Quote of the Day – Charlie Skelton (6/5/2013)

The same threat of “terrorism” was used to justify the no-pedestrian, no-stopping zones near the venue. The police laid out their logic: they had “no specific intelligence” regarding a terror threat. However, in recent incidents, such as Boston and Woolwich, there had been no intelligence prior to the attack. Therefore the lack of any threat of a terror attack fitted exactly the profile of a terror attack. The lack of a threat was a threat. Welcome to 1984.

Charlie Skelton – Bilderberg 2013: welcome to 1984

June 5th, 2013


We have found no actionable intelligence about you.  Therefor you must be a terrorist and an enemy combatant in the war on terror.  Please board the bus to Gitmo immediately or we will kill you.  Thanks!

-The Government

Someone nailed it on the head about “necessity.”  God help us because tell me, when was the last time a body of the state willfully surrendered powers it created? -B]

Quote of the Day–Law Dog (5/14/2013)

Matter-of-fact, this whole sorry episode is going to be another footnote in the annals of history that future scholars will point to and say, "This was the period of time in which the Government of the United States consisted solely of people who didn’t have any business running anything more complicated than a lemonade stand without adult supervision."

Law DogITAR and bloody dafties

May 11th, 2013

[I have nothing further to add. –B]

Quote of the Day – Brett Westerman

Yes mom, I know it was dad who mad you a mom.

Brett Westerman – Overhead while calling his mom on Mother’s day.

May 12, 2013

[Yes everyone in the truck burst out into laughter yesterday when he said that on the phone.  Why?  Because there was every ounce of that discomfort at the mental thought that was just put in his brain…. We all thought it was funny as hell.

Ahh to be in college again.  Wait, nope I’m good with freedom. -B]


Quote of the Day–A Girl and Her Gun (5/9/2013)

For all their concern, not a single one of them has expressed an ounce of sympathy to me. I dare say neither my brother nor I matter to them at all. But, they will include his death in their numbers to justify how evil guns are. They will use his death as one in a long line of emotional stories to manipulate the emotions of others and frankly that pisses me off. The only time this “friend” has ever spoke to me about my brother’s death was today and that was all of 5 words. The rest of the 6 paragraph email was about how wrong I am and how guns are bad and I should be sharing my brother’s sorry as a cautionary tale. Outside of the “I am thinking of you” sentence the rest was about the evil I am spreading(albeit probably out of being so naive) and how if we can save just one life…blah, blah, blah. She has not bothered to stay in contact with me, so she doesn’t know that I was attacked or that guns play a vital role in keeping my life safe, but of course my life doesn’t matter. My life isn’t part of the plan. What I do day to day has not mattered to her at all. Just today. Just the day Allen died. Her line saying “thinking of you” just doesn’t feel sincere for some reason.

A Girl and Her GunMay 8th

May 8th, 2013

[First go read her whole post.  It’s an enlightening view of the behavior of those on the other side.

It’s what we all knew, but they took the blood dancing and grief cutting to a whole new level.  Seriously what the hell was the point of that woman sending that email other than to cause pain, grief, and misery.  I am of the firm opinion that people like that are eternally miserable and insist on spreading their misery to others.

One of these day’s I’ll get around to writing up some of the other reasons I haven’t been writing as much lately, but suffice it to say, I don’t like spreading grief, pain or worry.  There’s a little over 6 months left in this year and I’m sure I can figure out some way to rock the rest of it like a boss.  I’m waiting for the all clear and then I’ll explain why.  Some in my inner circle know, but honestly I don’t want everyone and their mother worrying about it.

All I have to say is that overall her response is why I love A Girl.  She was considerably kinder than I would have been had someone send some pile of garbage like that to me.  Hell I remember fighting the urge to bitch slap the woman who told me that allowing my dad to undergo his cancer treatment is what killed him.  Had I been a better son I would have convinced him to do alternative therapy…  She knew nothing about when it happened, what cancer it was, nothing, she just heard my dad passed away from cancer while discussing treatment types.  She took that moment to try and cut into me and lay grief on me as if I was responsible.  After the 10 minute frothing rant was done where I chewed her up and spit her out verbally in front of a room of 20 people.  So loud mind you that no one else could hold a conversation she got up and walked out.  She didn’t speak to me for the rest of the weekend and everyone who saw it didn’t dare broach the subject of what exactly was said because it was obvious it was inappropriate.  I don’t think she even dared to call out my call sign on the radio for even normal traffic.

Some people love misery and they take great pride in making other people miserable.  If you try and make me miserable, I will drag you down, chew you up, spit you out and say **** you while sporting the bird.  Why?  Because I have no need for someone that miserable when I have an awesome family and an awesome group of friends.  Real friends that will support me at the drop of a hat, even if we’ve never met face to face.  The don’t send me an email out of the blue claiming to care while trying to say that I was somehow to blame for their decisions.  That I’m some how to blame for their decided use for an inanimate object.

And when you look at life when you have family and a group of friends like I’ve got; life’s pretty damn good! –B]

Quote of the Day – Barry Snell (5/8/2012)

I’ve come to realize after the Sandy Hook shooting that the reason we can’t have a rational gun debate is because the anti-gun side pre-supposes that their pro-gun opponents must first accept that guns are bad in order to have a discussion about guns in the first place. Before we even start the conversation, we’re the bad guys and we have to admit it. Without accepting that guns are bad and supplicating themselves to the anti-gunner, the pro-gunner can’t get a word in edgewise, and is quickly reduced to being called a murderer, or a low, immoral and horrible human being.

Barry Snell – Waking the dragon — How Feinstein fiddled while America burned

May 3rd, 2013

[And that right there is the honest truth.  Those on the other side of the “debate” aren’t interested in debate.  The view us as the devil incarnate and that our rights don’t matter.  To them we aren’t human, we’re sub-human, merely because we own an inanimate object that many of us use for self-defense.

It’s why over time I have lost just about all patience with those who would take away our rights. –B]

*Article via email from Terry.

Quote of the Day – Sean Sorrentino (5/2/2013)

No, the only reason you give a shit at all about this poor little girl from a gun owning family in a flyover state is because you think you can use her death to advance your political agenda. At some point, when you were down on your knees scooping her blood up in your hands so you could grease the skids for more gun control, you should have seriously questioned your humanity.

Sean Sorrentino – Stop pretending that you care! (Language Warning)
May 2nd, 2013

[Honestly I couldn’t put it better myself and it’s worth going over and reading the whole thing.  They are nothing more than vultures praying for preying upon the tragedies of others. -B]


Quote of the Day – Paul Barrett (4/24/2013)

The gun debate has been tilting toward the pro-gun side for more than a dozen years. The Boston Marathon bombings will continue that trend.

Paul Barrett – The Boston Terror Will Benefit the NRA, Hurt Gun Control

April 23rd, 2013

[Let me start off by saying, Paul was trying to be fair though there were a few comments that I don’t really agree with.  For example attacking Wayne LaPierre or this little bit at the end of his article.

But the NRA and some of its friends are not interested in rational discourse. They thrive on slippery-slope reasoning, according to which any limit on guns is a mere precursor to firearm registration and confiscation. As any gun manufacturer will tell you, the 9/11 attacks helped sales at firearm counters around the country and strengthened the NRA’s hand in lobbying against greater federal restrictions.

Paul most people, even the NRA, are willing to have a rational discourse.  The problem is there are so many irrational people on the other side trying to control the conversation the only reasonable thing is to just shut it all down.  For example look at Fienstein and what she was pushing and trying to tack on to that bill.  Moving further forward that bill honestly didn’t have anything really to do with background checks.  The people pushing for the bill even admit it would have not made any difference at  any of the mass shootings.

So is it irrational that we want to put on the breaks, let the emotion die, and approach this in a rational and reasoned manner instead of an emotional hysteria?

There were a few other errors, such as the comment regarding background checks for commercial firearms sales.  That is already required by federal law, so are we redefining commercial sales to include any sale?  Including letting someone borrow a firearm? At which point if you exempt it, today’s exemption is tomorrows loophole, not to mention how do you define and prove “borrowing”.

Paul’s conclusion though is correct and can easily be seen with this poll.

Sixty-nine percent say if they were in a situation similar to Bostonians, they would want a gun in their house.  

That includes a large 88-percent majority of those in gun-owner households, as well as 50 percent of those in non-gun homes.

As noted by Weer’d the lock-down also occurred in one of the most difficult areas to get a gun permit.  I expect there will be a large influx of new owners in that area.  Many of them will have an experience much like this individual.

“You’ll need a license for that,” the clerk informed me when I asked to see a modestly-priced BB gun.  Surprised but undaunted, I whipped out my drivers license and slid it across the counter.  At which point it was obvious to me that it was obvious to him I’m not a gun person. 

“To buy a gun in New Jersey you need a Firearm Purchaser ID Card from your Township’s police chief.  Even a BB gun.  Can’t even take one down to show you without it.”

Many had a wake up call last Friday.  Couple that with incidents like this, it’s no wonder people want to buy firearms for their own defense.

Then Angela Kramer softly pleads for help as the gunman who killed her parents and brother seconds earlier searches for her inside the family’s Darien home.

“I’m in my house. There’s shooting,” Kramer tells the operator in a low voice immediately after the loud gunshot.

Kramer’s 911 call lasted for more than 55 minutes until police searched the darkened house and rescued her from her hiding place.

Boy, Chicago’s restrictive gun laws while pushing reliance on the police really helped that family now didn’t it.

Last weeks incident served as wake-up call to many, doubly so since it was a citizen who was confined to his house that found the man on the run after they lifted the lock-down.  I’m sure that man probably would prefer to have a firearm the next time he investigates something out of place.

*As an additional aside.  I’ve met Paul and his wife both and they were both extremely nice.  I do not think Paul was trying to slight gun owners as a whole or even directly wanted was was really in that bill.  Odds are the particular publication for which he works had a serious hand in the tone of the article.

I do not know of any gun owner who actively supports giving firearms to criminals.  We all know damn well how that would have a negative affect on us and our rights.  What we don’t want though is the state coming in and arbitrarily denying or delaying the rights of law-abiding people because in the end, we know the criminals will still get their hands on a firearm.  The comments within that article do nothing more than aid in driving a wedge and turning off the other side causing them to ignore you and your position.

I do not think any firearm owner would complain about providing additional tools to aid people in “doing the right thing”.  Where we all have a problem is trying to trace that and enforce it under law.  It becomes this complicated problem fraught with danger because it will become all to easy to criminalize someone who would actually be innocent. -B]


Quote of the Day – Jennifer (4/23/2013)

Gun ownership is an exercise of your right to life. Defense of self is inseparable from this most basic human right. Would a bear still be a bear if you took its claws? De-clawing a cat permanently places them in bondage to their human masters. They are no longer free creatures. Denying arms to an otherwise free man does much the same.

This is not to say that those who choose not to own firearms are not free. The freedom lies in having the choice. Freedom of religion does not mean you must worship, only that you have the choice in how you worship if you choose to do so at all.

InJennifer’s Head – There Is No Such Thing As ‘Gun Rights’

April 23rd, 2013

[Yup.  It’s a basic human right.  It is one of the many reasons why I get angry when someone tells me or someone else that they should not be allowed arms.    There is a section of the population that only support basic human rights when it suits them.

These people are most aptly described as hypocrites.  -B]