Tag: Gun Rights

If That’s How You Feel

Dip shit Helmke of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Ownership is spewing out stupidity again. This is the second post in a row that I’ve sourced from Snowflakes in Hell.

I won’t link directly to the Brady Campaign site so you’ll have to go through Snowflakes in Hell to check this but here is a quote from Helmke:

“It is dangerous for Congress to dictate to Amtrak how to handle guns on passenger trains. Trying to micromanage Amtrak security is inappropriate at best, reckless at worst. But now that Congress has decided to allow passengers to be able to transport firearms in checked luggage on trains operated by Amtrak, at least their negotiators have responded to some of the safety concerns raised by gun violence prevention advocates.

Of course Snowflakes in Hell points how oxymoronic this statement is since Helmke said the exact opposite some time ago but I’m going to say something different about this.

I agree with Helmk *GASP* on one point. Congress shouldn’t be allowed to dictate the inner workings of a private company like Amtrak. But get this. Amtrak only exists because of federal government subsidies. Amtrak doesn’t actually make enough money to keep themselves afloat. So here is my proposal.

I say Amtrak be allowed to ban guns and run things however they want. But in exchange for this freedom they no longer are allowed to receive ANY tax payer money. Fair? Because while they receive MY tax money they will play by MY rules as much as I can make them.

Nerf Gun, The Same Thing as Real Gun According to Colorado University

More hysterical stupidity brought to my attention via Snowflakes in Hell. From this day forward Colorado University will be treating Nerf guns exactly the same as real guns. I’m glad I didn’t go there because I had several Nerf gun fights at my college. Also I can carry a gun on campus since I’m not a student or faculty of any college here in Minnesota.

Anyways Nerf guns are becoming popular on that campus for a fucking awesome reason:

Nerf guns have been popping up around CU this week, after some students started playing the popular game “Humans vs. Zombies.” It’s similar to the game of tag.

The humans are supposed to shoot the zombies with Nerf guns to keep them away.

I think this should be done at every college. We need more zombie defense and awareness training.

Congress Approves Amtrak Firearm Transportation

Good news everybody Congress voted in favor of allowing gun owners to transport their firearms in checked luggage when traveling on Amtrak.

Amtrak will be forced to reestablish their system for allowing firearms in checked luggage much like airports do. When this goings through I may actually consider Amtrak a viable transportation method.

The Second Amendment is Different From Other Rights

Via Sharp as a Marble we have a post on Walls of the City. It’s a list of different laws that would be on the books if other rights were shit all over as much as the second amendment. Here are some gems:

Anyone convicted of a felony or convicted of misdemeanor domestic abuse or assault is not allowed freedom of speech or religion and must rely on the government to provide speech and religion for them.
(1968 gun control act)

Many people in the gun rights community don’t like to touch this particular law. It’s probably due to the fact that nobody wants to be seen as supporting felons or people who abused their spouse. Personally I’m against either restriction and I’ll tell you why.

If you are worried a person who committed a heinous crime (well not just heinous crimes are felonies anymore, practically everything is becoming one) is going to commit an act of violence why the Hell is he out of prison? A huge majority of crimes are committed by repeat offenders which seems to imply somebody who has already committed a crime is more than willing to break another law (obtaining a gun while being a felon) to assist in a repeat offense.

Than you have those charged with domestic violence. If you’ve ever known somebody accused of domestic abuse you know the situation is probably anything but cut and dry. I have friends who have been accused by their significant other of physical abuse. Personally I refuse to take sides in such an argument but I can say the situation is dicey and the truth is usually impossible to drill down to. The fact that somebody can have their rights ripped away from them without absolute cut and dry evidence is a slippery slope to say the least.

But the bottom line is I’m against stripping anybody of any civil right.

Before engaging in new free speech you must pass an instant background check by a government authorized free speech dealer. Sorry, if your name is like someone else prohibited from speech and religion, it is up to you to prove you’re not that person.
(NICS instant background check and Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act of 1993)

Sounds pretty stupid when applied to free speech doesn’t it? How about to a right of trial by jury? Maybe you should be required to go through an instant background check before you have the right to not have your property searched without an issued warrant.

Any religions, peaceable assemblies, camera, computer, telephone or free speech enabling device made before 1986 is available to use by the general public. Any made after 1986 is only available to law enforcement.
(Closing of the NFA machine gun registry in 1986 by Regan with the Firearms Owner’s Protection Act)

Pretty straight forward. Once against sounds rather unreasonable when applied to religion and free speech.

Of course some gun control zealot will spew out a river of bullshit claiming you can’t compare the second amendment to any other amendment. This of course implies that the founding fathers of this country meant what they said with every right listed in the Bill of Rights except the second item posted. Seems odd that they would have made a random exception without noting it anywhere.

We Fight Fire With Fire

Here’s an example of how we fight back. A certain “news” organization by the moniker the Herald Times went and published a list of streets where people holding concealed carry licenses lived. Of course they did this in the name of safety.

So in the name of safety Gun Nuts Media present a database of streets with a Google map of streets where authorized journalists live. This is of course in the name of safety.

Your move Herald Times.

More on Wisconsin Microstamping

Snowflakes in Hell brings us more details on the impending Wisconsin microstamping legislation. First off the bill, titled AB 221, can be found here. The bottom line is that the bill is bad. Although all the provisions in the bill scare me this one is very interesting:

Fixing a broken pistol is now a misdemeanor, unless you get parts that make the correct microstamp. No replacing firing pins or barrels.

There you go, fixing a gun which you legally own will be illegal without getting parks that make the gun microstamp casings. This microstamping idea is beyond idiotic since it will cost gun manufacturers a fortune to implement, it will add parts to the gun making them less reliable, and it can easily defeated by criminals picking up their brass (or a cheap file). Those of you in Wisconsin now it the time to move against this.

Microstamping Hearing in Wisconsin

Snowflakes in Hell posted an article that again proves two things. First California is the gun control lobby’s testing ground and two if something passes there you can expect to see it coming to a state near you.

Remember microstamping? Yeah that technology that can’t be reliably implemented even though is going to be required soon in California. Well it looks like the anti-freedom zealots are trying to push it through in my backyard, Wisconsin. I wouldn’t be so worried for my Wisconsin friends by their firearm laws already suck pretty hard. If you live in that state get ready to fight this.

Strange Success Metric

Ah yes the Brady Campaign. They claim to be against violence but in fact they are against firearm ownership. How do we know this? Well Joe Huffman looks at their rating of success. According to Helmke stopping people from buying firearms is their success metric, not whether their bullshit reduced violence.

Incorrect Response

Another story via Says Uncle today. This one is aggravating to say the least.

What was the official response to the Fort Hood tragedy? Allow our soldiers to carry on base so they could defend themselves should another nutcase decide to start shooting the place up? No. Instead we get this:

Soldiers assigned to Fort Hood will have to register their personal firearms with the director of emergency services, he added. Fort Hood is home to some 50,000 active-duty soldiers and 18,000 of the soldiers’ family members.

The lack of logic of that response leaves me dumbfounded. So the directory of emergency services will now know who on base owns personal firearms and who types of firearms they are. So if one of them decides to go on a shooting spree they’ll have a better idea of what gun was used after many of our country’s finest are slain in a gun free zone.

How the Hell is this going to help anything?

Banning Rights of Those on the Terrorist Watch List

There has been a lot of stink from the anti-gun crowd saying we need to close the “terror gap.” It’s funny how everything is a gap to these people. What they really mean is we need to deny constitutional rights to people without do process. I think everybody knows now that the terrorist watch list is a secret list of names that you don’t actually have to do anything to get on.

Well Days of Our Trailers did a great post about the terrorist watch list. From his sourced posted there is a 35% error rate of the names on that list according to a Department of Justice audit. Of course I’m sure the gun control crowd doesn’t really care about that. After all they’re only OK with you having the rights they think you should have.