More on Gregory’s Magazine

Posted on January 10, 2013 by Weerd Beard

More selective enforcement:

The host of NBC’s “Meet the Press” displayed what appeared to be a high-capacity ammunition magazine on national television Sunday, embroiling the network in controversy and leaving D.C. authorities to decide whether a crime was committed….D.C. gun laws prohibit possessing a “large capacity ammunition feeding device” — defined as holding more than 10 rounds — regardless of whether it is attached to a firearm and whether there are bullets in it. The offense is a misdemeanor punishable by up to one year in jail and a $1,000 fine….Gregory appears to have used a large-capacity ammunition magazine anyway. A police official said detectives will try to determine whether it was real, how it was obtained and whether the segment was filmed in the District. The official said the investigation will entail questioning NBC producers and could conclude this week.

There’s nothing “apparent” about it, that was the 30-round GI mag. There is NOBODY saying it WASN’T exactly that. Yet still Gregory is walking free for a crime he thinks all of us should be arrested for.

Posted in Freedom, Guns, Politics | Leave a comment

Watch Piers Get Taken Down

Posted on January 10, 2013 by Weerd Beard

Calmly and efficiently.

Every lie countered, every talking point effectively rebutted. This is where you see Weer’ds Golden rule. When somebody says “Let’s Agree to Disagree”, it simply means “I may have lost the argument, but I refuse to admit you’re right.”

Thankfully we don’t need to win the hearts and minds of the British Tories.

Posted in Freedom, Guns, Safety, Self Defense | 8 Comments

At Taste of Logic From an Anti

Posted on January 9, 2013 by Weerd Beard

Jason Kilgore of the Joyce Foundation has written another article that’s 99.9% tripe, but he DOES touch on one interesting notion:

Of course, many countries in Latin America are extremely violent, thanks to the drug trade. Adding armed guards in every school, office, and even ATM hasn’t stopped the violence there, proving beyond a reasonable doubt the foolishness of the NRA’s suggestion of militarizing school campuses to keep kids safe.

It was a throwaway line from Jason, but he really hits on a HUGE point. Latin America generally has VERY high crime, a good portion of that crime is “gun crime”, despite strong laws against private ownership and carry. Most of these countries have laws that Jason wants here, but they have more violent crime than we do.

Still when you actually LOOK at the crimes you see a similar trend. Antis like to focus on spree shootings when they talk about cases, but they also mention that these events are indeed very rare, and the REAL crimes happen in this volume every day across America. This is the basis for Colin Goddard’s “Living for 32”, was that 32 people were killed on campus that day, but that number is roughly the DAILY “Gun Death” rate in America.

But we don’t have a spree shooting in a school or mall or movie theater every day. We also simply don’t have spree shootings in areas without extra anti-gun laws. Where do these shootings happen?

Inner cities. Why those places? Well look at who DOES the shooting, and frankly who gets shot. Gang members. Gangs of course are social groups, but the difference between gangs and clubs are that gangs make their money, and their status through the sale of drugs.

They are the American drug cartels. Drugs are illegal, as are the other criminal acts done by gangs. Most gang members have criminal an incarceration histories. Gangs exist in pro-gun states, as well as anti-gun states. The laws don’t matter to them, there is a public demand for recreational drugs, and they can make money off of it. They can’t use our justice system to settle disputes within this trade, so they handle it “In House” with violence. Its not always guns, they’re just as likely to stab or beat each other to death than shoot.

All this talk of “Gun Control” while overlooking the real problem is barking up the wrong tree.

Is there any other reason why Jason didn’t expand on that issue?

Posted in Guns, Safety, Self Defense | 7 Comments

“Gun Death” Cover-Up

Posted on January 9, 2013 by Weerd Beard

Wow!

Less than three months after he stood as a groomsman in the wedding of two friends he had known since college in Texas, Micah Moore walked into a suburban Kansas City police department and unloaded a dark secret: He had taken the woman’s life at the request of her new husband, a charismatic prayer group leader.

Police said Bethany Deaton’s death initially appeared to be a suicide. Officers found a note and empty bottle of over-the-counter pain medication along with her body in a minivan parked by a lake on Oct. 30….Moore, 23, lived with Deaton and her husband, Tyler, in a communal home shared by male members of their prayer group. He told police that several members had sexually assaulted Bethany Deaton, and they were worried she would tell someone. Moore said that’s when Tyler Deaton ordered him to kill Bethany Deaton, according to a criminal complaint….Moore told detectives Tyler Deaton instructed him to kill Bethany Deaton because he knew Moore had it in him to do it, and that Moore reported back to Tyler Deaton after she was dead. Moore told police that he had placed a bag over Bethany Deaton’s head and held it there until her body shook.

Is this crime less horrible because they didn’t shoot her?

Yeah

BLNN Logo

Posted in Gun Death? | Leave a comment

Is That What You Really Want?

Posted on January 9, 2013 by Weerd Beard

Yet another gun-grabber not thinking things through:

Is there anything more delicious than gun owners urging that a right guaranteed under the Constitution should be subject to reasonable regulation if the failure to do so causes harm? They want limitations — but not on the Second Amendment right to bear arms but rather the First Amendment right of free speech. A Westchester County, N.Y. newspaper, the Journal News, published a map showing the names and addresses of pistol permit holders. The information was public and there is no real dispute over the right to publish it. Nonetheless, the outcry from gun advocates was deafening.

First up a LOVELY false dichotomy right there! Yeah the 2nd Amendment is absolute, hence why I can build and sell guns in my basement as if I was making nick-nacks or computer software. And of course we can easily buy full-auto weapons and explosives…right? You see the antis always start with today being ZERO restrictions, and tell us NOW is the time to compromise. Of course that isn’t so. May I quote Lawdog for just a moment:

I hear a lot about “compromise” from your camp … except, it’s not compromise.

Let’s say I have this cake. It is a very nice cake, with “GUN RIGHTS” written across the top in lovely floral icing. Along you come and say, “Give me that cake.”

I say, “No, it’s my cake.”

You say, “Let’s compromise. Give me half.” I respond by asking what I get out of this compromise, and you reply that I get to keep half of my cake.

Okay, we compromise. Let us call this compromise The National Firearms Act of 1934.

There I am with my half of the cake, and you walk back up and say, “Give me that cake.”

I say, “No, it’s my cake.”

You say, “Let’s compromise.” What do I get out of this compromise? Why, I get to keep half of what’s left of the cake I already own.

So, we have your compromise — let us call this one the Gun Control Act of 1968 — and I’m left holding what is now just a quarter of my cake.

Second is he claiming that the 1st Amendment is absolute? Does the press have absolute freedom? We know they can’t publish medical records. We know they can’t publish information in minor children. They can’t peek in your windows to take pictures inside your home. Are you saying that respecting privacy in THOSE instances are wrong?

Of course not, you see anti-rights activists are all for THEIR rights. You see THEY don’t own guns, so any infringement there is fine and good. But they go to the hospital, they have private lives, they have children, so that stuff is sacred….because its THEIRS! You can trust them when they say they want changes for “Public Safety” not for purely selfish reasons…because there is no evidence that they are either ignorant or selfish, right?

The primary complaint seemed slightly illogical: the publication of the information placed gun owners in greater danger from criminals. Wait a minute. Isn’t this what it’s all about — that having a gun in your house protects you from criminals and deters them? Why would criminals knowing that you have a weapon in the house increase rather than reduce the risk of home invasion? Publicizing those that don’t have guns might do that, but that complaint doesn’t come from gun owners.

That’s one argument being made, that criminals may target homes simply because they AREN’T on the list. I would also argue that criminals can easily figure out occupancy of a home, and pick when the home owner isn’t there so they can STEAL the guns. Of course there is also the point that not all criminals are strangers to their victims. There are also police officers who may have criminals with a vendetta, or victims of domestic abuse who are hiding from their ex.

Boy, you sure care about public safety!

Sean Hannity and Ann Coulter ranted on this issue like two inmates in an insane asylum. In the most ludicrous analogy every posited, Coulter said if these facts about gun owners can be posted, why not publicize “which women (who had an abortion) on the street are likely to murder a child” — suggesting that somehow a woman who had an abortion is likely to murder someone else’s child! She also declared that “liberals won’t let us go after criminals,” and, of course, “They are coming after our guns!” In like vein, the newspaper received death threats and had to hire security guards. I don’t think even the NRA can claim that these threats came from criminals rather than “law-abiding” gun owners.

Oops, god forbid somebody tread on the sacred “Right” to have an abortion when a “Progressive” is in earshot! Also are you NOT coming for our guns? Seems there is a LOT of talk of various forms of confiscation out there, and at least banning of transfer, which means at BEST after you DIE they’ll take your guns from your estate. Hell even a law doesn’t get pressed with these clauses, you know that’s their intent. So sorry, the term “Gun Grabber” is 100% accurate, and you’re one of them.

Sorry, I don’t want to play your game.

Posted in Guns, Politics, Safety, Self Defense | 1 Comment

Morning Videos From ENDO

Posted on January 9, 2013 by Weerd Beard

Two videos that dovetail very well.

First this one:

The term “Assault Weapon” is a completely made-up term. It combines “Assault” and “Weapon” which gives it a sinister tone for the sole purpose of making people WANT to take action against them, and to vilify people who make a rational argument against the stupidity. Still rifles and handguns that were previously defined as such may neither be weapons, nor used to assault. And as he points out weapons used to assault may not be considered “Assault Weapons”. What’s even worse is even here in Massachusetts where “Assault Weapons” are defined by law, I still don’t know what people are talking about when they use the term, because there about about a dozen new bills that will CHANGE the definition from what it means here.

Why? Well so we can float this crap:

Did you see how he conflated Bushmaster’s semi-auto rifles with the full-auto rifles he used in the military? The same items that mere civilians can’t own unless they’re pre-86, we go through a ton of paperwork, pay a tax, get registered, and pay the market price which is close to the price of a damn CAR!

They’re trying it again, getting guns banned because of scary words and intentional confusion!

h/t ENDO

Posted in Freedom, Guns, Podcast | 3 Comments

Over The Top

Posted on January 8, 2013 by Weerd Beard

I’m amazed sometimes when I read anti-gun articles. You’d think I’d be used to it by now. Let’s have a look:

A hunting buddy of mine emailed me from the waiting room of his doctor’s office in Columbus, Ga., a few days after the massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School. He was cringing in embarrassment as an old redneck spewed racially divisive rhetoric in front of African-American patients. Then my friend’s embarrassment turned to astonishment as that same redneck (almost certainly a gun owner, given the region and his demographic profile) said, “I never cared much for Obama, but that speech he gave about those little kids—I give him an A for that. He’s gonna try and get more gun control, and I hope he gets it.”

I love it! He’s anti-bigotry, and all gun owners are total bigots, so let’s pass some damn laws! Yep if you own a gun you’re racist. If you’re religious, you’re a racist. If you own a gun, you’re also religious. Oh and everybody he doesn’t like are “Rednecks”. Good for him to lead with what kind of a man he is.

News flash: most gun owners support common-sense gun-safety laws.

Yeah, that’s why you can’t find ammo, magazines holding more than 10 rounds, and semi-auto rifles at any shop in America right now. That Bloomberg survey is going to be the new Kellerman Study. It isn’t true, nor was it done with any attempt at ethics or objectivity, but they’ll repeat it because they WANT it to be true.

I should know; I’m one of them. I own so many shotguns and rifles it’s a veritable arsenal. I used to hunt with my father and grandfather as a boy, and now I love taking my sons hunting with their grandfather and uncle. When I hear the words “gun culture,” the first image that comes to mind is not a crazed loner. I think of cold, crisp mornings riding a horse out into a Georgia field, feeling the thrill as an English Pointer snaps to attention at the scent of a bird. Or long hours sitting in a Texas deer stand with one of my sons, waiting, wondering if a big buck will arrive before the dying of the light. I taught each of my boys about the birds and the bees in a deer stand. Taught them how to respect God’s creation, honor the wild things we harvest, and thank the Creator humbly for our place in the food chain and the ultimate free-range, organic meal.

Yep, Mr. Fudd, George Washington was crossing the Delaware river that winter just to get to his duck blind! The 2nd Amendment is all about ducks and deer! Hey, can you justify your NEED for that arsenal? Can you not afford food? Do they not have grocery stores in your area? Is there a massive problem with contaminated food coming from livestock farming? Maybe you should turn them all in?

We should enact all those common-sense gun-safety laws and more. We should reinstate the Clinton-era ban on assault weapons, like the AR-15 used in both Aurora and Sandy Hook. And I don’t know a single hunter who supports the legal purchase of 30-round clips. I have hunted for decades, and have rarely gotten off even a third shot at a deer, much less an 11th or a 29th. Those massive ammo clips are useless for target practice, and pointless for personal protection. If you can’t protect your home with three shots, you’re not going to be able to do it with 30. Their only purpose: to abet mass killing. They must be banned.

Well its good to know your coalition of hunters is what you’re basing your entire opinion of American law. Newsflash, buddy, hunting is a pain in the ass here in the urban Northeast. I don’t own guns to hunt, and given that I’m not a poacher, I’m not going to hunt with magazines that are illegal. There are lots of LEGAL uses for these magazines.

Also if they’re just for mass killing, why do most police departments issue AR-15s with 30 round magazines to patrol officers? Are the officers planning on massacring their towns? Beat cops also aren’t going to be engaging in massive firefights and tactical entries. Every town and crossroads these days has a SWAT team for that, and those guys generally have full-auto rifles and other NFA items. A cop carries a handgun, and rifle for the exact same reason I do. Personal protection and protection of others.

Like so many gun owners, I am fanatical about safety. All of my guns have trigger locks, and the ammunition is under lock and key. Alcohol is forbidden during a hunt. Before a bird is felled, the hunter must be sure the dogs are safe, his compatriots are in position, and the shot is prudent.

When my kids were little I did not allow them to even point toy guns at the dog, much less at another human being. And I will never allow point-and-shoot videogames in my home. It is appalling to me that parents would allow their children to play a game in which simulating the killing of another human being is the goal. I’d much rather have my sons shoot a deer once, and spend the rest of the day cleaning the carcass and handling the meat, than “kill” hundreds of people in a videogame.

Your safety is valid. You own hunting guns, so if you’re not hunting you should lock them up. I agree. As a collector I have my collectors pieces locked up as well. But what about defensive guns? Doesn’t serve anybody well to defend themselves with guns shuttered away.

As for video games, you might be a bit of a freak there. Violent video games like the Call of Duty series or other shoot-em-up games are the best selling thing in America. If Video games were a problem, I wouldn’t be typing, I’d be reloading and taking fire. Sorry, all your friends and neighbors are probably playing violent video games, or watching violent TV and movies. This includes your buddies who have a loaded shotgun or rifle on the hunt. Do you see them blasting you in the back to score extra points? Why not?

My gun culture emphasizes tolerance. As a pro-Obama, pro-gay-rights progressive whose boys share the same political views, we are frequently in the field with ultra-conservative Republicans—and yet we hunt together, swap lies around a campfire, and depart with mutual respect. I ask the same of folks who do not appreciate gun culture. I know lots of liberals who would never pass judgment on someone’s sexual habits or faith choices or cultural preferences but who sneer at the thought of armed, ignorant rednecks tromping through the woods to murder Bambi. The left should not turn common-sense gun safety into a gratuitous attack on a culture they don’t understand.

He seems to forget that he lead with us all being racist “Rednecks”. His “Mutual Respect” seems to extend to “Well not to your face”. Classy!

I want to prevent would-be killers from having access to weapons of war. I want to stop them from teaching themselves to kill through videogames. I want mental-health services to be more easily obtained. And I want to deny murderers the notoriety they seek. Our leaders must attack the entire problem—and if they do, I believe my fellow gun owners will have their back.

Good motivations, but I think your methodology is exactly backwards. Thanks for playing.

Posted in Freedom, Guns, Politics, Safety, Self Defense | 6 Comments

Tin Ear

Posted on January 8, 2013 by Weerd Beard

Gotta love the tin ear of the antis:

Should citizens be allowed to carry firearms on Indiana’s public university campuses?

It’s a question that’s arisen in the Indiana General Assembly through legislation filed by Sen. Jim Banks, who wants public college students to be able to have guns at school for their personal protection.

Sounds like a plan to me! Given that the streets around most campuses people can freely carry guns, and how many students are 21+ GIs who were trained and expected to carry guns. I don’t see an issue. What’s the big deal?

Though the measure may have little chance of passage, it comes as the nation is once again immersed in a debate over how best to protect schools and colleges in the wake of the November massacre at a Newtown elementary school, which left 28 dead, including the shooter.

Banks, a Columbia City Republican, said the measure, Senate Bill 97, wasn’t prompted by that tragedy, nor the 2007 slaughter at Virginia Tech University where 32 people were killed and 17 wounded by a shooter who then took his own life.

Yeah, those gun free zones worked AWESOME in those situations didn’t they? Remember Einstein’s definition of insanity?

Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

She goes on for a bit listing some honest people and their concerns about safety on campus, but doesn’t take long to get back to the anti-rights tripe:

He said the presence of guns on campus would create a more dangerous campus environment for police, including making it more difficult to police student parties where alcohol is served and under-age drinking can occur.

“We don’t have to worry about (the fact that) several people could be armed,” Cox said. “It creates a safer environment when you go around knowing that the only people who should have guns on campus are police.”

That’s a nice comfort isn’t it? If somebody is shooting up your classroom you know they are being VERY VERY BAD! Also when a woman gets raped on campus by somebody with a knife, or just brute force they know FOR SURE, their rapist isn’t a cop! Comforting…

Only Utah has a statute specifically prohibiting public colleges and universities from barring guns.

I’ll list all the spree shootings in the state of Utah….ok, I’m done.

But, Pelosi said, school shootings have made university presidents “more vocal than they were before in opposition, and I think you’ll see more push-back from college professors and others.”

Campus law enforcement, he said, doesn’t want more guns on campus. “They don’t want to have to decide who is the good guy and who’s the bad guy” when responding to a shooting scene, he said.

Well given that professors and administrators live in their nice ivory tower, and don’t need to worry about late nite walks home to the dorms and off-campus housing. This is only slightly less ironic than the lawmakers who employ armed guards for themselves and their families telling us WE don’t need guns. Also can we put this “We don’t need to worry about who the good guy is” crap? First up this is what every town cop in America needs to be trained to handle, and there hasn’t been a problem.

Look let’s face it, the good guy isn’t going to be wantonly shooting people. And in the instance that its a one-on-one, or other targeted violent crime, the situation will be diffused by the time the police arrive. Hint, if the person isn’t pointing the gun at you or other people, and when you tell them to drop the gun they do, they’re the good guy.

“We’ve already got a problem on our campuses with alcohol, and as much as anybody wants to find an excuse for it, I think that combining those two (guns and alcohol) is more than dangerous, and I will not support that bill,” he said.

Ah yes, colleges are nothing but drunken stupors! I wonder why businesses even HIRE college graduates. I mean if you say you matriculated, it simply means you’re an alcoholic or a drug addict, right?

This is what passes for logic with them.

Posted in Freedom, Guns, Safety, Self Defense | 4 Comments

Rush Aftermath

Posted on January 8, 2013 by Weerd Beard

From the Ogre:

interesting that he’s still doing well in .45 ACP. Well I guess I win in the caliber wars again! I understand the loss of 9×19, its really the best defensive caliber, and the people have spoken!

Posted in Guns | 6 Comments

“Gun Death” Family Lost

Posted on January 8, 2013 by Weerd Beard

No violence, but a horrible tragedy.

A couple drowned and their 16-year-old son is missing after trying to save their dog from being swept into the ocean, California authorities say.

The dog chased a stick into the surf in Big Lagoon and was pulled out to sea by 10ft-high waves (3m), the Associated Press reported.

The boy ran in after the dog, followed by his parents. Humboldt County sheriff’s office rescuers found the parents’ bodies later.

The dog swam to shore on its own.

A whole family! Where are the calls to close the beaches? This isn’t uncommon as some might think. Every summer when a huge storm comes in, tourists and sight-seers flock to the exposed points on the coast. Almost every year some people get too close and get swept away by the waves. In Maine the coast is all rock, so once they lose their footing they’re quickly dashed to death against the rocks, and sliced to ribbons on the barnacles.

These stories are so common they don’t make anything but the regional news. I’m sure those of you in the sandy-beaches section of the country hear similar stories every year on riptides and undertows. A quick look at the CDC information, drowning is essentially the #1 cause of accidental death for children, yet we let them go to the beach!

Its almost like there is a nanny double-standard!’

h/t Wallphone

Posted in Gun Death? | 1 Comment