron, name one ‘common sense’ gun law”
“Hey, moron, name me one ‘common sense’ gun law, let alone a bunch. You can’t, can you? Because all you want to do is confiscate everybody’s weapons. That’s the only ‘common sense’ gun law liberal pissants like you want. Admit it! And by the way, I called you a moron earlier because I thought if I called you a (expletive) – which is what you are – you wouldn’t keep reading.”

Okay then.

Fisking time; let’s see how sensible his proposals are:

  • The one I mention most often is a universal, no loophole, no exception background check on every gun sale.
    That isn’t sensible until he proposes a way to enforce that on criminals who bypass universal preemptively-prove-your-innocence checks by purchasing stolen guns on the street from other criminals. They don’t comply now. And they don’t have to.
  • It’s been shown in poll after poll that a vast majority of Americans – up to 90 percent – support it.
    Except that when that 90+% claim was put to the test in an Washington [edited to correct state] referendum, only 60% voted for it. In New Hampshire, the claim was 94%, but the surveyors refused to release their raw data to prove it, and the folks there keep electing (and reelecting) folks who vote it down. (Oddly enough, I have never been polled on that subject, except by a couple of painfully obvious push polls in which I refused to participate. I never found anyone — not one, pro or anti — who claimed to have participated in the NH “survey.”)
  • We could ban the sale or possession of armor piercing and hollow-tip bullets, and we could limit magazines to 10 bullets.
    So he doesn’t want rounds that penetrate too much, but he doesn’t want rounds that limit penetration. “Sensible.” As stated, that isn’t going to fly with anyone. Pretty much any rifle round is “armor penetrating” (unless you only count Level 4+), and armor penetrating handgun ammunition is already banned at the federal level and in several states; it doesn’t seem to have had much effect on crime rates. Defenders and hunters want expansion because it’s more effective, generally, than solid rounds.
  • We could codify in law a wider access to mental health records in order to prevent individuals with serious illness from buying weapons.
    Oh, goody. Let’s start by looking at his health records. If he has nothing to hide, he has nothing to fear by putting his unredacted files on the Internet. In fact, we already have laws in place to handle the dangerously disturbed. Those who have been adjudicated a danger to self or others are prohibited persons. Or do you just want to do away with the due process part of depriving people of human/civil rights. Did he get a mental health exam before exercising his 1st Amendment right to write that column?
  • We could repeal the idiotic 1996 congressional budget amendment that prevents the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention from doing studies on firearms ownership and the effects on public health.
    There is no such research ban to repeal. Wouldn’t it have been “sensible” for MorMontini to figure that out before spouting off?
  • We could expand gun-owning restrictions to more individuals convicted of crimes like domestic violence, stalking and more.
    Those convicted of domestic violence (and any crime punishable by a sentence of more than a year in prison) are already prohibited persons. You know, like the recent Kansas shooter, who was a convicted felon, under a restraining order, who bypassed PPYI checks. “And more…” Maybe we could add “practicing journalism without a license” to that list.
  • We could establish a national waiting period for gun purchases.
    Who could possibly object to that, right? Certainly not Ms. Bowne. Anymore. I wonder what Montini is planning to do, if he needs to be sure his friends and family can’t get a defensive tool quickly.
  • Finally, a law limiting angry impulse responses to news columnists might be helpful. At least to me.
    Well, it’s clear that he wants violations of 1st Amendment free discourse, so I guess he’s cool with the journalist licensing plan.

So long as Montini is determined to sound like an uninformed moron intent on destroying individual human/civil rights (obviously starting with the First and Second Amendments) people are bound to keep thinking he is one.

No.

Your move, Montini.

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail
gun grabbers

Mask of the Blood Dancers

7 Comments

In response to a convicted felon on probation, under a restraining order, killing 3, and injuring 14 “Gabrielle Giffords” is dancing in the blood:

Gabrielle Giffords ‏@GabbyGiffords: In just the last week, 11 mass shootings have brought terror and tragedy to our country. This is not the America we strive for. #Hesston

Yes. This is exactly what “you” are striving for: a world in which honest people have to preemptively prove their innocence just to hope to exercise their right to self defense against murderous thugs who recognize no such restrictions. Helpless targets, so bastards like Ford can victimize them in perfect safety. Unarmed people in magical gun free zones that never work.

But no doubt, every time the policies that “you” push enable another horrific incident like this, you can call for more action that somehow requires more people to donate more money to your little Criminals’ Workplace Safety organization.

So I guess “you’re” happy.

I actually feel sorry for Gabby Giffords. Unless she has recently made a miraculous recovery, it’s unlikely that she formed that thought and typed that tweet. Medical professionals who are familiar with the sort of bullet-induced brain trauma that Giffords suffered, and who have observed her public appearances, tell me — while carefully noting it’s only a general observation and not a valid diagnosis, since they haven’t examined her –that her behavior is consistent with extreme brain damage that she will never further recover from; that most likely her understanding of the world, much less victim disarmament, is that of a young, innocent child. And always will be.

Giffords is most likely perpetual child who just wants to please the nice people surrounding her. One being used by her own husband, Mark Kelly, and the gun people controlling puppeteers around her. Think on the utter lack of morals and ethics it takes to abuse and manipulate a trusting child like that. Contempt only begins to describe my thoughts about them.

Then consider what Mark Kelly et al would be willing to do to everyone else, whom they don’t obstensibly love and care for.

Gabby Giffords is the mask that the victim disarmers use to hide the true face of gun control.

Ed. note: This commentary appeared first on TZP’s weekly email alert. If you would lik>e to be among the first to see new commentary (as well as to get notice of new polls and recaps of recent posts), please sign up for our alert list. (See sidebar or, if you’re on a mobile device, scroll down). Be sure to respond when you receive your activation email!

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail
authoritarian swine, gun control, gun grabbers, guns, Politics, Sellouts and traitors, So Much Stupid!, Voting

Hate In America

1 Comment

I watched part of a TV show last night, reminding me why I seldom watch TV, that and lack of time.

The show was on Investigation Discovery, and out of the two stories covered, one of them was the shooting at the Jewish Community Center in Overland Park. The criminal was an American Nazi. There was a video clip in the show of him sitting in the back of a police car yelling “heil hootler”! Yeah, actually I did mean to misspell it. Petty, I know. Pictures of him doing the hootler salute, the nazi flag, clips of his speeches and the whole 9 yards. Did he hate Jews? Oh yeah. He was asked if he was sad none of the victims he shot were Jewish. No, he considered those he shot Jewish collaborators. Was he an insane madman? Darn skippy.

All sounds like a well covered show, right? You would be wrong.

The show was about lionizing something called the Southern Poverty Law Center, an evil institution run by your typical flaming liberal Morris Dees.

Let me tell you a little bit about the SPLC from something that was on the national radar a few years ago in 2009. It happened in the state of Missouri, but it made waves across the nation when people found out.

The Missouri Highway Patrol issued a report to their troopers called the MIAC report. It was issued by the Missouri Information and Analysis Center (MIAC), a branch of the state’s Highway Patrol. This scholarly paper warned their officers to be wary of the following people that represented a danger to the officers and the public in general.

Christians, political conservatives, patriots, pro-lifers, libertarians, gun owners, and constitutionalists and militia members. Those that display Constitutional Party, Campaign for Liberty, or Libertarian material, such as bumper stickers. These members were usually supporters of former Presidential Candidates Ron Paul, Chuck Baldwin, and Bob Barr.

Any car sporting a pro-life, pro-free speech, pro-Second Amendment bumper sticker was to be viewed with extreme caution.

And where would the Missouri Highway Patrol get such a insane memorandum? Why, from the SPLC. Who never met a group of conservatives or conservative candidate they didn’t label as a threat or a hate group.

After a huge outcry from enraged conservatives and conservative lawmakers the MO HP retracted their report and the blame flinging session began.

Other states had reason to be concerned. The MO HP is part of a “fusion center”. They assimilate and disseminate information to state and local agencies. At the time, the federal Department of Homeland Security’s Web page entitled “State and Local Fusion Centers” said

Many states and larger cities have created state and local fusion centers to share information and intelligence within their jurisdictions as well as with the federal government….

In 2009 DHS “had deployed intelligence officers to state fusion centers in: Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, District of Columbia, Georgia, Florida, Illinois, Indiana, Louisiana, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Oregon, South Carolina, Texas, Virginia, Washington, Wisconsin.

I’m sure there are more now.

It was the prelude to what happened a couple years later.

It started with a request from the Social Security Administration jointly with the ATF, for the entire list of Missouri Concealed Carry permit holders as part of an investigation. An investigation which was dropped the minute the ATF received the list of all Missouri CCW holders. The request was made of the Missouri Department of Revenue. The Mo Department of Revenue, which illegally as in against Missouri Law, but at the direction of Gov. Jay Nixon had begun implementing REAL ID. The Mo DOR attempted to mislead the legislature by not telling them the ATF had been part of the requesting agencies. It is against the law to supply a list of gun owners to the Federal Government.

So who would break the law like that? The Missouri Highway Patrol.

Testifying before a Senate committee, Highway Patrol Col. Ron Replogle said the concealed guns list was given to an investigator looking into potential fraud involving Social Security benefits for the disabled. But he said the investigator never was able to read the encrypted information and ultimately destroyed the computer discs.

Republicans expressed concern that the privacy rights of Missouri residents are being infringed, but members of Democratic Gov. Jay Nixon’s administration insisted there was nothing wrong with the information sharing.

Now just a word about that encrypted disc that Replogle said they sent. It was NOT encrypted, it was in a password protected excel file. The password was included in the cover letter. The cover letter that was sent WITH the discs. The cover letter that was sent with the discs via REGULAR mail.

For fun you can listen to this interview with Sen. Kurt Schafer with Dana Loesch on The Dana Show.

Why would the Mo Highway Patrol do such a thing? Well, obama syncophant jay nixon directed them to, and after all, gun owners are the enemy, right?

So back to the TV show. The “courageous” Morris Dees who has armed security people at his home recounted an incident where intruders gained access to his grounds. He related the story of getting his guns, and his daughter had a .22 she was a good shot with, and they huddled together with their guns in their safe room till the danger had been resolved.

I kid you not.

I can’t make this stuff up. And now the SPLC is probably going to have this dam darn TV show telling uninformed people that this is a great group. Peachy, just swell.

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail
gun grabbers, Sellouts and traitors

Traitorous Bagel-Brains Against Gun Victims

6 Comments

bagel-brain-x-ray

U.S. rabbis’ anti-gun violence group starts in Berkeley
Like many Americans, Creditor reached a boiling point on guns after the 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting in Newtown, Connecticut, where 20 young children and six adults were killed.

If Rabbi Creditor wants to reduce gun violence, it would be a fine thing for him to organize gun safety classes for the young people of his community. He could work to expand economic opportunities so fewer would resort to the illegal drug trade. He could perform direct outreach to at-risk kids. He could exercise the prime responsibilty of a rabbi by teaching these people the difference between aggression and defensive use of force.

But Creditor is a rabbi in name only. He doesn’t want to teach.

“Our vision is to amplify the work that’s being done, knowing that Congress has failed us so far,” Creditor said. “The ability that faith leaders have to marshal civic activism is unrivaled.”

More laws. More violations of the rights of honest people. The kind of laws that those honest people — and even Congress — have rejected.

Because, when violent crime rates are dropping to levels not seen for decades, some crazy minor murdered a woman to steal her guns and take them to a designated gun-free victim disarmament zone to murder more people…

…he wants to inflict more human/civil rights infringements on the people who didn’t do it. Because the gun laws didn’t work there, Rabbi Creditor wants to turn the entire nation into Sandy Hook.

For safety.

Because disarming Jews worked so well there, he wants to turn America into Nazi Germany.

For safety.

I think not. I strongly suspect his motivation is a little more crass.

Creditor also got Eileen Soffer, a Mountain View resident who had worked as the national deputy field director of Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America, to come aboard as the full-time national coordinator.

That is the same Moms Demand Victims that is under the umbrella of Everytown for Gun Safety (along with Mayors Against Illegal Guns), which is chaired — and heavily funded — by billionaire Michael Bloomberg who never saw a gun in civilian hands that he liked (except his own bodyguards). Soffer undoubtedly brought along the promise of financial backing for yet another bloody-handed victim disarmament group.

Perhaps I’m being unfair; maybe he wants something other than restrictions on rights. But since he does want “further expanded background checks, public health research into gun violence“, I doubt it. The fact that he runs their F******k page as a closed group implies that they want to hide their agenda from those who appreciate civils rights.

I invite Rabbi Creditor to answer a few questions.

  1. Have you ever read the complete Constitution, to include the Bill of Rights?
  2. Do you comprehend the difference between a constitutional republic and a democracy?
  3. Exactly what gun laws do you propose to stop another Sandy Hook scenario (where the perpetrator violated a series of laws just to get the guns)?
  4. How do you propose to protect the rights of those who didn’t do it?
  5. How do you propose to enforce your laws on criminals (bearing in mind that criminals cannot be required to submit to a background check)?
  6. If your agenda includes weapons bans, will you man up and conduct confiscations peronally?
  7. Would any ban/confiscation recompense gun owners for the loss of property? Have you considered how much money that would be?
  8. What will you do when the good guys just say, No”?
  9. What will you do if the good guys say, “All righty, then“?

I await Rabbi Creditor’s response, though not with bated breath.

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail
gun grabbers

Brady Center Files Lies Over 3D Printed Guns

1 Comment

Or, as the truth-challenged victim disarmers put it:

Brady Center Files Amicus Brief Over 3D Printed Guns
The government’s attempt to keep 3D printed guns out of the hands of terrorists got a boost Thursday with an amicus brief filed in support in the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals by the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence.

That purports to be a Courthouse News article, but it appears from the text (including a “mission statement” for the BCPGV at the bottom) to be a press release. Let’s look it over.

  • “The U.S. Department of State ordered Texas-bases Defense Distributed to remove from the Internet what was essentially a do-it-yourself kit for making untraceable and undetectable guns.”
    Nope. It was electronic data files. No tools, no materials. 
  • “The kit included blueprints for 3D printed guns that could easily be carried through security checkpoints and used to wreck havoc.”
    I might allow that one if by “security” they mean the TSA. But to date, there are no really concealable 3D printed firearms (unless you count those AR lowers, which require a great many other parts to function). Most are large, bulky. They require metallic firing pins and barrels, and often metallic springs. Current US law alrready requires a minimum amount of detectable metal, and the DD plans incorporate that.
  • “What happens when these new, untraceable and undetectable guns wind up in the wrong hands, or easily slip through metal detectors at airports?”
    If they slip through metal detectors, it isn’t the fault of the metal-bearing gun, but of the sloppy security workers.
  • “Brady’s brief argues the Second Amendment does not give the right to make and publish plans for 3D printed guns”
    Technically true. For one, the 2A doesn’t give any rights, but protects a preexisting right. For another, it’s the First Amendment that protects the speech expressed in those data files.
  • “This case shows just how far the corporate gun lobby will go – fighting for a supposed right to export blueprints”
    Now that’s funny. Here’s a group working on the development of 3D printing technology that would allow individuals to make their firearms without having to get them from gun corporations. Eventually.
  • “undetectable plastic gun”
    Except for all those metallic parts required for function and by law.
  • “[T]he United States has the right to regulate the export of firearms, and that Defense Distributed’s attempt to give detailed plan to print guns to anyone with an internet connection amounts to international firearms exportation.”
    Yeah. Well, we saw how well that worked for encryption in the Crypto Wars. Now, if they’re claiming that these bulky, short-lived firearms are specifically designed for and used by the military, I wish they’d point to the units deploying with Shuttys and DD semiauto lowers.
  • “The mission of the Brady Center is to drastically cut the number of annual deaths from gun violence.”
    Then they should get out of the rights-violation business and get trained as mental health counselors, since two-thirds of those gun deaths are suicides.

I have a sneaking suspicion that this amicus brief is more of a fund-raising appeal to cover the expenses incurred for wrongfully suing Badger Guns and Badger Outdoors.

Ed. note: This commentary appeared first on TZP’s weekly email alert. If you would like to be among the first to see new commentary (as well as to get notice of new polls and recaps of recent posts), please sign up for our alert list. (See sidebar or, if you’re on a mobile device, scroll down). Be sure to respond when you receive your activation email!

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail
gun grabbers, Jewish humor, self defense

Jackie Mason has a suggestion for Michael Bloomberg

8 Comments

Jewish comedian Jackie Mason has a suggestion for Michael Bloomberg:

He’s standing there with 12 bodyguards, telling you that you shouldn’t have a gun to protect you, while he has 12 guys protecting him! As if his life counts, but yours is not important? If guns are not important and nobody should have a gun to protect himself, why does Bloomberg have 12 bodyguards? Why doesn’t he stand there with 12 rabbis? Why do they have guns? Instead of guns they should have pastrami sandwiches.

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail
gun control, gun grabbers, hatred of Jews, Uncategorized

The Nuge – read before you judge

76 Comments

A week ago Second Amendment firebrand Ted Nugent posted an appalling graphic on his Facebook page, showing a dozen of America’s most famous gun grabbers with Israeli flags superimposed on their photos. The implication was clear – an obvious, disgusting claim that some kind of vast Jewish conspiracy was behind gun control efforts in the United States.

Fans of Ted’s music and his Second Amendment supporters were understandably upset. Was Ted implying that Jews were somehow responsible for the demise of our freedoms? Was he an anti-Semite? Is Ted prejudiced in some way against Jews? Has Ted become a liability to the gun rights movement?

Fast and furious calls for the NRA to cut ties with Ted. The National Review Online called Nugent a disgrace to the gun rights movement.  The usual suspects – everyone from the Huffington Post to Mother Jones to the Southern Poverty Law Center to Media Matters – screeched about Ted’s alleged anti-Semitism. Even Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership – the organization from which this group sprang – immediately jumped into action to condemn Ted for his alleged Jew hatred.

PHOTO COURTESY OF MICHAEL IVES Toting a guitar covered with camouflage pattern and a zebra-striped semi-automatic assault rifle, Ted Nugent is ready for an assault on the outdoors.
PHOTO COURTESY OF MICHAEL IVES Toting a guitar covered with camouflage pattern and a zebra-striped semi-automatic assault rifle, Ted Nugent is ready for an assault on the outdoors.

You know what these reactionary outrageatrons didn’t do? No one in the mainstream media or any major gun rights organizations contacted Ted Nugent for a comment. They didn’t try to find out what was going on. They just assumed that a longtime friend and supporter of our freedoms, who never had an anti-Semitic bone in his body all of a sudden became a Jew hater, and they tripped all over themselves to condemn him.

You know how I know this? Because on behalf of the Zelman Partisans, I spent time on the phone with Ted Nugent – quite a bit of time – discussing this issue, and he told me so. “It’s not like my contact information is hard to find,” he told me. But no one called him to get a statement or to find out what was up.

“I can’t believe that knowing my history, knowing how much I love freedom, and how much I’ve fought to protect it, that no one thought to call me!” he said.

Now, what I’m about to tell you is not an excuse for the use of the graphic in any way. The graphic was originally found in 2013 on an anti-Semitic site called “the Jewish Problem” (and no, I’m not linking to that fascist crap – find it yourselves if you’re curious), according to a TinEye search I did when I first saw the Facebook post. There’s no doubt about what this thing is. Ted used it. There’s no way around it.

Ted is known for some pretty outrageous comments and his blunter than blunt delivery. He’s got energy and fire, and he doesn’t have a whole lot of time for political correctness. But the one thing he has never been is a racist or a bigot, so what happened? Why did a steadfast friend of freedom – regardless of color, race, ethnicity, gender, or sexual orientation – all of a sudden turn into an anti-Semitic jerk?

The answer is: he did NOT.

How do I know? Again, I asked him. Ted and I chatted on the phone first, texted, and then I asked him some questions via email. Apparently, that’s something every reactionary jackass who rushed to condemn him failed to do.

I simply asked, ” What happened? How did you wind up using this thing?”

“Can I say oy vey?” He replied. “I sincerely apologize for my irresponsible re-posting of such a nasty and offensive meme. In my rush between songwriting jams and musical recording frenzy, all I saw was the images of people dedicated to disarm us, I made no connection whatsoever to any religious affiliation. Everyone knows deep down that at 67 years of age I didn’t suddenly become anti-Semitic. That’s patently ridiculous, and those who rushed to such a mistaken condemning judgement should re-examine the system by which such equally irresponsible knee-jerk judgments are made.”

And you know what? Given his decades of commitment to freedom for every single person, regardless of race, color, or anything else, alarm bells should have gone off when Ted posted something so out of character. I was surprised to hear that no one, other than the Zelman Partisans (and one regional writer who put us in touch with Nugent), had made an attempt to contact him about the issue, and I asked him how he felt about supposed Second Amendment allies not bothering to contact him and clear the air.

“In a world of soulless political correctness and the dishonesty and denial that goes with it, I was not at all that surprised,” he told me. “The real tragedy is how many who claim to be on the side of freedom so viciously attacked me with zero effort to communicate with me directly as you so honorably did. For that I thank and salute you.”

I will say that as a former disc jockey for the American Forces Network, I blushed a bit at that. But you know what? That’s just good journalism, and I’m glad we got the chance to clear the air.

Ted Nugent’s real message that got lost in the outrage about the badly thought out use of that graphic? It was about Jewish people needing to defend their rights and freedoms, so that the horror of the Holocaust never happens again.

NEVER AGAIN! Plain and simple, the same powerful uniting message against freedom haters and gun banners that I have dedicated my entire adult life to in 1000s of concerts, numerous books, 1000s of articles, blogs, media interviews and constant speaking presentations. Period.

Oh, and our offer to Ted? He took us up on it. We’re sending him a Zelman Partisans membership packet, plus the yarmulke we promised, and he said he would wear the yarmulke on TV!

nugent membership

 

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail