Vicious dogs and tyrannical governments: Guns are needed for both

They need to be tightly controlled--kept on a short leash, as it were. In the context of the U.S. government, that "short leash" is the Constitution, and the very explicit limits it places on the federal government's power--power, remember, that is borrowed from the We the People. We know the consequences of allowing the government to slip that leash.

And finally, if, despite all our efforts, government does become tyrannical, it must be put down, like a vicious dog. Hence guns, and the Second Amendment. And we must be humane about it--bring enough gun. [More]

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

Bowhunters and gun owners: Hanging together so we don't hang separately

Guns, bows and knives are all "arms," as protected by the Second Amendment, and can all be used to defeat would-be tyrants and their hired muscle. For that reason, they are all on the forcible citizen disarmament jihadists' target list, and for the same reason, must all be considered necessary to the security of a free state. [More]

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

More than 10,000 80% complete AR-15 receivers already sold

Over 10,000 80% complete receivers sold, by just one of the producers. The efforts to stop effective home-produced guns, whether printed or not, are akin to trying to put toothpaste back in the tube. Millions of Americans, without specialized skills or terribly expensive equipment, can build, one way or another, precisely the firearms the forcible citizen disarmament advocates are most desperate to ban.

Checkmate, collectivists. [More]

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

Attacks on gun rights coming from dubiously self-proclaimed 'gun owners'

Whether or not Eisendrath is really a gun owner is hardly relevant--he's a domestic enemy either way. Then again, if he is not, that says something about his integrity, and that of the "gun control" movement. [More]

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

'Gun control': The 'gateway tyranny'

Whatever executive orders Obama writes, whatever laws Congress passes, and even whatever alterations are amended into the Constitution, it is We the People--down to the last three percent--who must submit to disarmament--and therefore to complete government control of every aspect of our lives--if the gateway to tyranny is to be crossed.

On this Memorial Day, let us vow not to dishonor the sacrifices of the men and women who fought and died for our freedoms. Let us vow to keep that gateway forever closed. Let us vow to convey an unambiguous message to every government official who wishes to open that gateway:

You shall not pass.

[More]

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

Is rabid Second Amendment denier Bill Maher a 'gun criminal'?

Since federal law states that anyone who is "an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance" is a "prohibited person" in the context of gun ownership (and it won't matter if Maher's use of marijuana is "medical" in nature, with a California doctor's prescription), his ownership of guns is in violation of federal law.

Now, Maher has also repeatedly expressed his disdain for the idea that private citizens and their small arms can effectively resist government tyranny (care to bet on that, Maher?), so "ain't giving up my gun" or not, if the "authorities" come after his firearms, it's very unlikely that they'll have to pry them out of his cold, dead hands, before he hands them over with his cold, scaly, reptilian, stoned ones. [More]

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

D.C. prosecutors give hero a break: 'Only' $1000 fine for saving child's life

By the way, the owner of the three pit bulls is now in his own legal hot water--facing three counts each (one for each dog) of possession of a dangerous dog, having an unleashed dog and having a dog without a collar. The maximum penalty for those nine counts is very likely less than what Mr. Srigley could have faced for his seven victimless "crimes," had the prosecutors decided to aggressively make an example of him. That prosecutors are punishing the owner of the dogs seems the height of hypocrisy--by punishing the man who stopped the attack, they've already shown that they're on the side of killer dogs, rather than the people who stop them.

Here's the thing. A law that has to be broken in order to save the life of a child--to prevent him from being torn apart by vicious dogs--is very likely an evil law. And a "justice" system that punishes a man (even if "only" by fining him) for being a lifesaving hero--is institutionalized evil. Why, as a (theoretically) free citizen, does any American tolerate this? [More]

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

Holographic Sight Guide

As David has, I have added the Holographic Sight Guide to my list of "Other Recommended Links" in the sidebar. Check them out, but be careful--that place has already tempted me to spend money I can't afford on a Trijicon RMR.

Immigration reform and 'gun control': an alternative view

Such an immigrant sounds to me to be far less likely to become the kind of voter who has made California the voluntarily disarmed "serfdom state" (willing serfdom, no less) it is now, than he is to become the "American by choice," that legal immigrant and American citizen Henson Ong is, who so magnificently articulated the sacred value of the Constitutionally guaranteed, fundamental human right of the individual to keep and bear arms.

That sounds like someone I would be proud to call a fellow American. [More]

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

The 'smart gun' that terrifies the gun-grabbers

The gun prohibitionists want to ban so-called "Saturday Night Specials," because they're too small and cheap. They want to ban .50 caliber rifles, because they're too big and expensive. They want to ban so-called "assault weapons," because they can be "spray-fired from the hip" too quickly and inaccurately. And now, $22,000+ bolt-action "sniper" rifles, because they can be fired too accurately. Is there any gun they don't want to ban? Any gun that the various "Goldilocks" of "gun control" would think is "just right" for private citizens?

Of course not. [More]

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

Administration scandals demand fresh mass media look at 'Project Gunwalker'

Fears of a tyrannical government, willing to break any law, and sacrifice any number of lives for its agenda, are no longer the exclusive province of "conspiracy theorists." In light of these scandals, is it really so difficult to believe that the Obama administration would deliberately facilitate mass murder on both sides of the Mexican border, including the killings of Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry and ICE Agent Jaime Zapata, in order to advance the "gun control" agenda? Is it not, in fact, more difficult to put such evil past these people?

Most of the press has given the White House a pass on "Project Gunwalker." It's well past time to revoke that pass. [More]

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

Jen Lawson's 'Cold Dead Hands' would serve well as gun rights advocates' anthem

I rarely presume to try to tell readers what music to listen to, but "Cold Dead Hands," written by Jen Lawson and Bo Dottley, is worth making an exception. The solo acoustic version here combines the song's powerful lyrics with Lawson's driving guitar and strong voice.

It's a song I would enjoy listening to even if the lyrics were not a clenched fist of defiance thrust in the faces of those who would trample the Constitutionally guaranteed, fundamental human right of the individual to keep and bear arms. That's important, because the wider the audience the song gains by virtue of its musical merits, the more people who are not yet gun rights advocates might listen to those lyrics and realize that what the gun prohibitionists want to take away from us is far too precious to give up without the fight of our lives--the last fight of our lives, if necessary.

The YouTube video is great, but the iTunes version might be the best 99 cents you've ever spent.

P.S. for the lyrics, go to the YouTube video, and click on the "Show More" right below the video. While you're there, be sure to click the thumbs-up "Like" button, too.

Federal 'smart gun' mandate going nowhere unless 'Only Ones' are exempted

The thing is, one does not need to be an "Only One" to have the right to choose not to gamble one's life on delicate, failure prone technology--technology that even if it works as designed, could make firing the gun with an injured hand (or one's non-dominant hand) impossible, or that could conceivably be shut down with a "kill switch," whether used by the government or by some other entity that wants you defenseless. [More]

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

If armed resistance to tyrany is 'un-American,' America has died

The Coalition to Stop Gun Violence must love Professor Fish, because they too have no line in the sand--including when the government rounds up members of "undesirable" races, religions, etc., for shipment to the camps. It would seem though, that like CSGV, Fish has a bigger problem than he realizes. It's not just "militant" NRA members who do have a line in the sand--it's 29% of the voting public--and that should be more than enough. [More]

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

'Printed' guns, the interstate commerce clause, and the Tenth Amendment

As long as every aspect of citizens' lives is ruled to "affect interstate commerce," there is no legal recourse against Congressional usurpation of powers to which it has no legitimate claim.

Without legal recourse, the only remaining option is far messier. But if it's all that is left to us . . . [More]

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

Bad news for CSGV: 1 in 3 voters meet their definition of 'insurrectionist'

That's CSGV's "civics" in a nutshell: the state must never be resisted by force of arms.

If that became more widely known, it's hard to imagine that a great many more Americans would not become "insurrectionists," by CSGV's definition. Given accurate civics lessons, it becomes impossible to imagine. At 29%, though, we already have about 10 times as many as we need. [More]

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

CSGV suddenly decides printed firearms are 'hype,' ignores their bigger problem

At the state level, exploiters of murdered children have over the last few months parlayed the Sandy Hook Elementary atrocity into magazine and "assault weapon" bans--in some cases confiscatory bans--and have castigated Congress for not following the same unconstitutional path at the federal level. 3-D printing has already spelled the doom for the effectiveness of such bans, as well as background check requirements and other restrictions on "assault weapon" sales.

CSGV claims not to be worried about this. Methinks they doth protest too much. [More]

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

The Empire Strikes Back at 3-D printed guns

The governments of China, Iran, and other tyrannies use internet censorship to maintain their grip on power. Now, the Obama administration appears to want to do the same. Whether it succeeds or fails in that effort, it has certainly succeeded in starkly illustrating what kind of regime has taken power in this country. [More]

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

'Gun violence' plummets, and 'gun control' groups demand course change; but why?

If "gun crime" has been falling dramatically for decades, and the "gun control" advocates are still shrieking for fundamental changes in gun laws, what is their objective? It can't be "gun violence prevention," or they would be demanding more of what we have been doing with such favorable results since the mid-'90s: dropping "assault weapon" and "high capacity" magazine bans, more "shall issue" concealed carry (or, indeed, more Constitutional carry), more "stand your ground" laws, etc.

Since they are instead advocating exactly the opposite, whose side are they on? Perhaps the side that benefits from higher "gun crime" numbers? [More]

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

Senator Manchin apparently imagines gun owners in a 'cage'

Hmm--"rattling the cage" of gun owners? That's a chilling way to put it. Does Manchin believe that the proper place for gun owners is in a cage? Perhaps a cage in Guantanamo, as Manchin's fellow critic of the NRA wants to put us in? Granted, Manchin's apologists would no doubt point out that he was speaking metaphorically, and that his meaning was only that the NRA had unnecessarily agitated gun owners.

On the other hand, if Manchin-Toomey had become law, one inevitable result would have been a great many more gun owners in prison--cages, if you will, merely for buying and selling guns privately. [More]

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