Category Archives: Guns

Shooting Irons!

Rule Five Second Secession Friday

The dust-up over gun control in Virginia has several counties looking to leave Virginia and join the decidedly more Second Amendment-friendly West Virginia.  Excerpt:

West Virginia lawmakers are scrambling to let rural Virginia counties join the Mountain State amid conservative voter anger with the new Democratic majority in Richmond and its push for gun control and other liberal initiatives.

In a building fight that echoes the Civil War-era split of the Old Dominion that created West Virginia in 1863, 40 of 100 West Virginia House delegates have signed on to legislation that would accept revolting Virginia counties and towns.

The effort began after the November elections when urban and suburban voters put the Virginia General Assembly into Democratic hands. Many of those Democrats ran on a platform of restricting and banning guns.

“We’re starting to get some phone calls from friends on the border who say these folks want to leave,” said West Virginia Del. Gary Howell.

Howell, a Republican, told Secrets that what started off as a long-shot effort “has turned into a real thing.”

He said that Virginia lawmakers and officials along the West Virginia border have cited the Democratic drive for gun control and desire to shift spending to the urban areas near Washington as reasons to leave for West Virginia.

In his bill, HCR 8, Howell and his team wrote about the urban-rural battle: “These tensions have been compounded by a perception of contempt on the part of the government at Richmond for the differences in certain fundamental political and societal principles which prevail between the varied counties and cities of that Commonwealth.”

He also cited gun control, a huge fight on display in Richmond Monday when some 22,000 gun owners protested restrictions sweeping through the state Senate. There is no new push for gun control in West Virginia.

Note that Gary Howell cites the “urban-rural battle” that I’ve mentioned before in these virtual pages.

The thing here is this:  A secession into a neighboring state might be the best thing for everyone concerned here, and it could certainly set an interesting precedence.  This move would relieve some pressure on Richmond, where the state government is increasingly blue, driven by the huge NoVa enclave of Imperial workers, who tend to see government and more government as the cure to all that ails us.  It would make the pro-gun folks in the western counties happier, and would increase West Virginia’s tax base and Congressional influence.

Now apply that to some other places.

What about our own Colorado?  Say some of the northeastern counties joined Wyoming or Nebraska?

What if the southeastern California counties moved to join Arizona?  Or the northernmost ones and some on southern Oregon realized their goal of a State of Jefferson?

What if eastern Washington seceded and joined Idaho?

How about farther east?  Would the counties of southern Illinois, notoriously conservative, be more comfortable as part of Indiana or Missouri?

People can vote with their feet.  But moving or not moving isn’t the point; people should also be able to choose the government that suits them.  Bear in mind this would exacerbate the “urban-rural battle” in some ways, by redrawing state lines that would exaggerate those divides even further, because, as you may have noticed, the examples I cite mostly involve rural areas separating from urban ones.

Maybe this time we’ll be able to have our secession a little more peaceably, since no one is (yet) agitating to start a whole new nation.

Animal’s Hump Day News

Happy Hump Day!

On to the links!

This rates an enormous, ninety-decibel “No Shit”:  High-tax states are driving people away.

Alaska is blowing its top.

Horseshit.

This has a frighteningly familiar ring to it.

Thousands of pro-Second Amendment protestors turned out in Richmond.   And, amazingly, nobody died.  The whole thing ended peacefully.

Remember the last time a pro-Second Amendment rally ended with a massive shootout?  Me either.

More UFO kookery.

White supremacists, my ass.

Our good friend and fellow author Jillian Becker has some thoughts on homelessness and crime that are well worth reading.

Payback’s a bitch.

Why are there seven days in a week?  And why is only one of them Saturday?

The correct answer is, “who gives a shit?”  Seriously, why are so many Americans so fascinated by these “royal” non-entities?  Didn’t our ancestors fight a bloody revolution to ensure we wouldn’t have any of those royal nobs nobbing it up over here on our side of the Atlantic?

This Week’s Idiots:

The leaders of Iran are idiots.

Mona Eltahawy is an idiot.

Andrew Cuomo is an idiot.

California is run by idiots.

And now…

This guy deserves special mention.  Relevant excerpt:

Two hours later, authorities in Exeter, another nearby town, got a call that the coyote had charged a family walking on a trail.

“The coyote attacked a young child, and the child’s dad went into protection mode and suffocated the coyote until it succumbed,” police said.

Man Card earned, for life.  And on that hairy note, we return you to your Wednesday, already in progress.

Animal’s Hump Day News

Happy Hump Day!

Programming note:  Trying a new format for the Wednesday links posts.  If I decide I like it, I may expand the format to the rest of the week.

On to the links!

The daffy old Bolshevik from Vermont steps on a rake.

Barack Obama got a Nobel prize for existing.  Now he’s getting an Oscar nomination for existing.  Talk about phoning it in.

Spartacus Drops Out.  Are we under a dozen yet?

Reporter in Australian taken in by old drop-bear gag.

Cocaine Mitch says Nancy Pelosi has struck out.  He’s almost certainly right.

The correct answer is “who gives a shit?

Austin, TX has a case of California Disease.

Goose. They are the Hate Birds, the Birds That Hate.

Duck!

Duck!

Goose!

We’re not stuck in here with you.  You’re stuck in here with us.

Coming soon to a blue state near you.

This week’s idiots:

This week’s selection of idiots is wide-ranging.

Bloomberg’s Francis Wilkinson is an idiot.

Casey B. Mulligan explains why many financial “experts” are idiots.

Andrew Yang is an idiot.

I have no idea who Eric Benet is, but he’s an idiot.

The stupid, it is strong in this one.

DNC Chair Tom Perez is an idiot.

And now…

It’s been an interesting week so far, and it’s going to get more interesting.  Things in the Imperial City right now are like the Energizer Bunny on crack; they just keep getting dumber, and dumber, and dumber.

And on that note:  We return you to your Wednesday, already in progress.

Goodbye, Blue Monday

Goodbye, Blue Monday!

Thanks as always to Pirate’s Cove, Whores and Ale, The Other McCain and Bacon Time for the Rule Five links!

There’s an interesting web site called the PanAm Post, which advocates for the cause of liberty in central and south America.  That’s a big uphill battle, but the world’s got no shortage of windmills to tilt at.  Anyway, last week they took a look at the relative states of violent crime vs. gun laws in the United States and points south.  Excerpt:

Violent crime dropped by 48.6% in the U.S. in the same period that saw the record number of arms purchases: 423 million firearms, according to recently released data from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives.

Firearms-related accidents alone declined 68 percent between 1986 and 2018, a period in which U.S. citizens purchased 8.1 billion rounds of ammunition.

“These figures show that the United States has a strong desire to continue buying firearms for lawful purposes,” Joe Bertozzi, president of the National Shooting Sports Foundation, told American Military News.

“The continued popularity of guns demonstrates that Americans have a keen interest in protecting themselves and their homes,” he added.

I’d say “keen interest” is something of an understatement.  If these sales records say anything, it’s that a lot of Americans don’t trust pols who blithely say “Oh, don’t worry, nobody will confiscate your guns” while jackwagons like the Governor of Virginia hint about using the National Guard to… confiscate guns.

But here’s the money quote:

For example, the Democratic Party demands greater control when carrying arms and has the backing of at least 150 companies that demanded greater control before the Senate. But sales show that millions of people disagree.

The irony is that the same party that seeks the removal of President Trump, whom they consider to be abusing his power, is the one that wants to deprive citizens of the ability to remove a tyrant from power.

This reflects the actions of the Democratic Party. They demand that the high and mighty state be the one to remove Trump from power, not “the people” they claim to represent.

Meanwhile, those with a more libertarian or conservative political orientation refuse to give more power to the state, much less to take away their right to self-defense.

For history has shown that every tyranny is established once it disarms its citizens. This is what happened in Cuba through Fidel Castro’s speech “Guns? For what?”

An Armed Bulwark. (Not the author of the linked article.)

Sixty years later, Cuba is still run by the same family. Twenty-five million people in the U.S. showed with their weapons that they are not willing to risk the same thing happening in their country.

They are safer both from crime and the possibility of the emergence of tyranny. That is why they are literally in charge of their self-defense.

Note that the author of this article is , who is listed as the cofounder of the Cuban Libertarian Party.  This is a young lady with a cause.  The cause of liberty in Cuba, granted, is the longest of long shots, but every change has to start somewhere.

But back to the article.  Ms. Flor focuses not only on crime but on defense against tyrants, which was what the Founders were concerned with when crafting the Second Amendment; unlike too many horse’s asses in the Imperial City, she gets it.  And, judging from sales figures, plenty of Americans do as well.

Rule Five Soft Targets Friday

There have been a lot of pixels spent discussing two recent shootings at Pearl Harbor and Pensacola, both naval facilities; among the casualties in Pensacola were active-duty servicemen.

Now, today, I’m not going to discuss the backgrounds or motivations of the shooters, neither of whom I will deign to mention by name.  I’m not going to mention the actions of first responders.  I’m not going to talk about the weapons used.  All that has already been hashed over.

What I am going to talk about is this:  Why are our military bases soft targets for gunmen?

Military bases in the United States are, inconceivably, “gun-free zones.”  Bear in mind that these bases are populated by men and women who are trained in the profession of arms. 

At Pensacola, the shooter walked into classrooms and opened fire, assured that there would be no meaningful response for some time until local law enforcement arrived to save military servicemen.  In this instance the local law enforcement would seem to have done a good job, but my question remains:  Why was their response necessary at all?

At Pearl Harbor, the gunman attacked workers near the dry dock of the U.S.S. Columbia, an attack submarine to which the shooter was evidently assigned; he did so knowing that there would be no meaningful response until local law enforcement arrived, and even though in this case the victims were civilian workers, there were still service members in the immediate area.  Again, my question remains:  Why was their response necessary at all?

I’m particularly concerned about the Pearl Harbor incident, as a Los-Angeles-class attack submarine in dry dock sure seems to me like something you’d guard with armed Marines.  If there are any former Navy types among all of you True Believers out there, please confirm.

Service members are in the profession of arms.  They serve knowing this.  So why are our military bases rendered soft targets by the refusal of the DoD to acknowledge this fundamental fact?

Here’s my proposal:

All officers and all enlisted personnel above the rank of E-5 (I’d be willing to consider raising that to E-7 if necessary to get this done) should be each issued a personal sidearm, should be required to train with that sidearm, to qualify with it at least annually, and to carry it loaded at all times while in uniform and on duty on base.   The sidearm should literally be part of the uniform.

When off-duty and in civilian attire, I’m not sure if I’d require carry of the sidearm, although I’d certainly allow it, and further, I’d consider serving active military to be by default concealed-carry permit holders just as serving law enforcement officers are, and therefore able to legally carry a personal sidearm concealed anywhere they go.

Anywhere they go.

Further, gate guards at closed installations shall be armed.  Back in the late Nineties when I was reactivated for the Balkans fracas, I worked in a Top Secret facility in Heidelberg, Germany; that facility was guarded by three layers of MPs, the first with a holstered sidearm, the second with a loaded M-16, the third at the end of a long approach hallway with a loaded riot shotgun.  Gate guards at secure installations should be no less well armed, and roving patrols of MPs likewise.

Our service members are, as I’ve said, in the profession of arms.  It’s  staggeringly stupid that we can’t acknowledge that by ensuring they be armed, and it’s even more staggeringly stupid that on our domestic bases we deprive them of the very thing that would make our bases secure, and not the soft targets for gunmen that they are today.

President Trump, as Commander in Chief, could fix this with the stroke of a pen.  Where is he on this issue?

Goodbye, Blue Monday

Goodbye, Blue Monday!

Thanks as always to Bacon Time, The Other McCain and Pirate’s Cove for the Rule Five links!

There’s a bill in the House to remove short-barreled rifles (SBRs) from regulation under the 1943 National Firearms Act, instead they would be regulated as any other rifle.  Excerpt:

The National Firearms Act (NFA) List is kind of a major pain. In particular, when it comes to barrel length. The law creates an arbitrary limit where a firearm with a barrel length of X is fine, but X-1 mm is illegal. It’s stupid. Yet, it’s the law.

Of course, criminals think nothing of shortening the barrel of a shotgun without blinking an eye. Others don’t hesitate to slap a short-barreled upper receiver on their ARs–upper receivers that are perfectly legal on a pistol AR, I should add.

As per usual, the only people impacted by a law like this are the law-abiding citizens who have to jump through unnecessary hoops to get a short-barreled weapon.

Now, a bill has been introduced that would address that issue.

The bill, entitled the “Home Defense and Competitive Shooting Act,” was introduced to the U.S. House this week by Rep. Roger Marshall. The Kansas Republican argues that SBRs have been overregulated since 1934 and that needs to change.

“Opponents of the Home Defense and Competitive Shooting Act want to use bureaucracy and regulations to obstruct citizens attempting to exercise their God-given right to keep and bear arms,” said Marshall in a statement issued by his office. “The firearms addressed in this bill are commonly used for hunting, personal defense, and competitive shooting.”

The measure has the support of gun rights groups to include the National Rifle Association and Gun Owners of America. It has been listed as H.R. 5289 and has 16 co-sponsors, all Republicans.

Of course this bill will go nowhere; it’s pure kabuki theater, nothing more.  As long as Wile E. Pelosi is Speaker, the chances of this seeing the light of day are precisely zero.

Now if the Republicans take back the House in the 2020 elections, on the other hand, well then the odds of this bill seeing the light of day are precisely…  zero.

The GOP are great on these kinds of bills when they are in the minority.  They are great on campaigning on pro-Second Amendment issues.  But when they actually have the chance to do something… Well, remember CCW reciprocity?  The Hearing Safety Protection Act that would have removed suppressors from NFA regulations?  Where did those go?

The ratchet only turns one way, True Believers, and it ain’t in the direction of liberty.  The GOP are better than the Dems on this issue – but only just.

Animal’s Hump Day News

Happy Hump Day!

On to the links!

Stacey Abrams is an idiot.

NBC’s Vin Gupta is an idiot.

Mother Jones’ David Corn is an idiot.

Bonus:  National Review’s David Harsanyi explains why Paul Krugman is an idiot.

Attorney General Barr on the Executive Branch.  Worth the read.

Economic Ignorance 101:  Pete Buttigieg Has a $1 Trillion Plan to Drive Up Housing, College, and Labor Costs.

Why Navy SEALS love the Sig P226.  Sigs are great guns; we’ve had a few at one time or another, even though I’m more of a wheelgun  guy.

Speaking of – daffy old Uncle Joe Biden is out bothering people about handguns now.

Elsewhere in the Special Ops community, SOCOM is looking to “upgrade” the 7.626 NATO M110 sniper rifle to fire the 6.5 Creedmor.

Government corruption isn’t limited to the Imperial City.

Justice Neil Gorsuch – better than expected?

You went full retard.  Never go full retard.

Should we make every weekend three days long?  As I get older, I’m increasingly down with this, even if it means making up for it the other four days.

Here’s a better way to convert dog years to people years.

Guess what?  The Democrat’s presidential candidates are being funded by billionaires.  Here’s the list.

And on that well-heeled note, we return you to your Wednesday, already in progress.

Animal’s Hump Day News

Happy Hump Day!

Mrs. A and I have to head for the airport in a little while, to head home to Denver; on Friday morning, loyal sidekick Rat and I answer the call of the bloodwind once more, as we set forth in pursuit of deer and elk.  But in the meantime:  Time for the links!

Number One for today’s links:  Feds have hurriedly dropped a case against a black-market gun builder because of a tentative judicial ruling that may have overturned much of the 1968 Gun Control Act.  No shit.  Go read, and try to ignore CNN’s pearl-clutching.

This scientist thinks we may already have found strong evidence of life on Mars.  I’m not so sure, but my biology credentials are a few years out of date; I have tried to, as they say, keep current, but that’s a long ways from working in the field day to day.

Joe Biden may actually be senile.

Liz Peek thinks the 2020 election is still President Trump’s to lose.  The history of incumbents seeking re-election bolsters her argument.

Guess what?  Our schools suck.  Welcome to 1977.  The answer?  Get government out of education.

Californians may be going collectively insane.

This might be interesting.

Well, that escalated quickly.

These three countries tried socialism and rejected it.  It sure would be nice if some American pols would learn from their example, but as my dear departed Grandpa was fond of saying, “you can teach ’em, but you can’t learn ’em.”

The Washington Examiner’s Adam Brandon points out that the Constitution is what is keeping us from Hong Kong’s fate.  I’d feel better about that assertion if it weren’t for the fact that the Imperial government has been wiping their asses with the Constitution since about 1860.

U of WA professor Holly M. Barker is an idiot.

Adam Schiff is an idiot.

Princess Spreading Bull Warren is an idiot.

Have a read about the eccentric wonder that was Thomas Edison.  One of my favorite quotes is from Edison:  “People frequently don’t recognize opportunity when it arrives, because it usually shows up in overalls and looks like work.”

A Deep State bureaucrat cashes in.

Bill Maher finds another acorn.

On that nutty note, we return you to your Wednesday, already in progress.

Animal’s Daily Functional Retard News

Before we start, be sure to check out my latest over at Glibertarians: Gold Standards II – The Colt/Browning 1911.

Texas Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee has officially hit Tard Factor Eight.  Excerpt:

Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee incorrectly claimed that AR-15 rifles fire .50 caliber ammunition and that the weapons are “as heavy as 10 boxes that you might be moving.”

The Texas Democrat, who is pushing for further gun control policies, made the statement to reporters, claiming that she has held an AR-15 but wished she had not.

“It is as heavy as 10 boxes that you might be moving,” Jackson Lee, 69, said. “And the bullet that is utilized, a .50 caliber, these kinds of bullets need to be licensed and do not need to be on the street.”

A loaded AR-15 weighs about 7.5 pounds and does not fire .50 caliber rounds, but rather .223 ammunition. The difference between the size of the two types of ammunition is stark, with .50 rounds typically used by the military in heavy machine guns and anti-material weapons.

It’s important to note that calling Sheila Jackson Lee (D-TX) an idiot does a grave disservice to idiots everywhere.  While (as you all know) I dislike the practice of attributing any disagreement to stupidity, in her case, it’s legitimately true; the woman is a dullard.  She makes her colleague Alexandria “Crazy Eyes” Occasional Cortex look almost functional by comparison.

But perhaps the most idiotic statement she makes here is that she has held an AR-15.  She clearly has not.  Like lying New York columnist and notorious pussy Gersh Kuntzman, she is not only a liar but a stupid liar.  Neither of them have handled or fired an AR-15; I’d bet money that neither of them have been within hailing distance of one.

Lying is one thing, and sadly, we’ve come to expect that of politicians.  But stupid lying – as stupid as this – should disqualify one from elected office.  The people of Jackson-Lee’s district should be ashamed of themselves for sending this moron back to Congress for thirteen terms.

Oh, and here is by far the best response out of dozens and dozens of stinging responses:

Animal’s Daily Assault Weapons News

From The Complete Colorado’s Jay Stookesberry:  Research Refutes “Assault Weapons Bans, Buybacks.”  Read the whole thing, of course, but meanwhile:  Excerpts, with my comments:

For example, consider one such proposal that is currently on display via a billboard in Grand Junction: ban assault weapons. Fortunately, we have the benefit of hindsight for this specific proposal because we tried it before. In 1994, a ten-year prohibition on the manufacture, possession, and transfer of certain “semiautomatic assault weapons” was signed into law.

Except it wasn’t a ban on those rifles; no, it made even less sense than that.  It was a ban on certain cosmetic features of those rifles; gun makers quickly started selling “post-ban” models with no flash suppressors and bayonet lugs, which made them perfectly legal.

And bayonet lugs?  Serious?  Bayonet lugs?  Fucking bayonet lugs?  When was the last time you heard of a drive-by bayoneting?  I suppose all those opposing street gangs fixing bayonets and closing to hand-to-hand range promoted that particular piece of stupidity.

And what was the result of this ban? The bill mostly targeted the cosmetic qualities of these weapons — restrictions which manufacturers circumvented by altering production so that the banned elements were excluded. But even without these loopholes, the ban’s impact on violence would have been minimal. A Justice Department report examining the impact of the ban was underwhelming at best. “Should it be renewed, the ban’s effects on gun violence are likely to be small at best and perhaps too small for reliable measurement,” the report states.

That rates a huge “no shit, Sherlock.”

The report goes on to explain that the law’s larger impact on overall gun violence was minimal, because the banned weapons were rarely involved in criminal acts in the first place. According to the FBI, rifles — a broader category that lumps together your grandpappy’s hunting rifle with military-style rifles — constitute an average of 340 homicides per year. Though any loss of life is tragic, these numbers don’t exactly rise to the occasion in solving what is commonly characterized as a national epidemic.

Remember that number.  340 homocides a year committed with any manner of rifle.  Now remember a particularly stupid statement issued recently by the Irish tortilla from El Paso, Beta O’Rourke.

But this debate isn’t about just any old rifle, right? The scope of this debate is often targets one specific style of the rifle: the infamous AR-15.

Yup, the AR-15 – of which I have a copy, and Mrs. Animal has a copy.

But here’s the real peach of the piece (emphasis added by me):

Again, analysis regarding the AR-15 — the so-called “weapon of choice” of mass shooters — produces less-than-impressive numbers. Between 2007 and 2018, 173 people were killed by mass shooters using an AR-15, according to a New York Times analysis — roughly, 15 per year. (For perspective, 13 people die per year from vending machines falling on them.) The fearmongering regarding this weapon becomes even more apparent when one considers the estimated 8 million AR-15s currently in circulation — the vast majority of which will never be involved in a crime.

Remember that bit, True Believers, and use it (hah) liberally.  You are, statistically, almost as likely to be killed by a vending machine as by a mass shooter with an AR-15.

I can add nothing to that.  Nothing.