And come to think of it, I’ve yet to see things like these sitting on a table at a gun show. Large cache of weapons seized in Matamoros | one, weapons, seized – Brownsville Herald:
The weapons seized included 59 assault rifles, 21 handguns, seven Uzi submachine guns, one .762-caliber machine gun, 412 packs of hydrogel industrial explosive, 12 meters of detonation cord, one rocket launcher, one rocket, one grenade launcher, six rounds for 60 mm mortar, three launchable grenades, one RPG and several other grenades.
OK… I don’t think that we can blame the ATF for this one.
From Howard Nemerov at Pajamas Media comes this report about how the UN Ignores Its Own Data to Promote Gun Ban:
Since the mid-1990s, the United Nations has proclaimed that global civilian disarmament will ensure worldwide peace and prosperity. But to comprehend their attitude towards civilian gun ownership, know that the United Nations believes you have no civil right of self-defense:
Self-defence is a widely recognized, yet legally proscribed, exception to the universal duty to respect the right to life of others. Self-defence is a basis for exemption from criminal responsibility that can be raised by any State agent or non-State actor. Self-defence is sometimes designated as a “right.” There is inadequate legal support for such an interpretation. Self-defence is more properly characterized as a means of protecting the right to life and, as such, a basis for avoiding responsibility for violating the rights of another.
In other words, if you kill an attacker, you violate their human rights. For now, the UN will let it pass if you can prove you were protecting your life. But this remains a “basis for exemption from criminal responsibility,” which implies that you owe a debt to society. Also, government can revoke this privilege of self-defense at any time.
Curiously, the UN never consults their own research when asking: “Does gun ownership make you less safe?”
UN data shows that gun ownership is associated with greater economic prosperity, more freedom, and less government corruption. So why doesn’t the UN pay any attention to their own data? The quote above is telling. It demonstrates the difference between the “American Experiment” and the tyranny that is more typical of the human experience.
Long ago, the American People asserted their dominance over their government. As a result, we do not see rights as flowing from government. Were that the case, rights would not be rights at all, but privileges granted by a tyrant. Instead, the People have rights that predate the formation of the government. The Constitution and the Bill of Rights do not grant, but rather, recognize rights that the People have held all along; simply by virtue of being Human Beings. In short, your rights come from God, not a politician.
The aspiring tyrants at the UN take a dim view of this philosophy. Someone who sees his rights and liberties as things flowing to him from God is someone who will be difficult to control. Someone who holds this view and possesses the means to resist tyranny will be especially difficult to control!
Mauser: Canadian long-gun registry useless
The homicide rate has not fallen since the introduction of the longgun registry in 2001. It was 1.78 per 100,000 population in 2001 and it is 1.81 per 100,000 in 2009 (the most recent year statistics are available). Few of the firearms used in violent crime (including homicide) are either registered or owned legally. According to published statistics from both the RCMP and Statistics Canada, gun owners are actually less likely than other Canadians to commit murder.
Read About It: The Vancouver Province (Canada)
Posted: 4/1/2011 9:32:02 AM
In engineering, there’s a phenomenon called “NIH” or “Not invented here”. This is when your management won’t allow you to pursue a solution to a problem because your proposed solution uses someone else’s widget. It occurs when management is more concerned with the company’s IP portfolio than with solving the engineering problem at hand.
Other organizations have their own versions of this behavior. At the New York Times, it must be called something like “Not scooped here”. David Codrea reports that the Old Gray Lady is passing on the “Gunwalker” scandal because they didn’t break it. Making matter worse, I suppose, is the fact that mere bloggers broke it.
From NRA-ILA comes the latest Outrage of the Week…
Outrage Of The Week
|Friday, April 01, 2011|
|This week’s “Outrage” comes to us from the Garden State, where insult has literally been added to injury for Mr. Jeffrey Muller.
This outrage was precipitated by an incredible case of mistaken identity. According to a recent story on the NJ.com Star-Ledger Editorial Page, Jeffrey Muller—a pet store owner from Sussex County, New Jersey—happens to have the same name as an alleged New York power broker. Unfortunately for Mr. Muller, his namesake ran afoul of five men from Missouri, apparently bilking them out of $500,000. The five thugs mistakenly targeted this Jeffrey Muller for revenge. They assaulted him, shocked him with a stun gun, and kidnapped him, driving him from New Jersey to Lake Ozark, Missouri. He was blindfolded, beaten and threatened with death. Fortunately, he was finally able to escape and the kidnappers were arrested.
Now back in New Jersey, Mr. Muller is understandably still shaken by the experience and fears reprisal from relatives of his abductors. He wants to protect himself, so he applied for a gun permit. He was denied. Twice. And the reason given for the denial? The Superior Court judge who ruled in the case said Mr. Muller provided “no proof of justifiable need” to carry a firearm!
Let’s make this clear: Muller was severely beaten, electrically shocked, abducted, held captive hundreds of miles from his home, threatened with death, and now fears future reprisals. And that demonstrates “no justifiable need?” That is outrageous!
I never thought that I’d be citing The National Enquirer as a source, but writer Mike Walker explains how NRA Board member Tom Selleck reacted when he spotted an extra mishandling a pistol on the set of Blue Bloods. The extra was waving a handgun around, allowing the muzzle to cover members of the cast and crew.
The guy, who was playing a cop but had never held a real gun, recoiled when Selleck – a lifelong gun enthusiast and board member of the National Rifle Association – spotted him and bellowed: “Hey, YOU! What the HELL are you doing? That gun’s NOT a toy – stop waving it around!”
Turning bright red as Selleck marched over and got in his face, the
nervous doofus quickly lowered the weapon, but the star barked: “Look at
you…your finger’s STILL ON THE TRIGGER!”
Totally confused, the mortified guy sputtered: “Is the gun really loaded?”
Rolling his eyes, Selleck snapped: “No, it’s not loaded. But when you
handle a gun it’s common sense to assume it IS loaded, and NOT point it
Filming stopped while Tom gave everyone on set a lecture on gun safety.
For those unfamiliar with “prop” guns, they aren’t props at all. Movie and TV studios use real firearms when they film. And as a result, gun safety on set in an important issue. (There have been fatal accidents in the past due to mishandled prop guns.) So, hats off to Tom for seeing to the safety of his coworkers!
Shack… Shed… Get it? Never mind…
From the Dallas Star Telegram: Montana store resists RadioShack’s demand to stop gun giveaway
An independent RadioShack store in Montana is standing firm, refusing RadioShack Corp. headquarters’ demand to stop giving away a firearm with each satellite dish sale — a 5-month-old promotion that has proved widely popular and garnered national attention.
Now before anyone starts with howls of indignation directed at Radio Shack, let’s consider that this is an educational opportunity. I doubt that many of the MBAs running The Shack have any direct experience with firearms. In fact, their perceptions are probably limited to what they’ve seen at the movies and on TV. If that version of gun ownership were anything close to accurate, then their reaction to Mr. Levy’s sales promotion would be understandable. We gun owners need to educate Radio Shack’s management about gun ownership is really like. They need to understand that there are firearms in half of all US households. They also need to know that approximately one third of the US population owns guns, and thus a sizable portion of their customer base, owns guns. The vast majority of these guns are owned without incident. They provide many Radio Shack customers with security and enjoyment.
So before you fire off a nasty-gram to Radio Shack, consider that they are simply ignorant of the realities of American gun ownership.
NRA News’ Cam Edwards talks to Bob Parsons, CEO of GoDaddy.com. PETA and the other animal rights whack jobs have their knickers in a twist because Mr. Parsons went to Africa to help control problem elephants…
The elephant that Mr. Parsons shot was destroying the crops of subsistence farmers in Zimbabwe. There are people in Africa who have food to eat tonight thanks to Mr. Parsons’ hunt.
©1994-2018 Gun Owners of the San Fernando Valley
Re-publication permitted with attribution.