Tag Archives: guns

authoritarian swine, gun grabbers, guns

Mike vs. Hoplophobe

2 Comments

What happens when a famous science fiction author, gun rights advocate and gun enthusiast takes on an angry, frothing, hysterical hoplophobe?

It’s a TKO. I know of no one who can dismantle an anti-gun zealot better than Michael Z. Williamson, so it’s worth your time to read the entire article. But here’s just a snippet below:

Gun freaks say if you take away their guns only outlaws will have guns. That’s a chance worth taking. Because if we ban guns, eventually the tide will turn. It might take 10 years or 20 years. Hell, it might take 50 years. But if we make it illegal to own a handgun, eventually there will be no handguns.

I have functional guns from 1872 in my collection.  In the UK, criminals convert dummy and airsoft guns to fire bullets.  Once again, the gun freak (you), opens his ignorant yap about a subject without doing the faintest modicum of research. That’s probably why you’re in “reporting,” the Special Olympics of writing. Real writers have to do research.

Let the hunters keep their rifles and shotguns; those weapons are ineffective tools in a mass shooting.

BWUAHAHAHAAHA!  You went full retard.  Never go full retard.   Your typical deer rifle has 3 times the muzzle energy of an “assault weapon” (please define what that is for me.  Go ahead) and about 10 times that of a handgun. But they’re “ineffective.”  Because nothing that can kill a bull elk could be useful for killing people.

Mike’s language and sarcasm can be strong, so be warned. That said, there’s nothing more fun than watching a professional author take down a sniveling, barely educated coward.

I give it a decided thumbs up.

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail
self defense, shooting

The Klown Kar of Stoopid Drives On

1 Comment

The looting, riots, violence, and downright ignorance in the aftermath of the grand jury decision not to indict officer Darren Wilson for shooting thug extraordinaire Michael Brown continue.

In case you were wondering, the horsebuggery currently includes investigation charges into the “family” of Michael Brown for a violent incident that erupted over some Michael Brown merchandise.  Yes, you got that right. The worthless “parents” of the dead thug have decided to cash in on their son’s demise, by attacking Brown’s paternal grandmother, who was… trying to cash in on her grandson’s demise. (Try to contain your shock and awe, please.)

Communists and Jihadist scum joined the party, using the Ferguson riots as cover to promote their own agendas. This is nothing new. These parasites do have a tendency to glom on to any protest they can find and use it to screech about overthrowing capitalism, call for a Palestinian state, call for violence against police, you name it.

Tolerant, peaceable social justice warriors chose to threaten a young lady who posted a limerick on Tumbler condemning Michael Brown as a thug. Not only did they expose her identity, phone number, address, and university on the Internet (an odious practice called “doxing” that essentially bullies those who might disagree with you into silence for fear for their very lives), but they threatened to rape her mother, to burn down her house, and decapitate and dismember her. Because social justice for anyone who disagrees with the victim mentality is harassment, death, rape, and dismemberment.

The New York Times chose to publish Darren Wilson’s address and the name of his wife (which they later deleted, while leaving his location intact for any miserable thug to exploit). There was no need to publish this. It was not part of the story, and had no relevance to the case. And yet, reporters Julie Bosman and Campbell Robertson chose to publicize the location of the man’s home, almost certainly exposing him and his family to unhinged Ferguson thugs. The New York Times defended the practice, while a social justice warrior on Twitter took the opportunity to publish the exact address and a photograph of the house that he claimed belongs to Wilson. Care to guess how many threats to burn down the house there were?

And finally, a bit of irony on this Tuesday afternoon.The NYT reporters got a taste of their own medicine, when a number of readers decided that turnabout was fair play and published both journalists’ physical addresses, as well as home and work phone numbers. Oooops! Well, apparently, little Julie Bosman wasn’t comfortable with the level of attention she was getting for publishing an innocent man’s and his family’s location in a national press report, so she waltzed her entitled rear end into the nearest police station and demanded protection… yep… from the police… one of whom she worked to get killed without so much as a thought to the consequences.

Sources inside CPD say that Julie Bosman demanded a level of protection afforded A-List celebs and dignitaries, but an investigation revealed that she was not in any danger, and deserved no more than extra attention paid to her address by patrol.

Despite hundreds of phone calls and not a few unsolicited delivery food sent to her Chicago home Bosman “wasn’t under any real threat” says a Chicago police officer.

“She came in thinking she was Steven Spielberg or something shooting a movie” demanding all kinds of protections says a law enforcement source with knowledge of the Chicago police. “The police laughed at her.”

In a world where the Internet gives everyone easy access to almost any kind of information, the right to self defense becomes even more important.

Dissent is not tolerated, and the Internet is used as a tool to threaten, intimidate, and facilitate violence.

Whereas in the past, information on individuals was largely at the fingertips of government agents, it is now at the disposal of any miscreant with a keyboard, who is too cowardly to confront the subject of his consternation in person, but prefers the cyber world to accept that task en masse on his behalf.

Whereas in the past, one may have had to worry about random break-ins, psychotic madmen, and statist government agents, today we can add vindictive cretins compromising your identity, bank information, school, family, and property by making it publicly available to any thug online.

Whereas in the past, you could disagree with someone’s politics, confront them in person, and even publish your disagreement in a press piece without too much fear for your life, now you have to worry about every social justice warrior whose battle cry of “RACIST!” galvanizes bullying Internet jerks to publish your location, threaten your family, and expose your personally identifiable information (PII) for every sociopath and thug to peruse.

They hide behind the First Amendment, claiming the right to publish anything they want without consideration about the consequences of their actions, and they expect unlimited freedom to do so. Meanwhile, they demand that you be disarmed, bound by bureaucracy, castrated by statism, and punished for the deeds of a tiny minority of others who abuse their Second Amendment rights, even as they use the First Amendment to threaten your well-being, your life, your livelihood, and your loved ones.

This is what we’ve come to, boys and girls. This is the state of our society.  If you wonder why more and more of us insist that the government stop infringing on our right to life, right to self defense, and right to keep and bear arms, this is why.

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail
authoritarian swine, gun control, guns, Voting

Rights are not up for grabs or votes

4 Comments

Now that Election 2014 has come and gone, and Bloomberg’s Everytown initiative suffered losses in nearly every arena, forcing him to waste $50 million  on an effort Americans obviously oppose, it’s time to ask some questions about our rights.

Among the sea of rejection for the gun control mission, however, there were tiny spots of stupid that gave small victories to the gun grabbers.

Washington state (as if you hadn’t heard Gunsense drones crowing about it) has passed Initiative Measure 594 – a gun control measure that would require every person wishing to purchase a firearm – even those doing so via private sales – to get government permission to do so.

This, in essence, has banned private sales. When you insert a government transaction, done through an FFL, into a private transaction, said sale ceases to be private.

Was the initiative about safety? Anyone who has been following the gun rights debate for any length of time knows that safety has nothing to do with it.  Criminals, for the most part, do not get guns through legal channels.

Guns purchase

Basic economics indicate that as long as there is a demand, there will be a supply, and when you close off legal supply channels, the black market flourishes.

So it’s not about safety. So why is it that Washingtonians were so eager to cede their basic rights to government infringement, even though this measure has no hope of stopping crime?

Why hand over your rights so easily?

Make no mistake, these are rights.

The right to keep and bear arms is a natural right that stems from the right to life and the right to defend your life. Why allow petty elected tyrants to control what tool you use to do it?

What about the right to property? Why would you allow the government to intrude on your right to dispose of your property as you see fit? If it rightfully belongs to you, why would you allow any government to control to whom you sell it?

And lastly, why would Washingtonians subject their natural rights to a vote in the first place?

Less than 50 percent of Washington residents voted in this election, and yet, they decided the fate of the natural rights of their fellow citizens – the right to dispose of their property, and the right to purchase it without government intrusion.

They decided this despite the fact that no loud, screeching, uninformed majority should ever be allowed to decide the fate of our natural rights with a push of a button.

That is not a decision any majority should be allowed to make.  And yet Washingtonians not only allowed the right to keep and bear arms and the right to property to be limited by their fellow state residents, but also allowed those rights to be put on the chopping block in the first place.

Rights exist. They are not and should not be up for discussion, debate, or a vote.

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail
gun grabbers

Shootings take their toll

5 Comments

How many times do we hear gun grabbers accuse us of itching for that next kill, being bloodthirsty, hoping we get to use our firearms to kill others?

I suppose it’s part of their public affairs tactic – make the enemy seem as unpalatable and unsympathetic as possible. Most of them don’t understand the difference between murder and killing – and if they do understand the difference, they have a tendency to gloss over it in order to paint the adversary as a monster.

In Jewish law, there is a very specific difference – even in terminology.

As in English there are two different words: “retzichah” for murder, and “harigah” for killing.

It is obvious that not all killing is murder, for the Bible itself imposes the death penalty for certain crimes! Jewish Law also says that if one sees person A about to murder person B, one is allowed to save B with lethal force—if necessary.

Some killing is justice, allowed by law – both in Jewish law and in United States statutes – and frankly, I know of no one who would claim defensive actions that result in death and outright murder are one and the same.

Of course, that doesn’t stop those who labor to relieve us of our basic rights as human beings from glossing over the difference.

A Twitter user (or more likely a brainless bot) by the moniker of @usgunviolence6 (if this is the sixth account this liar uses, I wonder whether the other five accounts were deleted by Twitter) makes it a mission to post every incident of what it calls “gun violence” it can possibly find on the Internet. It doesn’t matter whether the incident was a case of self defense, negligence or outright murder. It doesn’t differentiate, and by glossing over the nature of the incident, it attempts to ignore certain details.

murder

 The above link wasn’t just a random murder committed against Mr. Jess. Dean Randolph Jess was an escaped inmate – a monster who raped a child. Twice. Not that it matters to “US Gun Violence.” It simply posts the link and attempts to paint it as just another person killed in the United States by a gun.

Let’s ignore for a second the fact that this… thing… does a full body, naked dance in the blood of every innocent who is shot in order to promote its repulsive, anti-freedom agenda.

The dishonest attempt to paint the death of an escaped rapist as just another “US gun death” is beyond the pale, but nonetheless par for the course for those who seek to destroy the Second Amendment.

Lack of honor is their trademark, emphasized by the fact that they constantly accuse gun owners of waiting impatiently to fire their weapons at someone. They don’t understand how much agony, how much courage it takes to end another’s life. They weep for the criminals, and excoriate those who dare take responsibility for their own safety and the safety of others as bloodthirsty savages.

Barbara Waters Griffin I just wouldn’t feel any safer with a gun toting “can’t wait to shoot someone” person in a store with 50 more gun toting ” can’t wait to shoot someone ” people than I would with 1 criminal……….because either way there will be innocent people shot….

This is the kind of sick, hysterical attitude gun grabbers have toward their fellow Americans. They like to portray them as toothless rednecks who want to shoot someone just for the hell of it.

The truth is far from it.

Even police officers who kill someone in the line of duty have visceral reactions to having to take a life.

 Although every experience is different, officers who take a life often experience severe bouts of depression, alcoholism, marital problems, sleepless nights and feelings of being alone in the aftermath.

A fear of admitting a weakness often results in more severe problems for the officer.

“It’s not something anyone should have to go through,” Gar­ri­son said. “The emotion of it never ends. It changes who you are.”

Regular gun owners go through the same range of emotions. A year ago, Gareth Long fatally shot a home invader who was breaking into his house in the middle of the night. Not only did Long warn the intruder he was armed, but he begged – BEGGED the bastard not to make him shoot him. The invader approached the family anyway, and Mr. Long was forced to take the steps necessary to protect him and his family.

“It wasn’t just one life taken that night — there were three lives taken that night,” Gareth Long said. “It was his life and our lives. It will never be the same for us, ever again.”

Worse yet, the drug addled vermin who entered his home was high on drugs, and the nephew of the local mayor, so the Longs had to face the town’s wrath, as well as a police and grand jury investigation.

Think it was easy? Think this is something every gun owner hopes for?  “It was the worst experience I’ve ever had,” Gareth Long said.

In 1954 a pilot named William Bonnell shot and killed a teenage thug who attempted to hijack a plane full of innocent people. Raymond Kuchenmeister was 6’5” tall and weighed over 250 pounds. He was by all standards a large man, who, according to reports, had to be removed from the airplane by four men and some baggage-moving equipment. He was a threatening presence – intimidating and aggressive both due to his size and the stolen gun he was brandishing. 

William Bonnell shot this “kid.” He legally carried a gun (because in those days, that’s what pilots did), and he chose to use that gun to save the lives of the passengers on his plane.

William Bonnell was indelibly changed by what he had to do.  He was so affected by this tragedy, he never fired that gun again, and could barely complete his flight that day. He was an expert marksman, but he never again picked up a firearm. The overwhelming decision he had to make that day saved lives, but had a profound effect on his own emotional well-being.  I had spoken with Bill Bonnell’s son at the time I wrote this story, who gave me a complete picture of what his father was like.

Bill Bonnell was the only pilot available to make the scheduled flight that day, so even though he was obviously shaken by earlier events, he was forced to make the return flight from Cleveland to Fort Worth. 

Upon learning that Kuchenmeister died en route to the hospital, Bill Bonnell returned to Cleveland and contacted the teenager’s family.The family of Raymond Kuchenmeister planned no funeral service, and had apparently all but disavowed him, so William Bonnell – a father himself, a pilot, and a hero who was forced to do the unthinkable – paid for a funeral service and the burial for a disturbed youth who nearly killed him, his crew, and the men, women and children aboard his plane.

He didn’t consider himself a hero. This was an incident that had changed him – profoundly so – and he didn’t speak of it much to anyone. Those who knew him, those who were on that plane July 6, 1954, friends and family knew how deeply Bill Bonnell cared – how profoundly he was affected by what he had to do – he was a hero. But he was a hero who never got over having to shoot a man at close range – a teenager who was threatening to kill a plane full of innocent people.

These are the types of people gun grabbers refer to as “extremists” and “gun touchers,” and accuse them of being excited about the prospect of killing another human being.

Remember what they think of you. Remember you are the enemy to them – faceless, soulless, and barely even human. Remember they will paint you as monsters in order to promote their agenda, without actually giving any thought to what is in your heart.

I know I sound despondent, but I think what I really am is realistic.

And I never underestimate the adversary.

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail
guns, Inspiration

The future of the Second Amendment

2 Comments

I’ve written about Shyanne Roberts before. She’s a terrific kid and a champion shooter. I consider her the future of gun rights in America and what every child interested in shooting should look to as an example.

I’ve spoken to Shyanne on the phone. We spent nearly an hour talking about her sport, her future, and her dreams. She’s a sweetheart. She has a wide range of interests that includes things that every normal 10-year-old likes, such as music and cooking, and some that are considered unusual in the culture of fear and apprehension that seems to have permeated our once proud society.

In a world where shrieking shrews and power-hungry politicians try to disarm the populace and turn it into a herd of compliant sheep, Shy Roberts wants to be an inspiration.

“Kids and guns don’t always mean bad things happen.”

In a world where kids are taught to be afraid of tools of defense, and to rely on others for their own safety, Shyanne Roberts is a breath of fresh air.

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail
gun control, gun grabbers, Jewish history, mindset

Faith and Firearms Revisited

Leave a comment

Years ago – when I had time to write more than an occasional blog post, I wrote an article on faith and firearms for the U.S. Concealed Carry Association.

Having grown up Jewish, I always wondered why it is that major Jewish organizations were always pushing disarmament, and worse yet, leaning on faith to do it!

For an answer in this article, I turned to Rabbi Isaac Leizerowski – a friend of my dad’s and an authority on Jewish law. Rabbi Leizerowski confirmed that the right to self defense is actually mandated by Jewish law.

From the sanctity of Life comes an imperative to safeguard Life. The directive to defend your life is written in the Talmud, the 70-volume Code of Jewish Law, in at least three places. “And the Torah says, ‘If someone comes to kill you, arise quickly and kill him.’”

For a reply on the psychology of disarmament, I turned to another friend, who shed some light on the issue.

Jack Feldman, Professor of Psychology at Georgia Institute of Technology, has one theory: “Jews are called on to care for others who are troubled, suffering, etc. and to stand up for the oppressed,” he says. “It’s a mitzvah. Democrats and socialists (traditional proponents of gun control) have taken that role, in appearance if not reality…A lot of us have yet to get the message about the Left, and [continue to] cling to these fallacies.”

Life is sacred, my friends. We must work to change the mindset that disarmament somehow promotes safety, and is therefore a mitzvah.

It’s not.

Disarmament is death. It’s slavery. It’s tyranny. It’s the antithesis of everything Jews strive to achieve in the social sphere – life, liberty, goodness.

The Nazis knew this, and we should never forget this.

And we must strive to show it for what it is and challenge its proponents – especially in organized Jewish circles!

Because if we allow gun grabbers to control the message and spread the lie that gun control is somehow beneficial, we’ll be swimming upstream for a long time.

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail
gun control

Danger of gun control – my explanation

3 Comments

Many gun grabbers challenge us by asking why we don’t want more gun control laws. After all, why wouldn’t we want to make the nation safer?

Many of them just don’t understand the unintended (or intended) consequences.

Background checks. Fingerprint technology. Onerous licensing requirements. These things all require money – whether it’s funding for a bigger bureaucracy, databases, research, resources for investigators. It is resources the government has to spend on new databases for background checks. It is resources it has to spend on funding new research and technologies. It is resources gun shops (many of which are small businesses) have to expend on paperwork, legal bills, etc.

These are cost increases they invariably pass on to their customers.

Guns are already fairly expensive – several hundred dollars for a basic pistol.  It’s a fairly sizeable investment – especially for people who are struggling in this economy. If faced with the choice of armed self defense, or food on the table, I’m betting most would choose food.

Making guns even more expensive through regulation makes them cost prohibitive for many poor folks, who may live in neighborhoods that don’t have the gates and the armed guards that people like Bloomberg and Shannon Watts can afford.

By making self defense tools cost prohibitive to poor people, we are depriving them of their ability to defend themselves with the most effective tools on the market today.

Meanwhile, the background checks, the technology, the bureaucracy, and research do nothing to deter criminals from getting their hands on guns.  Most get guns illegally, or from a family member or friend, according to the Bureau of Justice Statistics.

In 2004, among state prison inmates who possessed a gun
at the time of offense, fewer than 2% bought their firearm
at a flea market or gun show, about 10% purchased it from
a retail store or pawnshop, 37% obtained it from family or
friends, and another 40% obtained it from an illegal source

So while gun controllers make tools of defense more inaccessible to people who truly need them, criminals continue to purchase them with impunity, and there’s not a single law that will prevent a criminal from violating it.

As a good buddy of mine, who just happens to be a sheriff and 30-year law enforcement veteran says, “Laws are for the law-abiding.”

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail
gun grabbers, mindset

Respect for Life

17 Comments

I’ve written numerous times about the gun grabbers’ lack of respect for human life. My contention is that they don’t consider life precious enough to protect. They don’t want the responsibility. They want to rely on the almighty state to protect them, and they want no one else to have that option.

Nowhere is that fact more obvious than on the Mothers Demand Gunsense in America Twitter feed. The #gunsense feed is rife with Mad Mommies and their henpecked husbands dutifully reposting every bit of spew that flies from the ever-so poisonous mind of Shannon Watts – the Bloombergian Stepford Monster who heads the hysterical mommy group.

I won’t post photos of every abusive post, but I would like to point out that their jokes about murder, their sarcastic glee every time a crime is committed with a gun that results in the death of another human being, and their snide and very public hopes for the death of those who oppose them are indicative of a general attitude – an attitude of hatred.

life 1 life 2

People have a tendency to dehumanize their enemies – to paint them as something soulless and fundamentally different from themselves in order to trick their mind into accepting that the death wishes they heap on the opposition aren’t really being directed at other human beings.

Every story of murder they post, gleefully pointing to death by gun, not considering that the innocent victim in whose blood they dance to advance their political goals is an actual human being…

Every ill wish they heap toward their political opponents, snidely pontificating how great it would be if open carry advocates died by gunfire…

Every threat to call police and report an active shooter or another type of threat when they see a peaceable citizen doing nothing more than exercising the right guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the Constitution…

 

life 3

…is proof that these people couldn’t care less about actual lives.

What they care about is their political agenda, and they will stop at nothing – not even criminal acts – to get what they want.

IMG_1456

 

I carry. I carry concealed. I believe open carry – especially of long guns – is tacky and unnecessary.  Firearms are tools of defense – whether from street thugs or from government ones – not props for your attempts to shove your ability to carry down the throats of others. I also believe it’s tactically dumb. It gives those who are intent on committing crimes time to plan out their possible attack against you and robs you of the element of surprise.

That said, I won’t begrudge others their rights. I will not advocate disarmament of those whose tactics I find distasteful. I will not wish death on my opposition.

But then again, I have respect for life – both mine and others.

You obviously can’t say the same for the gun-grabbing crew of Bloomberg’s astroturf kingdom.

 

 

 

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail