GIVE TIL IT HURTS!

Ain’t getting mine

Except bullets first.

No, Just No
They tell us that we are paranoid because no one wants to take our guns.

Jane Fonda says that we need to kill all of the white men in order to save the planet. You see, according to her and the climate change religion, we only have eight years to cut our greenhouse gas emissions in half, or the world is doomed. Of course, they were saying we only had eight years last year. They also said it the year before that. They also said we only had eight years in 2007, sixteen years ago.

She should have been arrested and sentenced to death for treason when she went to North Vietnam and sat on that anti-aircraft gun for a photo opportunity. I am sick of the anti-American left telling me how they are going to come after me to have me killed, fired, deplatformed, or whatever, then telling me that I am paranoid for not wanting to give up my guns.

I am not giving up my guns, I am not getting into the rail car, and if you try, my only hope is that I make the trade an expensive one.

Preeee-cisely. As the Marines used to say, I plan to go to Hell in a crowd.

I repeat: stop flapping your yaps and just come and take them already, Leftards. At this point, there are untold millions of us out here who are hoping you’ll do exactly that. Enough talky-talk; do or do not, there is no try. So let’s get this party started, then. We’ll see how THAT works out for you in the end.

Any time you feel froggy, cockholsters.

8

NEW JERSEY NABS TWELVE YEAR OLD WHITE SUPREMACIST DOMESTIC TERRORIST!

First, the story behind the headline.

BREAKING: New Jersey Has Enacted the Largest Gun Ban in US History
Our friends at Ammoland, who are based in the gun rights hell that is New Jersey, have uncovered what appears to be a little-known aspect of a gun control law that passed and was signed into law last June. They’ve just published an article by attorney Evan Nappen who has read the law closely and discovered that — intentionally or not — it’s actually the biggest gun ban ever enacted in these here United States.

The bill was ostensibly intended to outlaw firearms without serial numbers. It banned homemade guns, 3D printed guns, even possession of the files for running a 3D printer or CNC machine for making firearms. It even outlawed slingshots, fer Chrissakes.

Like so many laws that are enacted at all levels of government, this one was poorly written. And as a result, it’s incredibly broad.

I talked to Mr. Nappen this afternoon and he tells me the law is quite clear that for a firearm to be legal in New Jersey, it has to have a serial number and the serial number must have been imprinted by a federally licensed firearm manufacturer.

That means your Daisy BB gun — which under the state’s expansive and idiotic gun control laws is actually considered a firearm — may have a serial number on it, but Daisy isn’t a federally licensed gun maker. As a result that Red Ryder in your kid’s closet now makes you a felon.

By declaring non-firearms to be “firearms” under Joisey law, well, you don’t have to be a superdupergenius to see what comes next.

New Jersey State Police arrest young felon

12 year old Ralphie Parker has been remanded into custody to await trial on seventeen felony charges relating to firearms and domestic terrorism, NJ authorities have announced.

Photos of the young gunslinger both before and after his arrest were released to the press:

Yikes!
The terrorist brandishing his deadly fully-semi-automatic assault-weapon gun before being apprehended

The next picture shows the dangerous terrorist just before he was handcuffed by NJSPD officers:

Ain’t so fat and sasssy now, are ya kid?

Due to the extremely serious nature of his multiple crimes, Parker is being held without bond in solitary confinement within the Security Threat Group Management Unit at Newark’s Northern State Prison.

Poor Ralphie, he never knew what hit him. Turns out, shooting his eye out was the very least of his worries.

2
1

Just. Don’t. DO it

Reason #8,741 why you never, ever, EVER try to rob a gun store.

How do gun shops prevent a person from simply walking in, asking to look at a gun and some bullets, then holding up the store owner with the weapon?
You know, this is funny. I was actually in a gun store when something almost exactly like this happened.

It was a fairly large store, with the owner and 4 other sales clerks behind the counters. I was with a friend who was there to pick up a shotgun he’d ordered. A guy walks in and asks to see a Colt .45 Model 1911. The clerk opens the glass, retrieves the pistol, and performs the necessary check, then lays the gun on the counter for the man. He picks it up, looks it over and says “Perfect…I like it.”

He then reaches into his pocket, pulls out a loaded magazine, and inserts it into the gun, then slides a round into the chamber – all pretty darned smooth and quick. He then points it at the clerk and says, “I’ll take it.”

The clerk just shrugged, and nodded past the guy. He backs off a bit, and then looks around the store. Every other clerk was armed, and had pistols pointed at the guy. Every customer had been ushered quickly behind counters or racks out of the way, without any fuss or noise. When the guy looked back at the clerk, he now had HIS pistol out and pointed at the guy. My friend and I were both trying not to laugh at this point.

The owner then starts walking towards the guy, with his hands up. He’s explaining to the guy how badly this is likely to go for him, and points out that he is seriously out-gunned, and he is definitely NOT leaving the store with that firearm. He speaks calmly, gently…and slowly reached out and took the gun from the guy without resistance at all. He then politely asked him to get on the floor, and told one of the clerks to call the police.

Found out later the store owner was a veteran, and the other sales people were either veterans or retired cops. All in all, I was never worried, scared…no, I was amused. And so were the cops, when they showed up (greeting the owner by name as they came in), wondering who’d try to rob a gun store.

I still wonder about that myself, some 30 years later, to be honest.

A gott-damned idiot, that’s who, and nobody whatsoever else. Period fucking DOT, as Ringo always says.

6

God created man; Sam Colt made them equal

Should you buy a gun? OF COURSE you should, dumbass.

Progressives Convinced Us to Get a Gun
It’s hypocritical to urge Americans to disarm while also failing to protect them from surging crime rates.

Hypocritical? Nah, not quite. It’s EVIL, is what it is.

When I was growing up on the South Side of Chicago in the late 1950s, almost every boy had one treasured possession: a holster with two six-shooters. It was the essential toy for playing Cowboys and Indians, the most popular game in town. Regrettably at the time, my brother and I didn’t get in on the fun. Our father wouldn’t allow it.

He had his reasons: In depriving us of the revolvers, he often would cite his experience during World War II. Our father served in the French army

Ah, it all begins to make sense now.

and, as a member of an artillery regiment, fought the Nazis when they marched into Belgium. During that service, a rifle shot grazed the back of his neck and came close to taking his life. He made it clear that, having been wounded and seen the horrors wrought by firearms, he didn’t believe anyone should think of such weapons as playthings.

No sensible adult does, fool. As for kids disporting themselves at Cowboys and Injuns out in the backyard—Jeez O Pete, man!

 

Onwards.

Though as a child I sometimes resented not fitting in with my friends, I grew to accept that firearms were terrible devices that didn’t belong in our lives. As an adult, for many years I supported banning guns among civilians, even contemplating the merits of repealing the Second Amendment.

As the twig is bent…

But some months ago my thinking changed again. Today, my wife has a gun that she keeps in our home. She has the necessary permits from the authorities and has trained extensively in using the gun safely. Growing up, I never imagined I would have a firearm at home. But I am reassured to have one, even if I’ve never held it myself.

Our decision to acquire a gun is due to the recent release of the man who bludgeoned my wife’s younger sister to death several decades ago. My wife fears that the murderer, released from prison during the Covid-19 pandemic by New York state’s board of parole, poses a potential threat to us.

But our decision also is due to society’s current dysfunction. Crime is surging in our city—Washington—and around the country. Vagrants wander the streets, police are reluctant to tackle criminals, and courts seem unwilling to impose serious sentences on those who break the law. Given these circumstances, owning a gun seems to be one of the few ways to feel even a semblance of personal safety. There is an irony that policies progressives espouse, such as gun control, have prompted us to have a gun in our home.

Progressives nationwide have attacked police and law enforcement, alleging that our legal system is systemically racist and oppressive. They have caused recidivist criminals to haunt our streets and commit more crimes—and have refused to deal with homelessness in spite of the mental illness and drug addictions that so often afflict our cities’ most vulnerable. Numerous efforts to reduce the use of drugs have been rebuffed in the name, of course, of racism.

This approach has unleashed a crime wave and diminished our sense of safety on the streets. It is, therefore, unsurprising to see ever more law-abiding people seeking to arm themselves. As a result, there will be more guns out there, including in the hands of people who should never be near them.

To limit guns in America, much as my father wished, policy makers should focus on the underlying problems that are generating a spike in crime.

As always with leg-wetting hoplophobes, this sort of “thinking” is completely out of whack. “Limiting guns in America” is NOT a goal worth pursuing, based as it is entirely on ignorance, fear, and personal cowardice. In addition, it not only directly conflicts with the plainly-worded 2A, it also contravenes the values of individual self-determination, liberty, and personal responsibility upon which the Republic itself was originally Founded.

So how is it, then, that tremulous, antigun feebs dare to presume that, rather than scorning them for their pathetic neuroses, free Americans instead must bow to them and indulge their irrational phobias?

Sure, there should be more effort made towards reining in the crime currently rampaging and ruining US cities. At the same time, acknowledgment of a certain hard, immutable fact of life on this here planet must be made: Crime will never be eradicated completely. This is what we call part of the human condition; it will always be with us. Same-same for tyranny, which is the actual reason our Founding Fathers saw fit to feature the Second so prominently in the Constitution.

Those truths being self-evident, there can be but one reasonable way to look at the persistent shitlib obssession with doing away with the one truly effective means of resistance against crime and tyranny both: it is not merely wrong, not merely stupid, but actively, literally evil. Anything less is nothing but a comforting deceit we tell ourselves, as a balm for our collective lethargy in confronting it as it ought to be confronted.

All that said, I’m happy for this guy that they finally got a gun. But that’s only the start of it. Now, with a gun in the home, he needs to do himself a big, fat favor and emulate his obviously-intelligent wife: get to the local range; train with it; practice with it; get schooled on how to break it down and clean it (inquire about that at either the range or the local gun shop; you’ll find yourself astonished at the number of friendly, more experienced shooters who will be just pleased as punch to help you out). Learn as much about how y’all’s new firearm functions and the proper care and maintenance of it as you possibly can. It’s all part and parcel of the responsible-gun-owner experience, any one of which items you neglect at your own peril.

Education, see, is one of those “forever” kind of things; it never really ends, which is only meet and just.

(Via Insty)

2

DANGER, DANGER, YOUNG WILL ROBINSON!

On the list of things that will kill ya, turns out AR15s aren’t all that high up.

ABC News Accidently Admits AR-15s Aren’t as Dangerous as the Dems Pretend They Are
In their latest hit piece on Long Island’s GOP Rep. George Santos, ABC News let a little fact slip about the AR-15.

Santos co-sponsored a bill to name the AR-15 the “national gun of the United States.” ABC News stroked an article about voters protesters showing up at Santos’s office to protest the bill.

The ABC article states, “Research shows an AR-15-style rifle has been used to kill at least 226 people in mass shootings since 2012.”

If my calculator is accurate, that’s roughly 22.6 people per year, or 1.8 people per month, who have been killed by AR-15s in mass shootings.

Perspective
Let’s take a look at ways in which more Americans die every year than by AR-15s used in mass shootings:

  • Twenty-eight people are killed every year by lightning.
  • Roughly 2,167 Americans die annually from constipation.
  • On average, 951 people are killed by their lawnmowers while another 4,193 are killed by farm tractors and other agricultural equipment.
  • Murderous toasters kill 45 people per year.
  • Eleven teenagers die every day while texting and driving.
  • An estimated 40 people die every year while skateboarding.
  • Roughly 10,206 are accidentally strangled to death while they sleep, and for those who survive the night, another 10,386 will die every year falling out of bed.
  • As per the FBI, rifles of every variation — including but not limited to the scary AR-15 — killed 215 Americans in 2019. But another 1,533 were killed by knives, and 651 people were beaten to death by hands, fists, feet, etc.
  • In 2015, 5,051 people choked to death while eating.
  • Americans average 62 deaths per year by bees, wasps, and hornets.

What Have We Learned?
We’ve learned that if you want to cut down on needless deaths, you’re better off handing out prune juice than trying to purloin AR-15s, as we Americans are roughly 10 times more likely to die as Elvis did — on the toilet — than by an AR-15 in a mass shooting. We’re 50 times more likely to be beaten to death. We’re roughly 1,000 times more likely to be killed — either by accidental strangulation or falling — from our beds than by an AR-15.

“As Elvis did.” Sigh. I tire of having to point it out again and again, but the truth is Elvis did NOT “die on the toilet.” That story was manufactured by Vernon for a press conference in the immediate wake of The King’s demise. Being an old-school sort of backcountry coot, Papa Vern considered it much more of an embarrassment and a disgrace that his son might have died from lethal-level amounts of at least five different drugs coursing through his system than of a heart attack induced by straining unproductively on the crapper, and assumed most ordinary folks would feel the same way as he did about it.

As recounted in the second volume of Peter Guralnick’s masterful Elvis bio, Careless Love, the master bathroom at Graceland, see, had a separate-but-attached ante-room with a comfy sofa and a LaZBoy recliner therein. And that’s where Elvis was actually found crumpled dead on the floor, fully clothed in his silken jammies, with a magazine in hand. Elvis had for years been known to sit in the master-bath lounge area reading at any hour of the day or night, just relaxing, so it’s no big surprise that it might be where he expired.

Vernon’s grim fairy tale, intended to preserve some shred of dignity for his son after his death, actually had quite the opposite effect, having lingered on to haunt E’s memory as a topic of disdain and mockery ever since. Funny how our attitudes and assumptions have so radically shifted since Vernon Presley’s day, innit? Would that hoplophobic shitlibs’ knee-jerk loathing for the venerable AR15 might someday undergo a similar shift, I’m thinkin’.

With “friends” like these…

The NRA, The GOPe, all sorts of other ostensibly “conservative” outfits, like the Heritage Foundation among too many others—for many decades, Real Americans thought they could count on these organizations as at least lukewarm allies, if occasionally unreliable or even treacherous ones.

Well, guess what.

NRA was the first National Gun Control Organization
There are many in the gun community that are angry with Trump for the bump stock ban. I have never blamed Trump for the travesty that was the bump stock ban, because I don’t think that he is the one who sold out gun owners. Let’s be honest here- the NRA greenlighted the bump stock ban. This is nothing new, the NRA was pro gun control for most of its history.

In the 1920s, the National Revolver Association, the arm of the NRA responsible for handgun training, proposed regulations later adopted by nine states, requiring a permit to carry a concealed weapon, five years additional prison time if the gun was used in a crime, a ban on gun sales to non-citizens, a one day waiting period between the purchase and receipt of a gun, and that records of gun sales be made available to police. Florida becoming the 26th state to get rid of concealed weapons carry as a crime meant getting rid of that NRA proposal after 100 years.

During the 1930’s, the NRA helped shape the National Firearms Act of 1934. President Franklin Roosevelt wanted to make gun control a feature of the New Deal. The NRA assisted Roosevelt in drafting National Firearms Act and the 1938 Gun Control Act, the first federal gun control laws. These laws placed heavy taxes and regulation requirements on firearms that were associated with crime, such as machine guns, sawed-off shotguns and silencers. Gun sellers and owners were required to register with the federal government and felons were banned from owning weapons. Not only was the legislation unanimously upheld by the Supreme Court in 1939, but Karl T. Frederick, the president of the NRA, testified before Congress stating, “I have never believed in the general practice of carrying weapons. I do not believe in the general promiscuous toting of guns. I think it should be sharply restricted and only under licenses.”

After the assasination of President John F. Kennedy on Nov. 22, 1963 by Lee Harvey Oswald with an Italian military surplus rifle purchased from a NRA mail-order advertisement, NRA Executive Vice-President Franklin Orth agreed at a congressional hearing that mail-order sales should be banned stating, “We do think that any sane American, who calls himself an American, can object to placing into this bill the instrument which killed the president of the United States.”

The NRA also supported California’s Mulford Act of 1967, which had banned carrying loaded weapons in public in response to the Black Panther Party’s impromptu march on the State Capitol to protest gun control legislation on May 2, 1967.

Then came 1968. The assassinations of JFK, jr and Martin Luther King prompted Congress to enact the Gun Control Act of 1968. The act brought back some proposed laws from 1934, to include minimum age and serial number requirements, and extended the gun ban to include the mentally ill and drug addicts. In addition, it restricted the shipping of guns across state lines to collectors and federally licensed dealers. The only part of the proposed law that was opposed by the NRA was a national gun registry. In an interview in American Rifleman, Franklin Orth stated that despite portions of the law appearing “unduly restrictive, the measure as a whole appears to be one that the sportsmen of America can live with.”

It wasn’t until a mini-revolt was staged at the 1977 NRA convention that there was a change in direction. A group of gun owners pushed back and deposed the old leaders in a move called the “Cincinnati Revolt.” Led by former NRA President Harlon Carter and Neal Knox, the revolt ended the tenure of Maxwell Rich as NRA executive vice president and introduced new bylaws. The Revolt at Cincinnati marked a huge change in direction for the NRA. The organization thereafter changed from “hunting, conservation, and marksmanship” and towards the defense of the right to keep and bear arms. The catalyst for this movement was that the NRA wanted to move its headquarters from Washington, DC to Colorado. The new headquarters in Colorado was to be an “Outdoors center” that was more about hunting and recreational shooting than it was the RKBA.

I became a member of the NRA about a decade later and remained an annual member, until I became a life member about 15 years later. I believed for years that the NRA was fighting the good fight for gun owners. It wasn’t.

The NRA was always influenced by a group of Fudds who supported hunting, but hated guns that weren’t for hunting. The bureaucrats who were a part of the NRA’s organization always tried to steer towards hunting, eventually caused the organization to morph into an organization that used the threat of Democrat gun bans for fundraising.

It’s taken quite a long time for Real Americans to awaken to the sad, sorry reality that they are in fact beset on all sides, to emphatically include the one they had thought of for years as their own. One hates to plummet all the way down into unleavened, constant cynicism about absolutely everything and everyone. But in times such as these, when all that was once considered reasonable has been redefined—intentionally, and with malice aforethought—as unreasonable, even intolerable, what else can one sensibly do?

2

They lie

Divemedic runs the numbers.

Math, It’s a Thing

A study published this week by the Kaiser Foundation says that 1 in 5 people in the US has a family member who has died after being shot. This is a survey pretending to be science. Let’s do the math. I will even be kind and use the Kaiser foundation’s numbers. (FYI: The Kaiser Foundation is a lefty anti gun pseudoscience think tank)

Averaging the data they publish for the past 21 years, they claim that the annual firearm death rate in the US was 10.75 per 100,000. That equates to 225.75 people per 100,000 over the past 21 years. Or in other words, one person in 445 has died a so-called “gun death” in the past 21 years. Even if you assume that each person killed is from a unique family, for 1 in 5 people to have had a firearm death in their family would mean family sizes of 89 people. The math doesn’t stop there.

The average family size in the US has remained stable at 3.1 people. The statistic is impossible, even if you count grandparents, siblings, cousins, and more. The entire study is pseudoscientific garbage.

With these hoplophobic fascists, you just gotta take that as read from the very beginning. I say again: stop yammering about it and just come and take them already, shitlibs. Let’s all see how that works out for ya in the end.

Weapons of “war”

The hoplophobic, fascist shitlibs don’t have the vaguest clue what they’re prattling about. Not that that’s ever stopped them.

Sen. Kennedy Stumps Mayorkas (Again) Regarding the Definition of ‘Assault Weapons’ He Wants to Ban

Well, Department of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas is not having a good week. Earlier this week, he got raked over the coals by Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) over the border crisis.

Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.) also got a turn with Mayorkas and, as he’s been known to do, asked the secretary a few simple questions that someone in his position ought to be able to answer.

“Mr. Secretary yesterday you testified in judiciary that you support an assault weapon ban and we didn’t have much time to talk about that. Tell me your definition—once more—of an assault weapon,” the senator asked.

Easy, right? When someone says he wanst to ban assault weapons, it stands to reason that he should know what an assault weapon is. Mayorkas would prove in his responses that he has absolutely no idea.

“I am not an expert, right respect to the definition but of the assault bands. And so I defer to—”

“You are the Secretary of Homeland Security,” Kennedy reminded him, clearly suggesting that he ought to know the answer.

“—as as a I was about to say, I defer to the experts, I defer to, for example, the definition of an assault weapon that was codified in the prior iteration of the legislation that was passed and that was in operation when I served as an assistant United States attorney and the United States Attorney in the Central District.”

“So you would support the prior definition…”

“Senator I must defer to the experts with respect to the definition,” Mayorkas said again, before really stepping in it. “But I will tell you, for example, military—military-style weapons are of tremendous concern. ”

“You personally think we should ban assault weapons, and I know you tobe an intelligent man and a thinking person, so I know you’ve thought about it,” Kennedy responded. “What do you mean by military-style weapon?”

Spoiler alert: Mayorkas didn’t know the definition of “military-style weapon” either.

Naturally, Mayorkas is hardly unique in his stem-to-stern ignorance.

Jamaal Bowman Throws Unhinged Fit Against GOP in Hallway, Thomas Massie Drops a Little Reality on Him

For Democrats, whenever there is a mass shooting, it’s the fault of the gun. If the shooter is someone folks view as someone “one of theirs,” it’s the fault of the gun and the evil intolerant society that somehow must have affected the poor shooter, as we saw in the case of the Nashville shooting.

The answer, of course, is that in every case, whoever the shooter is, it’s the fault of the shooter. A gun is just a tool, that can be used for bad or for good, like a knife, a fork, or virtually anything else. The gun isn’t invested with evil powers to shoot people just because it’s an AR-15 or an AK-47. It just looks scarier to folks on the left who know nothing about guns. We heard crazy things on Tuesday from Democrats like Joe Biden claiming that an “AR-15 bullet” will “blow up inside the body.” Yet, he’s in a position of immense power to affect laws and is issuing executive orders from on high when it comes to guns.

But I think the award for the unhinged take of Wednesday has to go to Rep. Jamaal Bowman (D-NY), a radical Squad member, who just started screaming in the public hallway, falsely blaming Republicans for school shootings. To him, “doing something” means more gun control. Yet he never seems to explain how if virtually every school is “gun-free” why there are mass shootings in schools. So instead of talking about real solutions with Republicans, he throws a fit in the hallway for the cameras and calls the GOP “cowards.” No, sir, cowards are those who shout down anyone who thinks differently than you and who are afraid to deal with the real issues. But Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) stops, tries to calm him down, and gets him to talk. He does manage to lay a little reality on him.

Massie told him that schools don’t allow teachers to carry. That caused Bowman to lose his mind, screaming, “More guns equals more death.” Notice how Bowman was shouting and not listening to what Massie was saying.

Yep, just your typical, Mk 1-Mod 0 shitlib arrogance in ignorance. As for civilian vs military arms, here’s another little tidbit of information the Leftards will blithely go to their graves in total blank ignorance of (via Herschel—thanks!).

Original ATF AR-15 Classification Refutes Claim that Rifle ‘Not Meant’ for Civilians

U.S.A. – -(Ammoland.com)- “This responds to your Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request…concerning the following: 1. All classification letters (or if classification letters were named in some other way, those records) regarding Model R6000 Colt AR-15 SP1 Sporter Rifle, Serial No. GX4968 which was approved in approximately 1963; and 2. All classification letters…for AR-15 platform rifles predating the submission to the ATF for the Colt AR15 SP1 Sporter Rifle,” Adam C. Siple, Chief Information and Privacy Governance Division, notified attorney Stephen Stamboulieh in a Nov. 22 response (see below). “In response to your request, we have processed a total of 2 pages of responsive material.”

That referenced FOIA request was sent in May on behalf of firearms designer Len Savage and resulted in the production of a Dec. 10, 1963, letter from what was then called Alcohol and Tobacco Tax Division to Colt’s Patent Fire Arms Manufacturing Company, Inc. This is the first such classification for the AR-15 and has not been published before.

The FOIA request itself was prompted from a Nov. 2017 article in The Atlantic in which the magazine, unsurprisingly to anyone familiar with its anti-gun bent, attempted to bolster a claim that “these rifles were meant for the military, not civilians.”

“Colt sent a pilot model rifle (serial no. GX4968) to the BATF for civilian sale approval on Oct. 23, 1963. It was approved on Dec. 10, 1963, and sales of the ‘Model R6000 Colt AR-15 SP1 Sporter Rifle’ began on Jan 2, 1964,” one critic of the article contended. “The M16 wasn’t issued to infantry units until 1965 (as the XM16E1), wasn’t standardized as the M16A1 until 1967, and didn’t officially replace the M14 until 1969.”

So, they were being sold to civilians first?

Apparently so, yes. But don’t let’s anybody be holding their breath waiting for the lying liars of the Lyin’ Left to abandon their screeching about “MILITARY-STYLE FULLY-SEMI-AUTOMATIC ASSAULTWEAPONGUNS OF WAAAAAR!!!” They won’t even tone it down a notch out of a half-decent sense of shame, count on it.

Never, ever forget: on any given topic or issue, it’s never really about what they say it’s about. They care not a fig for addressing a problem, resolving an issue, saving a life, or their perennial fave “TEH CHILDREN!” No, it is all about the same thing it always and forever is: power, and control. Period fucking dot.

To call them “pond scum” would be a gratuitous insult to the relatively innocuous slick of slimy green goo that floats atop a pond.

Update! Via WRSA, an excellent Stefan Molyneux quote.

If you are for gun control, then you are not against guns, because the guns will be needed to disarm people. So it’s not that you are anti-gun. You’ll need the police’s guns to take away other people’s guns. So you’re very Pro-Gun, you just believe that only the Government (which is, of course, so reliable, honest, moral and virtuous…) should be allowed to have guns. There is no such thing as gun control. There is only centralizing gun ownership in the hands of a small, political elite and their minions.

Says it all, don’t it?

Your feel-good video of the week

Another FAFO Righteous Shoot™.


Justified? Yep—especially seeing as how AZ_Golfer posted a follow-up, explaining the backstory.

Man Shoots Stalker In Self-Defense, Video Goes Viral: Here’s The Full Story

Benjamin Backus, a 40-year-old financial advisor, reportedly provided assistance to his ex-felon neighbor, Michael Montanarella, in starting his own business.

However, Montanarella’s alleged descent into heavy drug and alcohol use resulted in him getting kicked out of rehab and developing paranoid delusions.

He believed that Backus was breaking into his home and stealing things, despite the fact that Backus and his son had moved. Montanarella reportedly threatened Backus after showing up at his new home, and even vandalized his property by breaking windows on multiple occasions.

Backus took out a restraining order against Montanarella, but the situation escalated on March 24, 2022.

Backus claims that he went out to warm up his car to take his son to his SATs and head to work, but heard an engine start behind him. He turned around and saw Montanarella drive past him before circling back to throw a rock at him.

Montanarella then allegedly jumped out of the car and approached Backus, who backed up down the road past his house while repeatedly telling Montanarella to stop and get down.

This led to the use of force by Backus, which was caught on camera and went viral.

Again: justified? Oh HELL yeah. More than, in fact; my only question for Righteous Shooter after reading that is, what the hell took ya so long, anyway? He never should’ve allowed Mr Psycho Stalker to get as physically close to him as he did, IMHO.

8

Sign me up!

I have an AR and I love the thing all to pieces, albeit in a totes non-sexual way, of course. But this is the kind of AR I REALLY want to own.

Expert testifies that a single round from an AR-15 can sever the upper body from the lower body

We’ve heard a lot about the abilities of the AR-15. Last summer, NPR reported that bullets travel from the AR-15 with such velocity that they can decapitate an adult. Rep. Bill Pascrell, Jr. informed us that a bullet from an AR-15 can liquify tissue and vaporize bone.

Now, as California’s Department of Justice weighs an assault weapons ban, Col. Craig Tucker has testified that a single round from an AR-15 “is capable of severing the upper body from the lower body, or decapitation.” Furthermore, it’s useless as a defensive weapon, except maybe when used to beat an attacker with it.

Uhhhh HUH. WELL, then, there you have it; The Science™ hath spaketh, nothing more to be said. Yet for some reason, the mouth is still moving.


Gee, I don’t know what we’d ever do without “experts” to look out for us and protect us from…whatthefuckever. But I sure hope someday we get to find out. Glenn snarks:

That’s nothing. I have some specialty AR15 rounds that actually travel back in time and kill your grandfather so that you’re never born at all. They’re a bit pricey, but worth it.

Okay, sign me up for some of those too.

3
2
1

Kavanaugh disappoints again

Divemedic offers the misguided fool a primer course on what the Constitution actually says, and how it’s supposed to work.

This past week saw a huge win for gun rights, in that SCOTUS struck down a part of the GCA that was added during the Clinton administration- making prohibited persons out of people who are subject to domestic violence restraining orders. AWA over at GunFreeZone did an excellent post on the ruling, and I won’t attempt to recreate that here.

My opinion on these DV orders is that they are bullshit aimed at men in an attempt to give women another arrow in their lawfare quiver. About ten years ago, I was the subject of one of those orders. It was sought and granted without me even being present, with the initial order not even having my correct name on it, by a woman that I hadn’t even seen in months, and in that order she alleged that I did things in stalking her that were impossible because I was not even in the country when they were alleged to have happened.

David Letterman was once subject to a DV order that was obtained by a woman who lived thousands of miles away, after the woman alleged that they were in a secret affair and that Letterman was sending her secret messages using his top 10 lists as a code. Using accusations of domestic violence has become a common tactic for women who wish to win divorce and child custody cases, as well as angry girlfriends who wish to get back at former boyfriends. Men have no legal recourse against women who are proven to be lying.

The decision that is the subject of this post fixes some of that. That isn’t how the left, or apparently Brett Kavanaugh, sees it. Kavanaugh wrote a concurring opinion, making the case that sometimes we have to weigh in on whether or not a law is a good idea.

That’s where he is wrong.

The Amendment says “shall not be infringed.” It doesn’t say “…unless you have a really good reason to do so.” The Supreme Court isn’t there to decide whether or not a law is a good idea. The court is there to decide whether or not a particular law comports with the Constitution. All of the authority of the government derives from the Constitution. Any power or authority that the government takes upon itself that is outside of that authority is nothing more than tyranny, an unconstitutional power grab that is based upon the principle of “might makes right” that flies in the face of the principles upon which the “government of the people, by the people, and for the people” was built upon.

There are those who would try and make the case that there is some balancing act to be done, but that isn’t how our government is supposed to work. Thomas sees that. Scalia, although a pragmatic sort of man, saw that as well. Kavanaugh does not.

So it would seem. With “conservative” Justices like Kavanaugh and Roberts for (putative) friends, the Constitution will never want for enemies. Sadly, it ain’t as if it doesn’t have enough of those already.

Update! Just read it myself, and DM is right: the above-cited Gun Free Zone post is indeed well worth a look. The Salon one he also linked, on the other hand, is precisely the kind of intellectually-tortured, logic-pretzeling codswallop we’ve all come to expect from the hoplophobic Goosesteppin’ Left.

5

OF COURSE they’re not coming for your gas stove!

I understand they also have some very nice beachfront property in Arizona up for sale, too.

Democrat-led cities are already moving forward with gas stove bans that will affect millions

Former New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio said in 2021 if his city could ban natural gas, ‘any city can do the same’

Yeah, well, the joke’s gonna be on you soon, Red “Bill”. Because guess what kind of stove practically every restaurant in the entire damned world runs?

Go on, guess. I dares ya. Yes, that would include those exclusive, hoity-toity, exorbitantly-priced eateries you self-proclaimed “elite” types so enjoy frequenting.

Democratic leaders in major cities nationwide have already moved forward with bans on natural gas stoves even as the Biden administration has pumped the brakes on similar regulations at the federal level.

Cities including Los Angeles, San Diego, San Francisco, Seattle and New York City — which are collectively home to more than 10 million Americans — have enacted varying restrictions on natural gas hookups impacting gas-powered furnaces, ovens and stoves. 

Leaders of the Democrat-led cities have argued that transitioning away from natural gas would help achieve climate and net-zero ambitions.

“New York City is proof that it’s possible to end the era of fossil fuels, invest in a sustainable future, protect public health and create good-paying jobs in the process,” former New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio said in December 2021. “If the largest city in America can take this critical step to ban gas use, any city can do the same.”

Following his remarks, de Blasio signed a law requiring the phase-out of fossil fuel usage in new buildings. The law, which goes into effect this year and mandates new buildings are fully electric by 2027, made New York City the largest city and first large cold-weather city to phase out fossil fuel combustion in new construction.

Electricity which comes from where and is generated using what, again now? We wonders, yes we wonders.

Eedjits, the whole sorry lot of ‘em. Eedjits, scoundrels, and reprobates.

1

Threatens the tyrant

The usual blather from a gun-grabbing blowhard.

Illinois Governor JB Pritzker has blasted the more than six dozen sheriff’s offices across the state for vowing to defy a new gun control law.

“This is political grandstanding at its worst. The assault weapons ban is the law of Illinois,” the governor’s office told Fox News on Monday. “The General Assembly passed the bill and the Governor signed it into law to protect children in schools, worshippers at church, and families at parades from the fear of sudden mass murder.”

The state Senate passed the Protect Illinois Communities Act last week, which bans assault weapons 2A-protected semi-automatic rifles and high-capacity standard-capacity magazines from being sold or manufactured in the state.

Edited by me, for purposes of veracity.

At least 74 sheriff’s offices have publicly stated their opposition to the law, calling it unconstitutional.

80 at last count, out of a possible hundred and two counties in Illinois. Which adds up to an overwhelming majority in anybody’s book. Gee, Gov Prickzter, think maybe the problem here might not lie with these stalwart sheriffs, who are standing up straight and tall in resistance to mendacious authority, but with this soggy sop you’re tossing to the fear-stricken and factually-challenged in your sorry state?

“Part of my duties that I accepted upon being sworn into office was to protect the rights provided to all of us, in the Constitution,” Edwards County Sheriff Darby Boewe said on Facebook. “One of those rights enumerated is the right of the people to KEEP and BEAR ARMS provided under the 2nd Amendment. The right to keep and bear arms for defense of life, liberty and property is regarded as an inalienable right by the people.”

The Illinois Sheriff’s Association stated last week that they have opposed the bill since its inception.

“We, as a representative of chief law enforcement officials throughout Illinois, are very concerned and disturbed by the ongoing and escalating violence throughout our State and Country,” they said. “We are always supportive of new tools, techniques and laws that assist us in preventing and holding accountable those that wage efforts of harm and violence on others. However, this new law does not do that.”

As statistics and studies have confirmed, over and again.

Pritzker’s office continues to maintain that law enforcement in the state doesn’t have the right to “pick and choose which laws they support.”

Perhaps so, and then again perhaps not. What they DO have is a clear and specific duty to refuse to enforce patently unlawful and contra-Constitutional edicts such as this one, you multi-chinned fascist slob. These good men and true are upholding their oaths of office; you’re violating yours. If this nation is to survive qua nation for very much longer, it will require a whole lot fewer of YOU and a whole lot more of THEM to see to it that it does.

Next time grubby, greasy Gov Prickzter is consoling himself with a few dozen fully-loaded triple-decker fatburgers in the privacy of the Governor’s Mansion, I hope he chokes to death on ’em.

7

Thinking ahead

Make no mistake here, folks: what we just saw with the gas-stove trial balloon is part of a process, a long-range plan.

Progressive cities such as Berkeley, San Francisco and New York City have already banned gas stoves and other appliances in new buildings. New York Gov. Kathy Hochul this week proposed a ban on gas equipment including stoves in new small buildings in 2025 and larger ones in 2028.

Come 2030, New Yorkers won’t be allowed to replace their gas stoves with new ones if they break down. “As you begin making a transition, everyone will have to switch out appliances,” a state official explained. This is how the left’s green-energy “transition” will work for all things. Come 2035, New Yorkers and Californians won’t be able to buy new gasoline-powered cars either.

The Biden Administration is also aiding and abetting the anti-gas stove cause. Last year it filed an amicus brief with the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals supporting a gas ban by Berkeley, Calif. The departments of Justice and Energy argued that cities and states should be able to exercise police powers to prohibit the use of “dangerous or unsafe items.” Why would the federal government weigh in on a local regulatory case, if not for ideological climate solidarity?

Rest assured, it’s not just about Climate Change (formerly Global Warming, formerly Global Cooling, formerly The Weather)™ alone. That’s just cover, a ruse. Rather, the CC agenda itself is part and parcel of the tyrant’s eternal ambition to let nothing escape his gaze or his grasp.

Progressives claim that gas stoves produce pollutants that are harmful to human health. But pollution comes from cooking with poor ventilation, not from natural gas. Electric range-tops have the “hidden hazard” of potential burns, to borrow Mr. Trumka’s words.

There really is a culture war coming over gas stoves, and everything else involving fossil fuels, because climate has become for the left a matter of core cultural identity. Progressives want to impose their values on the lifestyle of everyone else, including in the kitchen. If subsidies don’t work, coercion follows. When they can’t win the political debate, they resort to brute government force. They really are coming for your stove.

Along with everydamned thing else. Remember: there is NOTHING they won’t try to fuck with, take over, control, and ultimately, ban. Nothing. It’s who they are, it’s what they do.

5

Ignore illegal orders

In Illinois, of all places.

Some Illinois Sheriffs Say Departments Will Not Comply With Assault Weapon Registration Requirements

As potential legal fights percolate over Illinois’ new assault weapons ban, law enforcement officials in several counties have said that their departments will not enforce provisions of the bill that require existing weapons to be registered with the State Police.

Their arguments center around their stance that the bill, which makes it illegal for Illinois residents to purchase, transfer or manufacture assault weapons and extended magazines, violates the Second Amendment.

McHenry County Sheriff Robb Tadelman was one of numerous law enforcement officials throughout the state who shared messages on social media in the aftermath of the bill’s passage.

“Neither myself nor my office will be checking to ensure that lawful gun owners register their weapons with the state, nor will we be arresting or housing law abiding individuals that have been charged solely with non-compliance with this act,” he said.

Many of those law enforcement officials shared identical messages, including Kankakee County Sheriff Mike Downey, Sheriff Jack Harlan in Boone County and Winnebago County Sheriff Gary Caruana.

In a statement, Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker’s office called the messages “political grandstanding at its worst,” and said that sheriffs and departments that refuse to enforce the ban are “in violation of their oath of office.”

Au contraire, you rat-bastard prick; YOU are. Heartfelt kudos to these fine fellows; clearly, they understand their oath of office, the US Constitution, and their solemn and sacred duty to uphold it a damned sight better than their shitlib Goobernor ever will, or could.

(Via Divemedic)

2

Recent Posts

Recent Comments

Comments policy

NOTE: In order to comment, you must be registered and approved as a CF user. Since so many user-registrations are attempted by spam-bots for their own nefarious purposes, YOUR REGISTRATION MAY BE ERRONEOUSLY DENIED.

If you are in fact a legit hooman bean desirous of registering yourself a CF user name so as to be able to comment only to find yourself caught up as collateral damage in one of my irregularly (un)scheduled sweeps for hinky registration attempts, please shoot me a kite at the email addy over in the right sidebar and let me know so’s I can get ya fixed up manually.

ALSO NOTE: You MUST use a valid, legit email address in order to successfully register, the new anti-spam software I installed last night requires it. My thanks to Barry for all his help sorting this mess out last night.

Comments appear entirely at the whim of the guy who pays the bills for this site and may be deleted, ridiculed, maliciously edited for purposes of mockery, or otherwise pissed over as he in his capricious fancy sees fit. The CF comments section is pretty free-form and rough and tumble; tolerance level for rowdiness and misbehavior is fairly high here, but is NOT without limit.

Management is under no obligation whatever to allow the comments section to be taken over and ruined by trolls, Leftists, and/or other oxygen thieves, and will take any measures deemed necessary to prevent such. Conduct yourself with the merest modicum of decorum, courtesy, and respect and you'll be fine. Pick pointless squabbles with other commenters, fling provocative personal insults, issue threats, or annoy the host (me) and...you won't.

Should you find yourself sanctioned after running afoul of the CF comments policy as stated and feel you have been wronged, please download and complete the Butthurt Report form below in quadruplicate; retain one copy for your personal records and send the others to the email address posted in the right sidebar.

Please refrain from whining, sniveling, and/or bursting into tears and waving your chubby fists around in frustrated rage, lest you suffer an aneurysm or stroke unnecessarily. Your completed form will be reviewed and your complaint addressed whenever management feels like getting around to it. Thank you.

Categories

Archives

"Mike Hendrix is, without a doubt, the greatest one-legged blogger in the world." ‐Henry Chinaski

Correspondence

Email addy: mike-at-this-url dot etc
All e-mails assumed to be legitimate fodder for publication, scorn, ridicule, or other public mockery unless specified as private by the sender

Allied territory

Alternatives to shitlib social media: A few people worth following on Gab:

Fuck you

Kill one for mommy today! Click to embiggen

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

Claire's Cabal—The Freedom Forums

FREEDOM!!!

"There are men in all ages who mean to govern well, but they mean to govern. They promise to be good masters, but they mean to be masters."
Daniel Webster

“When I was young I was depressed all the time. But suicide no longer seemed a possibility in my life. At my age there was very little left to kill.”
Charles Bukowski

“A slave is one who waits for someone to come and free him.”
Ezra Pound

“The illusion of freedom will continue as long as it’s profitable to continue the illusion. At the point where the illusion becomes too expensive to maintain, they will just take down the scenery, they will pull back the curtains, they will move the tables and chairs out of the way and you will see the brick wall at the back of the theater.”
Frank Zappa

“The right of a nation to kill a tyrant in case of necessity can no more be doubted than to hang a robber, or kill a flea.”
John Adams

"A society of sheep must in time beget a government of wolves."
Bertrand de Jouvenel

"It is terrible to contemplate how few politicians are hanged."
GK Chesterton

"I predict that the Bush administration will be seen by freedom-wishing Americans a generation or two hence as the hinge on the cell door locking up our freedom. When my children are my age, they will not be free in any recognizably traditional American meaning of the word. I’d tell them to emigrate, but there’s nowhere left to go. I am left with nauseating near-conviction that I am a member of the last generation in the history of the world that is minimally truly free."
Donald Surber

"The only way to live free is to live unobserved."
Etienne de la Boiete

"History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid."
Dwight D. Eisenhower

"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

"There is no better way to stamp your power on people than through the dead hand of bureaucracy. You cannot reason with paperwork."
David Black, from Turn Left For Gibraltar

"If the laws of God and men, are therefore of no effect, when the magistracy is left at liberty to break them; and if the lusts of those who are too strong for the tribunals of justice, cannot be otherwise restrained than by sedition, tumults and war, those seditions, tumults and wars, are justified by the laws of God and man."
John Adams

"The limits of tyranny are prescribed by the endurance of those whom they oppress."
Frederick Douglass

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

“I hope we once again have reminded people that man is not free unless government is limited. There’s a clear cause and effect here that is as neat and predictable as a law of physics: As government expands, liberty contracts.”
Ronald Reagan

"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

Best of the best

Image swiped from The Last Refuge

2016 Fabulous 50 Blog Awards

RSS feed

RSS - entries - Entries
RSS - entries - Comments

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

Copyright © 2023