Two days ago I blogged about a a Congressional bill passed to prevent gunmakers from being sued by silly people looking to make a buck or lay blame on someone other then those truly responsible for the crime.
Today, we have news that is almost as good.
http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/04/30/america/NA-GEN-US-Gun-Lawsuits-New-York.php
"A federal appeals court Wednesday tossed out New York City's lawsuit claiming the gun industry markets weapons with the knowledge that they could be used illegally.
The 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that U.S. law provides the gun industry with broad immunity from lawsuits brought by crime victims and violence-plagued cities."
The lawsuit was actually started by Rudy Giuliani back in 2000...so much for his statements during his presidential campaign that he was a supporter of 2nd Amendment rights. Political lying bullshit... grrrrr. Is it possible to liable yourself? This is the same freakin crap that Clinton and Obama are doing.
In any case, this case sets a fine precedent against dumbassed politicians, stupid people, and idiotic people.
Wednesday, April 30, 2008
Tuesday, April 29, 2008
Pipsqeaks
I am so tired of all the gun rags going on and one about the minimum caliber for self defense. One maxim states that "All calibers for self defense should start with a 4 or higher." So a 40 S&W, 44 Mag, or 45 ACP are ok, but a 357 Mag or 357 Sig just aren't enough.... huh? The worlds most popular caliber for handguns, excepting 22 LR's, is the 9 mm Parabellum. Some hot versions of this round are fairly close to 40 S&W and 45 ACP is power.
There is nothing wrong with a 32 ACP, 380 ACP, and certainly nothing wrong with the 38 Special. They have been used in police and military forces around the world for tears and years and years with good results. Until the last few decades, the 32 ACP was THE common law enforcement round for many Western European police agencies. It wasn't until modern terrorists came around that law enforcement in Europe was forces to upgrade.
For personal defense, just carry! It doesn't matter what caliber you have unavailable to you directly... it matters what you have at arms length. A 22 LR in hand is worth far more then a 45 ACP that's too big to carry.
Yes, the 22 LR and 25 ACP are anemic in power. Hell, I am sure many BB rifles have more power then a 25 ACP handgun, but when in doubt...pull the trigger a few times.
There is nothing wrong with a 32 ACP, 380 ACP, and certainly nothing wrong with the 38 Special. They have been used in police and military forces around the world for tears and years and years with good results. Until the last few decades, the 32 ACP was THE common law enforcement round for many Western European police agencies. It wasn't until modern terrorists came around that law enforcement in Europe was forces to upgrade.
For personal defense, just carry! It doesn't matter what caliber you have unavailable to you directly... it matters what you have at arms length. A 22 LR in hand is worth far more then a 45 ACP that's too big to carry.
Yes, the 22 LR and 25 ACP are anemic in power. Hell, I am sure many BB rifles have more power then a 25 ACP handgun, but when in doubt...pull the trigger a few times.
Monday, April 28, 2008
Manufacturers are protected
The Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act was signed into law by Pres. Bush on October 26, 2005. The idea here is that gun manufacturers should not be responsible for the actions that individuals take with those firearms. Well, umm, duh. Sounds common sense, huh?
The Anti's have been talking people into suing gun makers and distributors for years with the idea of huge payouts and putting the gun makers out of business. It's a ludicrous idea, but some people have tried to do exactly that... sue the gun makers.
That's like suing Ford because your son drove drunk and smashed into a tree. It's not Ford's fault your son drove drunk and killed himself. It's not Glocks fault someone bought their product and committed a crime with it. It's like a druggie suing Merck because the needle he has been using for weeks infects him with MRSA (Methicillin Resistant Staph. Aureus). Or wait... like suing McDonalds for selling you coffee, which you put between your legs, and you get burnt.
How about we use some common sense? Don't touch the chain on the chainsaw while it's moving. Don't stick your fingers in light sockets. Don't sue because you or a loved one is just plain stupid and you are grieving.
The Anti's have been talking people into suing gun makers and distributors for years with the idea of huge payouts and putting the gun makers out of business. It's a ludicrous idea, but some people have tried to do exactly that... sue the gun makers.
That's like suing Ford because your son drove drunk and smashed into a tree. It's not Ford's fault your son drove drunk and killed himself. It's not Glocks fault someone bought their product and committed a crime with it. It's like a druggie suing Merck because the needle he has been using for weeks infects him with MRSA (Methicillin Resistant Staph. Aureus). Or wait... like suing McDonalds for selling you coffee, which you put between your legs, and you get burnt.
How about we use some common sense? Don't touch the chain on the chainsaw while it's moving. Don't stick your fingers in light sockets. Don't sue because you or a loved one is just plain stupid and you are grieving.
Saturday, April 26, 2008
50 cal
Since I was a little kid, I wanted a .50 Cal rifle, specifically a M2 or any of the Barrett's. I always thought it would be cool as hell to blast away at over a mile. Stories are abound about snipers using these things at 1500 yards or more. I know .50 cals have found a place a warmth in Afghanistan where there are used to "take out" enemy forces across peaks of hills. There are more then a few videos of 800 yard shots or more taking out people hiding behind rocks (and the rocks too).
In skimming through a CheaperThenDirt catalog today I about popped my eyeballs out of their sockets (a la old cartoons) then I saw the price. I never really paid attention to their price as I cannot really afford to spend 3 to 5 K on a gun. I mean, why worry about the cost of ammo on a gun I don't have, right? $5 bucks a round for "cheap" surplus and $7 bucks for new imported stuff. It gets worse when you add in the cost of links, if you need them.
For the price of 10 rounds of .50 cal Browning, I can get 2000 to 2500 22LR's, just over 300 9 mm's, 200 40S$W, or almost 200 45 ACP's. It's a tossup what would be more fun, 10 rounds of .50 or 440 for my Mosin rifle... 10 rounds of .50 Cal or 220+ rounds of .223.
Reloading components are not cheap either. By my estimate, it will still cost up to two and a half bucks a round if you roll your own; a box of 20 750 gr bullets will run about 45 bucks.
I am starting to rethink my dream of having one. I might need a second job just to shoot.
In skimming through a CheaperThenDirt catalog today I about popped my eyeballs out of their sockets (a la old cartoons) then I saw the price. I never really paid attention to their price as I cannot really afford to spend 3 to 5 K on a gun. I mean, why worry about the cost of ammo on a gun I don't have, right? $5 bucks a round for "cheap" surplus and $7 bucks for new imported stuff. It gets worse when you add in the cost of links, if you need them.
For the price of 10 rounds of .50 cal Browning, I can get 2000 to 2500 22LR's, just over 300 9 mm's, 200 40S$W, or almost 200 45 ACP's. It's a tossup what would be more fun, 10 rounds of .50 or 440 for my Mosin rifle... 10 rounds of .50 Cal or 220+ rounds of .223.
Reloading components are not cheap either. By my estimate, it will still cost up to two and a half bucks a round if you roll your own; a box of 20 750 gr bullets will run about 45 bucks.
I am starting to rethink my dream of having one. I might need a second job just to shoot.
Thursday, April 24, 2008
Democratic Debate
This is shamelessly copied from the NRA's website and shows the crap politicians spew to garner votes.
Debating Their Position On Guns
Friday, April 18, 2008
Speaking of “the most anti-gun candidate,” lately it’s becoming more and more difficult to keep track of which candidate is most deserving of that title.
As Democratic Presidential hopefuls Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama squared off at the Democratic debate in Philadelphia this week, moderator Charlie Gibson, from ABC News, opened debate on the gun issue by stating, “Both of you, in the past, have supported strong gun control measures. But now when I listen to you on the campaign, I hear you emphasizing that you believe in an individual's right to bear arms. Both of you were strong advocates for licensing of guns. Both of you were strong advocates for the registration of guns.” (Sound familiar?) “Why don’t you emphasize that now, Senator Clinton?”
Hillary answered with a stream of generalizations, but was specific on at least one thing, “I will [also] work to reinstate the assault weapons ban,” she said, also noting that, “the Republicans will not reinstate it.”
Obama was asked about the Heller case now before the United States Supreme Court, and specifically whether the D.C. gun ban is “consistent with an individual’s right to bear arms.” His response was, “Well, Charlie, I confess I obviously haven’t listened to the briefs and looked at all the evidence. As a general principle, I believe that the Constitution confers an individual right to bear arms. But just because you have an individual right does not mean that the state or local government can’t constrain the exercise of that right…”
When pressed further by the moderator (“But do you still favor the registration of guns? Do you still favor the licensing of guns?”), Obama was evasive, never really giving a straight answer and causing the moderator to quip, “I’m not sure I got an answer from Senator Obama.”
Senator Clinton was then asked, “you have a home in D.C., do you support the D.C. ban?” She, too, was evasive but said that she wants, “to give local communities the opportunity to have some authority over determining…” firearms law. She was further pressed “But what do you think? Do you support it or not?”
“Well, what I support is sensible regulation that is consistent with the constitutional right to own and bear arms,” she said.
“Is the D.C. ban consistent with that right?” asked the moderator.
“Well, I think a total ban, with no exceptions under any circumstances, might be found by the court not to be. But I don't know the facts,” Clinton concluded. At least she was right about that.
What we do know is that neither candidate joined more than 300 of their congressional colleagues in signing a brief in the Heller case in support of the Second Amendment, and both candidates’ records are well documented and show, unquestionably, that they’re both anti-gun. For either to now try to convince us otherwise is absurd. If one can’t plainly state that a ban on guns in the home for self-defense runs afoul of the Second Amendment, one has to wonder if either candidate believes any gun law would.
http://www.nraila.org/Legislation/Federal/Read.aspx?id=3847&issue=
Nothing else needs to be said.
Debating Their Position On Guns
Friday, April 18, 2008
Speaking of “the most anti-gun candidate,” lately it’s becoming more and more difficult to keep track of which candidate is most deserving of that title.
As Democratic Presidential hopefuls Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama squared off at the Democratic debate in Philadelphia this week, moderator Charlie Gibson, from ABC News, opened debate on the gun issue by stating, “Both of you, in the past, have supported strong gun control measures. But now when I listen to you on the campaign, I hear you emphasizing that you believe in an individual's right to bear arms. Both of you were strong advocates for licensing of guns. Both of you were strong advocates for the registration of guns.” (Sound familiar?) “Why don’t you emphasize that now, Senator Clinton?”
Hillary answered with a stream of generalizations, but was specific on at least one thing, “I will [also] work to reinstate the assault weapons ban,” she said, also noting that, “the Republicans will not reinstate it.”
Obama was asked about the Heller case now before the United States Supreme Court, and specifically whether the D.C. gun ban is “consistent with an individual’s right to bear arms.” His response was, “Well, Charlie, I confess I obviously haven’t listened to the briefs and looked at all the evidence. As a general principle, I believe that the Constitution confers an individual right to bear arms. But just because you have an individual right does not mean that the state or local government can’t constrain the exercise of that right…”
When pressed further by the moderator (“But do you still favor the registration of guns? Do you still favor the licensing of guns?”), Obama was evasive, never really giving a straight answer and causing the moderator to quip, “I’m not sure I got an answer from Senator Obama.”
Senator Clinton was then asked, “you have a home in D.C., do you support the D.C. ban?” She, too, was evasive but said that she wants, “to give local communities the opportunity to have some authority over determining…” firearms law. She was further pressed “But what do you think? Do you support it or not?”
“Well, what I support is sensible regulation that is consistent with the constitutional right to own and bear arms,” she said.
“Is the D.C. ban consistent with that right?” asked the moderator.
“Well, I think a total ban, with no exceptions under any circumstances, might be found by the court not to be. But I don't know the facts,” Clinton concluded. At least she was right about that.
What we do know is that neither candidate joined more than 300 of their congressional colleagues in signing a brief in the Heller case in support of the Second Amendment, and both candidates’ records are well documented and show, unquestionably, that they’re both anti-gun. For either to now try to convince us otherwise is absurd. If one can’t plainly state that a ban on guns in the home for self-defense runs afoul of the Second Amendment, one has to wonder if either candidate believes any gun law would.
http://www.nraila.org/Legislation/Federal/Read.aspx?id=3847&issue=
Nothing else needs to be said.
Wednesday, April 23, 2008
Empty your holster
"I don't like guns, to be honest with you," said student Ed Pardue, 33, of Charlotte. "But if they have a concealed-carry permit, they should be able to carry anywhere."
That's a common statement that the news media doesn't report. The vast majority of people support the 2nd Amendment, even if they do not own or like guns.
Anywho...on campuses across the U.S. students with CCW's are carrying empty holsters in a sigh of support for the CCW on Campus legislation currently being reviewed by Congress. "We're not necessarily talking about stopping mass shootings," Blatt said. "We're not saying (having concealed weapons on campus) would have prevented it, but it would have leveled the playing field."
Of course, the schools are vehemently against the bill. The philosophy is that more guns is bad and will cause more campus shootings. Well.. these are the same schools that decided that chaining the doors shut would be a good thing and all it did was create more mayhem.
http://www.charlotte.com/local/story/592598.html
That's a common statement that the news media doesn't report. The vast majority of people support the 2nd Amendment, even if they do not own or like guns.
Anywho...on campuses across the U.S. students with CCW's are carrying empty holsters in a sigh of support for the CCW on Campus legislation currently being reviewed by Congress. "We're not necessarily talking about stopping mass shootings," Blatt said. "We're not saying (having concealed weapons on campus) would have prevented it, but it would have leveled the playing field."
Of course, the schools are vehemently against the bill. The philosophy is that more guns is bad and will cause more campus shootings. Well.. these are the same schools that decided that chaining the doors shut would be a good thing and all it did was create more mayhem.
http://www.charlotte.com/local/story/592598.html
Tuesday, April 22, 2008
"Non-toxic" ammo
I was in Sportsman's Warehouse today and I about pissed myself laughing. I saw handgun loads with the term "non-toxic" on its label. This is about the stupidest thing I have ever seen..right up there with warnings on chain saws that say, "Do not touch chain when chain saw is on." or the labels on coffee cups that say, "Caution Hot Liquid."
This ammo, and others like it are "lead free" but I venture to say that anyone shot with these rounds would probably state they are most definitely not "non-toxic." Sure, being lead free or totally encapsulated in copper may be safer for the enviorment, but labeling them non-toxic is a bit of a stretch.
This ammo, and others like it are "lead free" but I venture to say that anyone shot with these rounds would probably state they are most definitely not "non-toxic." Sure, being lead free or totally encapsulated in copper may be safer for the enviorment, but labeling them non-toxic is a bit of a stretch.
Monday, April 21, 2008
Violence in Chicago
Over the weekend there were 36 shootings in the city of Chicago; 9 people were killed. I find this an amazing number. Since Chicago has virtually banned handguns with some of the toughest laws on the books, one has to wonder how all these people were shot with handguns. Now, admittedly, one of those shootings was from an Ak47 variant used to shoot up a plumbing store, but the various news reports were unable to confirm if anyone was hurt or killed in the plumbing supply store.
The Police Superintendent stated, "There are just too many weapons here. "Too many guns, too many gangs."
Wrong, lady. There are too many guns in the hands of criminals. The laws of your city left 36 people without protection or a way to defend themselves. It is a shame that any of these people were wounded, let alone being killed, but the travesty here is that many of these could have been prevent if law-abiding citizens were allowed to defend themselves.
There were interviews on CNN with school principles decrying the violence caused by gangs and gun, but no one stated that these "gun free zones" leave citizens defenseless. You cannot blame the police, but the lawmakers need to think about the innocents walking the street with targets on their chests just asking to be robbed, murdered, raped, etc. I have no pity for any gangbangers who may have been shot or killed, but the people whose only crime was being at the wrong place at the wrong time in one of the state and city sanctioned criminal marketplace deserve their rights to protect themselves.
It is time for lawmakers to actually read the Constitution of the U,S, and their states and not hide behind public sentiment.
The Police Superintendent stated, "There are just too many weapons here. "Too many guns, too many gangs."
Wrong, lady. There are too many guns in the hands of criminals. The laws of your city left 36 people without protection or a way to defend themselves. It is a shame that any of these people were wounded, let alone being killed, but the travesty here is that many of these could have been prevent if law-abiding citizens were allowed to defend themselves.
There were interviews on CNN with school principles decrying the violence caused by gangs and gun, but no one stated that these "gun free zones" leave citizens defenseless. You cannot blame the police, but the lawmakers need to think about the innocents walking the street with targets on their chests just asking to be robbed, murdered, raped, etc. I have no pity for any gangbangers who may have been shot or killed, but the people whose only crime was being at the wrong place at the wrong time in one of the state and city sanctioned criminal marketplace deserve their rights to protect themselves.
It is time for lawmakers to actually read the Constitution of the U,S, and their states and not hide behind public sentiment.
Sunday, April 20, 2008
Colts M4 contracts
According to a recent survey, "...soldiers who had served in Iraq and Afghanistan and found 89 percent were satisfied with the M4. While Colt and the Army have trumpeted that finding, detractors say the survey also revealed that 19 percent of these soldiers had their weapon jam during a firefight." Holy crap..!!! That's 1 in 5 guns jammed in a fire fight. Imagine if one out of five cars brakes failed during rush hour !!!
According to this article, the government pays $1500 for for the M4 Carbine. Seems to me, I can get a Bushmaster set up like a M4, minus the 3 shot burst, for about $900 or $1000. All that's needed is a selector switch and a special sear (basically). Another example of us tax payers being screwed.
Personally, I have never been a fan of the M16 family as a combat weapon. It makes a great target/varmint rifle, but has always proven to be a dirty, problem prone weapon. Our troops deserve the best... and this ain't the best.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080420/ap_on_re_us/the_gun_wars;_ylt=Ai8RT5qxG9keA3AqknBRU1us0NUE
According to this article, the government pays $1500 for for the M4 Carbine.
Personally, I have never been a fan of the M16 family as a combat weapon. It makes a great target/varmint rifle, but has always proven to be a dirty, problem prone weapon. Our troops deserve the best... and this ain't the best.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080420/ap_on_re_us/the_gun_wars;_ylt=Ai8RT5qxG9keA3AqknBRU1us0NUE
Saturday, April 19, 2008
Prices are up, again
Went to Walmart today. Usually a mistake, but I went by the outdoors section and noticed that 9mm ammo went up to $18.88, up two buck from their last price increase just 3 months ago. Prices on 40 S&W and 45 ACP also went up, looks like a buck each.
I haven't been to Sportsman's Warehouse, Cabela's or any local gun shops in a couple of weeks, but online and catalog prices have also gone up, considerably. Blazer Brass is up about 4 bucks in one place. I know copper, and hell all metals have risen in price over the past few years, but ammo manufactures are almost as bad as the gas companies.
Three years ago, you buy 45 ACP ammo for 10 bucks for 50 rounds, now it's 22 bucks--120 % more. Even the 525 round bricks of 22 LR are up to 14 bucks, about 40% increase. Add to this, almost all the ammo makers are selling their cheap stuff for the same prices... all their "premium" ammo for similar prices, seems like price fixing.
I haven't been to Sportsman's Warehouse, Cabela's or any local gun shops in a couple of weeks, but online and catalog prices have also gone up, considerably. Blazer Brass is up about 4 bucks in one place. I know copper, and hell all metals have risen in price over the past few years, but ammo manufactures are almost as bad as the gas companies.
Three years ago, you buy 45 ACP ammo for 10 bucks for 50 rounds, now it's 22 bucks--120 % more. Even the 525 round bricks of 22 LR are up to 14 bucks, about 40% increase. Add to this, almost all the ammo makers are selling their cheap stuff for the same prices... all their "premium" ammo for similar prices, seems like price fixing.
Friday, April 18, 2008
Real life isn't the mocies: Part 2
How funny.. after my last post, I found this:
http://www.gunreports.com/special_reports/handguns/108-1.html
Interesting read
http://www.gunreports.com/special_reports/handguns/108-1.html
Interesting read
Real life isn't the movies
In the movies, one shot drops the bad guy. The good guy can shoot any gun he finds with 100% accuracy and "innocents" are never hit by accident. One of my pet peeves is the ghetto sideways shooting. If you have tried it, you know it can be done, but recoil is a lot harder to recover from. It may look cool, but it is not functional. Don't even get me started on shooting from the hip, magazines that never run out of ammo, shooting and running at full speed, shooting and diving through the air, or my personal favorite, shooting at something flammable and it catches fire.
I was watching Rambo 4 the other day. Good movie. Fun movie. Like all action movies of that type, the bad guys shoot 1000's of rounds at John Rambo and he was hit once...it the shoulder, and did not effect his abilities at all. Must be nice to be a action hero.
I was watching Rambo 4 the other day. Good movie. Fun movie. Like all action movies of that type, the bad guys shoot 1000's of rounds at John Rambo and he was hit once...it the shoulder, and did not effect his abilities at all. Must be nice to be a action hero.
Thursday, April 17, 2008
Oppps !
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2008/04/04/ny_rifle_company_ships_loaded_guns/
How would you like to buy a new gun and find ammo included with it? What if the ammo was found in the chamber? Yikes is right.
Just one more reason to obey Rule Number 1.... Always treat every gun like it was loaded.
How would you like to buy a new gun and find ammo included with it? What if the ammo was found in the chamber? Yikes is right.
Just one more reason to obey Rule Number 1.... Always treat every gun like it was loaded.
Tuesday, April 15, 2008
Another Law that makes sense
http://www.nraila.org/News/Read/NewsReleases.aspx?ID=10909
Florida Governor Charlie Crist today signed important National Rifle Association (NRA)–backed legislation into law that will protect the existing rights of law-abiding gun owners. House Bill 503 preserves the self-defense rights of law-abiding men and women as they travel in their cars to and from their daily activities.
“Customers and workers should not have to choose between protecting themselves or following the political policies of an anti-gun business,” said NRA Past President Marion P. Hammer. “The right to protect oneself must be maintained no matter where you park your car.”
This legislation protects the rights of gun owners to possess a firearm in any private motor vehicle in a parking lot, and prevents businesses from searching private vehicles of customers or employees.
“This is a great day for the people of the state of Florida,” concluded Hammer. “Their right to keep and bear arms for self-defense and other lawful purposes has been restored.”
This just makes sense....
Florida Governor Charlie Crist today signed important National Rifle Association (NRA)–backed legislation into law that will protect the existing rights of law-abiding gun owners. House Bill 503 preserves the self-defense rights of law-abiding men and women as they travel in their cars to and from their daily activities.
“Customers and workers should not have to choose between protecting themselves or following the political policies of an anti-gun business,” said NRA Past President Marion P. Hammer. “The right to protect oneself must be maintained no matter where you park your car.”
This legislation protects the rights of gun owners to possess a firearm in any private motor vehicle in a parking lot, and prevents businesses from searching private vehicles of customers or employees.
“This is a great day for the people of the state of Florida,” concluded Hammer. “Their right to keep and bear arms for self-defense and other lawful purposes has been restored.”
This just makes sense....
Monday, April 14, 2008
Walmart and Bloomberg
http://www.abc15.com/news/national/story.aspx?content_id=baba5824-6f3b-4384-b05b-a6a251c17d88
It seems Walmart is going to be creating a database of guns it sells. It also seems like the worlds largest retailer is getting into the back pocket of Bloomberg on his campaign against guns. Walmart says "illegal" gun but Bloomie is against private citizens owning firearms outright. Watch it Wally World, if you capitulate on one thing, they are sure to ask you for more later.
It seems to me that Walmarts database, which it already has, since it is an FFL, it already in each store that sells weapons. Now it wants to link all Walmarts with the lists of all. Walmart is not a police organization and should not be collecting this data. This seems like a great opening for thugs to get information of the people who have bought guns. I am sure this database will contain names, addresses, Social Security Numbers, and all the other information listed for the NICS check.
Great idea. Let's open a database that walks bad guys to peoples homes to rob.
Thanks Walmart
It seems Walmart is going to be creating a database of guns it sells. It also seems like the worlds largest retailer is getting into the back pocket of Bloomberg on his campaign against guns. Walmart says "illegal" gun but Bloomie is against private citizens owning firearms outright. Watch it Wally World, if you capitulate on one thing, they are sure to ask you for more later.
It seems to me that Walmarts database, which it already has, since it is an FFL, it already in each store that sells weapons. Now it wants to link all Walmarts with the lists of all. Walmart is not a police organization and should not be collecting this data. This seems like a great opening for thugs to get information of the people who have bought guns. I am sure this database will contain names, addresses, Social Security Numbers, and all the other information listed for the NICS check.
Great idea. Let's open a database that walks bad guys to peoples homes to rob.
Thanks Walmart
Sunday, April 13, 2008
Clinton and Guns
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080414/ap_on_el_pr/obama;_ylt=Ai.E_HdP3PYte.gfwe_7QRiyFz4D
"Clinton has told campaign audiences that she supports the rights of hunters. Saturday, she reminisced about learning to shoot on family vacations in Scranton, where her father grew up. She's also said she once shot a duck in Arkansas, where she served as first lady."
Oh come on !!! She's voted for every single anti-gun legistation that's been put before her in the Senate and was a vocal supporter of the AWB from 1994.
How dare she !!
"Clinton has told campaign audiences that she supports the rights of hunters. Saturday, she reminisced about learning to shoot on family vacations in Scranton, where her father grew up. She's also said she once shot a duck in Arkansas, where she served as first lady."
Oh come on !!! She's voted for every single anti-gun legistation that's been put before her in the Senate and was a vocal supporter of the AWB from 1994.
How dare she !!
Saturday, April 12, 2008
Crazy stuff
I receive about ten differenet catalogs each month for gun, camping, and hunting stuff. Each month I see a bewildering array of crap for sale that one wonders... why would anyone buy that crap?
One of them is selling a certain brand of scope, dirt cheap with no warranty and no returns. Sounds like a greattttt deal. If it has no warranty and no returns, it's going to be a beauty of a waste of money.
Another one I have questions of are some of Aimpoint's very high end dot/holoscopes scopes. They run to about 1500 bucks. These scopes are basically no or very little magnification and project a variety of target "dots" onto a small screen that allow the shooter to leave both eyes open and target they, umm, target. Most help to a range of 100 yars, maybe two hundred. These high end Aimpoint scopes are night vision compatible and have some circuitry that will make one battery last like 5+ years. That's a lot, considering I can get a similar product a few pages later for $40, minus the 5+ year battery life circuitry and night vision. I can buy a LOT of batteries for the grand of cash saved. Besides, why am getting a night compatible one when 1) I do not own night vision equipment, 2) would be unlikely to "mount" that night vision equipment if I heard a home intruder, 3) be in a normal predicament where I would need night vision sight capability, unless I was in the military.
Add to this stuff is a plethora of grips. I never realized that everyone needs stag, fake mother-of-pearl, or fake ivory grips for every one of their guns. The list of "junk" can continue for days of articles, but I have more to do today then continue this list.
One of them is selling a certain brand of scope, dirt cheap with no warranty and no returns. Sounds like a greattttt deal. If it has no warranty and no returns, it's going to be a beauty of a waste of money.
Another one I have questions of are some of Aimpoint's very high end dot/holoscopes scopes. They run to about 1500 bucks. These scopes are basically no or very little magnification and project a variety of target "dots" onto a small screen that allow the shooter to leave both eyes open and target they, umm, target. Most help to a range of 100 yars, maybe two hundred. These high end Aimpoint scopes are night vision compatible and have some circuitry that will make one battery last like 5+ years. That's a lot, considering I can get a similar product a few pages later for $40, minus the 5+ year battery life circuitry and night vision. I can buy a LOT of batteries for the grand of cash saved. Besides, why am getting a night compatible one when 1) I do not own night vision equipment, 2) would be unlikely to "mount" that night vision equipment if I heard a home intruder, 3) be in a normal predicament where I would need night vision sight capability, unless I was in the military.
Add to this stuff is a plethora of grips. I never realized that everyone needs stag, fake mother-of-pearl, or fake ivory grips for every one of their guns. The list of "junk" can continue for days of articles, but I have more to do today then continue this list.
Friday, April 11, 2008
The public supports Gun Rights
http://www.gallup.com/poll/105721/Public-Believes-Americans-Right-Own-Guns.aspx
According to this Gallop poll, 73% of people agree that the 2nd Amendment is a guaranteed personal right, like the other rights in the Bill of Rights.. To extend this, this means that the vocal minority are making a lot of noise. Yes, as we already knew, the Anti's are the minority, almost by more than 3 to 1. To extrapolate further 93% of the people polled believe that there is a fundamental right to have firearms in this country (73% for individuals and 20% only for militia). 7% are undecided. The Anti's would have us all believe that there is a huge portion of the country that wants no guns, period.
To add insult to injury, 6% of those polled who stated they believed that only militia should have guns own guns. Umm, if you do not believe it is a personal right, why would you own one? Could it be for self protection?
Additionally, the number of people who want gun control to be more strict has dropped from 54% in 2000 to 49% in 2008, while those who want gun ownership laws to become less strict has gone up from 31% to 38% in the same time frame.
It's an interesting poll, and surprising that the anti-gun media would be publish it.
According to this Gallop poll, 73% of people agree that the 2nd Amendment is a guaranteed personal right, like the other rights in the Bill of Rights.. To extend this, this means that the vocal minority are making a lot of noise. Yes, as we already knew, the Anti's are the minority, almost by more than 3 to 1. To extrapolate further 93% of the people polled believe that there is a fundamental right to have firearms in this country (73% for individuals and 20% only for militia). 7% are undecided. The Anti's would have us all believe that there is a huge portion of the country that wants no guns, period.
To add insult to injury, 6% of those polled who stated they believed that only militia should have guns own guns.
Additionally, the number of people who want gun control to be more strict has dropped from 54% in 2000 to 49% in 2008, while those who want gun ownership laws to become less strict has gone up from 31% to 38% in the same time frame.
It's an interesting poll, and surprising that the anti-gun media would be publish it.
Thursday, April 10, 2008
Production is up
http://www.gunreports.com/news/handguns/BATFE_ANNUAL_FIREARMS_MANUFACTURING_EXPORT_REPORT_2006_224-1.html?ET=gunreports:e139:146653a:&st=email
This is listed as total firearm productions, so I am assuming this includes military contract weapons.
U.S. firearm production in 2006 increased 3.3 percent. Pistol and rifle production increased the most in 2006, while shotguns posted a slight increase, and revolvers a 14-percent decline. This is pretty good, after a 4-percent rise in 2005.
"Manufacturing 603,279 firearms, Remington led Mossberg (425,761), Smith & Wesson (408,095), Sturm, Ruger (403,272), and Savage (122,438) in total manufacturing." It's the sixth straight year Remington has kept number-one ranking. Funny thing is...Remington and Mossberg make only long guns.
It would be interesting to see all U.S. sales, including imports and surplus. For historical comparisons ( http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0BQY/is_8_45/ai_55605755 )
TOTAL FIREARMS PRODUCTION ALL RIFLES, HANDGUNS, AND SHOTGUNS MANUFACTURED IN THE U.S.
1980 5,645,131
1994 5,161,127
1996 3,834,528
1997 3,573,824
TOTAL FIREARMS PRODUCTION FOR
1997 SHOTGUNS 915,978
HANDGUNS 1,406,505
REVOLVERS 370,428
PISTOLS 1,036,077
RIFLES 1,251,824
TOTAL 3,573,624
TOTAL FIREARMS PRODUCTION FOR 1996
SHOTGUNS 926,732
HANDGUNS 1,484,477
REVOLVERS 498,944
PISTOLS 985,533
RIFLES 1,424,319
TOTAL 3,834,528
This is listed as total firearm productions, so I am assuming this includes military contract weapons.
U.S. firearm production in 2006 increased 3.3 percent. Pistol and rifle production increased the most in 2006, while shotguns posted a slight increase, and revolvers a 14-percent decline. This is pretty good, after a 4-percent rise in 2005.
"Manufacturing 603,279 firearms, Remington led Mossberg (425,761), Smith & Wesson (408,095), Sturm, Ruger (403,272), and Savage (122,438) in total manufacturing." It's the sixth straight year Remington has kept number-one ranking. Funny thing is...Remington and Mossberg make only long guns.
It would be interesting to see all U.S. sales, including imports and surplus. For historical comparisons ( http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0BQY/is_8_45/ai_55605755 )
TOTAL FIREARMS PRODUCTION ALL RIFLES, HANDGUNS, AND SHOTGUNS MANUFACTURED IN THE U.S.
1980 5,645,131
1994 5,161,127
1996 3,834,528
1997 3,573,824
TOTAL FIREARMS PRODUCTION FOR
1997 SHOTGUNS 915,978
HANDGUNS 1,406,505
REVOLVERS 370,428
PISTOLS 1,036,077
RIFLES 1,251,824
TOTAL 3,573,624
TOTAL FIREARMS PRODUCTION FOR 1996
SHOTGUNS 926,732
HANDGUNS 1,484,477
REVOLVERS 498,944
PISTOLS 985,533
RIFLES 1,424,319
TOTAL 3,834,528
Wednesday, April 9, 2008
Proposed Florida Law
http://www.bradenton.com/breakingnews/story/516181.html
"The bill under consideration states that businesses cannot prohibit employees or customers from keeping legally owned guns locked inside their cars if, like Gray, they have permits to carry concealed weapons. An identical bill already passed the House two weeks ago."
The other side of this debate is, "...we own this building. You couldn't bring a gun to a person's house without their permission. Why should you be allowed to bring one to their business?"
I agree that businesses and private citizens have the right to allow or disallow guns on their premises. I, on the other hand, believe that my car is my property and I have the right to protect myself while in my vehicle, to and from my place of employment. Cross your fingers.
"The bill under consideration states that businesses cannot prohibit employees or customers from keeping legally owned guns locked inside their cars if, like Gray, they have permits to carry concealed weapons. An identical bill already passed the House two weeks ago."
The other side of this debate is, "...we own this building. You couldn't bring a gun to a person's house without their permission. Why should you be allowed to bring one to their business?"
I agree that businesses and private citizens have the right to allow or disallow guns on their premises. I, on the other hand, believe that my car is my property and I have the right to protect myself while in my vehicle, to and from my place of employment. Cross your fingers.
Monday, April 7, 2008
Charlton Heston
Charlton Heston died a couple of days ago. I just returned from a weekend of camping when i heard this. This is a sad thing. Not only was he a great actor in such epics as the Ten Commandment, Ben Hur, and Planet of the Apes. He was also an early Hollywood-type to support the Civil Rights and even walked with Rev. King in 1063 in Washington D.C. Initially a supporter of the Gun Control Act of 1968, due to the assassinations of Rev. King and Bobby Kennedy.
He later became the President of the N.R.A. and was extremely proactive is gun control rights. He was not perfect as a Gun Supporter and gave into some new laws that hurt gun owners, but he was a very forward and verbal 2nd-Amendment supporter.
He later became the President of the N.R.A. and was extremely proactive is gun control rights. He was not perfect as a Gun Supporter and gave into some new laws that hurt gun owners, but he was a very forward and verbal 2nd-Amendment supporter.
Thursday, April 3, 2008
Arizona and Concealed Carry at Schools
http://www.nraila.org/Legislation/Read.aspx?ID=3754
Senate Bill 1214, critical Right-to-Carry reform legislation, introduced by State Senator Karen Johnson (R-18), could be heard in the Senate Committee of the Whole on Thursday, April 3. SB1214 would permit citizens with concealed weapons permits to carry a firearm for self-defense on public university and college campuses. The deadline for bills to be out of their house of origin is Friday, April 4, which is why its imperative that NRA members continue to call their State Senator and ask for their support for this important right to carry measure.
Let's see what happens tomorrow.
Senate Bill 1214, critical Right-to-Carry reform legislation, introduced by State Senator Karen Johnson (R-18), could be heard in the Senate Committee of the Whole on Thursday, April 3. SB1214 would permit citizens with concealed weapons permits to carry a firearm for self-defense on public university and college campuses. The deadline for bills to be out of their house of origin is Friday, April 4, which is why its imperative that NRA members continue to call their State Senator and ask for their support for this important right to carry measure.
Let's see what happens tomorrow.
Wednesday, April 2, 2008
Teachers carrying handguns
There is a debate now raging on the potential of arming teachers at our nations schools, colleges, and universities. On one hand, this will do away with the "gun free" areas that have made targets out of crazies on killing sprees and allow citizens t protect themselves and others. On the other hand, it does allow handguns to become accessible. All it takes is one teacher to put their weapon into their desk drawer, walk out of the room to speak to another teacher and you can get a 2nd grader who now has access to a gun. Or worse.. a disgruntled 11th grader.
There is a law going through the Arizona State Legislature right now that would allow teachers and students with a CCW to carry on campuses. Honestly, the more I think about this, the more I am confused. I watch the news every day and see a "road rage" segment; someone getting wounded or killed. What happens when a student with a CCW is taunted by a classmate or teased... or takes one too many pills before he gets to class and loses control? Are schools the right place to have easy access to handguns?
Most of me says YES, but there is the part that questions the responsibility of a 21 college student since i work with a bunch of college students and am currently attending school, again. I see these "kids" everyday and wonder if they will make it to 22, with the way they drive. Having a CCW takes responsibility that some people are not capable of. As for the educators, I am not so sure about a few of them, either.
There is a law going through the Arizona State Legislature right now that would allow teachers and students with a CCW to carry on campuses. Honestly, the more I think about this, the more I am confused. I watch the news every day and see a "road rage" segment; someone getting wounded or killed. What happens when a student with a CCW is taunted by a classmate or teased... or takes one too many pills before he gets to class and loses control? Are schools the right place to have easy access to handguns?
Most of me says YES, but there is the part that questions the responsibility of a 21 college student since i work with a bunch of college students and am currently attending school, again. I see these "kids" everyday and wonder if they will make it to 22, with the way they drive. Having a CCW takes responsibility that some people are not capable of. As for the educators, I am not so sure about a few of them, either.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)