California #1, New Jersey #2

As rated by the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Ownership.

Eight People Shot at Los Angeles House Party

Five Shot at Seton Hall University Frat Party in New Jersey

Just sayin'.

Where in the World is Rebecca Peters

Looking at the gun control connections for the Brady's, I saw that Rebecca Peters, who stated that:

civilians should not have sniper rifles, or rifles that they can kill someone at 100 meters distance, for example.

And told British firearm owners to 'get a new hobby' seems to have gone missing.

She is no longer listed as Director on the IANSA website. Instead there is an interim director named. Her wiki page calls her the 'former director' but her 'linkedin' page still states she 'currently holds this position' (or else hasn't been updated).

So what's up becky? George think you'ld do better serving him tea?

Just Another Joyce Puppet

It should come as no surprise that Joan Peterson, a board member of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Ownership, who claims to 'just be concerned w/ gun violence' and 'doesn't want to ban your guns', is, like I prophesied earlier, full of crap.

She's not just a board member of the BC/MMM, she's also a board member of MN's 'Citizens for a Safer Minnesota', an 'affiliate' of States United to Prevent Gun Violence', the umbrella Joyce Foundation group for minuscule 'grassroots' groups that can't survive on their own.

Here's what they had to say about Heller and McDonald"

“We disagree with both the 2008 Heller decision overturning the Washington, D.C. handgun ban and today’s McDonald decision applying it to Chicago,” said Heather Martens, Executive Director of Citizens for a Safer Minnesota and Protect Minnesota.

And of course the BC/MMM (and several Joyce Affiliates) are members of IANSA whose stated goals are to effectively eliminate civilian firearm ownership.

And she wonders why we won't believe her.

Day of Caring

Every year, the United Way has a "Day of Caring" in the county I work in. The business I work for is always heavily involved in promoting and volunteering for the annual event.

Today was that day. My employer paid me a full days wages to do 4 hours worth of volunteer work. Not too shabby. If I remember correctly, they have 290 seperate types of community service work. Everything from house painting for the elderly to garbage clean up along the river. One of my co-workers is the Head Honcho for a church group that collects old piece o' crap bicycles, fixes them up and donates them to homeless people. He also happens to be a "nuetral" who seems interested in my hobby.

That's what I did all morning...fix bicycles. Free coffee, free donuts and all the grease you could slather on both. After a free lunch, the afternoon crew took over and worked another 4 hours. The nice lady and Head Honcho from the church told us that they would be absolutely thrilled if we could deliver 10 functional bikes in 8 hours, as they had that many requests already pending.

We had a pile of "projects" and a near equal pile of bikes that were deemed unrepairable and only useful for spare parts. All I can say is that in 4 hours, we delivered no less than 16 serious Frankenstien bikes out of the garage. Each given a test ride around the block to ensure functionality and safety. Tools were scarce so we had to go all McGyver on some of them and use some good ol' fashioned creativity.

What's all this doing on a gun blog?

Well...

Since I'm a gun owner and therefore an obvious racist/homophobe/religious fanatic, I stipulated that the 4 bikes I repaired could only go to republican Chistian white heterosexual overwieght upper-class homeless men with a tiny penis, over 40 years of age.

When I made this demand of the nice church lady, I removed my pants and slapped my junk on the remaining donuts for proper emphasis.

We all spend a great deal of time talking about guns and ballistics and the law and the courts and the Federalist Papers and the Constitution and the Bill of Rights and all the studies and statistics and everything else and whatever and that.

Take a break once in awhile and talk about the potential mental damage of a young homeless boy's life riding around town on a bike with pink rims.

Volunteer.

Volunteer for something.

Volunteer for anything.

P.S. A can of black spray paint can do more than mark gang territory.

We win not only because we're right on one issue; we win because we continue to build support amongst those who have their own dedications focused elsewhere.

Never forget that.

"Agree to Disagree"? No, I Don't Think So.

I hear that phrase regularly from 'gun control' advocates when they're getting pushed to provide evidence or support for their claims. Here's one example of a Canadian PuSH'er after being unable to defend her belief that gun control saved her country from doom.

To all of you who have replied to me...and there are many of you........We are going to have to agree to respectfully disagree on this one. I don't consider I have lost a freedom because we have strict gun control laws in Canada. I feel fortunate to live in a country where people don't generally feel the need to carry a hand gun to protect themselves.

We have less murders, accidental deaths and suicide on a per capita basis from guns than the United states and I am very happy for that. It doesn't matter why....

That's right, 'It doesn't matter why'. Just ban guns.

And this mentality goes all the way to the top of their lobby. SIH, Joe Huffman and others have been taking a Bradybot to task.

And when she can no longer defend herself, just like the sycophant 'Kelli' on the old Brady Blog, she cries 'harassment' and that we must, you guessed it, 'agree to disagree' because discussion is 'futile'.

Now THAT I will agree with. Trying to 'discuss' anything w/ staunch gun control advocates is 'futile' because it will, without fail, end up w/ them claiming we should 'agree to disagree'. In varying levels of politeness.

No. I don't think so.

Why? Because in the big picture, they're trying to restrict ME, I'M not trying to restrict THEM. They may pull some anecdotes out of their @sses to show why they're afraid of all these gun owners but, when the real numbers are shown, they scurry away w/ 'agree to disagree'.

So again. No, I don't think so. And I will continue to disagree w/ them and actively oppose them every chance I get.

The Making of a Threeper

For those who don't know, 'Threeper' is the term used for what is best described as a 2nd Amendment Absolutist. Those that believe that all or most firearm laws are unconstitutional and should be abolished.

I'm not one of those but I do understand the mindset and how it's created. Let's take for example one of those 'reasonable, common-sense' laws in Illinois, the FOID card. For the most part, IMO, it IS reasonable. It's cheap, shall issue, and serves as a defacto background check which has kept several 'loophole' bills from passing.

On the other hand, the Illinois State Police (ISP) have this habit, every few years, of delaying issuing them up to six months and it having to take action by state representatives and senators to get them back on track. Their excuses for this usually include some form of "We can't afford more people" even though the cost of the license is higher than the expense.

Each and every time they pull this trick, it makes me lean a little more towards opposing ANY firearm laws, just picturing how that CAN and WILL be abused when put into practice. And that's just one example.

So it's really the 'gun control' advocates' own fault. Every time they try to play some word games and get caught, or, like Chicago or the ISP, make things as difficult as possible for law abiding people to own guns while criminals and Daley (but I repeat myself) have whatever access to them they want, they turn 'moderate' gun owners into hard-core ones and make 'fence-sitters' lean our way.

I hope they keep it up.

Yeah, What He Said

Sebastian at SIH answers questions posed by a Brady Board Member who commits 'reasoned discourse' at her own site.

His answers pretty much square w/ what I feel but, like several of the comments have stated, it won't mean anything.

These are mostly the typical loaded Brady-botesque questions that we hear all the time. She'll ignore any answer she doesn't like and will play word games w/ any others she thinks she can get away with. After we get upset enough w/ this round that we call her out on it, she'll play the 'wounded maiden' routine, call us a bunch of typical NRA meanies and then claim that she was only looking for 'thoughtful discussion' to 'solve the problem of gun crime'.

Then the cycle will start over.

Just watch. I'll wager a cookie on it.

2 major victories you'll never hear about.

Lotsa human type bipeds have been crowing about Heller and McDonald lately, and rightly so. It's always easy to harvest the low hanging fruit as blog fodder.

But when one has established their deified identity as "the bastard who scoops uncle," I guess I shouldn't gloat too much in the latest demonstration of my obvious superiority.

Big shoes? Cited references from credible sources?

Oh yeah baby, let's go there.

Illinois and Wisconsin now allow the concealed carry of firearms without any form of permit. Yep, Illinois and Wisconsin are now in line with Vermont, Alaska and Arizona.

" Two states, Wisconsin and Illinois, do not require a permit to carry concealed handguns in public while two states forbid the carrying of concealed handguns."



Didn't hear this news from any other gun bloggers before me???

That's because I am Wile E. Coyote.........super genius.

My source's credibility is beyond reproach.

Yeah baby, it's the Brady Campaign...

That should bring you to an "overview." Then read the section for "urgency."

I shall now flog my self for being so awesome.

heh

You Can't Make Everyone Happy

Over on the ISRA FB page, some individuals have expressed concerns over endorsements for the upcoming elections. Some have legitimate complaints, such as Dillard voting for a mag. capacity bill in '07 , to outright batsh!t partisan insanity.

A big complaint is about a primary endorsement for Debbie Halvorson (IL-11). True, outside of firearms, she's a complete loonball but even the GOA rates her w/ an "A". Some have suggested that the ISRA and NRA send out surveys on who their members think they should endorse.

Yeah, that'll work.

Besides being a logistical nightmare, the primary concept of these endorsements is to inform members about where their various legislators stand on FIREARMS, using past voting records and responses to questionnaires which are tabulated by the various lobbyists, information the 'average' voter doesn't have or know enough to look for. Then there's the question of do you get a vote for someone outside of your district? Why should you have a say in a place you don't have a vote in?

That's besides the fact that you still would have people whining that their candidate of choice wasn't selected for endorsement.

Seriously, if you don't agree w/ the endorsement, DON'T VOTE FOR THEM!! You have that option you know but if you find it so offensive that you just can't stand it, don't let the door hit you on the way out.

ISRA Banquet

Decided just to relax and not live blog the Banquet. Colleen Lawson opened up the festivities w/ a song.


After dinner (nice roast beef w/ red potatoes and green beans)
Otis McDonald gave rousing speech on the history of how he got involved.

After his speech, Exec. Dir. Richard Pearson presented him w/ 'the gun like he had when he was in the Army', a Springfield Armory 1911-A1 .

The McDonald v Chicago litigants (minus Adam Orlov) then presented the ISRA w/ a plaque thanking them for all the legal and emotional support during the case.



The Litigants and ISRA/IllinoisCarry leadership.
From left: Mike Weisman, Valinda Rowe, David & Colleen Lawson, Don Moran, Otis McDonald, Richard Pearson.


Didn't win any of the Raffle guns. No surprise there.
I then chatted for a while w/ the Rowe's, Mike Weisman and others before heading home. Mike made a pot of Turkish coffee for me to keep me awake on the drive home. It did, that's for sure.

Annual Meeting

MeetnGreet