The Minuteman » Tag » Laws Gone Wild

Tag Archives: Laws Gone Wild

Quote of the Day–Dan Muhlbauer (01/03/2013)

By | | , , ,
2 Comments

“We cannot have big guns out here as far as the big guns that are out here, the semi-automatics and all of them,” Muhlbauer said. “Those are not hunting weapons.

…

“Even if you have them, I think we need to start taking them,” Muhlbauer said. “Because if they’re out there, they’re just going to get circulated around to the wrong people. Those guns should not be in the public’s hands. There are just too many guns.”

Iowa State Representative Dan Muhlbauer

December 26, 2012

[First, let me be perfectly clear.  μολὼν λαβέ or molon labe Representative Muhlbauer.  I didn’t go shoot anyone with my firearms and neither did the majority of gun owning Americans so leave my property alone.

If you desperately want my property, I request that you lead the confiscation teams so that those you would attempt to use force of government to steal from can more easily deal with the tyrannical bureaucrat who sent the jack booted thugs to their door.  However like most petty tyrants you won’t actually bleed for your cause, instead you will send others to do your dirty work for you.

I will restate this for those who may have never seen my tripwire post, more specifically the lessons of the 20th century:

Lesson No. 2: If a bureaucrat, or a soldier sent by a bureaucrat, comes to knock down your door and confiscate your firearms– kill him. The disarmament of law-abiding citizens is the required precursor to genocide.

A word of warning though Mr. Muhlbauer, if any of those you attempt to kill succeed in surviving and escape, my assumption is they are coming for YOU.  A man like that will be on the run already and ultimately have nothing left to lose.  In the process of attempting to steal his property, you threatened his family, invaded his house, and even attempted to kill him.  Think about that sir, you may not be pulling the trigger yourself, but you’re creating the laws to tell others to kill people for you.  You are responsible!

I didn’t put a gun in anyone’s hand, I didn’t pull the trigger, I had absolutely nothing to do with a mentally deranged individual, yet you want to hold me and others like me responsible.  You would disarm us to leave us as defenseless as those children, praying that the police show up in time.  Tell me, did the police show up in time?  Because it took 20 minutes and it was a blood bath that any responsible gun owner could have stopped if they were there, but you sir would disarm them.  You would take their property or imprison or kill them.

That sir is sick and down right despicable.  You claim to be about protecting the children, yet you would have masked men invade homes in the middle of the night heavily armed killing anyone inside who merely looked like they might resist.  Think I’m exaggerating?  Look at your war on drugs and the number of innocent people killed in the wake of that mess.  You would use the force of government to kill otherwise law-abiding citizens for the victim-less crime of merely owning property.

Who is the mass murderer here Mr. Muhlbauer?  Who is attempting to use force to coerce others into behavior you, Mr. Muhlbauer, deem acceptable?

One group wants to merely be left alone, another group blames the first for tragedies the first group had no part in.  Tread wisely Mr. Muhlbauer.  We are not bloodthirsty and we aren’t out to kill or hurt people like you would claim.  We will however defend ourselves and our natural rights, rights that you have no say in.

To the people of Iowa, find a way to run that tyrant out of his job.  Sadly your state doesn’t support recalls like mine does, and yes I’m already looking into what needs to be done to recall a politician.  Anyone who votes yes from the State of Washington for an Assault Weapons Ban or Magazine ban, I will lead the charge to remove from office.  Some officials may think their reelection would be at least 2 years away, not true in some states.

There’s the Soap Box, Ballot Box, and Cartridge Box.  An attempt to remove anyone of the three options for defending ourselves and ensuring the governed can revoke their consent results in the third box being the only option. –B]

Quote of the Day – A Girl and Her Gun (01/02/2013)

By | | , , , , ,
3 Comments

Unless you are planning on using your gun to kill or giving it/selling it to someone who is, your buy back is nothing more than another thing to make you feel good. Listen closely to what has been said a million times by a million smart folks…your feel good move WILL NOT make a flying flipping bit of difference in terms of keeping your kid, my kid, any kid safe in schools, movie theaters, banks, parks…

(Emphasis mine)
A Girl and Her Gun – I Got Your Buy Back…
January 1st, 2013

[Most of the clamoring I’ve heard recently, including the BS being introduced in congress is the same old song and dance we’ve always heard.  It’s the classic, “Do it again but only harder.”

What’s the definition of insanity again?  It happens to be the same as futility.

 The act of doing the same thing over and over expecting a different result.

As Joe has so rightly pointed out though we need an orthogonal solution.  The problem is, they are unwilling to accept any solution but that which they want.  To them that is the only answer to the problem, their problem as defined by them.  Both sides of the debate admit there is a problem and want to find a solution.  One side of this debate doesn’t want to debate though, they want to lecture and do what they want.

Currently I’m sick of the BS being spouted by that particular group and as far as I’m concerned can be run out of the discussion.  We had the discussion on their talking points and they lost.  If they don’t want to grow up and actually discuss things like a reasonable and rational person, difficult given the prevalence for Peterson Syndrome, they can go sit at the kids table and eat while the grownups talk.

Ultimately A Girl’s conclusion is right:

So when another attack happens because no effective change took place I hope you are still feeling good about yourself. As for me, I prefer to do what at least has a chance of working. You will not be getting my gun. Not for 200 bucks or for $500 or for $1000 or…you get the picture.

Another attack will happen, it is an inevitability.  The choice of tool by the killer may change, but this tragedy will happen again as long as we keep redoing the same failed solutions.  China has had a string of similar incidents where a knife was used instead of a firearm.

For those of you who think that we can negotiate and retain some of our rights.  What happens when the next attack occurs? Or the one after that?  They will come and nibble again and again, stripping your rights away.  Ultimately to the point where they are trying to outlaw kitchen knives.

We stand to gain nothing by negotiating with the enemy on this front, instead we stand to lose everything.  Now is the time to stand up and fight.

If you haven’t contacted your reps, do so now.  That link will allow you to contact all your reps in one shot.  I spent some time last weekend and wrote individual personalized letters to each of my reps.  If you have the time, do it.  Don’t let the work of the past 19 years undoing the damage sink and fade into the darkness. -B]

SSCC #491-Ogden

By | | , , , , ,
Comments Off on SSCC #491-Ogden

But Hill opened his front door and was met with six men who he said were dressed in black, with no police identifiers that he saw. Three had assault rifles, Hill said; two were carrying tactical shotguns.

It’s worth noting that the home owner had to ask more than one before anyone on the other-side of the door identified themselves as police officers.  Then after he opened the door they promptly arrested him, and then they informed him his name was Derek and he was AWOL from the military… None of that information was correct.  The officers then refused to listen to the homeowner and then harrassed and intimidated his wife and children.

The money quote that put these guys on the count:

Melanie Hill said one of the officers made a comment about her husband coming to the door with a bat, saying that had it been a gun, the officers would have “blown you away.”

Because that is a lawful justification for the use of lethal force?  Merely being armed when answering a suspicious knock at the door by unresponsive people in the middle of the night is a reason to be shot?  Good to know.  Guess these guys went to the same training classes as officer roid-rage.

And remember folks, this was all over someone who was AWOL.  Not someone who is actually an immediate threat, but because they were AWOL.   This is your government and how they view the people.  Had they shot this man in cold blood, qualified immunity would protect them.  As far as I’m concerned, start shooting the bastards, period, end of discussion.  They can show up at the door and act reasonable or they can die.  Their job isn’t safe, that’s a given, but it shouldn’t be made safer by endangering those who are innocent.

Not to mention this classic line occurred as well:

Eric Hill said he received a phone call from police Chief Mike Ashment several days ago, explaining that the warrant was served at his house because it was the last known address of the man facing the arrest warrant.

The Hill family bought the house six months ago, Eric Hill said, but added that his neighbor told him the man police were looking for was the previous homeowner’s nephew, who had never lived at the home.

So in other-words they endangered the life of a family because they were too lazy to properly do their job.  In my world that’s negligence.

State Sponsored Criminal #491: John Doe

Because when you show up at someone’s house wearing all black with guns, you have a right to shoot the property owner for merely being armed.

Hypocrisy Knows No Bounds…

By | | , ,
Comments Off on Hypocrisy Knows No Bounds…

And here’s a nice listing from Colion Noir.

Here’s another one from Colion:

Quote of the Day–Chris S. (12/19/2012)

By | | , , , ,
2 Comments

Even my grandma is calling to ask about guns!

Chris S. – After Answering a Phone Call

[On my way home tonight I stopped by to chat with Chris and see how things were doing at my local gun shop.  Here’s how it looked as I walked in:

19785

I walked in as the last AR on the shelf was being bought.  The few remaining that look like they are are really just dedicated .22 LR.  The one sole carbine on the right is a 9mm carbine which was also liberated by the same individual who bought the last AR.  Notice how there are no Glock mags, AR mags, or just about any other standard capacity magazine.  Yeah the last of the P-Mags were leaving as I arrived.  They moved, in the middle of no where mind you, in a store that’s mainly known as a golf shop, over 50 rifles in the past 4 days they were open for business. 

So here’s what it looked like as I left from the purchase of a single individual:

19790

To give you an idea of how serious this rush is, he was asked if he had any SCARs or other high end rifles and was offered cash for purchase.  Think about that for a second folks, people were arriving cash money in hand to buy these.

I don’t think our opponents have fully realized what they have done.  I can guarantee you that those who have bought rifles over the past weekend aren’t planning on turning them in if they’re outlawed.  I went through all the pistols he had left.  Most were single stack or revolvers.  Every other normal capacity Glock, S&W, and XD was gone.

People are seriously afraid and I cannot say that the fear is ungrounded.  But as piece of good news I do think that Sebastian is right in this following statement:

This is not our last stand, it is theirs. If we beat them back now, if we deny them their agenda and keep the lawmakers in line, we will sweep these people from the field. They will, like Custer, have underestimated our numbers and our ferocity. We will dog our lawmakers. They will be sick of hearing from us by the time this is over. Obama’s historical legacy will be a lousy economy, and an ineffective and bumbling second term. It is our time to show the weak and pitiful Republicans how this is done, and how you beat Obama.

There’s no question though folks, this is going to be a fight.  Do not underestimate the power of our enemy, especially with emotions on their side.  Do not get cocky, do not think that magically we are just going to win this.  It is going to take work and effort.  Write or otherwise contact your legislators starting immediately.  If you’re not sure what to do, follow this write up from Robb.  Sadly again unlike our paid competitors I have to work for a living and I will be busy through the weekend.  My goal is to sit down Sunday afternoon or take the day off Monday and write up an improved form letter based off of Robb’s.  At the same time I’m going to work on creating a simple way to automate the whole process of contacting the necessary people.

Get everyone you can to start writing in as well.  We need to be heard and we need to show our voice.  There is no question that our opponents are dancing in the blood of the dead to merely further their political goals.  Their cards are shown when other politicians admit and explain that the laws they recommend wouldn’t actually prevent something like this from happening.

I offered my help to Chris on arming customers on the political front and got him hooked with with Sebastian’s primer.  My goal is to arm every last customer with the knowledge necessary to help win this fight.

Now is the time to fight.  To those that argue for a ban on assault weapons I say, “Molon Labe!” –B]

And here come the Fudds…

By | | , , , , ,
4 Comments

So already I’ve seen comments and even got an email from a friend about a particular comment that was left, below is what the comment said (emphasis mine, spelling his).

We all here want to feel safe and do what we can to protect our families & loved ones: we are parents to our children, wives to our husbands, true friends to our friends. More than this we are neighbors and members of our community, in church, club, workplace and park.

I honor the Bill Of Rights and welcome the freedom the Second Ammendment gives me. I also recognize that this was written 221 years ago against the backdrop of our emerging nation. At this sad time and remembering past atrocities I will now seek a complete ban on assault rifles – I will continue to proudly keep and carry my little Ruger.
While I dont know many of you here I know that you are no different to my own neighbors; good people living in difficult times. We all need to do the right thing and show leadership.

Here’s the thing folks, you either have a right to arms or you don’t.  There is no negotiating on this, we did that in 1994 and look what happened.  Further the current atrocity pulling at everyone’s heart strings happened within a state with an assault weapons ban!

If the ban didn’t stop him there what makes you think it would somehow work in the future?  Please inform me how “just one more law” would have altered the course of events given the litany of laws he broke before he even started shooting children.  Explain to me how the law-abiding gun owners are at fault and the sacrifice of their rights will somehow make the world a safer place.  Even law-makers admit that an assault weapons ban wouldn’t have changed anything, you must know something the rest of us don’t.

But lets destroy your BS regarding 221 years ago shall we?  At the time people owned cannon, artillery, and during the American Revolution the Kentucky Long Rifle was the AR-15 of the era.  Read that again, the Kentucky Long Rifle was the AR-15 of the era.  It was a military arm that was quite excellent at striking targets at long distances.  By todays standard our bolt-action rifles could be compared with muskets.  Muskets, lacking rifling, were less accurate but quicker to reload.  So there’s a trade-off yes, overall the technology was quite similar, however there was a considerable difference between the two.

Lets move forward not even 100 years to the civil war and the advent of the henry repeating rifle as well as the percussion-cap revolver.  Both of which greatly increased the available firepower of a single individual, yet by your argument we should have nothing more than what we had 221 years ago when it was written.  So no revolvers, no repeating rifles, this destroys cartridge firearms, thus kiss your bolt-action rifles and shotguns good-bye seeing as they couldn’t have conceived of this 221 years ago.

Because they couldn’t conceive of the advances in technology 221 years ago, because they didn’t see the immediate benefit of the printing press, you argue for a complete ban on an inanimate object, that you don’t use, thinking that will somehow stop evil. You are however more than happy to continue carrying your “little Ruger” which, by your argument, should be outlawed since we should only take into account what they had at the time.

So if you want to carry a defensive pistol and you want to carry on this argument, you will carry nothing more than a single shot flint-lock pistol.  For you see, you should only ever need one round!  If you need more than one, obviously you need to practice your aim more!  No one needs a 10 shot magazine, the size of the Ruger LCP, or even a six shot revolver, for our fore-fathers survived on 1 shot flint locks and that is what they had in mind when they wrote the 2nd Amendment, at least that’s what you claim.  You cannot have it both ways, you cannot just embrace technology you like and throw away that you dislike.

Our opponents would be happy to take away every semi-automatic pistol, who needs them right?  You can carry a revolver, it has six rounds, more than enough for anything you might encounter!  Then one day someone goes on a spree, reloading while the response takes 20 minutes and you hear cries that we need blanket revolver ban.  It’s a slippery slope my friend and the first assault weapons ban proved that along with another important fact.

The federal assault-weapons ban, scheduled to expire in September, is not responsible for the nation’s steady decline in gun-related violence and its renewal likely will achieve little, according to an independent study commissioned by the National Institute of Justice (NIJ).

“We cannot clearly credit the ban with any of the nation’s recent drop in gun violence. And, indeed, there has been no discernible reduction in the lethality and injuriousness of gun violence,” said the unreleased NIJ report, written by Christopher Koper, a professor at the University of Pennsylvania.

Now you could say I’m over stepping and taking this too far to which I would reply, how do you set the bar then?  George Washington didn’t cross the Delaware to get to his duck blind and by god the Second Amendment was not written with the aspect of hunting in mind.  No, at the time the American public maintained it’s own supply of military arms and while some would say that is no longer necessary, I would point out that to this day the United States has an unorganized militia that can be called upon to defend her.  As well as the fact that our government has committed atrocities against her own people and you wish to give that same government a sole monopoly on force.  Merely ensuring that her own citizens cannot resist if they feel it necessary to do so.

Lastly your argument for an assault weapons ban also completely ignores the fact that the majority of the features banned are purely cosmetic and safety related.  Tell me, what good does it do to ban a collapsible stock?  You know that thing that allows you to adjust the length of pull for different sized shooters.  That thing you adjust to make sure the shooter doesn’t get scoped, or otherwise suffer injury.  The pistol grip, which is quite beneficial for disabled shooters allowing for a more natural grip angle and thus preventing further damage to the wrist because of recoil.  Also my personal favorite, banning a barrel shroud.  Really!? Banning an object who’s sole purpose is to prevent the user from burning themselves.  That’s like banning suppressors, because we all like hearing damage!

Your statement above is nothing but pure hypocrisy no matter how you cut it. You either support the individual right of self-defense, including their right to choose what they think is the best arm for them, or you don’t.  You cannot just say, well I don’t like evil black rifles so their bad but leave my pistols alone.  What happens to the disabled woman who cannot easily deploy a pistol but can a rifle?  Must she be stuck with a bolt-action rifle that she cannot effectively operate the bolt on?  Ok, so you’ve left semi-auto rifles now with the necessary features to aid in ease of use.  Now are you going to limit her to 10 rounds?  That operator as I said lacks normal dexterity so while you can quickly and easily reload a magazine you’ve still limited the disabled shooter.  And for what?  It’s not like the magazine bans really matter to a determined individual:

Remember it was 20 minutes for the police to respond, so short of banning metallic cartridges, people can reload guns, again and again, using them for evil.  The answer is to step up and stop evil when it appears, that is best done by allowing people to retain the best tools for doing so.  That is not done by banning the otherwise law-abiding and turning them into felons overnight.  I find it ironic though that you claim we should do the right thing and show leadership and you do so by blindly following the talking heads.  The right thing is stepping up and doing what needs to be done, even if it seems difficult.  The right thing is protecting the rights of others despite the actions of a lone mad man.  By the way sir, you lead from the front, not from the rear as you kiss the boots of your future masters begging forgiveness for something that wasn’t your fault.

In the words of Samuel Adams:

If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace.

We ask not your counsels or your arms.

Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you.

May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.

Quote of the Day – A Girl (12/18/2012)

By | | , , , , , , ,
4 Comments

When I was mugged I blamed only 2 people. My attacker and myself. I can’t control him, so I looked at myself to figure out what I could do to put myself in a better position for survival should the element I couldn’t control decided to come after me again. I took responsibility. I didn’t blame the cops or the grocery store parking lot or even my parents. They had some influence as did society, but it was me who stood there and did nothing. It was me. I did not come after you or anyone else. I didn’t go to congress and ask for new laws to protect my lack of action. I took action. Law abiding, legal action and I took responsibility for my part in that day. I can tell you none of it felt good. I didn’t feel good after I picked myself up off the ground, I didn’t feel good as I hid in the bathroom and took care of my scraped up arms and back. I didn’t feel good when my so called friends turned their backs on me. I didn’t feel good when my daughter looked me in the eye and told me she didn’t feel safe because I didn’t stop the and guy. It didn’t feel good when I showed up in the park to learn how to defend myself. I felt anything but good. I felt sad and lonely. I felt lost and broken. I felt ashamed and confused. I felt scared and and hopeless. And I fought all of that everyday for over a year in order to take responsibility. In order to feel good again.

A Girl – Feeling Good
December 18, 2012

[First, go read the whole thing, it’s worth it and there were a few other quotes I almost put up first till I hit that one.

Now when I read that my immediate thought was, “No one ever said doing the right thing was the easiest route.”  I did a previous rant in the immediate wake and honestly her post and mine are intertwined together.

Feelings are driving the conversation for a lot of people right now, they want to do something, anything.  As I said before:

They want to be able to look at a physical object and blame it for what as happened.  They want to destroy the physical object and blame it for their grief.

They don’t want to admit that ultimately there was a person behind the gun.  They don’t want to admit no matter how hard they tried, they wouldn’t be able to control him.  They don’t want to admit all the efforts they took in advance to feel good in the wake of things like Columbine and other mass shootings in the end did nothing.  Not only did they do nothing, but the may have made it worse.

To them though that last thought is an impossibility   It is impossible that the actions they took to satisfy their feelings could have been counter productive.  How could they?  Their responses felt right to them in a previous time of emotional tragedy.

People currently forget that 11 years ago a group of men brought this country to its knees with a set of box cutters.  The tool is a tool and nothing more.  It’s use for good and evil rests entirely with the person holding the tool.

The principal, Dawn Hochsprung, gave her life ultimately trying to protect her students.  She was forced, by law, to be unarmed in that encounter.  The aggressor however broke numerous laws and had to actually steal the firearms to carry out his crime.  Think about that for a second, objectively.  We, as a community, trusted that woman, as well as the staff with the care and protection of our children.  We trusted that they would do what is necessary to keep them safe and educate them for the future.  We trust them enough to send our children there for a decent part of their young lives.  Yet we refuse to allow them the choice of carrying a firearm to defend our children should evil come before them.

We refused to allow the people immediately on the scene to respond to the threat posed against the children.  Instead the shooter was given 20 minutes to perpetrate his crimes.  He was given 20 minutes with defenseless victims.  Victims who were in the charge of responsible adults.  Those responsible adults, responsible for the children in their charge, were forcibly disarmed under the law.

The law in this case guaranteed the outcome.  We will never know what the outcome would have been had just one teacher been able to choose to be armed.  We can hypothesize given previous events, such as the Pearl High School incident in 1997.  But we can never actually know, all we can do is wonder.

It’s time to stop passing laws based on irrational emotion and examine a very simple and harsh fact.  When evil finally shows up, how can we react.  We focus too much on stopping evil out right and preventing it from ever happening.  While definitely a worthy goal, it is almost impossible to achieve since you cannot actually control the aggressor.  All you can do is react as quickly as possible and try to minimize damage.   What you can control to achieve that goal is yourself and your response, except in many cases the law has neutered that ability from the victims. -B]

Who Needs the 4th Amendment…

By | | , , ,
4 Comments

Leahy’s rewritten bill would allow more than 22 agencies — including the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Federal Communications Commission — to access Americans’ e-mail, Google Docs files, Facebook wall posts, and Twitter direct messages without a search warrant. It also would give the FBI and Homeland Security more authority, in some circumstances, to gain full access to Internet accounts without notifying either the owner or a judge. (CNET obtained the revised draft from a source involved in the negotiations with Leahy.)

Unpossible I say, a politician rewriting a bill to be counter to the interests of Americans after debuting it as being to their benefit?  It’s like they know the public doesn’t want this but it’s the only way they can pull it off.

Who needs the 4th amendment, am I right?  They’re not even trying to be overt about this anymore.  Can someone please explain to me why the government needs this kind of power.  How is it that the act of informing a judge and getting a warrant to express probable cause for the invasion of privacy is necessary is a hindrance?

Oh, that’s right, it’s a hindrance to finding undesirables to be weeded out of the population. While anyone with half a brain should know not to expect those things to be private, which is why I’m not a big fan of the cloud, it seems a far stretch the government cannot first obtain a warrant.

Contact your legislator now and start raising hell.  Just to illustrate the double standard of this, I’m reasonably sure it’s safe elected officials will be exempt and still require a warrant. Laws for thee not for me.  If these elected representatives want this, they need to make their services public for all to see… They’ve got nothing to hide right?  At least that’s what they keep telling us.