Cold Fury

Harshing your mellow since 9/01


Jesus H Christ, are you fucking kidding me? Seriously?

It felt to me like a bazooka — and sounded like a cannon.

One day after 49 people were killed in the Orlando shooting, I traveled to Philadelphia to better understand the firepower of military-style weapons and, hopefully, explain their appeal to gun lovers.

But mostly, I was just terrified.

Yeah, I could smell the piss drenching your Underoos from here, you simpering pusscake.

I’ve shot pistols before, but never something like an AR-15. Squeeze lightly on the trigger and the resulting explosion of firepower is humbling and deafening (even with ear protection).

The recoil bruised my shoulder, which can happen if you don’t know what you’re doing (bold mine, explanation unnecessary—M). The brass shell casings disoriented me as they flew past my face. The smell of sulfur and destruction made me sick. The explosions — loud like a bomb — gave me a temporary form of PTSD. For at least an hour after firing the gun just a few times, I was anxious and irritable.

Even in semi-automatic mode, it is very simple to squeeze off two dozen rounds before you even know what has happened. If illegally modified to fully automatic mode, it doesn’t take any imagination to see dozens of bodies falling in front of your barrel.

All it takes is the will to do it.

Forty nine people can be gone in 60 seconds.

Well, unless ONE SINGLE OTHER MOTHERFUCKING PERSON who knew what they were doing and possessed at least one functioning testicle—and wasn’t a goddamned gutless, sniveling pussy like yourself—happened to be there too, prepared to deal with a situation that, thanks to cowards like you and the socialist scum you insist on electing to run our lives for us, will become more and more usual in this country. But being such a pathetic excuse for a man, you just GOTTA make sure everybody else is legally required to be as crippled and worthless as you are, right?

Here’s a hilarious dramatic recreation of this twerp’s AR experience. I doubt it’s much different from the sad reality.

If this is what most Americans are content to think of—and tolerate—as “manhood” nowadays, we are fucked all to hell and gone. Yes, I know the vid is a spoof, and it’s a good one. I only wish I could say the article itself was. Looks like Culture of Cowardice is another new category I’ll regrettably be getting a lot of use out of.

Update! Just to wash the foul taste out of all our mouths here.

His name may not be as recognizable as the late Chris Kyle, but Eugene Stoner is the man behind the design of the AR-15. “American Sniper” Kyle’s autobiograpy and motion picture, depicted Kyle using a sniper variant of the AR-15. It all began in 1954 when Stoner, a World War II veteran, became the Chief Engineer of ArmaLite. Today, not only is the AR-15 extremely popular, AR15 accessories can be purchased separately so gun owners can create a fully customized rifle. It has become a favorite rifle for militaries, sportsmen, and preppers alike.

The U.S. counterpart to Russian, Mikhail Kalashnakov, Eugene Stoner actually first invented the AR10 which was rejected by the U.S. military in favor of the M14 rifle. With the base design already down, the team at Armalite made some changes to the AR10 (the big one was changing the caliber from 7.62 X 51mm NATO to the 5.56 X 45mm NATO cartridge) and arrived at the final product of the AR15. This finalized design is what the U.S. military adopted as what most know as the M16 rifle. While at Armalite, Stoner also designed a survival rifle for the U.S. Air Force that was designated as the AR5 and was later upgraded to today’s AR7 Survival Rifle.

Stoner continued his work with firearms going on to work with well known firearm companies including Colt (who had purchased the rights to the AR15 from Armalite) and Knight’s Armament. He even co-founded the company ARES Incorporated where he had a few other successful firearm designs.

It is safe to say that while not only bringing us the AR15 platform of rifle, Eugene Stoner is an amazing contributor to the modern firearms industry, not only on the military side of things but the sporting side as well.

I gotta say, I have some small experience shooting subguns, and I’ve always much preferred the Thompson or the MP5 to the AR15. I broke the bolt on a Colt AR15 once during a competition, which ain’t exactly something that happens every day. But for an alternate take on Stoner’s genius design, you can always check out the Captain, who loves ’em, and knows whereof he speaks too. As for the Thompson, an excellent article on it is here, but it won’t let me cut and paste from it for some reason, so you’ll just have to click on through and read it all.

And I’ll just say it one more time, for posterity’s sake: come and take them, liberal-fascist fucktards.


Dog bites man: Clinton tells the truth again!

No, really. Hillary said it, and said it well: “It’s not much of a right if it is totally limited and constrained.”

Of course, she wasn’t talking about any right actually, y’know, mentioned in the Constitution.

The Mariana Islands are a US controlled territory often forgotten, but now they have everyone’s attention. This small set of islands far off in the Pacific ocean passed a Senate Bill which is drawing a lot of criticism. As of April 11th, all new handgun sales are subject to a $1,000.00 tax. The governor of the islands, Ralph Torres, has since defended his position on passing the bill, and even suggested that this could be a model for others (referring to states in the U.S.).

This act has many repercussions for the residents of the Mariana Islands and us in the United States. For those on the islands, it essentially strips away the ability to buy a firearm. It makes purchasing a handgun a rich man’s game. You can no longer buy a Hi-Point out-the-door for $200. Now it’s $1,200! Many view it as economic discrimination. If you can’t pay the outrageous tax then you’ll have to find other means to defend yourself and your family.

Well, that’s okay, right? I mean, as long as rich liberals and politicians can afford to keep their armed bodyguards and all, that’s all that really matters here. After all, their lives are far more important and worth defending than yours will ever be. Meanwhile, in another province of an authoritarian tyranny:

Jamie Warren’s 4-year-old daughter looks forward to a music class at KRESA’s West Campus–a class parents are required to attend.

Warren’s husband sat in on the class.

“I think he attended two or three sessions before anyone noticed that he was carrying a gun,” she said.

By law, Warren’s husband can open carry his gun.

“Schools are gun free zones, and they tend to be targeted for mass shootings. He feels that he’s keeping her safer by carrying and having the ability to protect her,” she said.

But some parents at KRESA’s West Campus say no.

“This is not the way we live in a civilized society,” one parent said.

“There’s several hundred students over there and many of their parents have expressed very significant concerns and very frankly, anger towards us for doing this and I thought well, I’ve gotta respect their rights, respect the rights of the parents of children who have been traumatized possibly by violent situations,” he said.

But Warren says her family’s rights have now been violated.

“When he decided to not break the law, they began the process of bullying him. She saw him treated like a criminal for carrying the letter of the law,” Warren said.

I think that’s a good thing. Now the little girl won’t ever make any mistakes about what kind of country she actually lives in, no matter how much “land of the free, home of the brave” horseshit she has rammed down her throat every Fourth of July.

(Via Maet)


“Liberal” gun-grabbers: you gotta love ’em

They’re so compassionate and concerned, don’t you know. If you don’t believe it, just ask ’em.

“The man who killed Trayvon Martin should have never had a gun in the first place,” Hillary Clinton declared to the crowd at Al Sharpton’s National Action Network. The statement was pure, opportunistic political pandering. Clinton didn’t say why George Zimmerman — completely exonerated of homicide charges by a court of law — should have been prohibited by the government from owning a gun. That’s important to know, because, if elected, Clinton will be in a position to call for and sign “gun laws.” In a way, we ought to be grateful that, occasionally, totalitarians give us glimpses of their end game. Which doesn’t stop Hillary from doing what she does best, that is, lying…

I respect the rights of lawful gun owners to own guns, to use their guns…

Hillary said that right before showing everyone her huge “but,” which includes a veritable wish list of citizen disarmament fantasies documented by On the Issues. She has also endorsed adding a 25% federal sales tax on guns. Add to that her assertion that “the Supreme Court is wrong on the Second Amendment.”

No one wants to take your guns? If everything Hillary wants is enacted, what difference does it make?

Of COURSE Zimmerman shouldn’t have had a gun. Then he’d be dead, just another nameless and unlamented victim of rampant and unchecked black thuggery, and nobody would ever have heard of him, and no liberal idiots would have had to trouble themselves with confronting the real issue and could just go right on with their various wet-brained campaigns to remake the nation into something it was never supposed to be, and everything would be JUST FINE.

No, Zimmerman most certainly should not have had a gun, according to liberals. And neither should anybody else. Excepting, of course, their squads of personal bodyguards, the cops, the Secret Service, and the security personnel at the gates of their tony neighborhoods who protect their obscenely rich politicians from their marauding, lawless constituents.

Read on to the end of it, where Codrea asks a most, umm, penetrating question.


The final countdown

I’ve long believed that if there’s to be another American Revolution (the American Re-Revolution?), this will be what kicks it off.

Perhaps the biggest threat ever to the Second Amendment is working its way through the state courts in Connecticut.

A judge there is allowing a wrongful death lawsuit to proceed against Remington Arms Co., which made one of the weapons used by Adam Lanza to kill 26 children and staffers at the Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown.

The lawsuit, filed by nine victim families, claims Remington is liable for making and selling to the public a rifle unfit for civilian use.

Clinton’s charge that gunmakers enjoy unique protection from liability isn’t true. All manufacturers of defect-free, legal goods enjoy a broad shield against damage resulting from the intentional misuse of their products.

Still, gun opponents compare firearm manufacturers with automakers, who are routinely sued when their cars and trucks are involved in a fatal accident. But those suits center around product malfunctions or design flaws. If someone gets drunk and plows an automobile into a group of children at a bus stop, the automaker is only liable if something was defective on the vehicle that contributed to the carnage.

The weapons used by Lanza were not defective. They were misused. Neither the manufacturer nor the retailer, who is also being sued, sold them to Lanza. The emotionally troubled teen took them without permission from his mother’s home. A negligence case could be made against the mother. She should not have allowed her deranged son access to her extensive arsenal; I’m all for holding gun owners responsible for properly securing their firearms.

Lanza used legal weapons that were sold within the strict confines of Connecticut’s gun laws, but taken without the owner’s permission.

If that becomes the flimsy standard for manufacturer and retailer liability, as both this lawsuit and Hillary Clinton hope, it will be the end of gunmaking and sales in this country. And that’s just what backers of this strategy want.

Of course it is. But they should be careful what they wish for. If there’s anybody at all left in this country who remain perfectly willing to stand and fight the Left to retain (or regain) their God-given rights under the old Constitutional order, it’s the gun-rights folks, who can count a lot of cops and military personnel in their growing numbers. If the libtards end up getting what they want on this issue, it just might result in their destruction…or at least in killing them in job lots.


True American hero

Good on this guy.

According to, police say two armed suspects, a 19-year-old Parma man and an 18-year-old Cleveland man, entered Suleyman’s Supermarket on Cleveland’s West Side just before 10 p.m. and demanded money.

The store owner gave the suspects around $300, and they turned to leave, only to see a police officer standing outside. Panicked, the two armed men ran through the store to exit in the back, but were stopped by a citizen with a gun.

The citizen, a friend of the market’s owner, “grabbed” one of the suspects and “slammed him into the wall.” The second suspect hid in a bathroom while the armed citizen stood outside the door saying, “My gun is bigger than yours.”

The police report indicates the suspect “surrendered and begged the man not to shoot him.” The armed citizen ordered both suspects to the ground and disarmed them.

THAT’S how you do it. Consider this your feel-good story of the day, although I suppose it’s a shame neither of the criminal scum got themselves ventilated for their predation. And remember, according to the gun-grabber pantywaists, things like this NEVER, EVER happen.


Blast from the past

It’s a losing battle–and a worthy one.

The National Firearms act regulation of short barreled rifles and shotguns from 1934 should be eliminated. It made little sense when the primary purpose for the regulation was thwarted when it passed, it has become increasingly irrelevant, and it makes no sense at all after the Heller and McDonald decisions.

The reason for the ban on short barrelled rifles and shotguns had very little to do with the criminal use of such items. After all, criminals use handguns many, many, times more often. Short barreled rifles and shotguns are, in fact, as modified and used by criminals, expediently manufactured pistols.

The National firearms act of 1934 originally lumped in handguns with full auto firearms. It is clear that the Roosevelt administration wanted to subject pistols and revolvers to the same draconian regulations and taxes that machine guns were finally subjected to. Congress simply would not go along. It was a step too far for even the heavily Democrat Congress of 1934.

Once you understand that licensing of handguns to the point of prohibition was the major target of the legislation, the reason for including short barreled rifles and shotguns becomes clear. What is the point of banning handguns if any person can buy a rifle or shotgun, a hacksaw, and make a functional pistol in fifteen minutes from that rifle or shotgun?

Michigan had served as a blueprint for this action. First they had required licensing of handguns; then they made the possession of short barreled rifles or shotguns illegal.

The prohibition on short barreled rifles and shotguns was passed in the hope of making handguns so heavily regulated as to be impossible for an ordinary person to obtain. Without that regulation, the restrictions on short barrelled rifles and shotguns become non-nonsensical.

Well, naturally. And when was THAT ever any obstacle to retaining a law–or a bureaucrat, or an agency, or a government, say–firmly in place anyway?

It does nicely highlight how the gun-grabbers’ true intentions haven’t changed one iota in over eighty years, though. And it serves as a stark reminder, and a warning: they will never, EVER stop. Never. They’re worse than zombies that way, because even cutting off their heads won’t do the trick. And gun-grabbers have a patience completely lacking in your basic Mark-1 Mod-0 zombie, too. They take the long view in a way that zombies just can’t.

Beyond that, though, there’s not a whole hell of a lot to distinguish ’em.

(Via Maet and Herschel)


Prescription: more ditches

You’ll have to click on through to see what my title refers to.

Obama’s gun-control executive orders today, and the left’s latest call for full citizen disarmament, are acts of desperation. The left feels its grasp of my life slipping from its fingers, causing their envy and resentment to reach levels of insanity. Their depression in these coming months will reach critical levels, and I hope their physicians will make the necessary calls to the government in order to stem the tide of lefty/jihadist lethal attacks against innocent life. People’s lives matter more than the survival of the Democrat Party.

Do they ever. But it’s increasingly clear that the two are antithetical, at least if the people we’re talking about intend to live in freedom.

Via WRSA, who also throws in this bonus image:


Let him “cry” for all me, phony as his tears are. The more unhappy he is, the better off America will be.


Metrosexual douche pickles

An excellent companion piece for Cooke’s epic 2A rant.

What Your Reaction to My NRA Sticker Says About You
OK, so I don’t have an NRA sticker. Although I’m an ardent gun rights advocate, I am not an NRA member. The NRA and I never really got along all that well. But nonetheless, bear with me here, because I’m about to explain why the NRA sticker says much more about the metrosexual douche pickle who wrote this column than it does about anyone who has that sticker on their vehicle.

I see you quivering in your panties about a sticker, and I snicker just a bit. I look at you and I wonder if you ever had any courage, any integrity, and any understanding of the laws and principles on which this nation was founded. And I wonder if you’re a threat.

A threat to my freedoms. A threat to my way of life. A threat to the Constitution.

Well, seeing as how they’ve done away with most of the Constitution already, I’d have to say that–despite their no-ball, gutless, bedwetting nature–why, yes. Yes, they most certainly are. They’re why the Second Amendment was written in the first place, in truth. And sooner or later, they’re going to have to be dealt with.

Read the rest of it. You’ll love it, I promise. And on the plainspoken merits of this post alone, into Ye Ol’ Blogroll the good folks at Liberty Zone go.


The only good lion…

Maetenloch had a truly excellent, longer-than-usual post on l’affaire de Cecil in the ONT a couple of weeks ago, for which I had to hunt around a bit after realizing that Ace doesn’t have a danged search box on the ol’ HQ. But find it I did, and I’m glad of it. In the course of it–yep, read it all–he links to and excerpts from this:

Anti-hunting groups succeeded in getting Kenya to ban all hunting in 1977. Since then, its population of large wild animals has declined between 60 and 70 percent. The country’s elephant population declined from 167,000 in 1973 to just 16,000 in 1989. Poaching took its toll on elephants because of their damage to both cropland and people. Today Kenya wildlife officials boast a doubling of the country’s elephant population to 32,000, but nearly all are in protected national parks where poaching can be controlled. With only 8 percent of its land set aside as protected areas, it is no wonder that wildlife in general and elephants in particular have trouble finding hospitable habitat.

As Maet notes, Zimbabwe decided to allow controlled hunting, and this is how it worked out:

The numbers attest to the program’s success. Ten years after the program began, wildlife populations had increased by 50 percent. By 2003, elephant numbers had doubled from 4,000 to 8,000. The gains have not just been for wildlife, however. Between 1989 and 2001, CAMPFIRE generated more than $20 million in direct income, the vast majority of which came from hunting. During that period, the program benefitted an estimated 90,000 households and had a total economic impact of $100 million.

The results go beyond the CAMPFIRE areas. Between 1989 and 2005, Zimbabwe’s total elephant population more than doubled from 37,000 to 85,000, with half living outside of national parks. Today, some put the number as high as 100,000, even with trophy hunters such as Parsons around. All of this has occurred with an economy in shambles, regime uncertainty, and mounting socio-political challenges.

And then there’s this:

Cecil who? I wondered. When I turned on the news and discovered that the messages were about a lion killed by an American dentist, the village boy inside me instinctively cheered: One lion fewer to menace families like mine.

My excitement was doused when I realized that the lion killer was being painted as the villain. I faced the starkest cultural contradiction I’d experienced during my five years studying in the United States.

Did all those Americans signing petitions understand that lions actually kill people? That all the talk about Cecil being “beloved” or a “local favorite” was media hype? Did Jimmy Kimmel choke up because Cecil was murdered or because he confused him with Simba from “The Lion King”?

In my village in Zimbabwe, surrounded by wildlife conservation areas, no lion has ever been beloved, or granted an affectionate nickname. They are objects of terror.

The American tendency to romanticize animals that have been given actual names and to jump onto a hashtag train has turned an ordinary situation — there were 800 lions legally killed over a decade by well-heeled foreigners who shelled out serious money to prove their prowess — into what seems to my Zimbabwean eyes an absurdist circus.

PETA is calling for the hunter to be hanged. Zimbabwean politicians are accusing the United States of staging Cecil’s killing as a “ploy” to make our country look bad. And Americans who can’t find Zimbabwe on a map are applauding the nation’s demand for the extradition of the dentist, unaware that a baby elephant was reportedly slaughtered for our president’s most recent birthday banquet.

We Zimbabweans are left shaking our heads, wondering why Americans care more about African animals than about African people.

Well, it ain’t just Africans, if the abortion stats (sorry, did I say abortion? I meant the Women’s Right To Choose! stats) are any guide. Back to Maet for the bottom line:

So the bottom line is that if you actually care about the survival of lions as a species, you should support controlled trophy hunting. Hunters like Walter Palmer who paid $55,000 for the hunting permit have done far, far more to actually preserve real world lions in Africa than all of the hand-wringing celebrities and any of you reading this post. Ironically the weeping over Cecil and calls to ban all hunting of lions in Africa out of First World emotionalism may end up actually dooming them as a species. But everyone would still get to feel awesomely smug about their love of lions and general moral superiority from the comfort of their armchair .

Well, that’s all that ever really matters. As long as the Church Ladies of the Left get to remain all self-satisfied and comfy without ever having to actually do anything beyond attending the occasional Mostly Peaceful™ riot, all is well and the problem is solved, whatever it may be.


Testing the waters

Think we won one when the ATF pulled back on green tips? Better think again.

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives on Thursday raised new concerns about surplus military ammo used in popular AR-15 rifles and pistols just days after pulling back on a proposal to ban the ammo because it could threaten police safety.

In a Senate Appropriations Committee hearing, ATF Director B. Todd Jones said all types of the 5.56 military-style ammo used by shooters pose a threat to police as more people buy the AR-15-style pistols.

“Any 5.56 round” is “a challenge for officer safety,” he said. Jones asked lawmakers to help in a review of a 1986 bill written to protect police from so-called “cop killer” rounds that largely exempted rifle ammo like the 5.56 because it has been used by target shooters, not criminals.

His agency’s move to ban the 5.56 M855 version was condemned by the National Rifle Association and majorities in the House and Senate and as a result was pulled back though not abandoned. At the hearing Jones said that nearly 90,000 comments on the proposal were received, many negative.

As a result, he said that the ATF will suspend rewriting the “framework” used to exempt armor piercing ammo from sale or use. “It probably isn’t going to happen any time soon,” he said. Jones also said, “We are not going to move forward.”

The 5.56 M855 round, he said, is military surplus, typically has a green tip and was used in the M-16. There are several versions of the 5.56. The M855 carries a bullet that can penetrate police body armor, though shooters often debate that.

Just like every damned other 5.56 round does. Herschel cuts to the heart of the matter:

Banning green tip does nothing to prevent anyone from using a rifle round (shot from any weapon) to penetrate soft body armor, and wearing ceramic ESAPI plates protects against both frangible 5.56 mm ammunition and green tip ammunition. Furthermore, a so-called 5.56 mm “pistol” is nothing more than a SBR (short barrel rifle) with a barrel length of less than 16″ and no stock. It isn’t concealable.

So speculation of course ran wild as to the exact intent of the ATF. Are they stupid? Do they not really understand the technical issues they are dealing with? But today B. Todd Jones answered those questions. They are concerned about all 5.56 mm cartridges. Of course they are. But that .270 pointed soft point, shot from a necked down 30-06 cartridge from my bolt action deer hunting rifle? Yes, that’s the one. It will penetrate soft body armor too – lead ball, soft point, all of it. So will lead ball 30-06. So will lead ball .308. So will lead ball 7 mm. Virtually all rifle rounds (except .22LR and .22 WMR) will penetrate soft body armor because kevlar is specified to 9 mm rounds (as regards mass and velocity).

Jones knows that. The ATF at large knows that. What Jones is telling the Congress is that he wants their help in banning rifle ammunition. Rifle ammunition. All of it.

Bingo. And your rifles too, and, eventually any and everything that can be remotely construed as a firearm and can possibly be used for Constitutional purposes…which purposes don’t have a thing to do with hunting anything other than tyrants. Relax our vigilance even a wee bit in the wake of a supposed “victory” like this one? Not on your life.


The tyrant makes his move

Everybody ready?

It’s starting.

As promised, President Obama is using executive actions to impose gun control on the nation, targeting the top-selling rifle in the country, the AR-15 style semi-automatic, with a ban on one of the most-used AR bullets by sportsmen and target shooters.

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives this month revealed that it is proposing to put the ban on 5.56 mm ammo on a fast track, immediately driving up the price of the bullets and prompting retailers, including the huge outdoors company Cabela’s, to urge sportsmen to urge Congress to stop the president.

Wednesday night, Rep. Bob Goodlatte, the Republican chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, stepped in with a critical letter to the bureau demanding it explain the surprise and abrupt bullet ban. The letter is shown below.

The National Rifle Association, which is working with Goodlatte to gather co-signers, told Secrets that 30 House members have already co-signed the letter and Goodlatte and the NRA are hoping to get a total of 100 fast.

Gonna take a good bit more than just that, I’m afraid. This reign of witches, pace Jefferson, is not gonna just pass over on its own. It’s gonna have to be pushed along.

“This round is amongst the most commonly used in the most popular rifle design in America, the AR-15…” said Goodlatte’s letter.

So? Why else do you think he’s going after them? He couldn’t get them banned by Constitutional means–not there ARE any Constitutional means for doing away with a natural right explicitly protected in the Constitution itself–so he’s doing what any omnipotent tyrant would do: issuing a decree. Now we’ll see who’s willing to stand up and fight, and how far they’re willing to take the battle.

I’ve said all along that if there’s ever to be a final spark put to the funeral pyre of liberty that will ignite the hearts of the liberty-minded and rouse them to direct action at last, it will be 2A issues that do it. The gun-rights folks are aware, awake, and deadly serious about their rights and beliefs; I never have expected them to just go gently into that good night, not by a long yard. King Hussein Obama just might have struck the match here that will end up burning not just him but the whole socialist edifice to smoking ruin.

The soapbox: in a cacophony of voices, all are mere babble. The ballot box: a rigged system, a false choice, a meaningless charade, a dog-and-pony show that changes absolutely nothing, bread and circuses for the marginally aware, life vest for a forlorn and fruitless hope. The cartridge box: now under direct attack, by the very government charged by our Founding documents to protect it. As our old friend MM says in this comment (NOTE: forgot the link before, fixed now): whatcha gonna do?

But frankly, I advise you to refrain from discussing your intentions here, or on any other website or blog. Because they’re coming for those too:

In a 3-2 vote today, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) voted to radically overhaul the way Internet service is regulated. FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler and the commission’s two Democratic commissioners voted to move forward with the rules. The agency’s two GOP-appointed commissioners opposed them.

Under the new rules, broadband providers, long classified by the agency as Title I information services, will now be regulated as Title II telecommunications services—essentially making them public utilities, like the phone system. The move is designed to allow the FCC to implement strict net neutrality rules limiting how much control Internet service providers (ISPs) can exert over what passes over their networks.

Today’s vote is the result of a lengthy process begun by Chairman Wheeler roughly a year ago, and that process came in the wake of two previous efforts in which the agency’s net neutrality rules were struck down in court. But the end result of the vote was largely set near the end of last year, when President Obama released a statement calling for the agency to implement the strongest possible net neutrality rules.

Obama’s statement, itself somewhat atypical in its attempt to publicly influence an independent regulatory agency, followed a long, secret effort inside the White House, in which administration staffers acted, as The Wall Street Journal reported, “like a parallel version of the FCC.” Wheeler had been considering less restrictive rules, but changed his course after the president’s statement.

They mean to control us–all of us, in every imaginable aspect. They will never, ever stop–they’ll keep coming, keep trying every way they can think of to slip the leash over our heads and around our necks one way or another–they will have to BE stopped. The price of freedom is eternal vigilance.

In the meantime, though, it means that the FCC has taken an unprecedented and fear-reaching step in order to make good on one of the Obama administration’s long-running political priorities—a step that solves no significant existing problem, but is instead designed largely to fend off hypothetical harms, and give the agency far more power over the Internet in the process.

As Commissioner Pai told ReasonTV, the move is a “solution that won’t work to a problem that doesn’t exist.” It is a solution, however, that is now in place, and is sure to create some problems of its own. 

It most certainly will at that, and maybe not in the way some people think. Hey, what’s that sad, withered, half-dead looking tree over there? Could be it just needs watering.


To all sane people still living in California

All three of ’em, I mean: get out now, before someone maims or murders you and is given a medal for it by your deranged rulers.

I mean, after this, what the hell are you waiting for? The warning shots have been fired across your bow a bazillion times already.

Almost a month ago, I wrote about something amazing that happened in our Superior Court: the judge ruled against a prosecutor who sought a judicial indictment against James Simon, who had shot William Osenton when the latter followed Simon’s car for miles and then, after Simon pulled into his own garage, followed right into the garage after him, got out of the car, and headed for Simon’s house. Despite Simon’s warnings (both verbal and a warning shot), Osenton was undeterred, so Simon shot him twice in the stomach. Osenton survived the shooting.

The Prosecutor’s take  in the preliminary hearing was the same as that advanced by the Progressive: With a scary guy chasing you right into your garage, and then getting out of the car and storming towards the house, all that you are allowed to do is hide in the house, call 911, and hope that the police come in time.

We can call the Progressive’s and the Prosecutor’s take the anti-Castle Doctrine: Seconds may count, but you’d better politely wait several minutes until the police arrive, based upon the gun-grabbers’ unswerving presumption that anyone threatening you and/or trying to break into your house is, more likely than not, a pacifist who wants to sit down with you and discuss world peace through disarmament.

Unfortunately for Dr. Simon, the prosecutor didn’t let the matter rest after the judge said no. Instead, he decided to bring out the heavy guns [pun intended], and have a grand jury decide whether to indict Simon. The grand jury did, which isn’t very surprising given that the prosecutor had before him 19 upstanding Marin County residents.

And that should tell you all you need to know about what’s going to happen next. I won’t go so far as to say that anyone still insisting on staying in California will deserve it when something like this happens to them. But as with white people still clinging to Ferguson, Missouri, they long ago lost the privilege of being shocked and surprised by it.

(Via Maet)


Narratives, truth, and bigotry


Naturally, Democrats and the Left have tried to pry Southerners away from their guns and religion. Gun control has largely been a culture war effort for Democrats. “Some of the southern areas have cultures that we have to overcome,” was Congressman Charles Rangel’s explanation for why gun control was both needed and difficult.

The Washington Post’s Gene Weingarten cursed the Second Amendment as “the refuge of bumpkins and yeehaws who like to think they are protecting their homes against imagined swarthy marauders desperate to steal their flea-bitten sofas from their rotting front porches.”


Sixty-eight-year-old Joseph Sapienza suspects the men who attempted to break into his Gastonia home Thursday night thought he would be an easy target because he’s disabled and uses a walker.

But after scaring away the would-be thieves, Sapienza taped a note to his door, in which he attempted to make it clear that his trigger finger works just fine.

“(If) you try to break in my house again, I will be waiting on you,” reads the note, which was still there Friday afternoon. “Enter at your own risk.”

Sapienza, a Marine Corps veteran who served four years in Vietnam, was watching television in his bed at 7:42 p.m. at his home on Davis Avenue. He heard someone prying off the lock and pulling the nails to the latch out of his front door.

He grabbed his .45-caliber handgun, put it in a holster on his walker and began shuffling toward the sound. He flipped a hallway light on, yelled out to announce he was armed, and yanked open the door to see two men wearing ski masks.

They jumped off his porch and practically tripped over one another trying to flee, Sapienza said.

“It was like a keystone cops scene,” he said. “When they saw the .45, one ran one way up the street, and the other went the other way.”

If you despise the South as much as Democrat Socialists and other liberal-fascist haters like the above-quoted scum do, then stay the hell out, and keep your Nazi gun-control bullshit up North where it belongs. Otherwise, you just might get shot like the common housebreaking thugs you really are at heart.

And if you’d like to consider that a thinly-veiled invitation to come and take them, motherfuckers, then by all means be my guest. Some of us down here would absolutely LOVE it.

(Both via Herschel)


Pigs, flying!

Okay, you’re not gonna believe this. You’re just not gonna believe it.

The Assault Weapon Myth
In 2012, only 322 people were murdered with any kind of rifle, F.B.I. data shows.

The continuing focus on assault weapons stems from the media’s obsessive focus on mass shootings, which disproportionately involve weapons like the AR-15, a civilian version of the military M16 rifle. This, in turn, obscures some grim truths about who is really dying from gunshots.
Annually, 5,000 to 6,000 black men are murdered with guns. Black men amount to only 6 percent of the population. Yet of the 30 Americans on average shot to death each day, half are black males.

It was much the same in the early 1990s when Democrats created and then banned a category of guns they called “assault weapons.” America was then suffering from a spike in gun crime and it seemed like a problem threatening everyone. Gun murders each year had been climbing: 11,000, then 13,000, then 17,000.

Democrats decided to push for a ban of what seemed like the most dangerous guns in America: assault weapons, which were presented by the media as the gun of choice for drug dealers and criminals, and which many in law enforcement wanted to get off the streets.

This politically defined category of guns — a selection of rifles, shotguns and handguns with “military-style” features — only figured in about 2 percent of gun crimes nationwide before the ban.

Nothing the least bit surprising there; I doubt there’s even one of you reading this who doesn’t know all of it already. No, what’s completely jawdropping about it is where it’s finally being admitted.

Via Bob, who says:

The op-ed concludes that violent homicides are primarily a poverty issue disproportionately concentrated among small groups of particularly violent young men, a stunning and rare admission that poverty and the drug trade are the primary problem driving murder, not access to firearms.

I’d argue with that, myself. Poverty is an all-purpose Progressivist excuse used to rationalize wealth redistribution everywhere from our lawless (on both sides of the law) urban jungles to your more violent Mideast hellholes. But I’d suggest that far from having a poverty problem, we and the rest of the world have a morality and ethics problem instead, coupled destructively with more than just a few criminal-justice problems. He’s right on the money with this, though:

Don’t expect this sort of stunning admission of the facts to mark a change in cover from the Times, however. The brief bout of lucidity will quickly fade behind the veil of Alzheimer’s liberalism, and we’ll hear the rest of the deranged gaggle of op-ed writers to quickly fall back into the mantra of “Guns are bad, the NRA is evil, we need more taxes, government, citizen control, etc.”

Still…it’s nice to see that every once in a while a real and honest thought can escape from the morass of Manhattan, however fleeting that honest thought may be.

Nice, sure. Also–dare I say it?–UNEXPECTED!


Your feel-good story of the day

Give ’em hell.

Arthur M. Lewis may be elderly, but criminals are learning the North Palm Beach man is no easy mark.

The 89-year-old decorated World War II veteran foiled an armed robbery attempt Saturday afternoon at his Lake Park jewelry business that left a 44-year-old suspect with six gunshot wounds, but no loot.

The 89-year-old decorated World War II veteran foiled an armed robbery attempt Saturday afternoon at his Lake Park jewelry business that left a 44-year-old suspect with six gunshot wounds, but no loot.

Lewis was working behind the counter at The Jewelry Exchange at 900 N. Federal Highway when he was approached by a gun-wielding man around 3 p.m., according to an arrest report from the Palm Beach County Sheriff’s Office. Lewis said he immediately grabbed the suspect’s revolver and pulled out a .38-caliber handgun from his own pocket.

Lewis was working behind the counter at The Jewelry Exchange at 900 N. Federal Highway when he was approached by a gun-wielding man around 3 p.m., according to an arrest report from the Palm Beach County Sheriff’s Office. Lewis said he immediately grabbed the suspect’s revolver and pulled out a .38-caliber handgun from his own pocket.

The two men wrestled for several minutes and fired shots at each other. Despite battling someone half his age, Lewis got the best of it. A man identified by the sheriff’s office as Lennard Patrick Jervis, a Miramar resident, was shot six times by Lewis, including four times in the chest. Lewis’ left arm was grazed by a bullet, but he was otherwise unscathed.

Lewis said Jervis continued to fight with vigor, even with four gunshot wounds to the chest and one each to the wrist and leg. Large bullet holes remained in the store’s walls Monday and the area behind the counter where Lewis and Jervis fought hand to hand was trashed.

“People think because he’s 89, he’s frail,” said Vivien Bresnahan, Lewis’ girlfriend. “That irritates me because he’s anything but (frail).”

Jarvis eventually stumbled over the counter toward the front door and asked Lewis to buzz him out. Lewis complied.

“I was so glad to get rid of him,” said Lewis, who has been in business for 20 years. “I’d had enough of him.”

I think it’s safe to say the scum felt the same about you, Arthur. But your story is as good a refutation of the “liberal” gun-grabbers’ “high capacity assault magazine clip” horseshit as there is. Sometimes, six shots just aren’t adequate for the task at hand. Heavy, heavy emphasis on this:

Court records show that Jervis has been arrested 20 times in Miami-Dade and Broward counties since 1989.

Gee, imagine my surprise. The thieving punk was well along what you might call the Martin-Brown Road; he wouldn’t have stopped until he’d killed some poor soul like Lewis, or like my friend Chris, who was stabbed to death (over forty times) a couple of years ago when he arrived home from work to find his house being tossed by another of these oxygen thieves with a rap sheet as long as your right leg. Too bad Lewis didn’t off him; it’s extremely doubtful the filth learned anything from his righteous ventilating, and will be back plying his trade in a few short years.

Via Glenn, who says: “But maybe Lewis should upgun to a .44?” Heh. Indeed.


Works every time it’s tried

Yes, even in a liberal-fascist hellhole as far gone as Chicago.

Since Illinois started granting concealed carry permits this year, the number of robberies that have led to arrests in Chicago has declined 20 percent from last year, according to police department statistics. Reports of burglary and motor vehicle theft are down 20 percent and 26 percent, respectively. In the first quarter, the city’s homicide rate was at a 56-year low.

“It isn’t any coincidence crime rates started to go down when concealed carry was permitted. Just the idea that the criminals don’t know who’s armed and who isn’t has a deterrence effect,” said Richard Pearson, executive director of the Illinois State Rifle Association. “The police department hasn’t changed a single tactic — they haven’t announced a shift in policy or of course — and yet you have these incredible numbers.”

The Chicago Police Department has credited better police work as a reason for the lower crime rates this year. Police Superintendent Garry F. McCarthy noted the confiscation of more than 1,300 illegal guns in the first three months of the year, better police training and “intelligent policing strategies.”

Yeah. Right. Whatever. Somebody ought to refer that hack to the paragraph right above it. No that it would do any good; gun-grabbers gonna grab guns, no matter what.

A July study by the Crime Prevention Research Center found that 11.1 million Americans have permits to carry concealed weapons, a 147 percent increase from 4.5 million seven years ago. Meanwhile, homicide and other violent crime rates have dropped by 22 percent.

“There’s a lot of academic research that’s been done on this, and if you look at the peer-reviewed studies, the bottom line is a large majority find a benefit of concealed carry on crime rates — and, at worst, there’s no cost,” said John Lott Jr., president of the Crime Prevention Research Center based in Swarthmore, Pennsylvania. “You can deter criminals with longer prison sentences and penalties, but arming people with the right to defend themselves with a gun is also a deterrence.”

You can pedantically argue over correlation and causation all you like, but simple common sense says: the facts are the facts, the truth is the truth, and what works, works.


All they have is lies

See if you can count ’em all up.

A federal judge has upheld a package of strict firearms regulations that went into effect in Maryland last year.

In a 47-page opinion issued Tuesday, U.S. District Judge Catherine C. Blake said the law “seeks to address a serious risk of harm to law enforcement officers and the public from the greater power to injure and kill presented by assault weapons and large capacity magazines.”

Judge Blake, appointed by President Clinton, agreed with lawyers for the state, who held that assault weapons and large-capacity magazines “fall outside Second Amendment protection as dangerous and unusual arms.” She also pointed out that the plaintiffs could not produce a single example in which an assault weapon or more than 10 rounds of ammunition were “used or useful” in an instance of self-defense in Maryland.

The opinion cites statistics showing that ownership of assault weapons and large-capacity magazines is comparatively rare and yet they are “disproportionately represented in mass shootings” as well as the murders of law-enforcement personnel.

“Upon review of all the parties’ evidence, the court seriously doubts that the banned assault long guns are commonly possessed for lawful purposes, particularly self-defense in the home, which is at the core of the Second Amendment right, and is inclined to find the weapons fall outside Second Amendment protection as dangerous and unusual,” Judge Blake wrote.

I don’t know when I’ve ever seen a statement from a judicial opinion that is so packed with falsehood as that one is. Including “and” and “the,” as the old saying goes. Maybe we need to update another old standard while we’re at it: “Lie of the Left, law of the land.”

Via Herschel, who swiftly and handily dispenses with a few of ’em so I don’t have to.


Make mine…nine?

Since the H&K post and subsequent discussion the other day, I’ve been mulling this over some myself:

Once upon a time, I was sold upon the “bigger is better” theory of handgun bullets. I even—for a very short time—bought the line of gun store commandos and Internet warriors of “one-shot stoppers,” the claimed vast superiority of one caliber over another, etc.  But the reality of that argument was and is complete and utter crap.

It always has been. In the real world, where physics, psychology, and biology matter, “handgun stopping power” has always been a myth.

Whether firearms use comparable full metal jacket (FMJ) or hollowpoint bullets, it is location, location, location that matters. A .45-diameter bullet through a vital organ or into the central nervous system simply isn’t much more effective than a .40-diameter bullet or a .35-diameter bullet at handgun velocities. The hundredths of an inch in diameter difference were largely irrelevant. A human shot through the heart lungs, and other vital organs with a .45 ACP, 10mm or other vaunted “manstopper” can still live for minutes and continue fighting as long as he has the will to do so. A 9mm or .40 S&W bullet placed in the same location is going to be just as effective as a practical matter, all uninformed argument to the contrary. The only ways handgun bullets are “one shot stoppers” are:

  • a central nervous system strike to the brain or spine. If you short-circuit the body’s electrical system, the body collapses. All typical defensive handgun calibers can penetrate to sufficient depths.
  • a structural hit. Shots that shatter a leg or pelvis are relatively rare with handgun bullets, but in the event they do happen, the body collapses.
  • a psychological stop. The vast majority of defensive handgun uses where shots are fired result in non-fatal wounds. Attackers stop fighting because they either psychologically shut down as a result of a wound—acting like they think they should respond to being shot—or simply stop fighting and/or begin to flee because they don’t want to be shot again.

The most common defensive calibers, using quality defensive ammunition, perform in remarkably similar ways. Many law enforcement agencies are viewing the same data, and as a result of the data, are shifting back to 9mm pistols from the .40 S&W and .357 SIG pistols they’d adopted decades before.

Now for an admission: despite the premise of Correia’s controversial and entertaining post, I like H&Ks a lot. I’ve shot several full-auto MP5s in various settings, including subgun competitions at Knob Creek, and loved ’em. I also had a USP in .40 cal for a while that I eventually got rid of in part because I just never much liked .40; I vastly prefer shooting .45 to anything else, although I’ve had a couple of 9’s over the years and liked them just fine too. And that’s what got me to thinking about the eternal caliber debate. This, too, ought to enter into any practical-minded shooter’s deliberations:

9mm cartridges are extremely common, and also use less material (primer charge, brass, powder, lead, guilding metal, etc) than other calibers. As a result, they are typically several dollars per box cheaper to shoot than other calibers, and far cheaper per case, both if you handload or buy commercial ammunition. At the time of this article, I can purchase a 1,000-round case of 115-grain 9mm TMJ Speer Lawman from for $290. A 1,000-round case of .45 ACP from the same manufacturer on the same site costs $425.  That’s a $135 price difference to fire a thousand rounds.

There is also a vast selection of 9mm pistol designs on the market, keeping prices competitive in nearly every niche.

Although I’d pretty much dismissed the Europellet in favor of the venerable .45, in the apparently unlikely event that I ever get my hands on a spare dime again I might be giving serious consideration to picking up another 9. And immediately losing it overboard in a tragic canoeing accident, of course.


Escape while you can

Before they make that illegal along with your products, and your very existence.

Beretta U.S.A. Corp., located in Accokeek, Maryland, announced today that it has decided to move its manufacturing capabilities from its existing location to a new production facility that it is building in Gallatin, Tennessee. The Gallatin facility is scheduled to be opened in mid-2015. Beretta U.S.A. had previously planned to use the new Gallatin, Tennessee facility for new machinery and production of new products only.

“During the legislative session in Maryland that resulted in passage of the Firearm Safety Act of 2013, the version of the statute that passed the Maryland Senate would have prohibited Beretta U.S.A. from being able to manufacture, store or even import into the State products that we sell to customers throughout the United States and around the world. While we were able in the Maryland House of Delegates to reverse some of those obstructive provisions, the possibility that such restrictions might be reinstated in the future leaves us very worried about the wisdom of maintaining a firearm manufacturing factory in the State,” stated Jeff Cooper, General Manager for Beretta U.S.A. Corp.

“While we had originally planned to use the Tennessee facility for new equipment and for production of new product lines only, we have decided that it is more prudent from the point of view of our future welfare to move the Maryland production lines in their entirety to the new Tennessee facility,” Cooper added.

Good for Beretta for being smart enough to see the writing on the wall, to realize how gravely their future is threatened by remaining in Democrat Socialist Amerika, and for having the gumption to do something about it while they still can. Ace points out a possible downside:

Interesting, I think, that Beretta did get the Maryland state government to back down — but then decided it did not feel like being routinely threatened by an overweening and hostile local government.

Maybe a bit of bad timing to announce this a year before the move — doesn’t Maryland have an incentive to punish them now?

Well, we know how vicious and vindictive liberal-fascists are even in victory, so I’d be very surprised if they didn’t seek a way to lash out at Beretta somehow.


Convinced me!

Good stuff.

The one and only thing they know about guns is that they’re afraid of them. And like the juveniles they are, the only way they know to deal with their fears is to have Big Mommy wish them away.

(Via Bill)

Note: the stupid Twitter widget stopped working for some reason, so I just stuck the image itself in there.


HK: because you suck, and we hate you

An oldie but goodie from Correia.

An open letter to the gun community from HK’s marketing department:
In a world of compromises, some people put the bullets in the magazine backwards…But it doesn’t matter, because our gun is on the cover of the Rainbow Six video games. Look how cool that SEAL coming out of the water looks… If you buy a $2,000 SOCOM, you will be that cool of an operator too. And chicks will dig you.

At HK, we stuck a piston on an AR15, just like a bunch of other companies have done, dating back to about 1969. However ours is better, because we refuse to sell it to civilians. Because you suck, and we hate you.

Our XM8 is the greatest rifle ever developed. It may melt, and it doesn’t fit any accessories known to man, but that is your fault. If you were a real operator, you would love it. Once again, look at Rainbow Six, that G36 sure is cool isn’t it? Yeah, you know you want one.And by the way, check out our new HK45. We decided that humans don’t need to release the magazine with their thumbs. If you were a really manly teutonic operator, you would be able to reach the controls. Plus we’ve fired 100,000,000 rounds through one with zero malfunctions, and that was while it was buried in a lake of molten lava, on the moon. If you don’t believe us, it is because you aren’t a real operator.

By the way, our cheap, mass-produced, stamped sheet metal guns like the G3 and MP5 are the bestest things ever, and totally worth asinine scalpers prices, but note that cheap, mass-produced, stamped sheet metal guns from other countries are commie garbage. Not that it matters, because you’re civilians, so we won’t sell them to you anyway. Because you suck, and we hate you, but we know you’ll be back. We can beat you down like a trailer park wife, but you’ll come back, you always do.

Buy our stuff.

HK Marketing Department
HK.  Because you suck.  And we hate you. 

Is there more, sez you? You betcher, sez I.

For each of their wunder guns, you can get something else that costs a lot less, and works better, and has ergonomics designed by people that actually shoot. HK came about when some Nazis fled to Spain and built the Cetme. But Cetme doesn’t sound very tough, does it?  So they went back to Germany and became H and K, and if you call it H and K, fan boys will get mad, and insist that it is HK, because manly Teutonic operators and Navy SEALs don’t have time to say the word And. So HK rose to prominence by building the G3, which is what the Germans call the Cetme.

Now the G3 is a decent rifle. It is a cheap, stamped sheet metal, battle rifle. It has terrible ergonomics, with a hard to use safety, (and this is coming from a guy with gorilla hands), and difficult to use charging handle. It is reliable, because of the roller locking bolt that destroys your brass, and recoils worse than other competing .308 rifles. The FAL smokes the G3, and the only reason the G3 exists is because the Germans were too proud to pay royalties to those uppity Belgians. 

The G3 can be really accurate, if you weld a bunch of metal to the sides of it, stick on a nice barrel, and jack the price up $10,000. And no, that’s not a typo. The PSG1 is absurdly priced, and the cheaper version, the MSG90 is proof that if make anything absurdly heavy enough, it can be accurate. 

There is a collapsible stock available, which is awesome, if you like getting hit in the face with a piece of rebar, which is what their $400 stock feels like when you shoot it. Germans must be tougher than we are or something.

Of course. And if you don’t believe it, just ask them.

(Via Herschel)


Liberty’s last line of defense

That would be the Second Amendment, and its supporters.

Some 79 percent of Tea Party activists consider owning a gun an act of patriotism, as do 69 percent of Republicans. Democrats (35 percent) and independents (40 percent) are much less likely to feel that way. Men (60 percent) say being a gun owner shows patriotism, while over half of women feel it does not (56 percent).

Owning a gun is significantly more likely to be seen as patriotic in rural America (65 percent) than in suburban (46 percent) and urban areas of the country (36 percent).

Naturally, those viscerally opposed to both patriotism and the 2A–ie, the effete and effeminate urban Left–wouldn’t feel the same way as real Americans, and there’s no real reason to expect them to. But if the country is ever to be saved (a proposition I’m highly dubious of, to say the least) it’s going to be the gun-rights folks who do it–most likely after a good few of them, their families, and their pets have been slaughtered in no-knock gun-confiscation raids by federal SWAT/Gestapo squads.

(Via Herschel and Katie Pavlich)


A schooling

This article is a perfect illustration of what can happen when you fail to pay attention.

“I feel as if they’ve trampled all over the Second Amendment,” Warren says. “It’s so frustrating. I’ve done nothing wrong except to be in an accident. To be honest, I think these laws are ridiculous. Gun laws don’t do anything really. They just hurt the people who follow the law. The criminals don’t care.” Until the police refused to return her weapon, Warren tells me, she was unaware that a universal background-check law had even been added to the books. “They did a magazine law here in Colorado, too,” Warren tells me. “We can only have 15 rounds. It’s nuts. I took safety classes. When you’re in a situation where you’re being attacked, you’re shaking and you’re scared — the average is that you’ll hit the attacker maybe two out of twelve times. Why are they telling me how many [rounds] I can have? Why are they making it more difficult for me to protect myself?”

Because they don’t want you to be able to protect yourself, that’s why, and they intend to strip you of every useful means of doing so so that you’ll be forced to rely on their appointed “experts” for everything, up to and including the physical defense of your person in a violent assault when one of their duly-authorized “experts” is minutes or even hours away. They would far rather see you raped and beaten to death than freed from their iron-fisted rule by your own right and proper assumption of responsibility, a living, breathing example of a system that works far better than theirs ever can or will. They’ll take a whole pile of corpses over self-determination any day of the week and twice on Sundays.

That principle–rule by “expert,” assuming the incompetence of free individuals to make proper decisions for themselves–is the beating, black heart of Progressivism, from whence their fascist edicts flow like toxins contaminating the bloodstream of the body politic. If you don’t know that already, you damned well better educate yourself with a quickness, before they do that for you too–the hard way.

Does anybody but me find it both pathetic and annoying that this woman blurts out the bit about the standard-cap mag ban as if it ought to come as some kind of shock–as if she really thinks that just because she just had her own head pulled roughly from the sand, nobody else had heard about it either? That we’re all as willfully ignorant as she has been until now? I really don’t want to be too hard on her; her heart is in the right place, and she at least had the gumption to provide for her own defense, as is both her right and her duty. But come on, lady, get a clue already. Some of us out here are in fact paying attention, whether you have been or not.


“Before 1993, there were no mass shootings on U.S. military bases”

Just coincidence, I’m sure.

In 1993, most soldiers were stripped of their right to carry a weapon onto United States military bases effectively turning them into gun free zones.

While the directive was composed under big government progressive George H.W. Bush, it was implemented shortly after big government progressive Bill Clinton assumed office. This point is monotonous, as it is irrelevant.

NBC News in Washington listed shootings at U.S. military bases since 1994 in the wake of the most recent attack on Fort Hood, but did not delve into any that may have happened before 1993.

Why not?

The article failed to make the obvious connection that before 1993, mass shootings on United States military bases did not exist.

It is unconscionable that soldiers who are tasked with keeping Americans safe are thwarted by politicians from keeping themselves safe.

Well, yeah, but once we’re ALL disarmed, then we’ll all be safe, right? Except when we’re not.

(Via Larwyn)




"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

Subscribe to CF!
Support options


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 - entries - Entries
RSS - entries - Comments


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