RKBA News: Faith in Gun Bans, Magical Thinking?



My brother Chris and I were once again asked to offer up a rebuttal to an editorial in USA Today newspaper this week. Unfortunately, the paper rescinded the offer when Chris Cox, executive director of NRA’s lobbying division, offered to do the job. This is the longer version of what we had to say.

In their editorial, the USA Today editors called for a ban on “assault weapons.” They talked about various attacks utilizing “assault weapons,” mentioned the previous ban, which lasted from 1994 to 2004, and made excuses for the ban’s failure to prevent, among other things, the Columbine horror. USA Today called for bans on magazines with a capacity greater than 10 rounds, citing “research” from Johns Hopkins – which happened to be funded by Mike Bloomberg – claiming that if a new ban “only prevented 20 percent” of incidents involving “assault weapons” and/or “high-capacity” magazines, 100 lives would be saved. The numbers were grabbed from thin air and lacked any grounding.

The faith in bans is pure magical thinking. There is nothing to suggest that any of the proposed bans or restrictions would prevent 20 percent of any sort of crime or misuse – none. Real research into the 10-year Clinton ban on “assault weapons” showed that it was completely ineffective. The ban prohibited cosmetic features such as folding stocks and “prominently protruding pistol grips” (that’s what the law said). Gun prohibitionists claimed that guns built without those features to comply with the restrictions were “exploiting loopholes.”


The editors suggested that the problem with the ’94 ban was that its definitions were too loose and easily sidestepped by manufacturers. They decried the “ever-powerful gun lobby” for standing in the way of “logical changes by twisting any move to limit the sale of certain kinds of guns into a menacing attempt to take away all guns.” That’s an odd thing to say in the context of endorsing the expansion of one failed gun ban to encompass even more guns. Even as they deny the existence of the slippery slope, these same people will be back calling for an even broader ban and even stricter limits on magazine capacity until the ban covers virtually all guns beyond single-shot .22 rifles and double-barreled shotguns. It happened in Australia, which Hillary cites as a good example to follow.

It’s easy for people with no knowledge of firearms to imagine they can distinguish “certain kinds of guns” and just ban them. Those of us who have some knowledge of firearms recognize the magical thinking at work. There are only a few variations in basic action styles. Slide-actions, pump-actions, lever-actions and bolt-actions are all variations of a basic theme: a bolt is moved to the rear by some manual mechanism, ejects the spent case and as it moves forward into battery, it strips a round of ammunition from a magazine and locks it in the chamber ready for firing. Semi-autos, also known as autoloaders, function in the same manner, but rather than the operator powering the action, energy from the fired round and springs are harnessed to accomplish the maneuver.

Since a magazine is nothing more than a box or tube with a spring in the bottom, the only thing that limits a magazine’s capacity is the depth of the box or length of the tube, and the effectiveness of the spring. Therefore, any magazine-fed firearm can be modified to carry virtually any number of rounds in its magazine.

And of course these proposals ignore the fact that long guns – including all of the so-called “assault rifles” – are only used in about 2 percent of gun crimes in the U.S. The other 98 percent of crime guns are handguns. Can anyone imagine a scenario in which today’s advocates of an “assault weapon” ban would not eventually turn their attention to the most common guns used by criminals and in suicides? And once they start down that road, where can we expect the road to end? Will they be satisfied with just limiting magazine capacity after a demented coward attacks another Bible study group and uses his 10-rounds to kill nine people? Will magazine capacity be cut back to a limit of six or seven rounds? They tried that in New York. Will they insist on banning all semi-auto handguns as they now want to ban all semi-auto rifles? What about 8-shot revolvers and speed loaders? Jerry Miculek can hit a target with 12 shots from a 6-shot revolver in under 3 seconds. Do we ban the revolver or just ban Jerry Miculek?

While the Orlando shooting is the worst mass shooting in modern history, it is not the worst mass murder, or even the most deadly attack on a nightclub. That diabolical record belongs not to a fanatical Muslim nor racist deviant, nor even a suicidal lunatic. It belongs to a jealous drunk who, in 1990, decided to take revenge on his ex-girlfriend who worked at the Happy Land Social Club. His weapons were two matches and less than a gallon of gasoline. Eighty-seven people perished.

Guns don’t cause, or even enable mass murder. The cause is evil in the human heart. No magical solutions like banning “assault weapons,” expanding background checks, or giving the AG power to delete gun rights without due process are going to solve – or even favorably impact on – the problem. Restricting good people will not keep evil people from committing evil acts, and it won’t save lives.
Read the Original Article at WND


The Ultimate Construction Weapon??

De-Walt AR


Do not be surprised if this is not added to Feinstein’s list of “Assault Weapons” & “Weapons of War” next week……I mean just looking at this thing sends chills down my spine…it looks soooo dangerous!!!

I mean what does an average citizen need a tool like this for? You can’t just use a regular hammer and nails?? No, a tool like this should only be reserved for Professional construction workers and people who are properly trained; and that 100 round drum just has to go too, the typical construction worker only needs a 10 round clip to do his job..I mean giving him anything that make his job more efficient and the worker better equipped is outrageous!!!


This humorous parity was brought to you by your friends at HCS. 

What is sad folks is that the line of thinking I was making fun of in the above piece is a fair representation of the kind of thinking that is the cornerstone of the anti-gun movement in this country…

Continue to Stand up and Fight for your Rights and Stay Dangerous!!

The “Law-Abiding” Outlaw?


“We should never forget that everything Adolf Hitler did in Germany was ‘legal’ and everything the Hungarian freedom fighters did in Hungary was ‘illegal.'” –Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. (1929-1968)

“But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.”–Declaration of Independence, 1776 

After President Obamas nauseating “Standing on the Caskets of Victims” speech yesterday, I came to the ultimate conclusion that part of Mr. Obama’s plan, just like every other tyrant in history was to make every action he does LEGAL and every action his opponents make ILLEGAL.

Let me give you a few examples so we can get on the same page:

1. If the proposed Assault Weapons Ban passes, it would be illegal for you to defend your home against an intruder with a so called “Assault Weapon” or Pistol that uses a high-capacity magazine…BUT it would be LEGAL for you to defend your home with a revolver or lever action gun (to name a few).

2. Taking this scenario a little bit further, if a door kicking burglar, high on PCP, enters your home and attempts to rape your wife or sodomize your 13 year old daughter using a pistol that has a high capacity magazine or “Assault Weapon” you must STILL remain LEGAL (although the criminal seems to not have got the memo about illegal guns)and take him down with the fore-mentioned revolver or lever action rifle..Oh, BTW, you also could also use a pump action shotgun, single shot shotgun, single shot rifle or black powder rifle  too…although your odds have gone down tremendously against the intruders SEMI (OR FULLY AUTOMATIC) WEAPON…but congratulations, although you are dead and your family has been sodomized, you have remained LEGAL!!!

3. If any local state or federal Police Officer (or member of the military under martial law) attempts to  go beyond his legal rights and tries to arrest or search me using unlawful deadly force or beyond what is deemed necessary I have the legal right to resist arrest, and use whatever force I deem necessary to resist (TX Penal Code 9.31, 9.32).

Yes, one of the fundamental principles of the 2nd Amendment is that citizens should have firearms (even assault rifles)  to protect themselves against the tyranny of their LOCAL, STATE or FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. This includes Police who go beyond their legal rights. Most Police agencies are issued fully automatic or semi-automatic AR-15 type rifles and hi-capacity sidearms..you wanna go up against that with a lever action 30-30? I don’t think so. For you tactical minds out there, this is called PROPORTIONAL (or OPTIMUM) ARMAMENT and is considered fundamental in winning the fight.


As my readers know, I am not a big “Conspiracy” guy, but I would be amiss here not to mention the National Defense Authorization Act of 2013 (a child of the Patriot Act) that Mr. Obama signed and ran thru the Senate with a vote of  98-0 (funny, I don’t remember the media talking about this??) that among other things, makes INDEFINITE DETENTION LEGAL FOR AMERICAN CITIZENS. This basically means, you can be held (without formal charges) AND WITHOUT DUE PROCESS OF LAW, indefinitely in jail, while being “Investigated” for Terrorism or any other charges they choose to make up….I really wish I was making this up guys, but look it up for yourselves. It also has this nifty “sub-clause” that allows State Governors to call up Military Reservist (Weekend Warriors with “REAL” Automatic Weapons) as FIRST RESPONDERS to Natural Disasters and “Terrorist Attacks”….You can take this info as far as you choose, but at the VERY LEAST, I bet this makes you look at #3 above in a new light, huh? Yeah, it did me too.

I know this is dated, but Here is Senator Rand Paul (one of the only guys in Government btw that gets it!!) begging in vain the Senate to strike the above clauses from the bill..as a sidebar, 98% of the people I know meet the description he gives of “terrorist”..see where this is going guys??

BTW, before the hate mail starts, I am a huge supporter of LEGITIMATE law Enforcement agencies and in NO WAY am advocating  RESISTING ARREST or NOT COOPERATING with law enforcement or the Government just for the sake of rebellion or riot…the essence of this article is OBEYING THE LAW, WHEN THE LAW IS (MORALLY not just LEGALLY) CORRECT.

Sorry Mr. Obama, but I choose to read and follow the Constitution, Bill of Rights and Penal Code AS IT IS WRITTEN, not your twisted version you have “concocted” to gain control over the masses. I will continue to FOLLOW the letter of the law, as long as it is not twisted by an illegal and immoral government system, which our founding father knew was a possibility, thus enter the safeguard of the 2nd Amendment. I realize that I will be considered an OUTLAW in your eyes… I guess (and I think I speak for the majority here) I would rather be “ILLEGAL”ALIVE AND FREE than “LEGAL”, DEAD OR A SLAVE!!

“DOMARI NOLO” and Stay Dangerous!