David Codrea:

“I know Gillespie and I will not support him or vote for him,” a frequent correspondent active in Virginia Second Amendment promotion and support told me. Part of that may be due to Gillespie’s refusal to personally commit to the issue, as illustrated by his failure to return a Virginia Citizens Defense League Candidate Survey. Part of it may be due to his consummate insider loyalties to the GOP establishment as a former Bush White House staffer and head of the RNC. Part of it may be that he established a “bipartisan” lobbying firm with a Democrat partner, and a former White House Counsel to Bill Clinton at that. And the big part is that there was a better candidate that the establishment did not want..

Another survey Gillespie failed to answer is the one on immigration put out by Numbers USA, where he rates “indecisive” on the question of amnesty for illegal aliens …

Read the rest of David’s analysis.  When I see that there was a so-called “tea party” candidate running against an establishment candidate, and the establishment brought in the power brokers and dollars to run the tea party candidate out of the race, I won’t go to the polls on election day to vote for the establishment candidate.  Thus, I will not be voting for Thom Tillis in my own state.

This is entirely a personal choice, and I am not advocating that you make it too.  I’m saying that I’m not a prostitute and won’t whore my vote out to the highest bidder (or in this case, the least progressive candidate).

Dave Workman:

Contrary to what the gun prohibition lobby would have the public believe, the firearms community is hardly a monolithic voting bloc that thinks and talks alike on every issue. Gun owners argue amongst themselves about all manner of subjects, and the disagreements can get downright brutal. Such can certainly be said about the past 72 hours with the discussion and debate over the JPFO/SAF controversy.

And I’m sure there will be more to come.  My expectation is that good folk who work for JPFO will keep us informed of the vicissitudes of their labors there.

Kurt Hofmann:

Both Reid and Horsford appear to be arguing that the fact that sometimes law enforcement agencies do indeed abuse the power of certain firearms should not mean that agencies that do not engage in such abuses be forced to get by with lesser guns. Does the same logic somehow not apply to the rest of us?

Of course not.  Consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds, and Reid certainly has a small mind.  I suspect he is thinking about how his jack booted thugs at the BLM were stood down by boys toting rifles that looked the same as his thugs.  Awe … did your son not get rich selling out America to Chinese business partners because of AR-15s, Harry?

Mike Vanderboegh: Police shoot and kill an Ohio dad, 22, holding a BB gun in Walmart.  I say prosecute them for murder.  If I did that I would be in the state penitentiary.  They should be too.  One long term solution is to legalize open carry everywhere, at all times.

Matt Bracken has an outstanding piece up at WRSA on The Islamic Jihad Conquest Formula.  Matt hits the nail on the head.

David Codrea:

“A citizen will lose his appeal if the Attorney General can prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, not that the individual poses a risk, or that the person is a terrorist, or even that the person is under investigation; rather, the Attorney General must only demonstrate that the person has been placed on a terror watch list,” Titus continued.

“Once that has been proven, a process which affords the citizen no due process, no right to appeal, nor guarantees any reasonable notice or information to the actual fact that the citizen is on a terror watch list, the appeal is over and the citizen loses his Second Amendment Right to Bear Arms,” Titus elaborated. “The individual will not have a chance to introduce evidence of mistaken identity, abuse of Executive discretion or mount any other meaningful defense.”

Oh my.  This seems like more inside-the-beltway rulemaking gone awry.  Perhaps they put this in the federal register, perhaps not.  Perhaps they kept it out with approval of the rubber-stamp FISA courts.  Either way, you can bet that this is more infringement.

And speaking of David, he says he doesn’t like to go around link-whoring his articles.  He isn’t posting to Facebook anymore, but that’s fine with me because I make WoG a stop several times a day to see what David is saying.  David is a nice guy so he doesn’t like to link-whore.  I’m not, and I don’t mind it at all.  Traffic means that even if it is a poor article, my Google page rank increases, sending more traffic and increasing my voice of advocacy.  I do this for advocacy, not for ego (or at least, so I say).  I don’t really care what you think about me, but I want you to listen to my views because I want to change your mind.  But for David, he deserves to make a living at this, and I ask that you stop by every day to see what you can do to send him traffic.

Kurt Hofmann:

Frum notes that about 42 percent of police deaths this year were by gunfire. Whether that statistic is intended to justify the shooting death of unarmed Michael Brown, or the outrageously heavy-handed efforts to quell the unrest (a task now being handed off by the heavily militarized police to the actual military, as the National Guard is brought in), we can only guess.

Frum also asks if anyone thinks that “things [would] be better in Ferguson if the demonstrators were armed.” Well, some of the brutalized demonstrators might.

Perhaps the most chilling of this series of tweets was his observation about the supposed law enforcement need for heavy body armor:

Fewer guns in hands of the policed ==> less need for body armor on those who do the policing …

Oh good grief.  We just can’t get away from Frum can we?  Visit Kurt’s piece to see his full analysis.  As for my comments, I think that David Frum is an idiot.  And I think he’s chicken little.  And I think he should feel bad about himself.

Even the NYT is asking Who Will Stand Up For Christians?  Well, not the Christian church.  As I have pointed out, they don’t give a damn.

David Codrea:

“Suppose, for example, that a new, unregulated and highly lethal weapon were developed before a statute was enacted,” the Center speculated, arguing “the weapon would not be protected because it would not be in common use.”

In other words, every new development in personal weapons technology will, by default, be denied to We the People by the very body charged with facilitating a citizen militia and expressly forbidden from infringing with the right of the people to keep and bear arms. That the authorities have it in common use won’t matter. So much for Founding intent. So much for freedom.

So no new weapons developments are included under the rubric of the second amendment?  Do these judges give their decisions even the slightest review for logic, constitutionality and feasibility (new weapons developments are often vetted and proven in the civilian market, or in other words, where the money is, before it ever gets to the standing army (which the constitution said nothing about).

Kurt Hofmann:

Surprisingly, the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence (CSGV) counts itself among those who believe the brutal suppression of Ferguson is grossly excessive, according to their press release:

The Coalition to Stop Gun Violence (CSGV) is closely watching the situation in Ferguson, Missouri and we are deeply disturbed by what we see unfolding there. Our hearts go out to the family of Michael Brown, Jr. as they deal with an unimaginable loss.

What makes this surprising is that CSGV has long defended virtually unlimited power of government, to the point of denying the legitimacy of armed resistance against a government rounding up citizens for the concentration camps.

Don’t bother them with issues of logic.  To them, consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds, whereas for most normal people, it’s the way life must be lived.

Mike Vanderboegh:

A leaked document from the Department of Homeland Security’s Office of Intelligence and Analysis predicts increased “anti-government violence over the next year.” The document says the inspiration for violence is Cliven Bundy’s Bunkerville standoff with the Bureau of Land Management from earlier in the year.

I would have rather thought that the standoff at Bundy’s ranch was a symptom rather than the inspiration or catalyst?  I guess it goes to show how detached the elites are.

David Codrea:

A former lieutenant and a current sheriff, each implying the other is lying, doesn’t cut it. Whichever way it falls, the public deserves to know the truth.

You mean to tell me that a LEO is lying?  Say it ain’t so!  Actually, while this idea is not popular among the “only ones” and their gun control advocates who talk incessantly about them being trained to handle firearms and react under pressure, a friend (former captain of a large PD) tells me that most officers pull their weapons once per year at qualification and no more.

Mike Vanderboegh on the men we left behind in North Vietnam.  I had always suspected that.

Mike Vanderboegh on Kevlar helmets and their capabilities.  Worth reading this post.

This incident shows that you should always be ready for a gun battle in situations of self defense.

Vega was armed and tried to defend his family. There was a dramatic gun battle that reportedly involved the mortally wounded agent telling his father, “Keep shooting, Dad.” At one point Vega’s mother grabbed an AR-15 and fired away at the killers’ fleeing car.

Two million new Latino voters will swamp the GOP.  And now you understand again why Obama is doing what he’s doing.

David Codrea:

But Lanier and D.C. government didn’t just give up and fold. While these department-protective steps were being taken, legal staff was moving quickly to stall things. The city filed a request for a 180-day stay.

They didn’t have long to wait for a decision.

Judge Scullin ordered a 90-day stay, reflecting an agreement between plaintiff and defense counsels that “plaintiffs do not oppose a 90-day stay—starting immediately.”

MPD was quick to pounce.

“In light of the court issuing a stay of the Palmer v. District of Columbia order, Police Chief Cathy L. Lanier today issued a notice to members of the Metropolitan Police Department rescinding two teletypes related to firearms,” a media release explained. “All laws related to firearms regulation and crimes remain in effect.”

Because neither the judges nor law enforcement (in D.C.) cares about your personal protection.  They’re immoral and only care about themselves.  Contrast that with a Sheriff from my own home state of North Carolina.  One solution is to relocate and leave them to their own devices, as have many gun manufacturers from the North.

David Codrea:

“One thing Manfre said he and many other law enforcement officials would like to see in terms of sensible gun control is a ban on assault weapons,” the PR piece masked as news noted. “’In my opinion, there is no reason to have an assault weapon,’ he said” …

“[O]ne of his former lieutenants — a one-time firearms instructor the sheriff laid off in 2013 — said Manfre has a history of poor performance firing his agency-issued Glock model 17, a 9 mm semi-automatic pistol,” the report explains.

Manfre doesn’t think I should be able to have semi-automatic weapons.  I don’t believe that Manfre should be armed at all because he is dangerous.  There.  We’re even.

Kurt Hofmann:

But it is they, the “progressives,” who hope to keep these most vulnerable members of society disarmed and defenseless. It is they who claim that the best protection for such people is “hate crime” laws, making it “more illegaller” to commit heinous violence against someone if the assailant was motivated by hate for a group his victim is a part of, rather than anything about the victim himself.

With Kurt, I think hate crime laws are an abomination.  It is man trying to control thought rather than punishing behavior.  I may disagree vehemently with the chosen lifestyle of someone, but my disagreement doesn’t in the least remove, obviate or nullify the God-given right to self defense, which is irrevocable.

Fox News:

Should owners of firearms be required to carry gun liability insurance to cover the potential risks their weapons pose?

No.  But I was just wondering whether an insurance company might want to charge higher premiums for someone not armed due to being a higher risk of assault without the proper means of self defense.

David Codrea:

That last part is especially important. I went to see “America” yesterday and found it is nothing like the snotty and insulting put-downs on sites like U.S. News & World Report (“the paranoid style in conservative politics”) and Salon.com (“Dinesh D’Souza’s laughable embarrassment”). If anything, those attack pieces serve to bolster the thesis of the film, that there are two different visions of what America has been, is and should be about, with detractors relying heavily on one of the main subjects of the documentary, hard-left “community organizer” Saul Alinsky, particularly through their obvious and heavy-handed employment of his Rule Five “ridicule” tactic specified in “Rules for Radicals.”

I didn’t post this in time for you to listen live, but you can listen to the archives here.

Word of the day.

So Ben-Yehuda followed up with a suggestion: “Another name we can call this tool and truthfully we say that this name is more pleasant. For as the name of this tool in French (Fusil), German (Flinte) and Italian (Fucile), is derived from the stone from which one forages fire[Flint], since in the beginning pistols would be ignited by a pound on the above mentioned stone. It is true that this had already changed and there is no reason to call it after this characteristic. But we in Hebrew have a word for a stone of this type, and also of flames of fire.”

He went on to describe the word we had discussed: “The root is K-D-KH. And the name is ekdakh. Up to now linguists have been unable to define well what kind of stone this is. In Arabic kaddakh – a stone from which fire is struck. Anyway, even if we do find out what stone an ekdakh is, or decide on a stone to use it as a name for, this name is uncommon in speech, and its form and meaning of starting fire which it contains in it, is well equipped to designate the tool we are discussing. And thus we think and feel that it would be good to designate it with the name ekdakh.”

And so it was that the word ekdakh became the Hebrew word for pistol.

David Codrea says he figured his most recent column would be controversial.

Still, if one is to credit backers of such measures with being sincere, it makes little sense to demand background checks in one case, but to not only turn a blind eye, but to attack people for advocating doing them on the intentionally undocumented.  So why haven’t the “gun safety” groups joined in demanding background checks on illegal aliens, particularly with well-documented tie-ins to increases in crimes[?]

Controversial in import, perhaps, but not in facts.  We’ve discussed it before.  The Democrats want the illegals because of votes.  The GOP wants them because they want low paid workers who must live [in part] off the backs of the middle class, thus providing corporate welfare.  The GOP is in bed with the crony capitalists.  You want to see the NRA’s alleged power evaporate into nothing?  Flood the country with another ten million illegals who are given the right to vote.

Kurt Hofmann:

If the military stumbles upon new technology to make firearms more effective, we the people are owed access to that technology, and we must take it, by whatever means necessary.

Besides, as Kurt notes in his article, this isn’t a one way street.  I have always and will continue to claim that a new firearm or design isn’t fully vetted until it is released to the civilian market.  Soldiers and Marines work with what they are issued.  We get to buy what we want because it works the best.  We are the test laboratory, not the military.

Mike Vanderboegh:

What I hear is that Malloy has issued whispered, oh-so-quiet orders not have any enforcement of the Intolerable Act until after his re-election. After that, however, he will turn KGB Lawlor loose to wreak havoc. Voters in CT should be reminded forcefully that a vote for Malloy is a vote for the arrest and possible death of their friends and neighbors. Lord willing, I intend to go to CT just before the election in the last week of October to make that point. I will be in CO the week before that to do the same thing to Hickenlooper.

Go get ’em Mike.  I’m sure glad that Mike’s on our side.  Let’s support him however we can.

Finally, Muslims declare jihad against dogs.  Sorry folks.  My dog is a non-negotiable, just like my guns and my theological views.  Now pardon me while I go smooch with my Doberman.

David Codrea:

The use of “professional” opinions in this piece amounts to journalistic bait and switch when they are presented as subject matter experts on topics outside their accredited fields. They’ve never heard, they guess and, they have no opinion. Holy cow!

Said by one commenter, menckenlite, “Control freaks love psychiatry, a means of social control with no Due Process protections. It is a system of personal opinion masquerading as science.”  Psychiatry is pseudoscience, and in this case a bunch of pseudoscientists are addressing a policy issue for which they have no training and no anecdotal bank of guesses and probable outcomes.  Why would anyone expect anything else?

David Codrea:

“Effective immediately, pursuant to the decision in Palmer … and the directive of the Attorney General of the District of Columbia, members of the Metropolitan Police Department shall not enforce D.C. Official Code … until further notice,” that directive instructed.

It also provided three sample scenarios, the first noting a D.C. resident carrying an unregistered firearm should be so charged, the second noting a Vermont resident with no criminal record would be free to leave (with the potential for further investigation) …

Hey, investigate this, bitch.  God gives people the right and duty of self defense.  You will answer one day to God for your advocacy.  In the mean time, may every assaulted man or woman in your jurisdiction shoot back without your help or presence so that you can see what an impediment you are to peace and stability.

S&W settles with the SEC.  This sounds to me like a few people within the organization went a little rogue and did some untoward things.  I’m glad for S&W that this is settled, and it doesn’t reflect on a good group of people.  Now, if we can just get them to stop selling firearms to LEOs that civilians can’t have.

Gun violence is not a public health issue.  No, and doctors have enough to worry about to spend time on policy issues as a profession.

Standing up to the people of the gun.  “Assault weapons are not home entertainment. They are engineered to kill people. If our society can’t eschew this menace, then we may as well surrender to the People of the Gun.”  Yea, well you may as well go ahead and surrender now, to use your phrase, since you will never get our guns.

Via Uncle, New York DHS will pay you $500 to rat out prepper neighbors buying legal goods.

New York’s Division of Homeland Security is posting signs on businesses to encourage people to snitch on fellow citizens who buy such things as MRE’s (Meals Ready to Eat), ammunition, flash lights, match containers, gas masks and other items deemed to be ‘prepper’ in nature.

In this video a girl working at LZ Army Navy Surplus store in Auburn, NY tell us how a state trooper put up a flyer in their window which encourages customers to call the New York State Terrorism Tips Line to report this ‘suspicious activity’ under the as part of the “See Something, Say Something” campaign.

This is obviously nothing more than the beginning of the cultivation of ‘average citizen snitches’ who will rat out on their fellow citizens…

Hey, it is, after all, Amerika.

Finally, Mike Vanderboegh recommends equipment for obtaining water that, frankly, I hadn’t considered.  I think I will have to order one.

David Codrea:

That black gun rights activists are treated differently than white ones over the same advocacy issue is racist, pure and simple. But then again, what do I know, being what an official representative of a national gun ban group dismissed as “a white gun nut”?

Yea, it is, and you know what else is racist?  All Jim Crow laws regarding gun purchase and ownership.  So when you hear CLEOs oppose shall issue laws and talk about how they really have their finger on the pulse of the community and can tell if someone is a potential danger when the NICS can’t … blah blah blah … they’re really saying, “We don’t want those horrible black folk to have guns, do we?”  They’re bigots, pure and simple.

Kurt Hofmann:

Johnson accuses the NRA of “falsely arguing that .50 caliber weapons pose no threat to the general public,” despite there being not a single documented case of a person in the U.S. having been killed with a rifle chambered for the .50 BMG cartridge, and despite the rifles having been on the civilian market ever since Ronnie Barrett sold his first “Barrett Light Fifty” forty-two years ago.

Kurt goes on to explain the artificial use of sources – that is, making things up because you think the reader won’t actually go there and find out for himself.  I find Media Matters amusing, but note that I didn’t say interesting.  Kurt is known (by me at least) for his use of logic.  David Codrea is no mean analyst himself, but one thing you also get with David is clever post titles, clever prose, and illustrative commentary that invokes memories that most people share in common in order to explain a point.  When you read Media Matters, their title lines aren’t even interesting.  They go like this: “Someone said thus-and-such when he really should have said so-and-so, and he’s not sorry about it.”  It’s awful, really.  Media Matters is the most boring, dull, dreary, dry, and annoying site on the web, and there are a lot of dreary sites on the web.

Kurt Hofmann:

A Constitutionally guaranteed, fundamental human right of the individual, and these people demand the power to take it away without a conviction, without an indictment, without an arrest or formal charges, and now without “concrete facts” or “irrefutable evidence.” They seem more than a little confused as to who the “terrorists” here are–perhaps a mirror would help.

And there is an increasing willingness to affect the lives of good people based on whether they might in the future pose some sort of undefined risk, as if it’s possible to prove a universal negative.

Kurt Hofmann:

… there is perhaps an even more glaring contradiction in this proposed amendment to the Missouri constitution. The language of the amendment, while providing an explicit statement that the right to keep and bear arms is “unalienable,” also contains a provision granting the state explicit permission to “alien” that right …

Well, first of all, I’m quick to say I don’t believe in the second amendment, I believe in God, and He gives me my rights, not the state.  However, it is  helpful for the state to recognize that fact and make it explicit for everyone, and in this case it sounds like they are making matters worse.  Best to leave it alone until they really believe in unalienable rights – and in God.

Via David Codrea, Liston Matthews puts some tough questions to Ben Carson.  David will be watching.  So will I.  I consider Allen West a much better man all around, although not electable.  In fact, it doesn’t appear that anyone I like is electable.  Why even vote?  If the GOP fields someone like Chris Christie or Jeb Bush, I’ll stay at home and laugh.

Sharia Law In America:

“Two leaders of a mosque tried to cut off the hand of a man they allege stole jars of money from the house of worship, Philadelphia police said … Investigators say the two males accused the victim of stealing jars of money from the Masjid … The males, police say, dragged the victim to the rear of the property and attempted to cut off his hand with a machete.”

You are buying guns and ammunition, right?

ZeroHedge: The American Economy is a Ponzi Scheme: “Financial bubbles are what economist Robert Shiller calls “naturally occurring Ponzis” because the psychology of ever-rising prices and profits fuels an inflow of greater fools that sustains the bubble until all available greater fools have sunk their cash and credit into the bubble.”  Then the ponzi paint peels away to show the rotten wood of the economy.

WRSA: The Secret Government Rulebook For Labeling You A Terrorist.

And via Mike, the comment of the week: “A system built upon debt must eventually reach a debt saturation point. We are already there as world wide assets are dwarfed by world wide debt and the inability to paythe interest. Thus central banks have already resorted to their last hope – money printing. That inevitably leads to currency destruction, chaos, and the breakdown of society.”

And speaking of honesty and clarity, Mike says it short and sweet.  As for me, I don’t care if you wear a uniform or not.  If you’re the enemy, you’re the enemy.  And anyone who tries to take my weapons is the enemy.

Finally, Guns.com gives us the ultimate home defense handgun guide.  Meh.  There’s nothing ultimate about it.  He doesn’t even discuss Springfield Armory XDms, and no 1911s in the mix.  Too much Glock love for me.  Just insufferable.  I admit I would like to have me some of that Ruger GP100.  We’ll see how it stacks up against my S&W R8.

David Codrea:

Can you imagine how Rolling Stone would howl if someone from the “right” were to call for “Second Amendment remedies” against, say SEIU, or the Southern Poverty Law Center or Everytown? Or Organizing for Action? How does Yawn feel about his guy singling out “the corporatized wing of the Democratic Party” — the folks like Wenner, who put Obama, Pelosi and the entire leadership in office — for the same treatment?

They would howl and wouldn’t think a thing about the hobgoblins of inconsistency.  After all, progressives only think something is terrorism when they disagree with it.

In a 2013 e-mail, physics professor Bob Lange wrote that the Benghazi attacks were “not terrorism.” He explained, “It is not terrorism to kill representatives of a government that you are opposed to.” Bringing the conversation back to Israel, he noted, “If an Israeli soldier protecting a settlement is killed by Palestinian militants, it is not terrorism.”

Kurt Hofmann:

If, after all, government officials do not fear the wrath of an armed citizenry, the deterrent effect provided by the Constitutional guarantee of the people’s ability to deny a “government monopoly on force” has failed. If the government insists on ignoring both the Constitutionally imposed limits on its power, and disregarding armed citizens’ ability to enforce those limits, the only option remaining is for we the people to actively refresh the tree of liberty.

Sounds exactly right to me, and I agree with every bit of the sentiment expressed by Larry Pratt, including the unction (and good judgment) with which he communicated it.