Democrates want to ignore their problem with violence

The Anger of the violent left has reared its head in the most despicable way.  And the left refuses to take any blame for it.  And one thing should help expose how the left really feels about this event.  There have been several calls for the violent rhetoric’s to be toned done, and several members of congress have expressed their sympathies, but only one prominent member of the democrats has condemned this action, Bernie Sanders.  Always give credit where it is due.

And naturally, since this was a public shooting, the anti -gun rolled out their normal group of lying liars who lie to spew their talking points.  The fist to the Scene was David Frum, one of the token conservatives the left keeps around for just such occasions.  He also happens to be a senior editor at The Atlantic and a contributor for CNN.  On 14 JUN 17, he tweeted out the unresearched list of lies below and as of 19 JUN 17 at 10:50AM, it was still up on his page.

Frums Lies

Most of us are still wondering how you conceal carry a long gun and who does it on a regular basis for personal protection.  But Virginia Like, like all other states has background checks for all FFL purchased firearms.  Virginia, like almost all states, does not require anyone to register their rifles or hand guns after purchase.  And as we found out later, Virginia’s gun laws were not germane to this situation.  Cue Sherriff Buford T. Justice!

Roll call later reported that the shooter bout his firearm legally.  Bridget Bowman cite a joint law enforcement statement indicating that the “ATF has conducted traces on these weapons and has determined that both were purchased by the shooter from federal firearms licensees” (Bowman. 2017).

Next up was Virginia Governor Terry McAuliffe, who always sees an opportunity to move himself higher up the democrat’s ladder of relevance.  I know what he meant to say and even that is false.  He meant to push the discredited talking point about 93 “gun violence” related deaths every day.  Instead he let us know that “we lose 93 million American every day to gun violence” (McAuliffe, 2017).  I’m not sure how I’m even writing this because as one commenter stated, “we should all be dead by lunch time Saturday” (I wish I could find the post to give him credit).   He then went on to mention his usual complaints about “Background checks and gun show loop holes” without knowing anything about the shooter or the situation.

Finally, Author Peter Dreier of The American Prospect flat out lied to push his narrative.  Again, blaming the NRA for the actions of a crazed liberal who wasn’t an NRA member and who passed all background checks.  When the article was first published on 16 June 2017, the open line was “soon after (shooter’s name) brought an AR-15 rifle…” (Dreier. 2017).  From the start there was confusion about the type of firearms use.  On reported he had an AK-47 and one witness believed he had brought a shot gun.  None of the witnesses believed he was carrying an AR-15.  But Mr. Dreier and the American Prospect ran with the lie because they needed to push their NRA narrative about the ease with which people can get firearms.  I don’t take it upon myself to check on articles daily, but they issued a correction and it now states “soon after (shooter’s name) brought a 7.62-caliber rifle…” (Dreier. 2017).  The correction at the end of the article notes that the rifle was incorrectly identified as an AR-15 in an earlier version of the article.  I wonder what prompted the change since it was up for several days after multiple news sources, including ABC, FOX and Townhall all reported that he had used and SKS.

SKS vs AR15

Needless to say, the left has done everything in its power to make this an argument about guns and not about the violent rhetoric of its follower and even some of its leaders.  But again, they have no solution.  There is no law they are pursuing that would have prevented this shooting.  The SKS has a fixed stock, a fixed magazine and no pistol grip.  It would easily fall outside of the cosmetically based Assault rifle bans the love to propose.    And since he passed a background check, the cries about universal background checks and the mythical gun show loophole are pointless.  The left has no argument for gun control that is based on facts or reality.

Fletch

Frum, David (2017) Virginia: No background checks… Twitter.com.  Retrieved on 19 JUN 17 from https://twitter.com/davidfrum

Miss CJ (2017) Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe Claims 93 Million Americans Die From Gun Violence Every Day. Chick on the Right. Blog Post.  Retrieved on 19 JUN 17 from http://www.chicksontheright.com/virginia-gov-terry-mcauliffe-claims-93-million-americans-die-gun-violence-every-day/

Dreier, Peter (2017) VA Shooting Not About Bernie. It’s About Right’s Embrace of Guns. The American Prospect. Retrieved on 19 JUN 17 from http://prospect.org/article/virginia-shooting-isnt-about-bernie-it’s-about-right’s-embrace-guns

Date, Jack; Thomas, Pierre (2017) Gun used in Scalise shooting was legally purchased assault rifle, sources say. ABC News. Retrieved on 19 JUN 17 from http://abcnews.go.com/US/gun-scalise-shooting-legally-purchased-assault-rifle-sources/story?id=48051990

Vespa, Matt (2017) Reports: Scalise Shooter Used SKS Rifle, Same Firearm Used In Dallas Police Ambush. Townhall.com.  Retrieved on 24 June 2017 from https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2017/06/15/reports-scalise-shooter-used-sks-rifle-same-firearm-used-in-dallas-police-ambus-n2341800

Bowman, Bridget (2017) Baseball Practice Shooter Legally Purchased Guns, Police Say. Rollcall.com.  Retrieved on 24 June 2017 from http://www.rollcall.com/news/congressional-baseball-game-guns/?utm_source=news-alert&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newsletters

Wikipedia SKS article. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SKS

Advertisements

Failing Gun Laws

So I have not blogged in quite a while.  A lot has changed since November 8th.  Mostly for the good.  But suddenly there are gun rights under attack again.

Today, let’s look at the failures of some of the gun control legislation that was passed.  Primarily in two of my favorite states to talk about: California and Washington.  Seattle, Washington passed an ordinance that placed a $25.00 tax on all firearms and a $0.05 cent on every round of ammunition.  The justification came from Seattle City Council President Tim Burgess who “I think it’s very reasonable to expect a multibillion-dollar-a-year industry, the gun industry, to help offset the cost” (Kim. 2015).  Like all liberals, he assumes that any company is going to simply say ok and just absorb the costs.  No matter what, any liberal who tells you it’s time for any company or industry to pay their part, you should know that it is going to be passed on to consumers.

The tax was supposed to benefit gun violence prevention research, which usually means campaigning for gun restrictions and advocating on behalf of Moms Demand Action and the Brady Campaign.  The Planners envisioned that the “tax would raise between $300,000 and $500,000 a year” (Shaw. 2017).  But instead, all we know is that “tax payments received by the City were less than $200,000” (Shaw. 2017).  Again, another example of liberals shuffling stuff to the back of the news pile to avoid talking about it.  It is just like their failed minimum wage laws.  If they had crafted a success, they would not stop screaming about it.

Meanwhile, Seattle continues to see an increase in crime.  There are no statistics available for 2017 yet so we cannot but we can look at the crime rates in 2016, the same year the tax took effect.  And for the First 8 months of the year, business was booming for criminals, especially in crimes where the victim could not defend themselves.  Rapes were up by 55% and domestic violence went up by 11% (Oxley. 2016).  I personally don’t think eight months out of the first year that the tax was imposed is enough to validate a hypothesis, but again, it seems that the liberals in Seattle don’t care.   If I correctly understand their logic, more crime is ok as long as it isn’t committed with guns, and low crime is bad if citizens are allowed to use guns to protect themselves.

But now we are back to California.  The city of San Bernardino has been with another tragedy where a man shot and killed his estranged wife while she was teaching at an elementary school.  And quickly this story is fading from the headlines.  My basic assumption is that the individual did not fit the profile of a shooter that would further the narrative: white, conservative, racist male targeting minorities.  He did not have an AR-15 or even a semiautomatic pistol.  But perhaps it is also because this really was not a school shooting.  This was an issue of domestic violence.  It also happened at a school where guns were not allowed.  It is also unlikely that any proposal would have prevented this, even good guys with guns.  The shooter hid a .357 magnum revolver on his body and entered the school and went directly to her classroom (Hamasaki. 2017).  No one, not even a good guy with a gun, could have reacted fast enough to save the woman unless they had been in the classroom in the first place and ready to react the minute he drew his weapon.

The reason this is not drawing attention is that it is not an act of terrorism, and it was not some crazy person bent on killing as many individuals as possible before taking their own life or dying in a shootout with police.  I can’t believe I am going to type this, but Huffington Post almost gets it right.  “What took place inside that classroom was driven by domestic violence, not ideology” (Jeltsen, 2017).  Guns did not commit this crime.  And the crime is not gun violence, it is spouses/intimate partner abuse, of which the shooter apparently had a long history.

Ms. Jeltsen then goes on to cite Ruth Glenn who is the executive director of the National Coalition Against Domestic Violence to support the move to have domestic abusers stripped of their rights to own a firearm.  Here is the problem with that argument.  It is already illegal.  The Lautenberg Amendment to the Gun Control Act of 1968, effective 30 September 1996, makes it a felony for those convicted of misdemeanor crimes of domestic violence to ship, transport, possess, or receive firearms or ammunition.  The shooter was never convicted of any of the incidents in his past, even though he had been slapped with numerous restraining orders by ex-wives and girlfriends.  The shooter “had a history of weapons, domestic violence and possible drug charges before his marriage to Karen Smith, 53, a teacher at North Park Elementary School in San Bernardino. He was arrested four times between 1982 and 2013, but was never convicted in any of the cases, Burguan said” (Lam. 2017).  They key here is never convicted.  You must have a conviction to remove rights.

But the left has never been a fan of due process.  Just like male students accused of rape on a college campus, in this instance they want rights stripped on accusation alone.  Given how this turned out, it is interesting to note that no convictions were made given his history with the law.  Were the charges dropped in a plea or were they unable to be proven in court?  We may never know.  And even if he had been barred from owing firearms per the Lautenberg Amendment, that still would not have prevented him from stealing a gun, borrowing one form a friend, who did not know is history, or buying on off the streets.  As of this blog post, we do not know how the revolver was procured.  If he had never been convicted and was not pending any legal action, it is likely that he could have purchased his gun legally.

Recently, new California gun laws went into effect.  Assembly Bills 1135 and 1511, and Senate Bill 880.  What it comes down to is that the state redefined and expanded the list of weapons it categorized as assault rifles.  The state banned the “bullet button” that had been used to make some firearms legal in the state.  And finally, the state further restricted the rights of individuals to loan or temporarily transfer a firearm unless done so through a dealer.  None of these laws would have come into play to prevent this tragedy.  However, look for the California government to look for new laws to enact in the wake of this tragedy.  And again, they will all be feel good measure that would do nothing to prevent this type of a tragedy.

Fletch

References

Kim, H (2015) Gun rights advocates say Seattle’s new firearms, ammo tax is illegal, discriminatory. Q13 Fox News.  Retrieved from http://q13fox.com/2015/08/11/gun-rights-advocates-say-seattles-new-gun-tax-is-illegal-and-discriminatory/

Shaw, J. (2017) That Seattle “gun violence tax” didn’t really pan out as predicted. Hot Air.  Retrieved from http://hotair.com/archives/2017/03/25/that-seattle-gun-violence-tax-didnt-really-pan-out-as-predicted/

Oxley, D. (2016) Report: Seattle gun crime records set in 2016. Kiro 7 News.  Retrieved from http://www.kiro7.com/news/local/report-seattle-gun-crime-records-set-in-2016/449321942

Smith, A. (2015) NRA sues Seattle over $25 gun tax. CNN.  Retrieved from http://money.cnn.com/2015/08/25/smallbusiness/nra-seattle-gun-tax-lawsuit/index.html

Lam, K. (2017) San Bernardino school shooting suspect was ‘wolf in sheep’s clothing,’ murdered teacher’s mother says. Fox News. Retrieved from http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/04/11/san-bernardino-elementary-school-shooting-authorities-look-for-motive-behind-murder-suicide.html

Jeltsen, M. (2017) The Latest San Bernardino Shooting Reveals A Far More Common Form Of Terror. Huffington Post.  Retrieved from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/san-bernardino-domestic-violence-terror_us_58ed2046e4b0c89f91222524

Hamasaki, S. (2017) Student one of 3 dead in San Bernardino school shooting. CNN. Retrieved from http://www.cnn.com/2017/04/10/us/san-bernardino-school-shooting/index.html

More Ghost Guns.  And not the .30 Caliber clip kind

The Orlando Sentinel is reporting on the companies that are springing up in Florida that sell kits for making “Ghost Guns” and selling them to those wishing to avoid background checks. Most states have laws that allow for private gun manufacturing for private use on private property. But on top of that, they act like this is a completely new development. 


Homemade guns have become a staple in Australia and England where homemade shotguns made from $20 worth of wood and pipe are getting full price at city sponsored firearm buybacks. If you hop on over to my gun meme collection, you’ll see several examples of home made firearms made with the bare minimum of tools. Australia uncovered a gentleman making fully automatic MAC-10 knock offs and selling to criminals. Somehow, no one in the media is interested in this. But bring along an opportunity for someone to make their own AR-15 without a serial number and it’s time for reporters to clutch their pearls. All because of the ongoing push to scare everyone into thinking that the AR-15 will destroy us all. It should be noted that when the article talks about homemade guns found in crimes, it is still vague. “But some law enforcement agencies say more homemade guns being found at crime scenes, especially in California” (AP. 2016). If it was really homemade AR-15s, we’d be hearing about it constantly. 
Right now you all know I’m doing my own build. My total cost to assemble my own AR is going to be roughly $1946. Not really the price you pay when someone can give you something easier to hide for about $250. So let’s assume you do get your 80% lower. You still need roughly $600 worth of parts to complete your AR-15. You also need to find someone skilled enough to do the milling of your weapon. Don’t forget your lower milling jig that will run you and extra $75.

Now I won’t get too deep into the cost of the milling equipment and drill bits needed because to make the other types of homemade firearms you also need presses and stamping equipment. Both require a significant investment if this is the only use you would have for this equipment. The MAC-10 will still operate under less stringent tolerances so you do not need to be as exact with the parts like you would with an AR-15.


The biggest wrench thrown into this whole system is Defense Distributions and Cody Wilson. The Ghost Gunner is a programmable CNC system that can complete an 80% lower in about 3 hours. All you need is the correct program and the computer will handle the rest with expert precision for about $250. Now anyone can complete a professional build. But that still does not get around the cost of all of the additional parts to complete the AR. 


The uninformed liberal press would have you believe that these ghost guns are running rampant across the country and flooding the criminal black market with unregistered firearms. But this is not the case. The homemade gun is more likely to be a pistol caliber gun made from purchased wood, tubes, and springs than from an 80% lower someone has finished due to the cost, work and skill required, they do not have the ability to meet the need of the criminal element, especially when slightly used AKs could easily flood the market through Mexico.  

 – Fletch

References:

Associated Press (2016) ‘Ghost gun’ kit makers on the rise in Central Florida. The Orlando Sentinel. Retrieved from http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/os-ap-rise-of-ghost-gun-kit-makers-seen-in-central-florida-20161113-story.html 

Hoover, Amanda (2016) Why are some police concerned about ‘ghost guns’. Christian-Science Monitor. Retrieved from http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Justice/2016/1114/Why-are-some-police-concerned-about-ghost-guns 

Stanton, Sam; Walsh, Denny (2015) California black market surges for ‘ghost guns’. The Sacramento Bee. Retrieved from http://www.sacbee.com/news/local/crime/article50685560.html 

AR-15 Jig https://www.stealtharms.net/jig-ar15-kit

Catalog 2015

Trump (and the 2nd Amendment) Won

I’m on a flight to Hawaii. Kenny Loggins is playing on my headphones, and we’re over the Pacific so there is no wifi. So it is time to blog. I’m never the biggest fan of blogging on my tablet, the keyboard just isn’t always natural. But maybe I can do it this time.

My loving wife, who is the reason I am on my way to Hawaii (she deserves it after following me from TN to VA to KS to Korea and now AK) had begrudgingly agreed to allow me to by 2 new ARs in the event Hillary won. This is in addition to my current build. I’ve never been so happy to not buy a gun. But on the plus side, my Sharps Bros. MeanStreak lower receiver came in the day after the election.
So the USA went crazy. We elected a egotistical populist instead of a corrupt criminal and the left lost its mind. Riots protesting the outcome of a fair election broke out in liberal havens like Chicago, Portland, New York, San Francisco and Seattle. And people are demanding counseling because they are too damaged to go to class.  

I voted for Trump. I have friends who declared Trump voters monsters and are coming up with ways to teach their kids that we need to love everyone, even monsters. People I have known for years have suddenly decided that I am a bigot. One of my wife’s friends declared that professionally she will not see Trump supporters in her practice. Remember, these are the same people who demand that christians violate their faith to bake wedding cakes, but can’t have a discussion with someone with a differing opinion because it hurts their feelings.  

So why did I cast my vote for him? Should I destroy friendships to have an honest discussion about policy and issues? Would they even listen? So many of these people live in echo chambers that they cannot fathom anyone voting for Trump. They know so few people on the other side of the aisle, get all their news from Vox and HuffPo, and put their head in the sand when Wikileaks started producing all of the hacked emails. They don’t see that people could care less about the fake climate change arguments, or opening bathrooms to whoever want to use them because they can’t even put food on the table. They never expose themselves to the other side and so they could not prepare themselves for Trump winning in an electoral landslide. They did not care that they alienated half of the country by constantly screaming racism or sexism or what-ever-elsism. And now their only course is to scream it even loader. And of course, the usual demands of safe spaces.  

So I’d like to brag that the 2nd Amendment is safe. Trump has put forth a list of judges that many believe to be constitutionalists. And with one seat empty and Ruth Bader Ginsburg promising to leave if Trump were elected, the Supreme Court will be in place to protect the Constitution for many years.  

But the 2nd Amendment was not the reason I voted for Trump. I do not advocate for single issue voting. My reasons were: protect the Constitution, reduce the debt and deficit, repeal the affordable care act, reduce government intrusion, build an enduring Constitutionally conservative Supreme Court, and to prevent Hillary from getting back to the White House. There are some unfortunate things about Trump I have had to accept. He supports barring those on the terror watch list from buying firearms. I’ve been over that before so I won’t dig into it. He is a populist so there is no guarantee that his positions on many issues will remain the same. And I’ll be in a position of explaining myself to people for years who know nothing about his policies beyond “grab her by the pussy”. 

Liberals have lost sight of the battle. They think the presidency means everything. The forget that republicans control 2/3rds of the state legislatures and as many governorships. The map is turning red because we saw what a democrat controlled federal government was capable of from 2009-2010.  


I also find it funny that these kids in the street think they are going to start a revolution when we have all the guns. Remember, if you give up your arms, there is no defense against tyranny. I wonder, since liberals believe Donald Trump is going to be a radical fascist tyrant, will they suddenly become supporters of the 2nd Amendment?

Fear the uninformed journalist

So there is another mass shooting that you are not hearing anything about.  The Cascade Mall shooting in Burlington, Washington disappeared from the headlines after about 72 hours.  Why, because it did not further the narrative.  The Shooter did not use an AR-15, he used a plinking rifle.  He was mentally ill and had almost no motive for the shooting whatsoever.  He was of middle eastern decent, though he had spent most his life in the US.  He surrendered to the police and admitted to the killings.  And, he was an active supporter for Hillary on Social Media.  And, strangely, he is not yet as US citizen, but he voted in the last three election cycles.  So he is a liberal, he is of middle eastern decent, he did not use an AR-15, and he is proof that Washington state has issues with voter fraud.  That sounds like old news to me.

So, I started digging more into this event and came across two articles.  KIRO 7 news out of Seattle, Washington takes the cake this week for the worst research and understanding on firearms.  Author Ashli Blow digs into the question of how an assault weapons ban would or would not have prevented the shooting.  Specifically, she wants to know if the ban proposed by State Attorney General Bob Ferguson would have prevented the shooting.  You may remember Bob from my last article.

Here is the kicker.  Ms. Blow actually thinks that the ban would have made the gun illegal.  The Ruger 10/22 is one of the most popular rifles ever made.  It is estimated that over 5 million have been sold since it first hit the market in 1964.  The Rifle is chambered in .22 LR comes in at least 10 different variants from Ruger with numerous other companies making additional customized parts and accessories.  But no matter the variant, it always accepts the same magazine design.  The magazine well of every variant will accept the standard Ruger 10 round rotary magazine or the 25 round curved version.  But Ms. Blow has about as much familiarity with firearms as the next journalist.  She states that the ban proposed by AG Ferguson “would not ban the basic Ruger 10/22. However, the version of the Ruger 10/22 that police say Cetin used in in Cascade Mall shooting would be banned because it had a 25-round capacity” (Blow, 2016) (Emphasis from the author).

A removeable magazine has absolutely no impact on the function of a rifle.  It did not magically upgrade the capability of the weapon, or the lethality of the bullet, just because you inserted a different magazine.  Its basic concepts like this that demonstrate a lack of familiarity with firearms that makes it impossible to take most opinion writers seriously when they talk about the need for gun control.  But then it gets even weirder.  There is an Editor’s note stating that the article has been updated.  As directly stated: “Editor’s note: This story has been updated. The gun with the 25-round magazine police said the Cascade Mall shooting suspect used would be banned under the Washington Attorney General’s proposed legislation.” (Original Emphasis).  Now.  They 25-round magazine would have been banned under the proposed magazine limit, but not the rifle.  There is no difference in a Ruger 10/22 that accepts a 25-round magazine from one that accepts a 10-round magazine.  KIRO 7 even made an update to the article and still got it wrong.

editors-note

There is one common thread that links this with all other tragic events.  Another mass shooting, another gun free zone.  How many more gun free zones need ot be violated before people realize that these signs are defective?  Good, upstanding citizens will leave their arms outside but those bend on evil and destruction will not.  All it does is ensure the shooter has an environment rich with targets who will not fight back.

Blow, Ashli (2016) Would the Cascade Mall gun fall under proposed weapons ban? KIRO 7 News.  Retrieved from: http://www.kiro7.com/news/local/would-the-cascade-mall-gun-fall-under-proposed-weapons-ban/451062731

Hoft, Jim. (2016) Five People Shot Dead at Cascade Mall in Burlington, WA – A Gun-Free Zone – Shooter at Large. The Gateway Pundit. Retrieved from: http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/09/four-people-shot-dead-cascade-mall-burlington-wa-gun-free-zone/

Ruger 10/22 Wikipedia Article (Don’t Judge me) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruger_10/22#References

AGs off their rocker

So this week, let’s talk about two attorney generals on opposite sides of the country. Both are in deeply blue states trying to push for new restrictions on assault weapons. 

Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey has decided to throw her weight around by arbitrarily expanding the definition of an assault weapon. Massachusetts has a ban on cosmetic AR features. If your weapon has 2 of the listed features, then it is an assault weapon:

  • A pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon.
  • A folding or telescoping stock.
  • A grenade launcher or flare launcher.
  • A flash suppressor or threaded barrel designed to accommodate a flash suppressor;
  • A bayonet lug

The bayonet lug is always my favorite AR cosmetic feature. But AG Healey decided this wasn’t good enough. So even though the law says clearly that with 1 or none of these features, it isn’t an assault weapon. Reuters explains that “Healey’s statement said gun manufacturers made versions with minor tweaks to various parts of the weapon. Copycat guns are sold, for example, without a flash suppressor or with a fixed instead of folding stock.”  

These AR bans are like trying to stop people from breaking the speed limit by banning spoilers on Honda Civics. So now Civics are made without spoilers, but that isn’t enough because we still hate civics. So we are going to arbitrarily decide that civics without spoilers (the only banned feature) are also banned, even though the do not have anything on the banned checklist. Meanwhile, we ignore corvettes, mustangs, Cameros, or the reasons that people choose not to obey the speed limit. But golly gee, we sure feel good about ourselves.  

So that wasn’t enough for AG Healey. She decided to go after Glock and Remington through extremely intrusive lawsuits. Author Michael Levinson states that “Healey argues Glock firearms are “prone to accidental discharge” and makes clear in court papers that she is concerned the company may have been warned about the problem and failed to act.”

Glocks aren’t available for purchase in Massachusets by civilians; only law enforcement agencies can purchase them for their officers. Glock contends ” the “true purpose” of her investigation is “to harass an industry that the attorney general finds distasteful and to make political headlines by pursing members of the firearm industry.”” They also state that ,Healey is misusing her investigative powers “for the ulterior purpose of harassing an out-of-state company that does not engage in in-state consumer sales.”” I find it interesting that in 30 years of Glock production, Healey can only two incidents to prove here claim that Glocks are “prone to accidental discharge.”  

Meanwhile, in Washington State, Attorney General Bob Ferguson is pushing for an Assault Weapons ban and a magazine capacity restriction. And of course, he recommend s that rifles with a pistol grip, collapsible stock, flash suppressor, or bayonet lug fall under this proposal. So once again, rifles that have no change in functionality will become the standard semi-auto in another state that thinks removing the fly from men’s underwear will stop rapes.  


Once again, another firearm restriction in a state after they said that if we just pass one more law, we’ll stop the gun violence and we won’t ask for anything else.  

https://www.yahoo.com/news/massachusetts-attorney-general-bans-copycat-assault-weapons-220214020.html

https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2016/08/31/healey-launches-gun-safety-investigation/EqmsKiAIeweTWxbuk0NKNO/story.html

Washington attorney general wants ban on assault-style weapons; opponents outraged

http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/crime/state-ag-proposes-assault-weapons-ban/

The Plan

So I mentioned that I had decided to do a custom build.  I was debating what caliber  go with.  I have ruled out the .300 AAC because it just does not have the range to be an accurate round out to the distance that I want to shoot.  So that basically left me with two rounds.

Why don’t I explore an AR in a .308 or a 7.62×39 hybrid?  Basically, I really want to build my rifle off on a Sharps Brothers Hellbreaker lower receiver.  This has basically limited me to  the 5.56/223, the .300 AAC (which we already ruled out) and the 6.5 Grendel. 

But my decision making process took another curve when I started looking for 6.5 Grendel ammunition.  If everything went south, and I had to grab my bug out bag, my S&W M&P-15 would be my go-to weapon.  Therefore, my ammo requirement will always be 5.56 due to its widespread availability.  So the cost of buying vast amounts of this ammo is not the concern.  The problem was that I could not find that ammo I was looking for.  Eventually I found some at Alaska Ammo.  Nice little store that has everything you would want ammunition wise to have a good weekend.  They even sold a few rifles as well. 

SO they had my 6.5 Grendel, I bought a box, and I have decided that this is the round I’m going with.  Now I just need to track down everything. else.  If you’re interested, all of my specialty items I want to get are linked below.  At the rate I want to purchase the items, I think I should have my next rifle assembled in about 7 months.

My Barrel – My Lower – My Upper My Rail – My BCG – My Stock – My Trigger – My Grip – My Brake  – All Other Parts are generic MilSpec. Optics will come later 

Best Salesman Ever

So I spent two years living in Korea.  It was amazing, but there were no gun ranges, and no gun stores.  Ok, there were a few, but the gun would have been suspended in between two bungee cords and basically, all you do is move yourself in position behind the gun and then squeeze the trigger.  Kind of like holding a toothbrush in place a moving your mouth around the brush.

So needless to say, I made the most of my time when I arrived in Alaska.  I got a stronger lever action because I wanted something stronger than a .357 for my bear gun, and because I’ve always wanted a Henry Rifle.  I got my wife a new pistol for her to conceal and carry and for her home defense because I wanted her to haves something she could manage better.  The Snub nose .38 Special just wasn’t working for her.  And I finally bought my own Beretta M9.  You can tell me all day about how you think it is a bad choice, but I’ve taken it to war twice, luckily never had to fire it, and I shoot very well with one.  I maintain that with good magazines (not the cheap ones the Army bought in bulk), effective maintenance and care, and not treating it like a tool that only comes in and out of the arms room when necessary, the M9 is a very good pistol.

Then came the tragedy in Orlando, and again, I was lectured on how horrible guns were.  Never mind the individual was inspired by a hateful organization and their propaganda, we were going to talk about guns.  And as I talked about in my last post, the calls came to ban the AR-15.  So like a dutiful believer in gun rights, the right to sel- defense, and the right to oppression against tyranny, I made my way to Bass Pro and found a stripped down AR-15.  And I can say AR-15 because it was actually a model made by ArmaLite.

Facepalm

What was amazing was the way that the gun control crowd has shifted their method of restricting access to firearms.  The new push is called “No Fly, No Buy” (Joseph, 2016).  On paper, it makes sense, but only on paper without other scrutiny.  The Idea is that if you are on the federal no fly list or the terrorism watch list then you are too dangerous to own a firearm.  But like always, the logic ends there.  Like always, the process for how one gets added to the list, and who has the authority to add some on to this list cannot be explained by anyone who is pushing this bill.  When it failed, SEN. Charles Schumer (D-NY) cried out that “Republican colleagues voted to allow suspected terrorists to buy guns” (Pegram, Emanuel. 2016).  Even here he cannot hide the problems with his argument.  He said ”suspected” and not convicted.  Unfortunately for SEN Schumer, we have this concept of Innocent until proven guilty.  And you would need to be guilty for your rights to be taken away.

Democrats cannot hide their disdain for the Bill of Rights.  You see, there is these other articles that prevent the government from searching and seizing your property, and prevents the government form denying your rights without giving you due process.  This is no longer just a 2nd Amendment battle.  We have now entered the battle for the 4th and 5th Amendments as well.

But what is amazing is that a compromise to the “No Fly No Buy” was introduced by Republicans, and also supported by the NRA.  But you’d never know it because it seems rather than get what they want and afford Americans their right to Due process, SEN Schumer and SEN Warren would rather have a talking point. Unlike the Democrat version that would have flatly denied the right without Due Process, the Republican version would have allowed the Department of Justice to deny a sale for up to 72 hours while they presented their findings to a federal court to deny a sale.   Sounds like due process is afforded and those deemed too dangerous are denied from owning a firearm.  Two democrats voted for it, including our old friend SDN Joe Manchin (D-WV).  Noted anti-gun rights Senators Diane Feinstein (D-CA), Patty Murray (D-WA) and Claire McCaskill (D-MO) all voted against it and it failed to pass cloture.  SEN Manchin would go on to complain that the right to “due process is killing us” (Hawkins. 2016).  So sad that a representative has such a poor attitude of the rights afforded to citizens.

SEN Cuck Grassey (R-IA) introduced S.Amdt. 4751 to S.Amdt. 4750 to H.R. 2578 which would appropriate more funding for agents to conduct NICS background checks and require states to provide more information to the NICS system.  This would hopefully provide the NICS system with more assets and information to prevents criminals and other prohibitive personnel from slipping through the cracks when they attempt to buy a gun through an FFL.  One Lone Democrat voted for it.

In the end, all four bills failed and democrats immediately went on the offensive because the narrative is more important than reality.  But all the y accomplished was putting on display their disdain for or lack of understanding of the Constitution.

The same thing happened in 2013 after various gun control measures failed in the wake of the Sandy Hook massacre.  Back then, author Ryan Lizza complained about the composition of the senate and the “Tyranny of Small States” (Lizza. 2013).  There is a reason the House is structured the way it is and the Senate in its own method.   I wonder how he would feel if sanators were still appointed by State Legislatures rather than through popular election.  Let’s assume that the 31 state legislatures controlled by Republicans each appointed two Republican Senators.  There are 8 states with a split legislature so let’s assume they each give one republican.  I can’t say for certain so I’ll just assume that one of the two senators from Nebraska would be a Republican.  Suddenly, the Senate tilts 79 for Republicans and 29 for Democrats.  Ouch!

Hawkins, Awr (0216) Joe Manchin Lets Mask Slip: ‘Due Process is Killing Us’. Breitbart. http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/06/16/joe-manchin-lets-mask-slip-due-process-killing-us/

Joseph, Cameron (2016) Senate works toward compromise on ‘no fly, no buy’ gun-control measure. New York Daily News. http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/senate-works-compromise-no-fly-no-buy-gun-control-article-1.2682169

Lizza, Ryan (2013) Four Reasons Why the Gun Control Bills Failed. The New Yorker. http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/four-reasons-why-the-gun-control-bills-failed

Pergram, Chad; Emanuel, Mike; AP (2016) Gun control measures fail to clear Senate hurdle. Fox News. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/06/20/gun-control-measure-fails-to-clear-senate-hurdle.html

Senate Vote Record (2016) S.Amdt. 4751 to S.Amdt. 4750 to H.R. 2578: To address gun violence and improve the availability of records to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System. http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=114&session=2&vote=00103

Senate Vote Record (2016) S.Amdt. 4749 to S.Amdt. 4720 to S.Amdt. 4685 to H.R. 2578: To Secure our Homeland from radical Islamists by Enhancing Law Enforcement Detection. http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=114&session=2&vote=00105

Here we go Again, And Again

DCIM100GOPROSo, I have returned because evil never dies and just like clockwork, the uninformed gun grabbers are taking the wrong lessons from a tragedy. 

Our newest shooter had everything going for him.  Access to federal buildings, a statewide firearms License, no criminal record, and peers and law enforcement to cowed by political correctness to step in.  But within hours of the tragedy, A Florida Congresswoman was already preaching about the evils of gun shows, the AR-15 and all the usual ramblings. Obama’s statement was more about guns that the victims. 

Then came the predictable media outcry of falsehoods and emotional calls to ban the one of the most popular firearms every made.  The true nature of the gun grabber, to call for measure that would have had no impact on the tragedy, was on full display. 

·    Ban the AR-15 even though the Shooter used a different type of rifle

·    Close the gun show loophole even though the criminal passed a background check at a retail store

·    People on the terror watch list shouldn’t be able to buy guns even though he came off the list 2 years ago

·    Ban Automatic weapons even though the rifle was a semi-automatic

The biggest issue that democrats must realize is that one of their favorite pet groups of the oppressed was brutally terrorized by another.  And rather than face to face with the fact that Islam is not and does not want to be compatible with or accepting of homosexuality, they chose to blame guns.

By now, everyone has ready about Gersh Kuntzman and his PTSD from going to the rifle range.  Everything you need to know about this article is summed up in its first two words, “It felt” (Kuntzman, 2016).  There are so many things wrong with the article.  First, the New York Daily News cataloged the article under “crime” instead of opinion.  Then his string of observances came out:

·    “The resulting explosion of firepower is humbling and deafening” (Kuntzman, 2016). 

·    “The recoil bruised my shoulder” (Kuntzman, 2016). 

·    “The brass shell casings disoriented me as they flew past my face”

·    “The smell of sulfur and destruction made me sick” (Kuntzman, 2016). 

·    “The explosions — loud like a bomb — gave me a temporary form of PTSD” (Kuntzman, 2016). 

Not one of these observations is a fact.  They are all one person’s impressions of a situation they do not understand.  He notes that “even in semi-automatic mode” to characterize the rate of fire (Kuntzman, 2016).  This is disingenuous because it gives the impression that this weapon has an automatic mode.  I have no clue how an AR-15 firing a .223 round gave him a bruise.  I’ve you’ve ever been near a bomb, without ear protection, then you know it sounds nothing like a .223 from behind full earmuff sound protection. 

Then came Helen Ubiñas and her quest to show how easily it is to by an AR-15. She was utterly disgusted that someone who is a legal US Citizen, is not a fugitive from justice, not a felon, not convicted of domestic assault, can exercise their constitutional right to keep and bear arms.  She called it obscene and horrifying that an instant background check was, instant.  And that you could walk out the door with an AR-15 in “seven minutes” (Ubiñas. 2016). Again, this article is listed as news, but her impressions of the NICS process was only her opinion.  She then talks about her squeamish feelings and uncertainty on what to down with it before she drives to a Philadelphia police station to give it up, expecting the police to just be ready to receive a gun at a moment’s notice.  This is also a lie since she obviously had time to go to the photography studio and pose for a picture with her “newly purchased AR-15 semiautomatic rifle” (Ubiñas. 2016).  But it must be nice to have an extra $759.99 laying around to purchase a rifle on a whim so you can write an article on the background check process.  I’d hate to think that she was fronted the money by The Inquirer to buy it on their behalf.  Because, you know, straw purchasing is illegal.  I’ll give her credit, at lease she posed for her picture with her new weapon without her finger on the trigger.

This article has since been updated.  In the wake of the Orlando shooting, all the focus fell on the AR-15.  All the articles I’m going to talk about today talk about the AR-15.  The only problem was the shooter did not use an AR-15.  What is a “respected” newspaper to do to keep the narrative alive?  Well obviously come up with a incorrect corrections that makes no sense.  Per the update, it was “AR-15 type semiautomatic rifle, but not an AR-15” (Ubiñas. 2016).  I’m not sure what I just read except I think they are trying to say that it wasn’t the rifle we wanted to be, but close enough.

what-th-heck

That is just the Start.  Feminist blowhard Amanda Marcotte says that “the AR-15 must go” before going on a rant about another individual’s praise of the weapon, without then going back to support her premise of why the gun must be banned (Marcotte. 2016).  This was after her first article where she tried to link Christians to Muslims as both responsible for bigotry that caused the shooting.  But for once, she did not blame the patriarchy.  Ed Leefeldt at CBS News has renewed the debate about being able to sue gun manufacturer. And finally, Richard Cohen uses his status as a veteran and the public’s lack of ability to understand the differences between an AR-15 and an M16 to rail against civilian ownership.  He says that the civilian model is now an “even more lethal version of that weapon” than the fully automatic or burst fire version he qualified on in the Army (Cohen. 2016).

Every one of these pieces is the same really.  All are short on facts.  All play on public misperceptions. And each one pushed an emotional rather than a logic based argument.  It is why gun owners will always come out on top in these discussions.  We understand guns, how guns function, gun safety, and most importantly gun laws. 

So when Seth McFarlane tweets “Ban automatic weapons,” I say sure because they are already so highly restricted.  When Susan Sarandon blames the NRA, I laugh because once again, the shooter was not an NRA member.  And when they say weapons of war don’t belong in our streets, I ask them to define a weapon of war because the AR-15 does not fall into any of the descriptions they use.  In fact, I’m still waiting for them to identify one Army that uses an AR-15 as its standard infantry weapon. 

Fletch

References

Hawkins, Awr (2016) Omar Mateen Was Background Checked, Had ‘Statewide Firearms License’. Breitbart. Retrieved from http://www.breitbart.com/national-security/2016/06/12/omar-mateen-orlando/

Kuntzman, Gersh (2016) Firing an AR-15 is horrifying, menacing and very very loud. New York Daily News. Retrieved from http://www.nydailynews.com/news/crime/firing-ar-15-horrifying-dangerous-loud-article-1.2673201

Ubiñas, Helen. (2016) I bought an AR-15 semi-automatic rifle in Philly in 7 minutes. The Inquirer Daily News.  Retrieved from  http://www.philly.com/philly/columnists/helen_ubinas/20160614_Ubinas__I_bought_an_AR-15_semi-automatic_rifle_in_Philly_in_7_minutes.html

Marcotte, Amanda. (2016) The AR-15 has to go: Sorry, Jon Stokes, but your toy isn’t more important than people’s lives. Salon.com. Retrieved from  http://www.salon.com/2016/06/17/the_ar_15_has_to_go_sorry_jon_stokes_but_your_toy_isnt_more_important_than_peoples_lives/

Leefeldt, Ed. (2016) Can Orlando victims’ families and survivors sue gunmaker Sig Sauer? CBS News. Retrieved from http://www.cbsnews.com/news/orlando-nightclub-massacre-can-victims-sue-gun-maker-sig-sauer-and-employer-g4s/

Cohen, Richard (2016) The Absurd Availability of Assault Weapons. Real Clear Politics. Retrieved from  http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2016/06/14/the_absurd_availability_of_assault_weapons_130876.html

Header Image from http://www.leidproducts.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/LEID_SmartRail

Updated 05 November 2016 for grammar, structure, and to better cite material in the post.

 

Apples, Oranges, and Bowling Shoes

The Hill is reporting on a sure to fail bill that 24 democrats are sponsoring. The Bill is called “The Equal Justice for Victims of Gun Violence Act” and would allow the victims of gun violence to sue firearm manufacturers. For those familiar with this bill, the original version died in congress in 2013. It is unlikely that this bill would move through a Republican congress. I’m not certain what I want to call these bills. They are pretty much drafted with no hope of passage, and they take up time in the legislature, simply so a politician can either say they are doing something or to get PR points against the other side. Both parties do it. If you have an idea, please let me know.

Anyway, the bill seeks to confuse who is actually liable when someone is the victim of violent crime. From the article: “If you’re a carmaker and your airbags kill someone, you’re potentially liable,” continued (Rep Adam) Schiff (D-CA), one of the lawmakers behind the gun control bill. “If you’re a pharmaceutical company and sell faulty drugs, you can be held liable. If you’re a liquor store and sell alcohol to minors, you can be held liable.” (Devaney. 2016)

Take a look at these examples. If the airbag fails to perform its intended purpose, then the car manufacturer is potentially liable. But let’s say you sought to kill someone by having an airbag deploy when it wasn’t supposed to? Here you’ve taken an item and used it for a malicious purpose. Would you sue Ford?

The same is true with the pharmaceutical example. If I upped someone’s dosage with the intent to kill someone, would you sue the drug company?  And the final example, if you sell alcohol to minors, then you would go after the store or the clerk. When kids get ahold of alcohol, they don’t sue Jack Daniels. From the other Hill article:  “In some jurisdictions, if your dog bites me, you are strictly liable. No excuses, it’s your fault, you pay,” said Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), one of the sponsors of the bill” (Devaney. 2016)

Again. Who controls the situation? In this example, you would seek justice by going after the breeder. But no one sues dog breeders, they sue dog owners.

These are very poor examples to use, but they do because most people do not understand liability. What it really comes down to is most guns are stolen or procured off the streets when used in crimes. So you can’t go after a retailer for selling the gun. And if the owner was dutiful and reported the gun stolen to the police, they can only be so liable for failing to secure their gun. Who do the families seek financial restitution from? There are no sources in this case because it is unlikely the criminal has assets that to go after.

Hence they want to go after the gun industry. But they don’t sue knife manufacturers for stabbings. They don’t sue drug companies for overdoses. They don’t sue car companies or breweries for drunk drivers.

It is just like the Sally Kohn article I talked about in a previous post.  They are intentionally confusing product default with criminal intent because it makes it look like the gun companies have some impenetrable shield. This is only false because of the myth surrounding the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act which says you can’t sue a gun manufacturer or dealer if someone who legally purchased a firearm misuses it.

If I go to the bank, and get myself 14 rolls of quarters for use at a garage sale, but then drop them in a tube sock to beat the hell out of someone, will their family be able to sue the bank who gave me the quarters and the US Mint who manufactured them? Hmmmm….

Fletch

References:

Rep. Schiff, Adam (2013) H.R. 332 (113th): Equal Access to Justice for Victims of Gun Violence Act. United States Congress. Retrieved from https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/113/hr332

Sen. Craig, Larry (2005) S. 397 (109th): Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act.  United States Congress.  Retrieved from https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/109/s397

Devaney, Tim (2016) Dems push bill to let gun violence victims sue gun-makers.  The Hill.  Retrieved from http://thehill.com/regulation/266107-gunmakers-should-face-lawsuits-from-gun-violence-victims-dems-say

Devaney, Tim (2016) Dem bill would let shooting victims sue gun makers, dealers. The Hill.  Retrieved from http://thehill.com/regulation/267201-gun-dealers-could-be-sued-by-shooting-victims-under-new-bill

Updated 05 November 2016 for grammar, structure, and to properly cite references.