Before Black History Month ends...

Make sure you watch JPFO's short film on the racist roots of gun control, "No Guns for Negroes". It's the Black History that you won't get in even the most liberal of schools.

Is Sheriff Alderden really subverting the CSU gun ban?

Jim Alderden is back in the news.

From a surprisingly pro self-defense post on HuffPo:

After the Colorado State University Board of Governors voted to ban guns and other weapons at the Pueblo and Fort Collins campuses, Alderden went on record with the Colorado Springs Gazette to say that he would do all he could to undermine what he considers a dangerous policy. That includes refusing to book otherwise compliant concealed-carry holders who are arrested by CSU-Fort Collins campus cops into his jail, and testifying on behalf of them in court.

It's good to hear that Alderden hasn't changed his position. But I think "undermine" and "subvert" are the wrong words. These are the same scare words the anti-gunners used when gun manufacturers complied with the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban.

Regardless of the action (or inaction) Alderden takes, CSU's gun ban will still stand. It will not be undermined or subverted. CSU will retain the right to take whatever action they deem appropriate against a student who violates the ban. What Alderden is doing is refusing to take legal action against someone who isn't breaking the law and for that, he should be applauded.

And I love this quote from Alderden:

"You would think people involved in academia would want to deal in data and experience, but this has been all about emotion."

Indeed, Sheriff. Emotionalism is ware of the gun control movement and thank you for not buying it.

A Lesson from Canada: They will never respect you.

There are some gun owners who think that if they "compromise" with the gun controllers, they'll somehow earn their respect and no longer be a target of the gun controllers. This is especially true of the "Fudd" types who are more than eager to sell handgun owners and "assault weapon" owners up the river to protect their hunting arms.

Well, handgun owners in Canada have compromised quite a bit. More so than most Americans. And what have they earned for their efforts?

You handgun owners, more than any group of people in Canada, have done everything possible
to earn the respect of your fellow citizens and the federal government.
You have registered your handguns.
You have taken the federal firearms safety course.
You have applied for, and received, a firearms license.
You have answered personal questions about your school and business relations.
You have revealed the intimate details about your mental health.
You have asked your spouse or ‘significant other’ to assent to your ownership of firearms.
You belong to a shooting club.
You applied for, and use, an Authorization to Transport when taking your handgun to your club to shoot.
Your name and address is entered into a permanent RCMP data base.
You must notify the police when your move.

No other group of people in Canada save criminals out on parole is subject to deeper scrutiny.

But still you get no respect.
Your meek, willing, subservient compliance has gained you nothing.

Read the rest of it.

Looking at the state of gun owners in Canada is like looking into a potential future for American gun owners. Thus we have the unique opportunity to examine firsthand many "what if" scenarios. What if we allow them to register handguns? What if we allow them to register long guns? We can learn the outcome of many gun control schemes by simply looking at our neighbors to the north.

A peek into the mind of a hoplophobe or clever sarcasm?

Nothing quite sums up the irrationality hoplophobia as the last line of this op-ed:

Doug van Gorder via Boston Globe

But as a progressive, I would sooner lay my child to rest than succumb to the belief that the use of a gun for self-defense is somehow not in itself a gun crime.

Part of me is hoping that this op-ed is just some piece of witty satire, especially after reading lines like this:

An alternative to lockdown is immediate exodus via announcement. Although this removes potential hostages and makes it nearly impossible for the shooter to acquire preselected targets, it unfairly rewards resourceful children who move to safety off-site more shrewdly and efficiently than others.

Schools should level playing fields, not intrinsically reward those more resourceful. A level barrel is fair to all fish.

Forbid we allow people to run from danger, because some people might run faster than others. And I love the reference to fish in a barrel. If this isn't clever satire and this person is indeed serious, this is egalitarianism taken to the most dangerous extreme. If Glenn Beck ever needed evidence for his Progressivism-as-Disease theory, he's found it in this person.

I'm still hoping this is satire. And even if it is satire, you have to remember, there are people out there who aren't to far away from that mentality.

It took 17 years to register 300 million cars.

It took the federal government 17 years to create a registry of 300 million automobiles. Keep in mind that most automobiles are already registered at the state level and all that had to be done was petition each state for their records (4 states opted out). As a result of this 17 year effort, it's estimated that only 77% of cars are in the registry.

Now imagine the federal government trying to register the 250 million firearms in the US, most of which aren't registered at a local level. How long would it take? 30 years? 50 years? How many would actually be registered? 50%? 30%?

When it comes to respecting the 2nd Amendment, Oklahoma passes with flying colors, but we can do better.

Again, The Brady Campaign gives Oklahoma a score of 2 out of 100.

One thing that surprises me is that the latest and greatest of the Brady Campaign's bogeymen is left out of their scoring criteria: Open carry. With Oklahoma being one of the few states that prohibits open carry, surely The Brady Campaign could give us an extra two points.

There was a movement to legalize open carry in Oklahoma (there was even non-biased television coverage), but it ran into a roadblock: No one cared. This is the same problem efforts to legalize campus carry ran into. Apparently, one of the downsides to living in such a gun friendly state is mass gun owner apathy. A lot of people own guns, but very few are politically active. You just can't get enough people to write, call, and meet with their representatives. As a result, a lot of pro-gun legislation dies in committee.

Fortunately, gun controllers in Oklahoma are even less politically active and even more apathetic, so Oklahoma's score of 2 out of 100 will probably stand for a long time. However, that shouldn't stop us from aiming for a zero.

Lie #23: "...stare down loaded AK-47's on nature hikes."

"Families should not have to stare down loaded AK-47's on nature hikes." —Paul Helmke, president, Brady Campaign to prevent Gun Violence

Dishonesty and theatrics will not help your gun ban agenda, Paul. The brandishing of firearms is still illegal both in and out of national parks. Hikers will not be staring down loaded AK-47s.

Bad weather is not an excuse to confiscate guns.

Sorry, Bill. A state of emergency is when you need your gun the most. Especially in an emergency like Katrina where the police tucked tail and ran (or became looters themselves).

Taking guns from people who aren't breaking the law does not control looting. Luckily, such an act is now illegal.

The government loses 300 guns in two years

The only people that the gun controllers think are responsible enough to carry firearms, loses 300 guns.

Department of Homeland Security officers lost nearly 300 guns over a two-year span, leading to disciplinary actions and increased training, according to a new federal report.

An inquiry by the department's inspector general found that most of the weapons -- including handguns, shotguns and military rifles -- went missing as a result of negligence on the part of employees.

Nearly 200 of the guns were lost in "bowling alleys, public restrooms, unlocked cars and other unsecure areas, with some ending up in the hands of felons," USA Today reported.

The report outlines 289 missing firearms from fiscal year 2006 through 2008. Some of the guns were lost in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina and others were stolen from safes.


Most of the weapons were never found.

Hypocrisy from the Brady Campaign?

I'm surprised no one has made this connection sooner. I guess it's because for the most part, the Brady agenda has been largely unsuccessful outside California and a few other anti-gun strongholds:

Choice, and the two faces of the Brady Campaign - St. Louis Gun Rights Examiner Kurt Hofmann

Essentially it boils down to the Brady Campaign being all for the rights of property owners when it comes to banning guns from their property, but when an organization (Starbucks) makes the choice to allow guns on it's property (essentially being consistent with the local laws), the Brady Campaign demands that Starbucks ban guns.

It's a classic case of "Pro-choice as long as it's the choice I want you to make".

This is no different than the Brady Campaign's position on "states rights". They are all for states rights when it comes to banning guns, but if a state wants to allow guns, they seek to use federal legislation to override the state.

So why is the Brady Campaign being hypocritical? Because they don't care about property owners rights, states rights, or anyone's rights really. Their goal is to prevent as many gun owners as possible from carrying guns.

Security will protect you.

Really? Why even call yourself "security" if no one around you is secure?

Of course they aren't legally obligated to protect you. And neither are the police for that matter. So why not call these uniformed individuals what they really are: professional witnesses and clean up crew? Also keep in mind that this happened in the same city where up until recently they banned the carrying of guns for self-defense in parks (where "security" isn't even present).

An Oath Breaker...

Detective Rod Tuason is an Oath Breaker; The complete opposite of an Oath Keeper.

"Haha, we had one guy last week try to do it!" Tuason replied, referring to a Redwood City man who strolled into the Mi Pueblo Food Center in East Palo Alto on Jan. 27 with a gun on his hip. "He got proned out and reminded where he was at and that turds will jack him for his gun in a heartbeat!"

Being that this is in The People's Republik of Kalifornia, which turds would that be? The ones who ride in the back of the police car or the ones who ride up front? If it weren't for the uniforms and badges, i'd have a hard time telling which is which.

After several more comments in the thread, Tuason apparently joked that officers should shoot the advocates, who have made recent headlines throughout the Bay Area for sipping coffee at cafes and performing other everyday acts with visible weapons.
"Sounds like you had someone practicing their 2nd amendment rights last night!" Tuason wrote. "Should've pulled the AR out and prone them all out! And if one of them makes a furtive movement ... 2 weeks off!!!"

And it's the open carry people who are dangerous and intimidating? The gun controllers lost their collective mind when Chris Broughton simply carried an AR-15. What will they say about Rod Tuason wanting to gun down people with his?

As usual The Brady Campaign's silence will be deafening, as this fine uniform wearing turd is one of their Chosen Ones, whose badge is a magical talisman that imbues him with the self-control to openly carry an assortment of weaponry in public.

The Rod Tuasons of the world are more dangerous than any open carrier. He's the type of authoritarian, jack-booted, oath-breaking turd the gun controllers rely upon to enforce their civilian disarmament agenda.

The Brady Campaign dials the hoplophobia up to 11.

Taken from the Brady Campaign's latest attack on guns:

The open carrying of firearms in public places is inherently threatening and intimidating, and poses risks to those nearby, to law enforcement and to the community.

You'd think with such a dire threat, they would have some anecdotes of open carriers causing people harm or even just behaving in a disorderly fashion, but no.

For example, when open carry has occurred in retail stores, other customers quickly become alarmed and the police often are called to the scene, creating a volatile and potentially dangerous situation. Everyone should have the right to sit in a coffee shop or a restaurant with their families, including their children, without being confronted with the threatening presence of openly-displayed handguns and assault weapons.

That's it. The worst that has happened is that some people see a gun and react with fear. The gun isn't harming anyone, being pointed at anyone, or even handled. It's simply present. And that is apparently enough to petition for the prohibition/regulation of open carry.

Businesses should bar the open, as well as the concealed, carry of firearms on their premises. States where open carry is largely unregulated should either prohibit open carry, with limited exceptions, or adopt measures to subject open carry to strict licensing requirements in the interest of public safety.

Simply being afraid of someone or something is not enough of a reason to restrict someone's rights. That's why Jim Crow and Segregation are no longer around. You can't legislate based on feelings.

The right to carry is on the rise. You won't find many states willing to further curtail the right to bear arms. More people are exercising their right to carry, and thanks to recent legislative victories, they can carry in more places. As said on the Brady Campaign's own page, "More and more gun owners, seeking to “make a statement” about their right to have a gun, are openly carrying guns in public places..." Even Thug-in-Chief Edward Flynn is mulling over the idea of allowing concealed carry in one of the few states that don't allow it.

When will the Brady Campaign realize that just like the Segregationists, they are on the losing side of this issue?

Licensing and Registration = Confiscation

One of the many so-called "Common Sense" gun laws the gun controllers like to push is licensing of gun owners and registration of weapons. They say those two things will help reduce crime (ignoring the fact criminals don't license or register guns).

Historically, licensing and registration has only served two purposes: taxation and confiscation. Legal gun owners are told that all they have to do is pass a few tests, fill out some paperwork, pay a few fees, and they will be able to keep their firearms. However, more often than not, the legal gun owner's willingness to comply and compromise has been rewarded with the eventual loss of their arms. Their governments would decided to ban subsets of firearms or further restrict who should have firearms and use their licensing and registration records as a guide to whose house to show up at and what weapons to take, after they've given the gun owners a chance to voluntarily turn them in.

It happened in Germany, the UK, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and now Cuba.

Cuba has declared a two-month amnesty for citizens to register unlicensed guns, and says those passing aptitude and psychological tests will be allowed to keep their weapons.

...

Cubans were encouraged to register any weapons they owned in the years after Fidel Castro and his band of rebels toppled dictator Fulgencio Batista on Jan. 1, 1959. But later authorities used a list of those who had sought licenses to go door-to-door and encourage them to turn over their firearms - even antiques considered family heirlooms.

I wonder how many Cuban gun owners will have learned from the past and simply not comply? Better yet, how many American gun owners will fail to learn from Cuba? How many American gun owners will keep deluding themselves with the thought that it can't happen here (when it already has in some states)?

After the Heller decision, the gun controllers were giddy at the fact nothing was said to prohibit licensing and registration. And while Heller is the law of the land, licensing and registration is one law I will not comply with. Not when there are so many instances throughout history of licensing and registration being a precursor to confiscation.

ABC hatchet job on grenade lanchers.

Shameful. I guess that's what passes for journalism these days. Get on Google and take the words of the first idiot who picks up the phone as fact.

If you're interested in the actual process of buying a grenade launcher, read this. While there are slight differences between registering a short barreled rifle and buying a grenade launcher, most of the process is the same and it's much more accurate than ABC's schlock.