Monday - June 02, 2008
Anti gun campaigner stabbed to death
OK so, her son was a crinomol who gets his ass shot, scratch one gremlin.
Mommy Sweetest then goes on a crusade to Ban the Gun!
Mommy now graveyard dead, the victim of another knife crime.
I’m not making light of her death but I just can not help but wonder if her last thought was, Damn, I want a gun!
A prominent anti-gun campaigner has been stabbed to death at a flat in West Yorkshire.
The body of Pat Regan, 53, was discovered at the property on Marlborough Grange in the Hyde Park area of Leeds on Sunday.
Mrs Regan, a mother-of-six, started campaigning against gun crime after her son Danny was shot dead in 2002.
A 20-year-old man, a family member, has been arrested. Police said post-mortem tests would take place later.
Mrs Regan’s son Danny, 25, became involved in criminality and was shot at his then home in Haydock, near St Helens, Merseyside. His killer has not been found.
Following the death of her son, Mrs Regan set up a Leeds branch of Mothers Against Guns. She made such a big difference to so many people’s lives
She had previously met government officials to discuss how to tackle the problems of guns and gang-related crime.
Dee Edwards, co-founder of campaign group Mothers Against Murder and Manslaughter, said Mrs Regan would visit schools and give talks about the dangers and consequences of getting involved in crime.
She said: “She made such a big difference to so many people’s lives. This is an absolute tragedy for so many people.”
Mrs Edwards said she had known Mrs Regan for about six years and described her as the “most incredible woman”.
“It’s just the most dreadful news for everyone. She’s just an amazing woman,” she added.
Mrs Regan’s friend Sylvester Johnson, 74, said: “Since her son died she campaigned more for the better. She didn’t want any young people to get caught up in the trouble that her son got caught up in.
“She was very brave and I don’t know of anyone who would have a grudge against her.”
In February, Mrs Regan was involved with the launch of a DVD warning about the dangers of gun and knife gang culture.
Speaking at the time, she said: “Things are reaching a critical point. Kids are dying before us, but we shouldn’t have to bury our own children.”
In the same month, Mrs Regan was at then Prime Minister Tony Blair’s side at a Downing Street summit on tackling problems relating to gang-related crime.
Her campaigning work was also praised by Princess Anne during a visit to the city earlier this year.
Posted by Drew458
on 06/02/2008 at 07:25 AM
Filed Under: • Crime • Guns and Gun Control •
• Comments (9)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Sunday - May 25, 2008
USCCA Video of the Week
Posted by Christopher
on 05/25/2008 at 12:25 PM
Filed Under: • Crime • Guns and Gun Control • Self-Defense •
• Comments (8)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Thursday - May 22, 2008
Yeeeee Haaaaaw !!!
Out-friggin-standing. ht/t to Kim’s.
FREE GUN WITH EVERY PURCHASE !!!
Now that’s what I call an American company! Woo hoo!!!
A Missouri car dealership is triggering interest by offering customers free guns or gasoline with any purchase, and despite the skyrocketing price of fuel, patrons are going for the guns.
“We are aware of the gasoline and crime problem in America,” states an ad on the website of Max Motors. It goes on to note it “wants to be part of the solution and not part of the problem.”
“What we’re doing is giving everyone who buys a new or used vehicle a free handgun,” said Mark Muller, the dealership’s owner. “We have guns to display, but we can’t actually give them a gun, so what we do is give them a coupon for a local gun dealer here in town so they can pick out any gun they want. We recommend a semi-automatic.”
The certificate is good for either $250 at Alton Arms or for $250 worth of gas. Muller told WND no one has chosen the gas so far.
Wait, stop cheering for just a second. It gets even better!
“Six people came by – a bunch of long hairs who think the ‘60s are still going on, and who obviously don’t have jobs,” Muller said. “We all went out there with our cowboy hats on and told them we’d stomp ‘em, and they left.”
...
When asked if Sen. Barack Obama’s recent comments about people clinging to guns and religion inspired the promotion, Muller said yes.“My next promotion is to give away a free King James Bible to any Muslim that converts to Christianity,” he said.
The only thing I can find wrong with this promotion is that it isn’t big enough. $250 doesn’t get you much of a gun. I don’t know how close to the bone this dealer’s deals really are, but $500 would get you a much better pistol.
Posted by Drew458
on 05/22/2008 at 11:39 AM
Filed Under: • Economics • Guns and Gun Control •
• Comments (2)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Tuesday - May 20, 2008
The Wrong Fix for a bad law
Chicago Alderman Richard Mell is a former hunter with an arsenal of weapons that reportedly features shotguns, rifles and pistols, including a Walther PPK of James Bond fame. But there’s a problem.
Mell forgot to re-register the weapons as required every year by the ordinance that he helped to pass as one of the City Council’s most senior members.
So, what does an alderman do when he finds himself in violation of the law? He writes a new law. Mell has quietly introduced an ordinance that would reopen gun registration in Chicago and create a one-month amnesty for himself and other gun owners in the same predicament.
During the monthlong window, gun owners who attempted to re-register their guns between May 1, 2007, and April 1, 2008, only to be rejected on grounds the registrations had lapsed would be allowed to re-register without penalty.
A better fix for this ordinance would be ... ordnance. Take the poxy thing outside and shell it. Live in Chicago, Obama’s favorite city. Register your guns. All of them. EVERY YEAR. Bet it costs money too. Go take a flying fuck Chicago.
Posted by Drew458
on 05/20/2008 at 09:22 AM
Filed Under: • Guns and Gun Control •
• Comments (0)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Saturday - May 17, 2008
Strength In Numbers
Breaking news ... no solid details yet ...
Los Angeles police say a man with a rifle has wounded two people at a festival outside a Southern California church.
Authorities say the man opened fire a few minutes before 11 a.m. Saturday during a school festival at St. John Baptist de la Salle Catholic church in Granada Hills.
Officer Norma Eisenman says bystanders may have helped hold the man for police.
Two victims were taken into the church but there’s no word on their conditions or what prompted the attack.
LOS ANGELES — A man with a rifle opened fire at a festival outside a Southern California church Saturday, wounding three people, one of them critically, police said.
Shots rang out shortly before 11 a.m. outside St. John Baptist de la Salle, a Roman Catholic church in Granada Hills, Officer Norma Eisenman said. Bystanders tackled the man and held him until he was taken into police custody, she said.
The gunman wounded three people, Eisenman said. Two were taken to a hospital in stable condition and one in critical condition, she said.
Fire Department spokesman Brian Humphrey said another person was treated for chest pains.
The motive for the attack was not immediately known, Eisenman said.
Church officials did not immediately return calls for comment.
I want to know more. But I like the “bystanders tackled the man and held him” part. Good work citizens.
Posted by Drew458
on 05/17/2008 at 02:16 PM
Filed Under: • Crime • Guns and Gun Control •
• Comments (2)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Thursday - May 15, 2008
BATFE Out of Control As Usual
Of all the branches of the federal government, the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco Firearms and Explosives has the worst reputation. Like the IRS they seem to be a law unto themselves. This is the group that once decided a piece of string was a machine gun and convicted someone because of it. They have a tough job to do, but many folks in the gun world see them as jack booted thugs. The news about the conviction of David Olofson seems to bear this out. Worse, Olofson is being utterly slandered by the media, who are doing their best to make him appear as some kind of gun crazy terrorist.
The rest of this post might get a little technical, and it’s pretty long, so if you aren’t a gun enthusiast you can stop here. Just be aware that BATFE is out of control, and has the power to muscle the court system to get whatever convictions they want. Mr. Olofson is appealing, and I hope he wins. BATFE should be disbanded, or severely curtailed at the least.
Posted by Drew458
on 05/15/2008 at 08:55 AM
Filed Under: • Government • Guns and Gun Control • Insanity •
• Comments (2)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Thursday - May 08, 2008
Texas Guns up over politics
Texas caught off guard as more seek handgun permits
Some point to anti-gun politics as applications rise 39 percent and swamp the state
AUSTIN — Demand for concealed handgun licenses has risen nearly 40 percent in Texas in a year, an increase being attributed to many factors, even presidential politics.
Though the exact cause may be unclear, what’s certain is that the spike in applications has caught the Department of Public Safety unprepared.
The state is taking a month longer than the 60 days allowed by law to process original applications and 80 days longer on renewals, which are supposed to be handled within 45 days.
“We’re trying really hard, but there have been delays because of the tremendous increase in applications,” said Tela Mange, a DPS spokeswoman.
She said the department is paying overtime and hiring temporary workers to reduce the backlog. Mange said she doesn’t know why applications last month were 39 percent higher than they were in April 2007.
But Ross Bransford, who trains 1,000 Texans a year to qualify for a concealed handgun license, said he believes the looming 2008 election is a big factor.
”People are not sure what’s going to happen after the election,” said Bransford, who owns Austin-based CHL-Texas.com. ”Both Democratic candidates are anti-gun in one fashion or another.”
He said Sen. Barack Obama, who is leading the race for the nomination, is a “friend of (Democratic Senator) Ted Kennedy, and that scares everybody to death.”
Other instructors mentioned an increased interest from young adults after last year’s Virginia Tech massacre and recent changes in Texas law about carrying concealed weapons.
In 2007, lawmakers granted privacy to the 258,000 license holders by closing records that had been public since the concealed handgun law passed in 1995. They also extended the so-called “castle doctrine” defense to persons who use a gun to protect their vehicles, in addition to their homes.
Texas DPS has been processing about 1000 applications a week, but has been receiving more than 1800 applications per week. Some are new and some are renewals.
Go Texas, get ‘em while you can. Yee. Ha.
Posted by Drew458
on 05/08/2008 at 02:33 PM
Filed Under: • Guns and Gun Control •
• Comments (6)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Thursday - May 01, 2008
US Appeals Court to Mayor Bloomberg: You’re a Loser
Gee, that’s just too bad ain’t it? As far as I know, only the lawsuit in Gary Indiana remains in play. All the rest got tossed or were pulled.
The Second Amendment Foundation said today’s dismissal of a lawsuit filed against the firearms industry by anti-gun New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg should send a clear message that “courthouse demagoguery and harassment of law-abiding business is not the responsible way to fight crime.”
The 2-1 opinion, written by U.S. Appeals Court Judge Robert J. Miner, affirms the constitutionality of the 2005 Lawful Commerce in Arms Act. It overturns a lower court ruling by activist federal judge Jack B. Weinstein, explaining that he should have dismissed the case instead of allowing it to go forward.
“Today’s ruling is clearly a defeat for Michael Bloomberg,” said SAF founder Alan M. Gottlieb. “The law trumps a billionaire’s arrogance and a federal judge’s long standing anti-gun activism. It is time for Bloomberg to grow up, and for Weinstein to step down.
“Judge Weinstein should certainly step aside from a case that will come before the court shortly on Bloomberg’s harassment lawsuit of firearms dealers in other states,” he added.
Gottlieb called the Miner ruling a clear victory for America’s politically demonized firearms industry, and he congratulated gun makers and the National Shooting Sports Foundation.
“This ruling should also send a message to anti-gun extremist groups like the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence that bankrolling frivolous junk lawsuits in an attempt to bankrupt a heavily-regulated, lawful industry must cease,” Gottlieb observed. “Abusing the legal system to harass gun makers may grab a few cheap headlines, but what does it really accomplish? Criminals still commit crimes with guns they get illegally from illicit sources.
Brooklyn federal district Judge Jack Weinstein is known for getting assigned huge class actions with billions at stake. He’s also known for getting reversed by his colleagues on the Second Circuit Court of Appeals. In the latter respect, the month of April has been a doozie. On April 3, the Second Circuit reversed Weinstein in the so-called light cigarette litigation, decertifying a class of 50 million plaintiffs.
And today, the court tossed out New York City’s lawsuit accusing the gun industry of selling firearms with the knowledge they can be diverted into illegal markets. ...
The crux of the suit, which dates back to 2000: The city of New York sued the gun industry — including Beretta, Browning, Colt, Glock Inc. and a bunch of others — for facilitating “the movement of legally distributed handguns into illegal markets” by, among other things, facilitating “straw purchases” in which those qualified to purchase guns from the manufacturer, such as retailers, make purchases on behalf of those who aren’t qualified.
Back in 2005, Weinstein denied the manufacturers’ 12(b)(6) motion, holding that the 2005 Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, did not require dismissal of the city’s case, which was brought under a New York criminal nuisance statute. In a 2-1 decision, a Second Circuit panel reversed, finding that the claim restrictions of the PLCAA did apply and barred the suit.
The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that a federal law provides the gun industry with broad immunity from lawsuits brought by crime victims and violence-plagued cities. A federal judge (Weinstein) had allowed the lawsuit to proceed, though it had not yet reached trial.
...
Lawrence G. Keane, a lawyer for the National Shooting Sports Foundation, a firearms industry trade association, called the ruling “very gratifying to members of the firearms industry.”He said Congress “understood that frivolous lawsuits like New York City’s defied common sense and represented a clear abuse of the judicial system that threatened to bankrupt a responsible and law-abiding industry.”
The lawsuit was first brought in June 2000 while Rudy “I really am a Conservative. April Fool’s!!” Giuliani was mayor. The full court opinion is here.
Wow, what can I say? It only took 3 years, but the federal courts figured out that the federal law against nuisance suits against firearms companies trumps nuisance lawsuits against firearms companies. I’m so glad they figured this out. But I could have saved them 3 years and probably a few million in taxpayer money with my own enlightened and highly nuanced legal opinion of “well, duh!”
Posted by Drew458
on 05/01/2008 at 03:33 PM
Filed Under: • Guns and Gun Control •
• Comments (5)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Wednesday - April 30, 2008
Legal shennanigans over Philadelphia Gun Laws
As I covered here several weeks ago, Philadelphia mayor Nutter signed into law 5 new local gun laws. Ignoring the fact that these laws will be useless with regards to fighting crime and gang violence, it was against Pennsylvania law for Mayor Nutter to create these laws with his signature. Pennsylvania has had a statute against pre-emption since 1976, and that statute was found legal by the Supreme Court in 1996. Which means that no city, town, or municipality can make their own gun laws in PA. Nevertheless, Nutter did.
Philly DA Lynne Abraham had told the mayor that the laws would be unconstitutional, but he signed them anyway. She has vowed not to prosecute anyone arrested for breaking them.
During a City Council meeting Tuesday, Abraham stated she admired the efforts of City Council and the Mayor, but added she could not approve criminal charges stemming from arrests under the five new laws instated last week.
“Because these laws appear to me, as an attorney looking at the laws of Pennsylvania, to be preemptive, they are, on their face, illegal acts,” Abraham said. Abraham said a 1996 ruling upheld a 1974 law stating that Philadelphia does not have the authority to pass its own gun control legislation.
The NRA got into the mix and went to PA Judge Cutler Greenspan and got an injunction, but injunctions don’t last forever. I think this one is good for about a month. Today’s Scary News letter from the NRA/ILA (5 days late, but that’s how the NRA always is):
Friday, April 25, 2008
This week’s outrage comes courtesy of Philadelphia Police Commissioner, and former Washington, D.C. police chief, Charles Ramsey. As we recently reported, the Philadelphia City Council passed five gun control measures, which were subsequently signed by Mayor Michael Nutter in direct violation of Pennsylvania’s state preemption law.A Philadelphia County court granted NRA’s motion for a temporary restraining order against the new gun control regulations and ruled that Philadelphia is barred from enforcing the ordinances and moving forward on promulgating regulations. But the City opposed the injunction, saying they believed that the ordinances are both necessary and legal.
And while District Attorney Lynne Abraham previously advised Philadelphia’s city council and mayor that their gun control proposals were unconstitutional, the city pressed on, defying the state’s firearm preemption law in its attempt to circumvent the Pennsylvania legislature.
Enter Commissioner Ramsey, whose anti-gun leanings and arrogant, above-the-law mentalities have followed him to the City of Brotherly Love. Not content with his city passing illegal gun control “laws,” Ramsey is actually encouraging the City Council and Mayor Nutter to ignore the legal advice of city attorneys against enforcing the ordinances. Not only is he in favor of enforcing the illegal measures, he was recently quoted as saying, “As far as I am concerned, the laws are valid, and we will act as if this whole conversation with the D.A. just didn’t take place.”
When the City’s Police Commissioner--the top law enforcement official--encourages the mayor and council members to ignore legal advice, that’s not just blatantly arrogant and anti-gun, that’s outrageous.
Oh it’s more than outrageous. This is the head of the police department saying he’s going to enforce laws that he knows are illegal. It’s a case of “it’s for your own good” stretched to the limits; the man who is the head of law enforcement is vowing to act illegally because it’s the right thing to do. Dude, you are so fired. Don’t forget for a second that this Commissioner Ramsey fellow is the guy who pushed Washington DC’s gun laws into place - the ones that are under review by the Supreme Court right now in the DC v. Heller case. They too will fall.
Now we have another dog in the fight, Philly political sock puppet and City Solicitor Shelley Smith, who is challenging Judge Cutler Greenspan’s injunction because she feels the NRA lacks standing. [ Now, I am not a lawyer, so I could be off, but my understanding of “standing” means that a law, no matter how obviously wrong, can not be challenged in court until somebody has been injured by it. And “injured” means charged with breaking that law, but I’m not sure if “injured” has to include being convicted and penalized. The whole concept seems pretty damn stupid to me, but I guess it serves some sort of legislative streamlining process, or else the opponents of every single law would be challenging them in court the instant they were passed. Wait, is that actually a bad thing? Maybe not, but it would be an expensive one.] And my guess is that Smith is correct: no person has been injured by this law because a) it hasn’t been enforced yet, and b) the DA has vowed not to prosecute infactions because the laws are illegal. But that reality has nothing to do with the theater of courtroom drama.
“They don’t deal specifically with the legal injury as it relates to each of the separate ordinances,” Smith said. “You have to look at what every ordinance prohibits and then figure out if any of the plaintiffs can allege any specific injury.”
...
Greenspan on April 17 approved the NRA’s request for a temporary restraining order to keep the city from enforcing the new laws. She will hold a hearing on May 19 to consider the group’s request for a permanent injunction. The NRA says the laws conflict with a 1996 state Supreme Court ruling that only the state can regulate guns. Smith says the city laws do not conflict with that ruling. Further complicating matters, Police Commissioner Charles Ramsey had vowed to enforce the local laws before the restraining order but District Attorney Lynne Abraham said she would not prosecute anyone arrested for violating them.
So the whole thing is a washing machine full of bullshit, stuck in the spin cycle. The laws are illegal. The mayor knew full well the laws are illegal. The Police Commissioner knew the laws were illegal. The city DA told them so. The Judge saw immediately that the laws were illegal and issued an injunction. The city Solicitor is lying out her ass, but she has to take the mayor’s position. The only thing she’s right about is the lack of standing, so the injunction will fail. And there won’t be any standing because these laws won’t be enforced. So can the Pennsylvania Supreme Court take these laws on without standing, and bitch slap Philadelphia AGAIN for violating the pre-emption law? Wait and see. This is only the opening act in the latest theater of the absurd.
The five ordinances in question are largely familiar re-workings of state legislative proposals that have already been shot down: a limit of one gun purchase per month; no ownership of automatic, or combat weapons; the imposition of arrest or a fine if your gun is stolen and you fail to immediately report it to the police. These are the main points. Limiting gun purchases to one per month is the only proposal that even made it to the voting floor in pro-gun Pennsylvania, where it, too, was promptly defeated.
Wasting time and money in court on Monday will save no lives. And, isn’t that the point?
So, really, what is this all about? Mayor Nutter is a very bright man. What’s the hidden agenda on this apparent fool’s errand in court, and at taxpayer expense? The NRA has already persuaded the judge to issue a restraining order prohibiting the police from arresting anyone based on the new ordinances. Police Commissioner Ramsey has been through all this once before, in Washington D.C., where another local gun control law worked its way right up to the United States Supreme Court.
The clear intent of what Mr. La Pierre is calling “political theatre” is the faint hope that some court, somewhere, will entertain an argument that can lead to the possible invalidation of that rule of pre-emption in which the state keeps the good stuff for itself.
So really what we are looking at is the ultimate expression of the leftist mindset: they have passed laws that they know are illegal under current statutes, but they are counting on judicial activism to get those other laws twisted around so that they get their way. For your own good, of course.
No, NRA, this is far more than an outrage. This is nascent tyranny.
Posted by Drew458
on 04/30/2008 at 08:59 AM
Filed Under: • Guns and Gun Control •
• Comments (4)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Tuesday - April 29, 2008
Oh Canada
Toronto - A lopsided city council vote of 39-3 calling for a federal ban on handgun ownership came as little surprise yesterday. What proved revealing was how two right-wing councillors, seen by some as future mayoral candidates, came down on opposite sides of the vote.
Councillor Michael Thompson (Ward 37, Scarborough Centre), one of three who opposed the mayor’s call for a federal ban, described the effort as “political junk food.”
After pointed questions to Mayor David Miller, who made the request for the ban his key item for the council session that opened yesterday, Mr. Thompson said “to suggest that a ban is the solution today, we are providing a false sense of security.
“It is an empty gesture,” he scoffed. But Councillor Denzil Minnan-Wong (Ward 34, Don Valley East), a frequent critic of the mayor, voted with Mr. Miller and the majority of council.
”If this [proposed ban] has even a minimal effect on 1 per cent of gun crime, it is a victory,” he said. “We need to do everything we can to get crime down in the city.”
Talk about moving the goalposts. If disarming the entire country has any positive impact AT ALL on even 1% of crimes committed with handguns, then it’s worth it. I think these people have been hit in the head with too many hockey pucks. And while this is only the voice of one city council, they’ve got a petition signed by 45,000 Canadians in support of it, and they plan on taking this to their Parliment in June to push the issue.
“A minimal effect on 1 percent of gun crime”. Holy cow. Let’s see, what would you call minimal? How about 1 percent? In the USA in 2006, there were 43,000 traffic fatalities. If lowering national speed limits to 10mph resulted in less than 5 fewer deaths, then by the same “logic” that’s what we should do. That’s the same “minimal effect on 1 percent”. And think of the gas we’d save! Why, you could get around faster on a bicycle!
Moonbats. Mindless moonbats. Let’s all just completely ignore that a decrease of 1% of 1% (0.0001) is so far inside the normal statisical variance that you can’t even see it.
Posted by Drew458
on 04/29/2008 at 12:47 PM
Filed Under: • Guns and Gun Control • Stoopid-People •
• Comments (5)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Friday - April 25, 2008
Maybe I should just shut up
Mr. Hog, over at
Kim DuToit, who is not a reloader, sympathizes - “I know that the total opacity of the process for a total newbie has been what’s put me off it most of my shooting life—and if ever there was a ready customer, I’m it.”
Odds bodkins people!!! I don’t know whether to laugh, cry, or get pissed off. If you don’t have anyone to show you how to do this, and you can’t be bothered to spend 10 minutes searching things up on the internet, buy a reloading manual. Speers, Sierra, Hornady, Lee, et al ... every single one of them has a huge chapter in the front, usually with lots of pictures, that shows you exactly what you need to do, where all the bits go, and how to adjust them properly. Gun stores sell the manuals. So does Amazon.
If I wasn’t 10,000% certain that there were already dozens of How-To webpages, YouTube videos, etc., already out there, I’d get out the camera and go visit the garage and make a photo manual myself.
Look: you need a press, you need a set of dies, you need the proper kind of scale. You need a dial caliper, you need a powder funnel, and you need some kind of case lube. If you’re smart you’ll pick up an inertial puller. And a case trimmer with an assortment of cutters. And one of those deburring thingies. Then you need to buy the press, AND a loading manual. Then you read everything, play around with it, and put the press together. Most press companies have the whole thing up as a deluxe kit, ready to go. THEN you go buy brass, bullets, primers, and gunpowder. Because without the loading manual, you don’t even know which kind of bullets, primers, and gunpowder to buy!
And I’m peeved with Kim. I’ve been a loyal reader there for years, and I’ve always respected what he says, and I’ve greatly enjoyed his blogs. But that statement he made is very annoying, because it’s only true for someone who has made EXACTLY ZERO EFFORT TO LEARN. He of the great gun knowledge, who goes off to the range at the drop of a hat, who knows all these other gun people, and who seems to be so deep into the firearms experience ... complains about total opacity in terms of reloading knowledge. When legions of shooters have been on his forums for ages, talking about reloading from time to time (if not all the time). I’m sorry Kim, but I can’t swallow that one. You have made an erronious statement. And done a great disservice to those who were thinking about getting into it. Please make the smallest of efforts to learn, and you’ll find a nearly infinite amount of information out there, and it’s often even organized into beginner, journeyman, and expert categories.
If you can see, if you can read, if you have at least one functional hand, and if you are coordinated enough to be able to drink a glass of water without assistance, then I can teach you how to reload any cartridge on any press ... in under 10 minutes. Nobody is born knowing how to do this, but it is not complex. Clean. Deprime. Resize. Reprime. Charge. Seat. Crimp. That’s the entire process. That’s almost all there is to it. The only “complex” or “opaque” thing is adjusting the dies ... and that’s why I said you have to buy the dial calipers. It takes about 30 seconds to adjust each die, and if you’re Mr. Hog with his nice shiney new super progressive press, you only have to adjust them once. Once. Then you can pull your crank and spew out ammo until your arm falls off, and be happy.
Grrrrrr.
Posted by Drew458
on 04/25/2008 at 04:25 PM
Filed Under: • Guns and Gun Control •
• Comments (9)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Thursday - April 17, 2008
You Can Fool Some of the People Some of the Time
... but you can’t fool me. Obama and Clinton pretend to support gun rights during their latest really boring debate.
Gosh, some posts just about write themselves. This one hardly needs more than the header and the title. Here they go again, again. What is it with these two? The lies are pouring out of every one of their bodily orifices (Eeeww) and they think that no one is going to notice? Nobody is going to call them on it? Both of these two communists are about as anti-gun as it gets. They aren’t fooling one single gun owner who is centrist or anywhere to the right. And I think that’s it, in a nutshell. Both of them are going through the motions of pretending to support gun rights to show their far-left base that they can pretend to take centrist positions. Wink wink, nudge nudge, know what I mean? It’s a charade and everyone knows it, but it’s expected of them so they do it. The humorous part is that neither one is even halfway good at the pretense. Not even Hillary can lie this convincingly.
Sens. Hillary Clinton of New York and Barack Obama of Illinois, still scrapping for the Democratic presidential nomination, tried to reconcile their gun-control records with their professed campaign-trail support for gun ownership on Wednesday night.
Both candidates bowed to the nation’s hunting culture—yet insisted that “common sense” should prevail. Both candidates said they support and respect an individual’s right to own guns, but the positions they endorsed—an “assault weapons” ban, expanded police access to federal gun-trace data, and keeping guns out of the “wrong hands”—are straight out of the gun-control play book.
No kidding. That’s what passes for common sense when you have a solid F- rating from all the gun rights institutes.
Noting that both Clinton and Obama have been “strong advocates” for gun licensing and gun registration, Gibson asked Clinton why she’s backed off those positions while campaigning in Pennsylvania.
Gosh, maybe it’s because of all those bitter PA voters, clinging to God ‘n Guns ‘n Hate because the government has let them down for 25 years? Somebody give Henry Charles Gibson a ClueBat please. Or should I just sink to the bottom of the tank and call this a “loaded question”?
Clinton mentioned the soaring murder rate in Philadelphia and said that as president, she would put more police officers on the street.
Sure, because telling towns and cities how to run themselves is the job of the President of the United States. Just like her husband wanted to tell all the local schools to get school uniforms.
“I will also work to reinstate the assault weapons ban,” she said, referring to restrictions on semi-automatic weapons imposed during her husband’s administration. Clinton said the semi-automatic weapons ban “really was an aid to our police officers, who are now, once again...being outgunned on our streets by these military-style weapons.”
Stay tuned, another episode of Dumb and Dumberer is coming up next. The AWB didn’t do a damn thing to reduce crime or violence. And all these years later the number of crimes committed with this kind of weapon is still small, and the number of shoot outs with the police with them is even smaller. And just how many of those few are legally obtained? That’s the only real number that might be impacted by another AWB. Pure bullshit, as usual.
Clinton went on to say
“… we will strike the right balance to protect the constitutional right but to give people the feeling and the reality that they will be protected from guns in the wrong hands.”
So she should get an “A” for effort from the left. A good lie, fairly well told.
How about Oba-loney?
Obama, asked about the District of Columbia’s gun ban—which the U.S. Supreme Court is now considering—said he hadn’t followed details of the case.
Riiight. Biggest landmark case SCOTUS has faced in decades and he don’t know a thing about it. LOSER.
Obama said the nation has to “get beyond the politics of this issue and figure out what, in fact, is working.”
He mentioned public school children being shot to death in Chicago: “And I think that most law-abiding gun owners all across America would recognize that it is perfectly appropriate for local communities and states and the federal government to try to figure out, how do we stop that kind of killing?”
Hey, that’s easy. Just disarm all the black people living in the Democrat controlled cities. “Gun crime” will drop 60% overnight. Then disarm all the latinos living right next to them and watch it drop another 25%. What, that’s illegal? Unconstitutional? Racist? Well, yeah, it is. But it’s also true. Next step would be to arm all the retail workers and everyone behind a counter at any business. After that you arm the teachers. Guess what? Armed robberies and school shootings drop to almost nothing in a month. Sure, you’ll get a mountain or two of shot up criminals, but who cares? So what’s your solution Obamarama ... because this has been studied to death for generations, and it’s clear that an infinite number of laws isn’t doing much of anything?
So what’s Obama’s plan? Nobody knows. It’s appropriate for government to try to figure it out. What the hell does that mean? More empty hot air from the wizard of Hope. Such audacity.
And it wan’t him on that 1996 questionnaire, when he came right out and said that all handguns should go away and everyone should be disarmed. Nope, not him. Just because his handwriting was all over the form doesn’t mean a thing. Why, he never even saw that thing. PATHETIC LYING LOSER.
But Clinton couldn’t let Obama walk away with the Stupid Prize, so she had to find some way to cram yet another one of her feet into her big mouth:
Clinton hedged on whether she supports the D.C. gun ban: “I want to give local communities the opportunity to have some authority over determining how to keep their citizens safe,” she said. “What I support is sensible regulation that is consistent with the constitutional right to own and bear arms.”
Yeah, just like Obullshit, she wants to extend gun laws down to the town level. Never mind that that’s utterly unworkable, and has been found to be unconstitutional many times now, in both San Fran and Philly. But hey, let’s take a page from Mayor Nutter’s playbook of idiotic and illegal laws that won’t work and expand it to nationwide asshattery.
She said a total gun ban “with no exceptions under any circumstances” might be found to be unconstitutional—“but I don’t know the facts,” she said.
That’s about the only honest thing either one of them said the whole night. You sure don’t know the facts at all Hill. “Might be” unconstitutional. Holy crap. Even worse, she looked like the smart one compared to the other guy.
A little updatishness: John Lott Jr weighs in:
In fact, I knew Obama during the mid-1990s, and his answers to IVI’s question on guns fit well with the Obama that I knew. Indeed, the first time I introduced myself to him he said “Oh, you are the gun guy.”
I responded “Yes, I guess so.” He simply responded that “I don’t believe that people should be able to own guns.”
Right. Total liar, just like we always knew he was.
Posted by Drew458
on 04/17/2008 at 08:37 AM
Filed Under: • Guns and Gun Control • Politics •
• Comments (0)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Thursday - April 10, 2008
FLORIDA SENATE PASSES LAW TO ALLOW GUNS AT WORK. WELL, AT LEAST AS CLOSE AS THE PARKING LOT
TALLAHASSEE, Florida (Reuters) - Most Florida residents would be allowed to take guns to work under a measure passed by Florida lawmakers on Wednesday.
The bill, allowing workers to keep guns in their cars for self-protection, was approved by the Florida Senate by a vote of 26-13. It now goes to Republican Gov. Charlie Crist to sign into law.
Backed by the National Rifle Association and some labor unions, the so-called “take-your-guns-to-work” measure would prohibit business owners from banning guns kept locked in motor vehicles on their private property.
The measure applies to employees, customers and those invited to the business establishment as long as they have a permit to carry the weapon.
Backers say the measure upholds the vision of the authors of the U.S. Constitution, who made the right to bear arms part of the Bill of Rights.
Critics say the measure usurps business owners’ rights to determine what happens on their property and puts workers and managers at risk from disgruntled employees.
Dozens of workplace shootings occur every year in the United States and studies have shown that job sites where guns are permitted are more likely to suffer workplace homicides than those where guns are prohibited.
“This is an attempt to trample upon the property rights of property owners and attempt to make it more difficult to protect the workers in a workplace and those who visit our retail establishments,” said Sen. Ted Deutch, a Boca Raton Democrat.
I think it’s a good piece of legislation. We’ll have to wait and see if it gets signed into law. Then perhaps it will be challenged, and some court will have to decide whether the rights of a property owner include the power to deny people invited to use that property their human rights. Because I don’t think you should get to pick and choose. All or nothing. And part of the All is the 2A. Maybe the good citizens of Florida are standing up for themselves for a Change. I Hope.
Watch this law pass, then watch workplace mayhem drop to about nothing. And watch armed robberies drop as well. Too bad they didn’t figure out a way to arm the teachers, and I have no idea why companies involved in Homeland Security aren’t included in this bill either. Maybe because they’re already armed?
Posted by Drew458
on 04/10/2008 at 05:03 PM
Filed Under: • Guns and Gun Control •
• Comments (3)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Thursday - April 03, 2008
Common Sense Wins in Pennsylvania
HARRISBURG - The House yesterday rejected a measure aimed at curbing illegal handgun trafficking, the first substantive gun restriction considered by the full chamber in more than a decade. By a vote of 128-75 the House defeated an amendment - attached to a separate gun crime bill - that would have made it mandatory to report lost and stolen handguns.
Gun-control proponents hailed the vote itself as a historic achievement for opening floor debate on gun violence and forcing lawmakers to take a formal position on controversial legislation.
The defeat came despite impassioned pleas from Philadelphia- and Pittsburgh-area lawmakers who argued that the legislation was critically needed to control the flow of illegal weapons and protect the innocent caught in the crossfire.
Here comes the spin and the appeal to emotion:
“This is a defining moment in this state . . . and to the families of the 400 people gunned down in Philadelphia last year,” said Rep. Curtis Thomas (D., Phila.). “The urgency of now requires that we respond to people across Pennsylvania that have said we need to do something now.”
Uh huh. And just how many of those 400 were innocent victims and not gang members? And just how many were shot with unreported stolen guns? And please, “the urgency of now”? Is that like “the audacity of hope” only more pressing?
But the final vote reflected the dominant pro-gun ideology in a state where divisions over gun control run largely along geographic rather than party lines.
Yeah, city folks vs. country folks. I have heard PA described as a state with a big city at each end and Alabama in the middle. That’s a bit of an exaggeration, as is the rumor that the west end of all bridges connecting NJ to PA have a sign on them that says “America starts here”. Fake but accurate.
There is a huge difference between reporting firearms as stolen within X amount of time after the crime occurs, and reporting them stolen within X amount of time after awareness of the theft occurs. The first way makes it a criminal offense to be on vacation and not at home to count your guns every day, the second way allows gun owners to be good citizens. I’ve been hearing a lot about straw purchases lately, along with the “mock straw” idea this bill’s amendment sought to address. Is this actually happening, or is it just hot air? If it is going on, what do you think should be done to stop the “oh, I bought a boxful of guns and they were stolen right out of my car! Too bad the burglars left me this bag of money by accident.” means to arm gangs?
Posted by Drew458
on 04/03/2008 at 01:51 PM
Filed Under: • Guns and Gun Control •
• Comments (1)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Five Most Recent Trackbacks:
Once Again, The One And Only Post
(4 total trackbacks)
Tracked at iHaan.org
Thｅ advantage to having a guide with you is thɑt an expert will haѵe very first hand experience dealing and navigating the river with гegional wildlife. Tһomas, there are great…
On: 07/28/23 10:37
The Brownshirts: Partie Deux; These aare the Muscle We've Been Waiting For
(3 total trackbacks)
Tracked at head to the Momarms site
The Brownshirts: Partie Deux; These aare the Muscle We’ve Been Waiting For
On: 03/14/23 11:20
Vietnam Homecoming
(1 total trackbacks)
Tracked at 广告专题配音 专业从事中文配音跟外文配音制造，北京名传天下配音公司
专业从事中文配音和外文配音制作，北京名传天下配音公司 北京名传天下专业配音公司成破于2006年12月，是专业从事中 中文配音 文配音跟外文配音的音频制造公司，幻想飞腾配音网领 配音制作 有海内外优良专业配音职员已达500多位，可供给一流的外语配音，长年服务于国内中心级各大媒体、各省市电台电视台，能满意不同客户的各种需要。电话：010-83265555 北京名传天下专业配音公司…
On: 03/20/21 07:00
meaningless marching orders for a thousand travellers ... strife ahead ..
(1 total trackbacks)
Tracked at Casual Blog
[...] RTS. IF ANYTHING ON THIS WEBSITE IS CONSTRUED AS BEING CONTRARY TO THE LAWS APPL [...]
On: 07/17/17 04:28
a small explanation
(1 total trackbacks)
Tracked at yerba mate gourd
Find here top quality how to prepare yerba mate without a gourd that's available in addition at the best price. Get it now!
On: 07/09/17 03:07
DISCLAIMER
THE SERVICES AND MATERIALS ON THIS WEBSITE ARE PROVIDED "AS IS" AND THE HOSTS OF THIS SITE EXPRESSLY DISCLAIMS ANY AND ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY LAW INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF SATISFACTORY QUALITY, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, WITH RESPECT TO THE SERVICE OR ANY MATERIALS.
Not that very many people ever read this far down, but this blog was the creation of Allan Kelly and his friend Vilmar. Vilmar moved on to his own blog some time ago, and Allan ran this place alone until his sudden and unexpected death partway through 2006. We all miss him. A lot. Even though he is gone this site will always still be more than a little bit his. We who are left to carry on the BMEWS tradition owe him a great debt of gratitude, and we hope to be able to pay that back by following his last advice to us all:
It's been a long strange trip without you Skipper, but thanks for pointing us in the right direction and giving us a swift kick in the behind to get us going. Keep lookin' down on us, will ya? Thanks.
- Keep a firm grasp of Right and Wrong
- Stay involved with government on every level and don't let those bastards get away with a thing
- Use every legal means to defend yourself in the event of real internal trouble, and, most importantly:
- Keep talking to each other, whether here or elsewhere
THE INFORMATION AND OTHER CONTENTS OF THIS WEBSITE ARE DESIGNED TO COMPLY WITH THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. THIS WEBSITE SHALL BE GOVERNED BY AND CONSTRUED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND ALL PARTIES IRREVOCABLY SUBMIT TO THE JURISDICTION OF THE AMERICAN COURTS. IF ANYTHING ON THIS WEBSITE IS CONSTRUED AS BEING CONTRARY TO THE LAWS APPLICABLE IN ANY OTHER COUNTRY, THEN THIS WEBSITE IS NOT INTENDED TO BE ACCESSED BY PERSONS FROM THAT COUNTRY AND ANY PERSONS WHO ARE SUBJECT TO SUCH LAWS SHALL NOT BE ENTITLED TO USE OUR SERVICES UNLESS THEY CAN SATISFY US THAT SUCH USE WOULD BE LAWFUL.
Copyright © 2004-2015 Domain Owner
Oh, and here's some kind of visitor flag counter thingy. Hey, all the cool blogs have one, so I should too. The Visitors Online thingy up at the top doesn't count anything, but it looks neat. It had better, since I paid actual money for it.
RSS 2.0 
Atom 
