Mission statement:

Armed and Safe is a gun rights advocacy blog, with the mission of debunking the "logic" of the enemies of the Constitutionally guaranteed, fundamental human right of the individual to keep and bear arms.

I can be reached at 45superman@gmail.com.You can follow me on Twitter at http://twitter.com/45superman.

Wednesday, May 20, 2015

JPFO Alert: New Federal "Ban" of Combat Gear for Cops is the Kind of "Ban" Gun Owners Could Accept

Today's JPFO Alert notes that a "ban" that only means that the government isn't buying the "banned" item for you is one gun owners could get behind.

A nitpicking, irrelevant distinction? I don't think so. Look at it this way--what if proposals to ban private citizens' ownership of so-called "assault weapons" meant only that the federal government would not be subsidizing all or part of the purchase price? What if attempts to "ban" .50 caliber rifles were only attempting to clarify that it will be the responsibility of the aspiring rifle owner, and of no one else, to pay for it? What if the abandoned (for now) attempt on the part of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives to "ban" M855 ammunition simply meant that the federal government could not give it to us for nothing?

Wednesday, May 13, 2015

JPFO Alert: Gun Bans No Longer Enough; Now They Want to Ban Gun Information

Today's JPFO Alert notes that with the statists, crushing fundamental human rights is like eating potato chips--you can't stop with just one.

No, indeed you cannot stop the signal, and the fact that the administration is trying so strenuously to do so shows how desperate it has become.

Wednesday, May 06, 2015

JPFO Alert: Garland, TX and the Right that Defends All Others

Today's JPFO Alert notes that the right to free speech would not be of much use without the right to an effective means of defending it.

And so it is with all rights. The Constitution of the United States, as brilliant a document as it is, does not, cannot defend the rights it guarantees all by itself. The pen may indeed be mightier than the sword, but the sword is a great deal more effective for hacking people to death. One retains only the rights one can defend.

Wednesday, April 29, 2015

JPFO Alert: 7th Circuit OKs Gun Bans for the Illusion of Safety

Today's JPFO Alert notes that while disarming decent, peaceable citizens for the "safety" of the public is bad enough, disarming us for the illusion of safety is even more unforgivable.

Benjamin Franklin is widely quoted as having said some variation of "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." How much stronger his contempt would have been for those willing to give up liberty for the illusion of safety.

Wednesday, April 22, 2015

JPFO Alert: Netanyahu Talks a Good Game About Independence and Self-Defense, But . . .

Today's JPFO Alert notes that defining independence as the ability to defend oneself rings rather hollow when coming from someone who presides over laws that enormously hinder self-defense.

In the wake of several high-profile attacks on Jews in Europe by militant Islamic extremists this past winter, there have been some voices calling for European Jews to arm themselves--to, as Netanyahu might put it, break their dependency on the government's ability to protect them from evil. European gun laws are unlikely to change to allow that any time in the foreseeable future. Inexcusably, prospects for such a change in Israeli gun laws seem rather weak as well.

Wednesday, April 08, 2015

JPFO Alert: Anti-gun Congresswoman Wants Americans to Sell Their Liberty, Children's Futures

Today's JPFO Alert notes that DeLauro's "voluntary" gun turn in is to be INvoluntarily subsidized by the taxpayers, or, more likely, their children and grandchildren. And great-grandchildren. And great-great-grandchildren. And . . . you get the idea.

If DeLauro wants to buy your "assault weapon," tell her it can only be paid for in blood--and she can't afford it.

Wednesday, April 01, 2015

JPFO Alert: Columnist's "Modest Proposal" as Offensively Arrogant as Original, and it's Not Satire

Today's JPFO Alert notes the arrogance of yet another "modest proposal" to infringe on that which shall not be infringed.

The first use, or at least the most famous one, of the title "A Modest Proposal," was Jonathan Swift's 18th century treatise by that name. In it, Swift suggested that multiple problems could be solved with a program in which starving, impoverished Irish families would sell their children to the wealthy--as food. Thrasher, by contrast, would prefer to simply ban parents' most effective means of defending their children from those who would prey on and consume them.

Oh--and the other difference is that Swift's "Modest Proposal" was satire. Thrasher, in his modest way, seems really to want his to happen.