David Codrea:

Thousands of gun owners, many lawfully armed, rallied at the State Capitol in Hartford on Saturday to protest gun laws enacted in Connecticut. Organized by the Connecticut Citizens Defense League, the rally served to introduce activists to legal measures being taken in the courts to repeal those edicts, to promote support for politicians pledging to support the right to keep and bear arms, and to give fed up gun owners a public forum to voice their defiance of orders to surrender their firearms.

David was the keynote speaker and his speech (embedded at Examiner) is well worth the listening time.  Part 2 of the speech is on YouTube.  I appreciate David going and representing all of us, especially with a very good speech.  I must say that although I consider him to be a friend, I have never met him in person (a fact which I must remedy one day).  I find him to be persuasive, a good speaker, and well-presented, even if he isn’t as good looking as I am.

Kurt Hofmann:

Rabidly anti-gun Congresswoman Jackie Speier (D-CA), though, has another idea. She suggests that the Obama administration exploit Yee’s alleged crimes as justification for more restrictive gun regulation.

Of course.  What else would a good collectivist do except argue for more government control?  Kurt uses his powers of logic to upbraid the whole notion raised by this hag.

Mike Vanderboegh has a very interesting take on the recent racially motivated beating in Detroit.  I recall seeing this, and I sent myself a link with the subject line if you’re white you don’t belong in Detroit.  Mike invokes the memory of the Rwandan genocide, pointing out that the victims didn’t have guns.  And I recall thinking about these fellows in Detroit that a gun might have saved them from this beating.  Also we shouldn’t forget that the folks who perished under the evil Idi Amin in Uganda weren’t armed.

Rob Pincus recently did an interesting video concerning use of the AR pistol.  I found myself wondering why anyone would worry about the legal use of the weapons when you are under threat (is it legal to use three points of contact?) just because of what lawyers inside the beltway say.  Of course, Rob points out that the ATF weighed in on this issue, stipulating that use doesn’t matter.  I still wonder why, under threat, anyone would stop to worry over whether you shouldered the weapon.  I understand that it has to do with whether Rob trains folks to do that, but I would train to do whatever saved my life.