Soldier Systems
Tactical Tailor
Categories About Us EmailArchives Home Tactical Fanboy Soldier Sytems Home

3 Items That The Anti-Gunners Are Going On About

Maybe it’s last weekend’s NRA Annual Meeting but over the past few days three separate items have come out that the anti-gun crowd are latching on to. All three are the work of very pro-Second Amendment folks. But, sometimes the path to damnation is paved with good intentions. All of them will be used in an anti-gun agenda. Personally, I look at each of these separately, with varying degrees of interest and support but the question we need to wrestle with as an industry is whether to throttle it back or to use the attention to further our own agendas. Despite what the Left will tell you, the NRA isn’t pulling anyone’s strings and there are lots of people out there with lots of disparate interests. Some personal, some philosophical, but all pro-gun.

Item 1. Forbes Magazine reports on the ‘Wold’s first entirely 3D printed firearm

liberator

Called the Liberator, a name of significant historical significance, this pistol is the creation of Cody Wilson of Defense Distributed. Over the past year or so, he’s had some wins and some losses, but all along, it’s been a serious case of ‘look at me’ syndrome.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m the world’s biggest fan of innovation and turning things on their head, but following this story has been like watching a reality show. As I told a reader via email, “This is really bad timing but I highly doubt this is the first one ever. I’d say that other people who have done this have had enough sense to keep it under wraps. Some people just can’t get in the limelight enough.” I understand the kid wants to be famous, but some things need time to become ubiquitous lest they are vilified and made illegal. If everybody had a printer then it’s going to be harder to legislate. With few people owning 3D printers yet, it’s much easier for them to become a talking point for the media and an easy win for someone who wants to look tough on crime. When the public doesn’t understand the technology, they’ll believe what they’re told. And this young man is doing his best to call attention to himself and this capability.

There’s no real technological leap here. He’s just printing a gun out of plastic (you have to use a nail as a firing pin). He hasn’t developed a new method for making plastic rifled barrels or a new material that will stand up to the repeated shock of a weapon firing. As I said, I’m pretty sure this has been done before but those that did it, didn’t want it to become mainstream. I’d say that makes Cody Wilson less inventor, and more salesman. Expect half-truths to rule the day as this hits the mainstream media. Hopefully, as 3D printing has much more to offer the world than zip guns, we’ll see some cooler heads prevail as pressure mounts to throttle the technology.

Item 2. The Open Carry March on Washington

Organizers are using Facebook to bring 1,000 or more marchers together for an open carry march on the nation’s capitol as an act of civil disobedience. Here’s what they have in mind:

On the morning of July 4, 2013, Independence Day, we will muster at the National Cemetery & at noon we will step off to march across the Memorial Bridge, down Independence Avenue, around the Capitol, the Supreme Court, & the White House, then peacefully return to Virginia across the Memorial Bridge. This is an act of civil disobedience, not a permitted event. We will march with rifles loaded & slung across our backs to put the government on notice that we will not be intimidated & cower in submission to tyranny. We are marching to mark the high water mark of government & to turn the tide. This will be a non-violent event, unless the government chooses to make it violent. Should we meet physical resistance, we will peacefully turn back, having shown that free people are not welcome in Washington, & returning with the resolve that the politicians, bureaucrats, & enforcers of the federal government will not be welcome in the land of the free.

March

Reading through their Facebook page, I’d have to say that I have stumbled upon one of the actual intellectual battlegrounds for the war on guns. Apparently, I’ve been living in a bubble because I’ve never seen this level of people talking past one another. It is amazing how many anti-2A posters have been drawn there to vent. The Facebook page embodies the dangers of the internet and many of the posters seem to be breaking my basic rule of thumb when putting anything on the internet; civility. Don’t post anything you wouldn’t say to a person’s face. If however, they would say those things in person, the anti-gunners might ought to consider that the people they are threatening are armed.

Many examples of social change have been borne on the back of civil disobedience but unfortunately, I see so many ways this can go sideways. At any rate, expect this to become bigger and bigger news as the date approaches.

Item 3. During a seminar on home defense at the NRA convention, trainer Rob Pincus advocates placing a gun safe in a child’s room

The Huffington Post jumped right on Rob Pincus’ seminar on Home Defense where he proposes the notion of placing a spare weapon in a safe in a child’s room in the event of home invasion. But right off the bat, Pincus lays it out as he sees it. He knows it is going to be contentious.

“How about putting a quick-access safe in your kids’ room?” Pincus asks. “We have an emotional push back to that. Here’s my position on this. If you’re worried that your kid is going to try to break into the safe that is in their bedroom, with a gun in it, you have bigger problems than home defense.”

As you saw in the video, Pincus points out that a child you can’t trust in his own bedroom will just as likely try to get into the safe in your room as his. I agree on both counts. A lot of the negative that we see regarding children and guns can be traced back to parenting.

However, based on the media’s hypersensitivity to linking guns and children for maximum effect, this probably wasn’t the best timing for this line of thinking to go public. Anyone speaking at the convention had to know that they’d be placed under a microscope. But, if this is the best they can come up with based on the amount of coverage they dedicated to the NRA Annual Meeting, I’m not getting too worked up. Having said that, you won’t find me discussing in public where I might or might not put a safe of any type.

95 Responses to “3 Items That The Anti-Gunners Are Going On About”

  1. Lawrence says:

    Number 1 and Number 2 are DUMB ideas.

    Number 3 isn’t, but it will certainly be twisted and portrayed that way.

    We are in the midst of the biggest propaganda battle I have ever seen in my life right now – and I’m sorry to say that I think our enemies are better equipped and fighting smarter than we are right now. That’s not meant as a “defeatist” comment, but rather as a wake up call.

    • Chris says:

      Well thank you for thinking #1 and 2 through for me, so I don’t have to do it myself.

      I would suggest that the first 2 both speak directly to Jefferson’s quote

      “When governments fear the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny.”

      I stopped calling my AR15′s “assault weapons” long ago. I now call them “Regime Change Rifles”.

      They are for shooting people who would take them from me in the FUCKING FACE. Regardless of what fancy clown costumes the gun collectors wear. Be it “hood-rific” or, “Thin Blue Line” Navy, Or ACU or multicam.

      The first two stories are about making that point clear to the people who would send the cops or the military.

      And as to the editors expression of bad timing on the first story; If we always wait for the most opportune time there will always be an excuse not to. I’m reminded of the expression “A right not exercised is a right lost”.

      • SSD says:

        Yes, bad timing on the first story. There’s nothing wrong with him doing it, what is unfortunate is that he feels the need to make a spectacle of himself while doing it.

      • Joe says:

        Chris, did you ever serve in the military?

        • Chuck says:

          “Chris, did you ever serve in the military.”

          I don’t know if he did, but I still do. So, tell me, Joe, what goddamn difference does it make? Military service is entirely voluntary and is not a condition of citizenship. Nor should it be. Nor should anyone be thought less of for choosing, as a free man, not to take the King’s Shilling.

    • Chris says:

      As to your “defeatist”comment it is.

      Do you think there is any reason to argue with these intellectual nit wits?

      There is no argument that “our” side can fabricate that will make them say “schucks you guys were right all along.”

      So stop trying!

      Start phrasing things in a manner they will understand:

      “If you try to take my guns I WILL KILL YOU.”

      • Jason says:

        It is the comments like yours that are used as ammunition against us in the gun debate. No, you cannot sway the zealots from any side, but we can sway the uninformed moderate voter. They are the ones that determine elections which then determines our politics fight. So cool the rhetoric, stay calm, and give a proper reasoned argument. Regardless, of their “protect the children” stance, we have the moral high ground. Self-defense is a natural right and not a privilege bestowed upon us by the government and thus subject to unnecessary or useless restrictions.

        Civility is more important than you realize.

        • Chris says:

          I don’t care about the uninformed moderate voter. My rights are not open to vote.

          • Jason says:

            You hurt the cause, Man. It saddens me a bit, but you sir are the minority voice on the Pro-Gun side.

  2. Sgt B says:

    No matter how noble or well thought out ideas the pro-gun side comes out with, the anti-gun crowd will always come back and twist to make it seem like it’s the most awful thing in the history of the US.

    It’s not that any of these three things are insane or just down right crazy, it’s that the hype that gathers from liberals (and liberal media in general) spins these ideas and creates a hellstorm of ridicule and lies.

    It’ll never change or go away until we collectively figure out that electing people to office that are so excited to find new ways to control your life by creating crazy taxes or squeezing your rights are never elected again.

  3. Chris says:

    Gosh Brad,
    I don’t know how I’m going to deal with your disappointment in me and my deviation from your message.

    Sorry, didn’t realize we all had to be reasonable, as defined by you exclusively apparently.

  4. David Spicer says:

    As a cop, a fire arms instructor and a parent I whole hartedly agree with Rob Pincus. First off he is not advocating giving a child access, however we have seen in recdent months where a couple young kids having access to their parents firearms have saved their lives. I have personally trained my kids in the use of all my firearms from fairly young ages, actually as soon as they were able to handle them we’ve been out shooting as a family. Rob is right that if you have to worry about your kids getting to your guns you are raising your kids wrong. Both my boys, one now 20 the other soon to be 18 are better weapons handelers than most of my coworkers and that stands pretty much for all aspects of their skills. What Rob is suggesting is smart unless you carry on your person all the time (which I don’t while at home) to have weapons placed stratigicly through out your home. Having planned retreat areas is wise.
    I hope gun owners are starting to realize this attitude towards us, demonizing us and trying to criminalize us is not going away. Drudge has had articles reciently where they are pointing out that there are news agencies calling us terrorist for even owning weapons and being members of the NRA. I fear this fight will not end with the end of the Obama nightmare. I have not gone completely into the conspiracy camp but it is starting to look like they may have some valad points when they are talking about larger forces at play for the direction of our country. When they start making home schooling illegal and controling everything private schools teach then I just may be convinced.
    As for Chris, please keep in mind, you won’t have to worry about all cops and military personell.

    David Spicer
    Oath Keeper

    • veteran says:

      Great post and thanks for your commitment as a public servant.

      • Old Soldier says:

        David Spicer’s comments are accurate right up until the last one. I agree that the majority of the mature and patriotic military and law-enforcement members will refuse any anti-constitutional orders. As a former professional soldier and law-enforcement trainer I also know, and am willing to acknowledge that there is a significant percentage of soldiers and cops (usually the youngest, raised under the “new reality, and those which work for a paycheck instead of in support of justice under the constitution) who would follow orders to disarm citizens. It has already happened during Katrina, and increasingly martial law tactics are being used in pursuit of fugitives. This has a desensitizing effect when done often enough. As the older soldiers and cops, the ones who understand what the Oath Keepers stand for age out or are purged, the younger rising (the ones promoted for political reliability instead of performance or merit). Making comparisons to Hitler has become cliche’ but we would be stupid to ignore the lessons of history, such as how anyone not loyal to the Nazi party was quietly removed, replaced, retired, (or shot) and replaced over time with the Hitler Youth as they came of age; or as the loyal Nazis were advanced in rank. As much as I wish we could say that the military or law-enforcement could never be one of our worries, as much as I want it to be true, it is simply not the complete story or reality. I only hope the patriots will hold the line against the political purges that have already started.

        • veteran says:

          You brought up Katrina, lets not forget that we saw it happen again just last month with the Boston Bombings and how that crisis was more than enough justification in the hearts and minds of the “justice” department to suspend constitutional rights.

  5. 277Volt says:

    #1 – I’m 100% for innovation and I think DD would get a big hi-five from our Founders. The ignorant and reactionary media and politicians are the ones making a mountain out of a molehill.

    #2 – Mixed feelings. I’m all for sending a very clear message to Washington but out and out civil disobedience is a battle we need to choose very carefully. It is a very, very strong card to play and in my personal opinion it is a card we shouldn’t so easily play at this point.

    #3 – I have to say I agree with Mr. Pincus. He has a very valid point that a child brought up knowing boundaries and responsibility will not touch that safe. The folks that cry foul are folks that have never enjoyed the rich history of parents teaching their kids gun safety and the responsibility that goes with it.

    The cat’s out of the bag on printed weapons, civil disobedience needs to weighed carefully, some children raised without firearms should never be trusted around them and the media will ALWAYS twist everything we say and ALWAYS blow whatever we say out of proportion.

  6. ST Doc says:

    Chris, I think what Brad is trying to say and I feel this way, is you need to cool your jets. The kind of stuff your saying is exactly what loses pro-2A supporters favor with the public. And like David said, if someone wants to confiscate guns, they can count SOF out. Now, I can’t speak for everyone, but that’s the general consensus I get from the net. I’m sworn to defend the constitution from all enemies, and I will stand by that.

    • Chris says:

      I understand the sentiment ST.

      I just disagree.

      I don’t think we are at a point in this country where what the Freedom side is missing is just a convincing argument.

      Like all we need to do is finally phrase things in a manner that makes the vote-for-paychecks crowd go “shit, those old dead white guys were really on to something with this representative constitutional republic thing. I guess I shouldn’t cash that welfare check this month.”

      That ain’t gonna happen.

      You know it, I know it, and for damn sure the side you are trying to engage with reasoned discourse knows it too.

      I’m trying to clarify things for what I call the OPFOR as concisely as possible.

      In terms they will understand.

      Malcolm X didn’t say “please treat us nicely, master sir.”

      He said “We declare our right on this earth to be a man, to be a human being, to be respected as a human being, to be given the rights of a human being in this society, on this earth, in this day, which we intend to bring into existence by any means necessary.”

      I don’t understand why I should plead for my right to defend myself from would be tyrants any less forcefully.

  7. BradKAF308 says:

    Different Brad here;

    You guys. You are letting your foes polarize you. 2A is not a conservative vs liberal thing. What does your opinion on fiscal policy have to do with 2A? Maybe most 2A supporters are conservative like individuals but not all. Don’t let the other side make it thus. Talk to your conservative friends I’m sure you can disagree on lots of stuff.

    With all this rhetoric it serves 3 purposes. 1) You feel backed into a corner and so respond with all sorts of negative replies. 2) This alienates people on the fence who are the majority, they then go to the other camp, a good number of them very reluctantly. 3) It pushes “Liberals” who are pro 2A into a corner and through peer preasure don’t fight the antis. Don’t write these people off, never write anyone off. Bring them into the light. You catch more flies with honey than vinegar.

    You aren’t in Syria, civil war is not around the corner. Quit polarizing this, you are only fighting a small elitest group. Keep this civil despite the emotion! You are concerned over what can be lost, very noble! Some of them (the other side) only want everyone to be safe, very noble, but very naive. In a very calm quiet way show them the error of their way, take them to the range and have a nice day out. This is a long drawn out effort, it will pay off.

    Liberal or Conservative the people at the top want to control you and are only your friend till they are in power. At least with the true antis you know where they stand. You can’t change their minds but you can convince the fence people. Liberal or Conservative? It’s only a matter of opinion niether good nor bad. Just appropriate or inappropriate depending on the time and history will be the judge. Many of the Founding Fathers were liberals for their time. Look at history, you don’t think the 2A is a liberal act, never mind the rest of the constitution?

    You are in a democracy and this is a time to be talking, educating and leading by example.

    Walk softly and cary a big stick.

    • ST Doc says:

      +1 to this. The biggest thing I would like to stress is the fact that there is a lot of fear and uncertainty in this country right now. The last thing we need is to make people more afraid. I worked in civilian EMS before I joined up, and I’ve found that people respond a lot better when they aren’t afraid of you. Any LE guys on here will probably back me up on that.

    • Chris says:

      I’m sorry, you are wrong.

      We aren’t dealing with a misinformed well meaning opponent who can be reasoned with.

      We are literally dealing with people who use lies like “90% of guns found at Mexican crime scenes come from the US.” And then ACTIVELY go out and try to make that true.
      Get caught, then lie through their teeth to congress about it.

      We are dealing with people who so hate America and everything about it they would let American diplomats die so as not to upset towel-heads half way across the world, and then lie through their teeth to congress about it.

      We are dealing with people who when more than half of the American public is vehemently opposed to national health care ram rod it through with hand outs, virtual direct bribes to senators from nebraska for his vote.

      These people honestly think America sucks and needs to be brought down.

      • ST Doc says:

        I assume you’ve never fought war. It’s something I would really like to avoid, especially close to home. Please use your head and not your trigger finger. A bloody conflict on our home turf is absolutely what we don’t need.

      • BradKAF308 says:

        Those points are directed at the top Chris. You won’t change they’re minds it’s the average person positive actions influence. Stay away from negative stuff from 2A perspective. Positive hearts and minds let the others be negative.

      • Ash says:

        You paint with too broad a brush. I’d bet dollars to donuts you and I could spend an afternoon at the range, grab a beer afterwards and get along famously. What a shame you’d cast aside an ally based on the fickle game that is politics.

    • Ash says:

      Thanks for a reasonable and grounded post, sir. You clearly listed the dangers of playing into the Rhetoric Game. Kudos.

  8. y0te says:

    That’s hilarious. My gun safe is actually in my kid’s room. He’s 6 months old, but it is in there — locked.

  9. Bill says:

    “Cool your jets” is right. There have been more pro-Second Amendment advances made in the last 15 years than in the last 100, but both sides insist on playing radical politics and let their emotions override common sense. Talk of regime change and face shooting do FAR more harm than good. I’m as pro gun as any cop, but make ANY implication that I would violate the Constitution, OR that you would shoot me or mine in the face, and you’ll find that many of us Type As don’t much appreciate that.

    There isn’t going to be a “fight.” Think for yourself, and stop letting BOTH sides manipulate your emotions. The antis are struggling, trying to twist any tragic event into a groundswell, and it isn’t working. The reason we can’t get mags, ammo and new guns is our own panic and fear. We have a lame-duck President, and radicals on both sides in Congress who want to play this out, and we are letting them. Both sides need to stop the goofball rhetoric and get back to the business of beating out a budget and planning air strikes in Syria.

    Armed marches on Washington DC have a history of ending badly, very badly.

    • BradKAF308 says:

      +1

    • Chris says:

      If you are the kind of guy who would take my guns you get shot in the face. I don’t care what personality type you classify yourself as. If you aren’t going to take my guns you have nothing to worry about.

      • Bill DeWeese says:

        If you can’t make your point without the Saturday Night In The Trailer Park Chest Thumping/Tough Guy/Ain’t I a BadAss Routine, for the rest of our sakes, just skip it. To someone who is going to take your guns, they aren’t afraid of you or “worried” about you in the least. To someone who isn’t going to take your guns, you just sound like an ass who has had too many Old Mils and testosteronios.

        • Chris says:

          Its not a “ain’t I a bad ass routine” it is a declaration of fact; there are some things/ideas I am willing to kill for.

          If you find that disconcerting, perhaps you should warn the other side about the crazies they are about to unleash if they don’t back away from the edge of the cliff they find themselves on.

        • veteran says:

          Full of WIN!

          Chris, those you want on your side, you are alienating… Those which you are JUSTIFIABLY angry at don’t care….

          There are only two means at one’s disposal to convince others your perspective: Influence and Force…

          Until someone is physically trying to disarm you, keep the rhetoric to influence and work to have the heart and care to show influence to those who disagree with you and even malign you.

          and

          Know in your heart what your resolve is if things do go to the latter of the two means and KEEP THAT TO YOURSELF and your trusted friend and loved ones.

          • veteran says:

            (Just for clarification, my “Full of Win” comment was directed at Bill)

  10. Bill says:

    Dude, they are politicians, and politicians lie. Always have, always will. It wasn’t any different 250 years ago, we just have this romanticized view that guys in powdered wigs could do no wrong.

    There isn’t one leader who hasn’t taken their own spin into situational ethics, whether it be firebombing Dresden, the Gulf of Tonkin, Iran/ Contra or Teapot Dome.

  11. IvyMikeCafe says:

    #1. Agree with SSD on this. Love the innovation. However, there are legions of guerrilla machinists that can work miracles who keep it quiet. Appreciate what the DD guys are doing. I am torn on the approach, because they are goading The State into over-reacting, which they will do, but we don’t know what the 2nd and 3rd order effects will be. I’m pretty much not going to register my computer and printer with The Man, so I guess it jibes with the “Will Not Comply” spirit that seems to be developing lately.

    #2. I dig the aggro, but it is not the right time. I think a “David Gregory” march would be more effective where thousands of law abiding citizen-journalists cross into DC with empty 30rd Pmags – with no rifles/carbines – to document them on video while discussing gun control, just as David Gregory did.A bunch of journalists doing their First Amendment thing, just like Mr Gregory did.

    #3. The MSM is hyperventilating as usual. They will piss and moan, and responsible people should carry on with their plans to defend their families.

    The reality is, this is the latest incarnation of the civil rights movement. Massive, passive civil disobedience is the best tactic. Letters to Congress, hell yeah. Marches, hell yeah. Peaceful acts of non-compliance, hell-yeah. Contrary to the media BS, we have more women and moms carrying and shooting than I can remember. The numbers on guns and ammo sales are the real story while the MSM spins fiction. There are more and more new shooters out there than any time in recent history. The facts on violent crime and mass shootings don’t jibe with the media and Obama narrative.

    The grass-roots reality is on our side. When running and gunning, it’s “shoot, move, and communicate.” When it’s defending our rights to out flank the gun banners, it’s “communicate, communicate, communicate.”

    Folks that want to go to leather need to relax and take the long view. We have many, many options left.

  12. Mr. European says:

    A thousand men marching to your national capitol with loaded weapons (a significant fraction of which must be assault rifle derivatives)…

    Even if they actually go through with it and get that one thousand head count, how many do you think will be drunk or otherwise “tired and emotional?” Even if you get lucky and it’s 0,5% of the crowd, that’s still five people with loaded weapons. All you need is one idiot, 0,1% of the crowd, for it to go to hell in a hand basket.

    If the crowd goes there, it will most likely be monitored by law enforcement. And there will be some rage mongers in that crowd shouting “down with government,” “death to the tyrant” or something along those lines, whether because of ideology or intoxication. All you need is that one idiot to start shooting by intent or negligence and it will instantly escalate. One shot towards the cops (or ANY shots from the crowd), they start losing their cool, and then you have one thousand people and the city’s police department shooting indiscriminately. \THAT will help their so-called pro-gun cause.\

    This isn’t so much risking provocation as it is forcing it.

    Firearms are weapons of death and war, not tools of intellectual or political expression.
    Lawful and responsible ownership of weapons is one thing and being stupid about it is another. Woe to anyone who thinks that march as it is is the former.

    • Mark says:

      Except the scenario you have described has never happened and wouldn’t happen- At least from the side of the demonstrators. This isn’t the “Occupy” mob. But the government side? We’ve seen it before, and you can bet that the crowd will be infil’d with agents provocateurs.

      Firearms are the badge of free men.

  13. The “David Gregory” march with empty magazines is a brilliant idea. That should be pushed. It puts the other side on defense so many ways.

  14. Brandon says:

    Rob Pincus is a great guy. He is an advocate of safe weapons handling and keeping them secure. The huffington post is joke. Apparently they don’t understand that getting to your kids in a scary situation is your number one priority so it would make sense for a safe to be located near by. It is called a “SAFE” for a reason. I thought that is where all the libs wanted us to keep our guns anyway.

    This makes me think the libs are ok with hoping someone comes and saves their child for them rather than taking care of it themselves.

    • veteran says:

      The left does not like personal responsibility… this is why they are ignorant fools when speaking of freedom or liberty. Their desire is only for the effects of these concepts, the fruits produced by freedom and liberty are only amassed through the labor of responsibility and thus we see the current state of affairs in our beloved nation.

      • Bobbye says:

        The left never even thinks of personal responsibility. All they want is your money. They are thieves pure and simple. And they know it is easier to rob unarmed people. Responibility is just a ‘control’ word. Responsible to whom? Yourself? Chris is the only one in that group. And you may not like it be he and not you IS who they fear. I guess a drone will do him in quite nicely. Will you cheer that?

        • veteran says:

          The first four sentences of your post are correct and everything else afterward is just nonsensical. First, we are responsible to each other to live in a fashion worthy of respect, honor and the freedoms given to us by God. Until we forfeit them by living unjustly or immorally they shall not be infringed upon. Second, I understand how one deals with a wolf, that is by force pure and simple. But any sheepdog who wishes to leave the pastures where the sheep and shepherd are in order to fight a wolf that is not an immediate threat only ends up wandering into a situation where he is outnumbered, alone and dead. Failing his duty, his trusted position, to protect the sheep and the shepherd on the day the wolves decide to make their true intentions clearly known.

          As to your final two statements that serve no other purpose but to attempt to paint me as sheep and malign me, you sir are sorely mistaken. Its called being prudent and wise as to how we must handle this situation we are currently forced to address. I AM NO COWARD.

          • Bobbye says:

            veteran:
            I did not mean to imply any thing. I asked a question, unanswered. I am glad that you brought up God because if you are going to be accountabe to someone it should be God and God alone. I am not my brothers keeper, but God is. If I make myself an enemy to my brother, I make myself an enemy to God. I understand very well what kind of neighbor I should be. But I am not responsible to any of them.

          • veteran says:

            I personally agree, and only believe our nation’s woes will be affected/changed by the Grace of God and the adherence to the principles outlined in the revealed word, The Bible.

            But we cannot go about arguing this case with those who have no regard for our Human Rights let alone our Theological convictions arguing that way, until we are willing to get personal and come to know these people and attempt to earn their audience in order to minister where liberty and freedom come from.

            Going off like Chris was above only widens the chasm between us who are on the same side let alone our neighbor whom subscribe to world views which clearly are eroding our rights. Regardless, until they are sending black vans door to door and we see natty guard being sent to patrol the streets, we have no justification to begin inciting violence. Those who fought for our nation in the Revolution waited until they were being forcibly confronted and so should we…. Meet force with force, never throw the first punch. Everything up till now has been rhetorical attacks and we need to continue supporting those who are fighting in the NRA and the few legislators who have toed the line.
            I will be the first to stand and fight if the time were to come. But it’s not now!

  15. name says:

    I can’t tell if gun nuts love or hate America. They’re always talking about how patriotic they are, yet they keep making vague threats against the government.

    • Chris says:

      America ain’t the government. The concept of America exist in spite of the government.

    • Chuck says:

      Since when is the government synonymous with America? The current Federal leviathan would be unrecognizable to the Framers.

      Please explain why I, or any American, owe one iota of loyalty to a government that only seeks to take my wealth (by force) and my God-given rights in its insatiable hunger for more money and power.

      Those in government have long since stopped even pretending to obey the Oaths they took to the Constitution. Jefferson would be appalled that we sit here and type away on keyboards instead of stringing every one of the corrupt bastards up to every light pole in Mordor on the Potomac.

      • Mr. European says:

        Every sovereign country has a government. If you call yours America, then it has an american government. Or would you rather be ruled through national consensus? Have all 350 million vote on every issue. Or splinter into more manageable areas forming a REGION called America that is as much a single country as the Holy Roman Empire was.

        “Please explain why I, or any American, owe one iota of loyalty to a government that only seeks to take my wealth (by force) and my God-given rights in its insatiable hunger for more money and power.”
        :facepalm:
        Do you live in a rural area with no contact to the outside whatsoever, in a region that no other country would ever want to claim for any reason?

        If you mean with “government” the term “administration,” as in the current people in government, then I can follow your reasoning, but if you’re against the concept of government then you miss quite a bit of what being a citizen (of any state) means.

        Your national military is run, financed and regulated by the federal government, your police and emergency services are relegated to different levels of governance (federal – state – county), you have state and federal safety regulations, your infrastructure is handled through different levels of governance, etc. etc.
        If you think you can be fine and dandy without any of those, then go ahead and make your own country.

        And “stealing money by force” is such a strawman if there ever was one. It’s a social contract to pay taxes to a state that offers services and infrastructure. And your taxation is mild to begin with, then again many of your services are left to private hands… If you don’t pay taxes, then you break not only the social contract, but whatever statutes and law there is and you get indicted for it. The level of coercion used to bring you in depends on your own resistance at that point.

        And how are your rights being taken away? You have the freedom of religion (or refusal thereof), you have the freedom of choice, association (or refusal thereof), the freedom of speech (which you exercise), you own your property, etc.
        On the “equal justice” I can get behind any gripes you’d raise, I’m sure.

        And calling for violence on government officials you don’t like? Hardly fitting for a democracy. Yes, I call America a democracy. A republic is by its very definition a representative democracy.
        As a democracy you have the power to elect, supervise and replace your leaders. The fact that people don’t is merely the sign of widespread uninformed laziness.
        Instead of calling for the death of the ones you don’t like like a medieval barbarian, you should name and shame them and make people aware of their better options. THAT is what any citizen of any country can and SHOULD do. And with the power of the internet it’s easier than ever before.

        • Chuck says:

          Who let the euro-trash in here anyway? Come back when you are a citizen and actually have a dog in this fight. Until then, bugger off. Ask your UK pals what that means if you need clarification.

          • Mr. European says:

            Aren’t we being discriminatory?

            Don’t have the ability to counter my points so you resort to attacks and dismissal?

            And I thought americans were excellent at making their point.

            Indeed I don’t have a personal stake except human interest and sympathy.
            And you tend to make big waves on the global sphere.

        • Bobbye says:

          Every sovereign country has a government

          doesn’t have to. The Book of Judges in the Bible tell of sovereign people who lived in freedom (most of the time) without a government. They eventually asked for a government ( a king) and lost their freedom. Most of the Middleages in Europe were without what we would reconize as a sovereign government, and people were freer than current Europeans or Americans are now.

          • Mr. European says:

            “Most of the Middleages in Europe were without what we would reconize as a sovereign government, and people were freer than current Europeans or Americans are now.”

            True, many didn’t have a sovereign government we’d recognize today as such. They had sovereigns. And the sovereign’s every word is law.

            Feudalism is not what I’d call freedom by any modern measure. And if you think people should return to that system, then you should expect immense social stratification beyond anything seen today and the complete loss of all rights and freedoms by the lowest classes and arbitrary rule by decree by the ruling classes.

            And here I thought America was to serve as the antithesis of aristocracy and their rule.

          • veteran says:

            If you’re trying to say that man was never designed to rule man, I can get on board with that. That is truth and history continually reaffirms it.

          • veteran says:

            But Mr. E you brought up a great counter point, we need to keep what we have and work toward placing govt in the proper context it was initially instituted. On the scale of extremes the constitution and the federal govt were positioned closer to the end of anarchy than establishmentarianism whereas today we see the opposite.

        • Bobbye says:

          They had sovereigns. And the sovereign’s every word is law.

          Mr. Euro: Your idea of the Middle Ages is a naive government school boy view. Read King Alfred’s books if you are English to start to get a clue. And , no I did not say read what others have written.

    • Mark says:

      It’s been infiltrated by the left over the past half century so much that it no longer even resembles what it was designed as.

      It now threatens its own citizens. Bad move for them. It cannot end well if they persist. They are the ones pushing their ideology on people who generally want to be left alone, at peace.

      • Mr. European says:

        By your left?
        What’s clear even across the Atlantic is that private interests are the ones that have infiltrated your establishment.
        That is what money in politics does. Money takes precedence over sane policy.

        • veteran says:

          Mr. E,
          I have to agree with this statement. This is an age old tale which only serves the interest of corruption. I believe you see it clearly as it is the same issue which has brought about much of the problems the Eurozone currently is saddled with.

          This is not an American problem… This is a human/heart of man problem.

  16. Chris says:

    Jason says:
    May 7, 2013 at 18:07

    “You hurt the cause, Man. It saddens me a bit, but you sir are the minority voice on the Pro-Gun side.”

    My rights are not a cause, they are immutable. They are not open to vote, they are not open to discussion, and I will not let them be taken from me.

    I’m used to living my live in the minority. It doesn’t bother me in the slightest.

    This used to be a country in which the RIGHTS of the minority were more important than then WHIMS of the majority.

    • Ash says:

      “This used to be a country in which the RIGHTS of the minority were more important than then WHIMS of the majority.”

      Right on, man. I’m with you on legalizing same-sex marriage, seeing as you’re supporting the “rights of the minority” principle. I applaud you for standing up for the rights of others.

      • Bobbye says:

        Ash:
        you don’t get it at all! You want the government to grant you a right, while Chris is saying his rights pre-date and supersede the government. Chris would never ask the government for his rights.

  17. Joe says:

    I’m as pro-2A as anybody else here, but I’m curious about something.

    Last time I checked, we still live in a democracy, where our officials are elected into office by our citizens.

    Whether you like your leadership or not, doesn’t it become something other than a democracy when an armed group decides they don’t like it and forces it to be replaced with something they choose?

    I’m just asking because with comments like ‘Yes, lets solve this with more VOTING.’ it sounds like that’s what some of the extreme pro-2A folks want to accomplish.

    What if you get your ‘regime change’? What follows? (HOPEFULLY, your plan is to hold new elections) What happens if the majority again elects to be lead by people you don’t like? (since that’s what has already happened) Another ‘regime change’ until you get what you want? Doesn’t sound any better than what we have now, to me.

    • Mr. European says:

      +1

    • Chris says:

      Well, First, you’re wrong.
      We don’t live in a democracy.
      We live in a constitutional republic.

      This is important because in a democracy everything is up for a vote.

      In a constitutional republic, the rights of the minority are not open to being voted on by the majority.

      You know those things listed in the Bill of Rights.
      things like freedom of speech.
      freedom to be secure in your person and papers.

      Litttle stuff like that, that this FEDGOV routinely violates.

      So I’m not a big believer in the constitution as that structure is what got us to this point.

      I am a believer letting people live their lives free from coercion or the threat of coercion from the mob.

      • Joe says:

        Yes you are correct. But pointing out my mistake doesn’t change anything about my point.

        It’s no longer a constitutional republic OR a democracy, if a group puts their own leadership in charge at gunpoint. Which sounds like what you would like to see happen and it is no better than what we have now.

        • Chuck says:

          You’re right about one thing: it IS no longer a constitutional republic. The Constitution is a dead letter.

          Jefferson had a few things to say about tyranny and the right of the people to throw off the chains of said tyranny. You may have heard of it. Hint: google “Declaration of Independence.”

          • veteran says:

            Chris and Chuck make great insights, which are grounded in our nations history and the writings of the men which labored to give us the greatest opportunity to thrive as a nation unlike anything the world has ever seen…

            That said, we are not seeing enough physical force yet for any form of physical retaliation to be justified. This cannot happen unless it do go the route of Nazi Germany or any other example of overt tyranny in the worlds dark and sinful history.

            This is still the time to convince those around us through the presentation of historical facts and instruction on the founding documents in order to renew the sentiments which allowed us to be in the position we are today.

            And ultimately this can only happen through a renewing of the mind and spirit as to what our principles and values are as a nation. There is a reason why oblahblah takes every opportunity to speak to the youth of the nation in order to persuade and convince them of the ideologies he is deeply rooted in.

            WE MUST DO THE SAME IN A MANNER WHICH IS HONEST, CLEAR AND WORTHY OF HONOR in order to save the REPUBLIC!

          • Joe says:

            An yet no one has answered my original question!

            Once you guys that want to start a civil war overthrow the so-called tyranny of the federal government and get your ‘regime change’, what’s the plan? Will you be happy if the majority decides they still like it how it was before…

            or will YOU force your will on THEM?

          • Chuck says:

            The premise of your question is false, Joe. Very few of “us” want to START a civil war. The Feds will do that without any help from us. But we believe it is as inevitable as it will be tragic.

          • veteran says:

            We still have the means to influence through the current system a way to secure individual freedoms. Its up to us to speak out to our reps but more importantly talk with those around us and work to mentor, influence and debate particularly in the Universities in order to make known the corruption which threatens us all and God help us show the youngest among us the lies they are being taught.

  18. orly? says:

    I try to be a moderate, a person who tries to advocate both sides, and is perceived (and labeled) by most a “traitor” to all.

    As such, more than likely I will be labeled by both sides as “loony” and ignored.

    I believe in compromise, as had there never been no compromise with issues in the US before, the US would never had lasted this long.

    But we are Americans, we have/will literally over exaggerate everything.

    I could actually show my POV, and as usual, it will be in vain.

    So I will just say this:

    The “impending doom/threat” that has been regurgitated time and time again is materially improbable.

    But mark my words, if ever the next Civil War of the USA ever occurs, by a threat real or IMAGINED, the USA will become a NUCLEAR wasteland of our own undoing by forces home AND/OR abroad.

    • veteran says:

      I would agree that a government only is viable when compromise is a core principle in application to the everyday workings and proposed legislation in order to ensure a long lasting nation.

      My agreement ends when it comes to constitutional rights and the erosion of said rights.

      Let me ask you if you believe that is ok in regards to the rights one has to their preferred religion? Should we ban Christians, Buddhists, or Muslims from practicing aspects of their religious tradition? This is the catch 22 you are asking for when you make your statement in regards to the infringement of firearms (which comes right behind religion and thus if firearms are open for reform then so is the speech/religion) and the rest of our Republic (or the little which is left) will be erased.

      Though I disagree with much of what Chris is stating in the above thread, he is ABSOLUTELY correct in his interpretation of what a constitutional republic is. Our democracy ends where our constitution begins. (Or so it should)

      When you also make statements about the over exaggerations in our nations past and present I would have to concede this is true in many cases…
      BUT are you saying you believe that we are immune from the plagues of tyranny and statism in America? Because if so, then you are sorely mistaken.
      I would hope that you would recognize the fact that sentiment could only have come from a nation which did hold to its constitution and thus that which those in power currently wish to erode is that which has given the privilege of the comforts and present cynicism you may/or may not be expressing.

      Just my $0.02 take it for what it’s worth.

    • BradKAF308 says:

      NO DOUBT! IF AMERICANS EVER STARTED TO FIGHT AMOUNGST THEM SELVES ALL HELL WOULD RAIN DOWN ON THE US. FROM ALL SORTS OF PLACES AROUND THE WORLD. NO SIDE WOULD WIN. AND THE US WOULD BECOME POST NAZI GERMANY. THE CONQUERORS MAY NOT OCCUPY THE STATES BUT THEY WOULD NEVER ALLOW IT TO REBUILD!

      The party system needs to change. Regular people need to take positions of power. These 2 parties are polarizing the country and it will end in a mess. Are there only 2 views how to manage a country? You don’t want the Israeli or Italian extremes but something needss to change. The extremists seem to be driving the bus.

      A government has 2 parts in the west anyway. The elected part, which is supposed to be temporary. But it seems not to be. Only the figure head is. Not good. That is a major part of the problem. The other part of government is the public servents, soldiers clerks, health inspectors etc. These do not make a country they are to serve it in their own special way whether you like it or not. They are needed but they aren’t the country.

  19. orly? says:

    Might I also add:

    Remember the Mulford Act.

  20. WoodyTX says:

    #1 – Good and bad, in that (as noted above) there’s never a ‘good time’ to release this. Does anyone know what it uses for a chamber and barrel? Hell, a zip gun looks easier to make…

    #2 – Worries me. This smells of a setup, and the organizer does not have a history of calm and rational discourse. People listened to MLK because he was a preacher, a man of God and peace. People tuned out Malcolm X because he was a troublemaker (even if he was right, especially at the end).

    #3 – We need to expect that our quotes will be taken out of context. Rob actually ‘wins’ here, as the simple context takes the wind out of the HuffPo’s sails, and makes them appear reactionary.

    Just as Chris’ quotes above would be taken out of context and used against him in an argument, we need to make sure that we don’t alienate our fellow citizens, who will be voting on nickle-and-dime restrictions on our 2A freedoms in the future. I’d bet that we would have more success winning our freedom by using our ammo to take an on-the-fence or even politically opposed citizen out shooting, than we would by hording it against the dreaded Blue Helmets.

    Being right doesn’t mean you win, even if you have guns to back it up. We still have a strong democratic tradition in this country, and winning the hearts and minds goes a lot farther than putting bullets in them.

  21. Chris says:

    “@Joe says:
    May 7, 2013 at 20:18
    An yet no one has answered my original question!

    Once you guys that want to start a civil war overthrow the so-called tyranny of the federal government and get your ‘regime change’, what’s the plan? Will you be happy if the majority decides they still like it how it was before…

    or will YOU force your will on THEM?”

    OK, I’m not interested in force at all Joe.
    I just want to be left alone.

    I don’t particularly believe in the Social Contract theory of government, but if I did I would have to say the constitution is that contract!
    And going back to the DOI “And when any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.”

    So I would hope we would institute a government which isn’t destructive to those ends.

    It would likely look a lot like the Articles of Confederation. In other words, very very weak central authority.

    I’m not interested in living in the greatest empire know to man, or having the strongest army (a standing army is something the founders argued against!)

    I want to live in a just, free place that recognizes I have rights that are God given and not government granted.

  22. Joe says:

    Chris,
    (I just noticed the post by another Joe, asking if you served and I want to point out that wasn’t me. I don’t know why that had anything to do with the discussion.)

    Thanks for responding and actually explaining your position. I wasn’t expecting such a reasoned response from someone who was earlier talking about shooting clowns in the fucking face if they came for your guns. I haven’t talked to anyone who spouted off about getting rid of the government who actually had any idea of what to do after. I can’t say I agree with your choice of government but I respect that you have an opinion on how it should be.

    I do agree with Veteran that there is no where near the level of tyranny like that seen in Nazi Germany, that would require use of force to remove it and we have time to and need to reach out to the uniformed to point out what can be done to fix things.

    • Bobbye says:

      I do agree with Veteran that there is no where near the level of tyranny like that seen in Nazi Germany

      the only reason for that is Americans still have their guns!

    • veteran says:

      Anyone who does not know of Popvox.com should give it a look. It really makes it easy to make your opinion known to each of your reps whenever legislation comes up.

      • Chuck says:

        Agreed, Popvox is a great resource. Don’t make the mistake of thinking that those of us who think the electoral system is too corrupt and broken to save us don’t make use of whatever peaceful means we have left to try to change things. When the lead starts flying, I want to have a clear conscience that I did everything I could to stop it.

    • Chuck says:

      And reveal their true statist/collectivist colors in the process. Not that anyone who is familiar with California politics, especially as it relates to gun prohibition, have any illusions about Yee.

  23. Wombat says:

    I watch this crap from over in Australia and it never ceases to amaze me. You guys have the second ammendment and you’re still walking around on egg shells because “otherwise the government might ban our guns”.
    The premise of this article reads to me “these three balls to the wall advocates for the right to bear arms are revealing my status as a politicking limpdick”.
    They’re right to shun your “softly softly” approach and you should frankly be ashamed. You’ve mistaken who the sleeping giant in your nation is, and it’s not the government.

  24. BradKAF308 says:

    A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

    Too many people dwell on line 2 and forget line 1. You don’t want to be a lone wolf, sounds cool but isn’t. Be part of the community, The Militia.

    Here lies the problem of a march for 2A. This would be an emotional crowd, I could use more negative words to describe it. But it would not be what that first section says. “well regulated” My interpretation of this as a soldier not a lawyer or professor is that of a disciplined competent structured group. A gaggle of people walking up a road carrying guns would not inspire respect or admiration. They appear disorganized as a group, individually their dress and deportment lacking.
    But you say it’s not about how I dress, it’s show the gov…..
    Yes, BUT it’s not just the gov it’s the people too. You can give an image of a gang or the image of squared away respectable members of society exercising their right in a disciplined competent way. Image does matter.

    When is SSD going to create a 2A blog?

  25. Go Loud says:

    SSD – you called it. The 3D print plans have been pulled.