It’s time to take a look at complaint that I have. As a firearms enthusiast, I hold a love for the weapons I own and wish to own. I am a shooter, a hunter / sportsman, a collector and I am the defender of the premises of which I inhabit. I participate in a little bit of everything regardless of which category I would say I “specialize” myself in. There are firearms “enthusiasts”, “collectors” and then the “hunters”; but, why would someone be so different if they are more interested in standard-capacity magazines and or modernized weapons designs?
I read this article, about firearms accessories and suppressors, and I noticed that there was an apparent, purposeful separation and categorization of firearms owners. What bothers me is that we let this belittlement stand. The last time I checked, we all stand, side-by-side, firing at paper, steel or realistic targets and I see that line as something important to note. So, why is it that our choice in firearms lets them dictate whether or not we are in our own group? A group, mind you, that those anti-gun people aren’t even apart of themselves. It sounds pretty slanted, huh? Continue reading SHOTS FIRED: Who We Are
President Barack Obama, on the 26th of June, spoke at a Town Hall meeting in Minneapolis, Minnesota. The President touched on a number of topics, until a spectator was allowed a question and worked gun-control into the session. The White House has video of the entire meeting and there is a full transcript: which can be found here. Obama’s words caused some issue on one topic. However, very few pro-gunners seemed to notice one part of his speech that could change the nature of the gun-control push from here, on.
Now, I’m putting aside the incompetence regarding the thought that there are no background checks and ‘forgetfulness’ that the ‘gun lobby’ is comprised of, at the very least, half of the entirety of the American households (according to Gallup polls taken over the last five-years). What, instead, I want you to focus on is in bold (question begins here). Continue reading The Language of Control
I wasn’t originally going to do anything tonight, so I guess this is as good a thing to do as any. I’m poking around back on Yahoo!’s front-page when I notice an article about the “new face of gun-control”. The article was about Richard Martinez; a father, who lost his son to the ministries of a mad-man in Isla Vista, California, one week ago (23 May). In the article, I happened to notice Martinez’s profession. He’s a criminal defense attorney, apparently. A criminal defense attorney, mourning his son and talking about an organization (the NRA) who’s out to protect peoples’ firearms rights and questions them with “…what about Chris’s right to live?” The man obviously doesn’t understand putting down violent criminals in a very permanent manner. I’m going to let you have at that, as you see fit, but I’m not going to bother.
I was intrigued by the finding and decided to search the topic a little. I found a fresh article out of Indiana about one of their lawmakers defending firearms and stating a number of truths, but because he was speaking on the record to a left-leaning newspaper, he wasn’t going to win any friends. Nor was he winning many friends with his comments on Facebook, as they mentioned. Continue reading The Liberals’ ‘Bogeymen’ in the NRA
I’m going to talk a little about discussions I’ve already held with other people and pleads I’ve made to others who are demanding all of this gun control in the United States, especially after the Santa Barbara killing spree that took place a few days ago. I’m going share with you a refined version of one of those pleadings that I had, just a few nights ago — to, probably, no avail. I’m not going to include links to that page because I’m going to run it down here.
I was surfing around and found a statement made by somebody who was arguing for gun control after the killing spree (though, everyone calls it a mass shooting) and made every case for why WE shouldn’t even have that level of firearms restrictions, let alone more, at the same time. It was a gem, to say the least, and I did state as much in my reply. At first, I just wanted to laugh and face-palm, pointing it out to others and leaving it alone. But, I thought better of it. I could very well turn someone towards private firearms ownership with an long-winded, TL;DR argument — if they bothered reading it — and I did desperately hope they read it. So, here’s what started it. Continue reading Gun Control And You