Posts Tagged ‘AR-15’

Let’s Ban Knives Too

Posted by Troy on 27th March 2018 in Current Events, Human Nature, Political

They asked a 13ish-year-old why he was marching for their lives.  He responded “My brother was shot.”

Okay, so if your brother was stabbed, shall we try to ban knives?

I know what you are going to say… “That… DIFFERENT!” which is pretty much the hallmark of someone that doesn’t have a good explanation for how they feel.

I think we can all agree that no one NEEDS a knife that is greater than 2″ in length.  With a little patience, a paring knife will do anything you need to do.  So why do we have to have this high capacity… sorry… longer knives?  For CONVENIENCE?  Because you  think it’s fun to cut huge swaths of meat?  YOU MAKE ME SICK!

Can we agree that personal tragedy is a stupid reason to make any legislation?  Every year, 20 babies fall into 5 gallon buckets and drown.  Do we make it a law that people have to bust these buckets in half or that they come with detachable bottoms to prevent such deaths?  Or do we accept that it’s a tragedy and feel sorry for the families that it happens to.

You may say, “You care more about your right to buy an AR-15 than about kids’s lives!”  But that is not the case.  I don’t want to ban the AR-15 because it wouldn’t really do anything.  If he couldn’t get an AR-15, he’d use shotguns and pistols or a host of other choices.  If guns were not available, a suicide vest or some other horrifying concepts would suffice.  So why should I give up my right when it will not accomplish ANYTHING?  Just to say “We did something!”  Yes… we did something useless and removed a right in the process.  That doesn’t seem a noble goal.  It seems more like an act of vanity than anything.

You say, “You have been brainwashed by the NRA!  They’re just a tool of the gun lobby!”  Nah.  I joined the NRA because I love and understand the 2nd Amendment and want it protected.  Frankly, if they are serving the gun lobby, I flat out don’t care.  All I care about is that the 2nd Amendment stay intact.  I didn’t embrace the 2nd Amendment because of the NRA.  I embraced the NRA because of the 2nd Amendment.  Get it straight.

You say, “We’re not talking about doing away with the 2nd Amendment!  We’re just walking about COMMON SENSE gun control.”  Well, most of what you call “common sense” actually wouldn’t solve a damn thing…so I kinda question if it is really common sense.  But here’s a serious question: “If it’s NOT about doing away with the 2nd Amendment… why are you demanding FEDERAL gun legislation?”  You see, the states can do pretty much whatever they want.  You mean to tell me that Miami, FL has the same needs as Cody, WY?  THEY DON’T.  Why not let them decide what gun laws make sense for them?  The greatest thing is that, in so doing, you don’t have to actually disregard the 2nd Amendment because states have a very large leeway in their gun regulations.  So why is it so very important that it happen at the Federal level?   Because the end goal is total disarmament.  And that is why we will never give an inch.

Long Live the Constitution!

Congressmen’s advice to women: “Don’t resist, just take it.”

Posted by Troy on 26th March 2018 in Current Events, Political

A congressman recently stated that the Second Amendment was outdated because small arms could not compete with jets and bombs.   So, I guess his advice to girls would be, “Look… he’s bigger and stronger than you.  Fighting will only make it worse.  Just lay back and take it…”

Now I will tear his argument apart:

1 – Congressmen that scoff at small arms in the hands of individual combatants should do the duties of our service members.  After all, Congressmen ask service members to sweep streets in Iraq/etc with small arms fire coming randomly out of windows, etc.  I am sure that, since small arm fire is no big deal, they would gladly switch places with our service members.

2 – It is asinine to think that a tyrannical government would bomb their populace.  The reason is that a tyrannical government views their populace, buildings, factories, etc as resources to be managed.  They have no problem with killing people (who would be considered more like cattle than individual human beings), but factories and buildings (etc) are expensive and have to be replaced and cut into their pockets.  How many tyrannical governments are there?  How often do you hear about them dropping bombs, wholesale, on an entire city?  Granted, there are times when a regime is in danger of dying (like in Syria), but by and large, this does not happen.  Granted, maybe this is because most populations are unarmed, so sending death squads into a city accomplishes the goal without having to destroy valuable real estate.

3 – The descent into tyranny does not go: “Okay we are now tyrannical… bomb the F_______ out of that city!”  If it did, I would hope that there would be a revolt in the ranks of the military and the military would depose the government.  A military coup is a bad thought, but I would like to think that an early attempt to move straight into bombing would be prevented by the military itself refusing to comply with the order.

4 – So you may ask: well, if you assume that the military wouldn’t bomb you, why do you think they would shoot you?  Dunno.  Ask blacks in Chicago about that.  Ask Native Americans about that.  Look, the military is made up of Americans.  If they were given an order to put down a insurrection, they would follow the order.  If the people are armed with rocks and the occasional illicit firearm, they would still do so.  Any deaths would be regrettable, but they would think that the random armed resister brought it on themselves.  There is a huge difference between this scenario and having to march through Atlanta where every single window becomes a potential sniper’s roost.  Where every corner and alleyway becomes a chance for ambushes or guerrilla warfare.  It would not take long under those circumstances for the military to turn against the oppressive government.

The Second Amendment is not outdated.

Long Live the Constitution!

In defense of the AR-15

Posted by Troy on 19th February 2018 in Current Events, Political

Let’s be honest: this is a failure of the FBI.  Holy crap, how many people have to report a kid?  How many times does he have to say he wants to kill cops and be a professional school shooter before you say, “I’ll look into it?”

Okay, so people are all up on the AR-15.  Here’s my defense on why average Americans should be allowed to have these weapons:

1 – Just like drugs, if someone really wants an “assault rifle” for nefarious reasons, they are going to get it.  Sorry, but that’s the truth.  You can make the argument “Yeah, but why make it easier for them?” which does have some merit, but I will continue.

2 – For the most part, if you want to kill multiple people, a sawed off shotgun with a followup .45 pistol will give you similar numbers.  [exclusion for the Las Vegas shooter... in that kind of scenario with a packed field of people and a long distance, an "assault rifle would be ideal, but this is just one instance.]

3 – School shootings are statistically unimportant.  “HOW DARE YOU!  It is a tragedy!  What if that had been your child?!”  It was my child, I’d cry my eyes out.  Likewise, if my child drowned in a 5 gallon bucket (happens 20 times a year), I would be devastated.  However, I would also realize it is statistically unimportant.  As such, I would not push for federal anti-bucket laws.

4 – If you want to say, “If we save BUT ONE LIFE!  JUST ONE TEEN,” I will counter with: Do you know how many die from drug overdoses?  From alcohol related accidents?  What if we lowered the speed limit to 25 miles per hour?  What if we increased the age for driving to twenty-one?  Think of all the lives that would be saved.  But all of these have costs, and we are unwilling to pay for these costs.  The uncomfortable truth is this: “The way we live our lives, kills people.  We know this, and we are willing to accept a certain number of deaths to maintain our lifestyle.”  Think of it this way: the five-year old girl that got hit by a car and died may have lived if we had a fifteen mile per hour speed limit, or if we required that children stay indoors at all times, but we don’t.  Getting to places quickly helps us get more done per day.  Going outside is fun and healthy for the child.  We feel sad that the girl died, but we do not do away with cars that she may live.  We don’t make her parents keep her inside so that she will be safer.

5 – Murders are mostly caused by handguns.  Demonizing the AR-15 or any other rifle doesn’t’ make it so.

Long Live the Constitution!  Long Live the Second Amendment

School Shooting Solutions

Posted by Troy on 15th February 2018 in Current Events, Political

This kid was on Youtube saying that he was going to be a professional school shooter.  He was reported to the FBI.  Everyone that knew this kid knew that he was dangerous.  They knew that this was going to happen.  But I guess the FBI was too interested tracking down Russian collusion than following up on some kid threatening to shoot cops and school kids.

This kid was screaming out for help, and no one listened.  That’s why 17 people are dead at his hands.  Plain and simple.

You want to stop these things?  Identify people with mental issues and get them they help they need.  I am also a fan of increased CCW.  You say that schools should be a gun free zone.  Yeah, it was…until he brought a gun there.  Then it was suddenly NOT a gun free zone.  At larger schools, one or two armed guards would be a good idea as well.  Frankly, I am sure that there are plenty of retired military that would gladly volunteer their time tot he community in this service.

If you want to point to the “assault rifle,” as the issue, I hate to break this to you… a sawed off shotgun and a 1911 .45 would have had a similar body count in those packed conditions.  So either be honest and say you want to total gun ban or understand that your solution really isn’t a solution.  Let’s also be honest, there are over a million “assault rifles” in circulation.  How do you plan on getting rid of those?  Are you going to kick in people’s doors and take them?  And what if the people take offense at that and are willing to die over it?  How many law-abiding gun owners are you willing to turn into criminals and subject to fascist tactics and/or kill?  Just curious.  I want to have an honest conversation here.

Ask the people of France how their ultra-strict gun laws protected them from the AK-47s used by the Muslim extremists.

It’s like I always say: “Guns should be illegal.  That way, no one will be able to get them…just like drugs.”

Long Live the Constitution!

Obama Using Human Tragedy to Push Gun Control… AGAIN

Posted by Troy on 15th June 2016 in Current Events, Political

Never let a crisis go to waste, right?  With every mass shooting, they make a new push for gun control.  Here are the facts:

An assault weapon is an effective weapon, but other weapons are available that would have had similar results (such as a sawed off 12-gauge).  If they can’t get an assault weapon, they will buy other weapons or make a bomb or poison gas, etc.  As such, an assault weapons ban will not work.  That’s not even assuming that they won’t go to the black market and get one anyway.  If you can buy crack, what makes you think you can’t buy an AR-15 after they are made illegal?

The Terrorist/No-Fly list.  The issue with this is that you get on this list by them just putting you on there.  You have no right to see the “evidence” facing you.  It makes getting off the list impossible.  What’s to prevent them from saying that right-wing bloggers, tea partiers, etc, are all terrorists.  Boom.  You’re done.  The NRA has said they support this assuming that the FBI investigates you and settles the case.  So I will go one further.  If you are put on a no-fly/terrorist list, they have to take you to court and they have to settle the case one way or the other after showing you the evidence they have against you.  They have 30 days in order to do this.  After this, they pay you a $75,000 a day penalty like the EPA charged a Wyoming man that dug a home-made pond on his land.

I remind you, the Orlando terrorist bought his guns legally.  The San Bernardino terrorists had a friend buy theirs.  This is why gun laws are going to be largely ineffective.

I refuse to give up my rights.  Doing so will not make us any safer.  Let them live without armed protection for a while and see how they like it.

Long Live the Constitution!

ATF to Ban AR-15 Ammo

Posted by Troy on 16th February 2015 in Current Events, Political

This isn’t a joke, and it’s not the rantings of a paranoid conspiracy nut.  The ATF (aka BAFTE) is looking at changing the classification of the AR-15 round (.223) as “Armor Piercing.”

“Um, so what, dude?”

The “so what” is that this will, de facto, make the round unavailable to the US consumer.  It is BANNED if they classify it as such.

This is wrong on so many levels.  The worst of which is that it is cheating.  They couldn’t ban AR-15′s outright.  They can’t even drum up any sort of viable movement to do so.  The reason is because people are rational and know that the choice of weapon is meaningless.  If someone wants to kill someone and can’t get an AR-15, they will use a shotgun or a pistol or whatever.  They also can’t even use statistics as the “assault rifle” accounts for a very small portion of all firearm deaths.  So what do they do?  They use language to rob people of their rights.

Honestly, even left-wingers should be furious and outraged.  Of course, they won’t be.  I haven’t met a left-winger yet that isn’t a “ends justify the means” person.  It’s the end of the Communist Manifesto.  ”By any means necessary.”  It’s a mantra they live by.  It’s Orwellian.  You change the language to control the people.

The majority of .223 rounds are NOT armor piercing (the military does make certain rounds that ARE armor piercing).  If they can do this with the .223 round, what is to stop them from doing it with other ammo?  Why not?

This is purely agenda driven.  They couldn’t get gun control legitimately.  They couldn’t even get it after Sandy Hook and the media and Hollywood doing everything in their power to force people to “beg for gun control.”  They couldn’t even do it by playing with language.  Have you noticed that all the polls say, “Do you support common sense gun control measures?”  Shit!  Who’s going to say “no?”  What would you be saying?  ”No!  I’m irrational!  I am against all common sense gun control measures?”  There is no option that says, “I know you are trying to trick me and that your definition of common sense has no correlation to my definition of common sense.”

We have just one month to let the ATF know what we think about this.  Spread the word!  Here is the pronouncement.  Go to apacomments@atf.gov to let them know what you think.

Long Live the Constitution!

http://www.atf.gov/sites/default/files/assets/Library/Notices/atf_framework_for_determining_whether_certain_projectiles_are_primarily_intended_for_sporting_purposes.pdf