Published on Dec 2, 2016
Have you heard this phrase? "You're a NURSE! I can't BELIEVE you actually carry a gun! Aren't you supposed to want to help people? How can you be against 'universal healthcare'? " Oh, we're TOTALLY going there today.
Before you could apply as an individual or a trust. As an individual you needed local LE approval and had to do a background check and fingerprint card. Now you don't need local LE approval, but you have to provide them with a copy of everything you submit to ATF, individual OR trust. So there is no advantage when applying as a trust now. A person can inherit a SBR without problems if it is in a will, so again no need for a trust. So the trust had any advantages taken away.
Another thing, if you cross state lines with a SBR you must inform ATF for "permission" which can take 3 to 4 weeks. However, if you can restore the SBR to a non-SBR weapon, then you don't need the permission to cross state lines. Example, I am close to Indiana and have gone across the border to shoot an a gun club up there. I could remove the folding stock from my theoretical SBR, put the original butt plate back on, go to Indiana and then put the folding stock back on, if an SBR is legal to have in Indiana. Crazy eh?
Interesting about the Galil. The IDF soldiers I knew hated it and far preferred the AK47 or the M16 [early 1980's]. The major plus was a bottle opener. I am sure the weapon has been improved over the years. The M4 wasn't out there as a issue weapon when I was there. Most videos I have seen the last few years have shown the IDF carry M16 variants, although a video I found on utube from 2009 stated the IDF is moving to the domestic Tavor, I also found a tour of the factory from 2013. I have never seen a Tavor in action. The factory tour/range video is ok to know what they are producing, but there is some propaganda and hyper promotion toward Israeli weapons. Less BS and more actual facts would have improved the video.
I can attest the Maglula Uplula is a great little device. Really saves on the wear and tear on your thumb during a full day at the range. I highly recommend it.
On a side note, look out for counterfeits. Yes, seriously, they're out there. Once again, if the price seems too good to be true, it probably is. After some searching, I got mine for about $26. The Amazon link above ($23.95) is a very good deal.
Today we will ponder America, a country, even a civilization, that existed long ago where the United States is today, but bore little resemblance to it. It will be like studying cave drawings, or Sargon of Akkad. Pay attention. The is original source material of historical importance.
I was there, in America: Athens, Alabama, at age twelve.
Athens was small and Southern, drowsy in summer, kind of comfortable feeling, not much concerned with the outside world. It left the world alone and the world left it alone. In those days, people in a lot of places figured this was pretty workable.
Kids went barefoot. So help me. After about two weeks in spring your feet got tough and you could walk on anything, except maybe gravelly black asphalt that got hotter than the hinges. Parents let you do it. Today I guess it would be a hate crime, and you’d get an ambulance, three squad cars and Child Protective Services all honking and blowing and being important. We didn’t know we needed protecting. Maybe we didn’t.
It wasn’t like today. When your dog wanted to go out, she did, and went where she thought was a good idea, and nobody cared, and she came back when she thought that was a good idea, and everybody was content. She probably slept on your bed, too. Today it would be a health crisis with the ambulance and squad cars. We just didn’t know any better. I don’t remember anybody dying of dog poisoning.
Now, BB guns. We all had one, every kid that was eleven years old. Boy kids, anyway. Mostly they were Red Ryder, for four dollars, but I had a Daisy Eagle, that had a plastic telescopic sight, and was no end uptown. I was always aristocratic. Anyway, you could go into any little corner store and get a pack of BBs for a nickel.
In downtown Athens–there was about a block of it, around the square–there was the Limestone Drugstore. It’s still there, like them pyramids at Geezer. Kids came in like hoplites or cohorts or hordes, or anyway one of those things in history and leaned their BB guns near the door, with their baseball gloves too usually.
Nobody cared. We didn’t shoot each other with the BB guns because we just didn’t. It’s how things used to be. We didn’t need the po-leese to tell us not to do it because it wasn’t something we did. Shooting another kid was like gargling fishhooks or taking poison. You could do it, but probably wouldn’t.
Anyway the man that owned the Limestone was about eighty or a hundred years old and had frizzy red hair like a bottle brush and his name was Coochie. It’s what everyone called him anyway. He liked little boys–not like those Catholic preachers always in the newspapers–we didn’t do that either–but just liked kids. There was this big rack of comic books that nobody ever bought but you just took them to a table and read them till they fell into dust and drank cherry cokes and ate nickel pecan pies. I think Coochie used comic books as bait so he could talk to us. It was mighty fine.
We all had pocket knives, or mostly anyway. If you were rich you had a Buck knife. That was the best kind. We’d take them to school because they were in our pockets and it was hard to leave your pocket somewhere even if you thought of it. You could carve your initials on your desk when the teacher wasn’t looking.
Today if you had a knife in school you’d get the squad cars and ambulance and get handcuffed and have to listen to a psychologist lady until you wanted to kill someone. Probably her.
It was different then, back in America. We didn’t think of stabbing anybody. It would have seemed like a damn fool idea, like eating a peanut butter sandwich dipped in kerosene. It wasn’t how people were. I guess how people are is what they’re going to do, not what laws you have. You can tell a possum to sing church songs, but he won’t, because a possum just doesn’t have it in him. It’s not how he is.
When you shot a BB gun at something that needed shooting, like an insulator of a telephone pole, it was like a thing of beauty. You could see the BB sail away, all coppery and glinty against blue sky and it was like a poem or something. Maybe anyway. You could see it start to drop when the speed wore off and go sideways a little with the wind where there was any. You learned to calculate and you could hit just about anything.
Lots of things was different. Water fountains on the town square said White and Colored, White folks and black people didn’t mix at all. I thought it saved trouble for everybody but people from up North said it was wrong and I guess it was. Now the black folks up north are killing each other by hundreds, the papers say, and I’m not sure why that’s a good idea, but then blacks in places like Newark and Detroit have really good schools because Northerners really care about blacks and they mostly go to Harvard, so I guess it’s a lot better.
Another thing you could do with a BB gun was to get a twelve-gauge shotgun shell which you could do in several ways. You might steal it from your dad’s gun rack if he had one, or stick it inside a roll of toilet paper in a store and buy the toilet paper. But I don’t know anything about that. Anyway you could cut the shell off just in front of the powder and put the powder and primer on the end of the barrel of the BB gun. Pow! A spray of orange sparks would shoot into the air. It was real satisfying. It may not have been real smart.
Finally, manners, morals, and language as practiced in America. As boys, which is to say small barbarians in need, when alone together, of socialization, we insulted each other. “I’ll slap the far outa you, you no-count scandal.” I will slap the fire out of you, you scoundrel of no account. Or, “You ain’t got the sense God give a crabapple.” But, barefoot and tatterdemalion though we might be, or in fact certainly were, the elements of civilization had been impressed on us. We did not cuss or talk dirty in the presence of girls or women. We didn’t curse out teachers neither. I don’t rightly know what would have happened if someone had tried it. No one did. We weren’t that kind of people. It’s the kind of people you are that counts.At least, that’swhat I reckon. Even at twelve, I had that figured out.
Finally ... someone speaks the truth There's a video here, but I am unable to embed it.
follow the link. I'd say she kicks MSM directly in the balls, but since they don't have any, it is a metaphorical kick.
NRA spokeswoman becomes new face of gun rights movement
TAMMY WEBBER,Associated Press 7 hours ago
CHICAGO (AP) — Dana Loesch is the new public face of the National Rifle Association, an organization long associated with older white men.
At 39, she's poised, photogenic and a skilled public speaker, yet she's not softening the message of the NRA as it becomes an increasingly active voice in the nation's culture wars, with positions on everything from immigration to the media.
In the aftermath of the shooting deaths of 17 people, mostly students, at a Florida high school, it's Loesch who has been the NRA's main messenger.
The NRA dispatched Loesch last week to a CNN town hall, where she was questioned by students and parents from Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, the site of the Valentine's Day shooting. Often brash and combative, Loesch was measured and even-tempered, though she was booed when she left the stage.
Charlie Sykes, a longtime conservative radio host who has been critical of the NRA, said Loesch's skill is communicating with a broad range of Americans while retaining the ultra-conservative base built by Wayne LaPierre, the NRA's executive vice president and CEO since 1991.
"Imagine Wayne LaPierre sitting in that seat and you realize the significance of Dana," Sykes said. "She can bring the hot sauce without having that persona" of an angry white man.
Even before taking over as NRA spokeswoman last year, Loesch had a robust conservative following, cultivated on social media — she has 765,000 Twitter followers — and through years of television and radio appearances, including on her own radio program, "The Dana Show."
The day after the televised town hall, she was back in her more familiar mode, speaking to a far friendlier audience at the Conservative Political Action Conference near Washington. Loesch defiantly defended NRA's 5 million members, who she said "will not be gaslighted into thinking that we're responsible for a tragedy that we had nothing to do with."
And, her voice dripping with condescension, she addressed journalists from the mainstream media, who she said "love mass shootings" because "crying white mothers are ratings gold."
Her criticism of the media recalled an NRA video last summer in which she attacked The New York Times in a way that some on the right and the left feared could incite violence. In the video, Loesch said NRA members have "had it" with the newspaper's "fake news" and warned: "Consider this the shot across your proverbial bow. ... In short? We're coming for you."
Loesch was back on television Sunday, defending NRA members and arguing against calls to ban semi-automatic weapons like the one used in the Florida school shooting. "This is not the fault, nor are 5 million innocent law-abiding Americans culpable for this," she said on ABC's "This Week."
In response, David Hogg, a senior at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, said students were focused on countering Loesch as they campaign for tighter gun laws.
"If you listen to her speak, she's not really saying anything. She's sounding positive and confident and that's what she wants the people in the NRA to believe, her 5 million plus members," Hogg said on CNN. "She wants them to think that she's on their side, but she's not. She's actually working with the gun manufacturers."
Shannon Watts, founder of Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America, said she was not in the least reassured by Loesch's appearance at last week's town hall, especially after she attacked the media the following day.
"She's younger. She's a woman and a mom. She's television-ready," Watts said. "But her rhetoric is just as radicalized, if not more, than Wayne LaPierre's."
Loesch grew up in a blue-collar family in a small Missouri town near St. Louis, reared mainly by her mother after her parents' divorce. She told The Times that she recalls her grandfather hunting deer and raccoon, but also a night her grandfather stood on the porch with a shotgun to protect her aunt from an estranged husband.
"Looking back, I think I always wanted to know that I was safe," she told the newspaper for an article published last month.
Loesch studied journalism at Webster University, but dropped out when she became pregnant with her first son. She soon began writing a blog about motherhood and started her radio program. She later helped found the St. Louis tea party and had stints as a political analyst at Breitbart News Network and The Blaze.
Loesch, who has said she keeps a handgun near her bed and has a tattoo on her forearm with a reference to a Bible passage calling for Christians to wear holy armor, has never been afraid of being provocative.
During a 2012 radio show, Loesch said she didn't have a problem with Marines who urinated on dead Taliban soldiers, declaring: "I'd drop trou and do it too."
Associated Press writer Darlene Superville in Washington contributed to this report.
This story has been corrected to show that Loesch has 765,000 Twitter followers, not 46 million; she has 46,000 likes
In New York (the state, not just the city) there’s a rather Orwellian gun bill on the table that would require would-be firearm purchasers to turn over 3 years of their social media history and one year of their internet search history if they want to buy a gun.
“A three-year review of a social media profile would give an easy profile of a person who is not suitable to hold and possess a firearm,” said Brooklyn Borough President Eric Adams, who has proposed the legislation with New York State Senator Kevin Parker. (source)
Applicants to purchase a gun would be required by law to turn over their social media passwords to accounts like Twitter, Facebook, Snapchat, and Instagram, and they’d have to allow police to see a year’s worth of their searches on a year’s worth of searches on Google, Yahoo, and Bing. As well, anyone renewing their permit for a pistol would be subject to this invasive investigation.
Now, for those of you sitting there saying, “That’s fine, I don’t use social media and I use Duck Duck Go or StartPage” this is great – for now.
How long do you think it would be before other outlets like blogs where you comment or these different search engines are added to the list of things that are searched? Trust me, if it gets passed, this is a greasy slide straight to the bad place.
What will the police be looking for?
According to a write-up on the Democrat and Chronicle, a daily newspaper in Rochester, NY:
Police would be required to look for evidence the applicant searched for or used racist or discriminatory language, threatened the safety of another person, inquired about or alluded to an act of terrorism, and, finally, “any other issue deemed necessary by the investigating officer.” (source)
Think for a moment about how much the investigating officer’s bias would come into play here. In some ways of thinking, people who say “all lives matter” are considered the epitome of racism even when taken out of context.
And what about a couple of women talking about a breakup using heated language in a conversation about the ex who has become the enemy? Are they really going to act on it or are they just blowing off some steam?
Then I think about my search history regarding terrorism – I’m a blogger, for goodness sakes. My search history is a dark place. What if you’re researching what kind of gun you want to buy and you’re looking up things like “stopping power” or some other thing the anti-gun folks consider “scary” that is a completely legitimate question in reality?
And “any other issue deemed necessary” is just far, far too broad to provide any comfort whatsoever that the investigations would be fair and impartial. All of this is completely subjective. Anyone with a dark sense of humor, regardless of their sanity or upstanding citizen-ness, is going to be in for a hard time.
This social media and search history bill is unconstitutional on so many levels.
If you think it takes a long time now to get a gun or a carry permit (it can be weeks to months in some states), imagine how long it would take if officers are poring over everything on your laptop for the past 3 years. People in those areas would be waiting for far longer to make a purchase they’re allowed to make by the Second Amendment of the constitution.
Then there’s the dirty little pre-crime aspect of the whole thing. Eric Adams, one of the founders of this bright idea, said it was just basic police work. “If the police department is reviewing a gang assault, a robbery, some type of shooting, they go and do a social media profile investigation.”
But as the Foundation for Economic Education points out, in those cases, police are investigating a crime, not trying to predict one.
First, comparing the search of a prospective gun buyer’s internet history to routine police investigations is odd. When an assault, robbery, or shooting occurs, police are investigating a crime. That is not the case with someone trying to buy a firearm; the buyer is simply trying to make a lawful purchase. This bill is closer to what one might call pre-crime, an idea that has served as a plot device in dystopian literature for more than half a century. (The 2002 Tom Cruise movie Minority Report, a story that centers around a state that has figured out how to stop crimes before they happen, was based on a 1956 Philip K. Dick novel.) (source)
This complete lack of privacy for gun owners is also concerning. Remember, it isn’t just new gun owners who would have to submit to this investigation – any gun owner who wants to keep his or her firearm in a place where permission must be renewed would be subject to an invasive search every time they were up for renewal. This, to me, slips into the realm of unreasonable searches, against which we are protected by the 4th amendment.
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. (source)
Buying a gun is not a crime, which means there is no probable cause, right?
And who gets to decide whether something is hate speech? Ask any two people if a statement is hateful, and you’re likely to get two different answers. It all depends where you’re coming from. If some self-loathing, social justice warrior type is the one investigating versus some rigidly alt-right traditionalist, they’re going to see the social media commentary of a person very differently. You simply cannot make sweeping laws like this and leave the enforcement up to human beings who have their own biases without setting up a system of unfairness.
Additionally, there is the issue of defining hate speech, a notoriously nebulous term. (Europe has already shown where the road of state-regulated hate speech takes us.) What authority would determine what speech qualifies as “hateful”? To deny someone a fundamental right based on the state’s interpretation of “hate speech” would be an affront to constitutional principles. (source)
These people want to “protect” us right into dystopia.
But they don’t enforce the laws we already have.
They’re not even enforcing the gun control measures already in place.
The folks who want to make it more difficult for innocent people to exercise their second amendment rights should perhaps focus on the laws that are already in place instead of heaping even more of the onus on innocent people.
Several of last year’s mass shootings would not have occurred if those laws were enforced.
Nicolas Cruz, who shot up the high school in Florida. had serious mental health issues that were not properly reported and documented. Had they been, he would not have been able to purchase a gun – at least not legally.
And Devin Patrick Kelly, the guy who shot up a church in a small town in Texas, had a dishonorable discharge for violently assaulting his wife and child. Had the military reported this as they were obligated to do, he would not have passed the background check. He would not have been able to legally purchase those guns either.
We must ask ourselves this question seriously.
If we don’t enforce the gun laws that are already on the books, what good will more gun laws do?
More laws will mean that innocent people have a greater burden and that bad people will continue to flout the law with no fear of repercussions.
I don’t want to lose my right to protect myself just because government agencies aren’t taking seriously their responsibilities in preventing crimes.
Devin Kelley should not have been able to buy a gun according to the current laws. But the Air Force did not follow them.
Nikolas Cruz flat out told everyone he was going to be a school shooter. But the FBI didn’t do anything to stop him. He had years of history of mental illness and behavioral problems. But these issues were not reported to the database that would have prevented him from purchasing a gun.
Is the problem really with law-abiding, innocent gun owners? Or is it more reasonably with the authorities who aren’t abiding by the responsibilities charged to them and the people who are intent on killing? (source)
What good will more laws do? The proposed bill will cost extra money for anyone who wants to buy a gun, lengthen the waiting period, and rule out people based on the whims of the investigator.
Remember, these things never stop with just one state.
It’s easy to scoff and say, “Those crazy people in New York are getting what they voted for.” I know someone’s going to say it so there, I said it for you.
But that’s short-sighted, and dare I say, ignorant of the way the world works.
Look at all the states that have recently flipped from red to blue in the midterm elections. If you don’t think it could ever happen where you are, you’re not paying attention. Please keep in mind that I am neither a Democrat nor a Republican, but am referring to some party generalizations here.
Democrats, who tend to lean more toward gun control measures than Republicans, took over the House of Representatives in the midterm elections. They also won 7 governor’s seats that were previously held by Republicans. A Democrat won a Senate seat in Montana, for crying out loud, long known to be a conservative stronghold.
There has been hard blowback against President Trump which will leave ripples in future elections for decades. In fact, I don’t recall in my adult life ever seeing a president so hated, disrespected and maligned. And the people doing the most maligning are the ones with the biggest microphones – namely, the mainstream media and Hollywood.
It’s not a stretch of the imagination to suggest we could soon see a dramatic shift in the United States that will open the door to all sorts of controlling “greater good” kinds of things.
Greater good. You know, like searching people’s computers before letting them own or keep their guns.
If this passes in New York, it won’t be long before it passes in California. Then in Massachusetts. Then it will spread, like a gun control virus. And it won’t be long until we see something introduced in the US Congress.
All of these new gun control measures are a scary, Orwellian slope and we’re slipping down it a little more every day.