Very interesting read via reddit/firearms.

IN THE 12^th CENTURY, the crossbow was considered by many to be a weapon of mass destruction. Not only was it was remarkably accurate and deadly at vast distances, but shockingly, the bolts it fired could penetrate a knight’s armour. Crossbows meant that no breast-plated nobleman, prince or king was safe on the battlefield. Any low-born peasant with just a bit of training could kill a lord or sovereign with simple squeeze of a trigger — a platoon of crossbowmen could wipe out a kingdom’s aristocracy with just a few volleys.

And that was something Medieval elites feared might shatter the natural order of society.

Not surprisingly, the highest European authority of the day, the Roman Catholic Church, called for an outright ban on the weapon. And the Vatican wasn’t messing around — violating its decree could lead to excommunication, or worse: damnation of the soul. Strong language, to be sure. In fact, for much of the Middle Ages, the crossbow was considered to be one of the most destabilizing weapons in existence, not unlike today’s nuclear, chemical and biological weapons.

Or AR-15s?

The Libertarian Republic:

In what seems to be an attempted balancing act to play to both gun owners and the gun confiscation crowd O’ Rourke said, “If you own an AR-15, keep it. Continue to use it responsibly and safely.” He then followed up his statement by adding “I just don’t think that we need to sell anymore weapons of war into this public.”

[ … ]

“If you purchased that AR-15, if you own it, keep it. Continue to use it responsibly,” O’Rourke said. “We have this proud rich tradition [in Texas] of hunting, of owning guns for self-defense, for sport, for collection as you may own that AR-15 for, just because it is fun to shoot.”

Well now.  Ain’t that special.  There is a proud tradition in Texas of owning weapons of war, but since it’s fun to own weapons of war, those who already own them can keep them.  But be sure to use them responsibly, you hear?

Or he’s lying in order to placate the gun crowd.  But if you don’t change your mind soon, O’Dork, what’s going to be your strategy when the Kos-kids demand your head because you won’t come right out and say that you want them all registered and then confiscated?  You know that’s what’s going to happen.  Or at least your Alpha-handlers do.

Tisk, tisk.  Time’s a wasting.  Tell us your next move.

To be sure, there are those who are trying to get semi-automatic long guns before the ban, but these reactions are the most telling.

Some rushed to their trusted online dealers and stores to stock up on semiautomatic assault-style rifles. Others unlocked their secure cabinets, picked up their firearms and turned them in to police stations, no questions asked.

[ … ]

John Hart, a gun owner, said on Twitter that he has given up his AR-15 rifle and ammunition because his “convenience doesn’t outweigh the risk of misuse.”

Don’t worry.  I’m sure the government will protect and care for you.  They’ll show up at any shooting that occurs, and lay out the chalk lines, arrest the guilty, and comfort the grieving.

It’s always when weapons are banned.  Via Dave Hardy, this is an interesting read.

During 2012, Chávez’s approval rating reached 57% (higher than any point in time of Obama’s 2nd term approval ratings by a wide margin). Then he decided that it’s time to “disarm all citizens”.

The Venezuelan National Assembly in 2012 enacted the “Control of Arms, Munitions and Disarmament Law” with the explicit aim to “disarm all citizens”. However before the law took effect, Hugo Chávez passed away on March 5, 2013 at 58.

After his death, the contitution required that a presidential election be called within 30 days. Chávez’s hand-picked successor, Nicolás Maduro (a former bus driver and Chávez’s vice president afterwards), was elected president on April 14th, 2013.

Nicolás Maduro, the new president, imitated most of Hugo Chávez’s policies. He also proceeded with the plan to disarm all citizen. The Control of Arms, Munitions and Disarmament Law was pushed and taken effect in 2013. With the economy seemingly well, and people were mourning the loss of Hugo Chávez, there was only minimal pushback from some pro-democracy opposition figures.

“Venezuelans didn’t care enough about it. The idea of having the means to protect your home was seen as only needed out in the fields. People never would have believed they needed to defend themselves against the government. Venezuelans evolved to always hope that our government would be non-tyrannical, non-violator of human rights, and would always have a good enough control of criminality.”

Javier Vanegas (28), a Venezuelan teacher

All legal commercial sale of guns and munitions were banned – except to government entities.

During the first year, the law wasn’t much of a success. There were only 37 recorded voluntary gun surrenders, while the majority of seizures – 12,603 – were done by force. Estimated number of guns in Venezuela at the time range from one to six million.

The next year (2014), Nicolás Maduro invested more than $47 million to enforce the gun ban.

Yet firearms black market thrive instead, and a large number of illegal firearms are still in the hands of criminals and the collectivos (Venezuelan government employed thugs).

Then economic disaster struck, as it always will in a socialist country.  The violence came with it.

Via reddit, “After the defeat of the controversial red flag bill, the New Hampshire legislature slips the same text into HB696 – a bill to increase protections for the elderly against abuse.”

The language reads as follows.

Upon a showing of an immediate and present danger of abuse, exploitation, or neglect, the court may enter temporary orders to protect the plaintiff with or without actual notice to defendant.  The court may issue such temporary orders by telephone, facsimile or any other methods approved by court rules.  Such telephonically issued orders shall be made by a circuit court judge to a law enforcement officer, shall be valid in any jurisdiction in the state, and shall be effective until the close of the next regular court business day.  Such orders shall be returnable to the circuit court where the plaintiff resides or to which the plaintiff has fled, unless otherwise ordered by the issuing judge.  If non-telephonic temporary orders are made ex parte, the party against whom such relief is issued may file a written request with the clerk of the court and request a hearing on such orders.  Such hearing shall be held no less than 3 business days and no more than 5 business days after the request is received by the clerk.  Such hearings may constitute the final hearing described in RSA 173-D:4, V.  Such temporary relief may direct the defendant to relinquish to a peace officer any and all firearms and ammunition in the control, ownership, or possession of the defendant, or any other person on behalf of the defendant for the duration of the protective order.

Well, you know communists.  If they can’t get something the honorable and righteous way (and since their designs are never with honorable or righteous intentions, nothing they ever do is honorable or righteous), they’ll just use any tactic at their disposal.

I don’t intend to comment generally on the shooting in New Zealand.  I’m sure enough has been said already, and besides, that isn’t what I wanted to focus on.

Changes are coming to New Zealand guns laws.  Big ones, if you believe the PM.  She’s hell bent on doing it.  Apparently there is support among the general population (and read especially this comment thread), but on the other hand, New Zealand gun sales have increased since the Christchurch attack.

David Codrea observes that the already restrictive nature of gun laws didn’t do a thing to prevent the attack.

Special license endorsement firearms require a “genuine reason” for possession, “including sports shooting, hunting, and collection. Owning a firearm for self-defence is specifically excluded, and prohibited.”

New Zealand requires criminal and mental health checks with third-party character references. It has licensing and registration “of individual civilians licensed to acquire, possess, sell or transfer a firearm or ammunition.” It has domestic violence prohibitions.  Compare that to the “Universal Background Check” and “Red Flag/ERPO” edicts demanded for the U.S. as “common sense.” Private sales require a license, and “The buyer of a firearm in a private sale in New Zealand is obliged to pass official background checks before taking possession.”

The very same laws, by the way, the collectivists want for America.  But as we all know, stopping crime isn’t really the point of gun laws anyway.

As a bracing reminder of this, you might spend a minute rehearsing the twenty one mass shootings in Australia since their gun control laws went into effect.

And then ask yourself and your spouse, “Do we ever really want to rely on anyone else for protection of home and hearth?”

The Drive:

For one, the Reaper did reduce strain on a soldier’s arms when carrying a weapon. But it also increased fatigue from the awkwardness of firing and moving with the system on their back.

“The soldier’s breathing motion was exaggerated by the RSACS,” one report says. “This forced the soldier to tense his entire torso in order to effectively release each burst, thus significantly increasing the soldier’s overall fatigue.”

The change in high-mounted weight distribution also made it harder for troops to run and the pole made it impossible to get into a prone firing position.

[ … ]

Not surprisingly, the pole and cord also had a habit of getting caught on both foliage and other objects, as well as the user’s other gear. The system notably interfered with troops using helmets with night vision googles attached to them. It also made it difficult for machine guns with the F89 machine gun to open the top cover to reload or clear jams.

I’m sure glad the U.S. military isn’t stupid enough to do something like this for the benefit of girl-troops in the infantry.

Recall when I said this?

Do you suppose this would look like great land armies getting into formation at the edges of great fields of battle and marching towards each other?  What do you think such a messy civil war in America would look like?  Bubba would be wearing a Ghillie suit, shooting a bolt action rifle, or a modern sporting rifle, and after the shot you will never hear from him again – until the next one.  And you’ll never catch him.  Police will have to decide what side to take, and if they take the wrong one, they will be dealt with in the middle of the night when they take their dogs out to pee in the backyard.

Insurgent will be mixed with progressive statist, and there will be no SEAL teams or nuclear weapons to which you can turn because you won’t know one from another.  There will be nowhere to target a nuclear weapon, and nowhere for a SEAL team to raid.  All of their close quarters battle preparations will be for naught when their own families are in peril due to civil warfare.  These aren’t Afghan tribesmen you’re dealing with.  These are engineers, mechanics, fabricators and welders, chemists, and the world’s best machinists.  If you think Afghanistan was rough, wait to see what civil war would look like in America.

If you have ever said something like, “You can’t win because the government has a land army and nuclear weapons,” here is the moral of the story for you.  You are an idiot.

Some statist is having wet dreams of civil war against conservatives again, this time at Washington Monthly.  She says this (I assume it’s a she).

The only way for these Civil War fantasies to work out for the right wing is for the government to join them, The gov’t may acquiesce now and then (like the sheriffs who won’t enforce the law), but when the shooting starts, one side has tanks and fighter jets, the other side has handguns and semi-automatic rifles. Even if the Texas Air National Guard and a few others go full treason, they are still woefully out numbered and out gunned.  Red Dawn is make believe, guys.

For the author to accuse “rightists” of fantasizing about civil war, they sure do seem to be spending a lot of time in this article and comments fantasizing about civil war on “rightists.”

So what can one pistol do against an evil regime?  Watch this video to find out.

“This happened in the city of Maturin, on the East side of Venezuela. The National Guard was coming hard and heavy against some protesters when one of them pulled out a pistol, took several shots and apparently hit one of the guardsmen.

They stopped their charge.”

And yes, I’m well aware that I have titled the post the same as Mike Vanderboegh, and I have done it intentionally.  Go read his analysis, which is still the best.

Some of you may have seen this, but for those who haven’t it might be a good primer on exactly where she comes from and who created her.  My only issue with it is that he fails to pull the thread on the Soros money that lies at the root of her success.

I appreciate the folks on reddit/firearms keeping me up to date on the latest attempts at communist gun control in the North Carolina House of Representatives.  H.B. 86 is summarized as follows.

AN ACT TO REQUIRE A PERMIT FOR THE PURCHASE OF AN ASSAULT WEAPON OR LONG GUN; TO REQUIRE A 72-HOUR WAITING PERIOD BEFORE A PURCHASED  FIREARM MAY BE DELIVERED OR OTHERWISE POSSESSED; TO PROHIBIT THE SALE OF AN ASSAULT WEAPON OR LONG GUN TO PERSONS UNDER A CERTAIN AGE; TO PROHIBIT THE SALE OR POSSESSION OF A BUMP STOCK OR TRIGGER  CRANK; TO REQUIRE THE SAFE STORAGE OF A FIREARM; TO REVISE RECIPROCITY LAW FOR A CONCEALED HANDGUN PERMIT; TO REQUIRE THE REPORTING OF A LOST OR STOLEN FIREARM; TO REQUIRE ANY PERSON WHO OWNS A FIREARM TO CARRY FIREARM LIABILITY INSURANCE; TO LIMIT THE SIZE OF AMMUNITION MAGAZINES; TO REPEAL THE PREEMPTION OF LOCAL  REGULATION OF FIREARMS; AND TO ALLOW THE DESTRUCTION OF A SEIZED FIREARM.

I see that the totalitarians are shooting for the moon.  This has every fevered wet dream that has ever crossed the mind of the statists except outright ban of so-called “assault weapons,” which I’m certain would be in there without at least a hint that this bill might fail.

Age limits, waiting periods, fees to make it more expensive to own a firearm, charges for people who had access to a firearm when someone invaded their home and used it in self defense (i.e., “safe storage”), permitting for long guns as well as pistols, etc.

So instead of going in the right direction, which would be to do away with the pistol permitting scheme, which we all know is merely a way to raise revenue for the county sheriffs, they are going in the wrong direction, which is to expand this bastard program to long guns.

Well, allow me to take a very little time and help you to understand how most of us think about the issue of weapons.  We believe that ownership of the means of self defense and the amelioration of tyranny is a God-given right, not subject to amendment by men.  The constitution, which forbids what you are trying to do, is a covenant, an agreement between men concerning how we will live.  When either side breaks the covenant, it is forever broken, releasing the offended party from its obligations, and consequences necessarily follow from that.

All gun control, since God expects, even requires, that men defend home and hearth by whatever means is necessary, is wicked.

The Bible does contain a few direct references to weapons control. There were many times throughout Israel’s history that it rebelled against God (in fact, it happened all the time). To mock His people back into submission to His Law, the Lord would often use wicked neighbors to punish Israel’s rebellion. Most notable were the Philistines and the Babylonians. 1 Samuel 13:19-22 relates the story: “Not a blacksmith could be found in the whole land of Israel, because the Philistines had said, “Otherwise the Hebrews will make swords or spears!” So all Israel went down to the Philistines to have their plowshares, mattocks, axes, and sickles sharpened…So on the day of battle not a soldier with Saul and Jonathan had a sword or spear in this hand; only Saul and his son Jonathan had them.” Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon also removed all of the craftsmen from Israel during the Babylonian captivity (2 Kings 24:14). Both of these administrations were considered exceedingly wicked including their acts of weapons control.

The Almighty is the Lord of men, not tin pot dictators, and it is He who demands fealty.  Whether this bill gets a hearing, what ultimately happens means absolutely nothing concerning our rights.  It can only damn you in eternity as you attempt to supplant the edicts of a Holy God.  Our rights stand firm, do not change, and will not bend, since they are a function of the very character of the Almighty.

But just in case any of this isn’t clear enough to you, let me share what’s currently happening with and to the communists in Maryland, who are also attempting gun control.

Here I am with Wicomico County Sheriff Michael Lewis, who says he “will not comply” with onerous gun laws like long gun licensing and confiscation.

The brave gun owners of Maryland are saying, “We will not comply.”  And rest assured, whether North Carolina gun owners show up in droves or not to any such hearings in the North Carolina Senate or House, neither will we.

At some point, totalitarians must hear the word ‘no’.  Your move.