righttobeararms – Page 4

Gun Control Discrimination Part II – May Issue

A while back I wrote about how those who believe in Gun Control also believe in discrimination. Now I want to take that one step further and discuss an even more flagrant discriminatory practice, May Issue.

I am referring to the issuance of concealed carry permits, also known as CCW, CCL, CPL, CHL or other TLA’s. They are government permission to carry a concealed firearm in public and are issued by either a state, county or local entity. This is the opposite of Constitutional Carry, which refers to the view that the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution permits no restrictions or other regulations on gun ownership or possession. It is also referred to as permitless carry or “Vermont carry”

Having grown up and lived a considerable portion of my life in a constitutional carry state, I’ve always viewed the need to obtain a permit to carry a firearm with a certain level of disdain. The Second Amendment has always seemed pretty clear.

“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

However governments always have and always will insert themselves into places where they don’t exactly belong, and licensing the carrying of firearms is a good example. After all, it’s my life and my family’s life – and if you’re not going to be there to effectively protect it 24/7, why shouldn’t I be able to?

Shall Issue vs. May Issue

Shall Issue jurisdictions require a permit or license to carry, however the applicant generally only has to meet certain objective criteria, such as submitting fingerprints for a background check, to be free of disqualifying criminal or mental health issues and passing a firearms training class or qualification. Note that there are fees for all of these steps.

May Issue jurisdictions on the other hand impose additional, non-objective criteria, which include justifying the ‘need’ to carry a firearm beyond that of simple self-defense. Applicants must show this ‘good cause’ is above and beyond the level of protection currently offered by law enforcement in the area. In addition to training classes and qualifications, May Issue jurisdictions also typically impose additional psychological testing requirements. These add to the cost and time commitment required to obtain the permit and serves as yet another barrier to those who cannot afford it.

May Issue criteria tends to be more arbitrary than not. Since the determining authority has the full, ultimate and non-appealable discretion of who gets a permit and who does not, the deciding factors are purposefully nebulous. What is ruled a valid reason for one person, may not be considered for another. Many May Issue jurisdictions liberally issue to some but not to others. Even the most restrictive jurisdictions, the ones where the normal citizen is flat out told no before they even apply – or who won’t even accept an application – do in fact issue to a select few. Typical among these are the wealthy, famous and close family and friends of the issuing authority.

So what is the difference between a simple self-defense need and a ‘good cause’ self-defense need? That is usually the million-dollar question. The ONLY reason why anyone, including law enforcement and everyone other than criminals, carries a firearm is for self-defense. The average citizen can be a victim of violent crime at any time, in any place and their expected response under May Issue is to call local law enforcement that may be minutes away, at the absolute best, and only if someone else is able to call them.

Then there is the argument that having more people carrying firearms will make all citizens less safe and put law enforcement in more danger. Having been a citizen and law enforcement officer in a Constitutional Carry state I can tell you flat out that this is not true. The only impact is the criminals don’t know who is and who isn’t able to defend themselves. In other words, it’s a deterrent to crime.

It boils down to who is entitled or is privileged enough to be able to defend their lives. The wealthy, famous or connected justify it by saying they are more of a target for crime than others. While they may attract more attention to themselves, they are also in a position to have more personal protection barriers than the average citizen and are actually less of a potential target.

The most likely target of crime is always going to be the most disadvantaged in the community. Without the financial or political clout to obtain a permit, they are denied the most effective means to defend their lives and their family’s lives.

Denying that a basic right to self-defense exists in the name of ‘keeping everyone safer’ separates the haves and have-nots. You don’t have a higher level of ‘need’ simply because of who you are, what you do or whom you know. Personal safety and security is everyone’s right and May Issue is simply another discriminatory system to keep the privilege in the hands of a select few.

Bob

#oddstuffing, #self-defense, #2ndamendment, #constitution, #Vermont-carry, #discrimination, #mayissue, #mewe, #oddstuffing.com

If It Saves Just One Child’s Life…

It’s the ultimate tug-at-the-heart gun control argument. If it saves just one child’s life, isn’t it worth it? How could any intelligent, caring, common-sense person disagree with anything proposed under such an umbrella? After all, it’s for the children!!! Well, I guess I’m just a despicable human being since I disagree.

Let’s say for just a moment that we comply and implement every one of the gun control elitists’s draconian, anti-constitutional measures. This would include, but not be limited to, a complete ban on so-called “assault-weapons”, semi-automatic and pump operated firearms, “high capacity” magazines and handguns. Bolt-action hunting rifles and single-shot shotguns, all that are legitimately needed for hunting can be kept with a license, for now, since the government respects the Second Amendment. Australian-style buybacks (a.k.a. confiscations) are implemented and “Mr and Mrs America turn ’em all in” is the new law of the land. What then?

First, let’s look at what this will accomplish. Law-abiding citizens will turn in their previously legal firearms for mass destruction. Very few firearms will be in the hands of the civilian population and those that remain, along with restricted quantities of ammunition, will be under strict regulations for storage, transportation and use. The days of carrying or keeping a firearm for personal protection will be gone. We will save that one child’s life.

But what about the criminals, gang bangers, thugs, hoodlums and terrorists? The law now says no one can own firearms, certainly they will comply, right? Umm.. No. These are people who, by the very definition of them do not follow the law. They have never been able to legally own firearms or ammunition and their use in criminal activity breaks even more laws. They now enjoy a government imposed armed advantage over every single law-abiding citizen in this country. What in god’s green earth would make anyone believe they would willingly give up the tools of their trade when they know the incredible advantage they have gained against their intended victims?

Well, at least the supply chain of guns will be shut off now and they won’t be able to get any more, right? Umm.. No. Every day, tons and tons and tons of illegal merchandise is smuggled into this county. Everything from drugs to jeans to electronics to automobiles to people. How are firearms going to be a problem? It already happens today, packed in right along with everything else. And we aren’t alone here. Australia and the United Kingdom, whose gun control models our elitists seek to emulate, have HUGE illegal firearm smuggling problems. It just isn’t part of the narrative we are told to believe. Take a look at what the London police confiscate every single day to see how ineffective a ban would be for criminals.

Certainly violent crime will drop and we will all be safer, right? Umm.. No. Criminals, who have long since lost their fear of the law, law enforcement and the courts, have really had only one obstacle left, an armed citizenry. With this obstacle removed, very little stands in their way. Again, go to the most gun controlled countries around the world and see what their violent crime rate is.

But what of the police you say? They will protect us, right? Umm.. No. You’ve heard the phrase “when seconds count, the police are only minutes away”? Even with a vastly increased police presence, demanded by an ever increasingly victimized populace, the best police response is going to be minutes away at best at any given time.

Try this simulation if you would. Do burpees or run in place while holding your breath for two minutes to simulate fighting for your life. Assuming someone called for help the instant you were attacked AND the police can take the call, dispatch an officer and the officer arrives in that two minutes, you’ll be just fine, right? Umm.. No. All this assumes the most ideal circumstances which sadly, will never apply to you. It also assumes you were not shot, stabbed, strangled, poisoned, folded, spindled, mutilated, stapled or paper clipped in the process by someone who really doesn’t care about your life or anyone else’s.

So why do I disagree? Because if we decide to trash the Constitution and Bill of Rights with the promise to save that one child’s life, we will sacrifice scores more in cities and towns all across the country. No, I’m not saying it’s acceptable to lose a single child’s life or that the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one. But how do you justify sacrificing so many for the hope, the dream, the fantasy, of saving just one?

How many children would grow up without parents because the parents couldn’t protect themselves? How many wives and husbands would lose their partners because they were not allowed a means of defense? How many parents would lose their children because they are not allowed to keep them safe?

Yes, let’s save that one child by not letting someone else decide who lives and who dies.

Bob

#oddstuffing, #2ndamendment, #constitution, #billofrights, #tosaveonechildslife, #notavictim, #mewe, #oddstuffing.com

Who’s Going To Stop Them?

I don’t normally badmouth a community I am a proud member of, actively promote, advocate for, teach in and stand by with my very life and the lives of my family, but today I make an exception. To be fair, I’m not trashing the entire community, just 99 percent of it.

This past week it was announced Veto Gunmaggedon failed to get the required number of signatures to place any of the seven referendums on the 2018 ballot. Obviously, none made the 2017 ballot either. In order to make the ballots, each referendum would have had to obtain 365,000 validated signatures. The referendum with the most signatures got just 174,128 . Out of an estimated 12 million firearm owners in the State of California, that’s a bit over one percent. That is beyond pathetic.

Some warned against this effort saying it was too risky. Indeed it was risky, risky as hell. It was the Hail Mary of all Hail Mary passes, but it was also the only game in town and the right thing to do. Nobody else, not the NRA, CRPA, FPC or anyone else, had anything in the works that would have directly reversed these new anti-lawful firearm owner / pro-gun toting criminal laws. Yet, it still failed.

So why did this fail so miserably? It certainly was not due to the incredible efforts of a lot a dedicated, hard working men and women who gave their time, money and signatures to get this done. These folks, who it seems make up about one percent of California’s lawful firearm owners, are patriots who worked to salvage the rights of all legal firearm owners in the state. It failed because the other 99 percent either believe California’s increasingly oppressive gun control laws are going in the right direction OR, they just don’t give a damn.

While I strongly disagree with them, I understand some firearm owners are also gun control advocates just as the gun control elite are. They have their guns to protect themselves and believe keeping them out of the hands of other people will keep THEM safer. I can even understand the firearm owners who only have shotguns, revolvers or lever actions and think the black rifle crowd is just too dangerous. Nobody needs those military-style “assault weapons”. The laws don’t effect them and will keep THEM safer too. What I can not understand are those who just didn’t give a damn enough to be bothered with going out and signing these petitions.

Not only are these people wrong, they are sacrificing their own safety too. This effort was not about black rifles, standard capacity magazines or ammo background checks, it was about all firearms, all ammunition and the ability of all free men and women to own and use firearms for sport, hunting and to protect themselves & their families.

Here’s what the failure of these initiatives in California will do: The gun control elitists, including the Governor, State Legislature and Courts will all see that they have absolutely nothing to stop them in their quest to rid California of firearms in the hands of private citizens. Who’s going to stop them, the people? The ‘people’ just gave them a mandate to impose every draconian gun control measure they can dream up. And of course, local governments will need to get in on the action and impose their own even more restrictive local laws to show that they care MORE about “safety” than the State does. Who’s going to stop them, the people?

So for all the 99 percent of California firearm owners who don’t believe this will ever impact them, or were just too damn lazy to get off their asses and sign a few pieces of paper, know that at least 174,128 of us are going to be laughing our asses off when they come for YOUR guns and you scream for help. Nobody is going to help you because by then all of us will be laughing our asses off in prison. But hey, the good news is with California’s revolving door justice system, we’ll be out in time to see the trials for those who woke up too late for the party.

Will this be the last we hear from the valiant Veto Gunmageddon sponsors & volunteers? Absolutely not. A lot of lessons were learned from this experience and they have vowed to continue the fight. But with the lack of true support and backing of the state and national firearms groups, it’s anyone’s guess if future efforts will be able to break the apathy barrier in California. Meanwhile, all of this country’s worst gun control laws will begin going into effect on January 1st, 2017. And if you think this year’s legislative session was bad, 2018 is going to make it look like the good ol’ days.

So, I’ll leave you with a few questions: Do you really think it doesn’t matter who you vote for in November? Do you really think it won’t matter who picks the replacements for the next four or five Justices of the United States Supreme Court? Do you really think it doesn’t matter who runs for Governor or any of the State or Federal Representatives? Do you really think it doesn’t matter who runs for your local school board, water board, county board or city council?

Sadly, apathy in the firearm community is going to be the direct cause of everyone in California losing more of their Second Amendment rights and even worse, many innocent people losing their lives. It doesn’t have to be this way, but who’s going to stop them?

Bob

#oddstuffing, #Constitution, #2ndamendment, #vetogunmageddon, #voterapathy, #mewe, #oddstuffing.com

Baton Rouge Prayers / California’s Powdered Wig Governor

A note before this weeks post:

Once again there has been a cold-blooded, hate fueled attack resulting in the deaths of three law enforcement officers, with three more injured, one barely clinging to life as I write. Elsewhere in this country, other officers have been shot and assaulted in the past 24 hours. While we wait for the details to come out, I ask you please take a moment to keep these offices and their families in your thoughts and prayers.

I also say to not let the coward thugs; punk criminals; terrorist wannabes and idiots of the world dictate our lives to us. If anyone is going to live in fear, it should be them. It IS time for a change.

Bob

—

California’s Powdered Wig Governor

Unless you were living under a rock over the 4^th of July weekend, you heard California’s Governor signed a series of draconian gun control bills into law, then ran off to holiday in Europe. How positively colonial of him.

Less than 24 hours from when the bills were sent to him by the State legislature, the Governor signed six of them into law. Apparently he needed no further reflection, analysis or input on whether or not to strip the Second Amendment rights from the law-abiding firearm owners of his state. It’s almost as if they were predestined to be law and his signature was merely a formality.

The timing couldn’t be more of a slap in the face to citizens of our state and nation. Just days before Independence Day; the day thirteen former British colonies declared their independence from their oppressive British rulers. To top it off, California’s Governor then quickly scuttled off to Europe for a two-week vacation before the ink was even dry on these new authoritarian laws. His British Colonial Governor predecessors would have been proud and even a bit jealous. California’s Governor didn’t have to endure a slow sailing ship across the Atlantic to escape criticism from the commoners; he simply hopped on the private jet of a rich friend.

As is the norm for California’s government, all of the laws were in the name of “public safety” yet not a single one targeted criminals. Each and every one signed by the Governor targets law abiding firearms owners in the state.

So, what happens now?

Some are petitioning for a recall of the Governor along with calls for non-compliance and non-registration, plans to store firearms out of state with family and friends as well as plans to purchase of pallets of ammunition. Several manufacturers have already come up with new workarounds to the bullet button ban and even more hardware to eliminate “evil features”.

While all of these responses are laudable, there are some problems with them. The chances of successfully recalling the current Governor over this issue alone are exceedingly remote. Non-compliance may not be an option for some, as their professional licenses would be put in jeopardy if discovered. Taking firearms out of state does protect your ability to sell or hand down firearms to your descendants, but only if they move out of California. It also serves the State’s purpose of removing the “evil” firearm from its borders. Buying ammunition in bulk now to avoid the new in State-only purchase and background check system is a stopgap measure at best. How much ammo would you need to buy now to last the rest of your life? And finally, while I applaud the industry for coming up with the next great bullet button workarounds, these too are just temporary measures. Keep in mind one of the bills that did not pass this year would have made ALL magazine fed centerfire rifles a California “Assault Weapon”. Just as they successfully targeted bullet button firearms this year, you can be sure it will be proposed again and again and again until it does pass.

It’s important to remember the long-term goal of the anti-gun movement in California; the complete elimination of private firearm ownership. Each one of these laws moves them closer to that goal. Each firearm registered to become extinct with the current generation of owners and each firearm moved out of state gets them closer to that goal. Each firearm owner who gives up and moves out of the state removes another voice and another vote from California, gets them closer to that goal.

What needs to happen? California needs to stop blaming crime on the law abiding. California needs to stop blaming inanimate objects or irrelevant cosmetic features for the actions of criminals. California needs to punish those who commit crimes instead of those who have done everything by the book all their lives. What California needs is to take back our state in the name of sanity.

So while our Governor is in Europe being fitted for his new powdered wig to go along with his British Colonial way of thinking, it’s time for the citizens of California to start standing up to the government that no longer represents them. It’s time for real leaders who believe in the Constitution, the Bill of Rights and the ideals this nation was founded on to step forward. And right now may just be our last opportunity.

Bob

#oddstuffing, #2ndAmendment, #kalifornistan #gunvote, #gunrights, #prayforleos

National Disarmament Day?

Without question, the ultimate goal of the gun control movement is complete civilian disarmament. While feigning respect for the Second Amendment, they have been working tirelessly towards their goal for years with incremental “common sense” restrictions to “keep the public safe”. Limits on the types, brands and styles of firearms you can own, how many you can purchase, where and when you can carry your firearm for protection and limits on the type and amount of ammunition you can purchase are common. Add in a host of new laws on who can be stripped of their right to own a firearm without due process of law and they are well on their way towards the presumptive Democratic nominee’s desire to abolish the Second Amendment.

So, why not give them a day to try this grandiose plan out? We’ll call it National Disarmament Day and it will be on Monday, November 7, 2016, the day before the general elections. It will be 24 hours of gun control paradise.

Since the law abiding firearm owner is the only target of all the current and proposed gun control laws, on National Disarmament Day all lawful firearm owners will leave their firearms at home. You may have and use your firearms at HOME only. Outside the home, there will be no open or concealed carry. No carrying your firearm in your vehicle or at your place of business. No armed guards and no bonded, licensed or private armed security of any kind. The only ones legally armed in public will be law enforcement.

Understandably, there are some who will not want to go along with this plan. The good news is this is several months away and you have time to put in for the time off or close your business for the day. You may want to stock up on a few essentials ahead of time.

What will November 7, 2016 look like? One of two things will happen.

The first possibility is nothing will occur. There will be no crime, no violence and zero shootings. All of the legally owned firearms normally circulating in public will be gone. It will be the most peaceful day this country has ever seen.

The second possibility will look a little like the movie The Purge. Those who have the ability to protect themselves in their own homes will do so successfully. Those who venture out will be subjected to the wrath of an unchecked criminal element that will not hesitate to victimize anyone they come across. Businesses will be unable to protect themselves and will be looted. Law enforcement will quickly be overwhelmed and the National Guard, put on standby by the Governor of each state, will be activated to restore order. The number of injured and killed will be staggering.

Ready to sign up? Just go to www ARE YOU FREAK’N NUTS!?!?!

NONE of the “common sense”, “for the children”, disarm the law abiding citizen laws will ever do anything to disarm or discourage any criminal. In fact, it only emboldens them further. We are already at the point where the criminal or thug-terrorist has no fear of the law, the police or the courts. The only element they still fear is their victim. If that potential victim can adequately defend themselves, they will move on to a softer target. There is always a softer, easier target. They will go to a place and to people who do not have the ability to defend themselves. They will go to a “gun free zone” where they can act with impunity.

If you’re asking who in their right mind would go along with something like this, just look at the laws in place and being enacted or proposed in places like California, Illinois, New York, New Jersey and Massachusetts. This is the utopian vision of the gun control. It is brought to you by a group of political and economic elite who will never have to worry about their own security or the safety of their families.

Would you send your family out in public on National Disarmament Day? If the answer is no, then don’t allow your community, your state or your nation to become National Disarmament Day EVERY day.

Bob

#oddstuffing, #2ndamendment, #righttobeararms, #nationaldisarmamentday #getoutandvote!

Not So Smart Guns

Bond… James Bond. When it comes to high tech gadgets, nobody does it better than 007. Through the Bond movies we’ve seen cars that fly, swim and are invisible, jet packs, mini-rocket cigarettes, watches with lasers powerful enough to cut through inches of steel and of course, a signature gun – a gun that can only be fired by the owner.

While many of the Q inspired gadgets are pure movie fiction, some have come to exist in the real world, but with real world limitations. A couple of cars can fly, but they don’t look anything like a regular car. Some cars swim, but they are the odd ducks of the auto and boat world and they can’t go under water. And then there are signature guns, now called “smart guns” by those who believe they are the next greatest gun safety, a.k.a. gun control measure.

The technology has been around for years and generally relies on a ring, watch or band that must be held in close proximity to the firearm to activate it. The theory is if the owner is not holding the firearm with the appropriate activation device, it will not fire. The only current production firearm is a .22 LR pistol made by a German company, which uses a radio frequency identification (RFID) chip and requires a five-digit pin code for an eight-hour activation period. It is not currently available in the United States. A few tech entrepreneurs have jumped on the bandwagon and are working on prototypes with remote controls, electronic ammunition and RFID chips embedded in the firearm owner’s skin. Firearms with pin codes, fingerprint readers, sensors to identify the owners grip, Bluetooth activation and Internet connected schemes are out there as well.

Despite the lack of demand from firearms community, it is being legislated as a requirement. The President’s latest set of Executive Orders included a provision for federally funded research into “smart gun” technology. A 2002 New Jersey law stipulates that three years after “smart guns” are available anywhere in the United States only smart guns can be sold in the state of New Jersey.

It’s worth noting the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) and the National Rifle Association (NRA) have both been very clear that they are not opposed to “smart gun” technology. What they are opposed to, and I firmly agree, is a government mandate for it. If the market decides they want it, then the products will flourish.

What could be wrong with a “smart gun”? In a word: technology. Aside from the issues of adding sensitive electronics to a machine with heavy shock and vibrations; batteries die and usually at the worst possible time. Add a little moisture, heat or cold and they’ll die quicker. Radio frequency connections are not only highly prone to interference but hacking as well. Being tethered to a device of any kind means you must always be wearing that device on the hand you will be shooting with. Take it off and you’ve got access to an ugly little brick. If you’re wearing gloves or have dirty hands with devices that check fingerprints, you’ll be out of luck.

In the research I’ve done (yes, I really do research) the inherent unreliability isn’t the worst part. The most frightening part is what is hidden inside the “smart gun” technology. Two core features are part of nearly all “smart gun” technologies; GPS and remote deactivation. GPS integration allows tracking of the firearm at all times, similar to your cell phone. Remote deactivation allows you, or someone else to remotely disable your firearm. That alone should scare the pants off you. At any time your family, employer or coworker – under California’s latest proposed enhancement to the Gun Violence Restraining Order law – could file a complaint against you and your firearms can be deactivated without your knowledge.

The real danger surfaces when those two features are combined. Similar to GPS software in newer drones, geofencing allows a virtual barrier to be placed around sensitive areas disallowing operation. The most common areas for drone operators are airports. Now move this into firearms restrictions. Government buildings, Post Offices and courts are the first to come to mind. But what about schools? Since anything within 1000 feet of a school is already a federally defined gun free zone, your firearm won’t work there. If you live within 1000 feet of a school – guess what, the Second Amendment won’t apply to you. Certainly banks will want to get in on the safety of geofencing their property. Who would need to use a firearm at an ATM?

Now consider a riot, protest or disturbance of any kind in your neighborhood. The beauty of connected systems is a geofence can be set up anywhere, anytime. The first action taken to an incident in your neighborhood can easily be a gun-free geofence set up around it to protect the first responders. It won’t matter if you are the one lawfully defending yourself at the time, all “smart guns” will be shut down.

Here’s the funny thing about so-called “smart guns”: The ONLY people who this will impact will be the law abiding citizen who wants to protect themselves or their family using their Second Amendment rights. It will have ZERO impact on criminals who will be using the plain old-fashioned pull-the-trigger-and-it-fires firearm that the rest of the world will still produce and can smuggle into the United States.

Firearms are supposed to do one thing and one thing only, reliably and accurately send projectile out the end of the barrel each and every time the trigger is pulled. Anything that has even the remotest possibility of preventing that from happening is a threat to your life. Safety, security and marksmanship are the sole responsibility of the owner, not a computer chip.

Is a “smart gun” right for you and your family? If so, that should be your choice, and your choice alone. If you prefer to have the regular, reliable kind of firearm then that should be your choice also, not the government’s.

Bob

#oddstuffing, #2ndamendment, #smartguns, #guncontrol, #gunconfiscation

Remember the updated malfunction drill: Tap, rack, check GPS, change battery, run setup, re-sync, bang.

United We Stand

This is a difficult year for those of us in the firearms community. Attacks on our rights are occurring at the local, state and national level. Traditionally gun hostile states are doubling down on new and creative ways of whittling away Constitutional rights. Firearm friendly states are being forced to defend themselves from external forces funded by political motivated elitists. Presidential candidates are vowing to destroy guns with Australian style confiscations.

While some states are making strides towards a return of Constitutional rights, others are working to strip them away. This conflict of ideology across the nation will undoubtedly wind its way through the judicial system to the Supreme Court. The next Associate Justice of the United States Supreme Court has the potential to trigger the reversal of the Heller and McDonald decisions and fundamentally reinterpret the Second Amendment into oblivion. Our next President will likely appoint an additional two to three Supreme Court Justices during his/her term.

Let’s be very clear on what is going on. The attacks on our rights, on our ability to own and use firearms, to defend our families, and ourselves is well funded and well coordinated. While feigning to support the Second Amendment, the goal is crystal clear; the elimination of private firearm ownership. This is a long-term strategy to systematically minimize then eliminate rights. Every incremental “common sense gun reform” “in the name of public safety” or “think of the children” restriction is another step towards the eventual outright ban.

So with all this at stake, why are we fighting with each other?

Lately I’ve been seeing a lot of time and energy being expended bashing other firearm owners who flee to other states or are not doing ‘enough’ for the cause. Not only is this foolish, it’s counterproductive. If we can’t treat each other with respect, how do we expect the rest of the nation to treat us?

A lot of good people will undoubtedly migrate towards more free states. Let’s face it, even the most hardened, battle tested troops deserve a little time off the front lines and we know nothing of each person’s struggle. Consider how many firearm makers and related manufacturers have moved out of restrictive states. We haven’t stopped supporting them and we shouldn’t condemn some of our own for doing the same. Instead of ridiculing or berating them, we need to be understanding so they will continue to support those of us who remain and be strong proponents in their new home state.

Not all firearm owners can take the time to go to a rally or participate in a demonstration. Despite firearm ownership being lawful, some still need to live in relative secrecy because of their jobs or location. They are supporters just the same, but cannot be as vocal as others. Not everyone can speak to an audience, but they can write an email, a letter or contribute to an organization fighting on our behalf. There are many roles to play and we can each do our part in some way. But no matter what, we all must vote.

There are an estimated 350 million legal firearms in the United States, and the number grows every day. The owners span every possible race, culture, status, age, gender, religion and political affiliation. Imagine the power of that many united voices.

Without cooperation and participation from all firearm owners, the second half of Founding Father John Dickinson’s phrase is certainly going to kick in. And we will be the generation that allowed it to happen.

United we stand, divided we fall.

Bob

#oddstuffing, #2ndamendment, #unitedwestand, #gunconfiscation

Arsenals, Stockpiles and Caches – Oh My!

We’ve all seen the press conferences where a high-ranking law enforcement official or political gun grabber stands up with a crew of concerned cronies looking on from behind. In front of them, a table of scary looking guns and accessories is displayed. The description of the items usually includes terms such as ‘high-powered’, ‘assault weapon’ or ‘weapons of war’. Then, the requisite quote to emphasize how serious this really is: I’ve never seen a stockpile like this in all my years…

Whether called arsenals, stockpiles, caches or something else, the perp walk of guns is also commonly witnessed as ‘evidence’ is being staged on the front lawn of the suspect in question. The spectacle serves no crime fighting purpose other than to scare the neighbors and let the invited press get some good close-ups so the story will stick in the mind of potential jurors. I suppose it does also send a message. If you have a lot of guns and ammo, this could happen to you.

Just to be perfectly clear: I do NOT object to removing firearms from criminals. I DO object to using the criminal justice process to further political agendas with exaggerations and half-truths.

So, what exactly is an arsenal? In 1994, Handgun Control Inc., which later became The Brady Campaign, was trying to get legislation passed to create Arsenal Licenses using this definition:

Any person who owns 20 or more firearms or more than 1,000 rounds of ammunition or primers would be required to get an “arsenal” license. To obtain a federal arsenal license, a person would need to be fingerprinted, obtain permission of local zoning authorities, and pay a $300 tax every three years. Their home would be subjected to unannounced, warrantless inspection by the government up to three times a year. “Arsenal” owners would also have to obtain a $100,000 dollar insurance policy.

When was the last time a criminal used 20 firearms and a thousand rounds of ammunition in the commission of a crime? Is that even possible? And other than the obvious Second Amendment argument, why are these numbers so completely meaningless?

Collectors acquire firearms for the love of the craft, the history as well as for investments. Hunters, sport shooters, competitors and those who simply own firearms to defend themselves and their families know one firearm isn’t appropriate for every use. You probably own more than one pair of shoes too since even something that simple is purpose driven.

Buying ammo in bulk is no different than buying toilet paper in bulk; it’s cheaper in larger quantities. For anyone who shoots on a regular basis for training, competition, sport or recreation, buying in quantity and when it’s on sale can reduce the cost up to 50%. A single two-day training program can require over a thousand rounds. Buying in bulk also helps to insulate the firearm owner from temporary price spikes caused by political speeches about banning some kind of firearm or ammo.

Yet in the name of public safety and security, national, state and local politicians are trying to limit how many firearms or how much ammo you can have. In California where there is already a one-in-30-day limit on the purchase of handguns, anti-gun politicians are trying to extend that limit to include rifles and shotguns as well as party-to-party transactions. The result would be a strict one firearm a month acquisition limit. In New York, one ammunition-banning proposal would limit purchases to two times the capacity of your registered firearm caliber every 90 days. If you own a six-shot .38-caliber revolver you can buy 12 rounds of .38 ammunition every three months.

Are any of these laws going to prevent crime or limit it in any way when crimes are committed? Of course not. It’s as if these legislators are purposely trying to create a class of owners who are less competent to defend themselves because they can’t properly train with their firearms. Personally, I am a lot less concerned with someone who is investing their time and money in firearms, ammunition and training than with the gangbanger whose stolen six-shooter has five mismatched rounds because that’s all he has until he steals more.

So fellow patriots, be sure to hide your extravagant shoes and excessive rolls of quilted two-ply well. As soon as someone decides you don’t need those either, they’ll be laid out across your front lawn for all to view in horror and shame.

Bob

#oddstuffing, #2ndamendment, #gunandammobans, #gunconfiscation

European Terror Bombs = US Gun Bans

Last week we saw another pair of terrorist attacks in Europe, these two at the Brussels airport and a subway station. The weapons of choice were bombs. Almost immediately anti-gun zealots put out a call for expanded gun control in the United States. The logic escapes me.

First off, let’s separate the two non-related issues. A terrorist attack using suicide bombs in Europe vs. United States gun control.

If you’ve seen any of the images from Brussels, you know the carnage of the attacks and the tragic loss of innocent life. Desperate people with no regard for human life willing to blow themselves up along with scores of innocent men, women and children for their ‘cause’ is nothing short of disgusting.

Already airports around the world immediately increased security in hopes of preventing similar attacks. The Belgium airport attacks were in the public, non-secure departure halls, before passengers are screened to go into the secure, gate areas. No attempts were made to go into the secure areas or on to the planes; the departure halls victims were the intended targets.

The debate is now on pushing the secure area of the airport out even further to the main entrances of the buildings or even to the entrances to the airports themselves. Of course, each time the security ring is pushed out further, it creates a human queue at that point, which then becomes the next soft target. Relying on barriers and safe vs. non-safe zones only relocates the threat to the next target. It does nothing to stop it.

As we’ve seen in these attacks and others around the world, lone wolf or small teams of individuals who are willing to martyr themselves in the name of a cause are extremely difficult to stop. It can be done and is being done, but the efforts are the most effective when their own community identifies the threats before they are in play. Once out in public, a suicide bomber can simply detonate themselves to kill and maim innocents if discovered at a security stop. Even if this is not their primary target, they still kill – and more likely than not, our first responders.

So, the connection between European terror bombings and US gun bans? It goes back to the Rahm’s Rule, the product of Chicago mayor and former White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel, which says, “You never want a serious crisis to go to waste.”

Of course there is no connection but the anti-gun proponents want you to believe you will be safer if you and everyone around you gives up your firearms. After all, once all the legally owned firearms are gone, nobody will be able to hurt you.

But wait… What about the criminals who get their guns by illegal means? What about the terrorists, a.k.a. thug criminals with a cause who can get guns by illegal means? What about the guns that come into the country illegally? What about the guns that are made here illegally? And what about the other illegal weapons, the ones that are actually the weapons of choice for terrorists, the bombs that can be made by anyone with common every day items from the local hardware or auto parts store?

Disarming innocent people – people who have done nothing, committed no crimes and never will – in the name of protection from terrorists only turns them into innocent victims of terrorists. These are honest men and women who only want to protect themselves and their families and are in the best position to do so.

Preventing attacks like we’ve witnessed in Brussels, Paris, Madrid, Istanbul, Ürümqi, Tokyo, Oklahoma City, Boston, San Bernardino… is possible, but it takes time and hard work. It’s not just intercepting emails and phone calls, or de-encrypting cell phones. It means identifying those with the intent to kill early and deigning them the ability to do so. It means solving deeper national and international problems and reestablishing a moral compass in all communities that says it’s not okay to commit mass murder over ideological differences. It means leading by example.

The answer is certainly NOT disarming a population of law-abiding citizens leaving them with fewer rights and protections than the terrorists who are trying to kill them.

Bob

#oddstuffing, #terrorism, #2ndamendment, #righttobeararms