Nuke us till we glow, and shoot us in the dark?

With the Democrats winning a House majority, we have been warned to expect a lot of gun control laws, with firearms bans topping their evil wishlist. Back in May, the psychotic Rep. Swalwell [D-CA] penned an op-ed, giving us a heads-up on their intent.

Instead, we should ban possession of military-style semiautomatic assault weapons, we should buy back such weapons from all who choose to abide by the law, and we should criminally prosecute any who choose to defy it by keeping their weapons. The ban would not apply to law enforcement agencies or shooting clubs.

My response at the time was an email asking how he planned to enforce his totalitarian wetdream. He declined to explain.

Now we know. While Alison Airies was satisfied with stop & frisk, followed up with summary public execution, Swalwell is willing to go a bit farther.

For some reason, that May column started making the rounds again, folks apparently thinking it was published last week.

Joe Briggs tweeted an observation regarding the consequences of the ban.

So basically @RepSwalwell wants a war. Because that’s what you would get. You’re outta your fucking mind if you think I’ll give up my rights and give the gov all the power.

Swalwell, war criminal-in-waiting, explained how he would manage it.

And it would be a short war my friend. The government has nukes. Too many of them. But they’re legit. I’m sure if we talked we could find common ground to protect our families and communities.

By Friday afternoon, the nutjob was backtracking.

Joe, it’s sarcasm. He said he’s going to war with America if gun legislation was passed. I told him his government has nukes. God forbid we use sarcasm

No; Briggs said Swalwell’s attempt to massively violate the human/civil rights of tens of millions of Americans would spark a war, one started by the government. Which it would. Swalwell replied with the threat of overwhelming military force against civilians, demonstrating another bit of profound ignorance about other laws he’d have to change.

Sarcasm would be something along the lines of, “Well gee; everyone knows all the evil gun owners will meekly surrender their expensive property to the police state, so force won’t required.” Or, as he tweeted later:

But you seem like a reasonable person. If an assault weapons ban happens, I’m sure you’ll follow law.

That’s sarcasm. The threat of military force was not sarcasm. That was an explicit threat against innocent civilians.

Swalwell is unhinged. He is mentally ill. He has posted a threat more serious than those incriminating social media posts of recent mass shooters. He should be removed from office, and involuntarily committed as a danger to others.

It’s worth noting that this nuke-threatening politician is considering a Presidential run in 2020, potentially giving him access to the nuclear football.


Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could really use the money, what with truck repairs and recurring bills. And the rabbits need feed. Truck insurance, lest I be forced to sell it. Click here to donate via PayPal.
(More Tip Jar Options)


Ed. note: This commentary appeared first in 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!

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

Turns out there is such a thing as a stupid question.

Toledo, Ohio Mayor Wade Kapszukiewicz is riding his gun control hobbyhorse. This time, he’s hoping to use the imaginary economic clout of Toledo (74th largest city in the United States) to force firearms manufacturers to…

I’m not sure what. But he’s going to ask manufacturers which want to do business from whom Toledo wants to buy stuff a few questions as a condition of doing business. Seemingly, wrong answers will result in the city turning down manufacurers begging the small city to buy stuff hysterical laughter from companies which don’t need their business.

I have a few suggested answers to Kapszukiewicz’s questions, for properly motivated manufacturers.

Do you manufacture assault weapons for civilian use?

No. Ohio has no definition of “assault weapon” to put that in context, and there is no other standardized definition. Where there is a state ban on defined assault weapons, we don’t manufacture them for civilians there, because it would be illegal.

Do you sell assault weapons for civilian use?

No. No. (Ohio has no definition of “assault weapon” to put that in context, and there is no other standardized definition. Where there is a state ban on defined assault weapons, we don’t sell them to civilians there, because it would be illegal.

Which firearms does your company agree to not sell to civilians?

Agree? Which ones are you asking us not to sell? We already don’t sell machineguns to civilians, since that’s been law for 32 years. You had something else in mind?

Do you require your dealers to conduct background checks?

No. We found that us requiring background checks is redundant, since federal law already requires dealers to conduct background checks, and has done so for decades.

Does your company have a plan in place to invest in gun- and ammunition-tracing technologies?

We have a firearm tracing system in place. It’s called serial numbers and inventory control, as required by federal law for a long time. We do not manufacture ammunition, so tracing it would be impossible for us.

Do you use, at a minimum, industry best practices for inventory control and transactions?

Yes. It is and has been required by federal law for 50 years.

Ask a stupid question, get schooled.


Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could really use the money, what with truck repairs and recurring bills. And the rabbits need feed. Truck insurance, lest I be forced to sell it. Click here to donate via PayPal.
(More Tip Jar Options)

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

King County Customer Service

In Washington state, some anti-gun busybodies have taken it upon themselves to force firearms dealers to post signs warning how “terrible” their products are.

King County to require warning signs at gun shops and ranges
The signs say the presence of a firearm in the home increases the risk of suicide, homicide and unintentional deaths to children.

Specifically, the signs must read:

“WARNING: The presence of a firearm in the home significantly increases the risk of suicide, homicide, death during domestic violence disputes and unintentional deaths to children, household members and others.”

Oh dear, we wouldn’t want people committing sui… wait.

Washington legalized assisted suicide. But you have use drugs obtained through a doctor. I guess the medical/pharmaceutical industry simply doesn’t want the competition. Can’t have tax-payers checking out without enriching the medical-industrial complex, I suppose.

King County gun stores should assist visitors by directing them to the proper shop. I suggest taping this sign to the bottom of the mandated “warning” signs.

I wonder if King County requires doctors and pharmacists to post warnings about the lethal dangers of their own products. I see to recall hearing something about an “opioid epidemic”


Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could really use the money, what with truck repairs and recurring bills. And the rabbits need feed. Truck insurance, lest I be forced to sell it. Click here to donate via PayPal.
(More Tip Jar Options)

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

Poll: Would military personnel deploy nuclear weapons?

By now, I hope you are aware of threats by California Democrat Rep. Swalwell to use nuclear weapons to enforce gun control laws (newsletter subscribers will get an early look at a detail column on the subject; others will wait until Tuesday).

He’s trying to walk back the threat as sarcasm (it wasn’t) or hyperbole to demonstrate that the government has gun owners out-gunned.

Nonetheless, he is working on the assumption that military personnel will be willing to — illegally — exercise overwhelming military force, including Weapons of Mass Destruction, against American civilians to enforce gun control laws.

A couple of decades ago, military personnel were surveyed on a similar issue; the infamous Twenty-Nine Palms Combat Arms Survey. The results were very disturbing.

Swalwell has now upped the ante by suggesting that military personnel would go so far as to conduct nuclear weapon strikes against Americans for the sake of gun control.

I would like to limit this poll to current military personnel and veterans. I suggest reviewing the Posse Comitatus Act before taking the poll.

Please share this poll, to reach as many people as possible. If limited to regular TZP readers, I expect I’ll see a strong bias in responses.

The Question: “The U.S. government declares a ban on the possession, sale, transportation, and transfer of all non-sporting firearms (“assault weapons”). A thirty (30) day amnesty period is permitted for these firearms to be turned over to the local authorities. At the end of this period, a number of citizen groups refuse to turn over their firearms. Consider the following statement: I would fire upon U.S. citizens who refuse or resist confiscation of firearms banned by the U.S. government.”

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

Bumping off… REALITY

I had occasion to review the status of the coming bump-fire stock rule today.

The basic lie about how bump-fire stocks operate is still there, naturally.

This rule is intended to clarify that the statutory definition of machinegun includes certain devices (i.e., bump-stock-type devices) that, when affixed to a firearm, allow that firearm to fire automatically with a single function of the trigger, such that they are subject to regulation under the National Firearms Act (NFA) and the Gun Control Act (GCA).

But the real fun part is down in “Anticipated Costs and Benefits.”

It is anticipated that the rule will cost $129,222,483 million in the first year (the year with the highest costs).

“$129,222,483 million”

$129,222,483… MILLION.

$129,222,483,000,000

ONE HUNDRED-TWENTY-NINE TRILLION, TWO HUNDRED-TWENTY-TWO BILLION, FOUR HUNDRED-EIGHTY-THREE MILLION EFFING DOLLARS.

Come “12/00/2018” these idiots are going to break the bank.

Perhaps the feds should look into the “anticipated costs” of hiring a proofreader.


Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could really use the money, what with truck repairs and recurring bills. And the rabbits need feed. Truck insurance, lest I be forced to sell it. Click here to donate via PayPal.
(More Tip Jar Options)

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

Let’s play “Find the School Shooting” again

It’s time to guess how many of Everytown Dances In the Blood’s “school shootings” are anything resembling actual school shootings.

By Everytown’s definition, all of these do count as school shootings. But half of them were essentially after hours street shootings involving non-students. Some on public streets that happen to be within a college campus radius. Another one was only a “school shooting” because a stray round — not intended for the school — hit a window after hours; I won’t count that, intent matters. So that’s 60% of Everytown’s “school shootings” that aren’t.

So they score a measly 40% this time.

In February, 2018, they scored 71%.

In August, 2018, they scored a possible 50%.

Now they’re down to 40%, as they scrape and dig desperately for scary numbers to drive their victim disarmament agenda.

A centralized listing of real school shootings — as normal, sane, unbiased people would understand the term — would be useful. Everytown can’t and won’t do that. Because adult thugs shooting each other on the weekend don’t scare parents and students as much as often-imaginary shootings in school.

But if Everytown deciders they can and will provide decent data, they could use this definition:

A shooting which directly involves students, staff, or visitors to the school (not just someone on the property) on school property; at a school-sponsored event on school property; or where the school, students, or staff were intended targets on school property. After-hours incidents unrelated to the school other than location will not be included. Separate lists for high/middle/elementary schools and colleges/universities generally staffed and attended by adults will be maintained, to make more clear the threats to minors.

They could, but they won’t.


Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could really use the money, what with truck repairs and recurring bills. And the rabbits need feed. Truck insurance, lest I be forced to sell it. Click here to donate via PayPal.
(More Tip Jar Options)

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

H.R. 7115 “The Instant Felony Hobby Act”

And so much more. Officially, the short title for this mess is “3–D Firearms Prohibitions Act,” but I stand by my version.

(a) Banned hazardous products.—Notwithstanding section 3(a)(5)(E) of the Consumer Product Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 2052(a)(5)(E)), the following shall be considered banned hazardous products under section 8 of such Act (15 U.S.C. 2057):

(1) A firearm receiver casting or firearm receiver blank or unfinished handgun frame that—

(A) at the point of sale does not meet the definition of a firearm in section 921(a) of title 18, United States Code; and

(B) after purchase by a consumer, can be completed by the consumer to the point at which such casting or blank functions as a firearm frame or receiver for a semiautomatic assault weapon or machinegun or the frame of a handgun.

(2) An assault weapon parts kit.

(3) A machinegun parts kit.

That’s pretty straightforward. Note that it isn’t limited to 80% receivers. It’s any blank or casting, before any machining.

But this is odd:

SEC. 3. Prohibition of advertising do-it-yourself assault weapons.

(a) In general.—It shall be unlawful to market or advertise, on any medium of electronic communications, including over the Internet, for the sale of any of the following:

And it’s the same list. Apparently newspaper and magazine ads are still acceptable. For hazardous materials?

But “SEC. 4. Requirement that homemade firearms have serial numbers.” I’ll start with (c)(1)(A).

It shall be unlawful for any person, in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce, to make a firearm, unless the person has obtained a serial number and identifying mark for the firearm under this section.

So you can’t even start construction until you have a registered and tracked serial number; rather like building your own legal suppressor. But (c)(3) is worse.

BAN ON POSSESSION OR TRANSFER OF FIREARM WITHOUT SERIAL NUMBER.—It shall be unlawful for any person, in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce, to possess or transfer a firearm made after 1968 by a person who is not a licensed manufacturer, unless—

“(A) a serial number and identifying mark for the firearm has been issued under this section;

Remember, you can’t have a casting or blank, because it’s a “hazardous material.” You can’t build until you get the serial number. But you have to be finished in 10 days; 10 days to do a casting, machining a block of metal into a blank, or printing a receiver, finishing it, and affixing the serial number. Ten days. And grandfathering only covers pre-1986 hobbyist-built firearms. Because you can’t possess the old serialized firearm, it’s illegal before you could even apply for a serial number.

And then there’s SEC. 5. Definitions.

A “semiautomatic assault weapon” is any semiauto rifle or shotgun with any feed device other than .22 rimfire tube magazines. It includes anything using magazines, belts, drums, stripped clips, en bloc clips, and so on.

Dad’s old Browning hunting rifle is now an assault weapon.

As are semiauto pistols with any one of the usual arbitrary secondary characteristics: mag well not in the grip (there goes your broomhandle Mauser C96), threaded barrel (even if nother is threaded onto it), a second grip, weighs more than 50 ounces.

Any other semiauto pistol that’s otherwise compliant is still an assault weapon if it can be deemed to be a semiauto version of an automatic firearm (think CZ Scorpion EVO, or AK and AR pistol variants).

If you already have a home-built firearm, you’d have to destroy it before this goes into effect, because it’s impossible to get a compliant serial number. Any future home builds will be registered to you.


Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could really use the money, what with truck repairs and recurring bills. And the rabbits need feed. Truck insurance, lest I be forced to sell it. Click here to donate via PayPal.
(More Tip Jar Options)

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

Veteran’s Day, 2018

It’s Veteran’s Day, and I recently saw this video and it just nailed me. It broke my heart. That this can be happening in America is a shame, and I mean that literally and an outrage. The fact that there are around 7,000 foreign invaders headed for our southern border and that we should even entertain the thought of allowing any of them in, and giving them any kind of social services or benefits is a disgrace. And to the “do-good” helping hand out private social groups that would help the invaders but are not helping our Veterans first? You are a sham, you are a sham and a fraud.

Someone made the comment to me recently about people not wanting the caravan in the country because they look different than we do. What utter B___ S___. חרה to put it plainly.

I’m not a man, yet I would imagine the vast majority of the veterans in need of help are men. I’m not a black, or a Mexican, and only a little Native American, nor am I Asian. But we have homeless veterans that are, and I can promise you, I care far more about them than I do any illegal invader. No matter how pathetic CNN (#FakeNews) makes them look. We owe our veterans. We owe them a debt of gratitude for their service, and we owe them far more help than they are getting.

With the Demoncratic win in the house, I do not expect to see things improve for them at all.

At the end of the video there is quite a list of agencies should you choose to check them out. I reached out to a friend for some solid leads, and that’s what these are.

War Horses for Veterans https://warhorsesforveterans.com/

Special Operations Warrior Foundation https://specialops.org/

Fisher House Foundation https://www.fisherhouse.org/

Yellow Ribbon Reintegration Program https://www.yellowribbon.mil/yrrp/

Lead the way fund https://www.leadthewayfund.org/

And now, the video.

These are the statistics given in the video. Just in case you get caught up in the story and don’t absorb them, here they are to read over.

300,000 Veterans sleeping homeless on the streets, and rising.

Over 1.4 million are at risk of becoming homeless.

More than 67% of homeless Veterans served our country for at least 3 years.

Divorce rate among military couples has increased 42%.

An estimated 460,000 veterans suffer from PTSD.

Homeless veterans spend an average of 6 years on the streets.

The veterans administration has resources to serve only a fraction of our veterans.

Nearly 5000 veterans die by their own hands every year.

This is a large part of the list given at the end of the video, if I linked it, the link is active at the time of writing. Some in the video aren’t, and this is not the full list, but it’s a bunch of them.

Boot Campaign https://www.bootcampaign.org/

American Ex-Prisoners of War http://www.axpow.org/

American Forces Network http://myafn.dodmedia.osd.mil/

American Gulf War Veterans Association http://gulfwarvets.com/

American Legion https://www.legion.org/

Blinded Veterans Association http://www.bva.org/BVA

Call of Duty Endowment https://www.callofdutyendowment.org/

Code of Support https://www.codeofsupport.org/

Disabled American Veterans https://www.dav.org/

Heartstrings for Heroes https://heartstringsforheroes.com/

Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America (IAVA) http://iava.org/

Jared Allen’s Homes for Wounded Warriors https://www.homesforwoundedwarriors.com/

Lone Survivor Foundation https://lonesurvivorfoundation.org/

Marine for Life http://www.usmc-mccs.org/services/career/marine-for-life-network/

Operation Second Chance https://operationsecondchance.org/

Paralyzed Veterans of America https://www.pva.org/

Ride To Recovery http://projecthero.org/

Semper Fi Fund https://semperfifund.org/

The Battle Buddy Foundation https://www.tbbf.org/

The Enlisted Association https://trea.org//

The Raider Project https://www.raiderproject.org/

Veterans of Foreign Wars https://www.vfw.org/

For those of you who have served in the military, you are heroes. You are my hero, I don’t care if you peeled potatoes or washed sheets. Your families are heroes, because they served in their way right along side of you. You put aside your own life to serve our country, no matter your circumstance in life now, I ask G-d to bless you and your family, and bless ya’ll richly.

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

Savage Ignorance Part 1

Beretta92FS
1911A1
Glock 19 Gen 4

Recently I had occasion to patronize several commercial establishments including an apartment complex. Displayed on the glass entry door of each was the international symbol for “No,” a red circle bisected by a diagonal line. Centered in each was a handgun; Beretta 92FS in the first, 1911A1, possibly a Colt, in the second, and a Glock 19, Gen 4 in the third. I thought; thank G-d for Smith & Wesson. Why do those responsible for malls, schools, stores, apartments, and venues open to the public believe posting these stickers deters those bent on violent behavior? Criminals, by behavior and definition, exist outside the law and if legal prohibitions against them possessing firearms provide no dissuasion, a decal surely won’t. Instead they disarm the law-abiding, the only ones already on the scene capable of halting violent crime and mass shootings.

Webster’s Dictionary (a virginal source of information for today’s public school students) define Straw Man as: “a weak or imaginary opposition (as an argument or adversary) set up to be easily confuted (overwhelm in argument, refute conclusively).”1 Talk show host and baron of bombast Michael Savage knows something about Strawmen. Recently he launched a series of attacks on the 2nd Amendment, specifically semiautomatic rifles as well as their owners. His wild assertions were an army of scarecrows so stuffed with combustible straw, one dared draw nigh with matches at his own risk. When anyone says; “I own guns” or “I’m a big supporter of the 2nd Amendment” followed by a “but,” they don’t. They’re lying. It’s a trick to seize the intellectual and moral high ground thereby casting those in disagreement as extremists. Savage case in point. He began each show declaring support for the 2nd Amendment followed by an angry frothing at the mouth denunciation of firearms owners and notions of self-defense. In so doing, he promoted arguments undercutting the very amendment he purports to defend. Hay crammed in his Strawmen must have been plucked from the field of contradiction.

Savage’s first broadside came the day after the Las Vegas, Nevada Mandalay Bay Hotel mass shooting. He said he was a gun owner, big supporter of the 2nd Amendment, and to have given a “fortune” to the NRA apparently believing by brandishing such credentials he was immunized against critique. Savage asked if Americans should be able (allowed) to own “military grade weapons” and “assault rifles,” terms left undefined. He asked; should a man in therapy and on medication for mental problems be allowed to own a gun? If concealed carry was legal, how could armed citizens have stopped the killer’s rampage Savage demanded to know. In mocking tones he added; “Gun-slingers will say that. No matter what you hold in your pocket, you couldn’t have defended yourself. Fallacious argument. All you John Wayne’s with concealed carry on your mind, put it aside. You’d have gone down like ten pins.” He asked why anyone “needed” an “automatic weapon” declaring there needs to be “limits.” Should people be “allowed” to own a Howitzer, Russian tank, or bazooka? No one “needs” a semiautomatic rifle to defend their house, Savage continued, saying a shotgun was much better in that role. “The whole idea you’re going to get a semiautomatic rifle to hold off an army, come on. Stop the BS. If someone breaks into your house all you’ll have time to grab in the dark is a shotgun and an automatic pistol, not a semiautomatic rifle. Unless you keep a semiautomatic weapon fully loaded, and in your bedroom, it’s not going to do you any good. And if you do keep one, you’re crazy. If you keep a semiautomatic rifle next to your bed cocked and locked and ready to fire, you’re a sicko.” He then mocked Mandalay survivors who said they were no longer atheists. Next he attacked unnamed conservative talk-show radio hosts who, after Mandalay Bay, still opposed new gun control laws and regulations, yelling into the microphone; “You bunch of John Wayne’s!” He accused them of calling people like him, now supporting stricter new gun control laws; “lousy communist Progressives” adding in sneering tones; “No one wants to seize your guns otherwise it would have happened during the Obama years.” He asked how the killer had obtained “machine guns” because “they’re illegal” reminding listeners he wasn’t new to the gun control debate and had been on his high school rifle team. He asked if every psycho in the nation should own machine guns. “Did you know machine guns are legal in Nevada?” Savage continued. “But of course, fully automatic rifles are illegal.” What? Come again. Continuing in mocking tones, he asked who “needed” a fifty round drum magazine. “They should be illegal!” He shouted. “I argued this before. When I asked callers why they ‘needed’ one, they said to hold off the U.S. government which is against the private ownership of firearms.”2

Savage continued his assault on the 2nd Amendment the following day floating hysterical conspiracy theories attacking the Las Vegas Police for taking too long to assault the killer’s hotel room. Once again he reminded listeners he was a gun owner, “passed all the tests,” and gave money to the NRA therefore his calls for new gun bans had to be reasonable. Again he asked if the right to keep and bear arms included hand grenades, bazookas, used Russian tanks, and half-tracks asking; “Should there be limits on the right to keep and bear arms? What do you mean saying the 2nd Amendment ‘permits’ you to have any number of machine guns? Does this mean you can own two hundred machine guns, that every man should be able to have an arsenal in his basement? I can see having weapons to defend yourself but does that mean an entire arsenal? Why not RPGs and flame throwers? I don’t think the 2nd Amendment goes far enough” he continued in sarcastic tones. “I think we should be allowed to have flame throwers for that evil government that may arise any moment now. We should be able to have flame throwers.” During Savage’s shows, he insisted on calling magazines “clips” and using the terms semi and fully automatic rifles interchangeably.3 He entertained, as experts, numerous callers claiming because they had been in Vietnam, they knew precisely what weapons the suspect used (opinions subsequently contradicted by the FBI). Many voices sounded too tender to have been alive let alone old enough to have served in Vietnam. Once again he labeled anyone holding contrary views as “John Wayne’s” and “right- wingers” promising to hang up on them if they called his show. Savage concluded by attacking the Las Vegas Police, again, and blaming mass shootings on prescription drugs and the “proliferation of guns.”4

Savage’s claims and Straw Man arguments are wrong on so many levels, space and sufficient matches probably don’t exist to address them all. His oft repeated claim to be a firearms authority, supporter of the 2nd Amendment, and NRA backer is artifice, a trick as noted, to prevent debate to the contrary.

As to the efficacy of concealed firearms with respect to the Mandalay massacre, handguns are designed for self-defense at personal distances not against someone shooting rifles from the 32nd floor of a hotel window hundreds of yards away. Savage’s attempt to undermine concealed carry by judging its validity against situations for which it was never intended is a fallacious straw man argument a practice he accuses critics of employing. Does he really know what he’s talking about?

Doctors don’t use the terms bacterial and viral infection interchangeably. Weight lifters know the difference between dumb and barbells. Authorities on any subject use proper terminology. Improper use exposes pretenders, poseurs, and frauds. For example, in Stephen King’s novel Salem’s Lot, his policeman character checks his .38 special revolver to ensure the “safety is on.”5 A kid in his novel IT, warns another kid to be careful with his dad’s pistol, a Walther PPK, because it has “no safety.”6 In the movie The Fast And The Furious, Vin Diesel’s character Dominic Torretto tells Paul Walker that his dad’s 1970 Dodge Charger’s engine had so much torque, it twisted the “chassis” coming off the line.7 As a Deputy Sheriff and later policeman in the 1970s and 80’s, I carried and or shot Ruger, Smith & Wesson, and Colt revolvers in .38 special and .357 magnum. None, nor those on revolvers of colleagues, had a “safety.” I’ve also shot a variety of PPKs from Walther and Manurhin and their clones from FEG to Bersa and each had de-cocker safeties. Except for the Imperial (1965), Chrysler abandoned the chassis in favor of a uni-body frame, (1960-1961), which my 68’ Charger has, exposing The Fast And The Furious’s writers to be automotive ignoramuses. In like fashion, Savage insisted on referring to drums and other magazines feeding semiautomatic pistols and rifles as “clips” and conflated “assault weapons, assault rifle, semiautomatic rifle,” and “machine gun” as interchangeable terms, one and the same over and over.

A “clip” holds individual cartridges, “has no spring and does not feed shells directly into the chamber. Clips hold cartridges in the correct sequence for ‘charging’ a specific firearm’s [fixed] magazine.”8 A magazine holds rounds in a box, separate from the firearm for the weapons under discussion. Examples of clip “fed” firearms would include the Russian Mosin-Nagant 91/30 and American M1 Garand of W.W. II fame as well as the postwar Soviet SKS. Cold War weapons like the Soviet AK-47, U.S. M14, and later M16, are magazine fed. No such category of “assault weapon” exists for firearms. Any object that can be used to hurt another; flyswatter, umbrella, coat-hanger, or kitchen counter hardened wedge of cornbread is an assault weapon. The term “assault-weapon” was invented by liberals to frighten non-gun owners into believing your AR15 is identical to an M16 and that AKs and Mini-14s are full-automatic machine guns. Repeat after me; “The other side lies.” Editor of Jane’s Military Publications and firearms expert Charlie Cutshaw writes there are firearms categorized as “assault-rifles” but to be so classified they must be “shoulder-fired,” capable of fully automatic fire,” and chambered in a caliber intermediate “between pistol (or revolver) and rifle ammunition.”9 Some have a device allowing operators to switch from semiautomatic to full-automatic fire and back again. Commercial AK47s, AR15s, Mini-14s, and similar families of rifles don’t have this capability. Their triggers must be pulled, one at a time, for each round fired hence they are not “assault rifles” but “semiautomatic rifles” and “carbines.” “Machine guns” are typically heavy and tripod mounted, with hand held versions called “submachine guns,” and are capable of full automatic fire, emptying a magazine with a single pull of the trigger.10 Consistent misuse of terminology indicates Savage is grossly ignorant and misinformed, flagrantly dishonest, or both. He has no credibility.

No one wants to take your guns is the mantra of people, who, in the same breath, call for “assault weapons” (sic) and “high-capacity” (sic) bans. Time and again Liberals from anti-2nd Amendment organizations to Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton have said no one wants to take your guns and then promote Australian gun control which did just that. They are either stupid or brilliantly cunning. Perhaps dangerously naïve, I have never called liberals stupid because they’re not. Recall that U.S. District Judge Catherine C. Blake essentially resurrected the “sporting purpose” standard in upholding Maryland’s ban on AK and AR rifles mislabeling them “assault rifles” asserting they are not commonly used for lawful purposes including home defense.11 Liberals claiming; no one wants to confiscate guns, followed by proposals to ban AR, AK, and similar rifles, sounds contradictory until one understands their two pronged “trick”; the first is how they define “gun.”12 Confiscationists define “gun” in general as a firearm possessing a long established sporting purpose commonly used for hunting, trap and skeet shooting, and target competition at ranges and with no military analogue.13 This would exclude ARs, AKs, FN-FALs, and so forth. The second part of their trick is to convince the non-gun owning pubic there is no difference between full and semiautomatic firearms. Obama and others said time and again, AR15s, AKs, their derivatives, and similar rifles are military weapons that belong on battlefields, not our streets. It would not be confiscation, they argue, to return military weapons in civilian hands back to the U.S. Military where they belong.14 The only way to do this is through a ban on “civilian” possession of semiautomatic rifles and confiscate them as did Australia and England, and incrementally in California. How can Savage, living in Marin County, California, one of the most liberally infected in the galaxy, deny confiscation is not the liberal’s end game? He lies.

Like Judge Blake, Savage’s claim no one uses and no “cop” would recommend using an AR15 for home defense because they are such a poor choice, is pure buffoonery from one who has lived for too many years behind the Bay Area’s Tofu Curtain.15 Breathlessly, about to reveal a secret, Savage said his listeners, had never heard or been “told this” but one of the reasons AR15s are such poor choices is because the .223 round goes through walls. Shotguns and pistols are better because their rounds don’t. On the contrary, “More Americans than ever are relying on AR15s for home defense. Not only is an AR easier to shoot more accurately than a handgun—thanks to its additional points of contact with the body (cheek weld, shoulder mount, and two hands)—[and longer sight radius]—on AR rifles chambered in .223/Rem/5.56 NATO, produces superior terminal performance, and penetrates less when compared to the typical handgun.”16 An AR is harder to grab in the dark than a pistol or shotgun, Michael? Why is that? People have been attaching optics and lights to ARs for decades. A cocked and locked rifle makes one a “psycho” Michael?17 Employing his unloaded pistols and shotguns without lights against intruders beggars the question as to whose sanity should be in question. His rhetorical cant; “who needs” this or that firearm or “high capacity clips” and that the 2nd Amendment doesn’t allow possession of bazookas, hand grenades, and Russian tanks is a fallacious Straw Man argument to set the stage for infringements against the 2nd Amendment.

Savage is ignorant of or intentionally misrepresents the 2nd Amendment’s meaning. It grants no rights including to own anything. Rather, it recognizes an individual right to self-defense, to keep and bear arms, and establishes prohibitions against any government infringement on this right. The Declaration of Independence establishes it as a G-d-given right belonging to every individual inherent in their humanity whether government exists or not. It is inalienable and off-limits to a majority vote by one’s neighbors, act of government, or fashionable whim of the times. Rights cannot be modified, regulated, licensed, or infringed upon by government otherwise they would be called privileges.18 Inherent in the right of self-defense is the means by which one exercises it. To answer Savage’s “need” question, rights are not dependent upon a utilitarian need standard which, at best, is arbitrary, subject to popular opinion, or manipulated and controlled by those in power. Were this not so, government could raise the bar to demonstrate “need” so high, it becomes insurmountable thus rendering the right de facto abolished. Employing Savage’s Straw Manneed” standard to firearms ownership would subordinate it to ephemeral notions of “the common good, the good of the whole,” or “the greater good.”19 How long before it became extinguished? Ask Britons. By suggesting the 2nd Amendment regulates bazookas, half-tracks, Russian tanks, and grenades, therefore rifles can be regulated as well, is hay falling from massive gaps in Savage’s last Straw Man. Matches please.

Half-tracks and used Russian tanks are not firearms hence are regulated by other laws not the 2nd Amendment which applies to weapons citizen soldiers would keep and bear. Bazookas were the technological equivalent of shoulder fired canons, used against tanks, and grenades are sort of like exploding cannon balls. None of these are proper analogues to firearms. These are fallacious and false arguments employed by the deceitful to trick the unwary into surrendering bits and pieces of their 2nd Amendment rights until all of them are gone. This explains why Savage banned calls from those who knew what they were talking about in favor of kooks, conspiratorialists, the deluded, and poseurs.

11 Frederick C. Mish, Editor-in-Chief, Webster’s Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary (Springfield, Massachusetts, Merriam-Webster, Inc., Publishers, 1985), 1165, 276.

22 Michael Savage, The Savage Nation, broadcast 2 October, 2017.

33 IBID. 2 October, 2017.

44 Michael Savage, The Savage Nation, broadcast 4, 5, and 6 October, 2017.

55 Stephen King, Salem’s Lot (New York, N.Y., A Signet Book, New American Library, 1975), 317.

66 Stephen King, It (New York, N.Y., A Signet Book, New American Library, 1986), 353. With eleven years between publication, King still couldn’t get it right.

77 Universal Studios, The Fast And The Furious, 2001.

88 Kyle Wintersteen, “9 Most Misused Gun Terms,” Guns & Ammo, online, 21 November 2016 at http://www.gunsandammo.com.

99 Todd Woodward, “Down Range: Assault Weapons ‘Hoo-Hah,” Gun Tests 11 (November 2004) 2.

1010 U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms, at http://www.aft.gov/firearms.

1111 Jeff Knox, “Judge Says Maryland Ugly Gun Ban is Ok,” 13 August 2014, at http://www.FirearmsCoalition.org. See also; Michael Dorstewitz, “Judge Rules AR-15s are not covered under Constitution and are dangerous and unusual,” Liberty Unyielding at http://libertyunyielding.com/2014/08/13/judge-rules-ar-15s-not-covered-constitution-dangerous-unusual/#XErDCz10jgxiDG81.99.

1313 Richard Stevens, “Nazi Strategy Summed Up In 2 Words, Sporting Purpose,” 7 April, 1988, Jews For the Preservation of Firearms Ownership, at http://jpfo.org/filegen/-n-z-/nazirot.htm.

1515 I should know, I lived there for ten years.

1616 Richard Nance, “Your AR15 ASAP: Hornady’s Rapid Safe Wall Lock and Gunlock Provide a Safe Storage Solution for Quick Access in the Home,” Guns & Ammo 10 (October 2017), 76.

1717 Expanding what constitutes “mental illness” and “mental instability” is very popular on the Left who will use such determinations to expand individuals prohibited from owning firearms. Can thought-crimes be far behind?

1818 Ronald J. Pestritto, Woodrow Wilson and the Roots of Modern Liberalism (Lanham, Maryland, Rowman & Littlefield, Publishers, Inc., 2005), 3-6. See also; Gary T. Amos, Defending the Declaration (Brentwood, Tennessee, Wolgemuth & Hyatt, Publishers, Inc., 1989), 127-129.

1919 Jeff Snyder, A Nation of Cowards (St. Louis, Missouri, Accurate Press, 2001), 119-121.

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

Monkeywrenching the Democrats’ gun control agenda in the House

The Democrats will have control of the House next year. Which is bad news since they plan to push hard for more gun control rights-violations. Since they don’t control the Senate, we can hope those allegedly pro-gun folks there will locate their metaphorical testicles and prevent any of that from actually passing and going to a “pro-gun” President who is on record approving bans, preemptively-prove-your-innocence, no-due process, and bans.

Gridlock is our current best hope. I know a way to ensure that. We need just the right Speaker of the House. I propose…

Speaker of the House Hank Johnson, Jr. [D-GA]

Guam, midgets, helium, white uniforms, quarters, bathrooms, “a world without balloons”…

He’s a Dem. Check.
He’s anti-2A. Check.
He’s a crazed left-winger. Check.
He isn’t Pelosi. Check.

The House Dems should be happy to vote for him.

The Republicans… Face it, guys; your agendas aren’t going anywhere in the face of a Dem majority, but you still have a chance to sabotage them. And have a lot of fun with it.

So please, contact your House representatives and ask them to nominate, or at least support, Hank Johnson for Speaker of the House. We Want Hank!


Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could really use the money, what with truck repairs and recurring bills. And the rabbits need feed. Truck insurance, lest I be forced to sell it. Click here to donate via PayPal.
(More Tip Jar Options)

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

Jews. Guns. No compromise. No surrender.

Password Reset
Please enter your e-mail address. You will receive a new password via e-mail.