If gun rights advocates are going to Hell, we'll liberate the place

And this might explain the sudden focus on destroying the "gun lobby" (nearly universally among its enemies considered synonymous with the NRA, despite that not being remotely the case), even among "progressives" who until now had never specifically concentrated on "gun control." A populace that takes upon itself the responsibility for its safety and liberty, rather than trusting the government to do it, is itself a threat to the "progressive" agenda of the people's absolute dependence on an all-powerful, all-knowing government.

We're going to Hell? Alright--it's past time for a regime change down there anyway, because we're certainly not going to tolerate a "government . . . er, satanic monopoly on force," no matter how many "gun control" advocates are serving the master. [More]

That's today's St. Louis Gun Rights Examiner. Please give it a look, and tell a friend.

Carolyn McCarthy, barrel shrouds and 'assault slings'

McCarthy, though, apparently thought a ten year prison sentence for a strap would be appropriate--that it would be both desirable and Constitutionally permissible to mandate that rifles be more difficult to carry and to shoot accurately, on pain of a decade in prison. The intent here is not to claim that gun slings are in danger of being banned, but to illustrate the mindset of fanatics like McCarthy, who has nevertheless managed to be elected to Congress nine times.

McCarthy and her noxious ilk don't care about the specifics of how they attack gun rights--in their twisted minds, any infringement on that which shall not be infringed is a step in the right direction. Come to think of it, if they keep pushing like they are, maybe they would be safer with slings banned, unless they can manage to stay more than 500 yards away from we the people. [More]

That's today's St. Louis Gun Rights Examiner. Please give it a look, and tell a friend.

Prosecutors try to gag 8th grader in NRA shirt; reporter threatened with arrest

After all that, the prosecution agreed to drop the gag order request, on the condition that they be allowed to speak to the press, too. This is a decidedly surprising condition for them to impose, given their nearly frantic avoidance of the press so far.

The school administrators, the police department, the prosecuting attorneys and the judge responsible for this outrage are trying to destroy people's lives, for the "crime" of saying things they don't want said. They're out of control, and will undoubtedly continue their petty tyranny until the good people of Logan impose that control. Claire Wolfe's description of America's "awkward stage" might end for these oppressors sooner than they could have guessed. [More]

That's today's St. Louis Gun Rights Examiner. Please give it a look, and tell a friend.

NY Times revives 'sue and tax gun industry out of existence' strategy

Guns, of course, are not essential for public health.

Oh? Tell that to any of the hundreds of thousands (if not millions) of people per year who successfully use guns for self-defense--very nearly always without a shot fired. Then, tell that to the 170,000,000 disarmed by their governments in the 20th century, to render them helpless to resist those governments' further, genocidal plans. Keep in mind, though, that you'll need to enlist the services of a medium to hold that conversation. [More]

That's today's St. Louis Gun Rights Examiner. Please give it a look, and tell a friend.

'Walking while armored (and black)' apparently grounds for suspicion in New York

In that light, perhaps it should not be considered surprising that by New York City standards, a black man wearing body armor is considered sufficiently "suspicious" to justify forcible groping by Bloomberg's enforcers, Fourth Amendment be damned.

Again, it's not easy to conjure up any sympathy for "King Salim Habazz," or to be very upset about his removal from the streets, but if his making himself more difficult to shoot to death is to be considered grounds for suspicion of a crime worthy of suspending the Bill of Rights, why should any of us consider ourselves immune to the same abuses? [More]

That's today's St. Louis Gun Rights Examiner. Please give it a look, and tell a friend.

Embattled gun-hating Colorado senator begs for out-of-state money, condemns it

"Gun control" and hypocrisy are consistently boon companions, but most forcible citizen disarmament advocates are at least smart enough to make some kind of effort to hide it.

Maybe Morse is just making certain that when the recall election occurs, no one will perceive a need to submit his vote from the rooftops. [More]

That's today's St. Louis Gun Rights Examiner. Please give it a look, and tell a friend.

GOA steps up to defend 8th grader who faces year in jail for talking

The forcible citizen disarmament jihadists are waging a war of annihilation on the gun culture, and the juiciest targets are the young gun rights advocates. Kids are ill-equipped to fight back against adults in "authority," and gun prohibitionists, like all cowards, prefer targeting those who cannot fight back. Secondly, the gun-haters can afford to be patient, and wait a generation for the end game, and so if they crush the spirit of the next generation of resistance now, their objective--disarmament of the American citizenry--will be within easy reach in a few years.

If we let them get away with it, we deserve to lose. [More]

That's today's St. Louis Gun Rights Examiner. Please give it a look, and tell a friend.

Illinois AG seeks to deny forcibly disarmed young woman her day in court

Ms. Horsley's parents assert that at the age of 18--old enough to serve in the military (and indeed to join without her parents' permission), using some of the most powerful weapons in the history of humanity--she is not old enough for the responsibility of possessing a double barrel shotgun to defend her life. At 18, that is no longer their judgment to make.

It is past time to revoke her parents' veto power over her right to self-defense. [More]

That's today's St. Louis Gun Rights Examiner. Please give it a look, and tell a friend.

Illinois AG wants yet more time to decide on how to restrict armed self-defense

Madigan's stall tactics are a transparent attempt to inflict the most restrictive, intrusive and unworkable defensive firearm carry law possible on the people of Illinois. At the same time, while she stalls, Illinoisans are being forced to choose between "law abiding" (and thus defenseless against predatory muggers, rapists and murderers), and prepared to defend themselves (and thus "gun criminals," as per a law already ruled to be unconstitutional, but still enforced in 99 of the state's 102 counties). The Supreme Court has no business helping her in that endeavor. [More]

That's today's St. Louis Gun Rights Examiner. Please give it a look, and tell a friend.

8th grader who wore NRA shirt faces year in jail--for talking

It seems worth pointing out here that a police officer who can be thwarted from doing his job by a 14-year-old's talking would seem to be an officer from whom it would be wise not to expect much useful work.

More importantly, if one can face a year in jail for talking when an armed agent of the government has ordered one to be quiet, the First Amendment has effectively ceased to exist. There is no free speech when speaking against the government's wishes is a "crime," that can lead to a child spending a year in a cage. [More]

That's today's St. Louis Gun Rights Examiner. Please give it a look, and tell a friend.

Santa Monica college shooting may provoke push to regulate '80% receivers'

In the meantime, though, if one without extensive gunsmithing and metalworking skills wants to acquire truly effective firepower that has never been "on the grid" with regard to the government's knowledge of it, starting from an incomplete receiver might be the most sensible way to go about it.

The "gun control" zealots in government may try very hard to change that, but can they? [More]

That's today's St. Louis Gun Rights Examiner. Please give it a look, and tell a friend.

Government sues employers for background checks; wants to expand checks for guns

There is, admittedly, one argument one could make for banning excessive reliance on criminal background checks as a condition of employment (except, of course, for employment in a gun store), while simultaneously requiring such checks for gun purchases. One could argue, after all, that the fundamental human right to defend one's life and liberty against criminal assault and government tyranny is not quite as fundamental as the right to work at Dollar General.

It would be a decidedly odd position to take, but that's apparently not much of a deterrent for "gun control" zealots. [More]

That's today's St. Louis Gun Rights Examiner. Please give it a look, and tell a friend.

Maryland background check delays: Another danger of universal background checks

There were already plenty of reasons to oppose expanded background checks with everything we have, chief among them being that the entire concept of "prohibited persons" with regard to gun ownership--and thus the entire justification for any background check requirement--is fundamentally flawed. As National Gun Rights Examiner David Codrea says, "anyone who can't be trusted with a gun can't be trusted without a custodian."

The likelihood of an expanded background check system shutting down NICS, and thus strangling all legal gun sales, is just one more reason to fight this proposed infringement on that which shall not be infringed. [More]

That's today's St. Louis Gun Rights Examiner. Please give it a look, and tell a friend.

CSGV characterizes oath to obey Constitution as 'treason'

There is no denying that there are subversives in this debate. They're the ones trying to demonize those who have vowed not to obey an unconstitutional order. The only logical reason to object to the Oath Keepers is a desire that such orders be carried out. So who are the "traitors," again? [More]

That's today's St. Louis Gun Rights Examiner. Please give it a look, and tell a friend.

St. Louis Gun Rights Examiner humbly accepts CSGV's highest honor

As Patricia Stoneking, President of the Kansas State Rifle Association (and fellow resident of the "Insurrectionism Timeline") says, CSGV had might as well add an amendment to every entry on their "enemies list": "Charges of Patriotism Pending . . . . "

This is indeed a group that bestows honor in direct proportion to the extent that it tries to dispense opprobrium. [More]

That's today's St. Louis Gun Rights Examiner. Please give it a look, and tell a friend.

Perhaps 'modest invasion of privacy' should be met with a 'modest regime change'

When, as Thomas Jefferson said, “Tyranny is defined as that which is legal for the government but illegal for the citizenry," why should we tolerate an administration that demands to know about every email sent and received by we the people, when that same administration illegally refuses to comply with a valid subpoena of its own communications, pursuant to a bona fide investigation into yet another atrocity perpetrated by the same administration?

And now, we are asked to tolerate a "modest encroachment on our privacy." Here's a question for you, Mr. President. How would you like the American people to engage in some "modest" application of our "regime change rifles"? [More]

That's today's St. Louis Gun Rights Examiner. Please give it a look, and tell a friend.

Comment moderation

Due to a recent problem with the subhuman dregs of dubious sentience known as spammers, I have been compelled to, for the first time, impose comment moderation.

I have resisted that all these years, because it's a pain for both the blogger and readers, but I see no way around it for now.

Hopefully, these vile colo-rectal tumors will soon lose interest, and I can turn moderation back off.

News gets worse for those who fear home gun manufacture, death of 'gun control'

Indeed, these "unqualified gun seekers" may be able to do just that, and we are quickly moving beyond the rather rudimentary "Liberator" pistol, to truly effective firearms that can be acquired without the government's permission, or even knowledge.

With that, the death of the "government monopoly on force" fantasy, so dear to the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence and Representative Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), will be official.

Be afraid, "gun control" advocates. Be very afraid. [More]

That's today's St. Louis Gun Rights Examiner. Please give it a look, and tell a friend.

Running low on 'gun violence,' gun-haters now blame NRA for attempted poisonings

The bottom line is that if we are to restrict ourselves to saying only things that we are certain that crazy people will never use to justify doing something, well . . . crazy, we had might as well wear gags at all times, except for meals.

A government bent on tyranny would certainly appreciate it. [More]

That's today's St. Louis Gun Rights Examiner. Please give it a look, and tell a friend.

'Firing squad professor' apologizes--that's not going to cut it

More importantly, remember that he is a journalism professor. He is teaching the next generation of "authorized journalists." Does that not seem rather chilling? Can he be trusted to teach his students about the vital need to refrain from abusing the media's power to amplify their voices, to call for the oppression--the government-imposed extinction--of their political enemies?

I, frankly, am not that trusting. [More]

That's today's St. Louis Gun Rights Examiner. Please give it a look, and tell a friend.

Journalism professor advocates firing squad for millions of Americans

I'm an old hand at being accused of "treason"--the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence has done that for years, but this is the first time I've noticed anyone advocating lining millions of Americans up against the wall beside me. Well, at least I know where my newly fellow condemned can go to add the finishing touches to their uniforms before our execution.

Swindell's problem (and that of the rest of the collectivists) is that even if their side can slaughter all four or five million NRA members, it won't be enough. You feeling froggy, Professor? Then why don't you get this party started?

If this be treason . . . [More]

That's today's St. Louis Gun Rights Examiner. Please give it a look, and tell a friend.

Now it's our turn for a 'good first step' regarding gun laws

This time, though, it's we who are not going to be content with half a loaf. It is we who will come back year, after year, after year, exerting relentless pressure on every public official who is unwilling to acknowledge that we're not here for just a piece of our rights.

Let's adjust the "slippery slope" until we slide into liberty, instead of away from it. [More]

That's today's St. Louis Gun Rights Examiner. Please give it a look, and tell a friend.