Category Archives: Gun rights philosophy

When you announce that all fairgoers are disarmed…

When you announce that all fairgoers are disarmed, you should not be surprised when that attracts criminals.

Raleigh police are searching for two armed men who robbed two people at gunpoint late Saturday…

Police say the victims were walking to their vehicles after returning from the North Carolina State Fair around 11:30 p.m. when the armed men approached them and stole their wallets. 

Well what did Troxler expect? He made absolutely sure that everyone and their criminal brother knew that anyone coming out of the fair gates was disarmed for the robbers’ convenience.

How would it have been different if the announcement was “Any fairgoer might be carrying a gun…”? Would criminals be so quick to rob a group of people they knew had a possibility of being concealed carriers?

Disarming people makes them easier targets. Disarming them and then telling the whole world that they are unable to defend themselves attracts criminals. This is why I demanded my free armed escort to my car on the day I visited the fair.

For background on the State Fair Gun Ban, check out GRNC’s alerts on the subject.


GRNC Alert 10-13-14: Judge in State Fair Case Legislates From Bench

GRNC Alert 10-24-14: Troxler Lies about Fair Security

And here’s a short video I took showing the Security Theater at the State Fair.

They deny your right to defend yourself and then don’t even do a good job pretending to provide security.

What’s driving Durham crime increase?

Gang warfare, says the police.

The shootings that drove early numbers up were largely due to a feud between two factions of the same gang, according to police: likely a power struggle that led to a series of retaliatory shootings.

“What I think most people would be shocked to hear is that this violence, most of it, was Bloods shooting at Bloods and fighting amongst themselves,” Smith said.

The story says that “gang involved incidents” account for just 7% of overall violent crime in Durham, which is odd since the FBI reports that

Gangs are responsible for an average of 48 percent of violent crime in most jurisdictions and up to 90 percent in several others, according to NGIC analysis

I think this results from a difference in definitions. If one limits “Gang Related Activity” to just incidents of one gang going after another, or intra-gang conflicts, then the lower number makes sense. The real death toll comes from drug related killings which are certainly gang related, but not necessarily gang warfare.

An important note. It’s clearly not the increase in Concealed Handgun Permits causing the problem. It’s the same people that were always causing the problem, the criminals.

And he’ll be back on the street in no time at all

Police charged him with Trespassing on School Property, Possession of a Weapon on School Property, and Disorderly Conduct.

“I wanted to do something for all the children that have ever been sold into sex slavery and get out on a stage with a motherf***ing ax and a f***ing toothpick of a f***ing knife, my katana, and just lay everything down,” Kirk Cowart told in a rambling jailhouse interview hours after police arrested him for sneaking into a Virginia Beach high school with a hatchet.

Workers at Salem High School discovered Cowart on the auditorium stage. Police said he likely entered the school while the cafeteria was accepting an early-morning delivery on Thursday.

Watch the video Click through and watch the video and you can see that he’s completely nuts. (Video removed because it autoplays, go to link)

Here’s the thing. His charges are all misdemeanors in North Carolina and are probably misdemeanors in Virginia as well. They might get him a bit of help, but the minute he’s determined to be no longer an immediate threat to himself or others, he’s back out on the street.

Cowart’s father told WTKR his son suffers from mental illness and lives in his own imaginary world.

The problem is that his imaginary world intersects with our real world, and no matter how loony tunes this guy is, smacking someone upside the head with a hatchet is going to cause real effects in the real world.

There is no earthly reason that this guy should be free to roam the world. He should be in a nice safe place where he’s carefully monitored. It isn’t fair to us and it isn’t fair to him to ignore his problem and hope that he never kills someone or himself.

This guy is a prime example of why David Codrea is right about background checks. A person who shouldn’t have a gun shouldn’t have a hatchet either. Nor gasoline, matches, kitchen knives, or the contents of the cupboard under the sink. Anyone who cannot be trusted WITH a firearm cannot be trusted WITHOUT a custodian.

The anti-gun fanatics will congratulate themselves for making sure that Virginia bans him from having guns yet they will ignore the fact he has access to many other dangerous items. They won’t care that in 6 months this guy will be roaming around free, with deadly weapons as close as the nearest kitchen knife block. They won’t object to him wandering down to the local Wal-Mart to pick up a 5 gallon gas can. But they’ll cheerfully support a law that makes it illegal for me to loan my gun to a friend.

That should tell you what their real agenda is.

#NRA’s Billy Johnson imagines a world where guns were treated like other rights Gun control fanatics freak out

I’ve long thought that the bulk of anti-gun activists are emotionally challenged individuals. It appears that they are mentally challenged as well. How else do you explain the virulent reaction to what is really an innocuous video?





Oh dear! What did the NRA say now? Are children going to be forced to carry AR-15s in class? Are we finally becoming Margaret Atwood’s totalitarian Christianist theocracy, with children being forced to be the revolutionary vanguard?

Well, not exactly. It seems that Billy Johnson, of NRA News and Amidst The Noise has asked us a simple question. Why does US “gun policy” start from the  strange position of assuming that it is a good government position to limit access to a fundamental Constitutional right? Billy asks why guns aren’t treated like every other thing our government calls a right.

Watch the video and see for yourself.

You see the part where he says we should force all children to carry guns at school? Me neither.

Billy asks some good questions. Whenever something is considered a “Right” by our government, the Left goes out of their way to insist that the government not only allow people that right, but pay for it. Or force others to pay for it. Education? It’s a “Right” and so schools are free. We’ll leave aside for now the discussion of what is and is not a right. Go talk with Kevin Baker if you want to know the difference between a “Right” and “something that people have decided is important and so try to call a ‘Right’ but actually isn’t.”

Billy is correct. Since gun ownership is a fundamental Constitutional right, why is the government going out of its way to make it as difficult as possible to exercise that right? Why does the Federal government tolerate some states in their attempt to make it extremely difficult to “keep” arms and almost impossible to “bear” them? Would they tolerate a state which treated your right to free speech the same way?

If the Left was consistent, they would insist that the Second Amendment be treated just like the First. But no one actually expects the Left to be consistent. So instead of acknowledging the arguments made by Billy, they misrepresent his statements, freak out publicly, and insist that he is some sort of crazy lunatic for even opening his mouth. You can always tell who the Left thinks is a danger. The ones they attack the loudest are the ones they know are hurting them.

Well, Billy, you’re taking flak. That means you’re over the target.

Andrew Branca: on Trayvon shooting “Do it exactly like George [Zimmerman] did”

Friend and Podcaster Luke Apps of Triangle Tactical Podcast interviewed Andrew Branca, lawyer and author of “The Law of Self Defense.” Andrew throws out a little red meat. Here’s a sample.

Check out the whole interview at Triangle Tactical Podcast, episode 86.

‘Gun Free’ restaurant robbery makes ‘The Five’ with Greg Gutfeld (*Video*)

‘Gun Free’ zones attract robbers. Naturally, Bob doesn’t agree.

We are winning.

I especially like that they left my blog logo on the photo.

Original story HERE.

Wrong, Wrong, Wrong. Follow the signs.

In the aftermath of the Durham restaurant that posted ‘No Guns Allowed’ sign, getting robbed at gunpoint I’m hearing the siren song of “Just ignore the sign!” There’s even a blog post up at Wizbang saying exactly that.

Why CC Holders Should Ignore Anti-Gun Signs Posted in Stores

They are popping up all across the country, little stickers on the front doors of businesses, restaurants and retail outlets informing concealed carry holders that they are not welcome to carry their legal firearm inside. But if you are a concealed carry holder you should ignore these attempts to curtail your rights. If you are legally armed, feel absolutely free to enter and patronize those stores with your firearm no matter what these anti-Constitution store owners want.

Are you an idiot?

He makes two points

[I]t is perfectly logical to state that if a store cannot refuse to serve a gay or a person of a particular race or religion because this refusal violates their Constitutional rights, then a store owner cannot act to prevent a patron from observing their Second Amendment rights, either.


These signs do not hold any legal restrictions over your right to carry.

The second is just plain wrong. Here in North Carolina it is a Class 1 Misdemeanor, which is punishable by up to 6 months in jail and a fine of “as much of the court deems appropriate.” This is not a joke, it’s literally up to the judge to decide how much money he’s going to take from you. And that’s on top of the fat cash you’re going to shovel at your lawyer trying to get him to convince the judge that probation is a much better option than a lengthy stay in the Iron Bar Motel. And right after the arrest, while you’re making bail, you’re not working. Whoops, there went your job. And with your job, your house. No job = no money. No money = no rent or mortgage payments. Hope you like living with your mom. Or your wife’s mom.

So by all means, if you’re independently wealthy and can pay all your bills from savings while you sit in jail after you get convicted, go right ahead and break the law.

The first argument is also pretty stupid. As a matter of logic, it might make sense to the more logic oriented pro gun folks. But it isn’t going to fly in the real world. However much you think owning and carrying a gun is a natural right, and that infringing that natural right is akin to discriminating against gay people who want a wedding cake, they will tell you that you can take the gun off and not be gun gay any time you like.

It’s because they hate you. And if you’re so stupid that you don’t understand that there are people out there who hate you down to the core of their being because you’ve decided that your life is so valuable that you’re willing to carry a gun to protect it, I can’t possibly help you. You think that because your position is logical, consistent, and Constitutional, that people have to accept it and move on with their lives. You’re wrong. You’re judging people by looking in the mirror and calibrating your expectations based upon the person you see there.

They hate you. They will always hate you. They will use whatever tool they have at their disposal in order to destroy you. Getting on the wrong side of the law hands them the full weight of the government with which to destroy your life. And your argument is “hey, let’s just ignore that sign, what’s the worst that can happen?” Ask me again from your jail cell.

Finally, why would you give your money to someone so stupid that they think a sign stops criminal acts? Newsflash: They know the sign doesn’t stop crime. They want the sign to stop YOU. They don’t give a damn about what happens to you. Let’s look at it logically.

  • You’d have to be completely stupid to believe that a “no guns” sign would stop criminals from robbing the place.
  • They aren’t completely stupid. If they were they’d be out of business.

Conclusion: It’s not the criminals that they are trying to deter. It’s you, the concealed carrier. They don’t give a damn about someone coming in and blowing your head off. They just want to make sure that you “crazy people who carry guns for no good reason” stay as far away from them as possible. Because potato.

Guns are bad potato

And what do you do? You march in there, risk jail, and you hand that asshole your hard earned cash. You help him make his rent payment. You help him buy a new car. You fund his lifestyle. Why would you give money to someone who is perfectly happy to see you end up dead rather than permit you to lawfully and safely carry a gun?

It’s not a theory and it’s not an idle consideration with me. I have a friend who came home from dinner, after the night in a hospital, wearing hospital scrub pants because he didn’t ever want to wear his own pants again. They were stained with the blood and brains of his dining companions. He still has the shotgun pellets in the back of his head 20+ years later.

I will not set foot into a place run by someone who is more concerned with his prejudices than he is with my right to defend my own life. I will not fund the lifestyle of someone who’d rather see me dead than see me shoot a mass murderer inside his restaurant. And I certainly won’t go to jail, lose my job, and lose my home just to give money to a person like that.

If you’re that dumb, go right ahead. But stop making it sound like high principle when it’s just giving money to a person to your enemy.

Restaurant posts ‘No Guns Allowed’ sign, gets robbed at gunpoint

Update: If you’d like to know why I’m so adamant about restaurant carry, and why I won’t enter a restaurant that bans guns, listen to this 10 minute snippet of a podcast interview I did with Luke at Triangle Tactical Podcast. You see, I have a friend who survived a restaurant mass murder.


Sunday night at about 9pm the restaurant “The Pit Authentic Barbecue” in Durham was robbed by armed and masked men.

Police are searching for three suspects involved in an armed robbery at Durham’s newly-opened barbecue restaurant, The Pit, at 321 W. Geer Street.

Authorities said just before 9 p.m. Sunday, three men wearing hoodies entered the restaurant through the back doors with pistols, and forced several staff members to lie on the floor.

The bandits assaulted two employees during the crime, but they were not seriously injured.

Make sure to click over and watch the security cam video. Put yourself in the place of those workers.

I am very glad that no one was seriously injured. But everyone involved needs to face one very important fact. They were not murdered only because the robbers did not decide to kill them. The robbers had all the power. No one could resist them. Why? Because the owner of The Pit Authentic Barbecue has banned guns in his restaurant.

Here’s a photo of The Pit Authentic Barbecue, Durham, from the street.

The Pit Posted 2

And here’s a close up of the door, showing the sign.

The Pit Posted 1

Photos used by permission of an anonymous blog reader

Take a close look at the anti-gun sign. See how it’s not just some generic “No Guns” sign the owner, Greg Hatem picked up down at the local sign emporium. No, these are custom jobs. He went out of his way to make custom signs to make sure we gun owners felt unwelcome.

For those who can’t make it out behind the reflection, let me describe it. The three pictograms are labeled “NC State Capitol,” “NC Legislative Building,” and “The Pit.” Above the pictograms it says, “No Weapons” and below, “No Concealed Firearms.”

This isn’t just a simple case of some unthinking restauranteur slapping up an anti-gun sign. This is a political statement. He’s very clearly saying “The Legislature bans guns in their workplace, why are they allowing them in mine?” He’s trying to make the case for it being hypocrisy. Well I have three questions for him

  • Does The Pit Authentic Barbecue offer the same level of armed security that the NC Legislature and the NC State Capitol offer?
  • Are there armed police officers hired to stand guard patrolling The Pit Authentic Barbecue the same way there are armed police officers hired to stand guard on the NC Legislative Building and the NC State Capitol?
  • How does your insurance company feel about you assuming the responsibility for the safety of your patrons by prohibiting lawful self defense and banning ALL weapons in your restaurant?

I’m going to send a link to this blog post to the owner’s “Media Inquiries” address,

Samantha Hatem at [email protected]

133 Fayetteville Street
Raleigh, NC 27601

and ask them. What do you think their response will be? Feel free to email them yourselves.

UPDATED to add: This is just one of the several restaurants that Greg Hatem owns. His company “Empire Eats” also owns several other places.

Also, his original “The Pit Authentic Barbecue” in Raleigh was the host restaurant for Gabby Giffords’ anti-gun carpetbagger tour last July. They lied to us back then and said “We host all sorts of political functions. We don’t mean to take sides.” Yeah, right.

She’s my people (*Video*)

She’s a 51 year old black grandma from Detroit with short bleached hair, questionable fashion sense, and I don’t know what in her ears. But I recognize her as a member of my tribe.

video platformvideo managementvideo solutionsvideo player

(RSS Readers click HERE for video)

Note how happy the reporters are telling us with a great deal of excitement that a black woman hauled out a gun and shot someone. We are winning.

She needs to be front and center at the next Moms Demand anti-gun rally in Detroit. I’d live to see her tell the Demanding Mommies where to stow their anti-gun BS.

Full story here.

With his head so far up his backside it’s no wonder he has such a crappy outlook

Sometimes you have to gaze into the abyss if only to remind yourself that it actually exists. We sometimes forget who our enemies are. We often make the mistake of believing that the people who oppose us are people much like ourselves, just a bit misguided. Luckily these enemies have the same access to the internet as we do and frequently violate the old “better to keep quiet and be thought a fool than open your mouth and remove all doubt” rule.

The title of the piece is “NRA crowd cheered story of Milwaukee janitor killing two teens.”

During his speech at the National Rifle Association’s national convention in Indianapolis last week, Milwaukee County Sheriff David A. Clarke Jr. said he considers the law-abiding armed citizen to be “the great equalizer.”

He then told three anecdotes from Milwaukee in which legal gun owners used their firearms. The first was about Jeremy Rossetto, a Cudahy man, attacked while working at an apartment building in Milwaukee in March.

“He was being savagely beaten by three suspects, one wielding a small club,” Clarke said. “He told me afterwards he thought he was going to die. He was able to pull his firearm from its holster and deliver two shots, killing two of the suspects and saving his own life.”

The crowd cheered and whistled.

Now does that sound like a story of a janitor killing two teens? Or is it really the story of the NRA convention cheering the story of a man saving his own life?

The story continues with him relating how Sheriff Clarke talks about two more incidents, one where no shots were fired and one where one of three robbers was killed. He show what he really thinks of us here.

[Quoting Sheriff Clarke] “Those firearms, in the hands of law-abiding citizens, saved lives,” he said.

Theoretically. Maybe the dead perpetrators would have killed someone during their crimes, maybe not. Actually, those guns killed three people.

That’s his point. That’s what he can’t get past. You see, in his mind, these criminal assailants had as much right to remain living as the people they were attacking. In his tiny mind it is wrong to take the lives of the criminals and it is right to risk the lives of the victims. If you find yourself attacked by three people, one with a club, he would prefer you die or be grievously injured rather than allow you to use deadly force to preserve your life.

The last bit is just concern trolling.

The gun owners in Clarke’s anecdotes were found to have been acting within the law, and there are many who believe that such stories will eventually deter crime. But does it help that cause to cheer stories of people being killed?

Yes, Bruce, it does. Whenever an innocent person’s life and health is preserved, we rejoice. Whenever a criminal attack on a citizen is foiled, we rejoice. Whenever good triumphs over evil, we rejoice.

Killing can be a very ugly thing. Some people are very traumatized by it. Those are the very people who most need to hear our voices raised in praise so he never has to wonder if we think he did the right thing by preserving his own life or the life of another innocent person.

Here’s the speech

I guess we should be glad that they didn’t title the story “Gun-toting, racist mob applauds black Sheriff.”