I’ve been there done that: gone up against gun control advocates on live TV. It’s like herding cats. Nasty demented cats. Keith Morgan, president of the West Virginia Citizens Defense League, did a fantastic job of it last year, defending Americans’ natural, civil and Constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms. More than that, he shot down the interviewer’s rhetorical tricks. I’m not sure that this kind of interchange convinces fence-straddlers of the righteousness of the gun rights cause. But this one sure gave me some major league warm fuzzies, and for that I am truly thankful. Kudos, Mr. Morgan. You kept your cool and nailed it.
Do these people not realize that we have foreign domestic terrorist groups training in guerrilla warfare in our country right now posing as religious organizations? That’s why we need 15 round ammunition for our weapons. These crazy no respect for life heathens come after us infidels we have to protect ourselves and take as many of them out as possible. When the saying started that with gun laws only criminals will have guns I didn’t realize it would be because Obama changing laws would label law biding gun owners criminals..I’m beginning to wonder if the rumor about a bunch of guillotines being stored in this country for later use is true?
The Orange County sheriff’s office has announced new rules for issuing permits, although they caution the applicants, in so many words, that the rules will be reviewed again if San Diego successfully appeals.
http://www.ocregister.com/articles/sheriff-602509-concealed-county.html
Buy the newest M-57 and buy 2 of them , one fore using , the other fore spareparts , beware of recoil and overpenetration is fore sure , Reliability is as good as the ammo you are using , Clean every time after you fire it ,
7,62*25 is a very potent cartridge , beware of flash/dragon att nightshooting it will blind you and reveal your position ,
Train by shooting a woodloog dim 3inches wide and 2feet tall from 3yard and hit it every time , when you hit it with 7of 8 round the take Woodlogg to 10 yard line and do the same ,
Fore me the Woodlogg is a Terrorist / Burglar spine , take care of your M57 its a good gun proven by time ,
Hasn’t this video been posted before?
Those that can do. Those that can’t do nit-pick and snipe (no pun intended) at the doers.
If you’re so concerned about spelling, become an English teacher. ” This comment I often give to the wanna bes”: ‘ I was killing real men while the best part of you was running down your momma’s leg.’
The part that makes me laugh is it is the same group of people expecting 100 million gun owners to voluntarily comply that insist in very loud voices that 15 million illegal immigrants cannot POSSIBLY be deported…
Yeah we’ve all heard the BS that registration won’t lead to confiscation. The mantra of the cosmically STUPID it will indeed and inevitably lead to CONFISCATION it always does. And it has already. And those who sign up for the ACA or Obama care your info will probably be used to take away your rights at some point by some agency who deems you unfit.
“The constitutions of most of our States assert that all power is inherent in the people; that… it is their right and duty to be at all times armed.”
Thomas Jefferson
Agree, Mr. Morgan does a fine job. But – at 3:12 he accidentally admits that FAuto are used in crime. This is a slip up. He should have nailed the host for his ignorance. And using the “southern border” is a dog whistle for Libs to label him Right Wing Wacko. Best to stick to the subject. There is plenty of Gov mismanagement elsewhere to cite.
I’m so, so weary of hearing the same, tired BS rhetoric, misconceptions, and misdirection from gun control advocates and the press. Notice how the interviewer at no point even stopped to listen to anything Morgan had to say. You cannot have a discussion with these people. They just keep plowing ahead with their propaganda. They never, ever listen.
“an immature morality that sees no good beyond obedience to rules. And, it’s sheer lunacy”
I think that is the most important part of the whole quote.
FYI, this is a longer version of the interview, and it contains the “after the break” stuff (posted by the WVCDL on Youtube):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ECxDvwObwZk
Absolutely destroyed the interviewer. The only disappointment for me was that he didn’t clarify “arms” versus “ordnance”, but by outing the tired “nuclear bomb” argument as irrational played right into the interviewer’s request for a rational discussion. The media guy was the one being irrational.
Also. “Of course I’m armed you’re not?” Classic out-grouping. Loved it.
As a aside, I can’t imagine living in such fear of everyone around me. Sounds awful.
Kind of like being a soft, defenseless bunny living in a hole, huh? Poke your head out, look for coyotes, wolves or hawks and scamper about?
Sometimes you just have to ask people in this internet age, “How hard do you have to work to remain ignorant on this subject? A simple search of the ol’ interwebs would educate you immensely.”
I’ve seen this video, the longer one at that, dude wipes the floor with the (obviously anti gun) host, and pretty much emasculated him on national TV, it’s was glorious.
“Rob Morse at slowfacts.wordpress.com writes that Sheriff Gore told him that he wanted to issue CCW licenses: He said he wanted to issue licenses so citizens could carry a concealed weapon in public. He really wanted to. That is what he told me. He said, sadly, that California law prevented him from granting those licenses.”
Sheriff Gore is a LIAR. His statement is a bald-faced LIE. California law permits a sheriff or police chief to issue a concealed carry permit at his/her discretion. Sheriffs in the rural counties commonly issue carry permits to citizens who pass the background checks. I lived in Lassen and Modoc Counties before I escaped the PRCa, and the sheriffs in those two counties LIKED to have armed honest citizens. they generally had 20 deputies to patrol a county the size of Connecticut, and they were happy to have people who took personal responsibility for their own safety.
What’s the opposite of a catch 22?
It’s covering their bases is what it seems to me. If the country/ area turns pro-gun, they can say, “Well, I voted against it!” If it goes the other way, they can complain how the “other” dems failed you. Now if something happens in the future they can say, “It’s because universal background checks weren’t in play.” And if it doesn’t it can be used for them. It’s about positioning.
Wow, that title is darn confusing. Maybe it should be “Two Perspectives….”
Also, “Two articles in two local papers provide two takes on the two-to-one…” might be better comprehended as “Two articles in two local papers provide two PERSPECTIVES on the two-to-one…”
Grammar nazi signing off.
I believe the full text can be found here: http://www.bussjaeger.us/HB1589_amendment.txt
Basically the same as M-T, if it wasn’t purely word-of-mouth, it is ‘commercial’. If it was advertised in ANY way, it is commercial.
Can you imagine living that way? Basing your every remark and move on how others will receive it? Never being able to express yourself freely for fear of the political ramifications? Constantly selling out as a way of life? How do politicians live beyond 50, anyway? The internal strain must be immense. My ass bleeds for them.
Very good video. He did a great job on that video. When they are ready to vote Sen. Joe Manchin out I will happily send them a check.
He might have pointed out that modern sporting rifles are used to commit homicides at a rate far lower (statistically insignificantly in fact) than hands and feet. I absolutely love the fact that he suggested ending the interview all together right at the beginning if the interviewer was going to insist on ridiculous and strawman arguments. I’m not surprised but usually disappointed in the quality of my opponent when they somehow get from a debate regarding standard capacity magazines and modern semi-automatic rifles to nuclear weapons, as if the two somehow had something in common.
I also find it frustrating that so often in debate regarding regulation of weapons the obvious fact that a determined person of only average means and intelligence can in fact procure WMD. If one is interested in killing large numbers of people and has a modicum of time and resources the development and stockpiling of things like nerve gas, blister agents and other chemical weapons to the degree that with reasonably obtained delivery systems (read crop sprayer) thousands or 10s of thousands of people could be killed or injured quite readily. It’s a testament to the fact that there are basically no people in this country who wish to indiscriminately kill their countrymen who aren’t also deranged and addled to the degree that they lack the organization and focus to execute such a plan that such attacks have never taken place.
I decline to go into detail since I wouldn’t want to offer an instruction manual in creating mass casualty events but I assert that there are readily available and lawful to possess agents that with little or no modification would prove quite lethal if dispersed as an aerosol over a populated area.
The debate is about firearms in particular, not artillery, rockets, bombs and certainly not about WMDs. Attempting to deviate is always an attempt at a straw man argument and while it’s effective if allowed, it should never be allowed.
I have to wonder what the criminal facility would be of something like an M2 BMG or even a SAW like the M249. They are big, loud, expensive to own maintain and operate. Require a high degree of skill to operate effectively and are virtually impossible to conceal. Even if you could buy them at Wal-Mart I seriously doubt they would turn up as crime weapons very often. Given that for a few days of training and the cost of a few machine tools one could convert AR-15s to select fire weapons at the rate of several a day at least, and given that such modified weapons are virtually non-existent in crime there is either no need or a lack of urgency in using such weapons for criminal ends.
I’m getting far afield but I have to submit that since the knowledge and ability to produce automatic weapons is readily available, and that the ability to train with one is also a simple matter of space and economics, that if there were any great ends to be had from producing and using automatic weapons in crime it would happen a bit more often that the statistical outlier it currently is. Not only do the numbers bear out that there is little desire among the criminal element (for that is who commits most crime after all, career criminals) but I’m at a loss to come up with a crime that would be only possible or enhanced in it’s commission by use of an automatic weapon. (The one that sticks out is the North Hollywood bank robbery, which would have been at least as effective with a note and a finger poking though a pocket and which resulted in the death of both perpetrators, not exactly an advertisement for using automatic rifles to commit crime.)
Outside of suppressive fire, automatic weapons are not much of an advantage over semi-automatic ones. Even the US army experimented heavily with reducing the basic infantry rifle to a 3 round burst since full auto fire is typically inaccurate and consumes too much ammo for a soldiers load to support full auto fire for more than a minute to two.
While I would not like to see the result of something like the M249 or RPD platforms being employed at a crowded mall I would likewise not like to see what a heavy truck could do to a crowd of pedestrians. The means to inflict mass casualties cannot ever be absent from a free and technologically advance society. I also highly doubt that the sort of person who contemplates shooting innocent strangers in a crowded place is willing or able to devote the time and effort involved in learning to even load a belt fed weapon, let alone obtaining one and learning it’s practical use. I also doubt that in such a crowded and chaotic environment one armed with such a weapon is at any real advantage to a citizen or several armed with handguns and the will to resist. (It’s hard to mow down a crowd while at the same time scanning for the several people who are bracing to return accurate fire on you.) If we moved towards constitutional carry and lawful possession of whatever sort of firearm you have the means to purchase on the open market one can predict that for every instance of someone utilizing SAWs or crew served weapons in a crime there would be a dozen citizens responding immediately with pistols.
Liberty first, safety second. In the end I predict that safety will not be seriously harmed by greater liberty, there is a balance. Even if safety must suffer though, let it suffer at the hands of liberty.
The nice man at Powerline blog already explained this, men. Under 10 USC sec 311 all, as in A-L-L able bodied men between the ages of 17 and 45 are already IN the militia, and that with no terms or parameters of service provided. Of course that may yet bode ill for the geezers amongst us, but it makes a point both about the alleged ‘brilliant legal mind’ and the idiocy of their cause.
Excellent analysis and very helpful information. Great to see your contributions to this site continuing!
Not in that one, no. I did find the sniper in two of the pics, but that was only because I knew there was one in the picture.
This story got very little play on the local TV news. Kinda like “eh-what else is new”. It will NEVER change. Democrats,unions and privileged minorities. All inept.
lol! She can’t even be bothered to proof read her email, “inscrease”. Good one Lenora. With thorough work like that, I am sure your crack team will have the problem solved very soon…
I have 6 AR15’s but have always preferred bolt rifles for accuracy. My 308’s and now this Remington 300 SPS BLKOUT will be my next “very accurate” bolt rifle. Accuracy is what its all about to me….accuracy !