Bob – Page 27 – Odd Stuffing

Gun Shows and Gun Culture

You would think it would be enough for the gun control zealots to legislate, license, register, restrict, or outlaw firearms, ammunition and the law-abiding firearm owner to within an inch of their very souls, but that just isn’t enough. They want to eliminate anything to do with the horrors of “gun culture” from our communities and from our minds, because THAT is what will make everyone safe! Welcome to the beginning of the end of gun shows.

What is the latest and greatest in vogue gun control scheme out here on the (extreme) left coast? Getting rid of gun shows of course! It’s all the rage out here in California. Local, county and state politicians are jumping on the bandwagon to stop gun shows from operating in publicly owned venues. Why? Duh… guns. If it has anything to do with firearms in any way, shape or form, they want to get rid of it.

Where is this going on? San Diego County, Santa Clara County and the State of California for the Cow Palace in Daly City… among others. Politicians backed by “local activists” are making the case that banning gun shows will somehow make everyone feel safer.

For a hint at the logic, here are the comments from State Senator Scott Wiener who is backing SB221, a bill that would specifically bar the historic Cow Palace from hosting events that would involve the sale of guns or ammunition.

“Our country is awash in guns, and schoolchildren are dying,” said Wiener. “We need fewer guns, and we need to stop the proliferation of guns whose only purpose is to kill as many people as possible as quickly as possible. We should not have gun shows in the heart of the Bay Area. The Cow Palace gun shows should have ended a long time ago. Better late than never.”

And just to add a little bit of incentive, the budget for a new roof for the 1940’s era Cow Palace is being tied into the proposal.

If you think this sounds like a solution in search of a problem, you would be correct. Gun shows at venues around the state must follow all local, county, state and federal regulations, which they do to a tee. The widely spread myth of a “gun show loophole” has long since proven to be nothing more than a means to cause fear in the eyes of the uninformed public to get them to support more “common sense gun control laws”.

What is really going on is an assault on gun culture. And their definition of gun culture is anyone or anything that sees firearms in a positive way. Or, the way they look at it, unless you see firearms as something that should be completely banned from civilian ownership and use, you are part of the gun culture problem.

Law-abiding citizens legally own roughly four (4) million firearms in this country. The reasons they own them are as varied as our nation. There is no one profile of a “gun owner” in the United States, people from every walk of life, every race, every religion, every political affiliation in every corner of the country own them and use them responsibly each and every day.

These good people buy everything from new and used firearms, ammunition and accessories all the time. The firearms industry itself makes up about $ 31.8 billion of the U.S. economy, and that was in 2012.

Have you ever been to a gun show? If you have, you know what’s there. For those who haven’t, it’s a fascinating collection of new and used just about everything you can think of. Gun shows can fill entire convention centers or just a small meeting hall in a basement.

Overwhelmingly gun shows are populated by small vendors and companies with some kind of a niche in the market. You can find everything from new and used firearms from just about every corner of the globe. If you are looking for historic military firearms (weapons of war in gun control speak), you’ll find them from every military conflict, from every side of the conflict. You’ll see hard to find magazines and parts from out of production firearms that nobody else may ever have. You’ll find more accessories than you knew existed, some innovative, some a little strange. You’ll also find hats, mugs, jewelry, clothing, commemorative pins, patches and coins, crafts and creations as well as fishing gear and self-defense training programs mixed right in together.

I went to a gun show just this weekend and as usual, I was amazed at the variety of what you can find there. I saw a range of items from blunderbuss to modern sporting rifles, and everything in-between. I saw an original Red Rider BB Gun, an actual World War II FP-45 Liberator and custom hunting rifles that cost more than a luxury SUV. I saw books, I saw rare and hard to find parts, I saw custom crafted accessories I’ve never seen before and I saw ammunition I didn’t think still existed.

But as fascinating as the items on the floor were, I was more interested in the people. Despite what the gun control zealots tell you, I saw a cross section of the community. I saw old and young, men and women, wealthy and not so well off. I saw elderly in wheel chairs and kids in strollers. I met some wonderfully knowledgeable people who knew WAY more than I know about firearms, and a few blowhards that are better at talking than actually knowing things.

In other words, when you go to a gun show, you’re going to find a room or rooms full of people who see the positive benefits of owning firearms, each in their own special way.

This is what the politicians are trying to stop. People conducting legal commerce, acting in accordance with every law, rule and regulation tossed in to make their lives a little more expensive and harder. They are trying to stop people from learning, sharing knowledge, innovations, ideas and a little bit of bullshit along with legal firearms and accessories.

In 1997, the U.S. 9th Circuit found that a Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors’ ban on selling guns at county-run venues to “avoid sending the wrong message to the community relative to support of gun usage,” violated the First Amendment rights of gun show promoters. While seemingly an important ruling, this hasn’t stopped communities and the State of California from continuing to work on banning gun shows and/or gun sales in the name of “public safety”. After all, this is the 9^thCircuit and Constitutional rights are always in flux.

Gun shows are not, and never have been a public safety issue in California, or anywhere in the country. They are however a demonstration of the positive side of gun culture, which makes them a prime target of the gun control zealots in our community and the politicians they support. It’s just another NIMBY (Not In My Back Yard) argument against legal commerce and politically incorrect thinking.

I choose to think incorrectly.

Bob

#oddstuffing, #Constitution, #BillOfRights, #SecondAmendment, #GunControlFails, #GunShow, #GunCulture, #PoliticallyIncorrectThinking, #mewe, #medium, #oddstuffing.com

A Legitimate Reason?

There seems to be a growing trend where anyone who owns a firearm has to justify their need to own it. Simply wanting one or being guaranteed the right by the Second Amendment isn’t a valid reason. Self-defense is no longer a good enough reason. In the mind of the gun control elitists, you have to have a “legitimate reason” to justify why you “need” to own a firearm, and according to them, there will never be a legitimate reason. But guess what? That’s not the way the Second Amendment works.

Recently in Monterey, California, a probation search of a felon’s rented room at a residence produced an inert practice hand grenade, among other illegal items. Based on this, the police department obtained a search warrant for the remainder of the house. That search turned up, among other illegal things, 112 firearms and more inert practice hand grenades. The owner was arrested for charges of illegal assault weapon possession, improvised explosive devices and maintaining a drug house.

All well and good, and I have ZERO problem with the convicted felon or the home owner – a former police officer and relative of the Panetta political family – being arrested. By all accounts both were breaking the law with the drug possession and deserved to have their asses carted off to jail.

My problem is with the characterization from the Monterey Police Department who said, “We obviously have a large quantity of firearms and evidence. We are trying to track down where these items came from, what is the reasoning behind them, and is there a legitimate reason for possessing this quantity of firearms.”

Following the arrests was the requisite photo op of all the firearms laid out on tables for the press to click and spread. The two so-called “assault weapons” were ones that met the California definition based on their “evil features”. Still, the press reported the man “faces charges related to keeping an arsenal of illegal weapons and operating a drug house.”

This case is just one of so many examples of the police and the press portraying anyone with more than one firearm as a dangerous gun nut. It doesn’t matter if it’s two firearms and a dozen rounds of ammunition in a parking garage or 1200 firearms and seven tons of ammunition from a dead man’s house, the implication is if you own multiple firearms and more than a few rounds of ammunition, it’s an arsenal, stockpile or weapons cache and there is no valid reason for it other than planned illegal activity.

While the press and social media are spinning fables of sinister plots being created at every kitchen table, let’s deal with a few facts. While we do, keep in mind firearm ownership is often a very private topic and a lot of people are unwilling to disclose their ownership to anyone conducting a survey, especially in today’s hyper-politically correct society.

The latest estimate of privately owned firearms in the United States is about 400 million for a population of 327 million – a little more than one for each US resident. Of course not everyone owns a firearm and the estimates as to how many do ranges from 25% to over 50%. The average number of firearms owned is estimated to be between four and eight. Fortune Magazine even came up with the term “super owners” who have anywhere between eight and 140, with the average of 17.

Ignoring the obvious preliminary question of why people own a firearm at all (see the Second Amendment), why do people own multiple firearms? The reasons vary from each firearm having a distinct purpose such as conceal carry, target shooting, hunting large, medium, small and flying game, home defense, plinking, practice, competition, disaster prep, etc. etc. etc.) to a simple love of shooting and collecting. And then, there is the one reason that trumps every other, because they can and they don’t have to justify it to anyone.

The Second Amendment to the United States Constitution is unique in the world. No other country guarantees the right to bear arms the way we do. Some countries do grant the right to possess firearms, but more often than not there are serious restrictions on that right, or privilege as they see it. Most common are restrictions on the type of firearms that can be owned (shotguns vs. rifles vs. pistols), the number that can be owned, the legally allowed calibers (most common is no military calibers) the amount of ammunition that can be purchased and possessed in one year (i.e. 50 rounds of handgun ammo/year), the storage requirements (locked, unloaded in residence, stored in a gun club / government safe or ammunition kept at a different premises). Carrying firearms in public is generally restricted to the military, police, government officials and VIP’s.

If laws like these make you bristle at the mere thought of them, then it’s time to start looking around at what’s happening in our own country. City by city, state by state, gun control zealots are chiseling away our right to own and bear arms. Every little infringements brings us closer to a time when our “right” is sold back to us as a “privilege” that very few will be able to afford or access.

In some states, restrictions on the ability to even purchase or own a firearm already exist. Restrictions on the type of firearms you can own already exist. Restrictions on the caliber of ammunition you can have already exist. Restrictions on the number of firearms you can purchase in a given time frame already exist. Restrictions on how firearms are stored and whether or not they are allowed out of the home and where they can be transported to already exist. Restrictions on who can carry a firearm in public, and where they can go already exists. And in each of these cases, the gun control elitists are working to make the rules for law-abiding citizens more restrictive, more expensive and further out of reach for everyone – except themselves.

And how do they sell these so-called “common sense gun control” measures to the unknowing? By portraying everyone who owns firearms, or heaven forbid multiple firearms, as dangerous gun nuts. When they showcase criminals with multiple firearms they imply only dangerous, violent druggies, thugs and terrorists have THAT many guns and THAT much ammo. When they refer to any number of firearms as an arsenal, a stockpile or a weapons cache, they are trying to shift the narrative of what the law-abiding firearm owner is and paint them as the next potential active shooter.

Well guess what? Millions upon millions of regular, law-abiding firearm owners know the difference. Whether they own one, eight, 17 or a couple of hundred firearms each, they know they are not only among the safest, more responsible, law-abiding citizens out there, they know the fact that they do own firearms is a deterrent to violent crime. They know they are responsible for their own and their family’s safety, day in and day out.

So if you don’t think it matters who you vote for this year, then just go ahead and turn in your firearms now and trust your personal safety to the people who want to disarm you, but are doing nothing to disarm those who are preying upon your family.

And the next time someone asks if you have a legitimate reason for having ‘so many guns’, just look them straight in the eye and say – because I can.

Bob

#oddstuffing, #Constitution, #BillOfRights, #SecondAmendment, #GunControlFails, #ALegitimateReason, #safety, #security, #family, #BecauseICan, #mewe, #medium, #oddstuffing.com

High Capacity Magazines and Other Mythical Creatures

The gun control elitists are always coming up with ways to restrict and disarm law-abiding citizens. One of the favorite techniques is incremental confiscation of things they determine are now too dangerous for the public to own. Enter the “high capacity” magazine. Along with this menacing term, they perpetuate myths designed to convince you a magazine with a limited number of rounds makes you safer, if they are going to allow you to have a firearm at all.

What exactly is a so-called “high capacity” magazine? Depending on where you live, it’s anything more than 10 rounds, although there are some states where “high capacity” is over 15. In New York, it’s anything over seven. You can still own a 10 round magazine there, but you can only put seven rounds in it. Add one more and it becomes “high capacity”. Somehow, somewhere 10 rounds is what the gun control crowd now insists is a “standard capacity” magazine. The logic behind this arbitrary number is anyone’s guess.

Consider the world’s most iconic pistol, the John Browning designed M1911 with a magazine capacity of seven. Even at the time of its inception in the year 1911, revolvers and other magazine fed firearms were made that held more than seven rounds. Since that time, the standard capacity of semi-automatic pistols has increased thanks to innovations in design and materials of the firearm and magazine, as well as the ammunition itself. True standard capacity magazines are whatever fits flush in the grip of the semi-automatic pistol. Something that extends below that is… you guessed it, an extended magazine.

In restricted states, the law-abiding citizen who wants to defend his/her life and family’s lives can only have a 10 round magazine. Criminals – the ones who don’t obey the law and are the ones you are defending against – are always going to be able to illegally obtain any kind of firearm and magazine they want. After all, they are criminals. Of course the government can have anything and everything they want, and they need larger magazines to defend themselves against criminals. Are you seeing a problem with this logic?

Much of the myth of 10 round civilian magazines centers around the idea that when a criminal pauses to reload, it gives people in the area a chance to jump and disarm them. An empowering idea, but I’m going to call bullsh*t on that one.

For those of you who have ever done a Tueller Drill, you know someone can cover about 21 feet in 1.5 seconds. If you are the attacker in this situation, it assumes you are standing ready to go on command. In real life, if someone is shooting and you haven’t been shot yet, you’re probably getting your ass behind cover or at least concealment, not standing OK Corral showdown style waiting for them to reload.

How long does it take to reload a semi-automatic firearm? A lot less time than you think. Anyone with even a little bit of practice is going to be able to pull off that not-so–complicated maneuver in less than 1.5 seconds. Sure, if the shooter is not so practiced there’s going to be a longer break. But how exactly are you supposed to know how long it’s going to take from a hopefully safe position?

Revolvers are slower right? A bit, but again it doesn’t take much practice to get very fast with a speed-loader. And I’ll submit to you that someone hand loading one round at a time is just as deadly. Why? If you start after someone who has managed to get only one fresh round into the cylinder, they still have ONE ROUND IN THE CYLINDER, aka, a LOADED FIREARM.

Here’s another thing to consider. When is the last time you tackled, disarmed and detained someone? Keep in mind this person’s primary motivation is likely to kill you or someone else, not to run away. And not to pop anyone’s macho self-image, but keep in mind highly experienced professionals with the latest and greatest law enforcement tools and training can’t always pull this off on their own.

Most certainly it can and does happen. There are a lot of true heroes out there with and without self-defense training who have taken on armed assailants and kicked their asses. But what we will never know is how many were not successful. How many decided to charge a shooter and didn’t make it? Their extraordinarily brave efforts will forever be anonymous since only they know what they did and why.

Am I suggesting your only option is to do nothing and wait to get shot? HELL NO!! You fight back with whatever you have be it a pencil, rock, chair, knife or your bare hands. You do whatever you have to do to survive. But you shouldn’t have to rely on improvised weaponry, or no weapon at all against armed criminals. The Second Amendment protection of the right to bear arms means you should always have an option to defend your life and the lives of your family with arms commonly in use, in other words, a firearm with whatever capacity magazine is supposed to come with it. OR, at least that is what it is supposed to be.

Anyone who thinks you are safer having a magazine of 10 rounds or lower, or that your first choice, self-defense tactic against an active shooter is to give up a position of hard cover to rush someone during a reload, bare handed, is thinking more about the safety of the criminals than about your sorry law-abiding ass.

Bob

#oddstuffing, #SecondAmendment, #BillOfRights, #RightToBearArms, #selfdefense, #standardcapacitymagazine, #highcapacitymagazine, #immillwall, #mewe, #medium, #instagram, #oddstuffing.com

Purging Our Politically Incorrect Past

In 2001, the world was aghast when the Taliban were purging Afghanistan of all remaining non-Islamic statues. Among them were two Buddha statues in the Bamiyan Valley dating back over 1700 years that were destroyed despite international outcry and numerous requests to allow them to be relocated elsewhere. The Taliban’s strict interpretation of their religion forbids any symbols of living things, so that meant they had to be destroyed. Today, we have a similar eradication occurring in our own country only in the name of political correctness instead of religion, the purging of the Confederacy.

This latest round of historical cleansing stems from the 2015 shooting at a church in South Carolina by a pathetic high school drop out and druggie. But this isn’t because of what he did; killing nine people. It was because he was white, the victims were black and there were photos of him with Confederate flags. Blasted across the media as proof that anything to do with the Confederacy is racist and dangerous to modern day living, statues have been removed, building and street names changed and the Confederate flag all but outlawed.

The South has long been a target of the moral elite and this latest purging is right out of current Chicago Mayor and former White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel’s playbook of “You never let a serious crisis go to waste”. This was simply a golden opportunity to progress an agenda that couldn’t get traction before. Now, because of this horrific incident, the offended could finally rid their world of the hideous reminders of a long gone era.

How widespread has this absurdity been? Just recently, the high school in the small Vermont city where I spent the majority of my law enforcement service lost their “Rebel” team name. Apparently the team name used since the school’s founding 55 years ago during the Civil War Centennial and chosen as the school colors were blue and gray and the city was ‘South’ of its major rival, was too closely associated with the Confederacy for the politically correct.

In another case, a Georgia police sergeant lost her job because someone saw the Confederate flag she had been flying at her house for over a year to display her pride in her Southern heritage and honor her recently deceased husband, and was offended.

In both of these cases, there was zero evidence of racial discrimination, bias, violent intent or any other factor – just political correctness at play.

If this same psychopath shooter in North Carolina had been wearing Mickey Mouse ears during his homicidal rampage and killed only men with facial hair, because that is what HE believed Walt Disney would have wanted, would we expect a nationwide movement to shut down all the Disney theme parks? Of course not, that would be stupid. But so is thinking that one demented little piece of crap’s interpretation of the purpose of the Confederacy should shape the rest of the world.

History is a mixed bag of great accomplishments and dark, disturbing events. Our nation’s relatively short 241 years of existence is full of examples of great strides in technology, arts and civil rights as well as horrific abuses of human rights, pain and suffering. But history is just that, history – events that occurred in the past. It is the path that got us to where we are today and as intellectual and enlightened as we like to believe we are, we wouldn’t be here if it weren’t for what we as a nation went through.

While the United States did not grant Confederate soldiers full US veteran status as some believe, the men who fought for the South were our own just as the Union forces were our own. Their young nation was split and at war with itself, and it was their geography that determined the Southern soldiers’ destiny. It is not an excuse or an apologist view to want to treat those who lost their lives in this or any human conflict with a little bit of respect.

You might wonder why someone who mostly writes on Second Amendment topics cares about the South or the Confederate flag. It is simply because this is just another example of politically correct censorship and eradicating the world of things that some moral elitist is now offended by. We’ve seen far to many examples of firearms being banned for their offensive cosmetic features, as well as other draconian gun control laws, laws that have absolutely nothing to do with public safety and will never do anything to reduce crime or save lives, only make some people “feel better”.

Sanitizing our nation’s history by erasing symbols of something we find offensive today is just another step towards living in George Orwell’s “1984” where the past is rewritten to match the current party line. Removing these memorials, names and symbols is a slap in the face to all those whose lineage goes through the South and dismisses any of the positive contributions from that era and region of our own nation.

Heritage doesn’t equal hate just as a firearm does not equal violence. It is the intent of the individual, and ONLY the individual that determines what happens next.

Bob

#oddstuffing, #SecondAmendment, #Confederacy, #ConfederateFlag, #Heritage, #Rebels, #1984, #mewe, #medium, #instagram, #oddstuffing.com

To Each His Own

As always, the world of self-defense and firearm training is a varied one. There are those who take the profession seriously, and those who do not. A recent addition to the drama was a so-called ‘instructor’ who’s methods and instructional techniques went beyond unsafe and straight into gonna get someone killed. Ever defiant of the establishment, even after his training credentials were yanked by the NRA, he perseveres since he, and only he, knows better than the rest of the industry. He really IS that good, just ask him.

Some say firearms in general and firearm training is inherently dangerous. I disagree. It most certainly can be, but it is not without something specifically added to it to make it so. The most common additive is of course human error. And when the errors occur, lives can be lost.

First, and foremost, let’s talk about what is considered safe. Those of us in the training industry LIVE by the Four Basic Firearm Safety Rules:

Treat all firearms as if they were loaded.
Never let the muzzle cover anything you are not willing to destroy.
Never place your finger on the trigger until your sights are on target and you have made the decision to fire.
Know your target, what is in front of it and what is beyond it.

No matter what you do after that, if you follow those four rules you and the people around you won’t get hurt.

Like many instructors, some of the training sessions I facilitate are designed to nudge people outside their comfort zone both physically and mentally. But that doesn’t mean they are unsafe. You never push anyone past what they are capable of and never, ever cross the line of safety. Yes, we may walk right up to that line and swear at it, spit in its face and beat it like it owes us money, but we don’t cross it. The line IS the line.

Firearm safety like most things is progressive. Things the industry used to do 30, 20 or even ten years ago we would never do today. Why? Because people have been hurt and killed in training. Fortunately, the industry learned from its mistakes and we’ve all become safer as a result. But not everyone buys into this way of thinking. There are some instructors out there who think that because nothing bad has ever happened to them doing things this way, it never will. They are above it all and say to each his own.

For example, force-on-force training is an incredibly valuable tool to prepare for real life encounters, yet every year a number of law enforcement officers and civilians are seriously injured or killed while doing it. It’s not because the training itself is dangerous, it’s because someone violated the rules.

Instructors who conduct this type of training are fanatical about safety. Even the slightest violation of the safety zone is enough to shut everything down, re-search everything and everyone, and then start again from scratch. Often the students or observers see reactions like this as unnecessary, but experience in the industry has proven otherwise. Regardless of how valuable the training is; it is not worth a human life.

Quality, cutting edge training doesn’t have to come at the cost of safety. And anyone who believes they are above the standards, knows better than everyone else in the industry or has a lackadaisical attitude towards safety is playing a very dangerous game. Maybe nothing will happen and nobody will ever get hurt doing what they’re doing… maybe. But if you play that game too long it will eventually bite you, or shoot you, right in the ass.

If something doesn’t feel right, it probably isn’t. If your firearm instructor doesn’t take safety seriously and only responds to industry criticism with flippant remarks and boasts of their own tactical prowess, then it might be time to find a new instructor.

Train hard, but train safely.

Bob

#oddstuffing, #SecondAmendment, #Safety, #Training, #VodaSucks!, #YouKnowWhoYouAre, #patriotpatchco, #mewe, #medium, #instagram, #oddstuffing.com

Your Life Is Not Worth Defending

Every so often we get to hear politicians non-wordsmithed views on a given topic. Away from the speechwriters and handlers, their comments lend insight into how little they really care about their constituents. Thus was the reply of Congressional Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton, the non-voting representative of Washington DC, to a question of allowing District residents to defend themselves with concealed carry permits in the wake of the shooting of Congressional members in Virginia.

The delegate’s at times laughing response on July 10, 2017 was:

“The city has taken the position that the best way to defend yourself is not to be armed. So, your notion…is an insult– quite an insult to the wards that have greater crime. They have not come forward to me and say, ‘Congresswoman we want to conceal and carry.’ So, I suggest that you approach the people you’re talking about.”

Washington DC has among the strictest gun control laws in the nation. It was the landmark case of District of Columbia v. Heller which overturned the District’s complete ban on handguns and the requirement that lawfully-owned rifles and shotguns be kept “unloaded and disassembled or bound by a trigger lock” when in the home. How strict was the law? The subject of the case, Dick Anthony Heller, a licensed special police officer for the District of Columbia was allowed to carry a firearm for work in federal office buildings, but was not allowed to have one in his own home.

What exactly was the District saying? Is it that the officer who is trusted enough to protect employees and visitors in a federal office building with a firearm isn’t trustworthy enough to protect his own family and home with one? Or is it what and who is being protected? A federal building and federal employees are worth protecting but an individual’s home and family isn’t.

Time and time again, gun control elitists have made it clear there is a caste system in place here. There are people worth protecting with firearms (them) and there are people who are not (everyone else).

Politicians and the economic elite work tirelessly to eliminate your right to self-defense, while simultaneously exempting themselves from any new restrictions they come up with. They say you don’t need a firearm to protect yourself while they are surrounded by heavily armed men and women who are expected to lay down their lives to keep them safe. In the Heller case, they denied the very people who are protecting them the right to protect themselves, right along with everyone else.

Concealed carry permits are now technically possible to obtain in the District, thanks to years of lawsuits and legal decisions against them. However with each step forward, the District raises the bar for demonstrating sufficient need even higher and enacts more costly, time consuming and discriminatory administrative practices to keep them from actually being issued.

So what does the District’s position on unarmed defense mean? It means you have a population with no effective means to fight back against armed perpetrators. That’s right, I said armed perpetrators. For all the effort the District puts into disarming law-abiding citizens, they still have yet to make an impact on those who are actually committing the crimes. Washington DC consistently ranks on the list of highest murder rate and highest violent crime rate in the nation. In other words, a District of victims.

I have no idea where Congressional Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton lives or what she has for personal security. Outside her secure federal workplace, her minimum Congressional salary of $174,000 is certainly sufficient to provide her a safe lifestyle. However that lifestyle sets her far above and apart from the average District resident she is supposed to be representing. I also don’t question that nobody is asking her for concealed carry permits. Like all good elitist politicians, no doubt she keeps herself surrounded only by those who think the same way she does.

Now take a look at your own congressional representation and see if they are doing the same thing. Are they working to keep you from defending yourself while enjoying the security and benefits of the office you elected them to? Is your life worth defending to them?

Bob

#oddstuffing, #SecondAmendment, #2A, #BillOfRights, #SelfDefense, #DCGunLaws, #mewe, #medium, #instagram, #oddstuffing.com

Shall Not Be Infringed

Time for a little rant. The last four words of the Second Amendment are “shall not be infringed”. Pretty simple and plainspoken, as are all of the Amendments comprising the Bill of Rights. Yet somehow, this clear and distinct phrasing has been bastardized by government entities small and large around our country in the name of ‘reasonable regulations’. If nothing else about the gun control elitists bothers you, those two words should. And it should scare the hell out of you.

Just to make sure we’re clear on the context, this is the text of the Second Amendment:

“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.”

It is short and sweet at just 27 words. Like all other parts of the Bill of Rights, the Second Amendment is not a limitation on what “the people” can do, but clearly states what the government cannot do.

So where does ‘reasonable regulations’ come from and why is it so important? It stems from the Supreme Court’s District of Columbia v. Heller case which reaffirmed the Second Amendment protects an individuals right to own a firearm outside of military service; the militia noted in the prefatory clause of the Amendment. But at the same time, the ruling held that like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. This is what has become known as ‘reasonable regulations’ or ‘reasonable restrictions’ and is now the mantra for every gun control / gun ban scheme being formulated.

As we saw in the 2016 General Elections where gun control elitist candidates were so proud to say that they ‘respect the Second Amendment’ but in the same breath say they also supported ‘reasonable regulations’. Naturally, it was a political ploy to convince those who were not paying close attention that they wouldn’t come after their guns. In reality, that’s just what their so-called ‘reasonable regulations’ intend.

What sort of ‘reasonable regulations’ do they support? Forced government confiscations colloquially know as gun buybacks, banning newly created categories of firearms by their cosmetic features as so-called “assault weapons”, restrictions on dangerous levels of magazine capacity, limitations on the type, make and model of firearms you can purchase as well as strict limitations on how many you can purchase at once, and how long you have to wait to purchase a firearm, regardless of how many you currently own.

The latest insult to reasonableness is restrictions on ammunition purchases. Even though they have been shown to be wholly ineffective as a means to reduce criminal activity, new licensing of buyers and sellers are being put in place. While initially just a simple license to allow purchases, this system also enables the long sought after mechanism to restrict the quantity of ammunition purchased as well as limit the purchases to only those calibers of firearms that have been registered with the government. In other words, it forces a complete gun registration system.

You have to wonder why the Supreme Court didn’t answer what was and wasn’t a ‘reasonable regulation’ as well as the question of bearing arms outside the home at the same time as Heller. To be fair, that wasn’t the case that was handed to them and the Supreme Court doesn’t always resolve cases to the degree we’d like to see. In limiting the scope of the ruling, the Court virtually guaranteed decades of conflict and litigation against unreasonable restrictions around the country, as we’ve already seen since Heller.

At the core of our argument to protect our rights, we have to go back and look at the Second Amendment and determine the intent of the Founding Fathers. Yes, it is a decidedly originalism form of interpretation and is something the gun control elitists abhor. But how else can you claim the rest of the Bill of Rights applies to modern day society as it did when it was written if you say the Second Amendment does not.

And for those working in back rooms hidden away from public scrutiny concocting the next set of ‘reasonable restrictions’, I have just one question. What part of SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED do you not get?

Bob

#oddstuffing, #SecondAmendment, #BillofRights, #RightToBearArms, #originalism, #reasonableregulations, #Heller, #ShallNotBeInfringed, #TheCheapPlace, #mewe, #medium, #instagram, #oddstuffing.com

Gun vs. Firearm

When you hear the word ‘gun’, what do you think of? Depending on your political leanings, you may think of very different things. If you absolutely abhor guns of every type, shape and form, you probably only envision an object that kills innocent families and children. At the other end of the spectrum, you may envision a tool for empowerment, self-defense, hunting or sport. What if I had asked you the same question about ‘firearm’? Odd enough, the answer might be a little different.

Both words describe the very same inanimate object; the difference is the emotional tie to the word ‘gun’. Of course, there are many different terms that also describe the very same objects. Firearms, guns, arms and weapons are generic terms whereas pistol, revolver, rifles, shotgun, or hog leg are more specific. Some, such as ‘weapon’ are positively associated with military or police service. It is also negatively associated as belonging to a class of objects supposedly too dangerous for the public to own as the politically defined ‘assault weapon’ or ‘assault style weapon’.

Look at how those opposed to Second Amendment rights and ordinary citizens owning and carrying firearms describe them. The articles they post, the speeches they give, the so-called research they present; all emphasize how dangerous and deadly ‘guns’ are. They continuously blame the deaths on “gun violence” to the point where anyone listening to the message is going to naturally associate anything ‘gun’ with ‘violence’ and ‘death’. They are trying to make the word itself synonymous with something evil and dangerous.

All of this is why many of us in this industry, myself included, prefer to use the term ‘firearm’ generally or ‘pistol’ or ‘rifle’ specifically in our discussions, writings or when we teach. The rational behind it is simple. To present the most positive images of these inanimate objects, the people who own them, and the right to do so.

If you’re thinking this is pretty damn dumb; you are of course correct. It is dumb. It’s semantics at its best and political correctness gone wild. It’s a bit insulting to think that simply using the word gun vs. firearm changes the definition of what you are talking about. But it’s also the realty of the world we live in where far too many people listen blindly to the headlines and never bother to read the fine print.

Before you think about banishing the word gun from your lexicon, understand that it isn’t as simple as using one term for another. You would be hard pressed to find a firearmsmith instead of a gunsmith or try to buy a firearm sock instead of a gun sock. I even have the ‘g’ word in my company name because other more politically correct terms just didn’t make sense.

Of course, the point that tends to get lost in all of this wordplay is what are you doing with your firearms/guns? Are you a responsible firearm owner? Do you live by the four basic firearms safety rules like your life and everyone else’s depends on it? Have you taught your children about firearm safety? Do you store your firearms safely given your life, family and living situation? Have you trained with your firearms? Do you properly maintain your firearms? Are your firearms for the defense of your life and your family’s lives?

If the answer to these questions is yes, then I don’t give a tinker’s damn what you call that thing that goes pew. You are living proof that the term means nothing. What matters is intent, and yours is steeped in American tradition, family values and the Second Amendment.

I only ask that you be aware of the context of conversations and realize that there are those who wish to use every means at their disposal to portray firearm owners – gun owners, as negatively as possible to achieve their goal of denying our Second Amendment rights, even if it is simply using the word gun vs. firearm.

Bob

#oddstuffing, #gunvsfirearm, #secondamendment, #gunsvsfirearms, #responsiblefirearmowners, #mewe, #medium, #instagram, #oddstuffing.com

Made in the USA

Independence Day is tomorrow, July 4^th. It was on this date in 1776 the Continental Congress adopted the Declaration of Independence and thirteen former British colonies became the United States of America. 241 year ago, our nation was made. This year, I’m celebrating Made In USA.

Recently I needed to buy a rather pricy piece of equipment for my business. As with most things these days, there were many options from all over the world. Capabilities, reliability, options, support, price and reputation all played a part in my decision. I chose the product made in the USA.

When I received my shipment, I noticed a particular line on the packing list. It was Item # 14-1035-00 Label, “Made in the USA”. Sure enough, that label was prominently, and proudly displayed on the front of the product, the very one in the image that accompanies this article. The equipment, software and all the trimmings are from a company in Arizona that has been in business for over 30 years. All of the company’s engineering, development, assembly, training, support and operations are in this same location and always have been. Best of all, they are great people to do business with.

The United States used to be the world leader in innovation and manufacturing. We are still leading in innovation, although more and more of that is being outsourced offshore. Manufacturing in the US is now only a fraction of what it used to be. Why is that?

If you ask the big corporations, they say they need to outsource work and production out of the country in order to effectively compete. They say doing the same work and building the same products in the US would make their products and services more expensive and nobody would pay that amount. I say that’s a load of bull.

The real reason is profit and greed. When is the last time you saw a company drop their prices on a product because they moved production off shore? Their price to produce that product dropped by X% and no, that savings wasn’t passed along to you. Simply put, if you can make $5 profit on a widget made in the US vs. $10 on the same widget made outside our borders, they’re going to go outside every time. Is $5 profit a bad thing? No, of course not. But $10 is twice as much as $5. Greed is good, or so they say.

Companies also complain the American worker is overpaid and lazy. While this may be true for some individuals, as it would be for any civilization anywhere in the world, I don’t believe it to be a valid assessment. I think it’s an excuse. Does it cost more to pay American workers? Yes, but that’s the price we pay for a robust economy. And it’s not like those dollars don’t get spent. If American workers have become obsolete it is because the companies that employ them no longer see them as an asset to the company, only pricey liability on the company books.

Was my purchase decision influenced by the location of the company? Absolutely. Now does that mean I would have purchased an inferior piece of equipment just to have a “Made in the USA” label on it? Of course not, I’m patriotic, not idiotic. In this case I was fortunate to find an American company that is doing it right. Products and services made in the USA have to compete favorably with the world on all facets of what they make. You can’t just put an American flag on a piece of crap and expect people to buy it based solely on national pride.

During his inauguration speech on January 20, 1961, President John F. Kennedy stated: “And so, my fellow Americans: ask not what your country can do for you — ask what you can do for your country.” It was a call to action for the nation, to do what is right for the greater good. The most interesting thing is that the greater good for individuals very often correlates with the greater good for all. You just have to make the right choice.

As you are celebrating our nation’s birthday this week, I invite you to not only think about how the USA was made, but what is made in the USA. What can we do individually and as a nation, to make what is made here, even better.

Bob

#oddstuffing, #July41776, #IndependanceDay, #declarationofindependance, #MadeInTheUSA, #patriot #mewe, #medium, #instagram, #oddstuffing.com

To Serve Man

Ever since individuals came together to form societies, they have called upon some of their members to serve the public interest. Those who have heeded the call have provided everything from basic services like water and roads to safety and representation in larger groups. Public service was considered a calling and was never considered a lucrative life since they were paid by some kind of tax or assessment on the people they served. But what happens when those who serve do so for their own greed?

Every so often we’ll see a story about someone who has been living in the wilderness alone. These few hardy individuals are probably the only ones who are able to do everything for themselves. The rest of us rely on public servants for the essentials of modern living and beyond. For that mutual benefit, we pay a portion of our own earnings in the form of taxes. The more people, the more taxes, the more services needed and supported.

Our representative government used to be made up of citizen volunteers who served part time while continuing their regular jobs or businesses. When you look at our nation’s agricultural background, you can understand why legislative sessions traditionally run in the fall/winter months vs. the spring/summer growing seasons. Many state level governments continue to meet part-time and some not every year.

Somewhere along the line, the system was changed and those who serve are now taking the public for everything it can bear. Instead of representing the interests of the community they serve, they seem to primarily represent their own interests. How? They specifically exempt themselves from the laws they create for everyone else. They ignore rules, regulations and laws that do not meet their own immediate needs and create others that help them retain control and power.

If you need a current example, look no further than the California Legislature. The latest budget bill includes new requirements for qualifying a recall petition for ballot, specifically intended to help delay the recall vote of a member of the ruling party. This same budget bill even expands California’s list of persons prohibited from owning firearms. But then California is notorious for finding inventive new ways of sneaking law changes without public input or comment, a fact Second Amendment supports are well aware of. So-called ‘gut and amend’ laws completely change a bill at the end of the legislative cycle to bypass public hearing and comments. Rules for comments during hearings are suspended or ignored when dissenting opinions are brought up. Dramatic changes to statutes are submitted as administrative ‘file and print only’ regulations.

And what of our legislators themselves? Gone the way of the Dodo are the part-time, representative members of the community. Replaced now by full-time, professional politicians who have precious little in common with the people they are supposed to represent. This is especially true at the Federal level where our members of Congress enjoy salaries, benefits, retirement packages and perks of employment very few of their constituents can even dream of let alone acquire.

Our President campaigned on a platform to fix the federal government in a number of ways, including to “drain the swap”. A laudable goal, but I don’t believe he quite understood how strong the Swamp Side is. At the first sign of a sump pump, I fully expect the residents of the swap to simultaneously declare their swap a protected wetland as well as a National Historic Landmark. The residents, as the swamp’s indigenous inhabitants and preservationists of the swamp’s native culture, would be immune to any outside drainage.

This is of course our own fault. All of us, as the citizen, the taxpayer and the voter, have allowed the system to become so bastardized, so blatantly corrupt and so unaccountable to anyone. It didn’t happen overnight, but slowly, one little piece at a time so nobody would notice. Does all this sound familiar 2A supporters?

Can it be turned around? Can we return our government to the hands of the people? I’d like to believe so, but it’s going to take a lot more people caring about their country to make it happen. Even if we can’t drain the swamp, keeping it from getting any bigger would be a step in the right direction.

What happens if we don’t get involved? One of these days we’re going to wake up and realize they’ve really been writing a cookbook.

Bob

#oddstuffing, #toserveman, #corruptgovernment, #secondamendment, #draintheswap, #2A, #itsacookbook, #twilightzone, #mewe, #medium, #instagram, #oddstuffing.com