Category Archives: Gnashing and Wailing

Layers and layers of editors and fact checkers

Did you know that “Armor-Piercing” ammunition for AR-15s isn’t legal to possess? Neither did I. But helpfully, a “lawyer for the Sheriff’s Department” down in Fayetteville told the media just that.

The Cumberland County deputy who was injured in a shoot-out with a murder suspect last week was shot with armor-piercing bullets, a Sheriff’s Office spokesman said Thursday.

“This guy was using armor-piercing rounds, which aren’t legal to possess,” said Ronnie Mitchell, the lawyer for the Sheriff’s Office.

Umm, NO. Just NO.

There is a federal law against possessing PISTOL bullets that are made of certain materials which would make those PISTOL bullets likely to penetrate police vests, but there are no laws against rifle ammunition that’s considered “Armor-Piercing.”

Armor piercing ammunition
18 U.S.C., § 921(a)(17)(B)

A projectile or projectile core which may be used in a handgun and which is constructed entirely (excluding the presence of traces of other substances) from one or a combination of tungsten alloys, steel, iron, brass, bronze, beryllium copper, or depleted uranium; or

A full jacketed projectile larger than .22 caliber designed and intended for use in a handgun and whose jacket has a weight of more than 25 percent of the total weight of the projectile.

The term “armor piercing ammunition” does not include shotgun shot required by Federal or State environmental or game regulations for hunting purposes, a frangible projectile designed for target shooting, a projectile which the Attorney General finds is primarily intended to be used for sporting purposes, or any other projectile or projectile core which the Attorney General finds is intended to be used for industrial purposes, including a charge used in an oil and gas well perforating device.

And no one in the media bothered to question this incredible assertion. Not the reporter, the editor, the fact checkers, no one.

What’s the bet that the bullets in question were garden variety M855 “green tip” bullets and the lawyer knows even less about bullets than he does about law?

Mother Jones wets the bed in terror

Mother Jones has finally discovered that you can build your own firearm. What’s their biggest problem with it?

I’m with a dozen other guys, some sipping coffee, others making introductions over the buzz of an air compressor. Most of us are strangers, but we share a common bond: We are just eight hours away from having our very own AK-47—one the government will never know about.

Yep. That’s exactly it. The government will never know about it.

Why do gun haters always come back to that point? The idea that you are not permitted to own a firearm without first getting permission from the Government? You can’t build a plastic gun, an AK, or buy a gun without a background check/FBI permission.

The guy writing for Harper’s explains it to us, writing about the recent invention of a printable plastic gun.

What really has people upset about Wilson’s plastic pistol is the absence of permission inherent in the project. The idea that people might own something as dangerous and personally empowering as a firearm without society’s permission is what has always given gun-control advocates the fantods. That’s really what we talk about when we talk about guns: the power of the individual in relation to the collective, and the extent to which each of us needs to live by the permission of the rest.

It’s never about Guns, always about Control.

Oh NOES! Teh EBIL Gunz! On Campuses!

Poor Andrea. She’s so desperately afraid that NC Concealed Handgun Permit holders will no longer be banned from having a gun in their car when they are on a college or university campus.

For instance, the House will take up a bill today that will allow people with concealed carry permits to bring their guns onto campuses across the state as long as they store the guns in their vehicles.

You have to read her parade of horribles.

The students, however, can be a bit mystifying. They vomit a lot after football games. On the sidewalks. They sometimes drive onto nonexistent driveways, also known as lawns, and other times into trees. They laugh really loud at 3 a.m. and frequently have to be told to put their garbage into cans rather than on the yard. Then they have to be asked to roll their garbage cans away from the street. Things that are incomprehensible to the average adult often strike them as tres amusant. Like one morning, after a football game the home team won, I discovered that some wag had placed a condom over the street-crossing button at Cameron and Merritt Mill. Why? Who knows? It’s just the kids these days. They’re bright and shiny and full of mischief, same as they ever was.

Yeah, because that’s a good reason to deny adult CHP holders their right to carry a firearm.

You start to wonder if they live their whole life assuming that, except for them, no one on the planet is smart enough to get out of their own way.

News flash: The people on college campuses are not “children.” They are adults. The vast majority of undergrads are not even eligible for CHPs, because they are not 21 years old yet. But apparently the antics of college students are enough to deny adults their rights. Because college.

Notice I don’t say gun owners, because most gun owners are in fact, interested in preventing gun violence and support common sense measures that would allow this country to do so. No, I’m talking about highly reactive, anxious people who call someone a “gun grabber” because she supports universal background checks. I’m talking about people who react to every comment on gun violence prevention with anger and alarm. Geez, if you’re the ones packing heat, why so touchy?

We gun owners are touchy because people like her are doing whatever they can to make it more difficult and more expensive to exercise our civil rights. These gun haters don’t think blacks should be polite to the KKK, so why do they think gun owners should be polite to the gun haters?

Stick your “new civility” where the sun don’t shine.

Counterfeit rifle parts siezed in Cary, NC

You can bet that the anti-gun forces are going to spin out of control on this one.

A secretary of state’s investigator, working with U.S. Homeland Security agents, seized 1,559 mostly counterfeit Chinese parts for rifle accessories when they raided a Cary home earlier this month, according to a search warrant made public Tuesday.

So what exactly did they sieze from a home in the Containment Area for Relocated Yankees?

Inside, Davis told Manning, were parts marked as coming from A.R.M.S., Inc., a Massachusetts company that makes equipment for mounting sighting scopes on rifles, particularly the M-16/M-4 military assault rifles and the AR-15 civilian equivalent.

Davis contacted the company, and a senior executive there pronounced the seized mounts to be counterfeit, Davis said.

In the garage at Daybreak Bluff Drive, the returned warrant says, agents found an array of telescopic sights, mounting equipment for sights, several flashlights marked as known brands that can be mounted on rifles for tactical use and other gun grips, butts, butt pads, bipods for supporting the barrel in precise shooting situations and other gear.

It sounds like a bunch of stuff that wouldn’t be interesting except it can be attached to a rifle. If it was counterfeit doggie chew toys it would be more dangerous, but probably wouldn’t be reported in the press.

Why, oh why can’t we put anti-gun jurists on the DC Court of Appeals?

It’s horrible, I tell you! Those EBIL NRA people blocked a qualified judge!

Halligan is widely viewed by attorneys on both sides of the aisle as impeccably qualified to sit on the bench. So what’s the problem? It turns out that while working in the New York Attorney General’s office Halligan wrote a brief supporting the efforts of her boss, Andrew Cuomo, “to make gun manufacturers legally responsible for some of the violence in New York, a position that the National Rifle Association opposed. The N.R.A. punished Halligan for doing her job for New York, and the Senate Republicans followed.”

I can’t imagine why the NRA called upon Senators not to confirm an anti-gun lawyer to what amounts to the Junior Supreme Court.

Are Leftists really this transparently stupid? Or are they just lying and hope you aren’t smart enough to know the difference?

WRAL tries, mostly succeeds (*Video*)

In a breath of fresh air, WRAL “Multimedia Reporter” Mark Binker tries to explain the complex web of laws that you and I deal with every day.

 

 (RSS Readers click HERE for video)

It’s a breath of fresh air because almost all gun discussion on the mass media avoids using facts. They media spends most of the time trying to ignore the fact that most of what they ask to be illegal is already illegal. There can be no other reason that gun grabbers spend so much time trying to tell us that machine guns should be illegal. Umm, guys… National Firearms Act? Ever heard of it?

Poor Mark ran into the wall of information and honestly did his best to explain the laws. Unfortunately, whenever an outsider tries to explain something, insiders quickly see all the flaws. I want to tease him about it, but then I try to imagine myself (not a car racing fan) trying to explain the rules of NASCAR to anyone and I realize what he’s up against. Luckily, I have Mark’s email address. You might remember Mark as the person primarily responsible for posting the (mostly) redacted NC Concealed Handgun Permit database online.

If you read the WRAL piece before, read it again. You’ll see that many of the errors are corrected. Originally he fell afoul of the whole “clip” vs. “magazine” issue. He was also under the misapprehension that you couldn’t carry a gun where alcohol is sold. It’s actually where it is sold AND consumed. As I told him, it’s perfectly legal to carry a gun to the convenience store to buy the beer you’re going to take home to drink. He was also told by the Attorney General’s office that short barreled rifles and short-barreled shotguns are against the law in North Carolina.

I used the email address I had and to my surprise I got a fairly quick response. He changed out the “clip” for “magazine,” corrected the sold and consumed, and after some back and forth added a bit that explained that federally registered SBRs, SBSs, and silencers were legal in NC.

There’s one part that I’m still not happy about.

Practically speaking, the federal government tried to outlaw “assault weapons,” those that serve no purpose other than killing people, in 1994.

Mark, are you kidding me? Are you really trying to tell me that

  1. My AR-15 serves no purpose other than killing someone, and
  2. That killing someone with my AR is not a valid purpose?

This kind of editorializing has no place in what should be a straight news story. First off, it’s just plain wrong. An AR is the single most popular rifle sold in America. It’s used in competitions of all sorts, from local “Zombie shoots” all the way up to the rarefied competitive level of the President’s Rifle Match. The AR is a perfectly acceptable hunting rifle, though why people think that only hunting rifles are acceptable escapes me.

But most of all, saying that a rifle is primarily a tool to kill someone doesn’t make it a bad thing. My rifle is set up so that I can use it for home and short range defense. My suspicion is that if I put two or three rounds from my AR in the high center chest area of a home invader, he is unlikely to survive. This does not impugn the rifle, or me, in any way.

Overall grade for Mark’s effort is B. Mark got a lot of information correct, and he was willing to correct his info when he was told it was wrong. That counts for a lot. Unfortunately, that piece of really egregious editorializing knocks him out of the A range.

Mark, when you’re ready to learn about gun owners, let me know. You have my email. We’ll take my AR to the range. Have you seen the fantastic range that Wake County built for us?

Stop telling the truth!!!

Reporters lie. Sometimes. They like to shade the truth to make a better story. Sometimes. But most of the time they report factual stories in a factual way, lying only by omission and by the particular stories they highlight. Now we have a columnist who is openly calling for lying by omission.

Last week, a 28-year-old Henderson man named (Victim) was shot and killed. Before his mama had a chance to pick out a suit and tie in which to bury him, a local TV station was reporting on his criminal past, even, for dramatic effect, slowly scanning the camera across the arrest record.

Turns out the dude was arrested in 2008 and received probation in 2009 on charges of possession with intent to sell a schedule VI drug. Lawyers I talked to say that’s marijuana..

Oh, Noes! The Humanity! They told all and sundry that he was a convicted felon.

Victim

He was a drug dealer.

Sullying the dead unnecessarily is not a new phenomenon, but it still enrages — even when the newspaper does it.

You have to ask yourself why. Why does Barry Saunders get worked up into such a froth about a TV newsreader pointing out that a criminal who got murdered was a criminal? I’ll tell you why. Because it’s effective. Barry has appeared here before sneering at us toothless cousin humping rednecks for going to the gun show. Barry is anti-gun. Barry hates it when he brings up all the “Gun Deaths™” and we fire back with “yeah, but how many were criminals?”

Anti-gunners can’t argue with reality. Facts cut against their argument and they know it. Their only option is to tell us to shut up. Don’t tell the inconvenient truth, let us get away with our pretty lies.

He, and all the rest of the liars, can kiss my ass. I’m not shutting up for them or anyone else.

On the internet, no one knows you’re a dog. They do, however, know you’re an idiot.

I had to do it. Someone on the internet was wrong.

There’s a person on the interwebs who is pretending to be an extremely left wing dog. He (or she) posted about gun control, complaining that we’re just not having the discussion.

We’ve heard the President and his opponent talk about (and talk around) taxes, wars, domestic policies, Wall Street and even Big Bird. But there’s one subject both candidates won’t touch with a ten-foot leash: gun policies.

I left this comment. I want to preserve it here in case “Reasoned Discourse™” happens.

Wow. Talk about a dog’s breakfast.

” Would it surprise you to learn that gun injuries (accidents, murders, suicides) take nearly as many lives in our country as breast cancer each year?”

yes, it would. In 2010, 31,224 people died as a result of a gunshot. That’s 17,352 suicides, 12,632 homicides, 351 legal interventions (cop or citizen legally shoots someone in self defense) 613 accidents, and 276 undetermined intents. In according to BreastCancer.com 39,520 women are expected to die from breast cancer. That’s 79%, and not “Nearly as many.”

” Where is the discussion?”

Where have you been? We’ve been having this discussion at least since the 60’s. Longer if you count prior fails to accomplish gun control. The high water mark of gun control was probably the Clinton gun ban. We’ve rolled it back, plus lots of other gun laws too. There used to be very few places where you could easily get Concealed Handgun Licenses. Now you can get them in 49 States and in most of them its extremely easy for a law abiding citizen to get one. That’s progress, and it’s a result of the very long “conversation” we’ve all been having while you were ignoring us and hoping we’d go away. We brought facts and figures, your side brough lunatic theories about “blood in the streets” and “gunfights over parking spot disputes” and yet it doesn’t happen. We’ve had the discussion, you lost. You might want to accept that.

“Why are American humans incapable of having a serious chat about the correlation of increased firearms and more gun deaths?”

Please point to some data somewhere that actually shows an increase in “gun deaths” with an increase in guns. Given we are really concerned with overall violence, not the raw number of people who use a gun to kill themselves or others, that’s what we should actually be looking at. The problem with your theory is that you can’t actually prove this theory you have. Within the US, places with more guns have less crime overall and fewer violent crimes as well. Places with very stiff gun laws tend to have bad crime problems. Think Chicago and New York City. Besides, crime is on a long downward trend even as the number of guns skyrockets. More people own guns. More people legally carry guns. Yet the crime rate drops like a rock. How can that be? Could it be that the number of citizens who have guns has nothing whatsoever to do with the number of crimes committed?

“After the Aurora shootings, ABC New reported “the gun murder rate in the U.S. is almost 20 times higher than the next 22 richest and most populous nations combined.” ”

So what? Are you suggesting that people who get stabbed or strangled to death are better off than those who get shot? Are you going to claim that you don’t care if people die, just so long as they don’t get shot? The people who kill the largest number of people, serial killers, rarely use guns. Rarely as in almost never. Check out the Wiki entry on serial killers if you don’t believe me.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_serial_killers_by_number_of_victims

“Last week a father in NJ shot and killed his own son because he thought he was a prowler. No call to the police, just pull the trigger and ask questions later.”

This is a disgusting misrepresentation of what actually happened. What really happened is that the man received a call from his sister who lived next door. She had a person breaking into her house and needed help. He ran over there to assist her from the person breaking in and the “prowler” jumped out of the bushes wielding a shiny object. The man shot him dead, and when the cops got there to identify him they discovered that the “prowler” was the man’s drug addled criminal adopted son, who had a knife in his hand. The kid deserved what he got.

http://news.yahoo.com/connecticut-teacher-didnt-know-shot-masked-son-until-164212064–abc-news-topstories.html

“The Aurora shooter bought (legally) thousands of “cop-killer” bullets and that didn’t raise a red flag with anyone.”

Wow. And you wonder why we don’t want to have more conversations with you. What’s a “cop-killer” bullet? Let me tell you what it really is. The term “cop-killer bullet” was applied to some experimental handgun bullets back in the ’80’s that were designed to shoot through a car doors and windshield glass. They were made of very hard metal and needed to be coated in Teflon so that they didn’t wreck the pistol barrel. In typical fashion, the media decided to call them “Cop Killer” bullets because they thought that they would go through police vests. Ironically they didn’t. They are banned for sale to civilians. Cops don’t use them either. Let me be perfectly clear, the Aurora shooter didn’t have any “Cop-Killer” bullets. He may have had hollowpoint bullets for his pistol. They are the same bullets that the police (and I) carry. They are pretty standard. As for “Thousands” of bullets, so what? He couldn’t carry them all. It’s not like he brought the truck he would need to lug 6,000 bullets along with him. He did plenty of damage with only about 200. Are you planning on banning people from buying more than 50 at a time?

We’ve had a long conversation about gun control. It doesn’t work. We know this. Crime rates are down, gun ownership is WAY up. Concealed Carry is WAY, WAY up. Yet the rates of violent crimes are in the toilet. We’ve still got too much gun regulation and we’re doing everything in our power to get rid of it. And we’re going to succeed.

And they wonder why we don’t want to “have a conversation.” Why would we try to hash out policy with people who haven’t a clue which end of a gun the bullet comes out of?

And they wonder why we think they are humorless prigs

Leftists are apparently unable to deal with humor.

In keeping with the theme in today’s Weekly Briefing and the call therein for less know-it-all commentary, this post will not pontificate at any length about how offensive and troubling the “Random Thought” published today in the “Education Update” newsletter of the John Locke Foundation was. We all make dumb mistakes and have told “jokes” we’d like to have back.

 So what is the “NOT funny” joke that they are so worked up about?

Random Thought

The most “American” Olympic sport is Modern Pentathlon. I mean, it sounds like your average summer day in Detroit – swimming, running, riding, shooting pistols, and trying to stab a complete stranger with a sharp object.

So what part are the Lefties objecting to? I can see their point about the horseback riding. There’s not much of that in an average summer day in Detroit. Were they upset that Baltimore, Philly, Newark, New Orleans, and our beloved President’s own Chicago weren’t part of the joke?

OMG Guns on Planes!! Well, Almost…

Did you hear? Only quick thinking by unionized government drones selfless public servants of the TSA have prevented absolute Armageddon in the sky!

Channel 9 learned at least 31 people have tried to bring a gun through Charlotte-Douglas Airport since the beginning of 2011.

The TSA stepped in before those people could step through.

Oh, thank God for the TSA!

I know that many of you don’t click through the links, but you owe it to yourself to go to this one. They have a video up you have to watch. The text version of the story cannot capture the breathlessness of this video. The palpable fear of what is basically a non-story is off the scale. There were SIX GUNS SEIZED AT CHARLOTTE AIRPORT LAST MONTH!!! 

You’d think they were trying to drown raped babies in Alar. You see, the District Attorney isn’t “prosecuting” the people caught with guns at the security checkpoints. They are only socking them with “multi-thousand dollar fines,” but apparently reporter Scott McFarlane wants them perp-walked to the Federal lockup.

There is one shining moment where reason and sanity shines through. The reporter manages to track down a US House Representative, Paul Broun of Georgia’s 10th District and a foe of the TSA, and Broun delivers the best line ever.

“Thing is, a law-abiding citizen bringing a handgun on an airplane is not a danger,” Rep. Paul Broun said. “A terrorist with a handgun or a bomb is. We’ve gotta start focusing on the terrorists.” 

Who wants to bet that the reporter couldn’t see the sense in that statement?

Archie Bunker had it right

 

In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king. In the land of the disarmed, the guy with the box cutter flies your plane into a building.