The Minuteman » Gun Rights

Category Archives: Politics

Quote of the Day – Kathy Jackson (2/22/2013)

By | | , , , , ,
1 Comment

Like you, I want safer families and safer communities. Like you, I think it is appalling when bad people use firearms to do bad things. And like you, I want to see lower rates of violent crime and higher rates of good people staying safe. That is why I am a strong supporter of liberal laws in the area of concealed carry, and it’s why I am in favor of laws that improve the ability of ordinary people to protect themselves wherever they go. It’s also why I support the freedom to purchase and own firearms without a lot of bureaucratic tangles. Because I want good people to be safer, I support laws that make it easy for good people to protect themselves from violent crime.

Kathy Jackson – “Reasonable” Restrictions

February 22, 2013

[Like Kathy, I don’t see anything “reasonable” about restricting a human right.  Heck, I’ve described it previously.  My care and concern is for the law-abiding.  More specifically the innocent who would be victimized. There is nothing “reasonable” about trying prevent these people from obtaining arms.

Many look at 1588 and consider it reasonable.  The more I think about that bill, the more I become very concerned and very afraid.  The burden of proof will be on the seller that he complied with the law.  It will be nothing more than a gotcha used when they want to hang you but cannot find something else.  There are some serious problems with it and on the surface it sounds like a good law.  No law-abiding person wants to just hand a firearm over to someone who is prohibited.

My problem is instead of creating a tool to help those people perform that function, they have created a method to hang that citizen should the government ever feel like doing so.

They could easily indicate on people’s drivers licenses, which are renewed every 5 years, whether someone is a prohibited person.  Do it on EVERY license.  Make this valid instead of the NICS check as well, which would be much like the Idaho CPL in Idaho.  You have now alleviated federal burden and created a tool to help every citizen in keeping guns out of the hands of prohibited people.

Now what happens if the persons status changes?  The state confiscates the old license and issues a new one.  What about those without license, Washington has state issued ID as well, not to mention most owners would become weary of those who refuse.  Could bad guys still forge a license or the endorsement?  Yeah, but it’s merely a tool to help and you’re not going to hang someone who honestly intends no harm in the process.

It’s a crime to knowingly transfer a firearm to a prohibited person.  You have given an extra tool to the citizen to verify that person isn’t prohibited   The fact it is on everyone’s license prevents a registry.  The biggest issue is those who don’t have a license or state ID, it honestly shouldn’t be required to exercise a human right.  I view this mainly as a tool to help honest people and most people can easily exercise good judgement and currently they do for the most part.  No legal requirement to check, this prevents the catch-22 of placing bureaucratic onus on the seller, but having it there most people will do the right thing.  Heck, honest buyers will pull it out just to prove they’re good to go.  No need to record anything, no need to write it down.  It’s merely a tool to aid an honest transaction.  Yup, you have the stamp of approval and you’re old enough and you’re in state.  We’re set.

Instead our elected representatives our creating a bureaucratic mess that we will have to maintain to prove our innocence.  They aren’t interested in improving safety or helping the law-abiding do the right thing.  No, all they want is another law they can use to hang a gun owner with when they feel like it. -B ]

 

Quote of the Day – Oleg Volk (2/21/2013)

By | | , , , , ,
Comments Off on Quote of the Day – Oleg Volk (2/21/2013)

Sharing skills that a prospective partner lacks makes them more independent. That, in turn, makes the relationship more honest. A person who doesn’t strictly need you for a meal ticket or protection but chooses you anyway is more likely a true love. By contrast, politicians need dependent voters and foster learned helplessness with their policies.

Oleg Volk – Independent Women
February 13th, 2013

[In case it isn’t fully apparent, let me also use the other way Oleg presented this.

homedefense_612HC-P_5155web

Image By Oleg Volk.
A Picture is worth 1000 words.

We’ve had a pile of politicians lately showing their true colors towards independent women as well as their overall lack of respect for them, Jay G even has a nice list of different statements showing the truth and hypocrisy of their behavior.

All the women in my life are very independent and frankly, I’d rather keep it that way.

I’ve mentioned before why I get angry, that however didn’t even touch on the fact that I see that same type of behavior as attempts at enslavement and forced dependence.  When someone argues you or some class of people shouldn’t have access to arms, be them students, women, blacks, or any other discriminatory measure, know they mean to make that class dependent, not independent.

It’s all a matter of trust in the end and they don’t trust you. -B]

A Lesson About Safe Storage Devices

By | | , , ,
7 Comments

So I have seen this before but I figure it’s a nice refresher.

Note the results, still think those little boxes you see will keep your property safe?  Especially those quick access boxes some end up buying when they’re stuck in one of those states lacking in freedom and pushing tyranny.  Still think the arguments are really about your safety or preventing theft?

If you think curious kids can’t figure out how to pick a lock, you obviously never saw me as a child.  I figured out how to pick locks at first just with paper clips.  Making my own tension fork and rake to pop simple locks.  Eventually I got my hands on a real set.  Yeah, beyond a real safe and educating your children, you’re not going to do much other than increase curiosity.

So consider this a public service announcement and a warning.  If you’re using any of these items, be damn sure of their capabilities and weaknesses.  In so doing, be sure to use them in a manner consistent with their abilities.  I happen to fully agree with the presenters final conclusions.

Joe Biden is Running His Mouth Again

By | | , , ,
5 Comments

So our illustrious Vice President made another stupid statement today proving he knows absolutely squat regarding firearms, usability, self-defense, and legal use of force today.

“If you want to protect yourself, get a double-barreled shotgun.” “You don’t need an AR-15, it’s harder to aim, it’s harder to use,” he stressed.

“I said, ‘Jill, if there’s ever a problem, just walk out on the balcony here, put that double-barreled shotgun and fire two blasts outside the house,’” he said, and urged viewers, in closing, “Buy a shotgun, buy a shotgun!” 

Blink…

Oh my word, where do I start with all the problems in just those few little lines.

First and foremost, unless you are the Vice-Presidents wife who gets automatic State Sponsored Criminal status when doing something stupid, do not do what he recommends.  Firing a warning shot is a great way to end up in prison.  Firing at people outside your house, again not the brightest of ideas.  And the idea that the AR-15 is harder to use and a shotgun is easier is false.  In so many way’s it’s actually not that funny.

Let’s just look at it straight from the math point of view of recoil shall we.

  • A Benelli Eagle II firing 12 gauge 1 1/8 oz loads is approximately 22 ft-lbs of recoil.
  • An AR-15 is approximately 3.2 ft-lbs of recoil.

Tell me, which one of those is more manageable to shoot and use?  Also note the example shotgun is semi-auto which will lower the recoil as well.  Not to mention there’s a lot of design in that shotgun to lessen the recoil compared to your standard double barrel.

Moving forward, part of his argument is that shot spreads meaning you don’t need to be as precise with your aim.  Tell me, are you going to be shooting 25 yards in your house?  Maybe if you had a mansion like Joe you’d get that kind of range but for the most part most houses aren’t big enough to pattern.  Further each shot throws 8 projectiles into the wild, 8 projectiles you are responsible for what it hits.  So in his 2 shots he fires 16 projectiles yet he would restrict my magazine capacity to 10 shots.

So I need some help.  I am looking for a volunteer in the Palouse area, preferably female.  The requirements are as follows:

  • General lack of familiarity with firearms.
  • Willingness to learn.
  • Willing to be recorded for a response to Biden’s lies. (See below for details.)

I will not be tossing you behind a double barrel shotgun, my shoulder gets that honor.  No instead you will get free general firearms safety training, along with a 1 minute intro into the AR-15 platform and it’s use.  That training and a short course immediately after is what will be recorded for the response to Biden’s lies.  There is no requirement to interview or give your opinions though that would be appreciated.

Further I will provide a rifle and ammunition to attend local Appleseed event.  I’m also more than willing to pay for you to get the necessary training for you to obtain your Idaho, Utah, Oregon, or Arizona concealed pistol license if you are interested.

If you are interested or know of someone who might be interested, please contact me.

ArmaLite is Permanently off my Shopping List

By | | , ,
5 Comments

Initially it seemed like a misunderstanding though the response from the president makes it obvious who they support and who they hate.

Thanks for posting this email. I just received a concerned telephone call about it, an email from the staffer who stimulated the mail.

I think a bit of clarification is in order.

The root of the matter is a HUGE series of inquiries by both email and telephone asking ArmaLite to cut off sales to New York and other states which deny its citizens the right to own our rifles, as several other firms have done. Some of the contacts have been duplicates of others and some were so redundant that they appeared to be spam. Many of them have been rude and I’m afraid one of my staffers thought that he was responding to a spammer and was more terse than he should have been. Once he realized what happened he came to me and apologized.

My purpose here is to pass on his apology from the corporate level and to answer the initial question: What is ArmaLite going to do?

ArmaLite is continuing a policy put into place when California first banned our rifles. That policy remains:

1. We will not sell to those states which deny it’s honorable citizens the right to own ArmaLite’s.

2. We do not halt sales to individual officers even in problematic states. I am a former Police Officer myself, and the staffer who stimulated the recent anger is a currently serving one. We are well familiar with the fact that most rifles serving Police Officers are purchased by the officers themselves, and that they shouldn’t be punished for the actions of their political elite. 
We consider sales to those sate subdivisions which are not engaged or potentially engaged with disarming its citizens. DNR and Forestry Departments, for instance, sometimes serve in remote areas that conceal drug farms and their officers deserve good hardware. 

3. We will not sell to those lower political subdivisions that deny their honorable citizens the right to own ArmaLite’s. Chicago, for instance, prohibits its citizens from owning ArmaLite’s within the city limits so we make no effort to sell into that city. We have many friends on the Chicago Police Department and have continued to sell to them individually.

Our observation is that most County Sheriffs disagree with banning sales of our rifles and many publicly refuse to enforce such laws. We sell to those departments and to their Deputies, but will not sell to those County departments headed by Sheriffs who would deny their citizens the same rights.

In short, Americans need not worry that ArmaLite is selling to those who betray them.

As you can see by reading posts on the topic, some readers have been harsh with their criticism of ArmaLite. It was in response to this atmosphere that my staffer reacted harshly. He’s come to me and apologized and I personally am passing my own apology along with his.

But don’t be mistaken, ArmaLite is strongly involved with both personal, corporate, and political efforts at the State, National, and International level to protect our civil rights. And we’ll continue to support your shooting needs as the situation moves forward.

Respectfully,
Mark Westrom
President,
ArmaLite Inc.

Let me translate points 2 and 3 for everyone.:

1. We will not sell to those states which deny it’s honorable citizens the right to own ArmaLite’s with the following exceptions.** 

2. Thankfully when states decide to intrude on the right of citizens to own arms, they exempt those who work for law enforcement.  Therefor we will continue to sell firearms to individuals who work in law enforcement.  While not being sold to the department, the states allow them to have arms that are otherwise outlawed from the rest of the citizenry.  We are perfectly fine with this discrepancy and honestly welcome and encourage it.  It is much easier to abuse citizens when we have a monopoly on force.

3.  Even if for some reason police officers are prohibited from ownership, we instead will sell to the political body that created the regulation.  In so doing we are helping to ensure that the political body is the only group effectively armed and can abuse it’s citizenry as it pleases.  Even better though is the fact that many of our arms can be stolen off the trains, whereby criminals can also be armed meaning the political body continues buying even more firearms from us.  Sure the law-abiding may be caught in the cross fire but honestly who cares right?  If you want to make a socialist utopia  you need to break a few eggs.

*When county sheriff’s protest the banning of our rifles we will feign support by continuing to sell to them but not sell to other departments that would deny citizens those same rights.*

**What we really mean is we will purely abide by the law and screw you the law-abiding citizen while continuing the hypocrisy of arming those who get a exemption by their employment.

Now I put that section in stars because honestly I don’t know how that section can reconcile with the previous two.  Tell me, if they’re going to stop selling to sheriffs who don’t support the right to arms, why are they going to continue selling to other places they don’t?  The answer is simple, they aren’t willing to put their money where their mouth is regarding the right to keep and bear arms.

They see the government as a bigger cash cow than the civilian market.  They could have handled this situation considerably better, but they sunk that ship instead.  Trying to feign support is never a good idea as it makes you look like a sell out, which is exactly how they look.  If they had said they would only sell to departments they would have been in a much better position.  Point 2 though shows them as the hypocrites they are. 

ArmaLite has now taken the position on my list that Smith and Wesson once had.

Quote of the Day–John Eastborough (2/19/2013)

By | | , , , , , ,
3 Comments

Liberal Rape Tips: urinate on yourself to ruin your rapist’s mood. Republican Rape Tips: pull out a Glock and make him piss HIMSELF.

John Eastborough – Tweet

February 19, 2013

[So in case you missed it yesterday, a Colorado state legislator said the following:

“It’s why we have call boxes, it’s why we have safe zones, it’s why we have the whistles. Because you just don’t know who you’re gonna be shooting at. And you don’t know if you feel like you’re gonna be raped, or if you feel like someone’s been following you around or if you feel like you’re in trouble when you may actually not be, that you pop out that gun and you pop … pop around at somebody.”

Then our boy genius, Joseph Salazar doubled down on stupid by issuing the following “apology”.

“I’m sorry if I offended anyone. That was absolutely not my intention,” Salazar said. “We were having a public policy debate on whether or not guns makes people safer on campus. I don’t believe they do. That was the point I was trying to make. If anyone thinks I’m not sensitive to the dangers women face, they’re wrong.

“I am a husband and father of two beautiful girls, and I’ve spent the last decade defending women’s rights as a civil rights attorney. Again, I’m deeply sorry if I offended anyone with my comments.”

Emphasis mine.

Mr. Salazar, you state that you’re a defender of women’s rights yet you are arguing for their disarmament as well as the removal of their right to choose their method of self-defense.  Yes Mr. Salazar I get angry when hypocrites like you spout their lies and attempt to trample the rights of the innocent.

You argue that we should make safe zones, because you know gun-free and drug free zones have worked so well.  Your call boxes and whistles are merely methods to call for help.  When you call for someone else to come help you, mainly the police, what are you doing?  You are calling for someone else to bring their gun.  Tell me Mr. Salazar, why not cut the response time from minutes to mere seconds?

Is it that you like rapists and thieves and want to see them work in a safer environment?  Do you dislike the idea of a woman being independent and self-reliant?

Mr. Salazar, you argue that women are more likely to shoot someone who isn’t a threat to them, can you present actual factual documented evidence of that your assumption has happened?  Not only that it has happened though, but with such a frequency as to out weight the number of women who have lawfully defended themselves from an aggressor.  Or is this merely a similar claim to the argument that there will be blood in the streets over parking spaces if citizens are allowed to carry concealed weapons?

The fact is Mr. Salazar you honestly hate women and the law-abiding public.  You would rather they be easy disarmed prey for your criminal friends.  The thought of a rapist eating lead at the hands of their intended victim upsets you and that Mr. Salazar tells me all I need to know about your character, more specifically your lack there of.

If Mr. Salazar is your representative, I highly suggest you let him know* how you feel. –B ]

*You can also call him at 303-866-2918.

Quote of the Day – Sebastian (2/18/2013)

By | | , , , , ,
Comments Off on Quote of the Day – Sebastian (2/18/2013)

New gun restrictions there, even modest ones, is a much bigger deal than in the states anti-gun forces have already largely won. Any victory there will provide a template that will be repeated in other traditionally pro-gun swing states like Pennsylvania, Ohio, Wisconsin, Iowa, you name it. Once the dominoes start to fall, it’s going to be extremely difficult to stop. This is why they cannot be allowed to score any wins at all. This isn’t about reasonableness. This isn’t about people coming together to solve problems. Politics is not either of those things: it is about power, and nothing else, and the side that is more effective at wielding power is the one that goes home victorious, and the other beaten up and bloodied in ways that couldn’t have been imagined when you went in thinking they were going to be reasonable. There is no reasonableness in the political process, there is only victory and defeat.

Sebastian – How the Tide Turns
February 18, 2013

[First go read the whole thing.  Between that paragraph and the last paragraph it was a tie.

The law’s main purpose is simple, “to keep those who have the money and the power with the money and the power.”  Anyone who thinks differently is merely an ideologue who hasn’t discovered reality yet.

Right now our opponents are fighting tooth and nail to find a way to keep us out of the fight.  It is the only way they can hide their weakness and convince legislators to commit Seppuku.  Sebastian is right on another front, we must punish every last one of these tyrants come the next election.  We need to ensure those who attack our rights, even if unsuccessful pay the political price.

Those three sponsors for the Washington AWB are now saying, “I’m sorry I didn’t realize this was going to trample on more civil rights than just your right to arms.”  The three sponsors of that particular bill all belong to the Greater Peoples Republic of Seattle and I don’t see any of those paying for their crimes.  There are however plenty of people betraying gun owners over other bills such SB 5711.  We need to teach a very valuable lesson on all fronts.  We need to throw any legislator out who supported these bills.

Further if the state supports it, to show sincerity, get them recalled.  I’ve been contemplating for a while leading a charge to recall a couple of tyrants from Washington.  It will be exceedingly difficult, however there is always the possibility given the rapid change in the political climate of the past two months.  Washingtonians are pissed and many of them are becoming active again after being dormant for a long time.  I’m not kidding either, I know a few people who had even given up on voting after the King Dome/Safeco Field fiasco getting back into the ball game again.

What I don’t want to do though is make a bad move which is why I’m trying to talk with those who have a better aerial view of the political battlefield.

Make no mistake folks, we are seeing the final moves of a long played chess game.  How quickly it ends is anyone’s guess.  I can tell you if our opponents fail in their current plays, they will have exhausted themselves into defeat.  While we will still need to remain vigilant their relevancy politically will join the likes of the Aryan Nations and the KKK.  Let’s do everything we can to ensure their plays fail and anyplace they do gain an inch they pay politically by loosing a mile. -B]

Quote of the Day – Freiheit (2/15/2013)

By | | , , , ,
Comments Off on Quote of the Day – Freiheit (2/15/2013)

I got about halfway through this and realized that if a damn whitetail deer can run 150 yards after being plugged by a .30 cal rifle bullet then why should I expect a bad guy to stop and drop dead after a single hit from a handgun round?

Freiheit – Comment to Let’s Talk Terminal Ballistics 3 – The Myth of Handgun Stopping Power

February 14th, 2013

[First if you haven’t been reading Tim’s series on Terminal Ballistics, I recommend you do.  There are a lot of myths out there and many of them are stubborn and have serious trouble dying despite evidence and science to the contrary.

Second, this is exactly why magazine capacity limits are total crap.  Go read this section most importantly and then ask yourself, “Why wouldn’t I want to carry as much ammunition in a single magazine as I could?”

There is no magic bullet, well maybe a 50 BMG, but still the idea of a person stopping magically merely because it was God’s own caliber is a myth.  Especially with regards to pistols.  That isn’t to say, as Caleb rightly points out, there are reasons to prefer one caliber over another, but it’s not for the reasons many throw out there. -B]