David Codrea:

Dear Capt. Kelly,

Houston, we have a problem: Your story makes no sense.

You’re against rifles like the semiautomatic AR-15, which look like weapons of war, when you know full well the military doesn’t use them, but instead uses the select fire-capable M16. Yet you go to a dealer to buy a .45, a sidearm, which was actually, in your words, “designed for the military.” I’m not following your logic here.

You say as you were leaving the gun store, you noticed a used AR-15 and bought that, too. You then complain about your background check, and use that to attack private sales which don’t undergo background checks. I’m not following your logic here.

Consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds.  Or at least this is so for progressives.  Recall:

Yes, the left still loves guns.  There is no other reason for the fawning acceptance of the vulgar SWAT raid tactics in which innocent men like Mr. Eurie Stamps get shot and killed.  These tactics are repeated all across America every day. The left just doesn’t love guns in the wrong hands, and anyone who isn’t an agent of the state is the wrong hands.

Read the rest at Examiner.  Mr. Kelly doesn’t feel the need to be consistent like he demands for the little people.  He’s special and we’re not.  We’re the little people.  We look to the government for our protection, but he decided that he can do better than that for himself.

So thinks and lives our elitist rulers.

In the spirit of the amusing names we have been called, from Stone Age Vigilantes, to Tinfoil Hat Bircher NRA Peckerwood With A Long Gun, to finally the realm of people without much education or any sort of consistent dental care who live in trailers with 30 cats and have an NRA sticker on their $400 car, today brings a new one.

Gun paranoiacs.  I’m so conflicted.  I can’t decide which one I like the best.  I think stone age vigilante appeals to me the most.  How about you?

Ammoland has two extremely depressing reports.  We already knew that Eric Cantor and Paul Ryan were pretend conservatives with plans to cave on universal background checks.  This first report makes it sound even worse.

[The] Republican Majority Leader is leading the charge to cut a deal with President Obama.

The following are just some of the threats to innocent school children and our God-given 2nd Amendment liberties that Republicans are about to shove down our throats:

1.The NRA is cutting backroom deals to centralize gun owner data collection into the Obama/Holder massive government data base.

A centralized system is less costly to fight and far more lucrative for the NRA to appear to be “fixing“.

Like all establishment political lobbies the key to their job security is assisting in making problems they end up being called upon to “fix“.

2. Republican Majority Leader Eric Cantor is leading the charge to give Obama and Holder what they want in exchange for appearing to be “fixing” the problem of innocent children being butchered in our public and private schools.

3. Newly appointed Republican Judiciary Chairman, Bob Goodlatte R-VA 6th District, is providing political cover for the sneaky back room gun control deals and gun grabbing sell outs that his political masters – – John Boehner and Eric Cantor – – are cutting with Obama and his corrupt Attorney General, Eric Holder.

Political insiders have confirmed to me,  that Goodlatte earned his brand new chairmanship by ignoring the constitutional demands and grievances of every Republican Unit Chairman in his own 6th district.

And for the second report.

You might think that with Republicans in control of the US House of Representatives there would be no way ANY gun control legislation could reach the floor.

But sadly we are already beginning to see so-called “conservative champions” folding to pressure from the anti-gun media to sell-out gun owners.

Former Vice Presidential candidate, Congressman Paul Ryan, has stated that he would support legislation that bans private sales at gun shows.

In the House, Majority Leader Eric Cantor, along with the help of Rep. Scott Rigell (VA), Patrick Meehan (PA) and others, have stated openly that they will work together with anti-gun Democrats from Maryland and New York to tighten restrictions on private firearms sales and expand background checks.

Possibly even more upsetting has been Senator Tom Coburn’s willingness to work alongside anti-gunner Chuck Schumer (NY) to propose “bi-partisan” anti-gun legislation in the Senate.

Make no mistake, so-called “expansion” of background checks is little more than a blatant attempt by anti-gunners to register all firearms and gun owners in America.

That is why Representatives Steve Stockman (TX-36) and Paul Broun (GA-10) have drafted a letter to Speaker Boehner and the Republican leadership urging them to require the support of the majority of Republican members in the House before bringing any anti-gun bills to the floor.

This so-called “Hastert Rule” would mean that 117 Republicans would have to support a particular bill before it had any chance of getting a floor vote, not just the support of the anti-gun elitist in leadership.

Such political ploys would be unnecessary if the GOP weren’t filled with such weasels.  I cannot vouch for the accuracy of these reports, but I have followed Cantor and Ryan for a while now on firearms freedoms and gun rights, and it doesn’t surprise me in the least.

It’s fascinating that the GOP leadership would be willing to sacrifice their careers on the altar of political correctness.  And it will cost them their careers.  I don’t know how else to say it other than to keep repeating myself.  The gun owners who recently waited in lines for three or more hours to pay exorbitant prices for guns were not repeat buyers (long time gun owners like me already had most of the firearms we wanted and so we are purchasing ammunition now).  They were first time buyers.

I’ve watched them at the ranges.  I have overheard their conversations, I have watched them at the gun stores and gun shows.  I have heard their relatively ignorant questions (not ignorant because they’re stupid, but because they’re in the process of learning).  They are not us.  We already have guns.  These are new gun owners.  The polls they are trotting out to show the number of gun owners  decreasing are all lies.

I don’t know whether the questions aren’t being honestly answered or what other source there could be for the error.  But the polls are in error.  Don’t believe them.  And as for older gun owners like me, and even the newer gun owners like I have monitored for the past half year, we have made it clear with our voices and wallets.  No new gun laws.  None.  Period.  Not one more inch.  Not one.

Is this so hard to understand?  Note to legislators.  Tread carefully.  Don’t cross lines from which there is no return.

UPDATE: Sebastian believes that this is weak tea.  Whatever.  Look, I said that I could not vouch for the source of this information.  What I did say is that Cantor and Ryan are essentially dead to me.  They have both advocated universal background checks before, and that fact is undeniable.  Coming to their defense is strange and not at all something I would do.  What I also said is that the general thrust of the reports doesn’t surprise me based on my previous work to follow these two sellouts (and I do mean to say that Paul Ryan and Eric Cantor are sellouts – you simply cannot convince me otherwise because you don’t have the evidence).  Also, not that I dislike Breitbart.com, but I have never read anything they had to say about this issue.  What is the source behind the Ammoland reports?  They will have to answer that.  Finally, I note that Sebastian didn’t interact with me on this issue, just Ammoland.

After some mind numbing repetition of things we already knew, this Fox Business article does a good job of updating us on the status of things with at least some of the gun manufacturers.

According to a report from the NSSF, Connecticut stands to lose 1,768 jobs, $13.5 million in business tax revenue and $450 million in economic activity if Colt, Mossberg & Sons and Stag Arms move elsewhere.

Overall, the firearms industry accounts for $1.75 billion in economic activity and 7,340 direct and indirect jobs in Connecticut.

“A lot of these manufacturers have called Connecticut home for years, but now that they continue to be vilified, they have to consider if they want to stay,” McGuigan said, adding that local communities heavily rely on many firearms manufacturers.

Stag Arms is one of those companies. Located in New Britain, Conn., Stag Arms has become a well-known manufacturer of modern sporting rifles and employs nearly 200 people. It hired 40 new people last year amid 60% growth, and is working on a one-year backlog of 70,000 rifles. But with the uncertainty there over a potential ban on its products, Stag Arms put further expansion in a fourth factory building on hold.

Would the company consider moving in the wake of a Connecticut gun ban? “Absolutely,” Stag Arms President and CEO Mark Malkowski said. “If the state’s not going to be supportive, we have to consider moving.”

The possibility that Mossberg or Colt would relocate had occurred to me.  However, I was unaware that Stag Arms would consider moving.  This is a positive sign.  I’m also waiting on Magpul to announce their formal plans to relocate, if their words are to be believed.

Bob Owens was first to the report about Remington remaining in New York, and in fact, expanding their production facilities there.  This is disappointing to me, and – mark my words – this decision will harm Remington.  Just recently it was announced that Remington won an $80 million contract for a new sniper rifle for the U.S. Army.

Big news, right?  Well, take a quick look at comments over reddit/guns.  No one is thrilled, no one is congratulating Remington, no one is praising the civilian unavailability of this rifle, and no one is willing to pay this price for a weapon like this.

We await decisions by Beretta, Stag Arms, Magpul, Mossberg, Kimber, Springfield Armory, and Rock River Arms.  Contact me at any time.

Kurt Hofmann deals with this silly notion in the MSM these days that the number of gun owners is declining.  It’s a false assertion, but after addressing it, Kurt observes:

The gun prohibitionists want lowered gun ownership not only because they dislike guns and gun owners, though. The NYT article cuts to the chase:

“It also raises questions about the future politics of gun control. Will efforts to regulate guns eventually meet with less resistance if they are increasingly concentrated in fewer hands — or more resistance?”

The notion that gun ownership is declining is an article of faith among advocates of oppressive gun laws, because it is, after all, easier to trample the rights of minorities, as we have discussed before. As noted in that column, this is likely the reason that groups like the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence so often describe the U.S. as a “democracy,” rather than acknowledging that we live in a republic.

Yes, and here is another article that describes an analogous concept, where local LEOs are in charge of deciding who may have a concealed handgun permit (or even permit to purchase) in lieu of “shall issue” statutes.

South Carolina is currently considering legalization of open carry.  Texas is also considering such a law, and while there are all kinds of irrational fears that grip legislators when they consider this kind of thing, I can assure them that nothing they fear comes to pass.  I live in an open carry state, and the sky does not fall every day.

These are Jim Crow laws, and the idea behind them is the same as the one behind demonization of gun owners in general that Kurt analyzes.  The difference here, and something that the legislators should consider, is that we won’t be easy to trample underfoot.  We have guns.

Note to legislators.  Tread carefully.  Don’t cross lines from which there is no return.

Fox News:

Five Iranian Christian converts who were detained late last year will reportedly begin trial in Iran’s Revolutionary Court this week, according to a human rights group following the case.

The five men were among seven arrested in October when security forces raided an underground house church in the city of Shiraz during a prayer session. They will be tried at the Revolutionary Court in Shiraz’s Fars Province on charges of disturbing public order, evangelizing, threatening national security and engaging in Internet activity that threatens the government, according to Christian Solidarity Worldwide, a religious persecution watchdog group.

“Judging from recent cases, it is likely that, at the very least, those detained may face lengthy prison sentences,” said CSW spokesperson Kiri Kankhwende.

Christianity threatens national security.  In fact, anything but Islam threatens national security, because Islam is a political religion meant and designed for people control.

The reason these Christians are under threat by the state is that the Islamists know that if they expose their own system (I use that term loosely) of faith to inspection and logic, it will fall.  Christians have no such fear.

Islamists threaten people with violence when their thinking is under the slightest threat because they are scared.  They are cowards.  Would my reader ever threaten someone with bodily harm if they didn’t “convert,” or ever relinquish their own faith when under such threat?

CBS Los Angeles:

Fire officials were on hand to remind the public of what a similar quake could mean for Southern California.

“A lot of people don’t realize that we are earthquake prone in California, but we also could get a tsunami,” Los Angeles County Fire Asst. Chief David Stone said. “We just haven’t had one in a long time.”

Residents were urged to prepare for a number of disaster scenarios, including how to cope for being at least “two weeks on your own”.

You mean that the police won’t protect the people?  You mean people need to have medical supplies, food and water, and lights and batteries?  You mean that preparing for a disaster – natural or man-made – is wise move?  Oh, and by the way, California residents need to think about this while living in one of the most gun restrictive states in the country, maybe second now to New York or Illinois.

So who are you going to call when there is no power or police, and the inner city gangs are at your doorstep demanding your stuff, or your daughter?

Just Piper sends an important study our way.  We are accustomed to discussing al-Qaeda in Afghanistan, or al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, or al-Qaeda in the Maghreb, and so on.  It seems rather odd to be among the first to use the phrase “Al-Qaeda In the United States,” but with our failure to execute the war on the transnational Islamic insurgency, it was bound to happen at some point.

The study was done by the Henry Jackson Society, a British think tank, and includes a detailed statistical analysis of perpetrators of terror who were affiliated or associated with al Qaeda.  There are a lot of take-aways from this study, including how active Afghanistan and Pakistan are as havens for terrorists and their training camps.  The foreign threat has not disappeared regardless of what the administration is saying.  But knowledge of this fact should be coupled with knowledge of the local threat.

According to the new report, Al-Qaeda in the United States, of the 171 al-Qaeda or al-Qaeda-inspired terrorists who either committed acts of suicide terrorism in the U.S. or were convicted in U.S. civilian or military courts from 1997 to 2011, 54% were American citizens, and more than a third were born in the United States.  “Moreover, 36% of all individuals were U.S. born, indicating that these were citizens who had grown up in the U.S. rather than having moved there later in life.

This is important to us for a whole host of reasons, but let me focus briefly on just two.  First, while I have recently written about the potential for an apocalyptic shattering of the stability of American civilization due to governmental totalitarianism, there are other possible catalysts, one being attacks by groups of Islamic fighters (and we also know that Hezbollah cells are already embedded in American civilization).  Several well-placed attacks on infrastructure will cause the American economy to screech to a halt.  Shooting attacks on shopping malls will bring retailers to their knees across America.

But there is yet another, more insipid, attack that could happen on our freedom and liberty.  In the event of an attack such as I’ve described above (or a series of attacks), the U.S. government might (and probably will) use it as the expedient to declare martial law, and include firearms confiscations as the central policy of that control.  This might be done by the federal government, or it might be done by Governors of states (recall that gun owners had their firearms confiscated in New Orleans after Katrina).

The point is this.  There are a number of different catalysts for societal instability and the consequent push for totalitarian control.  Be wise and circumspect, and be prepared for any exigency.

Recall in Chicago SWAT Raid Gone Terribly Wrong we discussed stupidity and incompetence of the Chicago SWAT team and their terrible, thuggish, Gestapo-like tactics when raiding the home of Charlene and Samuel Holly in Chicago.

The SWAT team officers, except for one named officer, were referred to as “John Doe 1-8.”  Their names ought to be public knowledge, and I have submitted a freedom of information request to the Chicago Police Department to make this so (to the best of my ability).

Chicago_FIR_SWAT_Raid

Oh brother.  Not this again?

In the Gospel of Luke, chapter 22, verse 36, Jesus tells his disciples to acquire a sword.

Or does he?

How that passage is interpreted has sometimes influenced believers to justify arming themselves. Owning weapons, namely firearms, has been part of the national debate on gun violence and gun regulation in the wake of the Newtown elementary school shooting and other shooting tragedies.

With the Bible and other church teachings in hand, the question of how involved Christian communities should be in the guns debate is as varied as the viewpoints in the entire dialogue itself.

At least one Licking County church recently has directly joined the conversation on gun violence prevention, and while other local churches aren’t directly demonstrating a particular stance, their leaders lent their thoughts about how Christians could regard guns.

In Feburary (sic), the United Church of Granville conducted a Gun Violence Prevention Sabbath, one of many across the country that did so, said Dwight Davidson, pastor at United Church.

At the sabbath, prayers were said for peace and congregation members placed stones on the altar that symbolized the number of lives ended by gun violence in Ohio in 2008, Davidson said. He said the event was meant to raise awareness about the prevalence of gun-related deaths in the U.S.

“On the theological question, ‘Is it God’s will for … people to die every year from gun violence?.’ The answer is ‘no,’” Davidson said.

Yes.  Christ commissioned his disciples and told them to “go forth and be social planners.”  I can’t think of anything better for a church to do than have a “gun violence prevention sabbath.”

Actually, Deuteronomy 29:29 tells us “The secret things belong unto the Lord our God: but those things which are revealed belong unto us and to our children for ever, that we may do all the words of this law.”

Mr. Davidson no more knows the secret will of God for when or under what circumstances men will perish than does my dog.  Davidson is lying.  He doesn’t know what God’s will is regarding any particular event that has not been revealed.

But this is what has been revealed.  He has told us that he has made man in God’s image and that failure to protect life is equivalent to murder.  Davidson should go back and study the great commission to inform him whether God wants us to have a “gun prevention Sabbath.”  And by the way, he should do some basic research before be preaches on firearms again.  Finally, this is a reminder just what worthless junk most of the main stream churches have become.