Wednesday, August 19, 2009
The story started by pointing out the dramatic increase in gun sales over 2005. Then they said that most of these purchases are by law-abiding citizens. I was shocked! To hear a mainstream station call me a law-abiding citizen was amazing, especially since I just bought a new gun a few weeks ago.
They pointed out some illegal purchases: straw buyers (those with a clean record who buy the gun for someone who legally cannot, i.e. felons) and black market sales. Of course, gunnies already knew about this and have been saying for a long time what the story said; guns can be purchased legally by law-abiding citizens or illegally by law-breaking goblins.
Honestly, I don't know if they had a motive for this story, like pushing for gun control by showing they can be bought illegally. I lean against that, since they also said that drugs are bought illegally through the same channels as illegal guns. Perhaps they were actually doing unbiased reporting. It appears to be a small step in the right direction. We shall see.
What I don't understand is why people are in an uproar about people exercising their rights. If no one is breaking a law, what's the big deal? This man posed no threat to anyone; he was responsibly abiding by the law.
Was the man making a statement? Yes! Were people uncomfortable? Yes! A statement is ineffective unless someone gets their mind stretched by it. When 55 million people made the statement in November that they wanted Obama to be the president, I was uncomfortable. It stretched my mind to believe that there were actually enough ignorant/socialist/stupid/racist (voting for someone because they are black is as racist as not voting for someone for the same reason, and a lot of people voted for him because he is black) people to vote him into the White House.
The right to bear arms is protected by the Bill of Rights. The right to be comfortable is not. The right to be unoffended is not. People need to put on their big boy and big girl underwear and grow up. They need to think for themselves. That one might be harder since we have an education system that trains people to do what they're told and not think for themselves, but I'll save that argument for another day.
Sunday, August 16, 2009
Now there are two basic problems with this. One, it is limiting free speech. That's the obvious one. The not-so-obvious is that it's limiting free enterprise. The conservative talk radio has gained so much success over the liberal talk radio because people have chosen it. People want to listen to it because there are more facts than hysteria, the opposite of liberal radio. That's why the liberal TV and paper media are suffering as well. People are tired of hearing false emotional response and want facts to make a valid decision.
Now, as much as I disagree with the liberal media, I would never support anything that restricts their rights to broadcast. I will attack and expose their lies as I see fit, but I won't tell them to shut up and get out of the way. It's a free country, for now anyway. Let the people choose what they want to hear, keep the government out of decisions. Period.
Make sure to keep an eye on The Liberty Sphere. Great info there.
Friday, August 14, 2009
Yes, let politicians tell me how to raise my children, as if they know by success. No thanks, but I already have a parenting guide that has worked for thousands of years. It's called the Bible, but I guess most politicians don't know what's in it, or they'd know that what it says works. Unlike what they say. I think I'll keep it.
Oh, there I go again, clinging to my religion. Let me go get a gun now and start pouting bitterly.
Thursday, August 13, 2009
The Adventures of Roberta X: Oooooo, Man Had A Gun
Wednesday, August 12, 2009
Check out the story here.
Folks, spread this around. Most of the mainstream media in the states will overlook it because it proves them wrong.
Thanks to Dr. Ignatius Piazza at Front Sight Firearms Training Institute.
Tuesday, August 11, 2009
Uncovered Video: Obama Explains How His Health Care Plan Will ‘Eliminate’ Private Insurance
As a note to the steps the Administration is taking to push its agenda, Rich at Shots Across the Bow posts about several things that are happening/being said.
I find what this administration is doing to be as abhorrent as animal rights activists firebombing people's cars and homes. These are the real domestic terrorists.
Check this out. Department of Homeland Security profiles Americans based on their beliefs.
Funny how the very viewpoints they say are extremist are the same views the founding fathers had. Guess they were extremists to. They did revolt after all.
"You need only reflect that one of the best ways to get yourself a reputation as a dangerous citizen these days is to go around repeating the very phrases which our founding fathers used in their struggle for independence."
Charles A. Beard
How very sad, but how very true.
Hat tip to The Armed School Teacher.
Monday, August 10, 2009
It terrifies me that we have someone who is voting on policy for our country and saying that it is better to vote ignorantly on an issue than to learn the truth. What's worse is that this man is laughing at those who want to know the truth and are trying to bring truth to light.
It is a 1000-page bill. Thankfully, one legal scholar has taken the time to read the entire bill and make citations of the freedom-eliminating measures within the bill. It's a long read, even in his condensed version, but worth the knowledge. If you aren't as terrified as I am after two minutes of reading it, then you don't know enough history about what happens when governments take over health care. Let me spell it out: the government has the power to control when and how you die.
You can read the exposition here.
Folks, this is out of hand. The government is too big and trying to get bigger. We must stop them! More government always results in less freedom. ALWAYS. The worst part is that Obama is trying to stop all opposition to him and this bill, and I believe he and his supporters will get violent, as we've seen it happen already, but that's for another post.
Thanks to Law Dog for the video and 21 Guns, Salute for the article.
Saturday, August 8, 2009
We have a group of students who hold a "trial" and cannot bring any charges against a former Marine, but find him "guilty" of said non-existing charges and give him a "sentence". So much for due process and "innocent until proven guilty". These kids probably couldn't prove that 2+2=2x2. Sadly, this is indicative of where our judicial system is heading.
Hat tip to David Codrea at The War on Guns.
Friday, August 7, 2009
"Start Telling the Truth About Legal Gun Owners"
I just want to clarify something he said.
"How many people are killed each year by licensed gun carriers in Tennessee? None to date."
The statistic he references is the unjustifiable killings. In Tennessee, there have to be three conditions existent for a killing to be considered justifiable (which means it is not considered a crime). 1. you must be in fear for your life. 2. Your attacker must have shown intent 3. and ability to harm.
In other words, you can't shoot someone who is threatening to kill you if they are standing still 25 yards away and unarmed. If said person rushes towards you while still screaming the threats, then shooting could be considered justifiable self defense, provided all three above conditions are met.
I will now become a staunch advocate of . . . . what? You've got to be kidding me! How did someone think of it before me? What did you say they call it again? Oh, it's called
I mean seriously, when did we as a country lose our backbone and the ability to take criticism when it's due, to say that there are winners and losers, right and wrong, and absolute truth. The founders told it how it was at the risk of their lives. Respectful, but leaving no doubt as to their meaning. Why should we have to call facts anything but what they are. I don't buy being "PC". To me it's just a way that politicians use to lie and get away with it, and a way for the masses of the populace to try to subdue those who want to speak honestly. "oh, shhh, you don't want to offend anyone." Well it offends me that people won't be honest, so let's all just accept being offended, that we are entitled to differing opinions, and do our best to get along anyway!
The first Amendment does not guarantee freedom from offense, rather a freedom of choice.
Thursday, August 6, 2009
Posting this in a comment from my last post stirred up a thought process. Currently, the UN (United Neanderthals) is working on an international "convention" that seeks to alter the entire framework of American gun ownership, and it in essence takes away our status as a sovereign nation. You can read it here. I believe that these are some of the people George Washington was referring to.
Below is an excerpt from the introduction. What's amazing is that they don't realize how contradictory their words are.
"RECOGNIZING that states have developed different cultural and historical uses for firearms, and that the purpose of enhancing international cooperation to eradicate illicit transnational trafficking in firearms is not intended to discourage or diminish lawful leisure or recreational activities such as travel or tourism for sport shooting, hunting, and other forms of lawful ownership and use recognized by the States Parties;
RECALLING that States Parties have their respective domestic laws and regulations in the areas of firearms, ammunition, explosives, and other related materials, and recognizing that this Convention does not commit States Parties to enact legislation or regulations pertaining to firearms ownership, possession, or trade of a wholly domestic character, and recognizing that States Parties will apply their respective laws and regulations in a manner consistent with this Convention;
REAFFIRMING the principles of sovereignty, nonintervention, and the juridical equality of states,"
Excuse me, but if you are "reaffirming the principles of sovereignty, . . ." then maybe you should get away from creating a set of laws which bypass the very principles you claim to reaffirm!
In part of their purpose statement for this convention, they say this:
"to prevent, combat, and eradicate the illicit manufacturing of and trafficking in firearms, ammunition, explosives, and other related materials;"
First off, apparently they don't get it, but the people who are illicitly manufacturing and trafficking these things aren't going to care a bit about another law telling them they can't do it. THEY ARE CRIMINALS!!!
CRIMINALS DON'T FOLLOW THE LAW!
Oh, Wait, I think I just figured out how they can accomplish their goal . . . they should just kill everybody and then commit suicide. You can't have illicit arms deals happening if no one is around to make the deals. Goodness, they should have asked me sooner. I could have saved them a lot of time writing the stupid document.
Seriously, now. All this does is put laws on the book the bypass our sovereignty and make it harder for those of us who don't break the law to legally own firearms. Now, here's what we can do about it; In order for this "convention" to be ratified by the United States, it has to get a 2/3 majority vote in the Senate. The House does not vote on it. We need to be writing and possibly even calling our senators and voicing our disapproval of this measure. Personally, this is important enough to me that I'm going to let them know that if they support it, I will become their personal enemy with my resources doing all I can to put them out of a job. Here's where to get in touch with your Reps.
Wednesday, August 5, 2009
Of course, the first thing we did was go over the 4 rules. After that, I gave her a rundown of firearm parts and different actions. Sadly could not show her a lever or pump action, but hope to own them soon. After explaining safety and gun types, we headed out into the yard (I love living in the country) and went over aiming and shooting. After that we let some lead fly!
For her shooting, we went up to about 5 yards. Seemed like a good place for someone who had never been exposed to firearms, especially since I'm still tweaking the sights on the S&W. This is her first target with about 40 rounds through the pistol.
Worked with her some on shooting form. She has a strong tendency to lean away from the pistol and shoot high, then let her arms get tired and start shooting low. That's why there aren't 40 holes actually in the paper. The next target was a little better with 30 rounds being fired.
Five of the six holes in the orange (a 3" sticker) she got on her first magazine. She had a really good form on that one which got interrupted by some FTE's in later mags. My guess is that they were the result of 300 rounds of .22 without a cleaning. The first 290 shot with only one hitch, and that was a weak round, not a gun failure. She could have done much better without those failures as it was hard for her to find her position again. (note to self: have firearm clean before shooting with a new person.)
I also let her shoot my Springfield M6 scout. As she is quite petite, even holding up this light rifle made her arms tired, though she liked shooting the .22 rounds through it. I let her shoot a couple of .410 shells through it too, which she didn't care for so much due to recoil.
Overall, an extremely successful day at the range. She wanted to keep the targets and is taking them back to Korea with her. I'm facebooking her the picture of her with the pistol. She said it would scare her friends, to which I replied, "Well, you can tell them it was a lot of fun and no one got hurt. You can teach them." She's hoping to come back to the states for grad school, so hopefully there will be another opportunity to get her out.
Ah, now to the delicious smell of gun solvent!
When you send them a message using said form, it will also offer you the option of receiving e-mails showing how your reps voted on different bills. I highly suggest using this option.
Let's keep our reps accountable and let them know we're watching. This could be our last peaceful resort.
Tuesday, August 4, 2009
"Property of Barack Obama 2008"
This induced both fear and anger in me, but mostly fear. How far have we fallen that now we have people proclaiming that politicians (or worse, the government) own them? What happened to independence, self-sufficiency, and a "government of the people, by the people, for the people"?
If the founding fathers were here to see what's happening, they would believe that they had wasted their time and risked their lives for nothing. Hundreds of thousands gave their lives so that instead of saying "all hail the king!" they could say "all hail the milano messiah!"
Let's remember, the government is employed by us! The "messiah" is employed by us! We are not their property! We are their boss! We tell them what to do.
On the bright side, seeing the shirt did inspire this shirt.
Why don't we start reminding them of that and take charge of our employees.