Category Archives: Guns

When We Look At Ted Cruz, We See the Alamo

the_alamo
The Alamo Today

It was not until the last 24 hours, after 13 days of siege, that a real battle ensued. In the battle, the Alamo defenders fought valiantly and nearly all were killed including Jim Travis, Jim Bowie, and Davey Crockett.

The defense of the Alamo allowed General Sam Houston to build a large enough army to route Santa Anna and his men. “Remember The Alamo” was a constant battle cry at the Battle of San Jacinto, six weeks later. In the battle that lasted only 18 minutes, roughly 630 Mexican troops were killed and 730 captured while only 9 Texans died. Three weeks after being captured, Santa Anna signed a peace treaty, paving the way for the Republic of Texas.

The men who fought and died in Texas were ordinary people who took up arms to defend a great country. With the threat of death hovering above them for 13 days, they refused to leave their post (yes, a very tiny group did) and surrender. Even Davey Crockett, a man who already served as a United States Congressman, took up arms to defend Texas. Nearly all politicians today can learn a very big lesson from the men who lost their lives. There is a greater good besides your own self-interests. Politicians need to stop their petty differences and make the correct political sacrifices even if it costs them their career. They must be able to stand up to the political correctness without worry about what the consequences might be.

Ted Cruz is a Texan, and he acts like it. He is not afraid of demonizing his own party and possibly sacrificing his career in order to bring our country back to what the founding fathers fought for. The American people have had enough of the political correctness that has been drowning this country and holding us back from the being the great power we used to be. Washington should mark this day, March 6, as National “Remember the Alamo” day in honor of those who gave their lives and the selfless sacrifices they made.

Read it all.

What Makes a Good Shotgun?

OR RATHER, WE MIGHT PUT IT THIS WAY, what makes a shotgun good?

There's been a fair amount of debate here amounting to "My shotgun can whip your shotgun". Maybe some dialog on what we want and expect from our shotguns is in order. This can apply to both "Serious" and recreational shotguns. Here's my [set of] opinions, none graven on Tablets of Stone. A good shotgun should be....

Reliable. A failure rate of LESS than 1/200 rounds is minimal.Most modern US made repeaters qualify.

Durable. A use life of upwards of 35K rounds. Again, most modern US made repeaters can do this, some with a bit of small parts replacement.

Comfortable to use. This means fitting the shooter, of a weight consistent to the Rule of 96 with the load of choice, and capable of being shot many times in a short time period w/o pain. Ergonomics fit in here, and so does a clean, light but safe trigger.

Appropriate to the mission. 410s should not be used for pass shooting geese, nor 10 gauges weighing 12 lbs lugged through alder thickets for woodcock.

Appropriate to the shooter. That 10 gauge in pixie hands is punishing to use.

Affordable. Either on base price or per use. A $1K gun that lasts 50K rounds may be "Better" than a $500 gun that barely makes it through 25K.

Esthetically pleasing. This is completely subjective.

Capable of quick and effective deployment. Most shotgun usage, from crisis management to quail hunting, takes place in short time frames. The weapon, in the hands of THAT shooter, must be fast but sure.

Uses commonly available ammo. No 24 gauges. No 2" chambers.

That's about it. What do YOU think?

Thanks to Big Dave McCracken for the perfect shotgun theory detailed above, as he adds, "It's the pianist, not the piano." Works for me, as well.

Offensive To Aggressive Leftists

No Left Turn Signage
Just Get 'er Done
"I have a habit of comparing the phraseology
of communiqués, one with another across
the years, and noting a certain similarity
of words, a certain similarity of optimism
in the reports which followed the summit
meetings and a certain similarity in the lack
of practical results during the ensuing years."

Margaret Thatcher

"Politics: A strife of interests masquerading
as a contest of principles. The conduct of
public affairs for private advantage."

Ambrose Bierce

WITH REGARD TO THE RECENT UPROAR in Davenport, Iowa, where the town fathers in their mid-western wisdom decided to rename the traditional Good Friday to Spring Holiday, thus causing local and national outrage, columnist Dennis Prager has offered up a concise summation of what is a self-evident trend now creeping across America.

1. There really is a war against Christianity.

Leftism functions as a secular religion, and its adherents understand that the major obstacle to the dominance of leftist policies and values is traditional religion, specifically Christianity. With the demise of Christianity in Western Europe, leftist ideas and values came to dominate that continent. America, the most religious industrialized democracy, remains the great exception.

2. Why not abolish Christmas?

If a religiously diverse population and the separation of church and state demand abolishing government recognition of Good Friday, why not treat Christmas similarly and rename it "Winter Holiday"? This was asked of Mr. Hart, the Civil Rights Commission chairman. His response, in the words of ABC, shows the level of thought that is characteristic of the politically correct: "The commission, he said, discussed changing Christmas, but decided enough other religions celebrate Christmas, too. Hart, however, could not name one."

3. Civil-rights organizations are not about civil rights.

The ACLU and other left-wing organizations that have noble-sounding civil-liberties and civil-rights names have a problem similar to the one the March of Dimes had once polio was conquered: What to do now? Civil liberties and civil rights are extraordinarily well-protected in America. If the ACLU and the innumerable civil rights commissions ceased to exist, and a few smaller and politically neutral groups took their place, civil liberties in America would benefit. As is obvious from the Davenport example, these groups do not really function as civil-rights or civil-liberties organizations. They are organizations that promote left-wing agendas. And no leftist agenda is greater than minimizing the influence of Judeo-Christian religions, specifically Christianity, on American life.

4. Good Friday as an American holiday reminds Americans that this is a religious society.

Leftism opposes America's three great values—what I call the American Trinity (see, for example, my video on the American Trinity at prageruniversity.com) – "E Pluribus Unum," "Liberty" and "In God We Trust." The left uses diversity and multiculturalism to undermine E Pluribus Unum ("From Many, One"). It substitutes equality (of result) for liberty, and the powerful state for the powerful free individual. And it seeks, perhaps above all, to replace "In God We Trust" with a secular society and secular values. If it had a motto, it might be "In Science (or Secularism) We Trust." The elimination of Good Friday as an American holiday is just one more such battle in this war.

5. Non-Christians offended by Good Friday as an American holiday are narcissists.

The left tells us that non-Christians are offended by the government celebrating Good Friday. As a Jew, permit me to say that any non-Christian offended by Good Friday or Christmas gives new meaning to the word "narcissist." To seek to erase the name Good Friday is an exercise in self-centeredness and ingratitude that is jaw-dropping. We non-Christian Americans live in the freest society in human history; it was produced by people nearly every one of whom celebrated Good Friday, and we have the gall to want to rename it?

6. PC (Political Correctness) should be renamed OTL (Offends the Left).

Most Americans will characterize the Davenport attempt to rename Good Friday "Spring Holiday" as political correctness. That it is. But the term itself is politically correct. Like everything PC, the term itself hides its true meaning, which is leftism. Political correctness is invariably produced by the left. The term, therefore, should not be PC; it should be OTL, "Offends the Left." It is very unfortunate for America that it isn't. Americans would have much greater clarity as to the Second Civil War now taking place – from San Francisco to Boston to, yes, Davenport, Iowa.

Mr. Prager's six point firing line spotlights precisely why the Left remains so fond of Islam. Both ideologies consistently pretend to be easily offended while simultaneously playing the "superiority" and "victimhood" cards.

The American political scene and each of the thousands of well-documented Muslim sharia and jihadist atrocities spanning the globe by both US allies and US enemies that—under duress of policy—are routinely ignored by the so-called mainstream media, bear witness to this fact.

This dualistic morality is further corrupted when these players also exhibit absolutely no self-consciousness much less remorse at the outrage and the offense they level at those with whom they disagree.

If you doubt these assessments laid out against the backdrop of the recent FBI arrests of so-called Christian militia up in Michigan, I suggest we talk turkey.

Shit In A Bag

Get your shit in one bag."

iraq_muslims
Get Yer Shit In A Bag, and Let's Go!

Often a military term generally meaning, Stop foolin' around; get only the gear you need, put it in one bag, and let's go. If someone says your shit is in one bag but there is no bag around, you're being complimented. So if you really want to know HOW to get your shit in one bag, here's the expert. Someone asked the question concerning the ammunition strategy, "How many magazines is enough?" We thought it was an excellent question. Thanks to Doc for some solid advice.

I calculate the minimum number as 3x whatever my standard carry is for that particular firearm. For example, my daily carry gun is a G30. I (nominally) carry 3 magazines for it—one in the gun and two spares. So, my minimum for that gun is 9 magazines.

In reality, my wife has a G30 as well—so one would stock 18 magazines. And we often carry G21 mags (which fit) as the backup mags, so I have a minimum of 18 G30 mags, and 18 G21 mags.

As it happens, we have 4 G30's...so 36 G30 mags, and 36 G21 mags.

And we have 4 G21's...36 more G21 mags.

And as I said, those are minimum numbers. For my AR platforms, each one has at least 24 magazines. My M14's...21 each.

And so on.

We have a couple of FAL's...I bought 200 FAL magazines back when they were cheap (like a buck each). We also have a couple hundred G3 mags, for our PTR-91's, I got those at around $0.50 each. Since the mag is the most fragile part and crucial part of a weapon, it makes sense to stock up. Especially while we can.

It's clear some of us are serious weapons collectors.

Guns In The Hands of the Needy

Gun-control-experts
History does offer up the best medicine for those who forget theirs...

GESTURE POLITICS SWEEP THE NATIONS. Guns and ammo fall into the hands of destroyers. Huns and sons of bitches. Puns are the gems of the language and the money they earn is thrown back into more guns and ammo. Enough said. Two Western governments once connected by an energy which flourished upon the land somehow found themselves compelled to sell their citizens short. Just so the stealth but vitriolic and plotting barbarians can rush in to steal their culture, their lives, and the souls of their children. Suicide. What kind of civilizational survival strategy is this?

"You cannot invade the mainland United States. We are told there would be a rifle behind every blade of grass."

—Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto (Japanese Navy b.1884 d.1943)

Registering The Firearms

Firearms
“Laws that forbid the carrying of arms . . . disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes . . . Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.”
–Thomas Jefferson, quoting Cesare Beccaria in On Crimes and Punishment (1764).

HOUSE SPEAKER NANCY PELOSI, California Democrat, announced last week that she wants to register guns. Her next move will be to try to confiscate them.

The speaker picked a television show with a viewership of 4.6 million to float the Democrats' coming gun-control push. Questioned on ABC's "Good Morning America" about the prospect of new gun-control laws now that "it's a Democratic president, a Democratic House," she responded, "We don't want to take their guns away. We want them registered."

Politicians and bureaucrats routinely claim that registration helps solve crimes. If a registered gun is used in a crime and left at the crime scene, registration supposedly lets the police trace the gun back to the criminal. Though this turn of events might work on fictional TV crime shows, it virtually never occurs in real life. Criminals' guns are rarely left at crime scenes. When guns are left behind, it usually is because a crook has been seriously injured or killed and the police are poised to catch him anyway.

The few guns left at crime scenes rarely—if ever—are registered to the perpetrator. If they are registered at all, it is to someone else, whose piece was stolen. Despite what Mrs. Pelosi might think, those who use guns to commit major crimes such as robbing and killing are unlikely to respect her request to file paperwork so the government can catalog the tools of their trade.

Numerous examples disprove gun-control propaganda. Hawaii has had licensing and registration of guns for about 50 years. After all of the administrative expenses and inconvenience imposed on gun owners, police there cannot point to a single crime that has been solved as a result of those programs. Given Hawaii's remote island geography, this should be an ideal place to keep track of guns because movement in and out of the state is limited and legal importation is controlled. If registration is going to work anywhere, it should work there. Unfortunately, criminals seem to be able to get their hands on guns virtually anyplace in the world.

Other jurisdictions with a history of strict handgun bans, such as the District of Columbia and Chicago, have even required registration of hunting rifles and shotguns for more than 20 years. Neither the District nor Chicago can point to any crimes that have been solved using registration records.

Read it all.

Hmm, I think I'm going to go and purchase a firearm for the first time. If confiscating legally owned firearms doesn't reduce crime, then the government is indeed trying to wrest power from the people—which is why I and every member of my family should own a gun. The rapid speed and vitriolic nature of these powerful Democrats in moving their agenda is frightening, and despite all I have ever believed about this country and its honor in leadership, I do now believe we are headed for a constitutional crisis with the transnational statists.

Perhaps we may all soon need to defend liberty and the constituion of the United States by own own actions and blood, if this awful trend proves more a taste of reality than unsubstantiated conspiracy theory.

Students Unprepared For Adulthood

From the NRA today:

Gun Debate Tradeshow
Michael Kiefer, of DeFuniak Springs, Fla., checks out a display of rifles at the Rock River Arms booth during the 35th annual SHOT Show, Thursday, Jan. 17, 2013, in Las Vegas. The world's largest gun and outdoor trade show runs through Friday. (AP Photo/Julie Jacobson)

I have heard the arguments against extending Right-to-Carry onto college campuses before, but I've never heard them stated in such a way that belittles college students. In the Tulsa World, columnist Wayne Greene (who makes some pretty ridiculous arguments himself) quotes a "former academic" named Mark Taylor, who says college students "are unprepared for dealing with adult decisions of any kind, and especially with decisions of life and death."

The columnist writes that Taylor believes overprotective parents "have produced a generation of students who don't know how to fend for themselves but believe that they are tremendously important."

That argument is so ridiculous I hardly know where to begin, and if I were a college student I'd find it incredibly insulting. Are these the same students who are taking part in ROTC programs at colleges around the country? What about the military veterans who are going to school on the GI Bill? Are they "unprepared for dealing with adult decisions of any kind"? What about non-traditional students who live off-campus but drive in for evening classes? Do they not know how to "fend for themselves"?

Right-to-Carry holders are, statistically, far more law abiding than the general population. Forty states in this country have or shall-issue Right-to-Carry laws, and not one state has moved to repeal their statute. Right-to-Carry holders aren't the problem—and in fact are part of the solution when it comes to public safety.

What will the effeminate Left not do to stop law-abiding citizens from protecting themselves in the face of flagrant aggression? And yet when these very same law-abiding citizens try, under the aegis of well-founded law, to throw the book at murderous criminals, these criminals are coddled and supplied excuses for their vicious behavior. The fix is in, folks. There are people alive and in charge, or close to those who are, who desire and foment for a world on fire, whose secret and not so secret actions are slipped into our daily news along with impassioned pleas of peace, no less. Know your enemy. His name is Unsubstantiated Peace or Total Submission, so roll the dice or take your pick.