Permalink
Gun Owners of America

Washington, DC --(Ammoland.com)- “Gun Owners of America [has] spent the months since Newtown doing tremendous damage, insisting that expanded background checks will lead to a gun registry.” – New York Times, April 4, 2013

It’s quite a complement when the New York Times thinks that you are doing “tremendous damage.”  But you can be sure that the other side is not going to go away quietly.

And sure enough, the Obama Administration is trying to unilaterally undo our recent victory in the Senate – and to undo the “damage” that all of us inflicted together.

But first, a little history.

Remember when Senators Pat Toomey, Joe Manchin and Chuck Schumer formed an unholy alliance during the recent gun battle on Capitol Hill?  Remember how their amendment would have encouraged your psychiatrist to turn you in to the FBI’s gun ban list?

And you remember how we stopped that provision, because over 40 senators found it to be odious and a violation of the Second Amendment?

Well, guess what?  Barack Obama has just concluded that “he don’t need no stinkin’ Senate.”

Instead, Secretary Kathleen “ObamaCare” Sebelius – and her Department of Health and Human Services – has promulgated regulations which would, by executive fiat, waive all federal privacy laws and encourage you doctor to report you to the FBI.

Understand a couple of things:  First, the standard which your doctor would use to turn you in is embodied in Clinton-era ATF language and in the anti-gun Veterans Disarmament Act of 2007. Specifically, you doctor would “drop a dime” on you if he suspected you were even a slight “danger to yourself of others” or were “unable to manage your financial affairs.”

So if they say you can’t balance your checkbook, then you lose your constitutional rights.

But there’s another problem:  The day these regulations become law, lawyers will be lining up to sue “deep-pocket” psychiatrists for every case where they failed to turn in a patient to NICS – if the patient subsequently engages in a horrific act.

The bottom line?  Any psychiatrist who failed to report all of his patients to the NICS system risks losing everything if any of them engages in harmful conduct.  Soon the rule of thumb will be: See a shrink; lose your guns.

And the regulations will apply to private, as well as government-employed psychiatrists.

The bad news is that 165,000 military veterans have already lost their gun rights because of the “see a VA shrink, lose your gun rights” precedent from the Clinton-Bush era.

Sadly, what happened to military veterans has now begun in the private sector – especially in places like New York, after they recently passed their misnamed SAFE Act.

According to gun rights reporter, Dan Roberts, firearms are now being confiscated from gun owners because of their mental health information. For example:

“[John Doe] received a letter from the Pistol Permit Department informing him that his license was immediately revoked upon information that he was seeing a therapist for anxiety and had been prescribed an anxiety drug. He was never suicidal, never violent, and has no criminal history.”

So now taking anxiety pills can result in one’s forfeiting their Second Amendment rights in New York!

This is where the gun haters want to push their agenda.  And this is one reason why background checks are so dangerous – because they give government bureaucrats the opportunity to deny law-abiding people their constitutionally-protected rights.

But the good news is this:  The HHS rulemaking is still at an early stage, and HHS is (no doubt reluctantly) taking the views of the general public.

ACTION: Go to the Federal Register – at http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2013-04-23/pdf/2013-09602.pdf – and respond to the regs entitled “HIPAA Privacy Rule and the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS).”

Let the HHS know how you feel about waiving all federal privacy laws for people who seek counseling.

You may submit your comments at www.regulations.gov

Also, be sure to tell your congressmen that you oppose the “see a shrink, lose your guns” regs issued by the HHS.  Ask him to issue his own comments as well.

The regs themselves lay out several ways that you may submit your opposition.  The comment period ends on June 7, 2013.

Gun Owners of America
8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102
Springfield, VA 22151
Phone: 703-321-8585
FAX: 703-321-8408
www.gunowners.org

About:Gun Owners of America (GOA) is a non-profit lobbying organization formed in 1975 to preserve and defend the Second Amendment rights of gun owners. GOA sees firearms ownership as a freedom issue. `The only no comprise gun lobby in Washington’ – Ron Paul Visit: www.gunowners.org to Join.

Read more at Ammoland.com: http://www.ammoland.com/2013/05/obama-administration-trying-to-grab-guns-through-executive-order/#ixzz2Sc1YQrL3

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , ,

Permalink

From http://monderno.com/news/senate-rejects-gun-control/

Today the Senate rejected gun control, and in a big way. Several gun control proposals failed today, including amendments that would have banned standard capacity magazines, increased background checks, taken guns away from Veterans, and banned virtually every semi-automatic firearm.

Here are some of the highlights.

Lautenberg-Blumenthal Magazine Capacity Amendment

Failed with 46 voting for and 54 voting against. This would have banned those high capacity assault magazine clip thingies.

Burr Veteran Amendment

Failed with 56 voting for and 44 voting against. This is one that wasn’t talked about much, and honestly got a lot closer to passing than I thought it would, which should tell you all you need to know about the current state of affairs in Washington.

Feinstein Ban Everything Amendment

Failed with 40 voting for and 60 voting against. This amendment had zero chance of passing from its inception, but I’m glad it came to a vote. Now the traitors who voted for it can have the vote used against them in 2014.

Manchin-Toomey Background Check Amendment

Failed with 54 voting for and 46 voting against. This was the amendment that I thought had the best chance of making it out of the Senate to be quickly killed by the House, but it failed to make it even that far. Thankfully.

Following the vote, the NRA released the following statement.

NRA Statement

Today, the misguided Manchin-Toomey-Schumer proposal failed in the U.S. Senate. This amendment would have criminalized certain private transfers of firearms between honest citizens, requiring lifelong friends, neighbors and some family members to get federal government permission to exercise a fundamental right or face prosecution. As we have noted previously, expanding background checks, at gun shows or elsewhere, will not reduce violent crime or keep our kids safe in their schools.

The NRA will continue to work with Republicans and Democrats who are committed to protecting our children in schools, prosecuting violent criminals to the fullest extent of the law, and fixing our broken mental health system. We are grateful for the hard work and leadership of those Senators who chose to pursue meaningful solutions to our nation’s most pressing problems.

Technorati Tags: , , , , ,

Permalink
tim-mueller
Linn County Sheriff Tim Mueller, at his office in Albany, Ore., Tuesday, displays a copy of the letter he sent to Vice President Joe Biden. Sheriff Mueller says that his department will not enforce any federal regulation requiring the sheriff’s office to disarm law-abiding citizens. (Mark Ylen/Albany Democrat-Herald)

Rep. Yvonne Davis (D-TX) proposed legislation this week to remove US sheriffs who refuse to enforce Unconstitutional federal gun laws.
Guns Saves Lives reported:

Both the White House and Democratic lawmakers at the state level are making pushes to ensure that any new federal gun legislation is enforced by local sheriffs.

Hundreds of sheriffs across the country have signed and sent letters to the White House saying they would refuse to enforce any federal gun laws which they view as being unconstitutional.

Sheriffs upholding their oath of office to defend the Constitution apparently doesn’t sit well with Democrats.

Legislation proposed in Texas by Dallas Democratic Rep. Yvonne Davis would remove any sheriff or law enforcement officer who refuses to enforce state or federal laws. We’re quite sure that’s not going to fly in Texas, but it could lead the way for less gun friendly states to propose or pass similar laws.

Also this week White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said the White House expects all sheriffs to enforce all federal laws.

Source: http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2013/03/democrats-push-legislation-to-remove-sheriffs-who-refuse-to-enforce-unconstitutional-gun-laws/

Technorati Tags: , , , , ,

Permalink

 

 

I have been debating for a long time now if I would ever need to start carrying a knife or knives with my EDC. It was a fear of mine to carry a knife. Not because I may have to use it, but because I saw myself getting into a knife fight. I thought about it. I mean, I really thought about it. Pretty much everything I have seen which uses a knife is against someone else that uses a knife. I told myself, why would I every use a knife when I carry a gun. If I am beyond two arms reach, I will do “Shooting in Motion” from Combat Focus Shooting. Now when I am within one arms reach that might change the tactic I use.

I was too worried about getting in a knife fight with a knife fighter or with someone who trains a lot with knives. The likelihood of that happening is very low, but still possible. Now that problem is out of the way, I asked myself, why do I need to carry a knife? The more I talked with my brother Ian Strimbeck from Down Range Firearms Training and my distant uncle Alessandro Padovani from Safer Faster Defense, they made me realize how important it is for threats within one arms reach. It gives me an option if I have to defend myself with deadly force and cannot reach my firearm. Also, Alessandro has a training DVD called Safer Faster Knife Defense that can be found in the I.C.E. Training Store. I highly recommend this DVD.

 

I have been carrying a Sypderco Endura and Delica with a wave now for a few months. Ian showed me some fundamentals on reverse edge grip. With Alessandro’s DVD, I learned even more about knives and the employment of his methodology. Here’s the thing, the more I carry my knives, the more I realize I need more training with them. I tell people all the time, just because you buy a gun it does not mean you can use it efficiently.

After I had this revaluation, I finally bought the Syderco trainer copies of my knives . I was fortunate to find the Delica trainer with the wave, but could not with the Endura. As you can see from the different photos I have posted, I made wave in the Edura trainer. It only took about five minutes with a Dremel Tool. Alessandro told me it was pretty simple. So I knocked it out.

 

You will see me continuing my education with edged weapons to become more well rounded with attacks within one arms reach. Also plan to add the knife work I am comfortable with teaching in Close Quarters Defensive Concepts.

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , ,

Permalink

Former Astronaut Mark E. Kelly, a gun-control proponent and husband to former Congresswoman Gabby Giffords, recently purchased an AR-15 (an “assault weapon,” he called it)—which he now says he intended as an illustration of the need for more stringent gun laws.
Kelly reportedly bought the AR-15 and a 1911-style semi-automatic pistol at a gun store in Tucson, Arizona.

mark-kelly-gun-store
Breitbart News received a tip on this when Neil McCabe, editor of Guns & Patriots newsletter, contacted us on March 7 and said:
Mark E. Kelly, made purchases which included an AR-15–sometimes described as an “assault rifle”–at 3:30 pm on the afternoon of March 5 at Diamondback Police Supply, 170 S. Kolb Street, Tucson, AZ.
According to McCabe, witnesses to the purchases claimed Kelly purchased “high capacity” magazines as well.
On March 6, McCabe contacted Kelly’s gun control group–”Americans for Responsible Solutions”–and on March 8 they replied that his message had been passed on to colleagues who handle press requests. Breitbart News then began investigating the details surrounding the purchase, including visiting the gun store.
Suddenly, Kelly announced on his Facebook page that he was not going to keep the AR-15, which he has yet to pick up from the store.
Days after making the purchases,

Kelly wrote on Facebook:I just had a background check a few days ago when I went to my local gun store to buy a .45. As I was leaving, I noticed a used AR-15. Bought that too. Even to buy an assault weapon, the background check only takes a matter of minutes. I don’t have possession of it yet but I’ll be turning it over to the Tucson PD when I do.

Testifying to the Senate Judiciary Committee Jan. 30, Kelly had urged senators to restrict sales firearms based on their lethality–a common refrain with other witnesses that day, who argued that semi-automatic weapons, which chamber subsequent rounds as bullets are fired, and other guns with military-style features level the playing field against law enforcement.
Kelly and Giffords founded their own advocacy group to restrict gun rights, Americans for Responsible Solutions, in January. On its website, ARS wrote: “High capacity magazines are a deadly factor in gun violence.” A 30-round magazine is considered a high-capacity magazine.
The ARS website says: “Congress should act to limit the sale of high capacity magazines, which are not needed for hunting or self-defense, but have proven very lethal.”
Similarly, the ARS website says: “Congress should act to limit the sale of assault weapons.
In February, Kelly told Fox News Sunday’s Chris Wallace that lawmakers need to address “assault weapons.” He said the purpose of an “assault weapon” is “to kill a lot of people very quickly,” and he lamented that such products were “too readily available.”
Kelly has not commented on whether he will also return the .45 caliber semi-automatic pistol he purchased.
Photo: Captain Mark Kelly/Facebook

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , ,

Permalink

What does shooting a deadly charging bear have to do with self defense against wounded assailants that are human?

Quite a bit as a matter of fact. brown bear

While most of us will never have to deal with this reality, there is a small segment of the population who live and work in areas full of hostile bears.

These people go about their everyday activities knowing they may have to suddenly defend themselves against a charging bear, hell bent on killing them.

These folks know it takes a good sized piece of lead to stop a charging bear (or several) and they need aim well. And a wounded, angry bear can hold a surprising amount of lead before it dies. Poorly placed or weak shots to a bear might not kill it right away giving it a few minutes to maul you

This is really no different with a human attacker. Shot placement is critical, you want to disable the person as fast as possible, not just cripple them. A wounded assailant can still be able to shoot back at you.

In his article, “Doc, How Do I Know Where I Should Shoot?” on USConcealedCarry.com, James Williams M. D. relates what he has seen firsthand:

As a trauma physician, I have been witness to a lot of human deaths, and even more near-deaths. As a police medical officer and SWAT medic, I have seen the kind of damage violent felons can do when badly—even mortally—wounded. (Learn the most effective zones for bullet placement here)

Give up any thoughts you may have about “just wounding” or “slowing down” your attacker. Once guns become involved and bullets start flying, all bets are off. It’s a kill or be killed situation. No other outcomes should be considered.

Preparedness is the best approach here. Are you confident that your gun is a large enough caliber and will your bullets cause a substantial amount of trauma and tissue damage?

Do you know where the vital organs really are on a person? If not be sure to read Doctor Williams’ article above, in which he points out some of the kill zones on a human body.

A wounded attacker is every bit as dangerous as a wounded bear. Keep this in mind as you choose your concealed carry weapon and plan out your defense strategy for when the need arises.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , ,

Permalink

I teach Concealed Carry classes from time to time in Colorado.  Students ask me what is the best pistol to buy.  I tell them, “I don’t know, I don’t have enough information.”

Although a 45 cal will stop and more likely kill an attacker breaking in your home, can a 45 cal be easily concealed in thin layer clothing out in public?  Do you work at a gym and wear shorts or do you work in business attire?  Are you a construction worker or do you work in cold environments where you wear thick layers? For females, do you wear a dress or skirt, business slacks, shorts or pants? It’s easier to conceal between the upper tighs of a female wearing a dress or skirt.  Are you a female that wants to conceal in a purse, and how big is your purse?  Do you wear a large jacket and is it appropriate to the climate?  Are you in areas that are more likely to encounter gangs or large number militia groups?  For guys, do you wear your pants at the waist or half way down your butte?  Do you need a pistol that would only need to hold one or two bullets and hang from your neck? Or would you more likely need 15 rounds in your magazine to counter multiple attackers? For some, a single or double shot Dillinger may work and for others a lager 9 mm or 45 cal.  Do you want to carry concealed on multiple locations on your body (leg/boot, waist/hip, armpit, back, forearm or around a neck chain)? Many people wouldn’t bother you, if you pulled out a squirt gun that looked real. The criminals mostly want to hit easy prey targets and walk away (or run) from anyone that brandishes a pistol of any caliber.  Criminals know that even if a 22 cal hits them, it would at least draw blood, which, if left at the scene of the crime, may ID them.   Can a 22 cal kill an attacker?  Indeed! History proves this.  Can a 9mm (or mid-range/power bullet) kill?  Of course it can.  But all you really need to do is “stop the threat” and then escape, if possible.  Sometimes you may need to kill, to eliminate the threat to yourself or others.  So how good of a shot are you under stress (not just at the shooting range).  The more you train, the better your odds.  Buy a 22 cal for the jog around town and to practice with (since the bullets are cheap).  Buy a 9 mm (or any mid-range/power size) for times you wear regular attire that can conceal your “side iron.”  Buy a 45 cal to carry in your brief case, car, office desk, or trench coat.  Some people like hammerless, others like the visible hammer because it becomes very intimidating when you hear and see a hammer drawn back.  The sound and sight of a hammer being pulled back means “serious business,” and that alone may cause the aggressors to rethink their actions and run.  Some don’t like the hammer because it may snag on clothing.  Some like the revolvers and some like magazine fed pistols.  Revolvers may carry less ammo, but how many shots would you need to aid in your escape or to “stop the threat?”  Revolvers may be bulky, so take this into consideration.  Some feel the revolver is less likely to jam and for females–they may like the revolvers for feeding ammo.  Many women with long nails do not like feeding magazines with ammo.  Some people like the black-look to conceal more during the dark and others want the chrome pieces to flash out and show the attacker that they are holding a serious piece of shiny medal which is less likely to be a black toy gun.   Everyone has their preference and budget.  You can always start with an inexpensive 22 (or any small size cal) and later buy a larger cal.  We are not superheroes that need the biggest and the best to fight crime nightly.  Buy something now that is in your budget and practice your aim under stress to see how you can handle your weapons and how effective your aim is at various distances.  Many expert shooters at the range do average, at best, under stressful situations.   Try to conceal and draw your weapon quickly (without shooting off your feet).  Do this after trying on different outfits.   Some prefer “no safety” on their pistol because if they are going to draw it, then they are going to shot it.  For a novice to average shooter, I recommend a safety, but practice putting it on safe and taking it off safe quickly.  Make sure to try a variety of holsters and see what works best for your situation.  A good pistol with a lousy holster is not a good combination.  Single or double action is also a preference.  Go to the range and practice both and see what works better for your aim.  Look at your targets and see which one you do better at.  The proof is on the target.  I personally like single action and ”no safety,” but I have both.  I like the cool chrome but I have black pistols also.  I have a variety of holsters for different outfits.  I enjoy all of my weapons. I like the power of the 45 1911 but I like the price of the pistol and ammo for a 22.  And if I go out looking for small game the 22 works wonders.  I like my pistols to multi task for hunting, sport shooting and personal protection.  Have “Attention Deficit Disorder” (ADD) with your training and change it up often.  Buy what you can afford and when that gets boring, save up for the next piece.  Know your local laws for concealed carry and never point at anything you are not willing to shot to protect yourself or others around you.  If you cannot conceal carry in certain areas, find out if you can carry it in a seperate case or visibly carry it.  If you cannot carry at all in possibly dangerous areas, then carry a knife, medal/tactical pen or baseball bat.  Keep a clear head and think before you touch your weapon.  Never drink and touch a weapon!  Always do the right thing!

 

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , ,

Permalink

Although all handguns are designed, in principle, to be handheld, pistols and revolvers come in all shapes and sizes. Whether they are used for hunting, personal defence, target shooting or just as collection pieces, the wide variety of handgun models serves many different purposes, and gun enthusiasts have a whole range of points to consider when choosing their handgun of choice. For example, all handguns have different rates of fire (semi-automatic, single shot, etc), designs (revolver, cartridge, machine pistol) and range, among other features. Perhaps most interesting, however, is the power of some handguns. Despite their small size, handguns are capable of producing massive amounts of firepower, and some models can even rival the damage caused by automatic rifles and shotguns.

1972 44 magnum smith and wesson

.44 Magnum

Popularised by Clint Eastwood’s tough-talking, grimacing detective Harry Callahan in the Dirty Harry film series, the .44 Remington Magnum is one of the most recognisable handguns in the world. The long barrelled revolver still makes a appearance in many action films and video games, and the heavy, classic design of the handgun makes an intimidating sight. Although it is not the most powerful handgun (and it wasn’t at the time Dirty Harry was released in the 1970s, despite the film’s memorable speech saying otherwise), the Magnum packs tremendous force from its high velocity firepower and heavy .44 calibre bullets. The Magnum’s high recoil and large muzzle blast makes it generally unsuitable for police or army use as rapid fire can cause tremendous strain on the hands of users. However, the handgun is often used by hunters in North America, and its high stopping power and deep penetration mean that it can be even used on game as large as elk and deer. American publisher and avid hunter Robert E. Petersen once boasted that he killed a polar bear with the impressive revolver.

S&W 559

Smith & Wesson Model 500

The Smith & Wesson Model 500 is the most powerful, mass-produced revolver in the world. Released in 2003, the Model 500 was designed with a unique X-Frame design that could support the huge muzzle energy and pressure produced by the .500 calibre cartridges. The rounds are fired at a massive rate of 1975 metres per second, and the gun can be used effectively at a range of up to 200 yards when hunting game. In fact, the energy and velocity produced by the large calibre rounds has made the Model 500 suitable for hunting large African game, like cape buffalo bulls. Generating up to 4.1 kJ of force, the handgun produces a great amount of recoil and kick, and novice shooters should be under strict supervision when handling the impressive weapon.

WTS .50 BMG Pistol

This custom built handgun from German gun manufacturer WTS Waffentechnik weighs a whopping 7.2 kilograms, which makes it heavier than most automatic rifles. With its 430 millimetre long barrel, the WTS .50 BMG looks more like a rifle than a pistol, but it is still technically a handgun and is designed to be held like one. However, users will have to be very careful when using this monster of a weapon as it fires .50 Browning Machine Gun (BMG) rounds. Perhaps unsurprisingly, with such large ammunition the pistol is only single shot, and users have to load additional rounds via a bolt action mechanism. However, the huge firepower generated by the handgun means that just one bullet will be more than enough for any target. The WTS .50 BMG is not widely manufactured, and it is hard to purchase out of Germany. For many avid gun enthusiasts who have managed to get their hands on one, the handgun is certainly the talk of any gun collection

This post was written by Robert Johnson an gun enthusiast and keen angler. Visit Sealskinz for more information on the professional gun gloves and sporting apparel, all fully waterproof and wind resistant.

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , ,

Permalink

Have you ever wondered what it would be like, if you had to use your gun?  What if you killed the person who was shot? How would that make you feel?  These emotions need to be explored before an incident occurs. Just having a concealed carry weapons permit makes this self-examination extremely important. You need to understand what has to be done in case of a shooting incident.magnifying glass

Will you be able to pull the trigger when the time comes?

And then, what? What would you tell the police upon their arrival? And what about the media? What might you say to them?

NOTHING.  If you were the shooter, you shouldn’t talk to the police until your attorney is present and even if you were just a bystander to the incident, you should never talk to a reporter, unless you’re only giving them the cold, hard facts.  “Person A shot person B with a pistol,” or “I shot this man in self-defense.” Period. No justifications that media people can twist to make their stories front page news. You have to be very careful about what picture you paint when it comes to the media and how they might present your story to the public.

In his article, “All Eyes on You,” at USConcealedCarry.com, K. L. Jamison, Esq. wrote:

“There is a cynical defense attorney statement. It goes: Anything you say will be misquoted and used against you. In the aftermath of a self-defense incident the citizen will be overwhelmed with a desire to justify his conduct. Even when absolutely confident that gunfire was not only the right and proper thing to do, but the only thing to do, the desire to justify can be overwhelming. Experienced lawyers are of the opinion that adrenalin-fueled statements to 911 serve to talk the caller into prison. Statements to the media often record video as well as audio. As we have seen in the Zimmerman case these statements can be easily edited to result in misleading reports and, to be blunt, lies.” (Read more of Jamison’s article here.)

For this reason, keeping your answers to the point, without editorializing the shooter, who may have been in the right all along. And if you’re the shooter, remaining silent could help you stay out of court.

As Jamison points out, the media will bend details to their purpose, so sometimes, things happen in a different way from the way in which the media reports the incident. For example, Jamison cites a situation where a failing student started shooting at the Appalachian School of Law. Two of the students ran to their cars to retrieve their concealed carry weapons and were able to subdue the shooter without any further injury or loss of life.

When the national news services reported the incident, they left out the part about the students having guns because they “… had decided that mentioning the contribution of the pistols would give people the wrong idea about guns.”  Manipulation of what we see and hear should NOT be part of the media’s job, but it is.

If you find yourself either involved in or witness to a shooting incident, it’s better to keep silent or to only provide facts, not explanations.  By coloring details to justify your actions or the actions of others, the resulting news story could come to be the reason that an innocent person is prosecuted.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Permalink

It has certainly been a while since my last post. Unfortunately I have not been able to get my hands on any new gear to review, so this will be something of a rant with renewed vigor, with regards to the newly signed New York law that has limited magazines to seven rounds, among other points. Let me repeat that. Gun owners who possess magazines with a capacity of ten rounds (which is already a restriction) are now limited to magazines with a seven round capacity. Additionally, people who already own ten round magazines are given a year to sell them out of state, lest they face misdemeanor criminal charges. Don’t you feel safer?

A criminal with deadly intent and a firearm now has to limit him/herself to only seven casualties. That is, unless he wishes to carry two magazines. In which case, right off the bat he now increases his total to fourteen. Now I’ve never been considered a math whiz by any standard, but last time I checked in with “Mathematics Weekly”, fourteen was more than ten. I have a strong feeling it still is.

I have to assume that my audience (I also have to assume that I have one) is a literate bunch that can think for themselves and apply their own brand of logic and reasoning, so I won’t delve into why this law doesn’t make any sense. There are several reasons and they have all been heavily discussed. At this point, what I take issue with is what I can only assume to be spite. I have come to the conclusion that lawmakers are not stupid people. New York’s politicians are not stupid people. They are however, spiteful, in my opinion. The only thing that this new law is accomplishing is a new way to make NY’s gun owners’ already heavily restricted and unreasonably expensive hobby, just a little bit more impossible. In other words, since the hoops we as responsible, law abiding gun owners have had to jump through have already been made smaller, they have now decided to cover them in gasoline and light them on fire.

Law makers have come to the realization that they cannot at this point ban all guns. They probably realize that this isn’t something that is going to happen in the near future, either. But what they can do, and what they have just done again, is to make it much more difficult for us as New Yorkers to exercise our Second Amendment rights. Anyone who has read my previous post regarding New York and guns will already know my feelings on our inability to obtain a legal carry permit, among other injustices. I can only hope my future plans lead me out of New York and somewhere in the United States of America.

Thanks for reading, guys. And as always, if you have any questions or comments, feel free to either leave them below or send me an email. Be well!

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , ,