Articles by Herschel Smith

David Codrea.

“Senator Mike Rounds, R-S.D., is taking on the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) with a new bill expanding full-time travelers’ gun ownership rights,” Fox News reports. “Rounds reintroduced the Traveler’s Gun Rights Act on Thursday, a bill that aims to update federal law to account for gun residency issues full-time travelers — such as people who live in recreational vehicles (RVs), individuals with multiple homes, and military personnel and spouses.”

Yawn … big deal.

Read the rest of David’s analysis.  He’s a pro-immigration pol, supporting amnesty for more than ten million illegals in America.  That means your medical bills and tax dollars go towards medical care for someone other than your family since they treat the hospital ER as their PCP and then lean on the entire medical system to finish the job and foot the bill.  Ask me how I know and I can send you to an NP who works in surgery and emergency medicine.  There are no arguments here.  These are facts, and they are not in dispute.

For pro-immigration libertarians out there, that’s one of the most un-conservative and un-libertarian things you could do to the American people system.  It’s also theft, and therefore immoral.

David ends with Mark Smith’s video (which we’ve embedded), and then this.

Bearing Arms takes exception to Smith’s video.

I take exception to Bearing Arms. So does my colleague Herschel Smith at The Captain’s Journal.

By the way, his orange attire and bird vest doesn’t impress me.  I upland bird hunt too, but whereas he’s a realtor and insurance salesman and broker, I’m a working man.  He supports legalized theft, and many big businessmen do (so they don’t have to bear the brunt of the expense of immigrants), and I support morality.

He also fails to acknowledge what I’ve pointed out so many times before from Pew research that Hispanics support gun control by some 75%.  It’s a fact, and it is not in dispute.  Comments to my linked research from others say things like ““Hispanic” is a chimera. Around here the Cubans are damn near 100% gun owners. I think what they mean by “hispanic” is Mexican.”

Interesting, and totally irrelevant.  I didn’t say anything about where this commenter was from.  I quoted Pew who told us that 75% of the immigrants being let into America do not support their RKBA.  It’s a fact, and it’s not in dispute.

This guy doesn’t get it either at The Libertarian Institute.

The principle at stake here is the same principle at stake in the gun control debate–whether peaceful, law-abiding individuals should lose their freedoms because a few bad people commit atrocities.

Nice misdirect.  That’s not the principle and he knows it.  The principle is whether we let those people here to begin with given their opposition to our RKBA.  They oppose it by 75%.  That’s a fact, and it’s not in dispute.

I’ve watched John Bryan do God’s work for several years now in WV, and he is in large measure responsible for shining light on the complete corruption of the WV state police.

He’s lost some significant cases, but solely because of the horrible rulings by the Fourth Circuit, a gaggle of sophomoric, pompous and unscholarly rubes second only to the second circuit.  They found against the defendant in the case of a young man carrying an AR-15 to hunt Coyotes, claiming directly against what they claimed in U.S. versus Black, and going on a diatribe against the rifle itself.  Just several months ago, even after Heller, McDonald and Caetano, went on another diatribe against the AR-15 and ruled in favor of Maryland’s AWB in Fianchi v. Fosh (and the SCOTUS had to send it back to the Fourth Circuit for reconsideration under Bruen, just as they are pressing the Second Circuit to make the right call for gun owners in NY).

Anyway, even though Bryan has lost some cases, in every case I can think of, his arguments were sound and the fault lies with stupid courts.  But he has won many cases, and managed to bring a lot of light to the corruption in WV on the local and state level, and at least a modicum of justice for his clients.

As I said, he is doing God’s work.

This is just a terrible catalog of goofy, dangerous and unnecessary foibles in a very short amount of time committed by the best and brightest America has to offer.  The list is culled from many examples I have and is not even nearly comprehensive.

First up, cops in Colorado handcuffed a woman, put her in the back seat of a squad car, and then chatted with each other about the woman.  The problem is that they parked their car on railroad tracks.  Yes, seriously, railroad tracks.   The car was hit by a train shortly thereafter.  Here is video.

The most serious, necessary, and fundamentally requisite thing you’ll ever do as a worker in a manufacturing plant, power plant, construction zone, or working with lifting and rigging, scaffold building, or basically for anyone who can be held liable for injuries or cited by OSHA, is work safely.  Safety training is so important that it interrupts work activities, even critical ones.  You’re never late with safety training – ask me how I know.  You don’t climb stairs in a plant environment without holding both rails, or else if someone sees you, you might lose your job.  You never climb above a few feet off the ground without lanyards and harnesses.

It gets even more serious if it has to do with basic radiation safety, the annual retraining and testing taking a day to complete before you’re allowed in an RCZ.  If anyone ever sees you knowingly violating those protocols, security is called, you’re ushered off the premises, and management will collect your stuff and send it to you at home.  You’ve lost your job.

Those cops didn’t even think about safety.  Not the safety of the woman in the car, nor even their own safety.  Safety comes first, in everyone you do, in every activity in which you engage.  I’m left wondering if those cops would even have been able to pass basic safety training or recall what they learned while in the field.

Next up, here is a report from the great northeast.

It was mishandled, but it wasn’t.  It dropped, but it wasn’t dropped.  But it gets better and the excuses start.

“These weapons are not something like a handgun or something where you could just pick it up and the average person would know how to utilize it,” said Jeff Rinaldo, retired Buffalo Police captain.

No, of course not.  No one knows how to use a rifle.  But the best is coming up.

“It’s not the days of old when I was on patrol and we had officers out. You’ve got to have highly trained tactical officers now in these in these situations.”

This “highly trained tactical officer” who didn’t mishandle his rifle which wasn’t dropped, mishandled and dropped his rifle.  If you did that in the Marine Corps you would have spent some time in the “room of pain.”  At least that would have happened ten years ago.  As for now, it’s anyone’s guess.

Up next, they don’t know the law.  They never seem to know the law.  This video from one of my favorite lawyers (except for Stephen Stamboulieh) who explains the whole silly affair.

Next up in this parade of the obscene, Uvalde police are making excuses, the real one being that they are cowards.  “He has a battle rifle!”  Despite John 15:13, they just gave up and let someone else do the hard work, and even prevented fathers from going in to get the little ones.  What they’re doing now is figuring into the gun controllers’ calculus.

The cowards in the Uvalde Police Department that allowed a shooter to rampage inside a school for an hour before responding decided to peddle liberal gun control talking points to excuse their spinelessness.

Uvalde Police Department Sgt. Donald Page told investigators that they knew the weapon that the shooter had “was definitely an AR” and, therefore, “There was no way of going in. … We had no choice but to wait and try to get something that had better coverage where we could actually stand up to him.” One officer called it a “battle rifle.” The Texas Tribune, of course, ate this up, declaring that “The AR-15 was designed to efficiently kill humans.”

The Uvalde cops are weaponizing anti AR-15 sentiments to excuse their appalling incompetence and cowardice and people are eating it up. You're giving these people a pass because of their political utility to you. https://t.co/5POZBKj9WC

— Noam Blum (@neontaster) March 22, 2023

But remember boys and girls, they are the best, brightest and bravest America has to offer.

The reality is different as I’ve observed so many times before.  You’re never in more danger than when the police are around.  Get away from them as quickly as humanly possible.

And never, ever believe the myth that they’re there to protect you or your loved ones.

It’s like the Keystone cops, but with military hardware. Remember, with a simple signature of a police captain, they can go purchase machine guns and train them on you or your family … after busting down doors in wrong home raids.

Basically, this has unfortunately become the picture of cops in America.

GM 🌞

It’s Monday!!! pic.twitter.com/WEqcgDO844

— EducatëdHillbilly™ (@RobProvince) March 20, 2023

Amusing video.  I will remark that while I don’t have a strong opinion (or any opinion really) on Bear Creek Arsenal uppers, lowers or full rifles, he didn’t get great grouping with the heavier load.  One comment to the video indicates that one viewer got much better results with a 200 grain load.  But with such a lousy BC, I wonder why you would have the 450 Bushmaster and opt for a lighter load?

Anyway, if I was going to purchase a 450 Bushmaster rifle, I’d likely choose a Rock River Arms rifle in 450 Bushmaster.  They manufacture tight, close tolerance, well functioning rifles that usually group extremely close.  Of course, purchasing a RRA rifle will set you back more than buying a Bear Creek Arsenal rifle.  So the choice is up to you – if you make the choice at all.

If you have a rifle in 45-70, I would see this as overlap and maybe unnecessary.  But variety is the spice of life, and it’s always good to have more rifles.

Mark Smith makes a compelling case for his view.  He takes an incrementalist approach.  Listen to his whole argument.

Even after judge Reed O’Conner issued a preliminary injunction in the case of the Polymer80, the ATF is bowing their back up and demanding that their rule be enforced.  They literally don’t care what the court says.  They are in love with the courts when they side with the controllers, and ignore them when they don’t.

They are among the most lawless people on the planet. ATF doesn’t need laws – they make ’em.

Tenth Amendment Center.

On Friday, the West Virginia House gave final approval to a bill that would prohibit government entities from accessing information about firearm and ammunition purchases generated by a credit card merchant code without a warrant in most situations.

Del. Chris Phillips and a coalition of 10 fellow Republicans introduced House Bill 2004 (HB2004) on Jan. 12. The legislation would prohibit any West Virginia governmental entity from accessing or obtaining a record of a transaction involving a credit card that is retrieved, characterized, generated, labeled, sorted, or grouped based on the assignment of a firearms code without a warrant or a subpoena in most situations.

Financial institutions would also be barred from disclosing such information with the same exceptions. Financial institutions could also disclose such information if the customer provides written authorization for disclosure.

HB2004 includes specific requirements for a subpoena requesting such information.

On Feb. 3, the House passed HB2004 by a 95-0 vote. The Senate approved the measure with amendments by a 32-0 vote on March 9. The following day, the House concurred with the Senate amendments. The bill now goes to Gov. Jim Justice’s desk for his consideration.

The battle never stops between us and the controllers, and this is a good move.  It would have been a better move to exclude the provision that a warrant is needed, and just prohibit supplying such information to anyone under any circumstances.

Mark analyzes the decision, which can be found here.  Mark feels that he used an unnecessary approach, but ended up with the right decision.

Ducks.org.

For airline travel, the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) requires that guns be transported in hard-sided, lockable cases. One way to maximize luggage space is to buy one of the top-quality bulkier cases, like a Pelican or Explorer, then remove the foam interior and pack your hunting clothes in the case. The clothes serve as padding for your shotgun while freeing up room in your checked bag for waders and other items. Gun cases commonly come in one- and two-gun models. The best field repair kit is an extra gun, and if you’re going on a long-anticipated trip, consider packing two guns. To maximize luggage space, many traveling waterfowlers wear their hunting coats and use a field backpack or blind bag as a carry-on. That’s a practical idea, but make sure that you don’t have any loose shotgun shells in your pockets or bags before you pass through security.

Interesting tips.  The article is oriented towards water fowlers, but this could just as easily go for travelling to Kansas to shoot upland birds (in that case, Pheasants), or Minnesota (for Grouse).  I can carry a Beretta A400 in the truck to do Quail hunting in S.C. or N.C., but that brings up another point.

Reader xtphreak made these remarks not long ago on another article.

MrGunsandgear also made a statement about 6:04 re: a “rule” requiring FedEx & UPS to mark packages containing firearms for shipping.

I posted a comment there asking for specifics on this “Rule”.

Their “Rule” doesn’t override 18 U.S.C. § 922 – U.S. Code – Unannotated Title 18. Crimes and Criminal Procedure § 922. Unlawful acts.

Specifically (e) which reads:

“…(e) It shall be unlawful for any person ….  No common or contract carrier shall require or cause any label, tag, or other written notice to be placed on the outside of any package, luggage, or other container that such package, luggage, or other container contains a firearm. …”.

Can you specify the Rules that require common carriers to mark packages that contain firearms?

I personally used this against airline policy (Piedmont Airlines) to tag luggage with a bright orange CONTAINS FIREARM tag prior to 911.

[ … ]

I listen to MrGunsandgear, but on this he is wrong.

I posted the following to his youtube under my previous comment:

the UPS site states: “The labeling and outer box markings on all Firearm Products shipments must not identify the contents as containing Firearm Products. Labeling, including the shipper’s and consignee’s abbreviated names on the shipping label or air shipping document, must be non-descriptive.”

https://www.ups.com/us/en/support/shipping-support/shipping-special-care-regulated-items/prohibited-items/firearms.page

FedEx site says: “Re-package the firearm case in an outer box with no identifying markers”

https://www.fedex.com/en-us/shipping/how-to-ship-firearms.html

I think this is important because I think we need to know if carriers, including airlines, can legally put labels on our firearms cases?

On a final note, say you are carrying a shotgun for upland bird hunting on an airline.  Let’s say that it’s a really nice one, like a Beretta DT11.  What do you do?  Purchase travel insurance for $12,000 to cover the gun?  Perhaps the answer to this is don’t carry a DT11 on an airline.  But then, how do the competition shooters do it?  Maybe we can carry a cheaper gun on the airlines (good upland bird guns go for > $2000 though), but a competition shooter will carry his expensive weapon.

Totally and completely out of control, second grader reasoning skills, away from the farm, and off the rails.  Trying to make things up as they go and feeling constrained by the SCOTUS.

J. Lee asks about "designation" of "sensitive places" and how to figure this out. J. Lynch notes that very few of these places existed in 1791. "Were there even zoos" J. Lynch asks. J. Lynch notes SCOTUS not "giving us much to work with here." #bruenresistance

— Mark W. Smith/#2A Scholar (@fourboxesdiner) March 20, 2023

“SCOTUS not giving us much to work with here.”

Good Lord. And these people are judges.

I didn’t listen to the arguments, but I did read all of Mark’s Twitter entries. Here is what this apparently looked like today.

GM 🌞

It’s Monday!!! pic.twitter.com/WEqcgDO844

— EducatëdHillbilly™ (@RobProvince) March 20, 2023

And here is Mark’s more formal analysis of the arguments today.