Category: Gun Rights

Missouri Law Makers Looking to Confiscate Firearms

It appears as though law makers in Missouri are looking to confiscate firearms:

Missouri Democrats introduced an anti-gun bill which would turn law-abiding firearm owners into criminals. They will have 90 days to turn in their guns if the legislation is passed.

Here’s part of the Democratic proposal in Missouri:

4. Any person who, prior to the effective date of this law, was legally in possession of an assault weapon or large capacity magazine shall have ninety days from such effective date to do any of the following without being subject to prosecution:

(1) Remove the assault weapon or large capacity magazine from the state of Missouri;

(2) Render the assault weapon permanently inoperable; or

(3) Surrender the assault weapon or large capacity magazine to the appropriate law enforcement agency for destruction, subject to specific agency regulations.

5. Unlawful manufacture, import, possession, purchase, sale, or transfer of an assault weapon or a large capacity magazine is a class C felony.

Why do so many gun control advocates continue to claim they’re not coming for our guns? It has become blatantly obvious that they are coming for our guns. Of course the state can say it has the power to confiscate anything it wants but that doesn’t mean people have to comply.

As a side note I just want to point out that more news organizations should provide helpful links to the text of bills being discussed in their stories. It’s greatly appreciated.

Olympic Arms No Longer Selling to Employees of the State of New York

It’s too bad Olympic Arms is currently unable to meet current demand for their rifles because their recent announcement makes me want to buy something from them:

Press Release: Olympic Arms, Inc. Announces New York State Sales Policy

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
Olympic Arms is a staunch believer in and defender of the Constitution of the United States, and with special attention paid to the Bill of Rights that succinctly enumerates the security of our Divinely given Rights. One of those Rights is that to Keep and Bear Arms.

Legislation recently passed in the State of New York outlaws the AR15 and many other firearms, and will make it illegal for the good and free citizens of New York to own a large selection of legal and safe firearms and magazines. We feel as though the passage of this legislation exceeds the authority granted to the government of New York by its citizens, and violates the Constitution of the United States, ignoring such SCOTUS rulings as District of Columbia v. Heller – 554, U.S. 570 of 2008, McDonald v. Chicago – 561 U.S. 3025 of 2010, and specifically the case of United States v. Miller – 307 U.S. 174 of 1939.

Due the passing of this legislation, Olympic Arms would like to announce that the State of New York, any Law Enforcement Departments, Law Enforcement Officers, First Responders within the State of New York, or any New York State government entity or employee of such an entity – will no longer be served as customers.

In short, Olympic Arms will no longer be doing business with the State of New York or any governmental entity or employee of such governmental entity within the State of New York – henceforth and until such legislation is repealed, and an apology made to the good people of the State of New York and the American people.

If the leaders of the State of New York are willing to limit the right of the free and law abiding citizens of New York to arm themselves as they see fit under the Rights enumerate to all citizens of the United State through the Second Amendment, we feel as though the legislators and government entities within the State of New York should have to abide by the same restrictions.

This action has caused a division of the people into classes: Those the government deems valuable enough to protect with modern firearms, and those whose lives have been deemed as having less value, and whom the government has decided do not deserve the right to protect themselves with the same firearms. Olympic Arms will not support such behavior or policy against any citizen of this great nation.

Olympic Arms invites all firearms manufacturers, distributors and firearms dealers to join us in this action to refuse to do business with the State of New York. We must stand together, or we shall surely fall divided.

Sincerely,

Brian Schuetz
President
Olympic Arms, Inc.

Emphasis mine. Were every firearm manufacture to follow Olympic Arms’s example New York politicians would likely find themselves having to repeal their recently passed gun control legislation or face the realization that their primary expropriators, the police, would be unable to expand their expropriation operations. After all, the state would find it very difficult to steal from the general population if they didn’t have an arsenal of weapons to backup their threats. Imagine the headaches that would be faced by various police departments in New York if Glock and Smith and Wesson refused to do business with them.

For now I will make a note to purchase an Olympic Arms rifle when they catch up on production.

Registration Leads to Confiscation

A recent move by politicians in California demonstrates why I will never register one of my firearms:

All semi-automatic rifles with detachable magazines would be banned, all guns would be registered and no ammunition could be bought without a special permit in California under a sweeping list of bills rolled out Thursday by state Senate Democrats.

The 10-bill package constitutes the single largest gun control push in decades in the Golden State, which already boasts some of the nation’s strictest gun laws. It joins equally controversial proposals from Assembly Democrats that would regulate and tax ammunition sales and consider taking the state’s 166,000 registered assault weapons from their owners.

Gun control advocates often claim that they want to compromise. When those of us in the gun rights movement refuse they claim we’re unreasonable. Truth be told gun owners have compromised numerous times and gun control advocates always want more. Gun owners compromised when they registered machine guns, short barreled rifles, and short barrled shotguns after the National Firearms Act was passed. After that gun control advocates demanded that gun owners cease interstate sales of firearms unless such sales were done through federally licensed dealers and agree that certain individuals be prohibited from owning firearms. Once again gun owners compromised and abided by the Gun Control Act. Then gun control advocates came for more, they wanted a ban on the transfer of all new machine guns. This compromise came when gun owners submitted to the Hughes Amendment to the Firearm Owners Protection Act. Still not satisfied, gun control advocates then demanded that all individuals wanting to buy firearms from federally licensed dealers submit to a background check, which gun owners compromised on by abiding to the terms passed into law by the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act.

From where I stand it appears that gun control advocates are the unreasonable ones. Gun owners have compromised with gun control advocates time and time again and time and time against gun control advocates demand more. It’s impossible to make agreements with individuals that continue to move the goal posts. Gun owners in California compromised with gun control advocates when they registered their “assault weapons” and now gun control advocates are trying to use that compromise to sieze those registered firearms. This is why I won’t compromise with gun control advocates in any way, shape, or form.

More People Submitted Notice to Carry at the Minnesota State Capitol

How can anybody be surprised by this news:

The number of people who have notified authorities they will be carrying loaded weapons in the state Capitol area has spiked since the DFL-controlled Legislature put gun-control on the agenda in the wake of the massacre of schoolchildren in Connecticut.

While there were 56 people filing such notifications all of last year, there have already been 148 notifications filed in the last month.

It is legal for a permit-holder to carry his or her loaded weapon into the state Capitol and most surrounding buildings — state Rep. Tony Cornish says he is armed every day, usually with a 40-caliber Glock with a high-capacity ammunition magazine. This past week, supporters of gun-owners’ rights have been a force at the nearby State Office Building, swamping committees that have been discussing background checks, bans on weapons and ammunition and other gun issues.

[…]

In all of 2012, when the pro-gun GOP held control of the Legislature, only 56 new notices were filed, according to a spokesman for the Department.

Based on this article it appears that the author is attempting to insinuate that the increase in notices is due solely to the Democratic Party taking control in the legislature. It’s not until the last paragraph that the real reason is mentioned:

Since Jan. 7, the day before DFLers took control and began talking about responding to the Connecticut shootings, there have been 148 notices filed. More More than 50 new notices were received from Feb. 1 to Feb. 6, which includes days the hearings were taking place in the State Office Building. That is nearly as much as were received all last year.

The sudden spike in notices wasn’t due to the Democrats taking control, it was due to the sudden push for gun control. People in the gun rights movement who carry everywhere and were planning to attend the hearing simply gave notice so they could do what they always do, legally carry a gun on their person. While the author notes that a mere 50 of the 148 notices this year were filed between February 1st and 6th he fails to note that the hearings were known about in January. Many people likely filed their notices as soon as the hearing dates were announced so they didn’t have to file their notices before entering the hearings.

In other words this story is really a non-story and required no more than one sentence to cover. What the author should have wrote was, “Gun rights activists who carry firearms everywhere carried their firearms when attending the hearings on gun control.”

Gun Control Advocates Should be Fighting to Disarm the Police

Gun control advocates claim they oppose gun violence yet only seem to want non-state agents disarmed. In fact gun control advocates want the state to keep its guns because people with guns are needed to take guns from people. In their holy war to convince others to become members of the gun control church the advocates of gun control make outlandish claims such as police officers are more responsible with firearms than the average person. Stories like this indicate otherwise:

Two women who were shot by Los Angeles police in Torrance early Thursday during a massive manhunt for an ex-LAPD officer were delivering newspapers, sources said.

The women, shot in the 19500 block of Redbeam Avenue, were taken to area hospitals, Torrance police Lt. Devin Chase said. They were not identified. One was shot in the hand and the other in the back, according to Jesse Escochea, who captured video of the victims being treated.

It was not immediately known what newspapers the women were delivering. After the shooting, the blue pickup was riddled with bullet holes and what appeared to be newspapers lay in the street alongside.

Here’s a picture of the aftermath:

Apparently the police didn’t feel the need to identify the occupants of the vehicle before firing over a dozen rounds into it. In all likelihood the officers involved in the shooting will go unpunished because they were fired on the truck under the guise of officer safety. Combining the words officer and safety generally grants immunity to any wrongdoing performed by a police officer.

The police prove to be more irresponsible than the average gun owner time and time again. I, nor anybody I know who carries a gun, would have fired rounds into a truck. In fact if I, or any other person who carries a gun, had fired rounds into a truck we would be locked in a cage and hearings would be held on newly proposed legislation to punish every other non-state gun owner. Most of the time police officers involved in shooting bystanders are granted administrative leave until the one week news cycle passes, at which point the officers involved return to work. How anybody can support disarming accountable individuals such as myself but not unaccountable individuals such as state agents is beyond my comprehension, especially when they claim to advocate my disarmament under the guise of stopping gun violence.

Controlling the Message During the Minnesota Gun Control Hearings

During Wednesday’s gun control hearings at the Minnesota State Capitol a gun control advocate was given three times the amount of speaking time she was allocated and when the gun rights advocates took the stage several members of the committee, including the author of the bill being discussed, simply left.

Yesterday gun rights advocates that arrived at the hearing early were alerted to a sudden and otherwise unannounced change, all attendees of the hearing had to get tickets and tickets were going to be handed out in a manner that ensure an equal number of gun control and gun rights advocates were present. The reason for this wasn’t given although I have a friend who works as a Page for the House that claimed it was established to maintain order. I’m sure that’s what they told him, and I’m sure he believed what they told him, but it’s pretty evident the true reason for establishing the ticket system was to control the message by making it look like there weren’t as many gun rights advocates present as there were. Between the shenanigans that took place Wednesday and yesterday it was apparent that the committee had their minds made and that the hearings were entirely for show.

Of course this shouldn’t surprise anybody. Once again we return to the fact that committee hearings aren’t about listening to input from proponents and opponents of a bill, they exist to make the serfs believe they have some kind of decision making power within the state. Unfortunately that isn’t the case.

Gun Ownership in Latin America

As this country continues to go the way of Rome I’ve been looking at escaping this sinking ship of a nation before things get too bad. While performing my research on foreign lands I came across an excellent podcast called The Expat Files. The Expat Files is a podcast done by John Mueller, a man who left the United States and has lived in various Latin American countries for over 20 years. The most recent episode discussed gun ownership in Latin America. Honestly, based on what Muller said, it seems many Latin American countries are freer than our own. He mentioned that many countries do have laws requiring registration, licensing, and the usual slew of gun control advocate demands but the laws are not enforced because most Latin American countries lack the resources to run a police state. On top of that many countries in Latin America don’t bother enacting gun control legislation because they know people, especially those living in rural areas, will simply ignore them. I also found it rather interesting that it’s normal to see individuals walking around with pistols strapped to their hip as we’re often told that the United States is one of the few countries that allow such activities.

Overall escaping this country and heading to a place where the state’s decrees aren’t enforced sounds better and better. It’s obvious that things are going well in the United States nor are they going to be improving anytime soon. Between the never ending wars, deflating currency, faltering economy, and draconian state the United States is becoming uninhabitable. If you’re interested in escaping this ship but want to keep participating in the shooting sports I’d advise you to listen to the lastest episode of The Expat Files because Latin America may be a better option than sticking around here.

How the Political Machinery Works

For the last three days there have been hearings at the Minnesota State Capitol building on the recently proposed gun control bills. So far gun rights advocates have greatly outnumber gun control advocates, which could make it seem as though gun rights advocates have a chance at shutting these bills down before they hit the floor. In an ideal world that would be the case but in the real world that’s not how things work. When you’re working within the political system you’re playing by the state’s rules, of which there is only one: the state gets to make the rules. Yesterday it became obvious that the hearings were nothing more than a sham, as hearing usually are. Gun control advocates were given disproportionately more time to speak and the author of the bill that was being discussed walked out when gun rights advocates were speaking.

It’s obvious that the people proposing this slew of bills have already made up their minds and that no amount of reasoning is going to dissuade them. Nobody should be surprised by this though, this is how statism works and why the political process is not an effective means of protecting your property.

Comments Regarding Obama’s Visit to Minneapolis

Mr. Obama visited Minneapolis on Monday to promote his scheme to disarm us serfs. The event was predictable as the video shows Obama standing at the podium giving his speech while members of Minnesota’s largest gang stand behind him in solidarity. Several highlights form the story merit some mention:

“You’ve shown that progress is possible,” Obama told an invited, sympathetic crowd at the Minneapolis Police Department’s Special Operations Center in north Minneapolis, where he highlighted the city’s success in reducing youth gun violence. In his first visit outside Washington, D.C., to promote his own anti-violence and gun-control agenda, Obama said the nation can make similar progress — if the public demands it.

By progress Obama means disarming the serfs. I would say that a majority of non-state gun control advocates truly believe they are working to prevent violence but the state supports gun control for an entirely different reason. The state, which can be considered the nobility, wants the serfs disarmed because disarmed individuals are easier to expropriate from. You can only take so much from the serfs until they have to make a decision between dying of starvation or disobeying the law. Once the serfs get to that point they inevitably decide to disobey the law and that usually leads to the nobility being booted out of power (sadly they are usually replaced with a new nobility). If the serfs are disarmed the time it takes them to reach the point of disobeying the law is increased as the cost of booting the current nobility out of power is greatly increased. This delay allows the nobility to kick the can down the street and, they hope, enrich themselves by expropriating fromt he serfs while making their successors deal with the consequences.

Obama was correct, Minneapolis has made progress. Unfortunately for us serfs that progress his detrimental to our health.

“The only way we can reduce gun violence in this country is if the American people decide it’s important,” Obama said. “We’re not going to wait until the next Newtown, or the next Aurora,” he added, referring to the massacre of schoolchildren in Connecticut and the gunman who shot up a theater full of moviegoers in Colorado.

Actually there is another, far more effective, way to reduce gun violence in the United States; end the war on drugs. The state’s war on drugs that haven’t been approved by the Food and Drug Administration has caused a major increase in violent crime (just as Prohibition did in the 1920s). Organized crime syndicates such as the Mexican drug cartels and the United States federal government have been using violence to eliminate their competition since the war on drugs was first declared. Ending the war on drugs would reduce gun violence, likely more than any other action. Once again we return to the fact that the state doesn’t care about violence, it only wants a disarmed populace to expropriate wealth from.

Meanwhile, Minneapolis Mayor R.T. Rybak expressed outrage at politicians who already were talking down the proposal’s chances. “Well, guess what?” Rybak said. “People are dying out there. I am not satisfied with the main sort of front from the people in Washington, that this is sort of a game. Where are the other people on this issue? Get a spine, get a backbone. People are losing their lives.”

Rybak was correct, people are dying out there, and his thugs in the Minneapolis Police Department (MPD) are killing them. We return again to the increase in violence crime caused by the war on drugs. The MPD has a rather colorful history of using its capacity for violence to steal from the serfs. In neighboring St. Paul the city’s police went so far as to kill a family’s dog, handcuff the present children and throw them down next to the dead dog, and interrogate the parents in the hopes of finding some justification for raiding the wrong address. Obviously Rybak isn’t serious about reducing gun violence in Minneapolis, he just wants the MPD to have a monopoly on it.

Since Obama was present a pro-Obama shill was brought in to argue in his favor:

John Souter, the sole survivor of Minneapolis’ Accent Signage shootings last September, said of Obama: “If we don’t have the moral courage to support the president of the United States, shame on us.” Souter, an Accent employee, was in the private session with Obama.

If we don’t have the moral courage to oppose a man who orders the execute of children, shame on us.

One of the most interesting aspects of Obama’s visit is that he supposedly came to Minneapolis because of the MPD’s progress in reducing gun violence. Yet the reduction in gun violence wasn’t credited to passing draconian gun control laws, it was credited to police directly interacting with youth:

Obama’s speech, before risers filled with Twin Cities police officers and sheriff’s deputies, focused on a city effort sparked by a spike in juvenile crime a decade ago. Known as the Blueprint for Action, it involved connecting young people with mentors, intervening in kids’ lives when necessary and getting students to “unlearn the culture of violence.” A progress report showed firearms-related assault injuries among youth had fallen from 159 in 2005 to 94 in 2011.

In other words Obama wants you to support gun control because the MPD’s programs of directly intervening with Minneapolis youth has correlated with a reduction in youth gun violence. How supporting gun control and the MPD’s program of directly intervening with Minneapolis youth are connection is beyond me.

In conclusion Obama’s visit went exactly as expected. The visit served no real purpose other than demonstrating that gun control isn’t about violence, it’s about control.

Why Didn’t Anybody Tell Me My LR-308 Could Blow Up Railroads

I want to know why nobody informed me that my LR-308 could knock jets flying at 30,000 feet out of the air and blow up railroads:

Rev. Jesse Jackson on Sunday repeated the debunked claim that semi-automatic and so-called assault weapons can “shoot down airplanes” — and added that they can also “blow up railroads.”

“Semi-automatic weapons are not just about gun control, they’re about national security,” Jackson said on Fox News. “You know that these weapons can shoot down airplanes, they can blow up railroads. This is really a whole national security issue.”

I’m also curious how I unlock this feature on my rifle. In three-gun competitions I use it to shoot at steel plates and it fails to penetrate them so I have a hard time understanding how it could blow up a railroad. Is there a special type of ammunition I’m supposed to use? Are there occult rituals I need to perform? Would somebody tell me how the hell I can get these features working? Shouldn’t shit like this be in the owner’s manual?