Focus on Illinois II

Two weeks ago I posted on the Anti's modifying their tactics to focus on certain states that they feel they have an chance at succeeding in. This included Illinois.

Illinois NRA lobbyist Todd Vandermyde has informed us that the Brady Bunch has filed the paperwork to form a Political Action Committee (PAC) so they can try and influence Illinois elections to get more Chicagocrats into office.

From the Brady's:

"Illinois was selected to be part of this strategy because of the strength of organizations and advocacy in the state. The electoral strategy in Illinois is exactly what we did in California. We know it works. We are raising money in Illinois that is specifically earmarked to hold people accountable. We have a comprehensive strategy that involves raising funds, getting our message out on the phone and through the mail, and working in conjunction with other interested parties."

"What else does this strategy involve? We call it the concentric circle strategy. First, you want to make sure that all of your urban legislators are voting with you – you start with the areas that are most affected. In Illinois, that means asking if all Chicago legislators are on our side. If not, we have to take care of that. The point is, get your areas of strength locked up. Then, move into the ring of suburbs that border Chicago. Then you go to the next “ring.”

They're going to keep Chicago w/o a doubt. Our job is to make them hit a brick wall when they try to expand outwards. They know they'll never get the rural areas. What they want are an additional half-dozen to a dozen suburban votes to swing the tide. If that happens, we WILL see bans on 'assault weapons', .50 cals, magazine limitations, gun shows, additional licensing of owners and dealers, 'safe storage', victim accountability, and every other 'reasonable' measure the Brady's think they can get away with to limit and reduce firearm ownership.

All Illinois firearm owners need to contact their reps and senators.

My Kind of Church

Pastor Invites People to Bring Guns to Church

LOUISVILLE, Ky. — A Kentucky pastor is inviting people to bring their guns to church to celebrate the Fourth of July and the Second Amendment.

New Bethel Church is welcoming "responsible handgun owners" to wear their firearms inside the church on June 27, a Saturday.

An ad says there will be a handgun raffle, patriotic music and information on gun safety.

Church pastor Ken Pagano says guns must be unloaded and private security will check visitors. He says recent church shootings make it necessary to promote safe gun ownership.

Marian McClure Taylor is executive director of the Kentucky Council of Churches.

She says churches work to prevent violent harm and promote peace, but most "allow for arms to be taken up under certain conditions."

Ok. They've got to be unloaded but I'll bet that 'private security' are other church members.

A 'Smattering' of 2A Activists.

Those are the words of Brady spokesperson Chad Ramsey on the Campus Carry movement.

Opponents of concealed carry say there are relatively few students who are behind the movement. "What we're hearing is that they do not want guns on campus," said Chad Ramsey, spokesman for the Brady Campaign, a gun control advocate in Washington. "There is a smattering of Second Amendment activists out there. But I don't think there is a major grassroots effort among students — I think most students have been advocating the other side of the fence."

Uh huh. Sure. Kind of like when the Brady Campaign claimed that the SCCC was organized and financed by the 'gun lobby'?

The SCCC has over 37,000 members with groups on dozens of campuses in almost every state. All organized by students and former students.

The Brady Campaign claims on membership vary but are usually about 50K and has been seeing their support steadily erode over the last 15 years with turnout at their demonstrations in the double digits at best. The group "Gun Free Kids" in contrast IS funded and organized by the Nat'l anti-gun groups and has far fewer members and has far fewer clubs around the nation.

Who has a 'smattering' of activists again?

Not the First Time

Caleb, Sebastian, and Uncle point the the vandalism that occurred by anti-gun activists on a Georgia range. Unsurprisingly, this is a regular occurrence in Illinois with the Champaign County Burma Shave signs.

Anti's go on and on about how violent firearm owners are. Obviously they're against them because of what they themselves would do if they owned guns.


THanks to John Naese of GSL for the Image.

Missing the Point

I hate ACU's. In their attempt to find a camo pattern good for all environments, the Army designed one good for none. Look how clearly it stands out in a woodland environment:


And no, it's not just the lighting.

Silly me. I thought the idea behind camouflage was NOT to be seen.

Stereotyping

LITTLE ROCK, Ark. – A Muslim convert accused of killing a soldier in a "political and religious" attack on a military recruiting center pleaded not guilty Tuesday to a capital murder charge and was ordered held without bail.

Yep.

Epidemic of Gun Violence?

Nope.

Population group	Number of agencies	Population	Violent crime	Murder	Forcible rape	Robbery	Aggravated assault	Property crime	Burglary	Larceny-theft	Motor vehicle theft	Arson
Total	12,750	258,350,856	-2.5	-4.4	-2.2	-1.1	-3.2	-1.6	+1.3	-0.6	-13.1	-3.9

Pinning all their hopes

After being resoundingly disappointed in the lack of gun bans and restrictions by their golden boy Obama, the Brady Campaign is pinning all their hopes of avoiding incorporation of the 2A on the nomination of Sotomayor for SCOTUS.

I agree w/ Paul on this one. She's an anti-gun activist at heart and an Obama nominee so we shouldn't expect any logic or critical thinking from her when the Chicago case gets heard in front of the Supreme Court no matter his claims of her support for 'precedent'.

Yet on the other hand, she's going to replace a judge who ruled against Heller anyway so it's a zero net loss/gain for both sides.

I think she's going to get nominated. Anyone who goes against her will be called a racist and/or sexist, depending on which will get more traction.

We'll see what happens.

Attack on Children

Can't beat the military in a straight fight? Go after little kids to use as shields and hostages.

Not all cultures should be considered equal.

Attack on our military

Military recruiter killed in Ark shooting

My initial guess? An anti-war advocate targeting recruiters. Fox is reporting there is a 'device' in the suspects' SUV.

Paying it Backward

So what is the traditional response to out of control gov't spending and decrease in revenue due to a recession?

Why raise taxes and fees of course.

"But we'll increase deductions for the poor and middle class", they whine. "It will only effect businesses and the wealthy."

And what will those wealthy people who own those businesses do? Why raise their prices and/or cut back on hiring/services. Then there's also the fact that all those 'fees' and 'service' taxes disproportionately effect the 'poor and middle class' since we still have to get vehicle stickers, buy gas, etc. Can we say 'regressive tax' boys and girls?

Now the 50% increase mentioned in the above article did just fail in the Il house 42-70. What is currently up, and has already passed the Senate, is a 67% income tax increase from 3% to 5% plus numerous 'services'.

Yep. Genererate revenue by impoverishing the residents of the state even further while driving out business and voting yourselves pay increases each year. And these people keep getting elected.

Poaching on the Rise

Kaveman e-mailed me to inform me that the predicted effects of concealed carry in Nat'l Parks is already occurring. Two individuals in Michigan have been convicted of poaching.

Now we just have to wait for the dozens of forest fires that will be started.

Truth or Dare.

Armed and Safe notes that the ICPGV and the ICHV have become so unglued about a minor change in Illinois firearm law that they are blatantly lying to their members to try and get some opposition to it.

Who relies on 'fear' again?

Update:House Bill 182 passed the Illinois House today by a vote of 90-28. The bill now heads to the desk of Governor Pat Quinn (D) for his consideration.

Dear Mr. Bravely Anonymous

A few days ago I posted a piece on the American Hunters and Shooters Assoc.'s attempts to revamp its image as a real organization for sportsmen in lieu of an anti-gun group in camo. In response, I got one individual who took offense at me mentioning the fact that the AHSA supported Obama for president regardless of his history of anti-gun activities:

What has Obama, as president done AT ALL to affect gun rights?

ANS: NOTHING

Ok Mr. 'Anonymous', that's fair enough even with the qualifier. However is it due to a lack of desire or is it political expediency? Every single member of his cabinet has a strong history of supporting 'gun control'. Was this a conscious choice by Obama or is this merely representative of the DNC leadership pool that he had to choose from?

Of course that's only ancillary to what's being avoided. Ray Schoenke himself stated opposition to assault weapons at one point but now claims support. Was that the statement of 'consultants' or his opinion? If it was his opinion, what caused it to change?

What is the AHSA going to do fix its image as a gun control group in camoflage?

These are all legitimate questions that deserve an answer if the AHSA wants to even have a chance at being taken seriously as a gun rights group.

Like I said, I'm willing to listen. Instead of being a drive-by troll, come and discuss the issue. The door's open. Are you up to it?

Random Musings

Watching TV the other night, I saw an ad for a new prescription drug to counter Acid Reflux. As I have regular heartburn I paid attention. Then I decided I would never buy this product.

Why?

Because a company that couldn't hire an advertising company that could see the negative implications of the name of their product isn't one I would trust to do quality research.

The name of the product?

Aciphex. Pronounced "Ass Effects".

There was another product a while back for hair removal. Designed in Australia, they obviously used a Australian marketing company. It was called Nads.

I'm sure they were most embarazar when they were told about these little gaffs.

Just Another Day in Chi-Town

Federal charges expected today against Ald. Isaac Carothers

3 arrested, 9 hurt in shooting, chase and wreck

Teen Charged In Brutal Slaying Of 15-Year-Old

Ho hum.

Implications and extrapolations

I’ve seen a lot about the Colosimo case and the cabal that sparked it on the gun blogs I frequent, but I just ran across this nugget which might have slipped under the radar. More likely someone else has scooped this already; I’m just saying it was news to me and I wanted to share.

“Twelve religious activists pulled off a legal miracle yesterday: They convinced a judge - who once worked for the Philadelphia Police Department, of all places - that it's OK to break the law if the harm you cause is less than the harm you think you're preventing.”

Read the whole thing…and think about it.

My ponderings?

I should premise the following by saying that just because I raise the question, it in no way serves as to any clue to my beliefs. Don’t try to get inside my head, you’ll just get lost. I’m simply taking the logic from this decision and extrapolating.

Is it OK to bomb an abortion clinic because you believe “the harm you cause is less than the harm you think you're preventing?”

Is it OK to bomb a school which teaches evolution because you believe “the harm you cause is less than the harm you think you're preventing?”

Is it OK to kill gays serving openly in the military because you believe “the harm you cause is less than the harm you think you're preventing?”

Is it OK to kill people who drive an SUV because you believe “the harm you cause is less than the harm you think you're preventing?”

Is it OK to destroy someone else’s SUV because you believe “the harm you cause is less than the harm you think you're preventing?”

Is it OK to hunt down and kill hunters because you believe “the harm you cause is less than the harm you think you're preventing?”

THAT is what this decision gives precedent to. Let’s have some hypothetical fun, shall we. These are not my views, but the apparent views of Municipal Court Judge Karen Yvette Simmons.

It is now OK to kill members of organizations who strive every day to chip away at my Constitutional Rights because you believe “the harm you cause is less than the harm you think you're preventing?”

It is now OK to kill members of the legislative branch who strive every day to chip away at my Constitutional Rights because you believe “the harm you cause is less than the harm you think you're preventing?”

It is now OK to kill members of the judicial branch who strive every day to chip away at my Constitutional Rights because you believe “the harm you cause is less than the harm you think you're preventing?”

It is now OK to kill members of the executive branch who strive every day to chip away at my Constitutional Rights because you believe “the harm you cause is less than the harm you think you're preventing?”

Before I get the predicted response from any wandering posers about the difference between protesting and murder, I would like to remind them that the distinction is not made is this ruling.

All that matters is that one believes “the harm you cause is less than the harm you think you're preventing?”

If that’s not the most dangerous shit you’ve ever read; if that doesn’t make your bones chill, then I shudder at the thought of you exercising your right to vote, even though I will defend your right to vote with my life.

I’m kinda complicated.

It's like a bad TV show script.

Tapes of the Burris/Blago scandal have been released and, unsurprisingly, it digs Burris into a deeper hole regarding his purchased appointment to the US Senate.

What's really bad is the way these two talk. It's literally like the script off of a crappy crime show where the 'bad guys' are trying to be subtle and skirt around directly saying they want bribes:

"And therefore I can go off to, you know, wherever and do all these great things," Burris adds. He says that he has "been trying to figure out what the heck, you know, I can do."

"We've had a number of conversations about, you know, anything you might be able to do," Robert Blagojevich says a moment later.

They're both a couple of morons, you know.

Brady Bunch book out in June

Here's the prolouge...

Sorry for the dual post, been a while. Let me know what you favorite quote is.

Tacticool goes mainstream.

Watching "Deadliest Warrior" on Spike, I noticed a new brand of commercials. These are from a company called "OpsGear" marketing the usual array of stuff. Uniforms, gear, boots, t-shirts, etc.

What that means is that these kind of products are becoming so popular, companies can afford to market them on TV instead of just the usual dead-tree catalogs and online ads.

Cool.