With the way the country is, and the way Lincoln trampled the constitution (even call these united states “a nation” instead of looking at this as a union of independent states) we need not a right of cessation, but a right to expel. I’d like to put on the list Maryland, Mass., California (at least the southern part), New Jersey, Delaware, Illinois, Michigan and a hand-full of New England states.
Browsing Posts in 2nd Amendment
July first … it came and went with little notice to the vast majority of people within the state. If you were at Champs in Reston, you might have noticed a lot of people with guns strapped on, but you might have seen even more that you didn’t notice were carrying concealed. It was a celebration of the state finally recognizing the right of people to defend themselves in public without having to call attention to their ability to use deadly force in that defense.
There must have been at least 60 people there who were celebrating the right to bear arms. Some of the people here were visible, but I’ll let them announce their presence (or lack thereof).
What was amazing (if you believe MSM) is that nobody was shot; there were no gunfights in the streets; no blood was spilled.
Most of the time I do not think of SNL as having a conservative slant to anything they ever did (at least not the times I watched it). But I have to admit the spoof here is a perfect example of why an alarm system just isn’t going to save you. (Thanks to the VCDL newsletter for pushing this out … I just want to give it broader distribution.)
I am in the woods at a secure, undisclosed location seeking wild pigs with my friend Bob.
Saw about ten last night but none came by the blinds this morning.
I plan to have a full photo round up posted at Digital Camel Monday night.
So far the wine has been outstanding and the birds this morning were spectacular.
She shot the guy in a park just before he was to appear in court; her plea deal was announced a couple days ago but so far it has only been covered in the local press. Fortunately, Eugene Delgaudio is picking up where the major media so far have been silent:
He got what Public Advocate calls “immediate victim imposed death penalty”. And we need more of it…
A poll is in progress and in Colorado at least, among 1794 “online votes” voted in the survey question “Should the girl who shot her suspected rapist in Palmer Park go to prison?”
93 per cent think either “probation and counseling are adequate” or “She deserves no punishment at all, not even probation.”
Most sensible people would agree that if every law abiding citizen had the means to protect themselves we would have less violent crime. I think it is also safe to say that if more sexual assault victims carried out acts of vigilante justice on their attackers, we would have less sexual assaults. Arming minors is probably a more controversial matter. But the real story of the Colorado Springs case is the plea bargain and the fact that community opinion was overwhelmingly in favor of the victim.
Argued on legal grounds, vigilante justice is complex and subject to opprobrium from numerous angles – but public sentiment is pretty black and white in favor of it.
Thank you for bringing this to our attention, Supervisor!
This will be an interesting case to follow, if for no other reason than to find out what really happened. Apparently – from very early reports – a guy in a truck was attempting to merge onto I-95 and a guy in a Jaguar did not make what the truck driver considered adequate room for the truck driver to get onto the highway. So the truck driver proceeded to SMASH INTO the Jaguar numerous times while the two were driving up the highway. Somehow both vehicles ended up on the left shoulder, whereupon the guy in the Jaguar started shooting at the truck with his legally-owned pistol.
You can click here to see what the Jaguar looked like afterwards. The guy driving it had his young daughter in the front seat.
When I first heard about this on the radio, from the way it was reported I thought “there is a guy who should not have a firearm.” You are not supposed to shoot at other vehicles because of highway disputes, you are just supposed to get away from vehicles that are giving you a problem. But seeing the photo of the car has me wondering:
Granted that merge disputes happen all the time, if you were driving on 95 and a truck started purposefully crashing into your car, what would you do?
I am thinking, I would get the hell away from that truck and call 911, probably pulling off to the side of the road to do so. But what if the truck driver pulled over when I pulled over?
There seem to have been eyewitnesses so we will likely get more information as the story unfolds.
I loved this, and I hope Cafferty is right about remembering at mid-term elections …
“You Lie” Wilson seems to have been right. Again in the state of the union, Obama lying about the SCOTUS in overturning McCain-Feingold in Citizen United is yet another example. How can you tell that Obama is lying? His lips are moving doesn’t seem to cover all the times this guy can lie.
Wow. I’ve decided….
I finally figured that I would rather have Mark Sell as the leader. A lot has to do with the AG coming out for Mark. Some has to do with the weak statement that Candice is a 2nd amendment supporter because she used to shoot competitive rifle (Mark works for the NRA and is a life member … hmmm, which is a stronger statement?) Then there is the intangible that I like that Mark lives in a townhouse, and is more of a common man than Candice. He isn’t the upper middle in which Candice flies, he is Joe Average. I think that may be more important than all the other reasons.
I would like to see the “unwashed” masses of conservatives more closely represented than what has been in the past, and I think Mark will do that much better than Candice will … if for no other reason than Candice is so far removed from that level of field. So, yes, I’m saying being a successful person in business economics is a negative in this case.
Brian Withnell
Not officially, of course. That would be too crude. No, the TSA is going to start swabbing travellers’ hands for explosives. Will these swabbings be able to detect gunpowder residue? Will merely washing one’s hands after a session at the range be sufficient to remove that residue? What of those of us who reload?
Actually I am just trying to see if I can remember how to post photos via blackberry, but I can tell you ammo prices are way down if you look around. AK prices are not bad but not as good as available online. Not a huge crowd for a Friday, though because of the snow parking is a bear.
Mark Sell is doing a smart thing hanging out here, handing out his LCRC campaign flyers.
Today is a good day to be here. With ammo prices as low as online (and no freight charges) I imagine tomorrow is going to be really crowded and you will have to park a mile away.
Sorry I’m late. Gun show at the Expo Center in Chantilly.
Friday 3-8pm
Saturday 9am-5pm
Sunday 10am-5pm
While you are there I would suggest you go to the VDCL both which is to the right when you walk in the doors next to the snack bar. Your membership will help to fight Virginia’s draconian gun laws as well as allowing your voice to be counted to state elected representatives. Just getting the free e-mail updates does not allow VDCL to count you when they go as an organization to state congress. If you are into gun rights, be in ALL THE WAY!
Hope to see you there.
One of the most interesting articles I’ve read recently on terrorism. What is obvious is that those that rule cannot deal with the obvious, but they can put in place rules that will do nothing to prevent bad things from happening. Preventing terror would be a lot easier if precautions were clear and logical. While there are some people that are terrorists that are not part of the Muslim world, and not all Muslims are terrorists, it seems that if you were interested in truly identifying terrorists with a limited amount of expense, then you would profile the most likely candidates and use those profiles for extra scrutiny, not make travel for all individuals more difficult and more restrictive.
The same is true for dealing with gun crimes. The idea that imposing gun restrictions will reduce violent crimes just doesn’t seem to make sense. Even in England, where guns are essentially outlawed, and have been for years now, violence has not decreased but increased. In places where gun control was loosened, there was not an increase in violence and crime, but a decrease. Yet the cry for more gun control, which will be ignored by criminals, is always raised when a high-profile crime occurs.
The real problem is that the sheep have no teeth. For some reason, people think that if the sheep have no teeth, they will be safe. It just isn’t true. With real sheep, the predators know that they will be able to take at least some of the sheep, but the sheep herd in order to make it harder to single one out (like fish in schools) and so that when one falls, the rest can get away. Not unlike the two men in the woods that see a bear and it starts to charge … one stops and quickly puts on running shoes, the other says: “That’s foolish … bears can out run you even if you wear running shoes.” The first replies: “I don’t have to outrun the bear, I only have to outrun you.” We are acting like sheep. Instead of running away and hoping we can outrun the bad guy we should get some teeth.
Instead of acting like sheep, we ought to act like men. First, by acknowledging that bad people are in the world. The world is not full of wonderful people that are just turned a little wrong. The world has truly evil people in it that might not accomplish as much evil as Hitler, are the moral equal to him. And second, we need to be able to defend ourselves. That means not relying on others to defend us, but being ready to drive off those that would attack. And it even means we should expect everyone to be able to defend themselves (with perhaps the exception of the elderly and infirm). If we were a nation of warriors, we would be expected to step into the gap when someone does evil and threatens the lives of the innocent around them. Terrorists can “win” only if we allow them to instill terror instead of resolve and determination to stop them.
When evil strikes, it does not do so in front of the police officer (as fine as he might be, he cannot be everywhere). When evil strikes, we might be there, and the only way to stop evil from winning is to have those that are there stop the evil.
This is in reply to the thoughtful comments I read on Joe’s post regarding the AK, which became a discussion regarding the relative merits of the two types, AR v. AK. The general philosophy behind the two weapons is a reflection of the military tradition of the two countries. The AR is a precise weapon, regardless of the caliber. It is accurate out to 500-600 yards using the peep sight system adopted by the American military. Troops can be trained readily to become proficient out to that range, the entire Marine Corps is trained out to that distance. I agree w/Monk (someone note the date and time) the AK is not a weapon I generally appreciate. It reflects the Russian military philosophy that the tools of war, like the troops, are cheap, imprecise and expendable. The atrocious accuracy of the AK at 200yds is emblematic of everything that is wrong with the weapon.
The US and some other western countries became enamored of the 5.56×45 round because a soldier could carry more rounds than if they where equipped with the 7.62×51. The thinking was the stopping power of such a round on the plains of Germany to stop Ivan was sufficient; the 5.56×45 was, and still is, sufficient for warfare in open terrain. If someone gets hit by a 5.56 at 200+ yards, they are done for the day, if not for good. If you want to openly contest this, go find Monk in western Loudoun, and let him shoot you at 200+ yards (or even 100 yds), with a 5.56×45 using an AR15. If you are able to then run up and explode your IED strapped to your chest, more power to ya.
The trouble is that this round may not drop someone fast enough in an urban environment. In house to house, room to room fighting the high velocity 5.56×45 round is not knocking people down, as it is passing through cleanly, and not imparting its energy to its intended target. However, there are work-a-rounds, as the Wolverine put it, pull out a bazooka and the trouble in the other room WILL GO AWAY. As many AR type weapons are capable of carrying a 40mm grenade launcher slung underneath, that is almost as good as a bazooka. The real lesson here is that the AR is fine, the round it is pushing is far too specialized. The new 6.5×47 is a very good compromise.
I like to hit what I am aiming at. If you keep your AR clean it will work. Our troops kept their gas operated M1’s clean in WWII and Korea. The argument that taking care of a weapon is too much to expect is vacuous. The Russian’s made the AK popular because it was cheap. You get what you pay for. The loose manufacturing tolerances are a function of the abysmal state of Russian/Soviet manufacturing, not some stroke of design genius. The loose tolerances gave the AK its ability to be a maintenance free weapon. The price for this feature is accuracy. Accuracy kills. At 200+yds the AR is to the AK what a guided missile is to an iron bomb dropped at 30K ft.
The short comings of the 5.56 were magnified in Iraq, the fighting there has been almost exclusively urban in nature. In Afghanistan the 5.56×45 is in a mixed urban/rural environment and has performed well there. The urban environment is where the 7.62×39 shines, at close range it has far more stopping power than the 5.56×45. Again, the issue is not the rifle but the ammo. The AR10 fires the 7.62×51, a round with plenty of stopping power. As mentioned above the 6.5×47 Lapua is another option. Considering the nature of asymmetrical warfare the US may need to consider adopting a new round, or, returning to the 7.62×51.
Another area where the AK shines is in the use of it by untrained militias, guerrilla troops, or other irregulars. These troops fit the profile of typical troops in the Russian military doctrine. They can’t hit anything past 100 yards, regardless of weapon choice, so the AK is just fine. The AK requires no care, since untrained militia typically do not take good care of their weapons, the loose tolerances of the AK is a plus for these kinds of combatants. If all you want is something that will fire, with an effective range of less than 100yds, the AK is good enough. Since it is cheap, the AK is probably a better choice than the AR for those who can’t shoot.
UPDATE:
The issue of tumbling M16 bullets came up. Below is a link all may find useful:
http://www.firearmstactical.com/briefs13.htm
and the following illustration is useful as well.
Not sure if we were even going to have a new post for this here December 11, but I do happen to have a trick up my sleeve that absolutely guarantees it.
Here is a good comparison of the AK-47 and M16:
This comes under the category of “keeps on ticking”:
Military Channel a couple years back did it’s top ten list of combat rifles, and I’ll just let you guess which came out on top. “It will be around long after all of us have dissolved into dust”:
And remember: In Russia, president assassinates you.
Russia's Izmash plant where Saiga Ak-47s are produced
McDonald v. Chicago will go to the Supreme Court (WaPo). In D.C. v Heller, the Supreme Court ruled that 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.”) does protect the rights of individuals, and was not a “collective right” of the States. Even those Justices in dissent agreed on that point. The issue in McDonald is whether the Second Amendment restricts State and local governments as it does the feral government.
I am certain there will be those on the Court who say that, while nearly all of the other provisions in the Bill of Rights have been ruled to restrict State and local governments, the Second Amendment does not. That will be both amusing and disgusting.
To get a foretaste of the putrid “logic” of the Left, I ask our resident leftie loonies to have a go at making that argument.
