Firearm Accessories 1: Cases

Ok, so what do you need after you get a firearm? The market is certainly flooded with accessories, but what is really important? Today, I’m discussing cases for your handgun or long gun.

Regardless of what gun you own, it’s helpful to have a good way to transport it. Cases for long guns & handguns are either hard cases or soft cases. Hard cases have a rigid plastic or metal shell, typically lined with foam. Hard cases provide the most protection for your firearms but they are more bulky & awkward. Soft cases are padded nylon, canvas, fabric, or leather. They’re generally more convenient than hard cases. They may have extra pockets for tools & ammunition, and they may have multiple carrying straps for comfort.

However, be warned that some soft cases, like leather or cotton, may attract moisture from the air and hold it against your gun, causing rust. Synthetic materials are far less likely to cause problems but it’s not impossible. You should still keep them oiled and stored in a dry location. Invest in a dehumidifier if you live in a humid area.

Continue reading

Posted in firearms | Leave a comment

Intro to Firearms 7

When it comes to self-defense, it is important to have a firearm that fires quickly, so I recommend semiautomatics and double-action revolvers. They fire each time you pull the trigger. There are many other fine firearm designs, but a slow bolt-action rifle would be a poor choice in a crisis because it is so slow that you might not have time for a second shot. You need multiple shots if you miss or if there’s more than one attacker.

Please understand that this started as a simple list of guns that I recommend researching more. I started adding descriptions, and now it’s a full-blown post. These are only summaries of my limited knowledge, so you should still research each option.

For the sake of being brief, I cannot include very many specific details on each gun. We would need a long chart just for the Glock models alone.

I added an ***asterisk*** next to the firearms I personally plan to buy eventually.

As an alternative idea, you could buy a 22lr gun that *looks* like a badass self-defense gun, like the GSG 22LR 1911 or S&W M&P-15-22. It would be cheaper to buy, cheaper to shoot, and would still be intimidating for self defense. However, it would suck if you ever needed to actually use it for self-defense.

As one final note, always buy the best firearm you can find. Find your perfect tool, and then buy the nicest version. If you are only going to own one, then make it the best one.

Keep reading for my recommendations: Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment

Ruger 10/22 Scope Rail Options

I previously mentioned that adding a scope to the Ruger 10/22 means you lose the option to use the iron sights. That isn’t true any more, so here’s a summary of the best scope-rails on the market. Note that I have only tested the MSP rail so far, but plan to try the others eventually. I am confident they are all high quality, but they are each a very different design.

Mounting Solutions Plus SLR-10/22 Long
I bought this rail because it is less expensive than the Nodak Spud option, and it was available before the Ace in the Hole sight. Overall, it’s a good & simple system. It is simply a scope rail with a very low center groove so that you can still see the sights. There are other similar systems on the market for far cheaper, but they are also far lower quality. I tried a few of those before I found the MSP rail. I feel like I wasted my money on those inferior systems.

Mounting Solutions Plus SLR-10/22 Short
The only real reason I can think of to buy the short rail is if you know you’re only going to use a very small red-dot type of sight. The short rail should be compatible with the Tech Sights for the 10/22, but I think the Nodak Spud system is a better option than combining the MSP rail with Tech Sights.

Williams Gunsight “Ace in the Hole” This scope rail includes a simple peep rear sight. It uses a special front sight, so it is only compatible with standard “taper” barrels.

Nodak Spud NDS-26 combined with the NDS-23 or NDS-40 The NDS-26 is the rear rail & sight for the 10/22 receiver, while the NDS-23 and NDS-40 are front sights for different kinds of barrels. The NDS-40 is the front sight for standard taper Ruger barrels, while the NDS-23 is the front sight for .920 “bull” profile barrels. While the Williams “Ace in the Hole” system appears intended for use like a fine target-style peep sight, the Nodak Spud system is designed to mimic a military-style ghost ring rear sight that is faster but less precise. Nodak Spud is the right choice if you want to create a training rifle to match your defensive rifles like the AR-15. The Nodak Spud system is the only real option if you want to run with a .920 bull barrel. It may be the nicest system, too, but it is also clearly the most expensive. It costs more than twice as much as MSP rail or Williams rail. It is also

Posted in firearms | Leave a comment

5 Guns – Update

After some considerable thought, I must update my previous “5 guns” post.

First, although I love the feel of a 1911, I have become skeptical of their reliability. I suggest that a reader should choose another, more modern handgun. From here, I am entering the realm of “heresy” because my 2nd pick would actually be a Glock.

Now, let me begin by saying that I hate everything about how a Glock feels and operates. However, they are reliable and customizable. If you can only have 1 handgun, then a Glock can be adapted to a variety of calibers by simply swapping parts. If you start with a 40 S&W Glock, then is is cheap & easy to convert to 9mm or 357 Sig. However, if you start with a 9mm Glock, you must buy a new slide to convert to convert to 40 S&W or 357 Sig. Hence, I actually recommend buying a Glock model 23, 22, or 35. After that, go check out Lone Wolf Distributors for a wide variety of barrels that can convert calibers.

My ideal “Glock” would have a short slide with a 9mm barrel and a long slide with 9mm and 357 Sig barrels. The barrels would be threaded for a suppressor whenever possible. The short barrel would have night sights, and the long barrel would have high-rise sights to aim over the suppressor. I’m also very interested in a red-dot type sight, such as the Trijicon RMR, but I haven’t tried one so I’m not completely convinced.

I am uncertain whether I would prefer a Glock 23 or a Glock 22 modified to have a Glock 23 grip. Choosing a G-23 gives you a shorter barrel for concealed carry, but it also means a shorter maximum barrel length for the shooting range. A G-22 means you could have a full 6-inch barrel for the shooting range, but it limits you to a 4.5-inch barrel for concealed-carry.

I would also replace the semi-auto shotgun with a pump-action model, like the Remington 870 or Mossberg 590. Semi-auto shotguns are not really less reliable than pump-action shotguns, but the pump-action is simpler & will shoot unconventional ammunition, like “lock busting” ammo. It is also far easier to modify a pump-action from home-defense to hunting styles, so a single shotgun can do more for you. I really doubt I will ever use a shotgun for defense (I like rifles), so it makes sense to get something that is less complicated and more versatile.

Posted in firearms | Leave a comment

Hard Stop vs Soft Stop

In discussing self-defense, there are 2 basic ways to stop an attack. I call them a “hard stop” and a “soft stop” but other people call them “voluntary” and “involuntary” stops.

A “soft stop” is any time when the attacker is capable of attacking, but chooses to stop. Maybe he’s scared, maybe he’s in pain.

A “hard stop” is any time when the attacker is physically disabled. Maybe he’s unconscious, paralyzed, or even dead.

Soft stops are good because they have a minimal amount of violence. Pepper spray and stun guns* are a perfect examples of self-defense tools that are designed to get a soft stop. However, even lethal weapons are capable of causing a soft stop. A minor wound may cause enough pain & fear to cause a soft stop. Even holding a weapon might scare an attacker away. But that’s the trick with soft stops, isn’t it? Soft stops are all about what might happen. There are many cases where criminals have continued fighting through pepper spray. In fact, most State Police officers are required to learn to keep fighting with a full dose of pepper spray. Stun Guns? They hurt like hell, but that’s all. Hollywood grossly misrepresents the actual effects of stun guns. Get on youtube, you’ll find plenty idiot “Jackass” wannabes zapping each other with stun guns. Stun guns do NOT disable people. They do not leave people on the ground twitching & paralyzed. They just cause pain.

Pain is scary. Many criminals will just decide to leave you alone and go mug someone else instead. However, a determined criminal can fight through the pain. Worse, many self-defense tools are short-range. A stun gun is only a few inches long. To hit someone with a stun gun, you have to get really, really close. Close enough for him to grab you. Some people say that women shouldn’t carry a knife or gun because criminals will just take it and use it against her. A stun gun is worse. It can be taken away just as easily as a knife, but gives less protection.

Pepper spray has some advantages. It usually has a 15 foot range, so you don’t have to get too close. However, it isn’t very accurate, and it can be blown by the wind. At short range, it can splash and hit you. Also, you only get a few shots. It does, however, hurt like hell. Pepper spray is more than just painful, though. A good shot actually causes swelling in the eyes and throat. Most people will not be able to open their eyes and will have trouble breathing. However, some people are still tough enough to fight through it.

However, all of these things can fail. A tough guy (or experienced criminal) can deal with the pain. The only guaranteed way to stop an attacker is with a hard stop. In a best-case scenario, criminals will be scared away or wounded enough to retreat/surrender. In a really bad situation, a lethal weapon still gives you the option of hurting the attacker until he collapses.

Knives are affordable, lightweight, useful for daily life, and generally legal for anyone to own. However, they are short-range weapons. Frankly, there is a very high chance that a knife would be taken away from me. Knives still require a lot of muscle and skill to use well. It is possible (but difficult) to get a hard stop with a knife. A deep stab or many small cuts will cause an attacker to bleed. Eventually, he will lose enough blood to pass out. Unfortunately, it may take several minutes, which is long enough for him to hurt or kill you. I’ve read about knife fights where the “winner” died a few minutes after the “loser”. For this reason, I consider knives to be borderline on the hard/soft subject. They’re capable of getting a hard stop, but they’re mainly a soft-stop weapon.

This is one of the reasons I prefer firearms. In some cases, just seeing a firearm is enough to scare a criminal away. Further, most gun shot wounds are actually not fatal! According to one surgeon, an average of 6 out of 7 handgun wounds are not fatal. In one case, a woman shot her attacker 5 times in the head and neck. He walked downstairs, got in his car, and drove away. In another case, a man survived after being shot 19 times by police. These are extraordinary cases, but they proved that guns are not the magical instant death rays we see on TV. Even a person who is shot through the heart does not drop dead instantly. Any deer hunter can tell you that a deer can run a hundred yards after being shot through the heart. You can see it on youtube if you don’t believe me.

While a firearm is capable of a soft stop, we can never expect or guarantee a soft stop with any weapon. The ability to make a hard stop, if necessary, is a great advantage. Simply keep shooting until the attacker stops attacking. It doesn’t matter if he’s a macho badass mofo. A bullet to the spine will stop him.

*Side note: Stun guns are NOT the same thing as a TASER. TASER is a brand name (and acronym) that represents a specific product. There are no generic versions of a  TASER. They’re protected by copyrights.

Posted in firearms | Leave a comment

Buy Now!

Prices and availability for parts have mostly returned to normal, even if ammunition is still rare & expensive. (A few special parts are still hard to find for a fair price.) Unfortunately, it is inevitable that someone like Feinstein, Bloomberg, or Schumer will eventually start pushing for “gun control” again. It is possible that we may eventually see another ban on “assault” weapons and/or “high-capacity” magazines.

Of course, the question becomes “How should I spend my money?” We’re not made of money! Ask yourself what matters the most to you. For me, I think “assault” weapons look nice and feel nice. I love the adaptability of the AR-15, and I like threaded barrels on pistols. However, I also recognize that things like pistol grips and threaded barrels are nice, but they’re not really important one way or the other. Like we keep saying, the entire “assault” weapon controversy is based on how a weapon looks, not how it shoots. Hence, it’s really a moot point either way. I don’t support a ban (because it’s stupid), but I’ll be ok.

I think the “high-capacity” magazines are FAR more important for self-defense. Yes, in most self- defense cases, capacity is not a problem. Most self-defense cases are solved with less than 5 shots. However, I can point to cases that have needed more than 5, or 10, or 20 shots to stop an attacker. And frankly, there is NO advantage to having less ammo! A Glock 17 doesn’t get any smaller when you replace the 17 round magazine with a 10 round magazine. Hence, I think that anyone on a limited budget should probably buy some “high-capacity” magazines right now, just in case of a future ban.

Yes, you could wait and buy the magazines later, but prices will never be lower than they are right now. I understand that you might not have the money to buy now, but what advantage is there to waiting? It’s still $30 whether you buy today, tomorrow, or next month. (Except that  it might be $60 next month if Feinstein starts trying to ban again.)

Of course, it may not work. I’m not psychic. Maybe the next ban will be absolute – “Mr & Mrs America, turn them all in” (F- you Feinstein!). Or maybe there you’ll be allowed to keep them, but not allowed to use them. However, the more outrageous the ban is, the more likely it is to go to the Supreme Court. For example, the 5th Amendment requires that “just compensation” be paid to people when the government takes your legal property. On the other hand, no compensation was paid to the people whose alcohol was confiscated & destroyed in the 1920s. If the government is willing to ignore the 1rst, 2nd, and 4th Amendments, then the 5th is probably not a problem. (Of course, if you buy now, you would have the choice to disobey later. If you don’t buy now, you won’t have a choice if a ban hits.)

Still, I think it’s worth risking $30 (or $100, or whatever you can afford) to guarantee that you will have a “high-capacity” magazine in the future. I recommend that you buy at least two (one for main duty, one as a backup/reload), but consider buying more if you can afford it. Magazines can break or wear out. Think of them like car tires – they more you “drive” them, the sooner they wear out. You can NEVER have too many magazines! I don’t know how many I have, but it’s more than a few!

Even if you don’t own a gun yet, you should still think about buying some magazines. You can buy a gun later. If you don’t know what gun you want to buy, here are some the most common models.

Pistols (9mm) – in no order

  • Glock 17 or 19
  • Beretta 92
  • Sig Sauer P226
  • S&W 59 (old) – also fits in the Lionheart LH9
  • S&W M&P (new)
  • Springfield XD or XDM
  • FNH FNX-9
  • HK USP

Note: there are a few rifles that shoot 9mm ammo, and a few of them use pistol magazines. The Glock is definitely the most common in a 9mm rifle, but Kel-Tec makes an “assault” rifle the uses Glock or Beretta or Sig or S&W 59 magazines.

AR-15 – these are the single most common rifle magazines in the US BY FAR!! Other rifles that use AR-15 maazines: IWI Tavor, FNH FS2000, modified Steyr AUG, Kel-Tec SU-16, Benelli Benelli MR1, Mossberg MVP, and several less-common rifles

AK-47 – very few rifles use AK-47 magazines (except for the AK, of course), but if there is a ban, I guarantee someone will eventually design a post-ban rifle to use AK magazines.

Mini-14 – the Ruger Mini-14 is great because it is “politically correct” but magazines are expensive, and no other gun uses a Mini-14 magazine. However, Mini-14 rifles are common. (You can even buy one at certain WalMarts)

Saiga – the Saiga is a “politically correct” version of the AK. The Saiga uses special magazines, but some models can be modified to use AK magazines.

Other good deals at the moment:

You can also sometimes spot good deals if you follow – that place does a pretty good job of finding & announcing sales.

Posted in firearms | Leave a comment

“Universal” Background Checks Ripped Apart
There’s some interesting stuff here.

Anyone who advertises a gun online will have to do a background check. If someone puts the gun in the local Ad Bulletin or classified section of the newspaper, no background check is required. If that classified section is posted online, then a background check is required. How many people will unknowningly violate that law?

We have “universal” background checks in California, so I’ll tell you what it actually does. I traded my 9mm 1911 for a 9mm Glock. Instead of meeting and trading guns, we had to meet at a gun dealer during business hours, which was inconvenient. We each paid $35 for the background check fee (which is being abused in CA, that’s another story). Ten days later, we both had to drive back to the gun shop to pick up our guns. It may not sound so bad, but remember that not every town has a friendly neighborhood gun shop. People living in San Francisco have to drive an hour down out of town to find a gun dealer. We wasted $70, 2 hours, and a lot of hassle just so we could both leave with a different handgun.

Rural people have the same problem. Public advertisements are the only effective option to sell a gun in areas with low population density. Anyone who advertises their gun must then drive in to town to sell/trade. Again, it’s a real pain in the ass for country folk.


Or course, you know that there will be a fee for doing a private background check. (It’s government, there’s always a fee). The background check fee in California (Dealer’s Record of Sale) is too high, and it created a $24 million surplus. Instead of spending that money to administer or improve the background check system (which has major problems), the CA legislature recently stole that money to fund the gun-confiscation teams. To prevent hidden taxes, CA law explicitly prohibits over charging for fees. Fees may only be used for the purpose for which they were collected. The legislature is clearly violating state law, but that doesn’t stop them.


If you don’t want to read the link, I’ll summarize.

First, the prohibition on federal gun registration only applies to the DOJ & sub-agencies (like ATF). Any other federal agency is NOT prohibited. The DOJ is only prohibited from creating a registry using records from *current* gun dealer license holders. The DOJ could still compile a registry using records from out-of-business gun shops. Most gun shops are small businesses that eventually go away when the owner retires or dies. The registry would be incomplete, but it would be enough to find the huge majority of gun owners, especially when records from private sales are added to the dealer’s records. Further, the penalty for breaking the law is criminal prosecution … by the DOJ! Yeah, right, the DOJ will prosecute themselves. I’ll stop here.

Second, the protection for interstate travelers is negated by any state law that is a felony … like possessing an unregistered handgun in Massachusetts. Hence, travelers are not protected from arrest in the states where they need it the most, and any other state can invalidate the traveler protections by mimicking the laws in Mass. Travelers actually have more protection under FOPA 1986 than under the “enhanced” protection to Toomey-Manchin.


About the video-
I just watched Manchin’s video, and it is a huge pile of bull. It just gets worse and worse the more he talks. He’s so far off topic by the end that I don’t even know why he’s talking about unrelated topics, except to make himself look good & reasonable, and therefore his legislation must be good & reasonable.

As a note, I think NRA is going to drop Manchin’s “A rating” dramatically. I think they should create a system for revoking memberships from people who use the membership to work against the NRA.

Second, that NRA quote he reads at the beginning was probably written before we had the full text of Manchin-Toomey. We didn’t get the text until shortly before it was voted on. I read jokes comparing it to ObamaCare “We have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it away from the fog of the controversy” (Yes, Pelosi actually did say that). For a long time, the only thing anyone knew about Manchin-Toomey was what Manchin and Toomey claimed it would do.

Third, I am SO SICK of that misleading “90%” statistic.

Fourth, that was some nice fear-mongering with Al Quaeda. I prefer dangerous freedom to safe tyranny. Additionally, the quote that Manchin reads claims that “you can go down to a gun show at the local convention center, and come away with a fully-automatic assault rifle”. That quote is WRONG, and by using it, Manchin is also wrong. Full-auto guns are more regulated than silencers. The only place to buy one no-questions-asked is on the black market, they same way you can buy cocaine with no-questions-asked on the black market. Manchin is using lies & fear-mongering to push his agenda.

Fifth, Manchin is lying again. Background checks do NOT stop American citizens with terrorist connections from buying guns. People on the terrorist watchlist can still buy guns legally. That’s another subject for another time.

Sixth, quoting an editorial in the Washington Times? Media bias isn’t just influencing politicians, now it’s being quoted as a reliable source?

Seventh, he mentions online auctions website (I use GunBroker). Again, he’s glossing over the fact that interstate guns sales still go through a licensed dealer and have a background check. Using online auctions to find local guns represents a very tiny percentage of the internet auction business. When was the last time you bought something off of eBay that was local and drove to meet the seller face-to-face? It happens, but it’s incredibly rare.

Eighth, I am so sick of gun control being called “common sense”. It’s a nasty, underhanded way of defaming anyone who disagrees.

Ninth, he admits that the bill won’t stop mass shootings, yet all of this is riding on the emotional wave of a mass shooting. Mass shootings are the only reason Congress is having this “discussion” right now. (Every mass shooter that I can think of has obtained his guns illegally through theft or has passed a background check.)

10 – Now he’s talking about a commission to study gun violence. He’s portraying it like it will be a true common sense group that will look at things fairly. He specifically mentions that we should avoid banning rifles just because they look different (“assault” rifles, aka modern sporting rifles). Does anyone really trust the government to consult with genuine experts on an issue? Or do we expect them to follow their political dogma and use the commission to publish more misleading, biased studies that will be used to push more gun control? Obama and his ilk talked about starting a national “conversation” about gun violence. The result? The government has pursued gun control, ignored gun owners, and ignored any other possible solution – all while telling us that we’re unreasonable if we don’t support these new laws. Obama talked about how we should be ashamed after the lastest push for gun control failed. If the commission is made up of anti-gun people (it will be), then the result will be the same as always.

11 – Now he’s talking about how elementary school administrators can identify “a child that has problems”. (“They have no insurance” Wasn’t ObamaCare supposed to fix all of that?) So what is Manchin proposing? It seems he’s implying that we take away a kid’s Constitutional rights forever before adulthood and without the person ever committing a serious crime. Whatever happened to due process? Oh, so he’s talking about mental health care for youth? Why? I thought this bill was about background checks, not healthcare. He’s changing the subject to topics not covered by his bill.

12 – Bullet proof glass in schools is probably a good idea. THIS is the type of thing that would actually save lives without hurting anybody’s rights. But again, that’s completely unrelated to this bill. Manchin-Toomey doesn’t give bullet-proof glass to schools. Why is he talking about it here?

13 – I am so sick of the “if it saves just one life” line of bullshit. I have witten *pages* about this. It’s a false justification. They don’t actually mean that! If they were serious about that, we could save far more children by banning swimming pools than by restricting guns. I mean, at least 1 person dies every year while playing sports. Are we going to ban those, too? We don’t restrict those things because society has already accepted those deaths, and because society believes that the benefits of a swimming pool outweigh the risks. Attacking our gun rights proves that these politicians are willfully ignorant of the benefits of gun ownership. They only see the bad things about guns, while they ignore or discredit the good things.


Fourty-four thousand (44,000) people failed background checks last year. Less than 20 were arrested and prosecuted. The government is not even enforcing the background check system we already have. Criminals are being allowed to walk free after trying to buy guns. After being denied, what are they going to do? They still want a gun, and they’re still free to walk the streets. They will steal one, buy one on the black market, or get a family member to make a straw purchase.

What good is a system that fails to achieve its goal? It’s illegal for teenagers to drink alcohol. Does it stop teen drinking? Requiring ID to buy alcohol does make it a little harder for them, but does it stop them? No, any teen that wants booze can still get it.

Background checks don’t stop criminals from getting guns, they just stop criminals from getting a gun *today*. It just means they have to work a tiny bit harder tomorrow. The only thing that will truly stop criminals from getting guns is locking the criminals in a “gun free zone” (prison). If we’re serious about stopping criminals from buying guns, then we need to ARREST and PROSECUTE criminals who get caught trying to buy a gun illegally. Anything less is just empty threats and powerless bureaucracy.


What do *I* think we should do for background checks? I think we should create an instant-check system that private people can use without going to a gun dealer, and that does not create a permanent record. It should be easy to access on the internet, smartphone, or phone call. We should create a convenient system that gun-sellers WANT to use. And we should reward people for using it.

Right now, I have to be careful when I sell a gun to another person. If that person is a felon, I go to prison. I have no way to protect myself from accidentally selling a gun to the wrong person. A free online instant background check system would help me protect myself if I sell a gun. That is already enough of a reward to encourage people to use it if the system is easy & convenient.

We could also give people extra legal protection. Anyone that does a background check while selling a gun should be protected from any prosecution or lawsuit from any possible future victims. This is the same protection that is given to gun manufacturers.

This system would make it a little harder for bad people to buy guns privately, but does not have any disadvantages.


I’m becoming more suspicious of expanded background checks, the same way most gun owners are suspicious of registration. Even if passed with good intentions, it may be abused later. For example, the definitions of ‘mentally unfit’ are expanding in some states. In CA & NY, seeing a psych doctor for any reason risks being classified as unfit. It has already happened to non-violent people. These people were not adjudicated as mentally incompetent by a court. They are not a threat to themselves or others. They simply saw a psychiatrist. Look at Lynette Philips in CA, and worse, think about what it meant to her husband David. There was a similar case in NY. Over 150,000 veterans recently had their 2nd Amendment rights summarily revoked due to the possibility of PTSD. The ‘Progressives’ like to destigmatize mental health issues, yet these events will definitely make people think twice before seeing a psychologist. The ‘Progressives’ also love legalizing marijuana. What they haven’t told anyone is that if medical records are added to NICS, then all of those medical-marijuana patients will lose their guns rights (technically already lost, but unenforcible) and will have their guns confiscated using CA’s registration. Further, if background checks are universal, then anyone whose gun rights are unjustly taken will have no recourse.

It seems so simple. Step 1: universal background checks and expanded list of prohibited people (seems very “common sense”). Step 2: keep expanding that list of prohibited people until very few qualify to own guns. Each time they expand the list, it will all seem very reasonable. Step 3: Marginalize and stigmatize the few remaining gun owners until owning a gun is as socially accepted as smoking cigarettes has become today. Instead of banning guns, it’s a slow, creeping way to ban gun owners.


If found this article on FaceBook. Unfortunately, the writer only posts his articles on FB, so I’m copy-pasting it here. Every one of these things IS happening. It’s possible that they’re unrelated, each one independent of the others, yet the end result is the same. It doesn’t matter if it’s a conspiracy or a coincidence, it is still happening.

Patriots Defending America

Survival. The fight or flight instinct. It is the primal drive that is at the core of every person.

There are those who instinctively respond to confrontational/dangerous situations by fighting. There are those who instinctively flee.

The majority of people fall somewhere in between. Pending circumstances they may at times fight and they may at times flee. This majority can be taught over time to instinctively respond in either way.

You might wonder how this relates to Gun Control and America’s Freedom. Be patient and the pieces will begin to fall together.

Now imagine if a group of people in positions of authority within our government were to decide that the way our country is being run is not in the best interest of the people or themselves. Imagine that they feel that they know what is best for us, but what is best for us is to throw aside the barbaric guidance of an outdated Constitution. They will tell us what to buy., what to eat, what to say, how to act, and in turn they believe that our country will be a better place and of course they will personally benefit in many ways.

How would they implement such a drastic change?

In a country as strong and large as the United States, the only hope of achieving such a goal would be from a systematic and psychological approach.

Fight or Flight: The key to Change.

To establish such a radical change to the foundation of the country, those wishing the change must first recognize who will fight to oppose their efforts, who will naturally submit, and who can be taught to submit.

When presented with a confrontational/dangerous situation, fighters look for the nearest weapon, those who flee look for the nearest escape route, and those in between may do either.

Those who are instinctively fighters tend to have weapons. Those in between may have weapons. Those who flee tend to fear weapons.

There is no means for them to change the primal drive of fighters. They will have to pull the teeth of the wolves, but doing so is a dangerous task and must be done carefully. They will have to pull the teeth one at a time. To attempt to disarm all of the fighters simultaneously would lead to war.

One Tooth at a Time: Certain guns are inappropriate in citizens’ hands. Soldiers have PTSD and shouldn’t have guns. People with short-term psychological issues or who have received any of a myriad of medications should be entered into a system that denies them the right to own a gun. People should have to pay for outrageously expensive liability insurance if they are going to own a gun so that lower and middle-income Americans won’t be able to afford a gun.

While they are working at pulling the teeth of the wolves, they will have to work in parallel, diligently training the “between” people to instinctively submit.

They will teach them that when faced with a confrontation they should run or hide. They should pee or vomit. They should never use a weapon or try to defend themselves. They will teach them that standing up for themselves will just get them hurt worse. They will teach them that weapons are bad and evil things. They will teach them that only bad people want to own weapons. They will teach them that even pictures of weapons are not appropriate in our society. They will teach these things through the media to the adults. The will teach these things to our children at school.

When they have finished pulling the teeth of the fighters and training those between, they will be ready to make the changes that Obama has promised us.

We will no longer be represented by the government. We will be ruled by a governing class.

We, the Patriots of America, are the wolves who stand between the “Change” and America’s Freedom.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Intro to Firearms 6

Ok, I’m running out of material, so here’s a few links to more resources. Some of you (assuming I have more than 1 reader…) That’s an intro-level gun website meant for women. I don’t really know how good the page is. Of course, firearms are a male-dominated subject. Most firearm related material is written by men, but the actual writing is gender neutral.

Another source

Also, read some of the stuff by Jeff Cooper. He’s widely considered the father of modern handgun shooting techniques.

Finally, consider some real training from a professional. Of course, it’s best to own a gun to take to the training class. You can find NRA classes here. There are classes in WV. You can take the First Steps pistol class in Charleston WV. You can take the Basic Pistol Shooting class in a lot of places, including Poca WV. These classes are very affordable, costing only $65 plus the ammo you use.

If you’re willing to travel to the far Eastern panhandle of WV (about 5 hours from Charleston), you can visit the Echo Valley Training Center, which hosts famous shooting teachers like Rob Pincus (“peenk-uss”) and EAG Tactical. Classes are NOT cheap. Many cost $250 per day, and several classes take multiple days. However, this is some seriously badass training. NRA classes are for beginners. These are advanced classes for serious self-defense.

Posted in firearms | Leave a comment

Intro to Firearms 5

A beginning shooter should strongly consider buying an “airgun”, a gun that uses compressed air to push a small projectile. The most classic example is a child’s BB gun. This is a basic introduction.

Airguns have a lot of advantages. They can cost as little as $60 (compared to $200 for a 22LR rifle). The ammo is cheaper, too. They can be shot in the backyard, basement, or even in the dining room if you’re careful. They have no kick and make very little noise, especially the low powered ones. If you just want to have fun, air guns also have the advantage of being a legal way to play with a fully-automatic machinegun.

Projectile types
.177 BB – This is a round steel ball, usually coated in copper. These are the cheapest and least accurate kind of ammunition. Only use them in guns designed to shoot BBs. Cheapest ammo: $8/4000

.177 lead pellet – This is a shaped lead pellet, not a round ball. They are more accurate, more powerful (heavier), and a little more expensive. Cheapest ammo: $7/500

Note that there are larger calibers of lead pellets, but they are significantly more expensive and have no advantage for recreational shooting.

6mm BB – These are plastic balls used in Airsoft type guns. Airsoft guns are different enough from traditional airguns to be classified separately.

Gun systems
Multi-Pump – A pumping system builds pressure to propel the projectile. More pumps increase the power. This is one of the cheapest systems to shoot, but it requires muscle power to operate. Also, it can only shoot a single shot before re-pumping.

Break-barrel/cocking lever – This system uses a single long pull to compress a spring. When fired, the spring pushes a plunger which provides air pressure to throw the projectile.

CO2 – Pressurized canisters are used to propel the projectile. They cost about $15 for 25 canisters and provide about 50 shots per canister. Hence, $15 gets you enough gas for at least 1,000 shots. That’s still pretty affordable, and even a little cheaper than 22LR.

Airsoft – Airsoft guns, sometimes called ‘soft air’, are realistic guns used in games similar to paintball. Almost all of them use 6mm platic balls. Some use batteries to power a motor that runs an air pump. Some use canisters of compressed gas. The cheapest ones use a manual spring cocking system. In general, airsoft guns are the least accurate, least powerful, shortest ranged airguns on the market. They have the advantage of being the most realistic air guns on the market, especially the gas-powered ones. Typical cost for a quality pistol are under $200 (mine was $165) while quality gas-powered rifles are often around $500. Shooting a gas-powered airsoft pistol is almost exactly the same as shooting a real gun, except they don’t use real ammo. Unfortunately, this realism makes them really complicated and therefore fragile. Mine leaks gas when I fill it, and the slide-lock broke until I fixed it with a screw. However, I still love it. Even with its problems, it’s still cheaper to shoot than a 22lr, and it’s safe to shoot in a back yard. – clones of Glock, Russian Makarov, Russian TT-33, CZ-75, and 1911 – clones of Glock, Beretta, Sig, and 1911

recommended air rifles for beginners – most under $100 – checkout
Crosman 1077
Umarex Morph (converts between pistol & rifle)

IZH 60 $130 – this is a “cocking-lever” type system. It only holds 1 shot, but it’s accurate and only has a very light 10.5 pound cocking effort. It also has target style sights. It has the advantage that it doesn’t need CO2 gas, so it’s cheaper to shoot.

air pistols
Smith & Wesson M&P R8 CO2 BB Revolver
Crosman 357W/3576 airgun revolver
Crosman 2240 – single shot, 22 caliber, very accurate
avoid semi-auto bb pistols unless they are “gas blow back” because they have terrible trigger pulls

multi-pump air pistols – accurate & affordable
Crosman 1377 – this is a classic pistol, and only costs around $60. However, it requires some muscle to pump up to high power. The instructions say the minimum is 3 pumps per shot, but mine works fine with just 1 pump. The sights are kinda crappy, the gun itself is very accurate. I’ve shot spiders with mine at short range.
Benjamin HB17 – costs about $150, hard to find, but basically the same as the Crosman 1377 but much nicer
Beeman P17 – I don’t know anything about this pistol except that it is cheap ($40), single shot, and is supposedly easy to cock.

Posted in firearms | Leave a comment

Intro to Firearms 4

My friend mentioned that she’s interested in revolvers. There are 2 basic types: single-action and double-action. Single-action revolvers are based on the old Colt “wild west” era. They’re much slower to shoot, load, & unload. Double-action revolvers are much more modern. You can cock the system if you want, or you can just pull the trigger. They usually swing open to load & unload. Rick’s Colt Python is a modern double-action. Double-action revolvers are generally more practical than the old-fashioned single-action revolvers.

If you’re interested in double-action revolvers, checkout the Ruger GP100 and SP101. I recommend 4.2 or 6 inch barrels. The GP100 is available in 22lr and 357 Mag. The GP100 is only available in 357 Mag. Note that a 357 Mag can also shoot 38 Special ammo*. The SP101 is smaller than the GP100, but the GP 100 holds more ammo. The SP101 weighs less and the GP100 weighs more (personal preference). I recommend a longer barrel. People often make the mistake of buying tiny revolvers as a ‘first gun’. (It is especially a cliche for guys to recommend tiny guns to women.) Then, people discover that tiny guns kick really hard. The extra weight from a longer barrel helps to “absorb” the recoil (not technically correct, but hard to explain***).

Generally speaking, Ruger revolvers are a little less pretty and a little cheaper than S&W, but the quality is still good. Ruger and S&W are the only companies I really trust for double action revolvers. (There are many good companies that build single-action revolvers, but Ruger is arguably the best). The Charter Arms revolvers are cheap but mediocre quality. I don’t know anything about the Armscor/RIA revolvers except they cost about $200. AVOID Cobra & RG! The old Colt revolvers were good quality, but are usually considered too collectible today. The Russian Nagant revolvers are really cheap and they do work, but the ammo is rare/expensive, and the Nagant is one of the worst-feeling guns I’ve ever held. I don’t know anything about the EAA Windicator. Taurus quality is hit-and-miss. Some people love their Taurus guns, and some hate them. If you want the best, look at S&W.

*In 1935, Remington took the old 38 Special cartridge, made it longer, added more gunpowder, and called it the 357 Magnum. The only difference is their length and gunpowder amount.

***Heavier guns technically do not kick less. The kick feels softer because it is slower. It’s like the difference between someone punching you and someone pushing you. The fast hit hurts, while the slow push just moves you without pain.

Posted in firearms | 1 Comment

Intro to Firearms 3

The main advantage of a handgun is it’s small size and light weight, both important things for a gun that you’ll be carrying every day. If you’re not carrying a gun, then a rifle or shotgun (aka “long gun”) is fine for self defense at home. Of course, like all things, there is a huge debate in the gun community. Some argue that a long-gun is hard to navigate through a house, doors, hallways, etc (TRUE). Others argue that the superior power, accuracy, and reduced kick of a long gun is an advantage (also TRUE). Some argue that a long-gun is easier to grab and pull out of your hands, while other argue that a 2-handed grip on a long-gun makes it harder to pull away from you than a handgun.

Either way, it is something to consider, especially given the LOW price of a pump-action shotgun. I started thinking, and it’s hard to get a good handgun for $500, but a decent pump-action shotgun can be as cheap as $250 (last time I checked). Understand, a 12ga (twelve gauge) kicks like a mule. However, new shooters should look at the diminuitive .410 shotguns. They really don’t kick very hard, about half of a 12ga. The downside is that they’re rarely used for self-defense, so defensive ammunition is RARE. However, several companies do make it. Also, ammunition is far more expensive for 410 than 12ga. Check out any buckshot from companies like the ones below. Also check out the less-traditional Winchester PDX and Hornady Critical Defense Triple. However, AVOID the ‘slug’ ammo – it is severely underpowered. Also strongly avoid any kind of ‘less lethal’ ammunition for your physical and legal safety (that’s a topic for later).

410 buckshot
Sellier & Bellot
Golden Bear

see test results here:

Also note that for the above $250 price range, we’re talking about a pure basic pump-action with a hunting style 24″ barrel. You can crudely shorten the barrel with some basic hand tools, but be sure you don’t cut the barrel shorter than 18.5 inches. On the other hand, the “tactical” Mossberg models are more like $400. They look a little better but won’t protect you better than a hacked hunting shotgun.

Posted in firearms | Leave a comment

Intro to Firearms 2

Last time, we talked about handguns, rifles, and shotguns.

There are many sub-sections within each category. For example, shotguns are usually single-shot, double-barreled, pump-action, or semi-auto. Rifles are usually be single shot, pump-action, lever-action, bolt-action, or semi-auto. Most modern rifle designs are either bolt-action or semi-auto. Most handguns are revolvers or semi-auto pistols, but some handguns are also derringers, bolt-action, single-shot, or some other uncommon system.

Rifle choices: If selecting a rifle for defense, then semi-auto is strongly preferred. There is a lot of debate about which caliber is best, and which gun design is best. In short, your choice of rifle design and caliber depend on your intended purpose for the rifle.

If semi-auto is not an option for some reason, then (IMHO) the best option is a lever-action chambered in a handgun-caliber such as .357 Magnum, .44 Magnum or .45 Colt (not the same as 45 ACP). With practice, lever action rifles can be fired very quickly. Using a handgun-caliber means the rifle will hold more ammunition, kick less, and be faster to shoot multiple shots. Here’s what a world-class shooter can do with wild-west era guns, including a replica 1873 Winchester lever-action rifle.–Qw

Handgun choices: First, determine your purpose. If target shooting, then a longer & heavier handgun is better. Also, target shooting usually doesn’t require powerful calibers. If you plan to buy for self-defense, then caliber choice is very important. A self-defense gun may also be carried around every day, so small size and light weight will help keep you comfortable when you carry it. Of course, carrying a smaller handgun reduces your ability to defend yourself, but a small gun in your pocket is better than the big gun you left at home because it was too uncomfortable.

Second, determine if you want a revolver or a semi-auto pistol. Semi-auto pistols are often lighter weight and hold more ammo than revolvers. For example, a Glock holds 17 rounds of 9mm ammo, but a S&W TR8 only holds 8 rounds of 357 Manum ammo. However, revolvers are available in some truly awe-inspiring powerful cartridges like 44 Magnum, 454 Casull, 50 Alaskan, and the new 500 S&W. Revolvers are generally simple to use mentally, but physically challenging. They have longer & heavier triggers, hold less ammo, and are slower to reload. Semi-auto pistols can be mentally complicated with multiple steps required before shooting begins. However, a semi-auto pistol will usually have a much better feeling when you’re shooting. They have short & light trigger pulls, and require no extra work after each shot. Reloading a pistol takes several steps, but it is faster to do than reloading a revolver (Jerry Miculek doesn’t count, he’s some kind of superhuman with a revolver).

Oh, a few words of caution with handguns. First, a larger & heavier handgun will kick less than a smaller & lighter handgun with the same ammo. One common mistake is to sell tiny, lightweight revolvers to women for self-defense. These revolvers are difficult and painful to shoot. The #1 lesson those women learn is that they hate guns, or at least they hate their own guns because they kick so hard. A bigger, heavier handgun is better for shooting, but harder to carry. I would rather shoot a full-size 357 Magnum than a small 38 special. However, the little aluminum 38 special is a lot more comfortable to carry around every day for self-defense.

Second, you must be extra careful when shooting handguns. They’re very small & manuverable, so be careful that you don’t accidentally point them in the wrong direction if you get excited or distracted. It’s pretty hard to accidentally point a rifle at someone, but pointing a handgun is as easy as pointing your finger.

Revolvers come in 2 basic designs: single-action or double-action. Single-action revolvers require you to manually pull the firing mechanism back before each shot (cock the gun/cock the hammer). Single-action revolvers date back to the mid-1800s and were used in the Civil War and the “wild” west. These are the quintessential “cowboy” guns. Single-action revolvers are generally slower to shoot and much slower to reload than double-action revolvers. Double-action revolvers can be fired by manually pulling back the firing mechanism before shooting, or they can be fired by just pulling the trigger. Unfortunately, the trigger pull is very long and heavy if you don’t pull the hammer back first. However, they’re much faster to shoot. You can shoot a double-action revolver as fast as you can pull the trigger. Most double-action revolvers can be reloaded much more quickly than single action revolvers. Finally, some small revolvers for personal defense have a metal shield that completley covers the firing mechanism. Since it is covered, it is impossible to pull it back manually before shooting. These are called “double-action-only” revolvers (DAO). To shoot, you must pull the long & hard trigger each time. However, the shielded firing mechanism helps keep dirt out of the gun, and it reduces the chance the gun will snag or catch when pulling it out of a pocket. A DAO revolver is just fine for most short-range self-defense situations where you won’t have time to manually cock the gun before each shot.

Caliber choices: It’s always difficult to choose a caliber for your firearm. If you’re just shooting for fun, I always recommend 22LR (pronounced “twenty two long rifle”). Ammo is cheap for 22LR, the guns are cheaper than more powerful guns, it has very little kick, and is perfectly fine for target shooting at 150 feet or less. For defense, many experts recommend using the largest caliber that you can shoot comfortably. Other experts argue that accuracy matters more than caliber, and therefore you should choose a caliber that you can shoot accurately even if it is a little smaller. Smaller calibers kick less and usually guns in smaller calibers hold more ammunition. A semi-auto pistol that holds 17 shots of 9mm will probably hold about 15 rounds of .40 caliber ammo, or about 13 rounds of .45 caliber ammo. The question becomes whether you should have more shots that are less powerful (but easier to shoot), or more powerful ammo (but kicks more and fewer shots). That is a very personal question. I personally like the higher capacity and lower recoil of a 9mm. Also, 9mm ammo is cheaper than 45 caliber ammo. I want to shoot my guns more, and that means choosing a cheaper ammo. I also like 9mm because it is so common. There are probably more gun designs for 9mm than for 45, so as a gun collector, it’s nice to only need to buy 1 kind of ammo instead of 2.

A similar argument can be made for .223 and .308 rifle ammo. Most .308 rifles are designed to hold 20 rounds, while most .223 rifles are designed to hold 30 rounds. Like 9mm, .223 is lighter, cheaper, and softer-kicking than it’s larger-caliber competition. If you prefer Soviet style rifles, then there is a debate wih 5.45mm vs 7.62mm ammo for the AK system. Again, it comes back to the kind of uses and expectations you have.

When choosing a rifle type, it is important to first choose the type of rifle you want, and the caliber. If you have a good reason for wanting a certain caliber, that will limit you choices on what rifle to buy. For example, maybe you have a pistol that shoots 9mm ammo and you want a rifle that also shoots 9mm ammo to keep things simple. You won’t find any bolt-action or lever-action rifles that shoot 9mm pistol ammo. Your only choice is a semi-auto. Similarly, if you have a 357 Magnum revolver and you want a 357 Magnum rifle, then you will probably need to get a bolt-action or lever-action. Again, I recommend a semi-auto for defensive use, or just for having fun at the shooting range. If your goal is something in the wilderness, like hunting or survival, then you should probably look at bolt-action rifles. Compared to a semi-auto, a bolt action rifle is usually lighter weight, less expensive, and more accurate. A $400 Savage bolt action .223 rifle is more accurate than a $900 AR-15. The light weight is especially nice for people who carry their rifles around in the forest. The accuracy difference is small inside of 300 feet, but it gets more significant at longer ranges. Of course, super-accurate semi-auto rifles do exist, but they’re also super-expensive.

If you just need a rifle for fun at the shooting range, 22LR (pronounced twenty-two long rifle) is cheap and common. It’s very possible to find a quality 22LR rifle for about $200. If you need a rifle to carry in the woods for typical wilderness use (hunting/survival/animal defense), then a bolt action rifle is a good choice. A “bargain level” bolt action rifle like a Savage Axis or Ruger American can be purchased for under $400. They’re available in a wide range of calibers. If you’re looking for a self-defense rifle, the heapest option is probably a $350 SKS or $600 AK. They typically fire the Russian 7.62×39 cartridge, which is widely available and very affordable.

Posted in firearms | Leave a comment

Intro to Firearms 1

There are 3 general categories of firearms: handguns, shotguns, and rifles. Many other firearms defy classifcation into these 3 basic categories, but we can worry about those special guns later. (There are special categories for most of those other guns, but some guns still defy classification.)

Shotguns: These are designed to be held with both hands and pressed against the shoulder for stability & recoil control. The barrel is usually smooth on the inside, but special versions may have spiral grooves called “rifling”. They fire a “shell” loaded with many small pellets. The pellets spread out into a pattern. The pellets come in a variety of different sizes for different purposes. Shotgun shells are measured by “gauge” which is an old system based on the weight of a lead ball. For example, imagine a lead ball that weighs 1/12 of a pound (12 balls = 1 pound). That ball is a 12ga ball. Common shotguns sizes in common use are 12 gauge, 20 gauge, 28 gauge, and 410 CALIBER. Yes, that’s right, 410 shotguns are a caliber, not a gauge. 12 gauge is the most common and most powerful. 20 gauge is popular because it kicks less than 12ga but they suffer from limited ammunition choices. 410 is very small and is mainly used for small-game hunting and children’s shotguns. 28 gauge is uncommon and mainly used by target shooters. 16 gauge was common a long time ago, but it is very rare now. As a final note, the “spread” of shotgun pellets is greatly exagerated in movies & video games. At typical self-defense range, the spread is less that 1 foot across. Unfortunately, I don’t have any shotgun experience, so I’m going to skip discussion of shotguns except for home defense.

Rifles: These are designed to be held with both hands and pressed against the shoulder for stability & recoil control. The barrel has grooves on the inside (called “rifling”) to make the projectile spin. A spinning projectile is more stable, and hence more accurate. Some bad authors have claimed that the spinning bullet somehow makes the gun more deadly or powerful. No, but without a spinning bullet, it would be difficult (almost impossible) to hit a target past 100 feet. Rifles are capable of using an extremely wide variety of ammo, depending on the rifle’s design & purpose. Generally speaking, a rifle is more accurate and more powerful than a handgun. Of course, it’s not fair to intentionally compare a high-power handgun to a low-power rifle. Rifles are superior to handguns in every way, except for what they weigh (bad pun). Handguns are smaller & lighter than rifles, which makes them more convenient to carry & transport. A typical handgun is around 2 pounds, while typical rifles range from 5 pounds (ultralight) to 10 pounds (very heavy).

Handguns: These are technically designed to be held in 1 hand, but no one actually recommends a 1-handed hold unless necessary. They have rifled barrels for superior accuracy than a smooth barrel. Handguns are the most common choice for self-defense, and the most common choice for crime. A small handgun is easy to carry in a pocket for defense. A full-size handgun easily slips into a handbag, backpack, car glovebox, or bedside nightstand. Full-size handguns are generally more accurate and powerful than smaller handguns, but not always. Handguns are usually revolvers or semi-auto pistols, but other designs do exist.

I’m mainly discussing common designs & features, but remember that people have been building guns for centuries, and the current era of firearm technology started in the 1860’s with the invention of self-contained metallic cartridges. These enabled the creation of semi-automatic and fully-automatic firearms starting in the 1880s and 1890s. Since then, nearly all firearm research & design work has focused on perfecting the basic concepts that were pioneered 100 years ago. In between, gun designers have experiented with some pretty crazy, weird, and exotic ideas. As a result, there is an exception for every general rule.

Posted in firearms | Leave a comment

Senate abuse, and a Sinister prediction
It doesn’t seem right that Congress can bring back the same bill and vote on it again & again, ad nausea. They should eventually be required to resubmit the bill, send it back through the committees, etc. Think about how this could be abused. The Senate leader could literally call for a vote on the same bill over & over aain until it eventually passed. And there’s this:

Emily Miller (WashTimes) on FaceBook “Most telling vote in Senate today? Sen. Cornyn’s amendment for national concealed carry reciporcity. Harry Reid has blocked a vote on the House-passed bill for two years for fear it would pass.”

It seems like a big deal that one man can stop a bill from passing Congress just by refusing to let the Senate vote on a bill that has already passed through the House. In theory, he could stop a bill even if 100% of the House and 99% of the Senate approved. Even the President’s veto power is counterbalanced by Congress’ power to pass a bill by a 2/3 majority which negates a veto.

So in summary, the Senate leader can block a vote on a popular bill indefinitely, or force a vote on an unpopular bill daily.

PREDICTION: Before 2013 is over, we will have another mass-shooting that will be even more heinous than the one in CT. It will be perfectly timed, just like the theatre shooting that was right after the election or the CT shooting that was right before the 2013 legislative session. The politicians will dance on victims’ graves, happily pushing for more gun bans before the blood is even dry.

For the record, Adam Lanza stole the guns he used in Newtown. James Holmes and Jared Loughner passed background checks. Given that the background check legislation — the centerpiece of Barack Obama’s efforts to declare “victory over the gun lobby” — would not address, in any way, the incidents which supposedly gave rise to it, exactly what is its purpose, other than to destroy the Republicans’ “ground game” and decimate the most significant remaining pillar of their coalition

Posted in politics | Leave a comment

Marriage Equality intersecting with “reasonable” gun control

There’s an interesting overlap between DOMA, the 2nd Amendment, and Charles Schumer’s Senate bill that’s trying to ban private firearm transfers. This is a study in unintended consequences.

“In S.374, certain language would treat the absence of a gun-owning gay or lesbian person’s partner for a period greater than seven days as a transfer of firearms left behind in the home. As this “transfer” is not done by a Federal Firearms Licensee with a proper background check, it would be considered to be an unlawful transfer, converting the law-abiding gay persons into instant felons. Spouses, however, are exempt from this automatic felony, since one spouse can lend or give a firearm to another without a background check. But under DOMA, the Federal government does not recognize GLBT persons legally married under State laws as spouses, therefore would still be considered illegal transferees under S.374.”

Posted in politics | Leave a comment

link dump #3

I read something interesting the other day. Did you know that police officers can be sued for violating your civil rights? The politicians who pass unconstitutional laws get to keep their mansions, fancy cars, & social clout. It’s the men & women who enforce laws who risk losing everything they have in a lawsuit. I guess that’s one reason so many sheriffs are saying they won’t enforce new gun bans.

These links are mostly from February. I started using a new method of saving links in late Feb, so future posts should at least be more organized.
nra ad about capacity bans:

colion noir on hicaps:

originally posted by Weapon Outfitters on Facebook

When right wing people say stupid shit about rape, it gets broadcast for weeks. When left wing people say stupid shit about rape (CO State Rep Joe Salazar, i’m referencing your dumb ass) it gets swept under the rug.

University of Colorado Colorado Springs’ idiotic advice:

Colorado State Rep Joe Salazar’s idiotic comments about self defense:

damn, this guy can talk!

top dhs ceckpoint refusals
– this is some pretty heavy shit

Posted in politics | Leave a comment

Rise to Power

I found this on facebook, so don’t take it as gospel. As with everything, CONFIRM. Feel free to blame any modern parallels on whichever party you choose to vilify. The important part is that a society can go a long way downhill in only a few years. Don’t tell me it can never happen here. We are people. Being Americans does not make us better than Germans, Italians, Russians, Romans, or any fallen empire in history.

I will point out one thing, though. Germany was in a terrible economic crash after WW1, when a bright young man came along and promised the people a better, brighter future. He promised to change things. He gave them hope for the future.

“I am a witness to history.

“I cannot tell you that Hitler took Austria by tanks and guns; it would distort history.

If you remember the plot of the Sound of Music, the Von Trapp family escaped over the Alps rather than submit to the Nazis. Kitty wasn’t so lucky. Her family chose to stay in her native Austria. She was 10 years old, but bright and aware. And she was watching.

“We elected him by a landslide – 98 percent of the vote,” she recalls.

She wasn’t old enough to vote in 1938 – approaching her 11th birthday. But she remembers.

“Everyone thinks that Hitler just rolled in with his tanks and took Austria by force.”

No so.

Hitler is welcomed to Austria

“In 1938, Austria was in deep Depression. Nearly one-third of our workforce was unemployed. We had 25 percent inflation and 25 percent bank loan interest rates.

Farmers and business people were declaring bankruptcy daily. Young people were going from house to house begging for food. Not that they didn’t want to work; there simply weren’t any jobs.

“My mother was a Christian woman and believed in helping people in need. Every day we cooked a big kettle of soup and baked bread to feed those poor, hungry people – about 30 daily.’

“We looked to our neighbor on the north, Germany, where Hitler had been in power since 1933.” she recalls. “We had been told that they didn’t have unemployment or crime, and they had a high standard of living.

“Nothing was ever said about persecution of any group – Jewish or otherwise. We were led to believe that everyone in Germany was happy. We wanted the same way of life in Austria. We were promised that a vote for Hitler would mean the end of unemployment and help for the family. Hitler also said that businesses would be assisted, and farmers would get their farms back.

“Ninety-eight percent of the population voted to annex Austria to Germany and have Hitler for our ruler.

“We were overjoyed,” remembers Kitty, “and for three days we danced in the streets and had candlelight parades. The new government opened up big field kitchens and
everyone was fed.

“After the election, German officials were appointed, and, like a miracle, we suddenly had law and order. Three or four weeks later, everyone was employed. The government made sure that a lot of work was created through the Public Work Service.

“Hitler decided we should have equal rights for women. Before this, it was a custom that married Austrian women did not work outside the home. An able-bodied husband would be looked down on if he couldn’t support his family. Many women in the teaching profession were elated that they could retain the jobs they previously had been re- quired to give up for marriage.

“Then we lost religious education for kids

“Our education was nationalized. I attended a very good public school.. The population was predominantly Catholic, so we had religion in our schools. The day we elected Hitler (March 13, 1938), I walked into my schoolroom to find the crucifix replaced by Hitler’s picture hanging next to a Nazi flag. Our teacher, a very devout woman, stood up and told the class we wouldn’t pray or have religion anymore. Instead, we sang ‘Deutschland, Deutschland, Uber Alles,’ and had physical education.

“Sunday became National Youth Day with compulsory attendance. Parents were not pleased about the sudden change in curriculum. They were told that if they did not send us, they would receive a stiff letter of warning the first time. The second time they would be fined the equivalent of $300, and the third time they would be subject to jail.”

And then things got worse.

“The first two hours consisted of political indoctrination. The rest of the day we had sports. As time went along, we loved it. Oh, we had so much fun and got our sports equipment free.

“We would go home and gleefully tell our parents about the wonderful time we had.

“My mother was very unhappy,” remembers Kitty. “When the next term started, she took me out of public school and put me in a convent. I told her she couldn’t do that and she told me that someday when I grew up, I would be grateful. There was a very good curriculum, but hardly any fun – no sports, and no political indoctrination.

“I hated it at first but felt I could tolerate it. Every once in a while, on holidays, I went home. I would go back to my old friends and ask what was going on and what they were doing.

“Their loose lifestyle was very alarming to me. They lived without religion. By that time, unwed mothers were glorified for having a baby for Hitler.

“It seemed strange to me that our society changed so suddenly. As time went along, I realized what a great deed my mother did so that I wasn’t exposed to that kind of humanistic philosophy.

“In 1939, the war started, and a food bank was established. All food was rationed and could only be purchased using food stamps. At the same time, a full-employment law was passed which meant if you didn’t work, you didn’t get a ration card, and, if you didn’t have a card, you starved to death.

“Women who stayed home to raise their families didn’t have any marketable skills and often had to take jobs more suited for men.

“Soon after this, the draft was implemented.

“It was compulsory for young people, male and female, to give one year to the labor corps,” remembers Kitty. “During the day, the girls worked on the farms, and at night they returned to their barracks for military training just like the boys.

“They were trained to be anti-aircraft gunners and participated in the signal corps. After the labor corps, they were not discharged but were used in the front lines.

“When I go back to Austria to visit my family and friends, most of these women are emotional cripples because they just were not equipped to handle the horrors of combat.

“Three months before I turned 18, I was severely injured in an air raid attack. I nearly had a leg amputated, so I was spared having to go into the labor corps and into military service.

“When the mothers had to go out into the work force, the government immediately established child care centers.

“You could take your children ages four weeks old to school age and leave them there around-the-clock, seven days a week, under the total care of the government.

“The state raised a whole generation of children. There were no motherly women to take care of the children, just people highly trained in child psychology. By this time, no one talked about equal rights. We knew we had been had.

“Before Hitler, we had very good medical care. Many American doctors trained at the University of Vienna..

“After Hitler, health care was socialized, free for everyone. Doctors were salaried by the government. The problem was, since it was free, the people were going to the doctors for everything.

“When the good doctor arrived at his office at 8 a.m., 40 people were already waiting and, at the same time, the hospitals were full.

“If you needed elective surgery, you had to wait a year or two for your turn. There was no money for research as it was poured into socialized medicine. Research at the medical schools literally stopped, so the best doctors left Austria and emigrated to other countries.

“As for healthcare, our tax rates went up to 80 percent of our income. Newlyweds immediately received a $1,000 loan from the government to establish a household. We had big programs for families.

“All day care and education were free. High schools were taken over by the government and college tuition was subsidized. Everyone was entitled to free handouts, such as food stamps, clothing, and housing.

“We had another agency designed to monitor business. My brother-in-law owned a restaurant that had square tables.

“Government officials told him he had to replace them with round tables because people might bump themselves on the corners. Then they said he had to have additional bathroom facilities. It was just a small dairy business with a snack bar. He couldn’t meet all the demands.

“Soon, he went out of business. If the government owned the large businesses and not many small ones existed, it could be in control.

“We had consumer protection, too

“We were told how to shop and what to buy. Free enterprise was essentially abolished. We had a planning agency specially designed for farmers. The agents would go to the farms, count the livestock, and then tell the farmers what to produce, and how to produce it.

“In 1944, I was a student teacher in a small village in the Alps. The villagers were surrounded by mountain passes which, in the winter, were closed off with snow, causing people to be isolated.

“So people intermarried and offspring were sometimes retarded. When I arrived, I was told there were 15 mentally retarded adults, but they were all useful and did good manual work.

“I knew one, named Vincent, very well. He was a janitor of the school. One day I looked out the window and saw Vincent and others getting into a van.

“I asked my superior where they were going. She said to an institution where the State Health Department would teach them a trade, and to read and write. The families were required to sign papers with a little clause that they could not visit for 6 months.

“They were told visits would interfere with the program and might cause homesickness.

“As time passed, letters started to dribble back saying these people died a natural, merciful death. The villagers were not fooled. We suspected what was happening. Those people left in excellent physical health and all died within 6 months. We called this euthanasia.

“Next came gun registration. People were getting injured by guns. Hitler said that the real way to catch criminals (we still had a few) was by matching serial numbers on guns. Most citizens were law-abiding and dutifully marched to the police station to register their firearms. Not long afterwards, the police said that it was best for everyone to turn in their guns. The authorities already knew who had them, so it was futile not to comply voluntarily.

“No more freedom of speech. Anyone who said something against the government was taken away. We knew many people who were arrested, not only Jews, but also priests and ministers who spoke up.

“Totalitarianism didn’t come quickly, it took 5 years from 1938 until 1943, to realize full dictatorship in Austria. Had it happened overnight, my countrymen would have fought to the last breath. Instead, we had creeping gradualism. Now, our only weapons were broom handles. The whole idea sounds almost unbelievable that the state, little by little eroded our freedom.”

“This is my eyewitness account.

“It’s true. Those of us who sailed past the Statue of Liberty came to a country of unbelievable freedom and opportunity.

“America is truly is the greatest country in the world. “Don’t let freedom slip away.

“After America, there is no place to go.”


Posted in politics | Leave a comment

link dum #2

These links are from 3-7-13 and later. Yes, I know they’re badly out of order. I have a whole ton of text documents filled with random notes. I’m like that guy with a million sticky notes on his desk. For example, one note in this file between political news stories simply said “tub stopper” because I need to buy a new rubber plug for the bathtub. The point is that it’s going to take a while to find all of my notes, and I’m don’t want to try to figure out what order to post them. I’m just going to post them when I find them. – that one’s really nasty!
– why is it that nonexpanding bullets are considered inhumane when shot at animals, and expanding bullets are considered inhuman when shot at people? why a double standard? – some very good comments – ok, this one isn’t related to current political events, but it’s still major news.

Posted in politics | Leave a comment

link dump #1

These are mostly from mid January. I can’t stand to read all this again, much less comment on it. It’s really depressing, worrying stuff.

Maybe I’ll come back and add some commentary later.
So, when I buy a SEMI-auto rifles the gov’t calls it an “assault” weapon, but when the gov’t buys FULL-auto (machineguns) rifles they call them ‘personal defense weapons’. WTF?!?!?–disciplining-children-over-fake-guns-may-be-wrong-lesson-195101197.html

Posted in politics | Leave a comment

link dump intro

There’s been a lot going on politically. It’s overwhelming. I would like to write about all of it, but it’ just so … depressing. I’ve been saving all the news story links, but I don’t want to procrastinate any longer. I’m going to just start dumping links onto the blog with little or no commentary.

A friend recently mention how the NRA isn’t doing very well. Let me tell you, that is left media bias. NRA membership has surged by more than 100,000 members in the last few months. She mentioned how the NRA made a misstep by mentioning Obama’s kids. I remember when that happened, so here’s what I wrote about it in January:

NRA criticized about obama’s kids

yet obama exploits kids to promote gun control

I guess it’s ok to use children for political gains, but only if they’re the children of us ‘little people’. The kids of the political elite are off limits.

The point the NRA was trying to make is that the President’s family is protected 24/7 by a team with semi-auto and full-auto weapons, but he wants *your* kids to go to a school that doesn’t have even a single guard. He wants your children protected at home 10-round magazines while his children are protected by 30 round magazines. Is the life of one child more precious than the life of another, just because of daddy’s job?

Posted in politics | Leave a comment