SSCC #358/#359–Chicago

He bashed Luis Cordero Jr. over the head with a revolver over and over, cursing all the while, according to Cordero, his girlfriend and witnesses.

Then it was Cordero’s girlfriend’s turn for terror.

“He put his gun in my mouth and said: ‘You better shut the f— up, bitch, or I’ll blow your brains out,’ ” the girlfriend, Heather Rzany, told the Chicago Sun-Times.

The man with the gun wasn’t a gangbanger, an angry relative or an armed robber.

He was an off-duty Chicago cop, far outside his Englewood district, getting involved in a noise complaint being handled by a private security guard on the Northwest Side, Cordero and Rzany allege. And now he’s being sued for brutality and investigated by the Independent Police Review Authority.

No worries though because this is in a place where despite Heller and McDonald it is still increasingly difficult to obtain a firearm.  So the probability of either of these citizens putting up a fight against this anointed tyrant was nil allowing him to operate without fear.

Now why would I put this in the sponsored count though?  Simple, because of the following:

The lawsuit, which seeks unspecified damages, accuses an on-duty officer who responded to the beating of letting Gofron walk away — and of failing to document his name, badge number and where he worked.

Yup, it’s handy when your buddies can try and cover for you.  Isn’t Chicago great?

State Sponsored Criminal #358: Chris Gofron

359: Jason Burg

Because being a cop means you can get drunk while carrying a gun and do what ever the hell you want.

Barron is the owner, editor, and principal author at The Minuteman, a competitive shooter, and staff member for Boomershoot. Even in his free time he’s merging his love and knowledge of computers and technology with his love of firearms.

He has a BS in electrical engineering from Washington State University. Immediately after college he went into work on embedded software and hardware for use in critical infrastructure. This included cryptographic communications equipment as well as command and control devices that were using that communications equipment. Since then he’s worked on just about everything ranging from toys, phones, other critical infrastructure, and even desktop applications. Doing everything from hardware system design, to software architecture, to actually writing software that makes your athletic band do its thing.

Rule #1 Know of who you are talking to

I actually have numerous rule #1’s however the one I’m invoking today is know of who you are talking to, even more so of that of which you speak, especially if someone is offering advice to try to keep you out of jail.  Doubly so if they’re also trying to make sure that you realize it is quite possible you could be the cause of a wildfire.

So here’s the conversation for those of you who don’t know what I’m talking about.  Yes feel free to laugh at the guy who thinks he’s educating Janelle about how explosives work.

image

Aaron, let me enlighten you as to the background of my wife an I.  We are both staff for FlashTek.  Since you probably don’t know what that is, it’s run by Joe Huffman and is the company that is responsible for putting on Boomershoot every year.  Here’s the quick rundown from this year.

In one weekend we manufacture approximately 2000 lbs of explosives and are quite familiar with what they are, how they work, and the possible consequences of both their use and misuse.

We both spend a lot of time outside of preparation for the main event with experiments and development of the mixture, targets, and other things both pertaining to the technical aspects for the explosives as well as the event itself.

On the fire and environmental factors:

You do not actually need excess fuel in the form of gasoline to start a fire.  Actually the chemicals involved in the explosive can cause a fire on their own.  Boomerite actually can spontaneously combust when subjected to UV sunlight but your extensive knowledge of explosives has you obviously knowledgeable on that fact.  Do you know all the failure conditions for the materials involved in Tannerite to make your statement about fire not being an issue.  Further no reaction is 100%, actually far from it.  Some of the material from the explosion will not actually combust and be consumed in the reaction.  These materials can be problematic as it can react with organic material as it breaks down.  From a cursory inspection none of the materials immediately seem to be a fire danger but we thought the same thing about Boomerite.

The bottom line is that explosions are caused by combustion and to cause them we use materials that are prone to combust, quite quickly.  Yes reactive targets have been blamed for fires, including some recently here in the state of Washington.  While I’m not sure that the targets were the cause, it is certainly a possibility and not outside the realm of reality.  As a FYI when that happened, it was still relatively wet out here, still is actually.

However that doesn’t change that you are actually within the fire season for the State of Washington, as well as Idaho.  You can’t control the weather and just because things seem moist and safe doesn’t actually make it so.  Further there are already numerous wild fires including one in Colorado and another in Montana.  While further away, it should still serve as a reminder that caution and vigilance is important.

Be careful, be aware, have a plan to put it out, and make sure to turn the soil where you detonated the targets after you’re done to separate and disperse components.  But you, who knows so much about explosives were going to do that already.  Right?

Now on to my biggest point of contention.

This is Technically a Crime in Washington State

Washington is not exactly the friendliest of states with regards to explosives. As Janelle pointed out RCW 70.74 actually outlines many things that are prohibited regarding explosives. Including the fact that RCW 70.74.022 technically requires that any person mixing explosives have a license. While I fully and whole heartily sympathize and think it’s B.S. the law is still the law. It’s kind of funny that many of us whine about how congress critters ignore the law and then we turn around and do it ourselves. But that’s a level of irony for a whole different post.

But you’re not going to be in an urban area so how would you be caught I hear you cry.  I would hope to shout since discharging a firearm is illegal in most cities and townships.  But you should know you are not safe just because you’re in the middle of nowhere.  All it takes is for one person to see you and dislike what you’re doing and you’ll be in a world of trouble.  Joe had problems because someone who was near a quarry he had permission to be at called the sheriff and the ATF.  Joe learned of the situation after and an ATF Agent, not inspector (also known as the branch of Jack Booted Thugs), tracked him down and contacted him weeks after the incident.  Note Joe has a license to manufacture and handle explosives and permissions to be on the property.  Joe also knew inspectors on a first name basis with people in the same office as the agent.  Joe had every i dotted and t crossed and was legal and clear in what he was doing.

What cards do you have to play like that if someone doesn’t like what you’re doing?  You will be in violation 70.74.022 and if they attempt to classify the explosive as a firework you will be violating 70.77.495.  All it takes is some people trying to enjoy the wilderness that are disrupted by your activities and with a description of your vehicle you life can start rolling down hill.

FYI, I’m more familiar with how the legal system works that most people would ever like to be.  There is a phrase I often say that I am going to repeat here, it’s how prosecutors think:

It takes a good prosecutor to convict a guilty man, it takes a great prosecutor to convict an innocent one.

Given the overall destruction of Mens Rea three isn’t much the nanny state wont outlaw.  Even given the fact that it’s nanny stateish I would be very careful about willfully or knowingly committing crimes, much less posting to Facebook about your intent and will to do so.  That’s just not smart or bright at all.  Especially since it can be brought out as evidence later showing you knew full well about the legalities involved.

Will you probably get away without a problem? Probably.  Does it have the potential to go south on you?  Most definitely.  Do you need to be prepared about the potential to cause a fire? Yes, even though it isn’t extremely likely it can happen.  It may not even happen while you’re there but a day or two later.

What the wife was saying and I’m repeating:

Be careful, know what you’re doing is dangerous and can have consequences that you’re not immediately aware of, and be prepared to deal with them because you are responsible.  You would think that common sense would work, but common sense isn’t always so common.  Instead of walking over people thinking you know more than them and just dismissing their comments for whatever reason, maybe you should just shut up and listen.  They might have a reason for what they’re saying.

Barron is the owner, editor, and principal author at The Minuteman, a competitive shooter, and staff member for Boomershoot. Even in his free time he’s merging his love and knowledge of computers and technology with his love of firearms.

He has a BS in electrical engineering from Washington State University. Immediately after college he went into work on embedded software and hardware for use in critical infrastructure. This included cryptographic communications equipment as well as command and control devices that were using that communications equipment. Since then he’s worked on just about everything ranging from toys, phones, other critical infrastructure, and even desktop applications. Doing everything from hardware system design, to software architecture, to actually writing software that makes your athletic band do its thing.

Quote of the Day – The Redneck Engineer(06/27/2012)

Now, for those who tell themselves, “Oh, that could never happen to me. I live in a GOOD neighborhood!’ or “That sort of thing doesn’t happen around here!”, let me tell you about my neighborhood. Most of my neighbors are retirees, many are veterans. Everybody is fairly close-knit, we all look out for each other. This is not a “poor” neighborhood, and while not quite a “rich” neighborhood, crime is all but non-existent here. Defense situations can (and do) happen to almost anyone, anywhere.

The Redneck Engineer - Defensive mindsets can prevent defensive shootings.
June 27th, 2012


[First let me say, go read the whole thing.  Seriously, click over there and read it.  It is every man's worst nightmare come to pass.  This nightmare had a happy ending though in that not even a shot was fired.  Even if it had turned south, it was obvious who had the deck stacked in their favor.

Evil doesn't call ahead, it doesn't give advanced notice, and it doesn't have set boundaries.  While some places may have more frequent incidents no place is exempt from a visit by goblins.  There is a reason I carry a gun, even with how quite it is where I live.   

There is only one person I can absolutely guarantee will always be present when the SHTF.  Myself.  A cop may or not be present, friends may or may not be with me, but one thing is for certain, I am in that situation and the conditions will not magically change.  I have to depend on myself to get out of the situation, just the same ultimately my wife has to be able to depend on herself.  There is no question if danger comes around while I am present, I will be in the middle of that incident.  That however is of no benefit when I am not present.  She must be capable of defending herself from anyone who would wish to do her harm.

I don't want my wife to have to depend on me.  Far from it actually.  I want my wife to be able to think and act independently so that when the SHTF she knows how to react.  Not only can she react, but I know she'll be able to have my back without my asking or instruction.

My Spouse has my back - By Oleg Vok

Why would I want that?  See The Redneck Engineer's story.  He didn't need to be there and she rocked that situation like a boss. Yeah, it could have been a horrible nightmare, but in the end it had a happy ending.

This however also skips over what he said in his post title, that type of awareness and level headed thinking can mean that there won't even be a shot fired.  So remember, be careful out there and carry your guns. There's goblins in them thar hills, remember it.  -B]

h/t Bob S.

Barron is the owner, editor, and principal author at The Minuteman, a competitive shooter, and staff member for Boomershoot. Even in his free time he’s merging his love and knowledge of computers and technology with his love of firearms.

He has a BS in electrical engineering from Washington State University. Immediately after college he went into work on embedded software and hardware for use in critical infrastructure. This included cryptographic communications equipment as well as command and control devices that were using that communications equipment. Since then he’s worked on just about everything ranging from toys, phones, other critical infrastructure, and even desktop applications. Doing everything from hardware system design, to software architecture, to actually writing software that makes your athletic band do its thing.

SSCC #353 – ATF

Rochester police and federal agents made a mistake in Charlotte this week that has one woman baffled and frightened. She wants to know how they could mistake her house for one they were supposed to raid in a drug bust.

Simple really, they don’t hire the best and brightest.  Tyrannical bureaucrats don’t want enforcers who can think, much less read and tell the difference between the address on the warrant and the house they just arrived at.

How close was this almost a fatal screw up for the ATF as well as the home owner?

“My son had heard me arguing with this man and it was not a voice he’d recognize. My son is a hunter, he put a bullet in the chamber of his gun. They heard that, they yelled down long gun, at that point there he told another ATF agent that was with me, handcuff her and take her out,” Dominicos said.

However the real take away is the following:

“I’m still terrified. It’s almost like a P.T.S.D. experience, you keep hearing things. You think oh my God I hear a door slam, I hear someone pulling into my driveway. I see a light it’s like oh my God are they back?”

That’s the point.  Law enforcement and the government want us to live in fear.  Their actions exercise the very definition of the word terrorism.    The best part of the story though is the discrepancy between the home owners story, which is considerably more believable, and the statement released by police.

“Upon encountering an elderly resident, the team realized that they were at the wrong location at that time and left the premises.”

No you did not, you put her in cuffs and took her outside until someone bothered to read the house number and street name and noticed it didn’t match the warrant.

Considering this can happen to anyone, anytime, and quite easily can have dire consequences, why is this considered acceptable?  Especially since unsurprisingly the bad guys pretend to be cops.  At this point it’s better to just let the bullets file and sort it out afterwards.  Maybe if cops would knock first and be civil about it this wouldn’t be a problem.  If you think the screw ups are rare:


View Original Map and Database

Don’t give me the line about how serving a warrant is dangerous because the majority of warrants served are for non-violent offenses.  When the criminal is actually dangerous, they negotiate him to come out to reduce collateral damage.  There is the argument about the destruction of evidence, well if we weren’t serving warrants over victimless crimes involving nouns that wouldn’t be a problem now would it?

Even better though, with the consistently increasing use of SWAT teams in unnecessary circumstances, the number of people caught in the middle who are innocent continues to increase.  You can not use the service more and expect it to also become more accurate about it’s use, if anything it will become less accurate.

No knocks, like the TSA, need to be done away with.  They have both grown since September 11th and it’s eroding and destroying the last semblances of freedom and liberty.  The police state is here and we need to put an end to it.

State Sponsored Criminals 353: The ATF

Because it’s not the job of the swat team to read the warrant or make sure they’re at the right house.  If there’s collateral damage, the law-abiding citizen should have just behaved, he had no reason to defend himself.

via Uncle.

Barron is the owner, editor, and principal author at The Minuteman, a competitive shooter, and staff member for Boomershoot. Even in his free time he’s merging his love and knowledge of computers and technology with his love of firearms.

He has a BS in electrical engineering from Washington State University. Immediately after college he went into work on embedded software and hardware for use in critical infrastructure. This included cryptographic communications equipment as well as command and control devices that were using that communications equipment. Since then he’s worked on just about everything ranging from toys, phones, other critical infrastructure, and even desktop applications. Doing everything from hardware system design, to software architecture, to actually writing software that makes your athletic band do its thing.

An Open Response to Joan Peterson

Joan,

One must be very careful when writing a response.  If you’re not careful you can come across as two possible things:

  1. A hypocrite
  2. Crazy

Your response (link warning) does both of those quite handedly.  So I am not sure you will be able to understand any of this or comprehend the logical reasoning, but as one of the men who is responsible for what the CSGV considers the most offensive response I can’t sit back and ignore this.  I cannot sit back and ignore it as you spread lies and attack those who are my friends.  My comments will remain open as always, and the only thing to be deleted from this thread will be SPAM, personal attacks, and things that wouldn’t be allowed in a decent society.

So first let me apologize since I have no doubt this post is going to go Kevin Baker.  So let’s get the broad facts out-of-the-way.


Fact:  On the 8th of January 2012 there was a  Brady Campaign organized vigil held for victims of Gun violence.  The Brady Campaign defined this vigil as being for victims of gun violence.  This statement was issued in a Youtube video posted December 18th, 2011.

“On January 8th, we’re focusing on people. Real people, men, women, and children.  Mothers and fathers, husbands and wives, sons and daughters, friends and coworkers, Americans, taken too soon by gun violence.  On January 8th we ask you to take part in a nation wide candle light vigil to remember those who have been lost.  And to let our elected leaders know that we want action to prevent these tragedies….”

Those words are right straight out of the video from the Brady Campaign, and the video emphasizes that “Too Many Victims” was just about gun violence.

Update: Further the website (link warning) also stated:

“Imagine stopping a bullet before it kills a child. Impossible? Not with
your help! All across America people are coming together to save lives
from preventable gun violence. Will you join them, and the Brady
Campaign, as we host a nationwide candlelight vigil to honor victims of
gun violence?”

via Joe


Fact:  Weer’d on or about the 28th of December issued a statement that gun-rights advocates should participate and memorialize all violence, not just gun violence.

So on January 8th I ask everybody to post a picture of a lit candle and you carry gun. Because lit candles don’t do a whole lot but cast a meager amount of light…but a loaded gun in the hands of lawful citizens can do wonders to protect innocent lives from harm.

Also “Gun Violence” is a bogus and made-up term, so on January 8th I ask you all to light a candle to stop VIOLENCE, and show you have the means to do just that.


Fact: On the 8th of January a pair of gun bloggers and a group of USPSA competitors created a video of their vigil to violence.  This was a vigil to all violence, not just gun violence.  Shooters iterated how candles don’t stop violence.  One shooter, myself, relayed a personal story.

Both of my parents had defensive gun uses, it wasn’t a candle that stopped the violence, it was a gun.

It closed with remembrance to two victims of violence.

A candle would not have helped Kim’s husband who was stabbed.

Nor would it have helped her grandmother who was violently beaten for her purse.

That video focused on remembering violence and illustrating two important facts.

  1. You don’t have to be a victim.  You can fight back.
  2. There are more victims out there than just victims of “gun violence”.

Fact: There was a very nasty response to our vigil for all victims of violence with our statement of how we refuse to be a victim.

image_2_3

This included name calling and another outing rampage by the CSGV.  The CSGV on their Facebook also twisted words attempting to turn our vigil into something it was not.

CSGV-Correction

image via Miguel


Fact:  The Anti-Rights supporters have a history of threatening rhetoric and ill will towards who have different view points.  Unlike you, when I make a statement, I present facts and evidence to prove it.

CSGV_Harm1

This isn’t a one time occurrence either.

CSGV_Harm2

See this post from Joe as well for even more.


Now lets talk about your response.  Your response towards Jennifer shows your lack of critical thinking.  Writing in red is Joan’s own words.

So Jennifer thinks no one would light a candle for Lydia? Who says? Why didn’t Jennifer come to one of our vigils and light a candle for Lydia? Because she would rather attack the vigils which were in honor and memory of shooting victims. So, Jennifer-sorry you missed our vigils. We would welcome you.

Did you even read the story of Lydia?  Joan, you stated right there in your own words that Lydia wasn’t welcome.  The Brady Campaign video as shown above in the facts that Lydia wouldn’t count as a victim in your vigil.  Lydia wasn’t a victim of “gun violence” so why would she be included?

There is only one option as to why you would want other victim classes to appear at your vigil for gun violence.  You want to dance in their blood as well to make it appear they are victims of gun violence to provide you another political tool.

The real reason you dislike Jennifer’s post is because it shows your bias against other victims of violence.  Jennifer herself is a victim, yet you attack her without thinking about what she is saying.

You specifically call out comments that prove what I have said above.  My personal favorite is that you attacked the comment from A Girl and Her Gun.

That is more powerful than anything Joan or the likes of her could ever say.You are the one I admire. The one who fights for the victims and for the fight against violence. I am immensely thankful I am getting to get to know you. Also, Joan is stupid.

A Girl and Her Gun is another victim of violence Joan.  You even point it out earlier in your post as if some how citing it makes it irrelevant.

The truth is though it’s that other victims of violence make you uncomfortable Joan.  They illustrate that Gun Violence is a horrible metric and ignores a large segment of the population.  Gun violence implies that those victims are some how worth more than someone who was violated without the use of a gun.

You say the following:

These are the people who read my blog and then go and comment on other people’s blogs. These are the people who the NRA represents. These are the people who think they can threaten, demean, name-call, abuse, belittle, and mock. During and after the candlelight vigils  to honor victims of gun violence, the gun rights extremists ramped up their rhetoric.

When did we threaten, demean, name-call, abuse, belittle or mock?  We didn’t ramp up our rhetoric, we called for remembering all victims of violence, not just the one’s you find politically convenient.  Which brings us to the next part of your statement.

Victims make them nervous. They don’t like victims. They say we are “dancing in the blood of victims” when we light candles and ring bells. What’s that all about anyway? It’s a statement made often.

I’m down right offended at that statement.  I absolutely care about anyone who is a victim.  I will do anything and everything to help them recover.  What we don’t like, and despise, is some victims being treated as if they are some how not significant or worthy of notice.  We don’t like the fact that anyone has become a victim in any type of crime.  Victims, the real ones, we love and support.  What we do want to accomplish is to lower the victimization rate.  Where you would prefer the law-abiding disarmed, we would prefer them to fight back.  We are willing to spend our time and money to help people not become victims.

Here is a nice presentation of the differences between our culture and yours with regards to how we treat victims.

Now why would I make a comment about “real victims”?  Well it’s because in your effort to inflate your gun violence statistics you include criminals in your count.  Criminals such as the man who broke into a woman’s house with a 12 inch hunting knife after she just lost her husband.  The woman shot and killed the attacker, yet you include him as a “Victim of Gun Violence”.  You know who was the real victim in that incident?  The poor woman who was not breaking the law and was forced into a situation to defend herself and her child.

Who really cares about victims Joan?  I wanted that woman and her child to survive.  I wanted that store clerk at the Kroger’s robbery to remain unharmed.  You however step up and defend the criminal.  You wanted that poor woman to be shot so she could be another clear-cut victim for you to exploit for political gains.  That’s why you’re a blood dancer.  You prey upon the suffering of others to push your political agenda.  Even with the positive outcome, you actively pursued the incident in furthering gun control.

There is a distinct difference in reaction after a horrible event occurs between our cultures Joan.  While we immediately lower our head in mourning, sad at what we have lost.  You go into overdrive pushing political legislation, giddy inside at the fuel it provides to pull at the emotional strings of the public.  You know when people are emotional they very rarely are thinking rationally.

Then you continue with:

What these folks don’t see is that their rigid resistance to any common sense gun laws that might actually prevent some of the shootings in this country results in more victims. Do they want more shooting victims? It’s odd that they don’t see how failure to do something has resulted in more victims.

That’s the thing Joan, we care about all victims.  Even more than that we want to enable people to have a choice and not be forced into victimhood.  As for the last sentence, your assumption is that doing anything is some how good.  What if you’re actions actually raise violent crime?  Oh that’s right, you would consider more overall crime for less gun crime a win.

And then, cynically, they try to find their own victims. The truth is that there are too many victims and they know it.

Are you questioning whether or not A Girl and Her Gun or Jennifer are victims of violence?  If so Joan, that’s just so wrong it’s not even funny.  You’re less of a victim than they are since they both experienced it in the first person, they have the point of view of your sister, not yourself.  Now if you’re not questioning that, are you saying we can’t find victims of Gun Control?   Because lets ask Suzanna Hupp about that one.  Honestly any victim in a gun free zone is a victim of gun control.  They have had their choice regarding their own self-defense made for them.

There are too many victims and it’s baffling that someone would be saying that victims should be disarmed.

So to the pro gun bloggers who find it amusing to mock victims and survivors of gun violence, your words are here for all to see and they aren’t pretty. They portray a group of people who seem to believe that anything can be written with no consequences. Their voices represent a few loud, obnoxious and offensive people who are attempting to influence public policy in our country. Shame on anyone for listening to the voices of these people. We should all be offended.

Again, you say we were mocking, where were we mocking?  Our words aren’t pretty because we’re telling the truth Joan.  You don’t find them pretty because the facts don’t support your false view of the world.  As for our voices only representing a few loud people, here’s a loud dose of truth.  Our impromptu effort that was completely unorganized resulted in well over a hundred of blog posts talking about victims they know and how they themselves are going to refuse to be a victim.  So if we’re in the minority, why isn’t our video disliked overwhelmingly?

That’s the difference between us Joan, you memorialize the past and twist history to infringe the rights of others.  We on the other hand memorialize, learn, and act.  We learned from our friends and family who were victims.  We learned that there is evil in the world and you don’t know when it will arrive on your door step.

You attempt to shame people for seeking more knowledge on the subject.  Here I am reading your post, I find it deplorable that someone could so readily come to the defense of criminals by attacking the law-abiding, but I’m not saying you don’t have a right to say it.  You’re upset because you don’t want people to see the truth.  You don’t want people to realize that they don’t have to be a victim, that they can fight back, and if they do fight back they can win.  You want us to be silent, well many of us would rather speak up because we find our lives worth it.

And one last thing- I wonder how the bloggers and the people who comment on them would like to see things like this said about them in public? It’s something to consider before posting offensive things about another person. Do people like this think they can say anything on the internet? Do they know the person on the other end of the offensive and rude comment are humans with feelings and families and friends who fear for them when they see stuff like this? There’s the thing about “turning the other cheek” and there’s the thing about “doing unto your neighbors”. Those are things I learned in my church and practice every day.

I don’t hide Joan.  I post blogs under my real name.  If you’re offended by us saying you don’t have to be a victim I suggest some serious therapy.  Who wants more victims in the world?  As for turning the other cheek and doing unto your neighbors, we do that.  We do it better than your side possibly can.

You, you who hate guns, you gave me nothing.
No hope.
No tools.
All that was offered me was a life of fear, of resentment, of bitterness, of dependence…
The gun community has offered me hope and strength, and courage.
They have taught me to have belief in myself.
They have asked nothing of me in return and, yet, I would give them my life.
Funny thing is, they would never ask me to.
This is where I belong.
These are my people.

As for myself personally I stop and help people all the time.  I’m also ready should that person in need of help actually be a predator preying upon the good.  The best compliment I ever received was not even directed at me, it was someone explaining my character to someone else, “He’s an Eagle Scout both literally and figuratively.”  I am the guy that goes and shovels his elderly neighbors driveway and then turns around and helps the single mother next door with hers.  I’m the guy who will get up and Oh Dark Thirty and come get you because you just had an auto wreck and you’re car is totaled.  I am the guy who will go out of his way to help anyone.  I am not the guy however who will stand to the side and let evil triumph.  I am not the guy who will surrender to criminals who have violated me and thus surrendered the right for me to be civil to them.  I don’t know where it says in the Bible that I should surrender Gods greatest gift to a criminal.

I am reminded of a lesson told by OldNFO recently.

One evening an old Cherokee told his grandson about a battle that goes on inside people.
He said, “My son, the battle is between two wolves inside us all.
“One is Evil –  It is anger, envy, jealousy, sorrow, regret, greed, arrogance, self-pity, guilt, resentment, inferiority, lies, false pride, superiority, and ego.
“The other is Good –  It is joy, peace, love, hope, serenity, humility, kindness, benevolence, empathy, generosity, truth, compassion and faith.”
The grandson thought about it for a minute and then asked his grandfather: “Which wolf wins?”
The old Cherokee simply replied, “The one you feed.”

Think long and hard about which wolf you are feeding Joan.  Our hand is extended to everyone Joan, any victim can come to us seeking help, and we will help them.  I will live my life with zero regrets and I resent people trying to force regrets upon me.  In the words of Sean Sorrentino:

When I reach the Pearly Gates, I want the first thing I will hear to be “Unload and show clear.” I don’t ever want to hear, “Why weren’t you carrying your gun?” Or worse “Because you weren’t carrying, your wife will be along as soon as her killer finishes up.”

If I were to arrive in heaven prematurely and not have fought every step of the way I feel that god would be disappointed that I would waste such a wonderful gift.  Those who would force others to waste that gift are most guilty of that sin.

I also wonder if these folks have mothers, sisters, children, brothers who see what they write and what they would think about their father, brother, son or daughter writing such vile things on the internet for all to see. At least I know that my integrity is in tact because I don’t choose to deploy tactics such as these. No comments will be published from pro gun activists on this post.

Lastly Joan, my mom does read my blog.  She sees exactly what I write.  Sadly my father passed away, but I know he would be proud of me for standing up to those who would force victimhood on others.  My mom is proud that I am willing to stand up and say what needs to be said despite the fear that I would be disliked for speaking my mind.  Being despised by someone who would force others to be disarmed and strip away their rights is not an insult to me Joan.  It is a badge of honor and one that I will gladly carry with me until the day I die.

As for my integrity I have a very strict set of rules to protect it.  I do so because “Integrity once lost can never be regained.”  As such I never make a statement that I am unwilling to defend in public.  This includes having open comments.  Integrity means being willing to stand up behind that which you say.

I suggest you really think long and hard about your response because you haven’t presented a single element to support your case.  Also those you attack are also standing out in the open willing to freely debate, yet you hide unwilling to defend your position in public.  That is a sign of someone who lacks integrity.

Barron is the owner, editor, and principal author at The Minuteman, a competitive shooter, and staff member for Boomershoot. Even in his free time he’s merging his love and knowledge of computers and technology with his love of firearms.

He has a BS in electrical engineering from Washington State University. Immediately after college he went into work on embedded software and hardware for use in critical infrastructure. This included cryptographic communications equipment as well as command and control devices that were using that communications equipment. Since then he’s worked on just about everything ranging from toys, phones, other critical infrastructure, and even desktop applications. Doing everything from hardware system design, to software architecture, to actually writing software that makes your athletic band do its thing.

Update: Suppressor Laws In Washington–HB 1016-2011-12

As I posted earlier an attempt is being made to change the suppressor laws in Washington again.

This morning I got an email from Rep. Joe Schmick regarding it’s status. The part of the email we all care about is:

The bill did have a hearing and already was voted out of the House Judiciary Committee yesterday. It passed 12-0 out of committee.

It’s nice to see it made it out of the Judiciary Committee unanimously, hopefully it will move easily through the rest of the process.

Update(1/17/2011):It has been passed to the rules committee to decide on a second reading.

Here’s a list of the Rules Committee:

Update (1/30/2011): Found an article in the Kitsap Sun.

What I really liked seeing though was (emphasis mine):

No one spoke against legalizing the use of suppressors and a half-dozen supported their use at a Wednesday hearing of the Senate Judiciary Committee. Sen. Tim Sheldon, D-Potlatch, is one of the Senate bill’s four sponsors.

Update (2/7/2011):The bill just passed the house.

Barron is the owner, editor, and principal author at The Minuteman, a competitive shooter, and staff member for Boomershoot. Even in his free time he’s merging his love and knowledge of computers and technology with his love of firearms.

He has a BS in electrical engineering from Washington State University. Immediately after college he went into work on embedded software and hardware for use in critical infrastructure. This included cryptographic communications equipment as well as command and control devices that were using that communications equipment. Since then he’s worked on just about everything ranging from toys, phones, other critical infrastructure, and even desktop applications. Doing everything from hardware system design, to software architecture, to actually writing software that makes your athletic band do its thing.

Suppressor Laws In Washington–HB 1016-2011-12

The change to the suppressor laws is coming up in the Washington State Legislature again.  Those of you in Washington State, be sure to write your Representatives.  Here’s a sample copy of what I wrote.

Dear Sir or Madam,

I am writing you today in regards to HB 1016 – 2011-12, which will change the restrictions regarding firearm noise suppressors.

Currently within the State of Washington suppressors are outlawed from use. I can own them and I can even attach them to my weapon, however the act of discharging causes me to be guilty of committing a gross misdemeanor. To further illustrate how helpless this law is I can drive 5 miles, by road, and be perfectly legal to discharge as I am now in the state of Idaho.

The irrationality of the law in general aside, the central item in question is a safety device. Why is a safety device outlawed from use by the residents of our state? When hunting I must choose between situational awareness and permanent hearing loss. Why must I make this decision, why must I for the safety of those around me suffer permanent hearing damage at the direction of the state? Wearing hearing protection while hunting is unsafe as it limits your ability to hear, including others in the area that you wouldn’t otherwise be aware of. Not only must I suffer hearing damage but people in the surrounding areas who are not partaking in the sport are also subjected to the possibility of hearing damage due the discharge of a firearm. Another example is a pregnant woman who must use a firearm for self-defense, the resulting pressure wave from the shot can do untold damage to the fetus. Yet a simple suppressor could protect the fetus from the shot the mother fired to protect them both.

This law as currently written also applies to law enforcement, including wildlife management. There is no exemption for Section 1: C for law enforcement. This means that when using a suppressor currently our law enforcement is committing a gross misdemeanor. However, law enforcement is allowed to violate this law at their convenience; why do they get an unlawful exemption while law abiding citizens are punished by the government under the guise of “protecting them”?

Changing the suppressor laws would increase not just the health of those in our state involved in the shooting sports as well as those who have firearms within their house for defense, but also create extra revenue in the form of additional sales tax. Many shooters would gladly purchase suppressors for use; however, we do not because of this asinine law. Suppressors are not like you see in the movies, you can still hear it, but it depresses the sound to the point where hearing damage will be less likely to occur. Please, for the health of the shooters in our state, support HB 1016-2011-12.

Sincerely,

Barron E. Barnett

Please do your part, it’s time the stupid law is changed.

H/T Ry

Updates Here.

Barron is the owner, editor, and principal author at The Minuteman, a competitive shooter, and staff member for Boomershoot. Even in his free time he’s merging his love and knowledge of computers and technology with his love of firearms.

He has a BS in electrical engineering from Washington State University. Immediately after college he went into work on embedded software and hardware for use in critical infrastructure. This included cryptographic communications equipment as well as command and control devices that were using that communications equipment. Since then he’s worked on just about everything ranging from toys, phones, other critical infrastructure, and even desktop applications. Doing everything from hardware system design, to software architecture, to actually writing software that makes your athletic band do its thing.