I remember seeing this ad in Boys’ Life when I was a kid. (You can click the ad to embiggen it.)Ads like this are politically incorrect these days, but IIRC, there seemed to be fewer problems with kids misusing guns when I was growing up.
Some boneheaded local politician in Massachusetts wants to be able to send the local cops in to gun owners’ homes to “inspect” how their guns are stored. Perhaps this bozo hasn’t heard of the Fourth Amendment. You know, that bit in the Bill of Rights about a warrant being needed for a search.
The guy is a selectman in the town of Swampscott. I wonder how far that is from Lexington and Concord?
So how advanced does the technology of a weapon have to be to enable a rate of fire of 10 rounds per minute?
I have a muzzle-loading rifle, and, if I really hustle, I can get off two rounds per minute. However, there are muzzle-loading firearms that are capable of firing 10 rounds per minute. Consider the Colt Model 1851 Navy Revolver.
It was probably the most common revolver used during the Civil War. It takes a long time to load the six-round cylinder, but the cylinder is easily removed and replaced. It was not uncommon for soldiers to carry spare loaded cylinders. It’s possible to fire three cylinders (18 rounds) in under a minute.
However, there are even older weapons capable of firing 10 rounds per minute. Consider the weapon shown at the left. Henry V was able to use massed fire from such weapons to devastate an attack by a force that greatly outnumbered his happy few, his band of brothers, at Agincourt.
There are other, even simpler, weapons that can deliver a high rate of fire. David only took five stones when he fought Goliath. He was a good shot and only needed one to kill the giant, but an expert with a sling can get off 10 shots in a minute.
A sling is a stone age weapon.
Another member of Nanny Bloomberg’s
Mayors Against Illegal Guns Illegal Mayors Against Guns has been convicted and sentenced. Kwame Kilpatrick, former Detroit mayor and member of MAIG, received 28 years for corruption.
I wonder why all these corrupt politicians want to keep guns out of the hands of the citizens they are fleecing?
Texas Governor Rick Perry met with a group of bloggers at a shooting range, and Kathleen McKinley tells about her shooting lesson from him. The pistol used was the same Ruger LCP that Gov. Perry used to dispatch a coyote that attacked while he was walking his dog.
BTW, I concur with his choice of the LCP with a laser sight as a small carry gun.
Rick Perry isn’t the first politician to carry a .380 pistol for personal protection. President Theodore Roosevelt packed a Colt Model 1908. How many other current governors do you think carry for their own protection, and how many completely rely on bodyguards? I know which way I’d bet on Martin O’Malley, the Governor of Maryland.
Perhaps the Gentle Reader will remember that Secretary of State Kerry signed the UN Small Arms Treaty last week. Canada is refusing to sign.
The usual suspects should be proclaiming Canada a rogue state in 3, 2, 1 …
The math is not quite as silly here in Maryland, but, beginning tomorrow, this is what our legislators think will happen when the count reaches 11.
In .40 S&W these Walther P99 magazines go up to
Let’s say that you wanted to petition the legislature in your state and that when you delivered your petition you were told that it would be accepted until you were photographed and fingerprinted, took a training course, passed a background check, and paid a license fee. How would you react?
Let’s say that you wanted to buy a copy of the scriptures of your religious faith and when you went make your purchase the bookseller told you that you could not pick up your book until you were photographed and fingerprinted, took a training course, passed a background check, and paid a license fee. How would you react?
Let’s say that you wanted to register to vote and that when you went to do so you were told that you could not do so until you were photographed and fingerprinted, took a training course, passed a background check, and paid a license fee. How would you react?
Let’s say that you wanted to start a website to publish you ideas and that you went to an Internet service provider to set up an account and were told that you could not have web access until you were photographed and fingerprinted, took a training course, passed a background check, and paid a license fee. How would you react?
Beginning next Tuesday, if you wish to buy a handgun in Maryland you will be told that you cannot do so until you are photographed and fingerprinted, take a training course, pass a background check, and pay a license fee. How should a citizen react to that?
I was going spend the entire day ignoring Cabin Boy Bill Schmalfeldt, but someone sent me a link to his latest waste of bandwidth over at Digital Journal (No, I won’t link to it.). It’s called Op-Ed: If Abrams tanks are outlawed, only outlaws will have Abrams tanks. Schmalfeldt seems to believe that ownership of an Abrams tank by a U. S. citizen is (or should be) illegal.
Other than nuclear, biological, and most chemical weapons, citizen ownership of weapons is not generally prohibited under federal law. Some are restricted. Some are taxed. But few are prohibited. Some states are more restrictive than the feds.
I don’t know how one would go about buying one, but I’m not sure that there is any federal law that bans private ownership of an Abrams tank.
There would be a lot of paperwork and tax filings involved in owning an Abrams. The two 7.62 X 51 mm machine guns and the .50 M2 machine gun would need to have the appropriate ATF tax stamps (and the guns would need to have been made before the 1986 ban). The main gun (either the 105 mm for early M1 or the newer 120 mm) would also have to be registered with the ATF as a destructive device and the appropriate tax stamp purchased.
Here in Maryland, the three machine guns would have to be licensed by the State Police, and the owner would have to pay a $10/year fee for each. The MVA wouldn’t issue tags, so the owner would be restricted to off-road use.
If the owner kept live rounds for the main gun, the ATF would impose requirements on the storage magazine, and, here in Maryland, the State Fire Marshal would get involved.
Even an Abrams tank with the right paperwork.
UPDATE—Stacy McCain has more about crazy folks with guns here.
The Navy Yard shooter was a
white black tea party member Obama supporter armed with an AR-15 a shotgun who bought the weapon at a gun show store with out a background check.
Gun control is a losing issue for Democrats. Just ask the two recalled in Colorado yesterday.
UPDATE—Vodkapundit notes the following from his observation post in Colorado concerning the lack of mail-in ballots for the recall.
That put a real dent in the Democrats’ expected margin of cheating.
(H/T, Shall Not Be Questioned) Reuters is reporting that the NRA is filing an amicus brief in support of the ACLU’s suit against the Obama Administration concerning NSA surveillance. The ACLU is welcoming the NRA’s support.
The ACLU is asking the court to stop the NSA’s program of tracking telephone calls, to declare the program illegal, and to order the government to purge all its databases of the call records. The NRA says in its brief
The mass surveillance program could allow identification of NRA members, supporters, potential members, and other persons with whom the NRA communicates, potentially chilling their willingness to communicate with the NRA.
The NRA has also notes that the Obama Administration’s interpretation of section 215 of the the Patriot act would have the effect of nullifying the statutory ban on the centralization of gun purchase and ownership records.
Get ready to have fun getting those pesky flies! Get them all with the original salt gun, The Bug-A-Salt. Fill with salt, pump the handle, turn off the safety switch, aim and shoot. Kills fly’s [sic] within 3 feet with a mini shotgun effect. Only uses a pinch of salt. Virtually no mess. Effective way to rid fly’s from the home, yard or BBQ. Will not hurt glass windows or walls. High quality design and made to last. Use responsibly and have fun!
UPDATE—What better way to enforce a “no fly” zone?
Bill Clinton says that voting should be as easy as buying an “assault weapon.” I doubt that he means a real assault rifle. They are legally machine guns and require several months of paperwork, background checks by the ATF, a $250 tax stamp, and more. He probably just meant a run-of-the-mill modern sporting rifle such as an AR-15.
In Maryland, AR-15s are regulated weapons. Purchase requires presenting photo ID and passing a background check through the NICS. After that goes through, there’s more state paperwork and a State Police background check which typically take a couple of months. However, beginning in October, further purchases of AR-15s will be banned.
Somehow, I don’t think Mr. Clinton meant that currently registered Maryland voters could continue to vote if they presented photo ID and passed a background check at the polls, but that after 1 October no more voters would be registered.
But if you think he meant that Second Amendment rights should be as well protected as voting rights, you’ve been inhaling the stuff he says he didn’t.
Лучше старенький ТТ, чем дзюдо и каратэ. The old TT is better than judo and karate.
I love the freedoms we got in this country, I appreciate your freedom to burn your flag if you want to, but I really appreciate my right to bear arms so I can shoot you if you try to burn mine.
From WaPo—NSA broke privacy rules thousands of times per year, audit finds
From NY Daily News—Request for gun permits in Newtown set to double last year’s numbers: police
There’s a connection between these two headlines.
Regardless of our beliefs, we have to live in the real world, and the real world is not politically correct. People in Newtown, having learned that the police cannot always protect them and their children, are taking steps to be more self-reliant. They don’t trust government to be able to protect them from criminals.
And why should they? Government at every level is failing to be trustworthy.
I suppose the good news for the Newtown residents who aren’t gun owners is that the NSA will have records of their 911 calls.
If you were attacked by a mountain lion, would you fight back? Most of us would.
OK, instead of a four-legged predator, what if you were attacked by a two-legged one? Do you still think that you have a right to defend yourself? Or should you be required to run away? If I’m reading Eric Holder’s speech to the NAACP correctly, he wants to limit your right to self-defense. Is he forgetting this?
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life …
Isn’t our right to be alive and preserve our lives the most basic civil right? And didn’t the Supreme Court say in the Heller decision that the basis of the Second Amendment is grounded in the right of self-defense?
We have real world examples of how the aggressive suppression of the right to go armed in self-defense has worked. In Chicago, the murder rate is through the roof. New York has kept a better lid on violence but at the cost of subjecting its citizens to “stop and frisk” searches by the police.
It’s as if the Progressives want to make two-legged predators a protected species in a kind of Orwellian inversion of “Four legs good, two legs bad.”
I haven’t had much to say about the whole George Zimmerman case. Too many people have picked over its carcass, mostly people who are vastly unqualified by either training or experience to speak knowledgeably.
I won’t talk about the law involved, except to say that the evidence that I’ve seen points to Mr. Zimmerman firing in self-defense.
I want to talk about being armed and the real meaning of the Robert Heinlein remark that “an armed society is a polite society.” My friend Aaron Walker has argued that if George Zimmerman had been openly carrying his pistol, it is likely that Trayvon Martin would not have taken a swing at him in the first place. That makes sense. I can tell you that I once avoided being assaulted when I turned so that the other guy could see the .45 in my holster, and he realized that he was about to bring a knife to a gun fight. My potential assailant remembered his manners.
But that’s not the point of Heinlein’s maxim.
When one goes armed, he must remember his own good manners. When one is armed, whether with a gun or knife or any other weapon, he needs to remember that any conflict that he becomes a part of has the potential to become deadly. In that case, rather that feeling empowered to be obnoxious or assertive, the armed man seeks to avoid giving offense to others. Those who don’t have a significant risk of being removed from the gene pool.
The empirical evidence from those states that don’t interfere with Second Amendment rights suggests that gun carriers are a law abiding group. Folks with carry permits, for example, commit crimes at a significantly lower rate than politicians who are members of Mayors Against Illegal Guns (but that organization’s crime rate is sufficiently high that it should be called Illegal Mayors Against Guns).
Tantaene animis caelestibus irae?
UPDATE—I am not an advocate of open carry per se. Indeed, if Maryland would stop its concerted effort to suppress Second Amendment rights, I would probably engage in concealed carry most of the time. The incident I cite above occurred in a place where only open carry was legal.
Open and concealed carry have different tactical advantages. Neither is necessarily appropriate in all situations, but, regardless of how one goes armed, the necessity of being well mannered is always there.
Part of Brett Kimberlin’s personal puffery is his claim to have circulated lots of petitions that have received lots and lots of signatures.
The petition isn’t doing so well. As of 3 pm yesterday, it only had 15 signatures. That’s fewer than one for every three days that the petition has been up at Change dot org. Of course, Brett Kimberlin didn’t post this petition himself. He delegated the work to Cabin Boy Bill Schmalfeldt who has a track record of getting things started only to abandon them. If Kimberlin were serious, he should have picked someone with some stick-to-it-iveness.
Mayor Bloomberg was first caught using New York City IT resources to further his Mayors Against Illegal Guns gun control agenda. Today, JWF posts that he’s be caught sending a city employee to Nevada to lobby for a Nevada gun control bill. Instapundit suggest that this a matter that should be investigated by the New York Attorney General.
Yeah, it’s probably wrong to use city resources that way. I wouldn’t be surprised to find that the server hosting the MAIG’s assets has a big gulp hard drive that holds more than 16 Gb. Hypocrite. Arrogant hypocrite.
The concept that the Bill of Rights and other constitutional protections against arbitrary government are inoperative when they become inconvenient or when expediency dictates otherwise is a very dangerous doctrine and if allowed to flourish would destroy the benefit of a written Constitution and undermine the basis of our government.
Can any of you seriously say the Bill of Rights could get through Congress today? It wouldn’t even get out of committee.
—F. Lee Bailey
Heidi Yewman has a post over at MsBlog about her spending a month with a Glock pistol.
Her behavior is prime example of the fact that not everything that is legal is wise—or, in her case, responsible.
She bought a 9 mm Glock, took it home, and freaked out when she opened the box and found a magazine in the pistol. She found a cop (who was doing a traffic stop) and asked him to remove the magazine for her.
The cop thought I was an idiot and suggested I take a class. But up to that point I’d done nothing wrong, nothing illegal.
Nonsense! She had done something very, very, very wrong. She was fooling around with a firearm and had absolutely no training, not even the Eddie Eagle safely class the NRA offers for kids.
She began her … quest … fool’s errand … whatever … because she’s opposed to Starbucks’s policy of not hassling customers who carry firearms in accordance with local laws.
I was right to protest Starbucks policy. Today, they have a woman with absolutely no firearms training and a Glock on her hip sitting within arm’s reach of small children, her hands shaking and adrenaline surging.
Did I say, “irresponsible”? Let me also add, “immoral”! If she is so afraid of her own self-control that she doesn’t trust herself to be armed, why does she assume that she has the moral right to endanger others.
UPDATE—Zed from Day by Day asks a good question here.
Will there be a universal background check on each member of al Qaeda that we arm in Syria?