News from Louisiana.

SHREVEPORT, La. – The Caddo Parish Commission’s proposed resolution urging state lawmakers to strengthen the state’s gun laws and ban automatic weapons failed to win majority approval at Thursday’s meeting.

The commission voted 6 to 6 on the resolution authored by Commissioner Lyndon Johnson that brought out a full house of citizens opposed to the measure. The tie vote means the resolution failed and will not advance to the Legislature.

The resolution that came out of Tuesday’s work session sought to encourage the Legislature to change gun laws by setting mandatory requirements for owning and carrying a firearm as well as making it illegal to possess and use assault weapons, which were described as full automatic and semi-automatic with magazines/clips over 20 rounds. The only exception was for active military or law enforcement.

So gun owners in this Parish have a lot of work to do.  Six of the commissioners need to be thrown to the curb.

Via reddit/firearms.

This is wickedness.  The Holy writ: “For the Scripture says, “YOU SHALL NOT MUZZLE THE OX WHILE HE IS THRESHING,” and “The laborer is worthy of his wages.”  [1 Timothy 5:18].

So says the Lord.  The obvious solution is to pay the legislators nothing for their “services” and see how they like it.

Cute title, huh?  It’s not mine.  It comes to us via the UCLA Newsroom.

Some gun control advocates believe the amendment was never intended to guarantee an individual’s right to bear arms.

Dunbar-Ortiz offered a darker view of the founders’ intent: “The violent appropriation of native land by white settlers was seen as an individual right in the Second Amendment” — one of several points in U.S. history when the right to bear arms was invoked to secure white privilege.

“That long, intergenerational, violent struggle to take the land is why descendants of those mostly Anglo and Scots-Irish settlers today believe they are the authentic lords of the United States and should govern — a kind of blood right,” she said.

Even as she delivered blunt appraisals of modern-day policing, the National Rifle Association, Republican leaders and the Junior ROTC — a program that she believes is responsible for the “normalization of militarism for children” — Dunbar-Ortiz shared stories of her own immersion in gun culture. She grew up around firearms in rural Oklahoma, and in her 30s, she joined an armed radical-left group that amassed a huge arsenal.

“A firearm slung over your shoulder or a 9 mm Browning tucked under your belt creates a sense of amplified power, without which you feel naked and vulnerable,” she said. “Guns are awesome. They are also beautiful objects that are addictive.”

[ … ]

“If we do hope to develop long-lasting gun reform, it cannot be done in a vacuum and without consideration for the legitimate claims of gun advocates,” he said.

Dunbar-Ortiz offered a counterpoint. Invoking her extensive experience with communities fraught with guns, she said, “I don’t think it’s worth your time to try to convert them, frankly.”

Instead, she called on passionate grassroots organizers to fight for gun control laws at the state and local levels.

“I think the social movements are going to be more important than candidacy to change things,” she said. But, she cautioned, “I doubt that any common-sense firearms regulation can be enacted until the Second Amendment is understood to represent white supremacy and genocide.”

It would be too involved to give this a complete fisking, but a few things jump out at me.

First, it’s apparent that these so-called “scholars” have never really read the founders with open minds and thus they have no idea what they really said or why they said it.  I’ll say again, my professor Dr. C Gregg Singer, made clear many times that one cannot be a real student of history unless he studies the primary source documents of the era.  So for example, if you really want to understand why the American war of independence happened, you must read the newspapers, speeches and especially read the sermons of the day.  The pulpit controlled the war effort.

Second, Dunbar-Ortiz, whomever that is, doesn’t think dialogue is useful (no doubt that’s probably correct).  Instead, the suggestion is to rely on “gun control laws at the state and local levels.”  Or in other words, take guns away from peaceable men by relying on … you guessed it, men with guns.  The cognitive dissonance is rich and rewarding (at least for me).  Whether they’re happy or not all depends upon who has the guns, yes?  It didn’t take long for Bohemian hippies to turn into full-orbed communists, did it?

Finally, the real “gun problem” isn’t a gun problem, it’s a cultural problem caused in part by government subsidies, welfare and SNAP payments, which disembowel the inner cities and create and sustain fatherless families.  Other gun owners are usually peaceable men.  And yet, these people want to control and disarm peaceable men to the point that they have forums, wring their hands, speak in somber and solemn terms, and recommend draconian legislation, laws and regulations.

And they accuse us being being a cult!  As I’ve said before, the desire to control other men is the infallible sign and premier vice of the wicked.  So rather than being an illumination about gun owners, they have shined the light on themselves.  Their article title was too clever by half.

The Epoch Times.

Under the simple-minded President George W. Bush and the feckless President Barack Obama, as well as the peacetime generals whose conduct of the war will live in infamy, the U.S. military has been subjected to the greatest humiliation in its long and storied history.

It should have been asked to finish—decisively, quickly, and definitively, just as British Gen. Herbert Kitchener crushed the Mahdist forces at Omdurman in 1898—the conflict that began on 9/11; instead it has been turned into an instrument of “social justice,” a meals-on-wheels, three-cups-of-tea aggregation of sitting ducks, one held in open, murderous contempt by an armed rabble of primitive, superstitious, dog-hating goatherds.

Yep.  That sounds about right.  I had suggested that they drop Marines and Rangers at the border with Pakistan and let the Northern Alliance drive them to their deaths as they tried to cross the border, putting them in a pincer.  Then they could have put the Northern Alliance in charge and left.

Instead, they wanted anti-American Pashtuns in charge, and tried to test out their “three cups of tea” social workers with guns counterinsurgency bullshit.  And American boys perished for it.

And don’t even get me started on Iraq, or how they let the lawyers fight Americans as the Americans tried to stay alive.  There will be many men who stand before God and answer for the deaths of Americans on fields of battle in foreign misadventures.

Shooting Sports USA.

Armalite’s original blueprints specified a 20-inch barrel, 12-inch (measured from the upper-receiver face) gas-port location and a ballpark 12,500 PSI gas-port pressure level. Those are the “rifle” specifications, which work just fine. Therefore, the problem isn’t in the design. Rather, it’s in the redesign. The shorter the front end is, the more redesign has its influence. Carbine-length barrels and especially pistol-length barrels create a condition where using the same ammo there is higher gas pressure at the gas port.

An AR-15 has a “direct impingement” system. Propellant gas is bled off through a gas port in the barrel, this gas goes through the gas manifold or “gas block,” through a gas tube, and into the carrier key atop the bolt carrier, and that’s the end of the line—the resultant force deposited into the key starts the bolt-carrier assembly in motion.

Think of this gas system as a pressure chamber with two valves—one at the gas port and the other at the muzzle, and the moving bullet opens each valve as it crosses each plane. Therefore, the spacing of the valves matters greatly.

The better way to think of this is each is an orifice (even though an adjustable gas block is an adjustable orifice), not a valve.

As the bullet enters the barrel bore and moves forward, the space (volume) behind the bullet is increasing, which lowers the pressure of the contained gas behind it. More available barrel-bore volume before the gas port translates to lower pressure at the port. So, post-gas-port barrel length influences how long the system is “sealed” under full pressure, and the shorter the length, the shorter time. Again, the bullet is serving as a plug that’s sealing all the pressure in the system—until it exits.

[ … ]

Approximate figures for M855 (genuine 5.56 NATO) chamber pressure is about 60,000 PSI; pistol-location gas port pressure, 50,000; carbine-location, 33,000; mid-length, 27,000; rifle-location, 19,000. Thus, 5.56 NATO is hot and getting hotter, and it has been for years.

Installing a heavier buffer and also a stouter buffer spring buys time. Both increase resistance to the bolt unlocking, thus delaying it from moving. The heavier buffer better resists movement and moves slower. The stouter spring increases in-battery load against the bolt carrier, increasing its resistance to initial movement, and the carrier also then moves slower coming back against the buffer.

“Just put an adjustable gas block on it” is also routine advice, and, yes, that helps, but ideally such devices should be used to tune function. If it’s needed just to make the gun run, then the chances are certain something else was missed, most likely in the architecture. That’s where we’ll find the cure.

[ … ]

That’s easy enough with a carbine-length front, 16-inch barrel. A mid-length gas port is located 2 inches farther ahead of carbine-standard. It effectively also shortens the post-port distance by the same amount meaning lower pressure getting in and a shorter time the system is under maximum pressure. Both are good things.

If you’ve got a hankering for an AR-platform pistol, choosing a 10.5- or 11.5-inch barrel makes it possible to get a carbine-length gas system affixed, and that is a 3-inch additional length over the common 4-inch pistol-port, and a significant reduction in post-port length. That really tames a little gun.

I think it’s becoming fairly routine advice to choose the right gas system for your gun as a first step to correct over- or under-gassed systems, rather than tinkering with the gas block.

This is what the author is calling the “architectural” solution to the problem.  This isn’t exactly the same thing as having an adjustable gas block on a new AR-10 6.5 Creedmoor with a fixed 20″ barrel for folks who want to shoot hotter loads or those who want to hand load specialized cartridges and need to make slight adjustments on the block to ensure reliable operation.

I’ve said it before, many times.  This explains what it means to ignore the war around you.

This is via David Codrea.  Listen, I know that there are folks in Washington who live nearer to what is called the Northeastern redoubt, and others still are very busy and hard working people who farm and work all day.  These folks tend to be more isolationist than others.

But you simply can’t withdraw into your own world and forget those among whom you live.  You must see politics as war, and you simply must not let this sort of thing happen to you without having fought it until your last breath.

That there are some in that state who didn’t even know what the new gun laws say is a testimony to laziness, irresponsibility and disengagement.  I’m sorry if this sounds insulting to my Washington readers, some of whom I’m sure fought this new gun control in their state.  But everyone must get engaged.

I’ve often said that Texas was a close to turning from a red state to a blue state as any in the country, and I think the progs know it.

A national gun control advocacy group with financial backing from Democratic presidential candidate Mike Bloomberg is pumping $8 million into Texas races this election, with the goal of flipping the state House and returning vulnerable Democrats to Congress.

Everytown for Gun Safety unveiled plans Wednesday to use the same strategies it employed last year in Virginia, where Democrats won control of the state house for the first time in two decades. Since then, Virginia lawmakers have advanced proposals to expand background checks and limit handgun purchases, but a bill to ban assault-style weapons stalled this week.

“We believe Texas can be the next emerging battleground, with gun safety as the tipping point,” Shannon Watts, founder of Moms Demand Action, said during a call announcing the initiative. “The state is becoming younger and increasingly diverse. And after years of failure by leaders to address gun violence, it’s become a top issue for voters, especially in the suburbs.”

Over a third of the group’s state House targets are in North Texas …

When your enemy tells you what he’s going to do, you listen to him.  You have advance warning.  You will end up like Virginians, back on your heels, if you don’t watch it.  Politics is war.  See it that way.

Passed by the TV as the wife was watching the democratic debates and laughing, and heard this from Klobuchar: “The dreamers are our future.”  Heard this from little boy Petey: “They are as American as we are.”

But if you think there’s any difference between the democrats and republicans on this issue, tell me what that would be?

News from Alexandria.

Del. Mark Levine, D-Alexandria, said an armed man stood outside his kitchen window in an effort to coerce him to change his vote.

“On Saturday, a man with a large assault weapon with a large extended magazine came to my home. He stood outside my kitchen window for a couple of hours or so,” Levine said Monday on the Virginia House floor.

Levine then recounted what happened when he asked Alexandria police officers to respond to the man.

“I asked them to ask the man if he would like to come to my office instead, to come chat with me in my office in Richmond,” Levine went on. “And, if he did not want to do that, if he wanted to protest outside my office in Richmond. The man declined my offer, through the police.”

Alexandria police Lt. Courtney Ballentine confirmed that officers responded to Levine’s home Saturday and said the unnamed man was not trespassing on Levine’s property.

[ … ]

In wrapping up his speech to colleagues, Levine said he welcomes any discussion, protest or act of civil disobedience from those with an opposing viewpoint.

Ole Mark “Pray and spray red hot magazines” Levine.  I actually have trouble believing this account, as I can think of a whole host of charges they could bring against the man.  My son says Levine sounds like a “bitch and a liar.”  Besides, I can’t see the Alexandria police being that polite.

But let’s assume for a moment that this is all true.  What exactly did the little communist think was going to happen when he threatened to tyrannize the people?  Does he think that he is immune from consequences?

However, I’m happy to hear that Levine is okay with disobedience.  There’s a lot of that going to happen in the near future.  I’ll remind Levine he said that.

So this is all a lie, in which case I love it because it’ll all come out, or it’s true, in which case Levine feels threatened.  He should.  And not just from one person with a rifle.

UPDATE: I’ve submitted a FOIA request with the Alexandria Police Department to obtain the police report of this incident, if there is one.

Via David Codrea, this great piece by David Kopel.

In early 1775, tensions between Great Britain and the American colonies were reaching the breaking point. The previous October, King George III had forbidden the import of arms and ammunition into the colonies, a decision which the Americans interpreted as a plan to disarm and enslave them. Kopel, How the British Gun Control Program Precipitated the American Revolution, 38 Charleston Law Review 283 (2012).

Without formal legal authorization, even from the Continental Congress, Americans began to form independent militias, outside the traditional chain of command of the royal governors. In February 1775, George Washington and George Mason organized the Fairfax Independent Militia Company.

According to Mason’s Fairfax County Militia Plan for Embodying the People, “a well regulated Militia, composed of the Gentlemen, Freeholders, and other Freemen” was needed to defend “our ancient Laws & Liberty” from the Redcoats. “And we do each of us, for ourselves respectively, promise and engage to keep a good Fire-lock in proper Order, & to furnish Ourselves as soon as possible with, & always keep by us, one Pound of Gunpowder, four Pounds of Lead, one Dozen Gun Flints, & a pair of Bullet-Moulds, with a Cartouch [cartridge] Box, or powder-horn, and Bag for Balls.” 1 The Papers of George Mason 210-11, 215-16 (Robert A. Rutland ed., 1970). Similar militias were being formed all over the American colonies, with no formal authorization and no chain of command to the established government. The legal bases of the militias were the natural rights of self-defense and self-government.

And that, fellows – ” … promise and engage to keep a good Fire-lock in proper Order, & to furnish Ourselves as soon as possible with, & always keep by us, one Pound of Gunpowder, four Pounds of Lead, one Dozen Gun Flints, & a pair of Bullet-Moulds, with a Cartouch [cartridge] Box, or powder-horn, and Bag for Balls” – is what well regulated means.  It means, simply, regulated firearms, or in other words, properly functioning and well stocked and supplied.  Powder and shot available, sights adjusted, and in working order.

Persuaded by Henry’s eloquence, the Virginia Convention formed a committee—including Patrick Henry, Richard Henry Lee, George Washington, and Thomas Jefferson—”to prepare a plan for the embodying, arming, and disciplining such a number of men as may be sufficient” to defend the commonwealth. The Convention urged “that every Man be provided with a good Rifle” and “that every Horseman be provided . . . with Pistols and Holsters, a Carbine, or other Firelock.” (“Firelock” was a synonym for “flintlock,” the most common firearms of the time.) Journal of Proceedings of Convention Held at Richmond 10-11 (1775).When the Virginia militiamen assembled a few weeks later, many wore canvas hunting shirts adorned with the motto from the conclusion of Henry’s speech: “Liberty or Death.” Henry Mayer, A Son of Thunder: Patrick Henry and the American Revolution 251 (1991).

Today, they would red flag Washington and send a trigger happy SWAT team to shoot up him and his family and beasts.  Or in other words, they would have proven the very thing that brought the patriots together and caused them to arm against tyranny.

So any time some ignorant fool tells you that the founders couldn’t have imagined arming the citizens with “weapons of war,” remind them that Washington was an “extremist illegal militia founder” and intended to make war on tyranny.