I don’t know about you, but I’ve developed the habit of not carrying cash or coin in my daily life. Most of my large transactions (like paying bills) are online, and the smaller day-to-day stuff (bagel shop, grocery, gas) uses my debit card. When before I was disabled, I used to use cash and throw my change into a jar. And sometimes cash it in when times were tough. They are tougher now, but, I don’t generate any more change! 😦
I know. In TEOTWAWKI, I’m screwed.
Not that cash has real value as a medium of exchange, anyway.
SO, if you want a truly depressing read, go to the link here from Charleston Voice. Then
start continue hoarding canned and dry goods, water filters, ammunition, silver and medication. Oh, and toilet paper!
If you can afford to.
Seriously? The President finally comes out from his behind-the-curtain position on gun control (he’s NEVER had a pro-gun position in his entire political career), with yet another call for the reissue of the so-called Assault Weapons Ban. Based on previous utterings by his like-minded minions in Congress, a ban that has no sunset, and does have more bells and whistles!
Already there are predicted runs on commercial ammunition, components and firearms, especially those with the dreaded magic ‘over 10 and you can’t help but commit mass murder’ magazines, flash suppressors, bayonet lugs (because there have been so many drive-by bayonettings!), and the dreaded ‘shoulder thing that goes up’.
Which begs the question: How many guns do we NEED?
The answer: The right to keep and bear arms (if you buy the arguments of John Locke, Thomas Jefferson, George Washington, John Jay et al) is implicit in our humanity! Some say given from God. This means mere government cannot either issue, nor take way rights. The Bills of Rights isn’t a menu of the bill of fare available at government’s discretion (one from column A), it’s an enumeration of those rights already known and restrictions on government action. What if they tried to pass legislation regarding exactly how many letters-to-the-editor, blog posts, or redresses-of-grievance to government we were allowed? Or how many churches were authorized to exist by government? Or promoting warrantless seaches? (Whoops – they already did that!) Or limiting trial-by-jury (done) Or promoting cruel-and unusual punishment (most jails and prisons had color TV before I could afford one – just saying)
Okay, so my argument is flawed, because they (the United States Congress) has already abrogated many of our natural rights. This doesn’t mean this trend should continue, in fact, it should be reversed!
So, posing the question: How many guns do we NEED?
As many as we can afford is my direct answer.
Field & Stream asked this very question. And answered with a list of preferred hunting guns. I don’t think we’re on the same page.
They need to catch up, because it’s very possible we could end up like Great Britain or Australia, where violent crime is rampant, criminals have guns, and they are restricting glass beer mugs and restaurant cutlery!
Nope. I’m not saying this. I think every non-felon legal adult citizen has the right to own firearms to defend themselves, their family and their Nation. Regardless of race, creed, color or gender. (is that politically-correct enough? 🙂 )
Days of our Trailers brings to our attention statements from one Josh Sugarman, of the Violence Policy Center (hint: no membership, exclusively funded by the Joyce Foundation (translation George Soros) )
“Black women in America are almost always killed by someone they know, most often with a gun, and usually as the result of an argument…
93 percent (463 out of 499) of the homicides of black females were intra-racial (meaning that both the victim and offender were of the same race).
The average age of black female homicide victims was 35 years old.”
So the obvious solution as proposed by Josh Sugarmann of the VPC is to disarm black males (specifically between the ages of 18 and 65) since that would reduce gun homicides against black women by 93%.
Go and read the whole sickening thing. (and take side trips to DOOT’s links about the who’s who of the rights control bigots. Many funded by the aforementioned
Ernst Stavro Blofeld George Soros.)
What’s it for? Continue reading to find out.
This tool, known as an eprouvette, was used to test the strength of gunpowder. The user loaded gunpowder and fired. The explosive force pushed the gauge out. The further it moved, the stronger the gunpowder.
When an anarchist brings up the idea of abolishing the state around a statist they are usually met with a very Hobbesian argument. They claim that without the state humans would become vicious beasts roaming the world with the purposes of raping, killing, and stealing. Such a claim is absurd by its very nature:
Now, setting aside the fact that anarchism does not imply an absence of law or defense, and setting aside the fact that Hobbes’ ideas about the state of nature are completely ridiculous, just consider how interesting their claim was in that particular situation. Five armed men sitting in a field dozens and dozens of miles from a police officer having a civil chat about anarchism without any one of us trying to rape, rob or kill any of the others is a rather remarkable thing if Thomas Hobbes is right about human nature. Equally interesting is the fact that none of us feared or even contemplated the possibility of being raped, robbed or killed by anyone out there in the wilds of the Colorado plains that day. Like Coloradoans of the 19th century, we met scores of armed men over the course of the day, none of which we personally knew, and yet it never even crossed any of our minds to be concerned for our chastity, our wealth or our lives.
I’ve never claimed to be an anarchist, perhaps because today’s meme for anarchy consist of Lenin’s useful idiots, touting things like destruction of property and erosion of society as laudable goals. Funny how these folks always end up fomenting some-kind of totalitarian result.
Anyway, if you are looking for something besides Kate Middleton’s chest area on the Internet, you might find this essay of interest. – Guffaw
h/t Christopher Burg
I didn’t watch the first debate. Nor the second. Nor the third. I’ve three reasons for not doing so, to wit:
1. They are NOT debates, but rather stump speeches with responses. They don’t answer questions, just push their own agendas! (The President – Assault Weapons Ban, again!) (And Governor Romney – The Second Amendment is NOT about hunting!)
2. Not all viable candidates were asked to participate, and
3. The participants are not under oath when answering.
4. Why do I care what Tweedledee and Tweedledum have to say! Both are avowed statists with big government agendas. Not exactly my political stance.
“Government is not a solution to our problem, government is the problem.” – Ronald Reagan
My understanding, via the wisdom of the Internet, is the Republican took the first one, handily. The Democrat
interrupted and laughed a lot during the second. And CNN voted for the Republican both times. CNN! CNN said the President won last night.
Re: Gun Control (a rant) –
Mr. President, the Clinton Assault Weapon Ban did nothing to stop crime. Crime went down significantly when it finally sunset 10 years later. And virtually all the current statistics (except those from the totalitatian-loving, anti-rightist folks) show as there is more gun ownership today, and crime is down! I know you know this. Because gun control isn’t about stopping crime, it’s about controlling law-abiding citizens!
News Flash: Criminals don’t obey the law! (end rant)
Ultimately, the only ‘debate’ that matters in the one in the voter’s head on Election Day. All else is window dressing.
David White Wolf shares with us text (and link) of Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens trashing the rights of Americans, and misspeaking with regard to the actual law:
(Justice Stevens) [Miller] was generally understood to limiting the scope of the Second Amendment to the uses of arms that were related to military activities,” Stevens said today during a question-and-answer session after a speech today with the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence’s Legal Action Project. “The Court did not overrule Miller [in Heller]. Instead it ‘read Miller to say only that the Second Amendment does not protect those weapons not typically possessed by law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes, such as short-barreled shotguns . . . Thus, the Second Amendment provides no obstacle to regulations permitting the ownership or the use of the sorts of the automatic weapons used in the tragic multiple killings in Virginia, Colorado, or Arizona in recent years.
(Mr. Wolf) As y’all know, none of those killings involved automatic weapons (already legislated up the wazoo and pretty effectively prohibited from most private ownership, thank you very much), but rather semi-autos like you and I own and use for defense of our home and person.
One would have thought (at least I did) that an honored jurist with years of experience would know the laws about which he expounds!?
Of course, he was speaking at a Brady Bunch gathering…
Go and read the whole thing. Mr. Wolf is more graphic than I have been, and perhaps rightly so! – Guffaw
My right hand is only good generally for using a computer mouse.
Back-in-the-day, when I was an armed security guard, I carried left-handed. Many of those years I used my friend Dave (the
genius mechanic’s) Ruger Security Six – as I was gun poor.
We security folks even participated in competition, not unlike IPSC competition, but one had to be a licensed security guard to participate. (Burns, Pinkerton’s, Del Webb, all the big Valley security folks were invited.)
And I was dead-on with my right (OFF) hand, unlike most of the folks who couldn’t shoot their own foot with their left hand, if required to do so in the stage. Whenever there was a weak-hand stage, I was brought up to the front, because I as capable of actually doing it.
This was because I practiced with my right hand, both supported and unsupported.
Do YOU practice with your off hand? Both supported and unsupported?
In the real World, it might become necessary to shoot with your off-hand. Let’s hope not. You need both feet! 😛
A book written in 1995 by John Ross is a historical odyssey, about the history of gun control law in the United States, and it’s effect on the common citizen. It weaves this tale by showing how most of the Twentieth Century was spent abrogating our rights. The book is populated by both fictional and historical characters, making a blend of storytelling that is riveting.
There is sex. The book did have to sell.
I was brought back to the book by a blog post saying a link was available to download it FREE! Alas, the link does not seem to exist, anymore. And Amazon lists the book from around $100.00 to over $500.00.
Back-in-the day, I borrowed a friend’s copy, then mutual friends asked if they could borrow it. I obtained permission from the owner, and they did. And it became damaged! So, being persons of good faith, they ordered replacement copies, one each for my friend and for me! Direct from the author, autographed! I’m lucky enough to still have mine.
It IS a fairy tale. Having been published in the middle of the Clinton administration, many of the ideas brought forth to revert back to pre-gun control days were only that. Fairy tales.
But, we have come far, in spite of the continued assault on our rights by every administration since!
If you have a copy, read it again, just for the sheer joy of seeing some things in fiction having actually come true.PS – The image on the dust cover is a jack-booted-thug assaulting Justice. Neither the publisher or John Ross receive anything from me FTC – begone! PPS – Courtesy of Rev. Paul, here is a correct link! Thanks! Unintended Consequences pdf
I’ve always been fascinated about the real corridors of power. The underpinnings, not just that which is presented for public consumption. That’s probably one reason I became a private investigator and liked hanging out in the Old Phoenix downtown area. Back when half the men in suits were in Western-style suits and cowboy boots. And many carried guns. There were no permits, then.
It’s been said the mob never really controlled Arizona. But, this was a free-fire area for folks from Detroit, New York and Chicago. Connected folks.
The names Gus Greenbaum, Willie Bioff and Louis Bombacino are historic in the lore of mob killing in Phoenix. And let’s not forget the Don Bolles murder. Bolles was an investigative reporter who incessantly dug up dirt on mob toeholds in the State, and was blown-up for doing so.
I knew a bartender who worked at the I****** and the U**** T**** bars, known hangouts and meeting places for the Bolles bomber and his confederates. He confided in me he was harassed by local PD while he was giving prosecution testimony in the case!
These were not the usual known mob watering holes, like Rocky’s Hideaway or the Scotch Mist.
During the trial, my PI friend Harry (previously described in these pages) asked me if I wanted a piece of doing backgrounds on all the witnesses/participants/persons-of-interest. The list he showed me had many local dignitaries, including a prominent Senator, listed. At that time, I had a young family and confided in him that I’d just as soon not. Harry, always low-key, told me he understood, after all he’d known J***** N**** aka Louis Bombacino, before he was dispatched by the mob.
Guess the excitement of rubbing elbows with connected folks was a bit too real. Joe Bonanno still died peacefully in Tucson at age 97. Who knew?