Cold Fury

Harshing your mellow since 9/01

There’s always a workaround

Don’t have an Instagram account, and never wanted one. Until now.



Now that I have everyone’s attention, the backstory:

When Kimberly Matte captions an Instagram post “suns out, guns out, buns out,” she mostly means it. The sun may be out, but she’s inside. Her buns are definitely out, because she’s wearing a lime-green thong. Technically, there’s only one gun out, but it’s an AR-10 battle rifle, so she’s still overdelivering.

Matte has more than 84,000 followers on Instagram and recently founded her own social media marketing and modeling agency. She grew up in Windsor, Ontario, one of seven children — a fan of skateboarding, dirt-biking, four-wheeling, soccer, and tree forts, and not of guns. The first time she held a shotgun, she was a kid, “65 pounds soaking wet.” Her dad and brothers thought it would be funny to let her shoot it. “They didn’t tell me it was going to basically rip my shoulder off,” she says. “I was like, I’m never touching a gun again.”

But then three years ago, she moved to Michigan to be with her American husband, who’d recently retired from the military. Now they shoot guns together, and arrange assault-weapon-centric lingerie photo sessions for Matte and her clients. She makes good money for her part, doing sponsored posts for brands both firearm-related and not — assault rifles one day, teeth-whitening treatments the next. For $100 and some free products, Matte will post a “selfie and shoutout” on her Instagram grid; she gets paid thousands of dollars per month for recurring endorsements.

Matte’s feed is a mix of guns and rough-cut firewood and laser-cut underwear. She doesn’t let anyone shoot guns on her property because her yard is an unofficial foster home for wild deer, several of which she personally nurtured through infancy when their mother was hit by a car. She loves the president, hates the “free-for-all negativity” around him. She is extremely charming. Her platform, she tells me, is a place to preach love.

It’s actually a damned interesting article, albeit an unexpectedly long ‘un. Plenty more pics of several of these lovely gun-bunnies too, bless their hearts. Via MisHum, bless his heart too.

Share

Ammo info

Dave from Ammo To Go emails a heads-up to a real deep-dive into ballistic-gel testing of some popular handgun calibers, with an invite to me to write up a response if I felt so moved. As I told him, beyond a lifelong personal prejudice in favor of .45 ACP over anything and everything else, I am so far from being an expert on ammunition that I can’t even see “expert” from where I’m at, although I do enjoy the occasional 9mm vs .45 brushfire you see flaring up out there once in a while.

All that said, after having a look I’m sure there are at least a few of you folks resident in CFland who will be able to glean yourselves some useful knowledge from the article, so here t’is. Enjoy.

Share

Eyes, opening

A liberal gun-grabber gets Woke—really, truly Woke, I mean.

David Yamane is not your typical ivory tower sociology professor. Well, he’s not any more. As he related in a recent talk he gave the the National Firearms Law Seminar in Indianapolis, Prof. Yamane picked up a gun for the first time at the age of 42 and he hasn’t looked back.

He’s since made it his business to study America’s gun culture, including a class he now teaches at Wake Forest on the sociology of guns. As his website describes,

(T)he center of gravity of American gun culture has shifted from Gun Culture 1.0 — based in hunting and recreational/sport shooting — to Gun Culture 2.0 — based in concealed carry and armed self-defense. My approach to Gun Culture 2.0 is inspired by philosopher Baruch Spinoza: “I have sedulously endeavored not to laugh at human actions, nor to lament them, nor to detest them, but to understand them.”

That attitude alone tells you this guy was a highly atypical liberal to begin with.

Yamane has three lessons and takeaways for his audience.

  1. Guns are normal and normal people use guns – Resist efforts to stigmatize guns and gun owners by showing the positive face of gun culture.
  2. Shooting is fun and challenging – Promote the act of shooting whenever possible.
  3. Gun culture 2.0 is inclusive – Embrace diversity and inclusivity. Build Bridges not walls.

Yep: not at all your standard-issue, Mark-1 Mod-0 Lefty, his statement maintaining that he remains “a liberal professor journeying into American gun culture” notwithstanding. As a Class III range officer who has taught more than one bewildered and nervous hoplophobe how to shoot, I can tell you he’s not the only one. If you can only once get some of these people to the range, run the safety rules by ’em, put a gun in their hands, and let them fling some lead downrange, you’d be amazed how quick they come around. No, we’ll never change all their minds, nor will we persuade every one of them to just mind their own business and leave us the hell alone. At the same time, though, we can enlighten some. And we should.

Share

KCR Machine Gun Shoot threatened

Another NYC libmedia outlet has found out about it.

Twice a year, firearm enthusiasts meet at the Knob Creek Gun Range in Bullitt County, Kentucky, for an event billed “the world’s largest machine-gun shoot.” Visitors can avail themselves of a wide variety of powerful weapons, including magazine-fed and belt-fed machine guns, automatic rifles from the 1930s, and more exotic artillery, like a full-size cannon.

Buying and using high-powered weaponry can be an expensive hobby: for example, an NFA Class III arm — the category under which machine guns fall — can go for $20,000 or more, says an attendee, who, like many at the event, prefers to remain anonymous. Those guns can put out more than 600 rounds per minute, at a cost of at least 20 cents a round. (Visitors who do not own such guns have the opportunity to rent and shoot at a separate range.) Steve Sumner, a member of the family that owns the range, claims that shooting machine guns is “the fastest way to turn money into noise.”

Yep, it is that. Unexpectedly, the article isn’t the usual frothy mess of gun-grabber hysteria, but a pretty straight recitation of the bare facts; it’s short on text, long on cool photos, and entirely devoid of “analysis,” thank goodness.

I myself got briefly quoted years ago in a much more in-depth story about the Shoot which ran in NYPress, a more or less Right-leaning Village Voice competitor now more or less defunct:

I hung out for a while with Mike Hendrix, a rock ‘n’ roller affiliated with a band called the Belmont Playboys. We talked about my stint writing for High Times, Amsterdam and Knob Creek. “These things are just fun,” he said, “and these people are great. You should come to the one in the spring. It’s a great place to meet women. The women here are really interesting.” He mentioned that he and his band are due here in Manhattan soon to play the Rodeo Bar, and we made a tentative date for some serious drinking.

I recall the author, one Alan Cabal, as being more or less a newbie shooter, but not really anti-gun at all. Alas, we never did hook up for any of that “serious drinking” for some reason. But he seemed a nice enough fella.

(Via MisHum)

Share

Looks like another one I’ll be stomping the whole concept of “fair use” over

Fortunately, it’s an unusually long ‘un, so I don’t feel quite so bad about it. Kurt sets the stage with an intriguing first-person recounting of the 1992 LA riots.

I was a first-year law student, back a year from the Gulf War, and I had just joined the California Army National Guard. My unit was the 3rd Battalion, 160th Infantry, and we got called up early the first night and were on the streets for three long weeks. Making it even more delightful was the fact that the unit was in Inglewood, which was pretty much on fire. They burned most everything around, except our armory – that would have gone badly for them – and the Astro Burger.

My battalion commander grabbed then-First Lieutenant Schlichter, and we went all over the city in his humvee as he led his deployed and dispersed troops. Our soldiers came, in large part, from the areas most effected by the riots, and they were notably unpleasant to the thugs and criminals who quickly discovered our guys had no patience for nonsense. One dummy discovered that the hard way when he tried to run over some Guard soldiers from another battalion; he had a closed casket funeral.

The city went insane. Order simply ceased to exist. It was Lord of the Flies. I remember a cop totally breaking down because everything was completely out of control.

But I had a M16A1 – a real assault rifle – and I had a bunch of buddies with M16A1s. The regular folks … not so much. The decent people of LA were terrified, and with good reason. See, the dirty little secret of civilization is that it’s designed to maintain order when 99.9% of folks are orderly. But, say, if just 2% of folks stop playing by the rules…uh oh. Say LA’s population was 15 million in 1992…that’s 300,000 bad guys. There were maybe 20,000 cops in all the area agencies then, plus 20,000 National Guard soldiers and airman, plus another 10,000 active soldiers and Marines the feds brought in. Law enforcement is based on the concept that most people will behave and that the crooks will be overwhelmed by sheer numbers of officers. But in the LA riots, law enforcement was massively outnumbered. Imposing order took time.

And until then, our citizens were on their own, at the mercy of the mob. Betting that the cavalry was going to come save you was a losing bet.

LA’s Korean shopkeepers knew that. They operated many small businesses in some of the least fashionable areas of Los Angeles, and they were already widely hated by activists, being scapegoated for problems and pathologies that long pre-dated their immigration to Southern California. So, they became targets for the mobs.

Bad decision by the mobs.

See, most of these Koreans had done their mandatory service in the Republic of Korea’s Army. Those ROK soldiers are the real deal – the Norks are not a theoretical threat and the South Korean army does not spend a lot of time talking about feelings. They were some solid dudes. So, when the local dirtbags showed up for some casual looting, they noticed the rooftops were lined with hardcore guys packing some serious heat, including the kind of scary rifles that the Democrats want to ban.

The Rooftop Koreans.

It did not take long for the bad guys to realize that the Rooftop Koreans were not playing games – they were playing for keeps. The mob went away in search of softer targets.

There’s a lesson there.

Boy, isn’t there. Isn’t there just. The denouement:

It’s your duty to be prepared to defend our community. Your duty. Yes, being a citizen of a free country is sometimes hard. Too bad. Tighten up and be ready and able to pick up a weapon. Whether it’s a riots and disaster, or whether it’s some scumbag who decides to shoot up your house of worship or a shopping mall, it’s on you.

You have a job to do when chaos comes – no shirking your responsibility and outsourcing it to the local police or the Army. Being a citizen is not a spectator sport.

Now, the left does not see things that way. The mere idea of a good guy with a gun makes them wet themselves. The left hates the notion that we citizens might take personal ownership of, and responsibility for, the security of our own country – that we might act like citizens. See, citizens are unruly. Stubborn. Uppity. We’re hard to control at the best of times. Armed, 300 million of us are impossible to control, unless we consent to it.

Now, the Founders, who enshrined the natural right of free men to keep and bear arms in our Bill of Rights preceded only by the rights of free speech and freedom of religion, knew this. To them, an armed citizenry that is prepared, mentally and logistically, to respond to threats to the people is a feature.

To the liberal elite, it is a bug.

And there’s a reason for that, too, which can easily be inferred from this picture of how the minions of exactly the kind of socialist shitrapy people like AOC, Buttplug, Omar, Obama, Pelousy, HILLARY!™, &C intend to inflict on us respond to even peaceably-expressed dissent:

Venezuela-victim.jpg


Gee, wonder if that poor bloody wreck at left might wish he and his fellow protesters had been armed.

Share

Dysfunction

To NRA or not to NRA, that is the question.

U.S.A. – -(Ammoland.com)- “Stop the NRA shutdown,” a “critical update” in the latest American Rifleman urges.”New York Governor Andrew Cuomo has launched an all-out crusade to destroy NRA and put us out of business forever.”

No doubt the insufferable totalitarian wannabe would like to try. But as events unfolded over the weekend, resulting for the short term with Oliver North’s ouster as association president, it appears the greatest danger comes from within.

Not that Wayne LaPierre prevailing, for now, is a “win” for membership. Nor would it be had North succeeded. This was a coup attempt by NRA’s long-term PR firm Ackerman McQueen to replace former gravy train riders with current ones. There are no clean hands here, and with the weekend battle “won” by current management, don’t expect dramatic changes in the way things are run as long as they’re in power.

That means concerns being expressed by an increasing number of woke and angry members will continue to be glossed over by Fairfax “leadership.” We’ll continue to see NRA endorsing “compromise” infringements, with carefully-crafted statements giving de facto green lights to bump stock “regulations” and “red flag” confiscations, and with just enough weasel-wording for plausible deniability damage control when things blow up. We’ll continue to see dishonest political grades and endorsements that come back and bite gun owners. We’ll continue to see deliberate indifference to holding those politicians accountable for the single greatest threat to future “legal” recognition of the right to keep and bear arms – the overwhelmingly Democrat-favoring “pathway to citizenship.”  And we’ll continue to see an organization that puts more energy into “Enforce existing Intolerable Acts” than it puts on “shall not be infringed.”

And of course, we’ll see continued appeals for money, no matter if the flacking is outsourced or increasingly done in-house. Someone’s gotta pay for the salaries and perks.

A meme that’s being increasingly parroted by the gun-grabbers as a way out is that NRA must “return to its sportsman’s roots.” Understand that this is being done by people who really do want to take your guns. Don’t think for a moment they’re saying this to be helpful, any more than Democrats urging Republicans to be more “centrist” are concerned with helping the Party regain appeal. Surrenders simply mean there will be fewer battles that the enemy (what do you think those who want to disarm you are?) will need to win.

Those calling for such a return want NRA out of politics and focused on being Fudds. They really just want to be able to pass disarmament edicts, elect gun-grabbing politicians and appoint anti-gun judges without any significant organized opposition. Curiously, although unintended by those offering such “advice,” returning to its roots is exactly what is needed.

Codrea goes on from there to make a strong historical case for the idea. Herschel, for his own part, seems pretty disgusted with ’em.

So first there is the issue of exactly how an elected board of directors along with an elected president can demand the resignation of a bureaucrat, and be rejected by said bureaucrat outright and that organization continue to function. It can’t. I assess that the NRA is a completely dysfunctional organization and has been for a long time.

Leaving aside the issue of Ackerman McQueen, and $200,000 of wardrobe purchases by LaPierre, the bylaws, people and organizational structure aren’t sufficient to rid the group of ne’er-do-wells, whether LaPierre or the cretins who are financial liabilities and parasites to the organization. A board of directors who doesn’t direct may as well quit and go home. If there are too many bad apples in the mix, then it’s appropriate for the entire group to go down in flames, suffering the personal, legal and financial loss attending their malfeasance. Membership on the board of directors means legal and fiduciary culpability, as it should on any board.

But can this situation be salvaged? Should it be salvaged? I said a few days ago that the NRA had supported the NFA, the GCA, the Hughes Amendment, the bump stock ban, and red flag laws. It’s all true. This is an incomplete list. Via David Codrea, this list adds to my own.

The real issue with the VNRA isn’t corruption or not doing enough to push rights. The problem is what the group actively does to violate rights. NFA ’34, GCA ’68, FOPA ’86. Everyone knows those. It shows how long the rot has existed.

They tried to keep HELLER from going to SCOTUS. They actively killed constitutional carry legislation in New Hampshire. They wrote an “assault weapon” ban in Ohio. They sabotaged an RKBA/free speech case in NH.

I had forgotten how many open carry fights the NRA has sabotaged, and it’s also true that the NRA didn’t want Heller going to the SCOTUS. I consider Heller only a partial win because of the wording Scalia put in there supporting gun control at the local and state level, and the weakness of it leading to McDonald, which still isn’t recognized by lower courts. But Alan Gura snatched a modicum of victory from the jaws of defeat.

The point is that in almost every case where retreat was possible, the NRA has led the way. Then oftentimes, as with Heller, they claimed credit for what small victory the SCOTUS gave us. In every exigency in life, a man must make functional judgments. Whom to marry, where to work, how much to save, with whom to be associated.

In this case, the analysis is quite simple. If an organization is working against your interests, it’s an easy decision to jettison support for said organization. It makes no sense to support people who intend harm to your liberties. If this is considered on a tactical level (retreat might be a good option now), then it is incumbent on our detractors to explain how said retreat will be reversed and good use made of it rather than sling accusations. I see a lot of hand-wringing, but I see no detractor channeling Sun Tzu. If you want to be a general, then learn to lead and learn to win.

Kinda makes one yearn for the great and glorious Charlton Heston, don’t it?



CA leaves little room for doubt as to where he stands on the NRA issue: he’s done with ’em.

The Lairds of Fairfax are Beltway critters, and have been behind every single major 2A infringement on the national level since NFA34.

Screw them all, then dump them into the Morbark.

He recommends a few alternative courses of actions to consider, too.

Share

A true delight

You CF lifers will doubtless know what a dyed-in-the-wool, bred-in-the-bone Ford freak I am. My dad was a lifelong Ford man himself, and raised me to loathe all things GM reflexively, just as naturally and unthinkingly as breathing. If I opened a vein, I would bleed FMC Blue, the resulting puddle resolving itself uncannily into a distinct oval-shaped pattern. So you guys can easily imagine how much I enjoyed this brief, partial catalogue of Government Motors perfidy.

General Motors Doesn’t Want Anyone To Know These 20 Strange Facts
Despite GM’s long history and notoriety, there are numerous things that people do not know about the company and the products it has produced. From strange business decisions to hush-hush scandals, the company has a lot of dirt hiding under the rug. Here are 20 strange facts General Motors doesn’t want anyone to know or, at least, would prefer that most people forget.

Heh. I’m smiling already over here. A lot of what follows I already knew, but the very first one in the list surprised even me.

20—GM FAILED TO FINANCE A PURCHASE OF FORD
The history of General Motors is one of acquisitions and the take-over of many well-known car manufacturers. On September 17, 1908, the day after William C. Durant capitalized GM as a holding company, he purchased Buick Motor Company and shortly after that, acquired more than twenty companies, including Oakland, now known as Pontiac, Cadillac, Oldsmobile, and McLaughlin of Canada.

What few people know (except automobile historians) is GM also wanted to take over Ford—and nearly succeeded. In 1909, Durant offered Henry Ford $8 million for his stock in the company and Ford agreed. Durant also convinced the GM board of directors to make the purchase. However, Durant’s New York bankers squashed the deal when they refused to give him the loan needed to make the purchase.

All poking of fun aside, I’ve lamented at some length here over the years the loss of the age-old Foad/Chivvy-lay rivalry that was such a central feature of my ill-spent youth. All us greasy gearheads used to have ourselves a high old time ribbing each other about who ruled and who drooled, featuring the eternally unresolved “First On Race Day” versus “Fix Or Repair Delay” squabble among other jibes. It was all in good-natured fun, the dispute easily if only temporarily settled by a trip over to Franklin Boulevard in Gastonia for a drag-race blast from Shoney’s on the east side on down to McDonald’s on the west. Rarely did the matter descend to vulgar fisticuffs, although I’ll stop well short of claiming such a thing never did happen. Because that would be a lie.

That Shoney’s is as long-gone as the Ford-Chevy controversy itself is, alas, with all that noble American iron now reduced to pretty-much-interchangeable plastic egg-mobiles—featureless and indistinguishable one from another, except by direct reference to the badging. Nowadays, the young ‘uns couldn’t care less about such arcana, a vanished slice of Americana grieved over only by the old coots who reveled in it. A shame, really; they know not what they missed. Maybe it’s understandable: with the cars themselves being rendered anonymous, how could ennui and erosion of brand allegiance not be expected to follow?

Read the rest of ’em; whether you’re a Ford man or a Chevy dupe, you’re bound to find something of interest. Number 16 was another one I wasn’t aware of, and as a bonus I’ll throw in another fun GM factoid not mentioned at the above link:

The U.S. Army Ordnance Department considered several designs for low-cost/high production-rate submachine guns fabricated from stamped and welded sheet metal. A design developed in large part by George Hyde, with the assistance of General Motors’ Inland Manufacturing Division, was given the prototype designation of T-15. It was chambered for the standard .45 ACP cartridge and featured a sliding wire stock, which substantially reduced its length when retracted. Army Ordnance Col. René Studler was an ardent proponent of the new submachine gun and was instrumental in its subsequent adoption. The T-15 prototype was refined and superseded by the T-20. Unlike the selective-fire T-15, the T-20 only fired in the full-automatic mode.

The T-20 had number of advantages as compared to most other submachine guns, including the fact that its internal parts were fully enclosed, which reduced the possibility of the mechanism being clogged by dirt, mud or sand. In addition, it was designed with rather generous dimensional tolerances to allow functioning even when subjected to extreme dust or mud conditions. The bolt traveled along two steel guide rods, which prevented contact with the inside of the receiver and resulted in increased reliability and smoothness of operation. The gun could be quickly disassembled, and the barrel and bolt were easily removed. It did not have a conventional safety, but the ejection port cover prevented accidental firing when closed.

The T-20 prototype was extensively tested at Aberdeen Proving Ground and proved to be more reliable in the mud and dust tests than any other submachine gun ever tested by the U.S. Army. In addition to the Army’s Infantry Board, the new submachine gun was evaluated by the Airborne Command and Armored Forces Board. These latter two organizations were especially interested due to its compactness, which had obvious advantages for airborne use or in the cramped confines of a tank.

After conclusion of rigorous testing, the T-20 was recommended for adoption in December 1942 as the “U.S. Submachine Gun, Caliber .45, M3.” Official approval came on Jan. 11, 1943. Shortly after formal adoption, a contract was awarded to General Motors’ Guide Lamp Division for 300,000 M3 submachine guns. The Guide Lamp plant, located in Anderson, Ind., had extensive experience in the fabrication of stamped metal components, so it was a logical choice to manufacture the new submachine gun. 

How I knew about this was, I actually fired one at Knob Creek a few times, and its proud owner told me all about Grease Gun history. The article makes a glancing comparison between the M3 and the Thompson. Having run a shit-ton of rounds through both, I can tell you there IS no comparison—the Thompson is superior in every way. At the same time, though, if I was a D-Day footslogger coming ashore with the prospect of slogging across France carrying one or the other of ’em staring me in the face, I’d probably have picked the M3. Them Tommy guns are heavy, man.

Oh, and: if you’re a shooter, live anywhere near driving distance of Kentucky, and haven’t been to the Knob Creek shoot yet, may I ask what the hell have you been waiting for?

(Via Larwyn)

Share

No more talk

Just do it.

On Tuesday, Democratic president candidate Rep. Eric Swalwell took aim at the NRA, taunting them that they wouldn’t debate him. But NRA spokeswoman Dana Loesch had a swift and blistering response, quoting from Val Kilmer’s immortal performance as Doc Holliday in the film “Tombstone” and firing back, “I’m your huckleberry.”

Swalwell was responding to Loesch pointing out that Swalwell had “dodged legitimate questions about his gun confiscation-and-jail policy for quite some time.” Prior to that salvo, she had stated, “You said you would jail law-abiding gun owners if they didn’t turn in their lawfully owned firearms. How do you plan to confiscate guns?”

Swalwell responded, “Ms. Loesch — I see you’ve spent another day blowing up my Twitter. Thank you for following! But here’s the deal, you’re an @nra mouthpiece. I don’t aim down, so I don’t debate mouthpieces. But send me your president, @OliverLNorth. I’ll debate him anywhere.”

Good on Dana for stomping this asswipe and all, but my unalienable 2A rights ain’t up for debate—”SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED,” remember?—and I care not one lonely damn with whom Swallowspunk might or might not prefer to flap his cockholster in public about the issue. No talk, little man. Come and take them, if you dare. We’re all out here…waiting. Practical advice for ya: better bring help. Lots and lots of it.

Swalwell, apparently afraid to take on Loesch, sidestepped, “Here’s a prediction: the @nra is afraid to have its president debate me. They talk so tough on Twitter, but when challenged to a debate to defend their advocacy for unrestricted weaponry it’s just crickets from @OliverLNorth. #NoFear.”

“Afraid”? Of the likes of you, and whatever sob-sister army composed of like-minded pissants you might scrape up? It is to laugh, until the floating ribs part from their moorings. I say again: come and take them. Here’s a helpful historical review of what you’ll find waiting.

Someone once asked how many men were needed to start a revolution.
Apparently, 77 is enough to get the ball rolling.

Stand your ground. Don’t fire unless fired upon. But if they mean to have a war, let it begin here.” – Captain John Parker, Lexington militia

Throw down your arms, you damned rebels!” – British officer, 4th Regiment of Foot, on Lexington Common

And then the F**k-Up Fairy landed, someone pulled a trigger, and the genie was out of the bottle.

Tally at the end of the day:

Colonials:
49 killed
39 wounded
5 missing

British troops:
73 dead
174 wounded
53 missing

The British troops, formed of disparate clumps of men and officers from a dozen regiments (which made command and control even more tenuous throughout the day) after brushing aside what was always intended as token resistance at Lexington (the colonial militia was on the common, not blocking the road at all, and made no move to impede the far superior British forces, all the colonial leaders and stores of weapons having been removed or hidden long before the Redcoats’ arrival), marched on to Concord bridge, where they searched the town for weapons until noon, mostly to no great effect, but upon their attempted return to Boston got a much different greeting than at Lexington, and then began an all-day long fighting retreat that left every British officer from the original expedition injured or wounded and unhorsed, all of them exhausted, nearly out of ammunition, and all but surrounded and captured as they straggled back to the safety of Boston city limits. The British in Boston were subsequently surrounded and besieged by tens of thousands of enraged colonial militiamen, which troops then formed the seed of what became the Continental Army.

And with blood shed in strength by both sides, no way any longer to put back the cork to the genie’s bottle.

Lesser lights in modern times, agitating for both gun control and confiscations, and shilling for an open conflict in the midst of civil society, should learn a lesson or three about being careful for what you wish.

Yessirreebob they should. So…any time you feel froggy, Swallowspunk. Any. Fucking. Time. One of Aesop’s commenters brings up the amazing story of Samuel Whittemore as further food for gun-grabber thought.

On April 19, 1775, British forces were returning to Boston from the Battles of Lexington and Concord, the opening engagements of the war. On their march, they were continually shot at by colonial militiamen.

Whittemore was in his fields when he spotted an approaching British relief brigade under Earl Percy, sent to assist the retreat. Whittemore loaded his musket and ambushed the British Grenadiers of the 47th Regiment of Foot from behind a nearby stone wall, killing one soldier. He then drew his dueling pistols, killed a second grenadier and mortally wounded a third. By the time Whittemore had fired his third shot, a British detachment had reached his position; Whittemore drew his sword and attacked. He was subsequently shot in the face, bayoneted numerous times, and left for dead in a pool of blood. He was found by colonial forces, trying to load his musket to resume the fight. He was taken to Dr. Cotton Tufts of Medford, who perceived no hope for his survival. However, Whittemore recovered and lived another 18 years until dying of natural causes at the age of 96.

Let me reiterate that for you: at just short of 80 years young, this true American hero was still spry enough to be reloading after having been shot in the face, bayoneted, and left for dead. He wasn’t done with his enemies quite yet, see; aged as he was, gravely wounded as he was, having already done more than his part to resist, he was still unswervingly determined to have another go at killing as many of those Redcoat gun-grabbers as he possibly could, by any means he could contrive.

And if you think they just ain’t building Americans that way anymore, well, you just try us. You’ll learn, to your horror and dismay, that there are still a good few out here even yet. And they’re all done talking.

They’re out here…waiting.

Share

History, revised

Ask a silly question.

We’re all heard stories about young children being punished at school by their socialist teachers for drawing or cutting out pretend handguns, or even for pointing a finger on the playground and saying “Bang! Bang!”

And some of us did sound the alarm about the “slippery slope,” years ago, when the forces of political correctness realized how easy it was to start rewriting history by “digitally editing” old historical photos. After all, why NOT remove the cigarette holder from old photos of President Franklin Roosevelt? You don’t want today’s kids to think it’s OK to smoke, do you?

But surely we’ll never reach the point where gun haters in a U.S. government agency will actually start doctoring images to remove the rifles (the arms with which Americans won and have long defended our freedoms) from the hands of American COMBAT SOLDIERS, will we? — altering an image of a soldier in combat, removing the piece of equipment on which his survival depended, to make it appear that U.S. soldiers CARRY NO NASTY RIFLES when they go to war?

They’ll never go THAT far. Right?

Gee, that’s a toughie all right.

Standing in line at the post office the other day, I noticed a poster on display showing eight newly issued commemorative stamps, along with a sheet of 20, behind glass, of one of the new stamps, called “World War I / Turning the Tide.” In the background of this stamp can be seen a biplane, a shell burst, and some barbed wire. In the foreground, a uniformed and helmeted U.S. doughboy strides bravely ahead, holding close to his chest an American flag.

I have nothing against featuring the American flag on a stamp, mind you. But look at the way that soldier’s arms and hands are positioned. You’ve seen men on combat patrol holding their arms and hands in that position plenty of times. But they weren’t holding flags. 

Does it get worse, you ask? Guess.

I emailed artist Mark Stutzman in Maryland, who designed the “Turning the Tide” commemorative and who had earlier drawn the Post office’s popular 1993 “Elvis” and “Buddy Holly” stamps. In his original design, as submitted, had the American doughboy held a rifle in his hands?

He replied: “Hi Vin, Thanks for writing. Interesting that you should bring this up. My original proposal was with a rifle.”
A source familiar with the back-and-forth between artist Stutzman and the Postal Service told me the USPS “Stamp Advisory Committee” was “a little ‘gun shy’ about the rifle being so prominent.” Stutzman declined to confirm that for the record.

“We debated a few options and settled on him holding the flag instead,” Stutzman told me. “It seemed to bring some patriotism forward and helped identify him as American more immediately. Since stamp images are so small, there’s a need for immediate comprehension. In this case the read of hierarchy is WWI soldier, America, and war (barbed wire, plane, smoke)…I am somewhat speculating on the reasoning for why the decision (to remove the rifle) was made since I got information about committee meetings second-hand through the art director. He may be a better source for info and also have a direct line with the Postal Service. Greg Breeding is his name. . . . Super guy and easy to talk to.”

Not so much. 

Imagine my surprise. Then begins the hem-hawing, slithering-squirming, slip-sliding evasion of the old Bureacrat Shuffle.

After several days of ducking my emails and phone messages, art director Breeding, in Charlottesville, Virginia, finally sent me his polite refusal to talk:

“Hello Vin, Thank you for your interest in the World War I stamp. It was my deep privilege to art director this issuance to commemorate America’s role in bringing World War I to an end. Such an incredible part of our history. Regarding your questions, it is the policy of the Postal Service to direct these types of inquiries to Public Relations…”

Said PR guy “will be happy to assist you and, sometimes, he will subsequently involve the art directors and other Postal employees as well.”

Not so much.

Suprynowicz soldiers manfully on in his bootless quest for a simple, straight answer to his query, but the bobbing and weaving from our putative “civil servants” just continues on and on from there. Y’know, like it does. I guess we can maybe take some small gratification from the fact that even these insensate bureauweasels seem to know that their airbrushing of history is something to be ashamed of, cold though that comfort may be.

(Via MisHum)

Share

Gimme sanctuary

Oh, it’s a Red Flag all right.

More than two dozen counties in Colorado have taken a page from the left’s playbook by declaring themselves “Second Amendment sanctuary counties” in anticipation of the passage of a bill that allows local governments to seize people’s guns without due process.

In February, Democrats in the Colorado legislature introduced HB19-1177, commonly known as the Red Flag bill.  The law allows the government to seize firearms from a law-abiding owner after as long as a petitioner “establishes ” by a preponderance of the evidence that the gun owner “poses a significant risk to self or others.”

The subhed calls Red Flag “an insane idea ripe for abuse,” which it is. But abuse, of course, is the whole point.

The petitioner only has to meet the “preponderance of the evidence” standard, which is a lower standard than the “beyond a reasonable doubt” standard used in criminal trials. It basically asks whether the petitioner’s proposition is more likely to be true than not true. This is the same standard that kangaroo courts for campus sexual assault and harassment rely on, per the guidance of the Obama administration.

Second, the Red Flag bill ensures gun owners, not their accusers, bear the burden of proof, and makes it very difficult for the gun owner to defend his or her constitutional right to bear arms. The owner is completely unaware a petition has been filed against him until the police show up to confiscate all his firearms. Since a search warrant is issued at the same time a temporary extreme risk protection order (ERPO) is issued, the police may search the house even after the owner surrenders his firearms.

There’s more, and worse, from there. But then comes the good news.

In anticipation of the bill’s passing, more than two dozen Colorado counties, including Douglas County, the seventh-most populous county in Colorado, passed “Second Amendment Sanctuary” resolutions. Many did so at the request of their duly elected sheriffs.

These counties affirm their support for their sheriffs “in the exercise of his sound discretion to not enforce against any citizen an unconstitutional firearms law.” They also promise not to appropriate government funds to build storage facilities for firearms seized by law enforcement. More counties are either considering similar measures or, like Arapahoe County, the third-most populous Colorado county, waiting for the final wording of the bill to decide the best course of action.

Facing increasing opposition from counties, Colorado Attorney General Phil Weise, a supporter of the Red Flag bill, dismissed the resolutions as something that couldn’t override a state law.

But state law can override the US Constitution, huh? I see, I see.

He said sheriffs in those counties should resign if they refuse to follow the law.

As should all elected officials responsible for turning illegal-alien “sanctuary cities” and states into shit-strewn, disease-ridden Third World hellholes, amIright? Ohnononono, of course not. That’s diff’runt.

It’s interesting that the left now pushes back against gun sanctuary counties by using similar language to what conservatives have said about immigration sanctuary cities—”Our nation and state depends on the rule of laws” and “Everyone must obey the law.”  But there is a fundamental difference between sanctuary on the left versus that on the right.

The left supports illegal immigrant sanctuary because they don’t want to obey federal laws they don’t like. They choose to protect law-breakers who may pose security threats to communities and law-abiding citizens. The left supports the Red Flag bill and opposes the gun sanctuary counties because they oppose gun ownership and Second Amendment rights. Once again, they rely on a state law to disobey federal laws they don’t like.

Basically, the Left wants its way, and is perfectly happy to pervert, debase, and ignore any law, precedent, or principle to get it. They’ll deal with the chaotic dysfunction they create later—maybe. Just let ’em get us all under control first, then they’ll see about “fixing” things for us.

Colorado isn’t alone in this fight. A similar Red Flag bill is working though the New Mexico legislature right now. Twenty-nine out of 33 sheriffs there signed a letter disapproving of the bill, and 24 counties have passed a Second Amendment sanctuary resolution, affirming their support of their sheriffs not enforcing what they view as unconstitutional gun control legislation.

What’s happening in Colorado and New Mexico has national implications because similar Red Flag bills passed in at least eight blue states in the United States in 2018, including New York, New Jersey, and Illinois. In recent testimony before the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee, David Kopel, a Constitution scholar at the Independence Institute, said “Nearly a third of such orders are improperly issued against innocent people.”

Conservatives in these blue states have been looking for ways to push back against aggressive gun control legislation that they believe infringes upon their constitutional rights. Now Colorado and New Mexico have shown them what they can do.

As good a move as this one is, I’m afraid we’re all going to have to step up and do a lot more before a whole lot longer. Until it’s shown to be painful—even fatal, most likely—for them to mess with us, they will NEVER stop doing so.

Share

Conscientious cops

Good on ’em.

Sheriffs in rural Washington state are reportedly refusing to enforce the gun controls contained in I-1639, an initiative passed by voters in November 2018.

The initiative was funded by millionaires and billionaires.

Rural Washington state appears to have had enough of it. The Guardian reports that numerous sheriffs are refusing to enforce the controls contained in I-1639. After all, the initiative was rejected by 27 of the state’s 32 counties. It passed because of the financial backing and the massive populations of the cities compared to the populations of rural areas.

Klickitat County Sheriff Bob Songer is one of those allegedly refusing to enforce the controls. He said the controls are “unconstitutional on several grounds. I’ve taken the position that as an elected official, I am not going to enforce that law.”

Again: good on ya, sir. If your constituents remain smart—and deserving of their eroding liberty—re-election shouldn’t ever be something you need to worry much about. The Real Resistance need as many like you as we can possibly get, and not just out there in Washington state either.

Can’t parody ’em anymore update! A peek into the future at a cop of a different stripe.

October 28th, 2046. A day I’ll never forget.

It started just like any other day. I was at the station, watching President Ocortez on TV as she sentenced a criminal to death for denying that women experience erectile dysfunction, when the call came through. 10-37, Triggering In Progress at the memorial! I dropped my tofu and latte, sprinted to my patrol Prius, and blazed out of the parking lot at my max speed of 22 miles per hour.

On the way to the call I reminded myself not to get complacent; these situations can turn deadly in an instant. But I knew I’d be okay as long as I followed the escalation of force steps. If the suspect was a cishet patriarchal oppressor, shame, then accuse, then destroy online. But if the suspect was an oppressed victim of colonization, he wasn’t a suspect at all. So the steps were to ask for compliance, beg, plead, cry, apologize for my privilege, grovel, cry, admit everything is my fault, ask permission to touch him, cry, run away, drive to the station, cry, quit my job. Hopefully this situation wouldn’t require more than one cry.

As I tore through the streets, making sure not to hit any of the bicyclists passing me, I heard a muffled thump ahead. Smoke drifted from around the corner of a building. I turned and saw electric cars aflame, blood and body parts scattered on the street, broken glass and shards of metal everywhere. Just ahead of my car a human with long blond hair, wide hips, round stomach and large breasts frantically pushed a baby stroller away from whatever had just happened.

I cranked down my window and yelled, “Excuse me! What gender are you?”

“What gender am I?” She asked? “I’m obviously a pregnant woman!”

I glared at her. She was on the verge of a thought crime. I asked, “What happened here?”

“A suicide bomber just blew himself up!” she screamed.

I shook my head. “Trump,” I muttered. “That son of a bitch.”

“What?” she blurted. “Trump hasn’t been president in 25 years and has been dead for over a decade. This has nothing to do with Trump. Some guy yelled ‘Allah akbar, I love ISIS’ and blew himself up. People are dead and dying, please send help!”

“Oh, I’ll send someone,” I said. “You just stay right here and wait for them.” As I drove away I keyed my radio. “Dispatch, we need a Bias Response Team to 600 Main. A pregnant, female-appearing human expected me to assume her gender. She also failed to understand why a marginalized member of this oppressive society would lash out against the cishetero patriarchy. Tell the team to kill if necessary.”

The dispatcher responded, “Yeeeeeeeee!” Zhe was triggered, and nobody could blame zher. What I’d just described was traumatic. But I knew that zhe’d send the team as soon as zhe got zherself under control. Then I added, “Oh yeah, there was a bombing or something too. No idea of motive, probably workplace violence.” I continued toward the memorial, leaving behind patriarchal colonizers who’d no doubt gotten what they deserved.

Read it all, it’s funny as hell. At the same time, it really ain’t funny at all. Not anymore, not when we’re way more than halfway to Bizarro World already.

(Via Aesop)

Share

“My answer would be, ‘It’s none of your fvcking business'”

Wrong answer. Mine would be: NO, I do not. It might be a lie, but when some meddlesome asshat is trying to pry into business not his own with me, I don’t feel the slightest compunction about telling said asshat anything at all, and let him try to sort truth from fiction if he can.

Boston city officials plan on pushing legislation requiring doctors to ask patients whether or not they possess firearms in their homes.

Mayor Martin J. Walsh’s administration said Wednesday that the step would be taken to help health care providers statewide “play a larger role in addressing gun violence” by identifying red flags or patients at risk of suicide or domestic violence.

“We’re just asking them to help identify ways to save lives,” Boston Police Commissioner William Gross told the Boston Business Journal, adding that the legislation won’t suggest that doctors should solve crimes and that owning guns won’t be included in patients’ medical records.

Yeah, you go straight to hell, y’hear? It’s a safe bet that the medical-records bit at the end is just a straight-up lie itself, or soon will be. Actually, if I’m not mistaken the AMA has been urging doctors to ask their patients the same thing for several years now, but I could be wrong about that. MisHum closes with:

Why not ask about knives, rope, cars, baseball bats, booze and pills while you’re at it.

Don’t worry, they’ll get around to it soon enough. Count on it.

Update! Bill explains why “none of your business” is a mistake:

Don’t tell your medico anything you don’t want the government to know about if you can help it.

My doctor in SF once asked if I owned any firearms.  I told him no, which was a flat lie.  But telling him it was none of his business would have told him too much.

Exactly. This is just one of the many horrible side-effects of socialist tyranny: the complete erosion of trust, even in places where trust can be vital, and ought to be a given. But then, the eventual degeneration of beneficial, healthy community relationships into Hobbes’s War of All Against All is another of those features-not-bugs baked right into the collectivist cake.

Oh, and it would seem my memory didn’t quite fail me just now on the asking-about-guns thing. Or not entirely, anyway.

Share

“How Much Blood Would Leftists Be Willing To Shed To Disarm Patriotic Americans?”

ALL of it, of course. They’d prefer that anyway.

My question for Congressjerk Eric Swalwell is pretty simple: “How many Americans would you murder to achieve your goal of disarming us?”

It’s a fair question. 

Now, we know that some Americans would resist this kind of tyranny. People all over the world are resisting the elite’s commands. The Brits Brexited. The French are rioting because they don’t want to sacrifice their livelihoods on behalf of the global elites’ weird weather religion. And a decree that the Second Amendment is not a thing anymore would certainly provoke some serious pushback here.

The Brits ain’t “Brexited” shit yet, and aren’t likely to, more’s the pity. The French, on the other hand, look like getting their act together at last, on which I hope to have more in a bit. But I still think Kurt is right about the likelihood of at least some pushback in the event of a serious gun-grab, although whether it would end up with full-on insurrection is something I’m not quite as confident of as I was before Black Tuesday.

Rep. Swalwell, some people are going to fight rather than cave in, so what’s the number of bodies you would be willing to pile up to win? Let’s put aside the right or wrong of resistance; it’ll be a thing. It’ll happen. You’re from near San Francisco, so you don’t know any real Americans, but even though I am from that hellhole too, I’ve met a few Americans in my travels. They are an ornery people who don’t give in to the kind of bullying you advocate. So, you’re going to have to kill some people to do what you want, and I just want to know how many you’re prepared to off to achieve your goal.

After all, it’s not as if you Democrats don’t already have a history of killing people for having guns you disapprove of.

Remember Waco? The raid on David Koresh’s compound was because his weird band of misfits allegedly had scary, outlawed guns. That’s why Democrat Janet Reno initially decided to send in the troops. The government got four of our ATF agents killed, then slaughtered the resisters, including women and kids.

I’d guess Kurt wouldn’t much like this sentiment, but I can’t say the loss of the ATF agents in the course of doing their “duty” of murdering men, women, and children at the behest of Leviathan is anything I ever lost any sleep over, or ever will. And while we’re at it, abominable government hitman Lon Horiuchi ought to have been pushing up daisies a long time ago himself, instead of looking forward to a nice cushy federal pension after he retires as a true FBI “hero.”

Now, Congressman Strangelove properly took a lot of grief for suggesting nuking fellow Americans, but even if you accept his backtracking about how this was a joke – nothing’s funnier than suggesting the mass murder of fellow Americans! – he only put nukes off limits. What killing systems are still on the table? Infantry? Artillery? Bombers? Because his answer assumed that he would support prosecuting a war against those who failed to obey and submit to arrest.

So, Congressman, what means of destructions are still on the table to use against fellow Americans who refuse to allow you to strip them of their Second Amendment rights because you Bay Area liberals want to show those hicks in Jesusland who’s boss? Is shooting them okay? Shelling them? Bombing them, just not with nukes?

Again: all of it, plus whatever else it might take to get the job done. This is why:

Understand that the leftists with Swalwell’s mentality are not driven by notions of justice or reason, but by cold hatred for Normal Americans. We’ve been disobedient. We’ve been defiant. We’ve refused to surrender our means of defending our own sovereignty to our elite overlords, and that is intolerable.

Exactly. Which is why, as Kurt concludes, anybody who still thinks of them as “our fellow Americans” needs to get woke, and fast. There are a lot of Swalwells out there—a LOT, probably more than any of us dare to imagine—with government schools churning out more of them every day.

Share

Yet another lie debunked

Related to the last one, yes, but Ithought I’d break it out into its own post anyway.

The claim that the US has by far the most mass public shootings in the world drives much of the gun-control debate. Many argue that America’s high rate of gun possession explains the high rate of mass shootings.

“The one thing we do know is that we have a pattern now of mass shootings in this country that has no parallel anywhere else in the world,” President Barack Obama warned us. To justify this claim and many other similar quotes, Obama’s administration cited a then-unpublished paper by criminologist Adam Lankford.

Lankford’s claim received coverage in hundreds of news stories all over the world. It still gets regular coverage. Purporting to cover all mass public shootings around the world from 1966 to 2012, Lankford claimed that the United States had 31 percent of public mass shooters despite having less than 5 percent of the population.

But this isn’t nearly correct. The whole episode should provide a cautionary tale of academic malpractice and how evidence is often cherry-picked and not questioned when it fits preconceived ideas.

Lankford’s study reported that over the 47 years there were 90 public mass shooters in the United States and 202 in the rest of world. Lankford hasn’t released his list of shootings or even the number of cases by country or year. We and others, both in academia and the media, have asked Lankford for his list, only to be declined. He has also declined to provide lists of the news sources and languages he used to compile his list of cases.

These omissions are important because Lankford’s entire conclusion would fall apart if he undercounted foreign cases due to lack of news coverage and language barriers.

Lankford cites a 2012 New York Police Department report which he claims is “nearly comprehensive in its coverage of recent decades.” He also says he supplemented the data and followed “the same data collection methodology employed by the NYPD.” But the NYPD report warns that its own researchers “limited [their] Internet searches to English-language sites, creating a strong sampling bias against international incidents,” and thus under-count foreign mass shootings.

Does Lankford’s paper also have that problem?

Of course it does, as Lott and Weisser go on to explain. Via the below-cited Tom Knighton, who adds:

Additionally, the fact that Lankford won’t release his list of mass shootings seems to indicate that he knows his study is crap but doesn’t want anyone to figure it out.

It’s unlikely that this study will get a whole lot of play. It goes against the anti-gun narrative to such a profound degree that it’s guaranteed to cause some serious cognitive dissonance. Anti-gunners will reject it outright, not because of bad methodology or anything, but simply because they don’t like the outcome. They prefer the poorer study that confirms their beliefs. Confirmation bias to an extreme.

But the truth is, we’re not some mass murder mecca.

That truth, along with a whole lot of others, is inconvenient to the gun-grabber agenda. So as Knighton says, it won’t get much play. That being so, I repeat: come and take them, you rotten rat-bastards. Stop whining, stop play-acting, stop lecturing, and make your fucking move. Let’s just see what it gets you.

Given how many armed Americans there are who are deadly serious about their God-granted 2A rights, and given what those people know Leftists to be, it’s a wonder there aren’t a lot more shootings in America than there are, really. A testament to the cool, calm forbearance of American gun owners, that is. Or their sense of charity and tolerance for the terminally stupid, maybe.

Share

Just another damned Drunkocrat-Socialist

One of Ace’s Moron Horde unleashes an amusing comment about Ted Cruz’s opponent, Beto “Blotto” O’Rourke, having been pinched for crashing his car while drunk as a boiled owl, then trying to flee the scene.

Old take: Beto is so dreamy, why he’s almost a Kennedy!
New take: Wait, fleeing a drunk driving accident and using his connections to get out of trouble? O’Rourke my ass, he IS a Kennedy.

Heh. Meanwhile, Ace also notes that Trump has his own plans for an assist in the Texas Senate race:

I will be doing a major rally for Senator Ted Cruz in October. I’m picking the biggest stadium in Texas we can find. As you know, Ted has my complete and total Endorsement. His opponent is a disaster for Texas — weak on Second Amendment, Crime, Borders, Military, and Vets!

Good on ya, Mr President—and good on Cruz too, for a righteous two-barrel blast of double-ought truth right into smarmy Democrat-Socialist faces:



Tom Knighton picks it up from there:

The O’Rourke supporter let the mask slip. He had no problem responding that the anti-gunners will want to come and take our guns away because we know that deep down, that’s the end game. That’s the goal.

Luckily, this is in Texas. I don’t care what the polls say about how close the race is; I don’t see a rabid liberal like O’Rourke winning against someone like Ted Cruz. In part, it’s because O’Rourke and people like this guy want the guns. They want them all, and they won’t be happy until they get them all.

That’s not Texas. Texas is a state deep in the heart of gun country. While some anti-gunners undoubtedly live there and like living there, the majority of the state supports the right to keep and bear arms, as a matter of heritage if nothing else.

Cruz’s response was perfect. He’s right that it summed up the campaign perfectly. That’s what this campaign season is really about. The Democrats have gone full-on gun control with their candidates. They expect to retake Congress, then take away our guns to some degree. Then they’ll start working to take more of our gun rights away, inch by inch.

They most certainly will. They will never, ever stop, either, until the RKBA is a long-gone memory. At this point, desperately hanging onto our ever-dwindling God-given rights is what EVERY election season is all about, really. Ted Cruz was no more than telling the simple truth about these statist, liberty-hating assholes…which is the most damaging thing anyone can ever do to them short of killing them outright.

Share

Gun rights, explained

A state AG and a judge who get it—and ain’t afraid to say it, bless his heart.

“As a practical matter, when a firearm is kept in a home for self-defense, it is always ‘in use,'” Michigan attorney general Bill Schuette wrote in his brief. “Criminals never take a day off, and they never call ahead. To serve its self-defense purpose, a gun must be readily accessible whenever its owner believes he might possibly need it.”

Though U.S. District judge Paul Maloney dismissed a similar case brought by another couple, he ruled that the Johnsons’ case could move forward against the request of the state agency.

“Storing firearms in an inoperable condition makes them useless for the defense of hearth and home, which implicates the Second Amendment,” Judge Maloney wrote in his order. “The need for self-defense rarely comes with advance notice; it occurs spontaneously, often at times specifically chosen for the expected vulnerability of the intended victim.”

Read the rest for the backstory, which is both chilling and infuriating.

Share

Lost cause?

Yet still they persist.

Placing all of this into context, the actions of the Obama State Department and the lawsuits by the Democrat attorneys general have merely demonstrated once again the utter futility of gun control. DD’s software is only the tiniest tip of the iceberg. Not only is it and other similar software already in the public domain and readily available for use by one and all, there is no way to recall it. That fight was over in 2013.

Moreover, individuals have been making their own firearms in this country since the founding of the Republic. Today it is possible to make high quality, fully functioning lower receivers for firearms such as AR-15s, AK-47s, and handguns using simple hand tools. As long as they are not sold to others, it is perfectly legal to make firearms with no serial numbers and no means of tracing them. This state of affairs exists because there is no way that the government could ever hope to effectively regulate or prevent such private manufacture of firearms that is ongoing in homes, garages, and machine shops across the nation.

While DD sells a so-called Ghost Gunner computer-controlled milling machine that will speed up the process of making lower receivers for AR-15s and model 1911 pistols, the same job can be and has been done using hand tools such as routers, drill presses, and electric drills. The number of such privately made firearms is estimated to be in the hundreds of thousands.

But the private manufacture of firearms is the least of the challenges facing gun control advocates. They must contend with the fact that there are over 90 million law-abiding Americans who legally possess over 300 million firearms and who pose no demonstrable threat to their fellow citizens.

In addition, there are untold millions of firearms in the hands of our very large criminal population. These individuals don’t undergo FBI background checks to buy their guns. They use straw purchasers with clean records to do the buying. Or they get them in back alleys or on street corners from other criminals. In many places, they can even rent a gun to pull a job or commit a murder. Neither restrictions on the ownership of guns nor their traceability through serial numbers are of concern to these predators.

The bottom line is this: there is and can be no such thing as effective gun control. Just as there is no way to recall and quarantine DD’s software, there is no way for the government to meaningfully restrict possession of the millions of firearms in civilian hands. Not even a governmental decree to confiscate all firearms is feasible. Putting aside the mandate of the Second Amendment, are 90 million Americans to be turned into outlaws by legislative fiat? And how are these newly minted criminals to be stripped of their firearms?

If even a fraction of that 90 million were to resist confiscation of their weapons, does the government have the police, military, judicial, and penal resources to search, disarm, arrest, prosecute, and punish that vast legion of otherwise law-abiding citizens? Would the law-enforcement establishment willingly undertake such punitive actions? We have already seen substantial numbers of gun owners in Connecticut and New York openly defy hastily enacted antigun laws imposed in the wake of the Sandy Hook school tragedy. Faced with other more pressing threats to public order, police and sheriffs’ departments in those states have wisely elected not to risk the mayhem that could very well result if they attempted to arrest and disarm defiant gun owners. And, even if the government somehow managed to confiscate all 300 million legally owned firearms, what about the uncounted millions of firearms already in the hands of the underworld?

The gun control advocates may not realize it, but they lost the fight long ago. It’s all over but the shouting.

Well, if they can just arrange things so that shooters can expect to be arrested for ever actually USING a gun in self-defense (more on that later, perhaps), or doing much of anything at all with them besides burying them in the backyard, they’ll consider it a win. And they won’t be entirely wrong about that, either. Nor can we quite say they’ve lost, given the thousands upon thousands of gun-control laws already on the books.

Share

Do the math

You ain’t getting ’em, gun-grabbers.

The foregoing math on the roughly 20 million semi-auto rifles is not the full extent of the problem for the gun grabbers. Additionally, there are at least 50 million centerfire handguns that would be suitable for resistance warfare. (And another 3 million being made or imported each year.) There are also perhaps 40 million scoped centerfire deer rifles in private hands. The vast majority of those have no traceable paper trail. Fully capable of 500+ yard engagement, these rifles could be employed to out-range the tyrants and their minions.

Then there are the estimated 1.5 million unregistered machineguns now in the country.  Except for a 30-day amnesty in 1968 that generated only about 65,000 registrations, they have been contraband since 1934. Their number is particularly difficult to accurately estimate, since some semi-autos such as the M1 Carbine, HK91/93/94 series, and AR-15 are fairly easy to convert to selective fire. Similarly, nearly all “open bolt” semi-auto designs are easy to convert to full auto. Large numbers of conversion parts sets have been sold, with little recordkeeping. Some guns can be converted simply by removing sear springs or filing their sears. Just a trickle of unregistered full autos are seized or surrendered each year. This begs the question: If Federal officials have been unable to round up un-papered machineguns after 84 years, then how do they expect to ever confiscate semi-autos, which are 15 times more commonplace?

As evidenced by the 1990s wars in the Balkans, when times get inimical, contraband guns get pulled out of walls and put into use. We can expect to see the same, here.

Now, to get back to the simple mathematics, here are some ratios to ponder:

  • NRA members (5.2 million) to Door Kickers (82,863) = 63-to-1 ratio
  • Military veterans (20.4 million) to Door Kickers (82,863) = 249-to-1 ratio
  • Unregistered machineguns (1.5 million) to Door Kickers (82,863) = 18-to-1 ratio
  • Privately owned semi-auto rifles (40 million) to Door Kickers (82,863) = 485-to-1 ratio


The mathematics that I’ve cited don’t bode well for the gun-grabbing collectivists.

He has a lot more, and I do mean a LOT. It all adds up to total nightmare for fever-dreaming totalitarians, who really ought to find themselves better uses for their time.

(Via MisHum)

Share

A rational reason to ban guns

Hey, when he’s right, he’s right.

After all, like much of the Constitution, the Second Amendment relied on a responsible citizenry to safely use such a powerful device as a gun. In the right hands, a gun can defend a citizen’s family and property. In the wrong hands, however, it can massacre a school full of children. After decades of the Left’s assault on traditional American values, is there any private American citizen out there who is truly responsible enough to handle a firearm?

Responsibility and accountability have not only taken a beating in American culture over the last several decades, but the entire culture has abandoned those concepts in favor self-destructive beliefs. The things we once valued as the basis of healthy society, like marriage and child-rearing, are now devalued at alarming rates.

The erasure of liberty and its replacement by state control has been the primary mission of the American Left for over a century. As Diana West aptly analyzed, we’ve experienced the “death of the grown-up” in the United States. Children are individuals who lack the responsibility required for living independently. Today, most Americans are treated as overgrown children by the Left. Only instead of needing adult supervision, they are in need of government oversight. Thus far, most Americans have done little to disprove the Left’s disgusting assumption about them (as evidenced by the data cited above).

Perhaps the Left is correct when it demands that all ordinary Americans surrender their arms to the state. After more than a century of the Left’s “long march through the institutions,” maybe the Left has succeeded in making the American people nothing more than overgrown children. If that is true, and Americans are no longer responsible enough to be trusted to use their Second Amendment rights properly, why end with banning guns? Face it, the Left has managed to slowly decimate our liberty by destroying our culture.

Of course, Weichert is deliberately overstating the case a bit here to make a point; it isn’t quite as bad as he makes it sound—quite. There most certainly are plenty of Americans still responsible enough to own guns. We haven’t all been reduced to overgrown, helpless, feckless children just yet. But that ain’t for want of trying by the Left.

Share

Toys!

Ace runs down a whole bunch of great ones from the 60s and 70s, but he leaves out one of the greatest of them all: the M16 Marauder, by Mattel. Our whole neighborhood had these things when I was a kid, and they were GREAT. Only trouble was, after packing fistfuls of dirt down the barrel a few times to make it smoke when you “fired” it—which naturally we all did—the big, realistic sound it originally produced was rendered kind of…umm, humble, shall we say. First thing we all did, right out of the box, was rip the silly orange tip on the muzzle of the weapon off and throw it away to facilitate said dirt-packing. Also because it just looked goofy.

It had a select-fire switch which didn’t function—it was full-auto only, which means it was no more a true assault rifle than are the semi-only AR15s the libs are all soaking their Underoos over today—and a charging handle which did. You racked the lever back, laid on the trigger, and the handle would tick along forward until it reached the stop and the “magazine” was “emptied.” I don’t recall ever counting individual shots to determine what the magazine capacity was (according to this ad, it was “over 50 rounds”). You easily could’ve, as the cycling rate was somewhat slower than a real-life Thompson M1A1*. It just never occurred to us to do it, that’s all.

The mechanism that made the sound also created a modest vibration along with it, thereby heightening the whole M16 experience to the delight of all. When the charging handle got all the way forward to the stop the shooting stopped too. Then you “reloaded” by racking back again and the fun started all over. You blasted away on full rock-and-roll until you finally ran out of rounds, resulting in your position being overrun by Victor Charlie or the NVA, the pus-nutted commie bastards. Then you’d be captured and hauled off to the Hanoi Hilton for years of torture both physical and mental, your very existence denied by the US government for ass-covering purposes. Eventually you’d break and sign a statement denouncing American imperialism, whereupon you would be released to “serve” the next 70 or 80 years as a duplicitous, arrogant, self-serving Republican US senator, perhaps. If you were lucky.

The only thing that might’ve made this thing more fun was if it had come with a detachable magazine, with a spare or two included. But we’d only have lost ’em pretty quickly, I guess, so maybe it’s just as well they didn’t.

A mere hundred and forty bucks on eBay, folks. Probably around ten brand new way back when, fifteen at most. Nowadays, you wouldn’t dare try to buy such a thing for your kid at all. If you expressed a desire to right out loud you’d be hustled off to a facility for some vigorous “counseling” regarding such egregious child abuse, your kids heavily sedated to restore their shattered psychological equilibrium before being packed off to foster care for good. You MONSTER.

This is what we call “progress,” see.

*Best subgun EVER, by the way. And yes, I have shot one, and know whereof I speak. Many times, thank you very much.

Share

Repeal the 2A? Why bother?

They already effectively did—by ignoring it.

Make no mistake about it: in the hands of the American left, the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution is not safe. For that matter, virtually nothing wise or precious or sacred or holy or otherwise good is safe with those corrupted by a liberal worldview. Whether marriage, the family, the church, life in the womb, education, small businesses, fossil fuels, law enforcement, the military, or the Constitution, time and again, liberals have proven themselves to be on the wrong side of the truth.

What’s more, in the hands of today’s leftists, the Second Amendment – and anything else in the U.S. Constitution with which modern liberals are unhappy – is in jeopardy whether or not it is “repealed.” As most now well know, John Paul Stevens – a retired associate justice of the U.S. Supreme Court – recently gave his direct endorsement to the shockingly foolish – but increasingly popular among Democrats – idea that the Second Amendment should be repealed.

Few should be surprised by Stevens’s position in this matter. With the way too close Heller decision a decade ago, he almost got his wish. In 2008, liberals were a mere one vote short of effectively killing the Second Amendment. In a republic that properly respected and understood its Constitution, Heller wouldn’t have been necessary, and under the absurd circumstances that such a case should make it to the highest court in the land, the vote to uphold the Second Amendment wouldn’t be close.

In their efforts to remake America into their image of a leftist utopia, rarely never (FIFYA—M) have liberals let the Constitution stand in their way. For decades now – whether as public executives, legislators, or judges – liberals have conveniently ignored the Constitution or “interpreted” it beyond recognition.

Any “right” whose exercise requires a government license or permit can’t properly be called a right at all. All in all, this seems like a good time to re-link and re-excerpt Charles Cooke’s pitch-perfect challenge from 2015.

That being so, here’s the million-dollar question: What the hell are they waiting for? Go on, chaps. Bloody well do it.

Seriously, try it. Start the process. Stop whining about it on Twitter, and on HBO, and at the Daily Kos. Stop playing with some Thomas Jefferson quote you found on Google. Stop jumping on the news cycle and watching the retweets and viral shares rack up. Go out there and begin the movement in earnest. Don’t fall back on excuses. Don’t play cheap motte-and-bailey games. And don’t pretend that you’re okay with the Second Amendment in theory, but you’re just appalled by the Heller decision. You’re not. Heller recognized what was obvious to the amendment’s drafters, to the people who debated it, and to the jurists of their era and beyond: That “right of the people” means “right of the people,” as it does everywhere else in both the Bill of Rights and in the common law that preceded it. A Second Amendment without the supposedly pernicious Heller “interpretation” wouldn’t be any impediment to regulation at all. It would be a dead letter. It would be an effective repeal. It would be the end of the right itself. In other words, it would be exactly what you want! Man up. Put together a plan, and take those words out of the Constitution.

Cliff’s Notes version: come and take them, you lame fascist fucks.

Share

Lies, damned lies…

And damned liberals.

Here’s the deal – everything the liberals say about guns is a lie. Every. Single. Thing.

Oh, it ain’t just guns, boyo. You coulda just left “about guns” right out of there.

It’s a lie when they scream that you can hit the Guns-2-Go drive-thru and buy yourself a fully semi-automatic assault machine gun with high-powered 5.56 mm rounds, because glorified 5.56 mm rounds are “high-powered” on their planet, faster and quicker than you can call an Uber.

It’s a lie when they say an armed citizenry would be powerless in the face of a leftist government equipped with tanks and artillery and bombers – though their assumption that a leftist government would use tanks and artillery and bombers on the American people seems like a pretty good reason for having an armed citizenry.

It’s a lie when they say they only want to have a “conversation” and seek only “bipartisan compromise.” Foamy Marco Rubio got suckered into that grift just like Chuck Schemer suckered him into pushing amnesty, and they’ve been ritually disemboweling him ever since.

Which brings us round to one of the best lines on the topic I’ve seen yet. Bold mine, because it merits the emphasis:

Liberals constantly sneer that we are “insecure about our masculinity” and “need guns to feel like men.” Leaving aside the millions of gun-owning women out there who don’t seem to fit within that stupid paradigm, and the irony of leftist doors opining on manhood, liberals miss the point.

We don’t need guns to be men. We need guns to be free men.

And that right there is what really drives them nuts.

Update! Who you gonna believe, us or your lying ears?

Did you hear? They’re talking about repealing the Second Amendment. It started with former Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens and George Washington University Law Professor Jonathan Turley. And it sure does seem like those calls prompted skeptics of American gun culture to echo their remarks. Turley and Stevens were joined this week by op-ed writers in the pages of Esquire and the Seattle Times. Democratic candidates for federal office have even enlisted in the ranks of those calling for an amendment to curtail the freedoms in the Bill of Rights. Of course, this is just the most mainstream invocation of anti-Second Amendment themes that have been expressed unashamedly for years, from liberal activists like Michael Moore to conservative opinion writers at the New York Times. Those calling for the repeal of the right to bear arms today are only echoing similar calls made years ago in venues ranging from Rolling Stone, MSNBC, and Vanity Fair to the Jesuit publication America Magazine.

Are you sitting down? You might be surprised to learn that none of this occurred. It’s only your vivid or, some might go so far as to say, fevered imagination. Rest assured, CNN host Chris Cuomo insists that “no one” is calling for the repeal of the Second Amendment. And even if they are, as Justice Stevens most certainly is, he’s a “boogeyman” who commands no influence or respect. Apparently, to suggest that anyone is calling for such extremist measures, and not universally beloved “common-sense” restrictions on firearms ownership, amounts to swatting at phantoms. Cuomo retreated into a familiar, well-fortified rhetorical trench—a place where other liberals can be found whenever basic firearm-ownership rights are called into question. Essentially, his contention boils down to this: You didn’t hear what you thought you heard.

You might also have heard conservatives complain about a double standard applied to students who survived the Parkland shooting and emerged as prominent gun-control activists. Those conservatives claim that when they take these students seriously and engage with their ideas or criticize them for unfairly smearing their opponents, they are accused of issuing personal assaults on the character of near-defenseless children. Well, you’ll be happy to learn that this, too, is a figment of conservative imaginations.

It is a “straw-man argument,” suggested the New Republic editor Jeet Heer, to claim that liberals have reacted with anything other than friendly disagreement when student activists are criticized. The left’s only visceral objections arise when figures on the right accuse these students of fabricating their identity or experience—which, unfortunately, has occurred. The mere suggestion that the left has done anything other than welcome respectful and legitimate criticism of the Parkland students amounts to “conspiracy theories,” according to Rewire New editor-in-chief Jodi Jacobson. Anyone saying otherwise is “scared” or peddling a “weak case.”

That’s good to know. I was concerned for a while there that liberals had deliberately conflated substantive disagreement with personal attacks on the Parkland activists.

Don’t worry, folks; if you don’t like any of those lies, they have plenty of others.

Updated updated! Turtles lies, all the way down.

For baseball players, it’s “Keep your eye on the ball.”

For fighter pilots, it’s “Lose sight, lose the fight.”

Different ways of saying the same thing:
History’s gut pile is assembled from the body parts of the witless and clueless.

At its root, the Parkland shooting, except for the dozen-and-a-half unfortunate victims, was nothing surprising or newly dreadful, and nothing functionally different than any of the other mass shootings enabled by the concentrated stupidity of Gun Free Victim Zones. It’s what happens when you ring the dinner bell, chum the water, and push tourists into the pool with predators created by the Left, sharing the same amoral outlook as hungry carnivorous sharks.

FFS, that’s been the entire point of the exercise, indeed the very raison d’etre for the Evil Party to enact it: precisely to keep up a steady supply of outrageous acts, to feed their Political Hate Machine with a never-ending supply of still-warm victim’s blood, for their faithful party hacks to always be dancing in, until they achieve their goal:

the total disarmament of anyone who would oppose their totalitarian control of the population.

Whoot, there it is. Plenty more at the link, of which you should read the all.

Share

THAT’S how you do it

What works. What doesn’t.

Texas allows school districts to approve “marshals” or “guardians” as the last line of defense against a shooter. Under this program, faculty members volunteer to keep a firearm within reach in case the unthinkable happens. They undergo mental health screenings and rigorous firearm safety training — in some cases they are held to a higher standard than police officers.

In an active shooter situation, law enforcement takes roughly three minutes to respond on a good day (through no fault of their own). It’s disturbing to consider the damage that can be inflicted in that amount of time. Only school marshals — who, contrary to the media portrayal, represent a select few trained and capable staff members — can deliver response times measured in seconds rather than minutes.

Coverage in the aftermath of Parkland has focused disproportionately on the AR-15. The gun has been established as a symbol of mass shootings, a device designed for wanton destruction. What use, we are repeatedly asked, could private citizens have for an AR-15? Texans like myself have been frustrated by this collective amnesia. On November 5, 2017, a private citizen heroically stopped the fleeing shooter of the First Baptist Church in Sutherland Springs using an AR-15.

The lesson is that guns are morally neutral. It is people who have the capacity to use them for good or evil. Those willing to kill the innocent in cold blood will hardly be hindered by a new gun regulation. They are, after all, willing to murder – it defies logic that they will respect a gun law. It stands to reason, therefore, that schools should be made a hard target, just like airports, stadiums and government buildings.

There have been no shootings, intentional or otherwise, at any participating districts in Texas. Teachers and students feel — and in fact are — safer coming into work.

A sign outside of Argyle High School, which has opted into the program, reads “Please be aware that the staff at Argyle are armed and may use whatever force is necessary to protect our students.” Is a would-be shooter more likely to target such a school or a “gun-free zone?” The answer is obvious.

Oh, considering that ALL these mass shootings happen in “gun-free zones,” I’d say it’s way on past merely obvious. But I can’t see any way that it helps to advance the Left’s agenda of total control and tyranny, so there’s no chance of their reacting to it with anything other than the usual sobbing, shrieking hysteria.

Update! Did somebody mention what DOESN’T work above? It’s actually not hard at all to deduce if one takes an honest look at the facts. Strangely enough, that’s another thing Progtards are ferociously against doing.

America does not have a gun crime epidemic. There are, however, epidemics in many locales and cities. Who do you think runs the vast majority of those cities?

NRA-funded Republicans?

No.

Lobbyists for firearm manufacturers?

No.

The vast majority of those cities have been run by Democrats for decades upon decades.

Here are the top 20 cities with the highest gun murder rates in the U.S. per capita. Of these, every city except the last one, Tulsa, has a Democrat majority in the mayoralty and City Council or Board of Aldermen.

Here are the non-fatal shootings top 20 per capita. Notice the overlap of several cities; the cities on the non-fatal list absent on the murder list are also Democrat-run cities, except for the last one, Jacksonville.

Exhausted yet? There’s more.

And hoo boy, is there ever. Rich ain’t just whistlin’ Dixie with this one, and you need to read all of it. The numbers permit only one conclusion: we need ourselves some reasonable, common-sense Democrat control legislation.

For the children. IF EVEN ONE LIFE IS SAVED…

Ahem.

Share

Get in their faces!

THAT’s how you do it.

Angered by word of the disciplining of two Lacey High School students for a gun-related social media post, 200 parents, community members and other supporters of the Second Amendment on Monday let the Board of Education know they don’t want the district trampling on their rights or meddling in their home lives.

“You guys are reaching into our private life, the private life of our children,” said one parent, Lewis Fiordimondo, who has twins in pre-kindergarten and a daughter at the high school. “It’s not your place. It’s not the school’s place.”

Another dad, Frank Horvath, whose son is a senior at Lacey High, put things in blunter terms.

“It’s none of your damn business what our children do outside of school,” Horvath told the seven board members toward the end of a four-hour meeting, most of it occupied by speaker after speaker venting anger and frustration at school officials largely unable to respond due to confidentiality rules.

The unusually large turnout for Monday night’s board meeting in the high school auditorium was prompted by a five-day in-school suspension of two senior boys after one of them posted a photo of themselves with guns at a local shooting range, away from school property and not during school hours.

Of course, according to the libtards running America’s schools, EVERYTHING is their damned business. To wit:

This after the language of a district policy in the student handbook was quietly amended last week following a local uproar in the Lacey community and the threat of a lawsuit by the Association of Rifle and Pistol Clubs of New Jersey, whose lawyer, Daniel Schmutter, was at Monday’s board meeting.

Before the policy was changed, it had stated that, “any student who is reported to be in possession of a weapon of any type for any reason or purpose whether on or off school grounds,” would be subject to penalties including up to a one-year suspension.

Now, the policy omits any mention of possessing a weapon off school grounds or the length of a suspension. The revamped policy also adds a note about school buses.

Bold mine, and simply outrageous. But hey, the personal is political, and very much vice the versa. Right, Lefty?

I hate to say it; I hate to even think it, truly I do. But it looks more and more like it will come down to actual, for-real killing in order to get these tyrannical liberal-fascist busybodies off our backs and out of our lives. That’s assuming we ever do, or can, that is. What’s for sure and certain is that they’ll never go away, they’ll never give up, they’ll never rethink their presumed right to rule with an iron fist, and they’ll never admit to error in even the smallest degree.

That leaves us with Glenn’s recommendation: “Punch back twice as hard.” Heh. Indeed.

Share

“We are living in a cesspool entirely of the left’s making”

Said a mouthful there, bub.

Not surprisingly, mature, responsible gun-owners have declined the left’s invitation to be caricatured and smeared as the scapegoats for where liberalism has taken us as a culture. As serious people, they don’t have much capacity for irrational, emotionally unhinged accusers pointing their fingers at those who not only did not cultivate the environment that has bred mass shooters, but also do not provide such people from their own ranks. The phenomena of unhinged “mass shooters” and the predictably vulnerable environments where they carry out their evil are unique byproducts of liberalism and its failures.

Generally speaking, law-abiding gun-owners are of a different time and culture. They are anachronistic. To lawfully own a firearm is a commitment to timeless principles of maturity, personal responsibility, individual freedom, and civic awareness. It is a trust, a right possessed by free people who exercise their freedom carefully and mindfully. It is not a masculine exercise, as men and women exemplify these qualities equally in their lawful ownership of firearms. It is rather a uniquely American exercise, which is why the left fully loathes it. When liberal commentators spontaneously declare themselves gun-owners for effect, it is unlikely that they are telling the truth, because the philosophical underpinnings of American gun ownership are anathema to them. In everything else they do, they shun and disclaim the America of individualism, honor and integrity. They show no other willingness in their words or actions to reject their liberal brethren so totally as to own what their paganism declares an object possessed of evil powers.

As true Americans, law-abiding gun-owners reject the illogic, dishonesty, and corruption that animate every aspect of liberal politics and social structure. They loathe the culture that celebrates intolerance and bullying of opposing views, indeed which goes so far as to turn a blind eye to physical violence when it is carried out by leftist assailants against Americans to coerce conformity and acceptance of poisonous ideologies. They reject the culture that both creates victimhood and then encourages the rage it causes, so that those who see themselves as victims feel personally and socially justified in doing harm to people who have done them no harm whatsoever. Truth is irrelevant; liberals look outward. Their enemy is always to blame.

Another piece I could happily just repost entire, a truly brilliant, no-nonsense, well-crafted blast of truth and reality. Read it all? Hell no; go luxuriate in every powerful word.

Share

Categories

Archives

Notable Quotes

"America is at that awkward stage. It's too late to work within the system, but too early to shoot the bastards." – Claire Wolfe, 101 Things to Do 'Til the Revolution

"To put it simply, the Left is the stupid and the insane, led by the evil. You can’t persuade the stupid or the insane and you had damn well better fight the evil." - Skeptic

"Give me the media and I will make of any nation a herd of swine." - Joseph Goebbels

"Ain't no misunderstanding this war. They want to rule us and aim to do it. We aim not to allow it. All there is to it." - NC Reed, from Parno's Peril

"I just want a government that fits in the box it originally came in." -Bill Whittle

Subscribe to CF!

Support options

SHAMELESS BEGGING

If you enjoy the site, please consider donating:



Click HERE for great deals on ammo! Using this link helps support CF by getting me credits for ammo too.

Image swiped from The Last Refuge

2016 Fabulous 50 Blog Awards

RSS FEED

RSS - entries - Entries
RSS - entries - Comments

E-MAIL


mike at this URL dot com

All e-mails assumed to be legitimate fodder for publication, scorn, ridicule, or other public mockery unless otherwise specified

Boycott the New York Times -- Read the Real News at Larwyn's Linx

All original content © Mike Hendrix