Glock Sales Surge

In case you couldn’t predict the bloody obvious Glock’s sales have surged have the shooting in Arizona. The anti-gunners are spouting bullshit about this being some kind of sick desire to own the gun that killed so many people when in fact it’s not.

The reason Glock pistol sales have surged all of the sudden is most likely due to the gun control legislation ideas being pumped out by Washington. One of their own was shot and they’re out for blood meaning they’re going to go after anybody they can. A target in the cross hairs of Washington right now is Glock because they made the tools which was used by the shooter. It’s just like how Washington goes after the manufacturers of getaway vehicles when one is used to commit a crime against… never mind I forgot gun are somehow responsible for crimes while other tools are not.

Either way people want to get Glock pistols before any legislation that may make them illegal (maybe a ban on polymer framed pistols or other such nonsense) starts moving. Why would somebody want one of these pistols? Because they’re fucking amazing tools. Frankly this kind of thing happens whenever a gun is used in a high profile crime so it’s not surprising in any regard. But it’s not due to some desire to have a memento of the shooting.

Better Than Us

Our “representatives” have been positively frothing at the mouth with gun control legislation ideas. A New York “representative” appropriately named King is going to introduce legislation that makes it illegal to carry a gun within 1,000 feet of a federal official.

Of course the crazy ass Arizona shooter wouldn’t have shot Gabrielle Giffords if this law was in effect because it would be illegal to carry said gun that close to her. You know they really should just it illegal to shoot somebody as that would be kind of a catch all for these types of situations… wait it already is. I guess we just have to find that one magical law that will make murdering psychopaths reconsider their desires because that makes sense.

The other interesting thing to wonder is what will be the definition of federal official. The federal government employs a great number of people and chances are you have be closer than 1,000 feet to one without even realizing it. How will we know who are federal officials and thus who we have to keep an arbitrary distance from when carrying? Will federal officials be forced to wear some kind of indicator, maybe a “I ban guns within an arbitrary distance of me” sign, as they walk around? I doubt dip shit King put any such thought into these questions as they are concerns only of the peasants of which he rules over.

I Don’t Think the News Reads the News

Notice something wrong with this article?

They have bemoaned the state of America’s political discourse, called for leadership in toning down heated rhetoric, speculated over whether this is a turning point for Barack Obama or Sarah Palin and puzzled over the shooter’s mental state.

But one thing that has scarcely been raised is gun control.

Riiiiiight. It’s not like Feinstein and McCarthy are dancing in the blood happy that they may have a tragedy needed to push through a restriction on arbitrary capacity magazines or anything… oh wait that’s exactly what they’re doing. Wait a minutes, the article contradict itself:

But here in the US, the only regulatory response so far has been to call for a ban on the sale of high capacity magazines like the sort that Jared Loughner allegedly used in Arizona, enabling him to shoot 31 bullets from a semi-automatic handgun without having to reload.

So gun control is scarcely being raised but gun control is being raised. This makes no sense whatsoever until you realize it’s just one long anti-gun article. Those anti-gunners never were too strong on brains nor the ability to write something that doesn’t contradict itself. Hell even I can write an entire article that doesn’t forget earlier parts of itself exist.

Information on Multiple Victim Shootings

After the event in Arizona is seems people are making claims that the number of multiple victim shootings has been on the rise. Well that’s not really true:

While Thomas didn’t refer to trends over a longer period than just three years, the numbers for the longer term are murky as well. To more easily analyze Fox’s data — which goes back to 1976 — we averaged the number of incidents for each five-year period (or, in the case of 2006 to 2009, a four-year period). Here are the results:

• 1976-1980: 20.6 incidents annually
• 1981-1985: 16.8
• 1986-1990: 18.2
• 1991-1995: 23.0
• 1996-2000: 20.0
• 2001-2005: 21.0
• 2006-2009: 25.5

More to the point it seems the number of incidents has been rather inconsistent. Of course somebody will point out that the period involving the lift of the “assault weapon” also followed by an increase in these incidents I’ll point out that the period involving the implementation and enforcement of the “assault weapon” ban was followed by an increase in these incidents as well and thus we can pretty much factor out that piece of legislation as having any effect on the number of these incidents.

The article is a good read.

A Bunch of Vultures

No sooner does the news of the Arizona shooting break does New York “Representative” Carolyn McCarthy talke about introducing new gun control regulations:

Many said that people with a history of mental instability, like the alleged shooter, Jared Lee Loughner, should not be able to buy a gun — and no one should be able to buy stockpiles of ammunition used by the 22-year-old assailant.

Hold the bus. At least when you talk about magazines with an arbitrarily sized capacity you can claim it has some kind of relevance to the shooting maybe. But talking about stockpiles of ammunition? Really? How much ammunition did the man have on him? Sure he may have owned 100,000 rounds of ammunition but that doesn’t mean shit if he’s only to carry a small percentage of that. In case that dumb bitch McCarthy didn’t realize ammunition has weight and size meaning you can only carry a finite amount. So how does having a stockpile change anything? The answer is it does and McCarthy is just a fucking tool. Oh and she isn’t the only dipshit:

Pennsylvania Rep. Robert Brady, a Democrat from Philadelphia, told CNN that he also plans to take legislative action. He will introduce a bill that would make it a crime for anyone to use language or symbols that could be seen as threatening or violent against a federal official, including a member of Congress.

Wait isn’t threatening violence against a federal official already illegal? Yes, yes it is. Don’t believe me? Well you could always try it and see where it lands you (here’s a hint, in prison). I do love how they law will only involved federal officials and not threats against lowly little peasants like you and me. After all they’re not our representatives but our rulers. We also have a fuck face from Illinois:

Another vocal supporter for gun control, Illinois Rep. Mike Quigley, told POLITICO that he hopes “something good” can come from the Arizona tragedy – perhaps discussion on a new assault weapon ban, sales at gun shows and tracing measures.

Yes because banning arbitrarily sized magazines helped reduce violence last time it was in effect… wait no it didn’t. We also have this golden quote:

“The ability to buy a weapon that fires hundreds of bullets in less than a minute,” said Quigley. “He had an additional magazine capability. That’s not what a hunter needs. That’s not what someone needs to defend their home. That’s what you use to hunt people.”

What the fuck do hunters have to do with the second amendment? Exactly nothing, the second amendment wasn’t put into place to allow hunting it was put into place to allow the citizenry to overthrow a tyrannical government. We also have a quote from another gun control nutcase:

“I’ve seen no evidence that he falls into those categories. It’s the same thing as this guy at Virginia Tech,” said Horwitz. “We can do a much better job checking people’s mental health background.”

No we really can’t “do better.” Crazy often doesn’t manifest until the person decides to, well, be crazy. No expansion of background checks will allow for every person with bad intentions to be caught. You can’t detect evil plain and simple.

You have to be appalled at these people who waste not time to swoop in on a tragedy and use the death of six people to forward their political campaign by pretending they’re looking out for your safety when in fact they’re doing the exact opposite.

Such Much for No Compromise

Gun Owners of America (GOA) like to tout the line that they’re the only “no compromise” gun rights organization in the United States. As far as I can tell their main reason for existence is to bitch and whine instead of doing real work. Likewise their whole idea of “no compromise” apparently only goes so far. As Snowflakes in Hell points out the head of GOA believes gun rights only extend to American citizens:

But Gun Owners of America Executive Director Larry Pratt says the state has every right to restrict conceal and carry permits to citizens.

“If the guy wants to enjoy the full benefit of residing in the United States become a citizen. He’s been here for 30 years what’s he waiting for?,” Pratt told FoxNews.com.

Pratt says the only reason the ACLU brought the suit is to pave the way for illegal aliens to have conceal carry permits.

“They want to make it so illegal aliens have the same rights as everybody else…every little bit chipping away,” he said.

The person in question here is Wayne Smith a man who legally immigrated here 30 years ago. He’s been here legally so I really can’t see how this case will allow illegal aliens to apply for carry permits but honestly I don’t believe anybody should need a permit to carry a gun regardless of who they are. Likewise I find it disgusting that Larry Pratt would be such a hypocrite by stating his organization is “no compromise” while he’s will make compromise on things such as making a justification on why we should need to beg the state of exercise our right to bear arms. Furthermore Mr. Smith has held a carry permit for years:

The lawsuit was filed this week on behalf of British national Wayne Smith, who legally immigrated 30 years ago, and for years was able to get a concealed license. In 2002, however, South Dakota amended the law, making U.S. citizenship a requirement to carry a concealed weapon. When Smith went to renew his long-held permit last July, he was denied because he is permanent legal resident, not a citizen.

Ironically the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) is the organization who is bringing up the lawsuit against South Dakota. The ACLU doesn’t have a friendly history as far as the second amendment goes but even they’re less willing to compromise on the revocation of a person’s carry permit. What does that say about Mr. Pratt? Frankly I think it says he’s a prick in the highest form.

The Impossible is Back

The Armed Citizen blog is back online with all those impossible stories of people defensively using firearms. It looks like those fuckers over a Righthaven (who are also suing our local Minnesota gun forum) didn’t end up getting the domain name which is good news for us and bad news for the anti-gunners who claim firearms are seldom ever used for defensive purposes.

New Hampshire Doing it Right

It seems New Hampshire is working hard and ensuring they’re known as the free state. Today the new Legislature convened and one of the first things to go was the stupid ban on carrying weapons into the House floor. Now people entering the House floor may carry a firearm so long as it’s concealed (display is still banned).

I’m going to wait for the anti-gunners to claim there will be blood running through the House with the lift of this ban.

Blood in the Streets

Now that the Heller case has been concluded and firearms are no longer all but banned in Washington D.C. the homicide rate must be through the roof. Blood must be flowing through the streets with the increased number of firearms. People must be cowering in fear with all the violence that has occurred because of the Heller case.

Wait… what’s that? Oh homicide rates in Washington D.C. fell by 9% in 2010? I guess the anti-gunners were wrong yet again. It’s almost as though this is no correlation between gun control laws and homicide rates.

Ruger LC9

As promised Ruger introduce a new firearm yesterday, meet the LC9. It’s nothing too jaw dropping really, yet another compact carry pistol. This one appears to be a scaled up version of the LCP chambered in 9mm and built with a manual safety (not a big fan of that particular feature myself). Nothing amazing or unique here but we’ll see what the user reviews end up saying.