FPC.

FORT WORTH, TX (June 30, 2023) – Today, Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) and FPC Action Foundation (FPCAF) announced that a federal judge has granted summary judgment for the plaintiffs in VanDerStok v. Garland, vacating the ATF’s “frame or receiver” rule and preventing the federal government from enforcing it. The opinion can be viewed at FPCLegal.org.

“This case presents the question of whether the federal government may lawfully regulate partially manufactured firearm components, related firearm products, and other tools and materials in keeping with the Gun Control Act of 1968,” wrote Federal District Court Judge Reed O’Connor in his Order. “Because the Court concludes that the government cannot regulate those items without violating federal law, the Court holds that the government’s recently enacted Final Rule… is unlawful agency action taken in excess of the ATF’s statutory jurisdiction. On this basis, the Court vacates the Final Rule.”

“We’re thrilled to see the Court agree that ATF’s Frame or Receiver Rule exceeds the agency’s congressionally limited authority,” said Cody J. Wisniewski, FPCAF’s Senior Attorney for Constitutional Litigation and FPC’s counsel in this case. “With this decision, the Court has properly struck down ATF’s Rule and ensured that it cannot enforce that which it never had the authority to publish in the first place.”

“This is a monumental victory against the tyrannical ATF. Firearms Policy Coalition and FPC Law have argued that this rogue agency has unlawfully attacked gun owners in this latest round of ‘rulemaking’ and we are grateful to see the Court agree,” said Richard Thomson, FPC’s Vice President of Communications. “We will not stop, however, with this latest victory. FPC and FPC Law will continue to bring these cases to put a stop to the immoral and unconstitutional actions of the disarmament regime.”

Winning is fun!

Part One

Romans 9 and 1 Corinthians 1 as references.

There is the offense of the cross and the scandal of the cross. But they, at the center, have much overlapping commonality. It could be the scandal that offends, but both are scandalous and appalling to men.

The New Religion and mock-Christian liberalism are both inclusive, but neither is actual Christianity. At the center of the Gospel of Jesus Christ is the exclusive nature of Christ and by Him Christianity.

The Roman Empire had many gods in the first century. So too, the continual influence of the last Greek empire and its philosophies in Christ’s day permeated much of European and Mediterranean basin civilization; the seeking of “new knowledge” and the presence of many gods was in every town and hamlet.

What struck the first century’s polytheistic (and pantheistic) senses as the Gospel went west was that Christians proclaimed one God, a living God, and an undivided title by Him to be made a son of God. To the exclusion of all religions, Christ stands as the only way to have a personal relationship with God. He alone is the door and salvation for entrance into the legitimate flock (John 10:9), which is His Church – the body of Christ; everlasting life in heaven is through Jesus. This is deeply objectionable, still today, and even among some professing Christians.

The world nods in acceptance and approval when you find a new way to have temporary comfort in your own skin. Whether that path is proper or even wholesome doesn’t matter. Everyone is allowed to have his unique god, which does not matter as long as everyone finds the thing that helps him justify his evil while conforming to the modern sense of ethics and morality.

It’s claimed that you can have any savior you like and be secure in your feelings; this is the least objectionable thing in which there is no scandal. Can’t we all get along? But to the mind of the man in Christ, he knows Holy God is deeply offended at making yourself accepted among men in the rejection of Him; Christ said, “Ye cannot serve God and mammon.”

All those professing to be wise by knowledge and “science” and well-doing, comfortable in their own deception, are brought to ruin in the simplicity, exclusivity, power, and authority of Christ’s cross.

The abject sinfulness and grotesquely open wicked flaunting of sin as pride all started with well-doing. Where else could the works of men, trying to do good, lead but to proclaiming themselves to be free from consequence? These works of faith have led directly to the place warned of by the prophet in Isaiah 5:20, “Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!”

All this evil of the New Religion in the West started as well-doing; the works of being a good person but outside of God’s holy law through faith in Jesus Christ is ruinous. They still think they are correct; the claim is that good people are being tolerant. They genuinely believe. You might say, well, I’m not that bad, I would never land in the bed of someone of my own sex, but the works of your own righteousness, whatever they may be, will no less land you in the same hell with them.

Also, today, self-centered humanists are significantly at odds with the message of the cross. As it was from the start, the preaching of the cross two thousand years later is somewhere on the scale of foolishness for them (1 Corinthians 1:18) to causing seething murderous rage (Acts 7:45). Without Christ, you are numbered as an enemy of God.

There’s a movement that’s gained little traction, but we must be on guard. There are those saying that Talmudism (modern Judaism), Mohamedism, and Christianity are all Abrahamic faiths and are, therefore, equally valid. The Talmudists are promoting this but don’t actually believe it and still hate Jesus Christ. This is the subtlety of the devil, a broad way, an easy non-offensive path, but Christ has defeated sin, death, and the grave; Jesus says, “strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.”

Few find it because it must be sought by faith in Jesus and only by faith in Him. Talmudism and Mohamedism are founded in hatred, not in the love of God, who gave His only begotten Son to reconcile sinful man to Himself. It is not holy God that must negotiate with all the faiths; it is men that must be reconciled to God by surrendering to Him through faith in Christ Jesus.

All men are helpless before the God that created them. The evolving god that changes as a man ages and learns, built by the world’s wisdom, is foolishness to holy God (1 Corinthians 1:23-29). But men, in their vanity, assert a god: regardless of the form, the mastery claimed by man is to conceive his god and make that god the symbol of his many illusions so that he may placate his fears of the unknown universe. But it’s not the man that can conceive God but God that creates the man.

“For to this end Christ both died, and rose, and revived, that he might be Lord both of the dead and living.” – Romans 14:9

Jesus Christ is Lord of all. We must convey that you can, in accordance with the power and authority of Jesus Christ, enter into His kingdom and eternal life in heaven by placing your faith in Him. He died for your sins, was buried, and rose again on the third day. Jesus lived a sinless life, defeating sin on the cross, and He rose again on the third day conquering death and is now seated at the right hand of power in heaven, crowned Ruler and King of all that is. The power and authority of God to make life eternal can be realized by you, in faith, and the gift of eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord imparted unto you by the forgiveness of your sin and imputation of Christ’s righteousness.

“Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth.” – Romans 9:18

The acceptance of Jesus Christ’s payment for your sins on the cross and sole reliance on Him for eternal life, by faith in His resurrection, is for those that belong to Him mercy, but to those that are not, it lends to a hardened heart. God’s authority over all His creatures and, therefore, the offense of the cross is well shown in this verse. God does what He wants with whom He will, and nobody can tell Him to do otherwise; He is sovereign. But we know that entrance may be gained by much prayer in seeking not to rule God that He changes His mind but by calling upon the mercies of Christ Jesus the Mediator. Nonetheless, God does as it pleases Him with His creatures.

But this exclusive title offered by Christ to become a son of God comes not by the workings of man, for what difference would Jesus Christ make if He were just one more religious figure added to the pantheon of global gods? That notion is no offense to the world or the New Religion. Jesus, the “good guy” and guru of kind living, is easily assimilated into the many false world belief systems, and thereby, Christ, in the mind of the unconverted, becomes just another inoffensive idol among the rest.

A man is not saved by following the moral life of Christ or the ethics of His teaching but by faith; except a man be born again, he cannot see the Kingdom of God: ye must be born again. Nonetheless, if they would be called friend, those that are His keep His commandments. In fear of the Lord, when He reveals Himself and His divine authority to judge your wicked crimes against him, a man can receive Christ as having taken his substitutionary punishment. As applicable as Christ’s teachings may be, and indeed, obeying Christ’s commands is a fact of life after conversion, the rest is simply religion.

——-

Part Two

No man genuinely converted by Christ chose to become Christian; neither did any man who did not receive Christ get converted.

This statement about the undivided authority of the Almighty to work His will for His unknowable purposes will offend not just unbelievers but 95 percent of professing Christians. Salvation is an exclusive moment. You can join a denomination, church, cult, or movement and perform rituals, rites, recitations, and ceremonies, but that’s not conversion. All other associations exist for the sake of Christianity and not Christianity for the sake of performances; the object of our faith is not ceremony; it’s Christ.

God, in His grace, may reveal to a lost sinner his sin, allow him to see that he’s headed to hell, or leave him fearful without excuse knowing he will stand before the God of creation. All these things are true.

The scandal is this; there’s nothing any man can do but surrender his whole being to the One who made him, accepting that God does that which He will. There’s no way but the cross, and unless God, in His mercy, shows you your need, you’ve been condemned already, a helpless soul headed to an unknown death and an eternity of darkness and separation from God. Jesus came to seek and to save that which was lost; until the soul of a man knows it’s lost, in need of Jesus, he is unlikely to be found. Here’s the offense, those dead in their sin, except God quicken them through faith in Christ, are damned; all men have sinned against God, and only Jesus can save them.

Except God calls you, there is no heaven for you. You deserve the eternal torture of God for your sin, and until you face this fact, under the power of conviction from the Holy Spirit, the Christ of the Bible is just an imaginary being. Every man’s salvation testimony is unique, but every man who’s been converted has one. A testimony of Christian ceremony is not a conversion covenant with the holy Creator. If your testimony relies upon a ceremony of any kind for eternal life and not upon Christ, why are you waiting? We suppose a man could reject the call of God, but having shown Himself to them, it’s unclear how or why he would. Reading this, God is offering you the way by faith in Christ alone; if you’re feeling helpless right now, you are being called; Jesus is the way!

God doesn’t force Himself on a man; that would not bring love and mutual fellowship but resentment in the man. But in His lovingkindness, our merciful God shows the man his need for Christ. By a thought, God could make all men little robotic automatons of obedience, but that’s not love; that’s tyranny leaving God little better than a petty despot, which He is not. Faith in God’s love and trust in Him through His Son brings salvation!

Starting a discourse about preparing a home in heaven for His followers, Jesus said, “ye believe in God, believe also in me.” Elsewhere, a forewarned seeker, whose child was possessed, cried out in faith with tears unto Christ and said, “Lord, I believe; help thou mine unbelief.” You must receive the Christ of God.

And so we begin to see a more complete picture of the offense of universal damnation for sin and the scandal of the exclusivity that is the cross of Christ.

“Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.” – John 14:6

With God, there is no doubt allowed as to who is the Saviour and who is the way to heaven. Contained therein is the very right of Christ set forth before all men: He claims to be the sole path to heaven for meeting the Maker (Romans 9:21), the Father of us all by faith; if you would be forgiven and made His son being condemned no more and welcomed into eternity.

But you must face some facts; no man comes to God but by Christ. That is the most offensive claim ever made, and they killed Him for it. For we are designed to seek a god, as religious beings, to have a god, and Jesus, being the only way, destroys all the imaginations of the hearts of men, leaving them helpless at the mercy of He who says, “I Am.” Salvation isn’t merely through Christ, but only through Christ. Other means are hereby resolutely rejected, leaving a man helpless and thus deeply offended in his pride.

If Jesus weren’t the only way, but just another way, He would have been gladly added everywhere to the list of fine men who’ve benefited history with excellent teaching on lofty living, and there would be no persecution of His followers. But being the only Saviour, exclaimed by those in Christ who must abide by their new nature never to deny Him, brings hatred from all corners to the Christian man. The name of Jesus is hated the world over by those that remain in their sin, but unto us that are saved by His grace, we know, neither is there salvation in any other. The religious despise Jesus most of all, even today, and two thousand years ago if He had been just another teacher of good things, they would not have tortured Him to death.

If the offense of the cross is done away with by inclusiveness, so too is the glory in Christ’s power by the resurrection gone. The simple question remains, do you believe in the power and authority of Jesus Christ to save your eternal soul; will you be converted through faith in Jesus Christ? Christ has bound all men’s hope of peace, faith in God, love, redemption, forgiveness, grace, new birth, soul salvation, and eternity in heaven to His person. Jesus isn’t only a good life, He didn’t teach merely another truth, and He isn’t only a way; He is the way, the truth, and the life.

The offense of exclusivity and the scandal of the cross is the beauty of Christ to those who belong to Him by faith.

Source.

“Even though (Wagner leader Yevgeny) Prigozhin acted out, yelling give me ammo, give me ammo, there was no actual ammo hunger,” says Ocherkhadzhiev. “The problem was, they used six times more ammo than is tactically and academically called for. They just buried the Ukrainians in shells. And in these conditions, the Ukrainians still defended.”

I don’t want the discussion thread to turn into a political one.  That’s not the point of the post.

But I find this remark utterly fascinating.  I know that when the Marines first joined the fight in Afghanistan, the Taliban were surprised at the fact that they (the Marines) could carry a half dozen magazines in a tactical vest and stretch the ammo out to cover a 24-hour fire fight under the supervision of good NCOs (the NCO corps in the U.S. military is entirely a product of Western culture and Eastern and Middle Eastern armies completely lack such a structure, focusing instead on commissioned officers, in the end making them less capable or efficient, something I’ve written on extensively).  The disciple of targeting, fire control, etc., surprised the enemy combatants.

Similarly, the practice of the Taliban was to bury U.S. troops in fire.  Seldom would they take the attack straight to U.S. forces except en masse (Battalion versus Company).  I’ve also written extensively on that subject in Massing of Forces.

Shooting Illustrated.

It’s not quick to load. Its range is miniscule. It’s not very accurate. It’s difficult to master and it kicks like hell. Even so, the shotgun is universally feared and respected.

Why? Because when it’s in trained hands, it is unlikely to miss. Its bowling-ball-size swath of destruction allows more leeway for error than a single bullet. And, when those .33-caliber, solid-lead balls smash into something at close range, there’s not much short of a world-class trauma team that can repair such damage. Dangerous men who tangle with dangerous men for a living know this, and if the other team has brought a shotgun to the fight, it commands all the attention of a rattlesnake in the outhouse. More than 100 years ago, in the Great War, Winchester’s 1897 pump-action shotgun was so devastating on the battlefield, our enemies petitioned to have it banned.

Academically, the shotgun’s power is easily defined. The standard, nine-pellet, 00-buckshot load features a collective 1.21-ounce payload that’s fired at 1,200 fps to produce roughly 1,700 ft.-lbs. of muzzle energy and 30 ft.-lbs. of free-recoil energy. Or, you can choose a 3-inch, 12-pellet magnum load fired at 1,425 fps to produce 3,295 ft.-lbs. of energy—if you are prepared for its 55 ft.-lbs. of recoil that will soon wind up on your cheek and shoulder. Either way, it’s vastly favorable to be on the butt end of that punch rather than the muzzle.

[ … ]

Yet, the shotgun’s power shouldn’t be overhyped, even by so-called experts such as this writer who have a vested interest in the arm’s worth, for it is irresponsible and dishonest to do so. Fact is, the combat shotgun is a specialized tool—requiring extensive training and practice—for certain close-range scenarios, but it shouldn’t be the end-all choice in arms for everything. After 35 yards it’s not great, and after 75 it’s terrible regardless of the load. If your hands are untrained, you’re better off with a rifle. The shotgun is heavy, takes an eternity to load compared to a detachable-magazine-fed firearm and mastering it so its pattern strikes where the shooter looks, without the use of sights, takes years to accomplish.

Some of this seems to me to be a dated viewpoint.  We’ve already shown that with the right choke, 00 buck can be put inside a five inch group at 50 yards.  By way of information, the choke used in that video the URL embeds is now available and I have one.  I have not used it yet.

Also, shooting the Beretta A400 with its gas operation and kickoff stock recoil control, I’d have to remark that it doesn’t feel much different than shooting an AR, and I could hunt Quail with it all day with ease and comfort.  And I’m not sure it’s correct or even wise to say that if you can’t shoot a shotgun accurately your “better off with a rifle.”

I do know that 00 buck will travel through walls like handgun or even rifle rounds, and that the discerning shooting will consider other loads for homes in neighborhoods like Turkey shot (#4 or #5).  Finally, I’m not sure it’s correct to focus on the difficulty of reloading when magazine tube extensions can give you seven rounds.

First up is professor Smith, and then we go on to pistol braces in Texas.

Source.

A jury has acquitted on all counts the former school resource officer who stayed outside during the February 2018 massacre at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida – absolving him of wrongdoing in the rare trial of a law enforcement officer for his response to a mass shooting.

Scot Peterson, 60, took off his glasses and wept in court as the judge read off the verdict, finding him not guilty of seven counts of felony child neglect, three counts of culpable negligence and one count of perjury.

“I’ve got my life back,” Peterson, a former deputy for the Broward County Sheriff’s Office, told reporters outside court, describing the years since the shooting as “an emotional roller coaster.”

I couldn’t care less what sort of emotional roller coaster he’s been on nor how he feels about any of this.  He’s a coward.  Regardless of what the law requires, he should have been a righteous man and, if necessary, given his life for the children.

Having said that, this is the right legal decision.  Holding police responsible for the protection of life runs afoul of court decisions in the following cases.

Castle Rock v. Gonzalez

Warren v. District of Columbia

DeShaney v. Winnebago County

Progressives hate the police except for when they enforce laws they want (that means against everybody but them as was the case with Antifa), and the traditional conservatives are the only ones left who believe the myth that the police are there to serve and protect.  They are not, nor have they ever been.  They are agents of the state and will behave that way at every opportunity.  No court ruling has ever said police are there to protect citizens.

It is the responsibility of every good man to defend his family, and thus should men be armed and capable of doing so.  As for schools, if you want them to be safe, hire people who are under contract to do that, harden the entrances, and give teachers weapons.  Better yet, get your children out of public schools and home school them to learn math, physics, chemistry, rhetoric and logic, and theology.

Don’t conflate the fact that this man was a coward with the notion that the police are there to protect you or your children.  That’s what you and your weapons are for.

AllOutdoor.

This image is from the Montana Knife Company (so that we don’t get accused of poaching a picture from AllOutdoor).  They also have green and black and other color patterns.

It appeals to me.  I love good knives as well as well-made firearms.

Two comments.  They’re going to have to do a bit better than “Restocking Soon.”  Also, the price of $350 seems rather steep (although well-made knives go for a lot these days).  For that price, it had better function well and stand up to abuse.

Professor Smith breaks this down for us.  It’s a lengthy but very good review.

Now, if we could just get Marlin to come out with a new model 444. Maybe Ruger needs to hire me to tell them what to do. It seems like I keep running into them a lot.