ammo for sale All commissions earned are donated directly to the Second Amendment Foundation

Friday, July 30, 2010

Gotta watch those "experts" Updated!

If someone from a gun-controlled paradise like New York claims to be an expert, watch out:

"You could take someone out with one of these scopes in the dead of night from up to a mile-and-a-half-away," [Dietl] said. "I have friends in Iraq who use these. These are the real deal."

The scopes in question are 4x gen3 night vision scopes - a mile and a half? Clearly my skills aren't nearly as good as officer Dietl's.

4 power scope for long-range night time sniping my ass!

Not to mention Dan Wasserbly, supposedly a weapons expert for Jane's, claims that the Raptor 4X Night Vision Weapons Sight is so "advanced the average U.S. soldier wouldn't use one."

Oh Danny boy, the average soldier wouldn't use them because they're of limited utility to the average soldier, not because they're so advanced (and they're Gen3, not the uber-advanced Gen4).

We're surrounded by idiots.

Update: Others have noticed.


Whiners among us

I sincerely hope this officer loses:

Morris County is seeking to dismiss a lawsuit filed by a sheriff’s officer who claims she was discriminated against when she was required to fire a gun while pregnant.

In her suit, Detective Sgt. Moire Reilly, now 35, said her physician told her "the discharge of a firearm during her pregnancy posed a significant risk of harm to (her) unborn child."

Poor, poor highly-paid whiner .... I think I'm gonna be sick. But there's more:

the sheriff’s department tried to help Reilly take part in the qualifying procedure by offering to let her fire her weapon outdoors to reduce noise levels; fire her weapon alone to cut noise; use a soft-body armor to reduce the impact of noise and have the weapon cleaned by someone else.

Carmagnola said Reilly refused all these accommodations.

Now, in my life, I've been discriminated against, including an action against a former employer with regards to my military service.* But if you'll read the whole article, you'll see that this woman is really being unreasonable.

And I think the police department needs to out Mr Doctor on the witness stand to find out if he's actually got evidence or if he's parroting some anti-gun party line.


*I lost - so much for federal law.

Alan brings it ...

... over at Snarkybytes.


Thursday, July 29, 2010

Damned if you do ...

... damned if you don't:

The District police department policy on forcible entry caused a "deadly delay" as officers waited for a supervisor outside an apartment while a mother and her two young sons were being stabbed to death inside, according to a lawsuit filed by the woman's family.

But Vox nails it when he says:

If you are relying on the police instead of yourself, you are quite literally defenseless. If you don't own a shotgun, a rifle, and a pistol or three, then you are neglecting one of your most basic responsibilities as a human being.

Remember, the Supreme Court has ruled repeatedly that the po-po have no responsibility to defend you particularly.

No responsibility whatsoever.

So unless you're calling to have a dead body picked up, don't bother.


Here here!

Absolutely spot on:

That's right, I believe Drew Douglas Grant, a person responsible for the intentional deaths of 4 children and a teacher, should be granted a permit for a handgun.

Read the post for the necessary context.

This is why Robb Allen is a regular guest on Vicious Circle .... and I'm not!


Nurds R Us

I need to let my daughter see this.


Wednesday, July 28, 2010

Some people ...

... get all butt hurt over the simplest things:

Commanding officer: 'Did you get him?'
Soldier: 'Yes, sir.'
Commanding officer: 'Are you sure?'
Soldier: 'Yes, sir.'
Soldier reaches into rucksack and places severed head on table.

I mean, the Gurkhas are a tough bunch ... and it's a cultural thing. So don't send Gurkhas out on a mission to bag a high-value target and then complain about the manner in which they verify that they've bagged said high-value target.

I mean, really.

Demotivational by RobertM

Another thought ...

... about something Sebastian said:

... we might be able to poke enough holes in it that people who want a machine gun can get one. It just might add more hoops to jump through.

And that's the problem I have with it. We 'might', and we may have 'more hoops to jump through' above the ones we've already got.

Back in 1986, I purchased an Olympic Arms CAR-15. It was an A-1 model, with 16" barrel. At the time, my dealer was just getting into class III manufacturing, and he quoted me a very reasonable price to convert the rifle to full auto*. I elected to wait, as I was going to Marine Corps boot camp that summer.

But then came the Hughes amendment, and all that changed. When I got out of boot camp, the price of a conversion had jumped considerably. Like, out-of-my-price-range considerably.

And to date, even at my highest earning level, I never found an extra $10k to spend on what is essentially a $1500 rifle. And I can't see ever having that amount, unless I win the lottery.

But would I ever need a full auto weapon? Hmmm, I don't know, but these two folks might have.

Do I want a full auto weapon? Absolutely.

But how long would Sebastian make me wait, just so he could feel better about the NRA?


*He actually suggested that I get it papered as a full-auto, with a 10" barrel and a suppressor, since at that time you didn't have to pay the $200 for each NFA item you papered.


Sometimes I try to poke Sebastian about the NRA, and sometimes I try to get information. Such was the case yesterday when I commented on this thread:

No… but there are no Republicans that pro-gun either. For the foreseeable future machine gun laws aren’t going to change substantially.

And I think that's too bad. Because I keep hearing that we're winning.

I fully understand that the NRA prefers to have favorable legislation in hand over a favorable court decision, since the courts are far less certain than congress. So why aren't they pushing the envelope?

We have won on many things recently. And on many things, the courts will have to make some folks catch up. But as I heard UJ say on a Vicious Circle once, 'when it comes to why we need to carry a firearm, we've won that argument'. Arizona just passed a no-permit concealed carry law (that's constitutional carry). 48 states have agreed that shall-issue permits are the way to go.

So why don't we start acting like we've won the argument? Why isn't the NRA pushing states like MA and CA to get with the program? I wouldn't be nearly as down on the NRA if they would develop a definite plan to fully restore the 2nd amendment, publish it, and push it. Make the top 3 items your priority until they're accomplished. Like this:
  1. No restrictions on semi-automatics or handguns of any kind, in any state.
  2. Shall-issue concealed carry in all states
  3. No-permit open carry in all states
Once you accomplish #1 (or #2), then you add a new #3 (like repealing Hughes?!). And they would naturally have to work against further encroachment, but that's expected. And I understand that there are state constitution issues in many states, but let the state NRA organizations fight for the changes.

And wouldn't that be a fitting test for some of these 'pro-gun' Dems? Have the NRA suggest that a pro-gun Dem sponsor a repeal of the Hughes amendment?
Wouldn't that be a hoot?!

I get frustrated by what I see as inaction. Yes, I realize that there is significant action (God bless you, Alan Gura!), but still.

Let's start acting like it for a change.


Up is down

You know the world's gone crazy when I've spent a significant amount of time searching for a Hello Kitty bento box!


Tuesday, July 27, 2010

Hee hee

Read about progressivism!


Will they never learn?

Because raw milk-sellers are among the most violent:

Now supplies of raw milk and other products have been confiscated from a farm and a distribution point in California for alleged violations of a long list of various government rules, such as permit requirements.

California? Seriously?! I'm tellin' you, one of these days .....


A thought

I've got an idea on what to do with these thoughtful dissidents:

Oil Spill Charity "F-Bomb-A-Thon" from on Vimeo.

If you see anyone on the street wearing this t-shirt, take your fist, and firmly apply it to the shirt-wearers nose.

That should do.


Monday, July 26, 2010

Sad day

I wondered when this day would come. I realized that Straightarrow was sick when I saw him comment on Mike Vanderboegh's first chapter of Absolved.

You will be missed Straightarrow, and I can only aspire to your level of patriotism.



Lame ducks

Lots of folks are being alerted to the possibility of congress passing lots of stuff during their lame duck session (assuming the R's take over the house). But further study finds a loophole that will squash those designs:
There are now six unelected members of the U.S. Senate; they represent Colorado, Delaware, Florida, Illinois, New York, and West Virginia. The rules governing the seating of senators elected to replace appointed senators are left to the states in the 17th amendment. New York’s law specifies the date the new senator takes office as January 3, so Kirsten Gillibrand will still be a senator in a potential lame-duck session, regardless of the outcome of her election bid. The other five states, however, all have laws that indicate the election winners may be seated immediately following their election — in time for the lame-duck session.

You can be assured the D's will fight tooth and nail against the sill of the people.


hmmm ...

... I wonder of the TSA will be amused?


Oops ...

... I guess complying with criminals isn't the best idea:

She was doing as police recommend in robberies – comply with a robber's demands. But her Lady Smith & Wesson .38 special, which she carries by permit, was hidden in her purse – and the purse was being held by one of the attackers.

Then the situation, suddenly, got much, much worse: One of the robbers demanded that she take off her clothes.

But it turned out ok ....... one dead goblin and the other in critical condition.


Friday, July 23, 2010

Was blind but now ...

... I see what Sebastian's all about:

Politics is a lot about perception, and if you had complete transparency, it would make bluffing and posturing a lot harder. For the same reasons you can’t have transparency in poker, you can’t really have it in grading.
This post was the result of an exchange (slightly off-topic) about how the NRA computes their 'ratings'. It is my contention that the ratings (or grades, however you want to put it) should be arrived at by a definite formula; one that is easy to duplicate (and check for accuracy) and open to all.

Sebastian disagrees, and thinks that the current, nebulous issuance of ratings is what keeps politicians on their toes.

Because this is just a big game to Sebastian .... high stakes, to be sure, but still a game.

It's not a game to me.

In the two+ years that Otis McDonald waited for the Supreme Court to rule that, yes, he really does have a right to own a handgun for protection*, it's also possible that he could have been seriously injured or killed during a crime.
After all, it was the result of a couple of break-ins that made him decide to be armed in the first place.

That's the really insidious thing about the 'lets take it slow and easy' approach; while some are taking it 'slow and easy', people are dying for lack of defensive arms.

So if you live in a jurisdiction where firearms are restricted, my advice is to get one, no matter what it takes, no matter how far you have to go to get it. Frequent gun shows (fuck you, Dennis Henegan), ask your hunting buddies; hell, if you have to, go see your local drug dealer.

You, as a human being, have a natural right to protect yourself - and you deserve to be as well armed as the thugs** who would prey upon you.


* What SCOTUS really decided was that you had a natural right to self-defense; the legality of it means you may own a handgun.

** Whether they wear uniforms or not

JPFO alert

We can defeat the Schumerites and the ADL.

What they don't understand

Or rather, what they're not willing to do anything about:

“The problem with the Tea Party, I think it’s just unsustainable because they can never come up with a coherent vision for governing the country. It will die out,” Graham said.

The American people don't need 'governing' - we can do just fine on our own, and the Tea Party knows it.

And this is also why the Republicans are not the saviors of the country. They want to 'govern' just as hard as the Democrats, only from the other side of the coin.

We are so fucked.


Thursday, July 22, 2010

An excellent outcome

Uncle has a post that tells us that some folks still 'get it':

“Don’t we call that, in the business, stealing?”



Free market in action

A story in WorldNetDaily shows how the free market works:

At the time, he had never heard of Kyle MacDonald, a Canadian who made international headlines when he traded a red paperclip for a two-story farmhouse through a series of transactions in 2005 and 2006. MacDonald blogged and wrote a book about the adventure, spawning many copycats.

Steven was not one of them.

The teen said most of the people he trades with aren't after something for nothing.

They are simply looking to get rid of an item they don't need in exchange for something they do. And they often can get a better deal than if they sold the item for cash.

Yes, this 17 year old has a bright future ..... just not in government.

Imagine bartering a dead cell phone into a Porsche. Sure, it took him 15 different transactions, but young Steven Ortiz did what folks do all the time: trade something they have for something they find more valuable.

Wish we had more of that going around.


Wednesday, July 21, 2010

Two Americas ...

There is an opinion piece circulating around the internets about the ruling class in America vs the rest of us. It contains some pointy observations that the Democrats mostly trust their political leaders to do what they want done, but very few Republicans show the same level of trust with their leaders. The point of that observation is that there is a not insignificant portion of the population that believes they don't have effective representation.

It brought to my mind a chapter in Mike Vanderboegh's novel Absolved, entitled Interposition , which describes how America has become two distinct countries. One of the tenets of the novel, and Mike's blog, Sipsey Street Irregulars, is to point out that the end (or lack of confidence) of the rule of law is particularly troublesome; if the law won't protect us from the government, then it also won't protect the government from us. The Republicans have served as the buffer between 'them' and 'us', but from the commentary referenced above, we don't trust the Republicans to do even that.

It has been said that politics is a blood sport, and it's really true. Politics are the mechanism the public uses to keep from revolting. The problem is, the Republicans don't act like it, and tend to go along with most of what Democrats want, just less of it.

So when enough of the pubic sees no political recourse for having their views heard, how long then before the pitchforks come out?


Another 'Taserable' offense ...

... suspicion of driving without valid insurance:

A man is threatening to sue police after an officer accidentally discharged a 50,000 volt TASER — into his GROIN.

Peter Cox, 49, was on his way to do some landscaping work at the home of a friend when he noticed a police patrol car was following him.

He added: ”After it happened the driver of the police car came up to me and said, ‘The reason we wanted to talk to you was because your car came up as no insurance.’

Yep .... that's exactly how you want your constabulary to act. Granted, this happened in the UK, but it's (once again) instructive none the less.


Friday, July 16, 2010

No blogging for a while .....

.... my mother passed away today, and I have no idea about the arrangements so far.

Your prayers for my dad are greatly appreciated.



This story truly is:

A home invasion in Phoenix on Wednesday morning ended with an armed man taken into custody after he was accidentally shot by one of three other invaders.

That's right ..... he picked a house that was in the process of being robbed!


Thursday, July 15, 2010

Cogitate ......

... on this one:

Kids around the country are getting high on the internet, thanks to MP3s that induce a state of ecstasy. And it could be a gateway drug leading teens to real-world narcotics.

I'm not sure if this is from The Onion or not .........


Doesn't want to fully cooperate? Use force!

At least he had the balls to resign:

Janice Wells called the Richland Police Department when she feared a prowler was outside her clapboard house in the rural west Georgia town.

The third-grade teacher had phoned for help. But within minutes of an officer coming to her backdoor, she was screaming in pain and begging not to be shocked again with a Taser. With each scream and cry, the officer threatened her with more shocks.

Read the linked article ..... it gets better. And they have dashcam video.

h/t David Codrea @ War on Guns


Interesting ...

... I'll have to keep up with this one:

An ATF agent is being tried for murder in the U.S. Virgin Islands in a case that has pitted local cops against federal agents, and caused furious U.S. law enforcement authorities to withhold help from local police while crime and gun violence in the popular tourist destination continue to climb.

Sounds reasonable to me ..... ask the officers down in New Orleans if they get a pass on murder. But here was the part that caught my eye:

After the local government decided to prosecute Clark, the ATF stopped sending agents to the U.S. Virgin Islands.

So if that's all it takes, then local attorneys general need to get on the stick!


Wednesday, July 14, 2010


This is an update to this post, where the news organization discusses firearms safety ..... and gets it pretty wrong!


JPFO Alert

The NAACP's race card rant.

All is not lost, apparently

Sebastian has a story about a judge who ruled that the police just can't keep a gun on you as long as they want:
"Reinhart gave no indication that he was armed or dangerous," Crone wrote. "Nevertheless, with the laser sight of Deputy's Coney's gun prominently fixed on him, Reinhart was ordered first to kneel with his hands behind his head for a period and then lie face down on the ground for an additional period of time while waiting for the second police officer to arrive. Reinhart was then handcuffed before he was searched twice. We believe that a reasonable person in Reinhart's position would not have believed himself to be free to leave but instead would have considered his freedom of movement to have been restrained to the degree associated with a formal arrest."

About time someone ruled this way.


Tuesday, July 13, 2010

First instinct: Use force

Another instance of the po-po using force first, and asking questions later:

Michelle Schreiner's blood sugar was dangerously low when a friend called 9-1-1 and Gresham police and paramedics arrived to find her holding a syringe full of insulin.

The officer ordered Schreiner -- who was dropping in and out of consciousness and was having trouble speaking or moving -- to drop the syringe. He shot Schreiner with a stun gun before handcuffing her and allowing paramedics to treat her.

Yeah, the first signs of diabetic-fucking-coma will get you shocked into coherence every time! There's more at the link.

One of these days, a relative of someone needing medical help is going to be there when said someone gets tased (or roughed up or handcuffed) before anyone helps them, and that relative will be armed, and will take matters into their own hands.

And I won't have any sympathy for the officer.


Seen at HotAir ...

... this headline about Dems losing their shit:

...I’ll enjoy video snippets like this, which shows another Democrat House member losing his temper in the face of public anger with their agenda.
Video at the link, and though short, worth watching. I wish I could see the extended remix version.


A sad tale .....

In my area, a victim of probable idiocy:

A three year old girl has died after being shot in the chest earlier today at a house on Tinsley Place of east 23rd Street. Chattanooga Police Spokesperson Sgt. Jerri Weary has not said who shot the gun.

Another report indicates that a sibling fired the shot from a weapon found in the home.

Right now, I want to let the gentle reader know that I have all the sympathy for the mother, who was home at the time. This is tragic any way you slice it.

But as Kathy Jackson says at The Cornered Cat, 'Childproof ...... isn't'. And that's the reason that I've endeavored to educate my 5 year old about my firearms (she's thoroughly uninterested in them now).

Many years ago in my hometown, a similar incident happened, fortunately not resulting in any deaths, though a young girl was injured. It seems that a young boy pulled the drawers out of a chest of drawers, stair-step fashion, and climbed up to the top drawer, where he found his mother's loaded .25 auto.

Obviously knowing nothing about the 4 Rules, he shot his sister.

But what moved me to write a fairly scathing letter to the editor was her statement to police that guns had no place in the home, and she urged other parents to get rid of their guns.

As tactfully as I could, I unloaded on the mother .... basically laying responsibility for the incident at her feet by doing nothing to ensure the safety of her children with regards to the firearms in her house.

I pulled no punches .... and no one responded that I was in any way out of line.

Read The Cornered Cat .... it's definitely worth your time. And say a prayer for the family of the little girl who was shot.

And for God's sake, teach your kids about firearms and firearms safety.


Monday, July 12, 2010

Tazers are NOT non-lethal

Just ask Phillis Owens .... oh wait .... you can't, 'cause she's dead:

Owens died after taking a hit from a deputy's stun gun. At the time, she was reaching to again pick up a handgun she had put down earlier during tense negotiations with Clackamas County sheriff's deputies.

I'm not sure that I blame officers so much for this one .... what I will fault is the general protocol of officers.

I'm an Andy Griffith kind of guy, but then, I've lived in smaller towns all my life. The sheriff grew up with residents, as did his deputies. So it evades my understanding that law enforcement sees a gun, and assumes 'bad guy' (and yes, I understand officer safety and all of that).

An 87 year old woman, upset because someone is operating a backhoe in her yard, and no one tries to talk to her?

It just makes me shake my head .......


Friday, July 9, 2010

Only One® convicted

The transit officer who killed Oscar Grant in a subway has been convicted:

A Los Angeles jury convicted a former Bay Area Rapid Transit police officer Thursday of involuntary manslaughter in the shooting death of an unarmed man on an Oakland train platform.

I'm not sure that any murder charges are appropriate, so all's well that ends well.

I also note this burst of common sense from the prosecutor:

Alameda County District Attorney Nancy O'Malley indicated that she was "disappointed and frustrated," because "this was not the verdict we sought."

"The case is a tragedy in every respect. Oscar Grant should never have been killed at the hands of a sworn officer," O'Malley said.
Of course, this is Los Angeles .....


JPFO Alert

Will American gun makers be patriotic this time?

Thursday, July 8, 2010

Another small victory

Gov Jindal allows firearms in church:

Governor Bobby Jindal has signed a law that will allow churchgoers to carry guns into house of worship.
The bill will allow persons qualified to carry concealed weapons to bring them to churches, mosques, synagogues or other houses of worship.

But here's the part I'm confused about:

Pastors, or other heads of the religious institution, are required to announce the presence of such weapons, either verbally or in weekly newsletters and bulletins.
Seems like there might be a few fine-print disclaimers appearing on the back page of church bulletins ..... or on the marquee's out front!


Wednesday, July 7, 2010


Mike V at Sipsey Street puts some knowledge on us about Lord Acton:

No doubt the responsibility in such a case is shared by those who ask for a thing. But if the thing is criminal . . . the person who authorises the act shares the guilt of the person who commits it. . . The greatest crime is Homicide. The accomplice is no better than the assassin; the theorist is worst. . . Crimes by constituted authorities worse than crimes by Madame Tussaud’s private malefactors. . . Murder may be done by legal means, by plausible and profitable war, by calumny, as well as by dose or dagger. . . The responsibility exists whether the thing permitted be good or bad. If the thing be criminal then the authority permitting it bears the guilt. . .


The NRA are at it again

This time, they're supporting a suit against the City of Chicago:

Fairfax, Va. -- The National Rifle Association is supporting a lawsuit against Mayor Richard Daley and the City of Chicago's newly adopted gun control ordinance, which violates the U.S. Supreme Court's recent ruling in McDonald v. City of Chicago

So I wonder, does this mean the NRA are supporting financially, or that they're in favor of the suit?

My guess is the latter.


Tuesday, July 6, 2010

Will wonders never cease

Dave Hardy at Of Arms and the Law links this article from the Daily Kos, wherein liberals are admonished to live up to their labels:

Liberals can quote legal precedent, news reports, and exhaustive studies. They can talk about the intentions of the Founders. They can argue at length against the tyranny of the government. And they will, almost without exception, conclude the necessity of respecting, and not restricting, civil liberties.

Except for one: the right to keep and bear arms.

This article is a doozy ..... you really need to RTWT.


But he's an Only One®

Must not have wanted to be counted ......

An attempt to get one resident, a county police officer, to fill out Census forms landed Haas in the back of a patrol car with a trespassing charge.



One of the best ...

... explanations I've seen yet. Not that I like the whole tiny steps theory.

Well, Then, What's The Big Deal About McDonald If I Still Can't Buy The Gun I Want?
Courts work through a system of precedents. If a superior court says an argument is invalid, it can't be made again. Mr. Gura has been following a very clear and simple strategy to knock down the antis' arguments, one at a time.


Monday, July 5, 2010

Thank you, Big Hollywood

Should have posted this yesterday ......


JPFO Alert

Several from over the weekend:

Happy July 4th?

Calling all Gulf Area Gun Owners

Paranoia? You Decide

Saturday, July 3, 2010

Happy 4th of July!

Be careful, remember and reflect.


Friday, July 2, 2010

NRA bleg

Does anyone know how the NRA come up with their ratings?


This made me giggle

Ace has this on his site ..... funnee!


Funneez ...

Alan haz them:


A new resource

While visiting Mike's site yesterday, I came across another 'only ones'-type resource.

Injustice Everywhere: The National Police Misconduct Statistics and Reporting Project.

Well worth your time.


Hmmmm ...

... seems some others are noticing that the NRA's endorsements are - strange:

Can you believe this? That you actually have to call the NRA to ask them to endorse the pro-2nd Amendment Sharron Angle over Harry Reid?

Some of the commenters make some good points.

If you ask Chief Apologist Sebastian, Harry Reid's strength lies in his being able to keep anti-gun legislation off the senate floor. Commenters make the point that it may be because the Dems get their asses handed to them when they're allowed to vote on such measures.

I'll also point out that 'holding up' legislation is also a kinda nebulous thing to score .... it gives the NRA the option of just pulling his score out of their ass.


Thursday, July 1, 2010

A disenting view?

Here's a perspective that bears consideration, but won't be popular:

The supposed “victory” in the recently-decided McDonald v. Chicago case goes to the core of this issue and illustrates, yet again, that the U.S. Constitution operates to eliminate state sovereignty and to cement federal supremacy, the dreadful results of which we see more keenly and feel more obviously every day.

I kinda feel the same way .... the constitution was designed to limit the federal government, not the states. While I feel that 'incorporation' of the 2A is a good thing, it does go against the grain of federalism.



Breda brings this to our attention.