All posts by Carl Bussjaeger

Author: Net Assets, Bargaining Position, The Anarchy Belt, and more

Ideal Conceal Update

I got another update email from Ideal Conceal. For those of you who’ve forgotten this because it’s been so long since they said the gun would be available yet never appeared, this is the “cell phone gun.”

Nothing in this update gives me any reason to believe the thing is not vaporware at best. But I see that Ideal Conceal finally got a Type 07 Manufacturer FFL. I guess the Big Lake FFL friend Kjellberg said would do the manufacturing wanted no part of this. Which might explain why I was unable to find an Type 07 FFL there who would admit to being involved. But the address given is an office building that still listed as “for sale.” I wonder if the ATF has inspected his shop, and if it was there or at his home.

For the longest time, the pistol was computer renderings and photoshopped stock images. Then it was a 3D-printed inop model. After that, it supposedly became real, but failed in testing. All along, they’d announce new, pushed back availability dates. And finally stopped giving dates.

In this new video, seemingly recorded in Kjellberg’s home (we never see shop facilities; I wonder why), we learn that they seem to have abandoned 3D printing, and possibly abandoned the injection molding we heard about in March. Now it’s machined. We’re treated to blurry video of printed out photos of what are alleged to be machined parts (enough for 10 guns) and a print-out of a computer rendering of the fire control assembly.

One commenter said:

It would be nice to have an actual projection of when we should expect to see the product finished and for sale! This process is really dragging out without a real commencement date. Disappointing to say the least.

Which is pretty reasonable. When the company has claimed that it was taking orders, it’s fair for folks to wonder what frickin’ year this thing might ship. If ever. Kjellberg disagrees:

Wondering how many projects you have taken from a thought to a napkin to production? We are just a couple of people, not a big company. Also if you watched the video, we started over in January to give you the best product. Perhaps this looks easy, but to make a light, tight pistol and do it on a tight budget takes time.

Funny thing: I worked on a project for a telecom company; low-voltage monitors for remote site alarm monitoring. With about for people, we went from the idea, to a circuit schematic, to designed final product in an enclosure, parts ordering,through assembly (including etching circuit boards ourselves), followed by field testing, production, and delivery of 100% tested units to the field. In about three months.*

We were able to do that because we knew what we were doing, and intended to deliver a real product. Kjellberg and Ideal Conceal? I’m thinking not so much on either count.

Designing a gun does take time. But do you think John Browning took advance orders from 4,000 retail customers before he finalized the 1911 design?

On the other hand… In Browning’s 71 years, he designed at least 39 firearms that went into full production. Assuming he started designing the day he was born, that’s an average of 1.8 years per design. In fact, he started learning in his dad’s shop at 7, so the average comes down to 1.6 years per design. Kjellberg is at 1.1 years in designing a basic derringer and counting.


* Heh. That was twenty-something years back. I still have the schematic, BOM, and installation instructions. Looks like I lost the circuit board mask, though.

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

UPDATED: Who is playing who?

UPDATE, 5/3/2017, 3:42 PM EDT: Rock River Arms and Springfield Armory have both issued press releases disavowing the IFMA’s actions and have withdrawn from the association.

That’s a good start.



Original post:
In dueling headlines between two RKBA-oriented web sites, we see some interesting views regarding Rock River Arms, Springfield Armory, their lobbying group Illinois Firearms Manufacturers Association, and an Illinois bill intended to discourage gun dealers by running up their operating expenses.

Springfield Armory, Rock River Arms Trade Opposition to Illinois FFL Licensing Scheme for Carve-Out
Earlier today, the Illinois State Senate passed bill SB-1657 by a one-vote margin. While its prospects are still unsure in the House, if signed by Governor Bruce Rauner, the new law will mandate state licensing for all Illinois gun dealers. It will also restrict all others in Illinois to nine firearm transfers per year.

The lobbyist for the Illinois Firearms Manufacturers Association (IFMA), Jay Keller, traded that group’s opposition to the bill in exchange for a carve-out, removing Prairie State firearms manufacturers from the licensing requirements.

This hit the news first, and Second Amendment-minded gun owners were understandably upset. Then we heard “the rest of the story.”

Put Away The Pitchforks: Springfield Armory & Rock River Arms Did NOT Sell Out Gun Owners
If true, then the Illinois Firearms Manufacturers Association (IMFA) alone is to blame for the group’s decision to remove opposition to the bill, and early assertions made by another firearms news site claiming that Springfield Armory and Rock River Arms directly and intentionally screwed over the citizens of their state as well as smaller manufacturers and gun dealers, would almost appear to be libelous.

If true, I would suspect someone bought off the lobbyist. However, I would not consider the claims that the manufacturers screwed the shooting community libelous because the claims were based on the actions of a group that officially bills itself as speaking for those manufacturers.

“But wait! There’s more!”

Springfield Armory & Rock River Arms Made Campaign Contributions to Anti-Gun Rights Politicians
We can now reveal that Springfield and Rock River have, through IFMA, donated tens of thousands of dollars to Illinois anti-gun politicians over the last several years.

If all this is correct, then it’s possible Rock River’s and Springfield’s lobbyist has been suckering them. For years. Or IFMA may well have been positioning them for special privileges all along. In which case, the investment paid off when they were exempted from the draconian terms of SB-1657.

I expect another salvo of defensive press releases from the companies and and IFMA. Hopefully, they’ll clarify matters.

America does not enjoy actual free-market capitalism. Government intervention makes industry lobbying a necessity. Companies should take advantage of most lawful means of protecting themselves. But…

Companies should not throw their sister companies and customers under the bus in the process.

If Rock River and Springfield really want to “clarify” this in a way that doesn’t get them Smith & Wessoned, I suggest that they disavow their lobbyist, file suit for fraud, and announce that they will not sell firearms to any Illinois law enforcement agency should this bill — or any other similar bill — somehow pass, a la Ronnie Barrett and apparently a few dozen other companies.

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

Poll: Rate Trump’s first 100 days of RKBA

When Donald Trump first started campaigning for President, many people were dubious of his new-found commitment to the right to keep and bear arms given his history on the subject: gun bans, preemptively prove your innocence, waiting periods, and more.

But once he hit the campaign trail he started talking a good game. The question was, could he walk as well as talk?

One hundred days in, he’s still talking, but he has also done some good things like ending the Social Security abuse. On the other hand, Obamacare 2.0 attempts still have RKBA problems, federal gun-free zone requirements are still there, and his Second Amendment advisory group is vaporware.

Since everyone else is rating Trump’s first 100 days in office, how would you rate him on RKBA?


Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

Full Auto Stupidity?

Being the suspicious type, this anti-RKBA publicity stunt… automatically raised a few questions in my mind.

TN Dem Sets Up Stand to Prove It’s Easy to Sell a Gun, No One Buys Gun
On April 5, Tennessee Democrats tweeted a video of House Democratic Caucus leader Mike Stewart (D-52) trying to prove how easy it is to sell a gun by offering an AK-47 for sale at a lemonade stand. The video ran just over 48 mins and no one bought the gun.

It’s been suggested that he bought the weapon through an illegal straw purchase since he seemingly purchased with the intent to resell. That is probably unlikely as he claims it was a private purchase (and did he voluntarily undergo a background check?). But… he was advertising that as an “AK-47”. I have not found any manufacturer that calls a semi-auto AK variant an “AK-47.” The AK-47 is a specific model of assault rifle (the real deal- full auto capable), and an NFA item.

So forget straw purchase. Was it an AK variant such as a WASR-10C, or an AK-47?

  • If it’s an semi-auto variant, he may have committed fraud in false advertising by offering it an as AK-47.
  • One could also suggest that — semi-auto or AK-47 — his offer to sell a supposed NFA item without background checks is illegal.
  • In the unlikely event that the weapon is an NFA item (for $700? Nah.), he offered to transfer it without background checks or tax stamps. And when was it made; post 1986?

All this may sound like nitpicking, but these are just the sort of existing laws that victim disarming police statists use against honest (and licensed) dealers, not to mention their customers. In a country where “equal protection under the law” is supposedly part of the highest law of the land, Stewart should face the same consequences for his actions as would anyone less blessed (and Democratic), or admit that those laws are purely for harassment and to infringe on Second Amendment-protected rights.

Hmm… Does anyone know if Tennessee’s Capitol Hill is a designated gun-free zone? Not that it would matter for someone hell-bent on violating your human/civil rights. But that might be a contributing factor in his failure to sell that AK-whatever: possibly smarter folks knew better than to take possession of a firearm in that location.

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

Dreaming

David Codrea linked to a column.

Angry Feminist Who Wants Same Rights As Guns Gets LEVELED With EPIC Response!

So…

  • Cosmetic [features] would be banned.
  • Ugly women would be banned.
  • Too-large breasts would be banned (those deadly aircraft-downing 50s, you know).
  • Too-small breasts would be banned (concealable, dontcha know).
  • Registration… well, America already makes humans register, so she’s good there.
  • Speaking of concealment, burkas without a Concealed Dressing License would be illegal.
  • Unless, presumably, she’s ugly (see #2).
  • High capacity… Nah. Not going there. But still.
  • I suppose there might be an Integrated Breast Identification System that… well, think fingerprinting.
  • California would require microtramp-stamping of all women.
  • I thought these lefties hated discrimination based on color. Evil Black Wo… WTF?
  • Come to think of it, women would be banned from schools.
  • And shopping malls, to the relief of many a husband’s wallet.

And here I thought the ban bunnies’ cars=guns comparisons were stupid.

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

When the truth won’t do

I’m working a theme this week.

Robin Brulé, “Member Of Everytown Survivor Network,” wants universal preemptively-prove-your-innocence checks. After all…

My mother is gone; others may be saved
My 75-year-old mother, Ruth, and her friend had been shot and killed. My mother had taken a trip to visit her friend who lived in a retirement community. They were drinking coffee and reading the newspaper when strangers robbed them and took their lives in a single instant.
[…]
the glaring loophole in New Mexico state law that allows criminals, domestic abusers and other dangerous people to obtain guns from unlicensed sellers with no background check, no questions asked. SB 48/HB 50 would close this deadly loophole by requiring a criminal background check for all gun sales.

No honest folks really want violent criminals walking around with guns (although one might also wonder what the violent criminals are doing on the loose in the first place, if they’re known). But Brulé fails to explain how universal PPYI checks would have stopped her mother’s murders. After all…

“Wright had no prior criminal record in Arizona…”
[…]
“Court records show Lauro was arrested on a second-degree burglary charge in 2013. The charge was dismissed in 2014.”

And…

Gothic said both men were subject to standard pre-employment procedures, drug screenings, and E-Verify, “which exceeds legal and industry practices.” The company said they are cooperating fully with law enforcement in the ongoing investigation

So, Brulé, how would your background checks stop a couple of guys, apparently with no disqualifying convictions, from purchasing a firearm? From anyone, including an FFL who has to go through NICS?

Another question: Given that, in Haynes, the Supreme Court has rulled that felons cannot be forced to self-incriminate on firearms charges, how do victim disarmers propose to force disqualified persons to comply with PPYI? Your police state dream law would only apply to honest people. You know, the ones who aren’t the problem.

Third question: Even if SCOTUS suddenly decided to toss the Fifth Amendment, how do you victim-disarming whackos propose to preemptively stop strawman purchases?

When victim-disarming ban bunnies start suggesting laws that don’t infringe on honest people’s right, and do apply to the real criminal predators, I might stop regarding them as liars or idiots. Or both.

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

Fakes Quotes, courtesy of victim disarmers and the lying media

Liars lie. More große Lüge.

List of reasons people got shot last month makes grim reading
Parents Against Gun Violence summarised news reports as if they had been written in the first person voice, to underline how pointless these reasons are for death or serious injury.

“Quote:” A guest at my son’s New Year’s Eve party got drunk and wouldn’t leave, so I shot him dead.

Reality: There was a fight. The aggressor refused to leave, and was shot in self-defense. The defender was not charged.

“Quote:” Some guy dinged my door in a parking lot and we started arguing about it. We both had guns, so I shot him first.

Reality: “Victim” dinged a guy’s car, and they did get into an argument. “Victim” tried to draw a gun, so defender drew his and fired. Judge threw out the case, and the defender was released.

“Quote:” I accidentally ran over a dog with my car. The guy who owned the dog was really mad about it and was yelling at me, so I shot him dead.

Reality: Self defense; no charges filed.

“Parents Against Violence” — or “Parents Against Gun Violence”?* This brilliant example of große Lüge urinalism gives both versions of the group name — is pulling the standard trick of intermingling criminal use of firearms with justified self defense. They want you to equate defense with murder. All the better to manipulate the ill-informed into supporting “sensible gun laws.”

We have facts. They have disingenuous fake “quotes.”

But look which Metro published.


Edited to add footnote.
* While there is a “Parents Against Violence,” that is an Alabama-based group that doesn’t seem to be related to this. This list of “quotes” appears to have been lifted from the Facebook page of “Parents Against Gun Violence.”

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

große Lüge

The Big Lie. Gen Xers and later may not know the term, but some of us grew up knowing a little history.

A big lie (German: große Lüge) is a propaganda technique. The expression was coined by Adolf Hitler, when he dictated his 1925 book Mein Kampf, about the use of a lie so “colossal” that no one would believe that someone “could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously.” Hitler falsely claimed the technique was used by Jews to blame Germany’s loss in World War I on German general Erich Ludendorff, who was a prominent nationalist and antisemitic political leader in the Weimar Republic.”

So. Make a lie so big that the gullible will assume no one could make that up, and repeat it so often that it works its way into thought processes and becomes the “truth.” While Hitler accused Jews of using the technique, his accusation was itself the epitome of the big lie.

I’ve found, though, that the große Lüge has another effect that… works even on those who question everything: Sheer frickin’ exhaustion and frustration.

I am the editor of the weekly TZP alert newsletter. The bulk of the news letter is a collation of RKBA-related news (and other items that I think will interest our readers). I scour media sources of various slants for news good and bad. I try to find stuff that never makes it onto your television screen.

I make a special effort to include material about what victim disarmers are up to. “Know your enemy” stuff.

große Lüge stuff, it turns out.

  • 90% of Americans want this gun control
  • Assault rifles are the favored weapon of criminals
  • Assault rifles are the same thing as assault weapons
  • 5.56 NATO is an incredibly high-powered “bullet”
  • Background checks would have stopped the Sandy Hook massacre
  • Guns are designed to be loud so you know to run
  • Guns aren’t loud enough to damage hearing
  • The TEC-9 is a submachine gun
  • Guns kill more people than car accidents
  • And the recent favorite lie that Congress eliminated background checks (the Social Security rule)

…and on and on and on, over and over and over…

The problem is, those long since debunked lies keep going like the zombie apocalypse. They annoy me. At one time, I hoped that by writing to “authorized journalists” I could potentially educate the merely ignorant, and put the ones deliberately distorting facts on notice that we know what they’re up to. But I can’t keep up. The lies spread like whack-a-mole with hydras instead of obnoxious little mammals.

So I rarely bother with that angle any longer. More usually, I’ll respond by penning a sarcastic post that blares the offender’s stupidity to the world. Or as much as might be paying attention to little ol’ me.

That’s mildly satisfying. For about thirty seconds. Until I see the next repeat of the same bloody große Lüge. So it has gotten to the point that I’ll be halfway through another piece…

…and give it up. Because the große Lüge will just pop up in another media hole anyway.

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

Intent

LSU art student Jordan Marcell speaks of the “intent” in the creation of firearms. A lot.

Opinion: Guns dangerous by nature, effects not containable
“Even when not performing their purpose, the ever present danger with firearms, is that— somehow— they will.”

Too much, and yet still misses two points.

Let’s start with that intent. Marcell claims to believe that firearms are simply built to be deadly destroyers of biological life, and that this is a continuing and progressive trend towards ever more deadly weapons. If that were true, there would be no handguns produced, as long guns can project bigger, faster, more damaging rounds than could — effectively — any handgun. If simple killing were the goal, I’d stick to a AR-15 pattern rifle and a vest full of 30 round magazines, and junk the compact polymer pistol in wimpy 9mm which I do carry everyday.

I don’t carry that handgun to kill. I carry it to defend myself (and others, should the circumstances warrant). My handgun was not designed by Ruger to be the penultimate killing machine. It’s designed to be carried routinely and comfortably and to provide basic protection.

Or take this little number.

Does anyone seriously believe that was designed for anything other than punching holes in paper? One could use it to kill, but so could such a determined person bash in his victim’s skull with Marcell’s coffee mug.

Next, consider Marcell’s fear that all firearms will perform the deadly purpose mistakenly attributed to the inanimate gadgets.

According the CDC, in 2015, 36,252 people died by firearm; that includes homicide and legal intervention (such as self-defense) and accidents. We’ll pretend each death was accomplished with a separate firearm: 36,252 guns.

Conservative estimates of firearms in civilian hands in America range from the wildly implausible 265 million to a more likely 500 million, to a possibly over the top 750 million.

If you studied math, rather than Marcell’s “Studio Art” you probably see where I’m going with this.

36,252 firearms were seemingly used in accordance with the “intent” Marcell believes imbued their design. Out of 265-750 million firearms. If Marcell were correct then — conservatively — 99.98632% of firearms suffered gross design failures: 264,963,748 guns failed to kill anyone (as they are allegedly designed to do).

You’d think that if 60-130 million gun owners (estimates vary as wildly as estimates of firearms) thought their guns had malfunctioned, there would be a monumental class action lawsuit wending its way through the courts. As some anonymous Internet wag noted, “If guns kill people, where are mine hiding the bodies?”

Or, just maybe, those inevitable deadly effects are “containable,” because of the intent of the owners.

There is no “intent” conferred upon firearms. As always, intent resides in the person operating it. Yes, even in negligent or accidental discharges, some had the intent to do something — likely stupid — with the gun.

So Marcell missed two points. Did you notice a third point which he implied?

“A firearm, as a tool, is an instrument that was created with the purpose of eliminating biological life— or killing, if you prefer that term.”

“Killing.” He fails to distinguish between murder and self defense. Or to differentiate between murder and hunting for food. Or murder and putting down a terminally suffering animal. Even in “killing” intent varies. Unless one is a liberal arts student incapable of more than simplistic over-generalizations bearing no resemblance to reality.

If Marcell equates all killing to murder, I wonder what our young student eats. Surely not meat, yet…

And you who feed on nothing but plants
Don’t hold your pride so high
For plants are living, and just might feel
And they take so long to die.
– Fisher’s Chant, Leslie Fish

Does Marcell heartlessly murder suffering plants for sustenance?

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

Wounded Knee

The massacre of Lakota men, women, and children occurred on December 29, 1890.

320px-woundedknee1891

From Wikipedia:

On the morning of December 29, the troops went into the camp to disarm the Lakota. One version of events claims that during the process of disarming the Lakota, a deaf tribesman named Black Coyote was reluctant to give up his rifle, claiming he had paid a lot for it. A scuffle over the rifle ensued and by the time it was over, more than 150 men, women, and children of the Lakota had been killed and 51 were wounded (4 men and 47 women and children, some of whom died later); some estimates placed the number of dead at 300.

Victim disarmament. Where have we seen that before?

But only police and military should have guns. Right?

 

 

Right?

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail