Weer'd World

OK First Gun Laws are written about people who know NOTHING about guns or how they work. If people this ignorant designed cars, to change your oil you’d need to first invert your car over an oil storage container, you would then insert a pipe cleaner into the oil fill hole and clean out the filter, then fill with oil.

Also “Bad Judgement” is the Massachusetts code word for “Fuck Due Process!”.

Now on to this story from Grand Rapids:

Nicholas Looman said he was not surprised the Kent County Prosecutor’s Office found he complied with state law while carrying a gun into an elementary school voting precinct this week.

He’s disheartened with what he sees as a lack of understanding with open-carry gun laws and has hired an attorney to “explore the possibility” of a lawsuit against local law enforcement authorities.

Looman questions whether being “detained” in an office at Aberdeen Elementary School on voting day violated his personal rights. He is upset with how the whole situation was handled….Through a series of conflicting state laws and exceptions to laws, a person who is licensed to carry a concealed pistol can legally carry that weapon into a school, as long as it is visible.

The state’s “weapons-free school zone” law does not apply to a concealed weapons permit holder, but at the same time, a person with a permit may not carry a hidden weapon into a school, Forsyth said.

What do the Police Say?

In his written opinion, Prosecutor William Forsyth said Looman legally carried his pistol when he went to vote with the gun holstered in plain view at his waist. But he used “extremely poor judgement” in bringing the gun days after a school shooting in Ohio, Forsyth said….“We’re saying that right now, there is a lot of confusion across the state,” he said. “We want to respect the second amendment, but if we want anyplace to be weapons-free, it’s a school.”

OK so are police Law Enforcement, or “Judgement Enforcement”? He didn’t break any laws, guess what, he already has a Mommy and Daddy, and none of them were the cops illegally detaining him.

Also I’ve never crossed this wicket, I always voted in Public buildings in Maine. OK that’s not true, young Moonbat Weer’d Beard did vote for Al Gore on the University of Maine Campus (Which Doesn’t count anyway as any lawful citizen 21+ can open carry with no permit, or conceal carry with a permit. Campus police can ask you to leave, and administrators can expel you, but never will criminal charges be filed. And here in Massachusetts I’ve always voted in public buildings where carry is not prohibited.

But what was this, a school, or a polling place?

Also let’s not forget the myopia of the officer quoted. Just because some place is a legal “Gun Free Zone”, doesn’t mean somebody won’t walk right through that sign and shoot kids. Just look at Ohio.

What you want is not to have Bad Guys with guns, good guys with guns are just fine. Note when cops detained this citizen they didn’t leave their guns in their cars.

It wasn’t a “Gun Free Zone”, and from your stupid logic, you made it worse, officer!

Hopefully he’ll win, tyranny should hurt!

As you can tell from reading this blog you’ll see I don’t have any respect to those who promote gun control. I believe it was Ronnie Barret of Barret firearms and the NRA Board of Directors who said anybody who supports gun control is either ignorant or sinister.

I know I’ve said it before but I’ll do a quick re-cap. I used to be anti gun. I grew up in a liberal suburb in a home where my folks still don’t much care about guns (we’re getting a bit better, but I doubt they’ll ever be crazy about guns, and I doubt either of them will ever come to the range with me). I was also a teenager during the golden-age of gun control. The 1990s. Between the ignorant anti-gun teachers, and the ignorant anti-gun news media, and the Brady Campaign (back when that meant something) were in full force.

The crux of the anti-gun arguments are rooted in things that SOUND like good ideas. Banning guns will lower “Gun Death”. “Assault Weapons” are more dangerous than “Hunting rifles”. People who carry guns are paranoid and dangerous. You are X times more likely to shoot a loved one than an attacker. Its too easy for the wrong people to buy guns.

Then a friend took me shooting. It wasn’t like I suddenly was pro gun because I had just spent an afternoon having fun shooting. I still thought they should be banned….but maybe I could get one…just for fun, you know!

I didn’t have the money…nor was I old enough (but I didn’t know that at the time), and given that it was now 1999 I had this thing called the INTERNET!

So from the comfort of my Dorm room, I read about guns. Given that the “Assault Weapons Ban” was in full effect, I ended up reading a lot about that.

bayonet lugs? I’m supposed to be afraid because the GUN has a KNIFE on it???

Flash hider? Seemed to make sense watching Rambo shoot a blank-adapted gun. With no bullet the powder quickly leaves the gun and most of it burns up in the air rather than in the barrel. My first day at the range I shot a .460 Weatherby magnum! This was an ELEPHANT gun and amazingly powerful, and it doesn’t make much of a flash at all. I remember seeing a souvenir video of my Buddy at basic training (we laughed our ass off at the Gas tent section!) but I still was surprised at the rifle range seeing my buddy shooting an M16 and there was NO flash.

Grenade launcher. Makes sense with this! Only an M203 40mm grenade launcher is an NFA firearm in itself. No the AWB is only talking about these. Really….really.

And it seemed that they always claimed “Assault Weapons” were more powerful than hunting rifles. (The picture is a .223, a .243 Winchester, and a .308 Win) Note all are “hunting cartridges” but the smaller one is the common round fired from AR-15 “Assault Weapons”. I remember people saying you can’t hunt with an AR-15 because it would “Blow the deer apart!”. Now AR-15s are one of the most common hunting rifles…and most deer hunters get a 6.8 SPC or more powerful upper, as the .223 Rem is a bit underpowered, at least for the larger deer we have around here.

My point being that I found out the “Assault Weapons Ban” was a total lie (and that was before I first set foot in a gun shop and found that the walls were covered with ARs and AKs, and there were boxes upon boxes of surplus “pre-ban” magazines…so “ban” was just as spurious as “Assault Weapon”)

When I found one MASSIVE hole in the anti-gun argument, I obviously wondered how true anything else was. When I found more lies I started to think “Well they can’t ALL BE LIES, can they?”

Yes, Mr. Beard, they can be. They can be, and they are.

Anybody who supports gun control is either sinister or ignorant. Mr. Barret is as right in philosophy as he is in making kickass guns.

This brings me to present with an extended comment to Joe Huffman’s troll Ubu52.

Go read the comment thread for the full effect, but I closed with this set of questions:

BTW in case I didn’t tell you, as recently as 1999 I would have 100% agreed with your above statements (tho I’ll note that the whole punitive insurance scam is a more recent invention)

A few people raise some points I found VERY shocking, and unbelievable about guns and gun control, so I decided to research them, just to prove that person wrong in spades. Turns out I was wrong. Lead me to question everything I thought I knew about guns and gun control.

I had a choice, then, support laws I knew that punished and got good people killed while taking no effect on the criminal element that makes the headlines, or switch sides and start supporting gun rights.

Really this leaves me two questions for you, Ubu. #1. You’ve likely seen all I saw that convinced me gun control was completely spurious and dangerous, and have chosen to support it anyway, Why? OR #2. You have seen some data or some studies I haven’t in all my years of verifying that I made the right choice to both go against gun control, but to own and carry guns. Can I see that?

When I was a new gun rights supporter I was constantly looking for people wanting to debate. I had been wrong once before, I knew I could be wrong again. This goes double when you consider that now I OWN guns. If I’m putting myself or my family in undue danger, I’d want to know!

Nothing. Seems that lots of people ask a simple question that is the crux of the debate, like Joe’s “Just One Question”, never has an anti-rights supporter answered that question. PERIOD. FULL STOP. DO NOT PASS GO!

Think about that. They support restricting guns in the name of safety, guns have existed for nearly 1,000 years, and personal arms for all of recorded history, and restrictions on arms has existed for almost all of that time.

Yet nobody can answer: “Can you demonstrate one time or place, throughout all history, where the average person was made safer by restricting access to handheld weapons?”

Note the people being asked this aren’t housewives and laymen who might not know much about guns or history…but PAID LOBBYISTS, and Politicians who have made gun control a cornerstone of their careers.

Just look at these questions. They’re so simple, and if they can answer them THEY WIN!

You show me that I’m at greater danger owning a gun than being unarmed, and you might as well take my guns away. Also I’ll give them up willingly. I carry and own my guns for safety of myself, my family, and my friends, as well as for law-and-order in general.

Prove that wrong, and I don’t have a leg to stand on.

Of course if they answer the truth and never have people been safer when personal arms were banned, or that there isn’t any data or reputable reports that show guns to be dangerous in the hands of lawful citizens.

This is why they will NEVER debate an knowledgeable pro-freedom person, even people like bloggers who aren’t paid lobbyists, or full-time activists. We’re literally armatures and they are literally professionals, and they are TERRIFIED of us because we’re right, and they’re wrong.

They KNOW they aren’t making us safer. They know this and they advocate for bans and restrictions anyway. They are evil.

I have no respect for evil.

Just saw this tweet from Mayors Against Illegal Gun lackey “Everygun”

Pro gun bloggers agree, private sales transferred through an FFL with NICS free of charge may get them talking. Imagine if they got paid?

Now fist up I have no issue with opening the background check system to everybody. I wouldn’t just use it for guns, either. Wanna babysit my kids? Here fill out this NICS form! I’m gonna hop down the to the corner for a sandwich, would you mind watching the register? Oh fill out this form first! So I hear you want to date my daughter, if you have a clean NICS I don’t see a problem with that….but remember, son, anything you do to her, I’m going to do to you!

Etc. Of course Everygun must include FFLs to this. Why? They’re federally controlled. Their paperwork can be used for an illegal national registry for confiscation, also FFLs can be revoked, and if all gun commerce must be done through an FFL the .gov can essentially eliminate gun commerce!

Last you have “Progressive” Economics. Where there is such a thing as “Free Money”. Remember, under Obamacare Healthcare is going to be free, never mind how the Doctors, Hospitals, and Staff are getting paid!

Same goes for gun shops. Stores have rent, stores need employees, utilities, security, and capital to keep the shelves stocked. If your employees are getting paid to do NICS checks all day that bring no money into the store, how long will your business last?

But I got thinking about where the money comes from. You see Everygun like most anti-rights activists doesn’t do this out of the goodness of his/her heart. They do it because they are PAID!

Who pays them? In the case of MAIG, Michael Bloomberg and the Joyce Foundation.

So here’s the deal, you want a background check for “Everygun”, have Mayor Bloomberg and the Joyce foundation create a background check system. Make it not require an FFL, let’s say it just used a computer. You enter a persons name, birth date, and town they were born in, and push “Enter”, and you get one of two answers: “This Individual has Passed the NICS Background Check”, or “Be Advised, this Person has not passed the NICS check, Transfers are not Authorized”.

Of course if you get the flunk, that generally means the system screwed up, THEN you need to go to an FFL. You can fill out the paperwork, contest the 2nd Denial if that happens (and at this point a denial will be most certainly an error, as everybody will be able to scan themselves just for something to do) and if a Shop does a transfer of a gun that they are not in full possession of (mail order from other states, or face-to-face transfers) then they will submit an invoice of NICS Checks to MAIG and be compensated at $50 cash per transaction.

Sound good to you? Sounds good to me.

If you have a twitter account send this post to Everygun. Watch their reaction to a reasonable, and common sense compromise.

I wonder what their real motives are.

Yeah like we didn’t all know by now!