Previous Post
Next Post

“Candidates must realize that reducing gun violence is a winning and moral issue,” The New York Times’ Editorial Board opines over images designed to short-circuit rational thought. “Aggressive turnout by voters who believe this can defeat the N.R.A. at the polls. Until then, the bloodshed will continue.” Yeah, that’ll stop the criminals, crazies and terrorists! Until then more news . . .

Not the FBI (courtesy

Day before Parkland, grandmother foiled grandson’s alleged school shooting plans – Good thing she didn’t contact the FBI

Just a day before the school shooting in Florida that left 17 dead, a Washington state woman handed police her grandson’s journal — which allegedly detailed plans for a mass shooting at his high school.

Catherine Katsel-O’Connor called 911 on Tuesday in Everett, Washington, after she read the journal of her grandson, Joshua Alexander O’Connor, the night before, according to court documents.

She indicated that she was alarmed by the violent sentiments she discovered in the journal — as well as the semi-automatic rifle she found hidden in a guitar case.

Memorial for victims of Parkland, Florida school shooting victims (courtesy

Sheriff promises Florida vigil attendees: Politicians ‘will not get re-elected’ if gun laws don’t change – That’s one theory . . .

Broward County Sheriff Scott Israel made pointed comments on gun control, saying, “If you are an elected official and you want to keep things the way they are and not do things differently, if you wanna keep the gun laws as they are now — you will not get re-elected in Broward County.”

The statements receiving a round of applause and standing ovation from the crowd.


So You Want To Have A Conversation About Gun Control? – I don’t think that word means what the antis think it means.

When you try to conflate the NRA and the KKK, who were on completely different sides of the race debate when they were created, and still are, you’re virtue signaling and look like an idiot. (And it doesn’t matter what you’ve read in some leftist rag by someone else ignorant, no matter what alleged credentials they claim.)

When you claim suppressors allow “silent assassinations,” or speak of “high capacity clips” (sic), or that “bump stocks [sic] turn rifles into machine guns more dangerous than what the military uses,” or reference “the shoulder thing that goes up” or talk about “assault weapons” based on what stock and grip two identical rifles have, you’re being a complete tool. You’re not “saving lives,” you’re not “promoting gun safety,” you’re flapping around like an idiot and making a scene.

If you say you want to “compromise,” you’re lying, because we’ve spent 150 years “compromising” with your ignorant bleats, and, as you admit, have “accomplished nothing.”

So if you have any intellect whatsoever, you should probably take this opportunity to shut the fuck up and let the experts handle it before you kill another patient.

Chelsea Handler Tweet

Judd Apatow: Trump ‘Too Much of a Coward’ to Buck the NRA – And Chelsea Handler’s too stupid to comment on Constitutional rights

A tale of two rifles- AR15 vs. AR10 (courtesy

AR15 vs AR10 , Is Bigger Really Better? A Look at Big vs Little ARs Downrange – Yes, bigger is better. Deal with it.

There’s a reason that so many the best AR15 scopes have the same drop compensation markings for .223 and .308. While not identical and subject to variance depending on bullet types and weights, the trajectories between the two calibers are fairly similar. If you simply want more the energy and momentum of a bigger and fatter bullet, then an AR-10 in the classic .308 caliber might be your Huckleberry.

Where things start to get interesting is with other caliber options presented by the larger magazine well and upper receiver components of the AR-10 rifle platform vs the AR15. With a structure designed to handle longer and fatter cartridges safely, all sort of possibilities open up. While there are others, 6.5mm Creedmoor is a great example. Perhaps that’s why we’re seeing so many AR-10 and other semi-automatic platforms adopting that caliber.

SHOT Show fun (courtesy

A Gun-Control Measure Conservatives Should Consider The National Review favors due process-free “gun violence restraining orders”? FTS.

The concept of the GVRO is simple, not substantially different from the restraining orders that are common in family law, and far easier to explain to the public than our nation’s mental-health adjudications. Moreover, the requirement that the order come from people close to the respondent and that they come forward with real evidence (e.g. sworn statements, screenshots of social-media posts, copies of journal entries) minimizes the chance of bad-faith claims.

Previous Post
Next Post


  1. Well, I guess I’m adding the New York Times to the list of media outlets that cannot be taken seriously.

      • +1
        I get their daily email summary, and I find it rather amazing how often they present the “news” with built-in political analysis.

    • They got a Pulitzer, which they refuse to return, deny or otherwise legitimize, for covering up genocide in 1932. You’re just now adding them?

      • Actually, I didn’t know that was them. I thought the Washington Post (also on my list) made the cover up.

      • NYT is the paper of record, the most comprehensive journalistic record, which like all journalism is imperfect. When juxtaposed to the endless bullsheet on this silly site it is like divine writ

    • The NY Times – a rag such a failure they recently admitted they won’t be printing anything within 10yrs (because no one wants to read their crap). And good riddance

  2. New York born Sheriff whose had his deputies called out dozens of times for Cruz says gun laws need to change.

    No Porky Pig, you and the FBI need to change.

    • Let’s have the sheriff open his files so we can all read what his deputies have written and more as to why they deemed there was nothing to be done. First couple I can see. Numbers 30-36 not so much. Make them public.

    • On the AR-10 vs AR-15 article, a 20″ 6.5 Creed vs a 16″ 308 and 5.56 gun is not exactly a fair comparison especially at distance. Shooting at rifle lengths with carbines seems like a setup for failure from a ballistics standpoint.

      My 18″ 5.56 gun vs my 18″ 243 AR-10 I’m building? Yeah that’d probably do a bit better.

      • I read the article, and it wasn’t meant to be a strict comparison of one style of gun, but in different calibers. IOW, not a, “Which is better? 1911 in .45 or in 9mm?”
        Instead, it was a comparison of different calibers of rifles someone might have in their safe.
        I can find comparisons of 18″ ARs all over the interwebs. I can find articles like the one in question, also, all over the interwebs.
        The article was straightforward in what was attempted. In the comments were many asking for other calibers to be tested, because the commenters had those firearms in their safes. They recognized that this wasn’t a straightforward comparison of rifles identical to each other except in caliber.

      • I finally bought a 24″ .243 WSSM upper from Dtech. I could be more pleased but not by much. I had it tailored for longer heavier bullets and from the performance of my initial loads I don’t think any AR-10 has much if anything on it at distance. I am interested most in mid range performance though and primarily use 90gr monolithics but with 105gr VLDs I imagine it’d hang right in with a 6 or 6.5 Creedmor. I bought 750 cases before I bought the upper to make sure that I could keep shooting even if the remaining trickle of brass production stopped. With Hillbilly and RCC brass in business even that shouldn’t happen anytime soon.

    • New York born? Me too, so that’s all I need to know a politician has to prove he’s done more than just swear to uphold the Constitution, he’s got to understand and apply it also.

  3. I would think that appointed officials(police chiefs and the like) would have to go along with the gun grabbers – because that is who appoints them. Elected officials(Sheriffs and the like) are mostly pro gun ownership for the good people. They know they can not protect the population and that they need help

    • Well, schools will allow kids to take guitars to school. It’s also a nice place to hide your AR-15 from grandma if she didn’t watch Desperado or read your journal.

  4. Wasn’t the Sheriff part of the problem? Aren’t sheriffs elected? I guess he doesn’t want to get re-elected considering his performance.

    • “..Aren’t sheriffs elected?”

      This one is.

      And he is in the bluest part of this otherwise red state when it comes to politics.

    • As a sheriff, he can’t do much more than enforce the laws.
      But, after making statements like this, next cycle he will be running for a legislative seat where he will say he can make a difference by enacting laws that will somehow stop all this violence committed by guns. And he will point to these statements to make his point.
      And the next sheriff will do what he did: ignore the signs.

  5. It’s still Floriduh…all you idiots had to do was put the murdering bastard away during one of your THIRTYNINE trips to his house. Duh😩😖😧😟😡

    • This is not Minority Report. What do you suggest? Keep in mind, whatever you do will have to apply to the rest of the population. What powers do you want the state to have over us?

      • Except he had committed actual crimes that could have been prosecuted. Notwithstanding that, they could have always Martha Stewart’d or Scooter Libby’d him. You know, get him to commit a process “crime” while investigating him. They’ve shown time and time again that they’re not above ensnaring the innocent, why not abuse their power in a more constructive way?

        • Again, we are back to fictional precrime or something you need to do to the entire population. Yes they could have arrested him and thrown him in jail for any trumped up charge, but you have to do it to everyone who fits that profile. I’m guessing 2% of the population, but whatever it is it is not going to be insignificant.

        • CRIME is NOT “pre-crime”. It is reported he beat his mother up,threatened,harrassed and attacked his ex-girlfriend’s boyfriend among other actual crimes. At the very least he should been denied on a 4473. Duh…

        • Fought with his ex-girlfriend’s boyfriend. How many high school kids fall under that. And the cops were called to the house when he was 11 or 12. Why do I get the felling that home was not the best in the world. Yes there are lots of indicators, but exactly how much power do you want to give to the state?

  6. Maybe the Florida High School shooter suffered from D.D.S. (Diversity Dementia Syndrome). Just sayin’!

  7. The NRA’s strength lies in its 5 plus million member, all of whom vote. The coastal elites represented by the NYT don’t have much stroke out here in flyover country. Bring it on.

    • Plus the other 100+ million gun owners who aren’t members of the NRA but vote their guns, anyway.

      • I’ll admit it’s probably my biggest issue. I couldn’t vote for an anti. Maybe I’d vote for someone just agnostic on guns, but never an anti. If you can’t stand for self protection at least what can you stand for/ what are you hoping we’ll fall for?

        • Personally (and this is just me, you can do what you want. The generic “you” applies here, too), I don’t like being a single issue voter. Of course, each issue carries it’s own weight.
          But I have found that those who are anti-gun also happen to be open border enthusiasts, abortion promoting, “diversity” promoting, leftist idiots, looking for the whole world to see as Hillary Clinton (possibly in drag), but hiding some of their more extreme views for the cameras. But it really doesn’t take much digging on the interwebs to find past statements that reveal what’s really going on in their minds.

    • The NRA membership count includes (at the very least) members under 18 and some non-US citizens as well. (both legal residents with hunting licenses and I think some foreigners), so it’s impossible for ALL of them to vote.

      • Nanashi says: The NRA membership count includes (at the very least) members under 18 and some non-US citizens as well. (both legal residents with hunting licenses and I think some foreigners), so it’s impossible for ALL of them to vote.

        So, that’ll knock at least 15-20 kids off the list…
        And THAT’S your best argument? At least pick a real point to debate. Kids are dying because frigging security guards are UNARMED, parents are burying their children because we can’t arm and train teachers, and we’ve one political party that’s ok with men trying to sneak into girl’s bathrooms, and you want to argue the number of child memberships in the NRA? I’m all in favor of you using your right to voice your opinion, but at least pick a worthy topic.
        Whadda you want to fight about next: Chocolate, or Chocolate Fudge… Which is better tasting?

  8. “So you want to have a conversation about gun control”
    Just finished reading several articles by Michael Z. Williamson. The dude is a brilliant writer. Very articulate.
    I’d love to see him versus Michael bloomturd, or some other gun control freak.
    I’d need plenty of pop corn.

    • He is smart on a lot of it, but throwing out the typical anti-gun ignorance on firearms can bite you in the ass if you ever have a debate with someone who know a thing or two about the true effectiveness of firearms.

  9. Some one should’ve yelled out, Isn’t it true Sheriff that YOUR deputies made 39 visits to mr cruz’s home? Is it not also true that the FBI also investigated mr cruz for threats made?
    And yet mr cruz slipped thru the cracks. What gun control law pray tell, would’ve helped you do your job?
    I don’t think it’s Pro-gun politicians WE NEED TO VOTE OUT IN NOVEMBER, IT’s YOU THAT NEEDS TO LEAVE. The blood of the victims is on YOUR hands and on the FBI’s Hands! YOU MR SHERIFF WERE DERELICT IN YOUR DUTY!

  10. Sheriff promises Florida vigil attendees: Politicians ‘will not get re-elected’ if gun laws don’t change –
    Guess how many “gun control” bills Obama passed during his 8 year anointed reign? A total of 0. The first two years with full control of WH, Senate, and House. Obama increased gun owners rights by overturning the Reagan prohibition of private guns in National Parks and George Bush’s prohibition (after 9/11) of guns in Amtrak trains. The Brady Bunch gun control cartel gave Obama an F on gun control legislation. And Obama got re-elected. Res ipsa loquitur. I rest my case your Honor.

    • What? You mean gun control isn’t this super duper winning issue like the progtards say it is? That just isn’t like them to blatantly lie like that…. Oh yeah it is!

  11. “Candidates must realize that reducing gun violence is a winning and moral issue”

    Because that worked so well for Hillary and her campaign.

  12. Liberals like this ‘sherrif’ seek more power through laws when they themselves failed.

    Throw it back at them: why are they racist (most gun control laws affect minories more)? Why are they misogynist (women, children and elderly are at a disadvantage)?
    Why punish the law abiding citizen?
    If the 50-100m gun owners were a problem, you’d know about it.

  13. There it is, defeat the NRA.

    One man commits an act of evil. The FBI goofed on at least 2 tips.

    The NYT board really wants to take this opportunity to direct all existing anger at their political opponents. Hey everybody, they say to their faithful readers, now if the time to hate those who disagree with you politically. They are to blame for this. Point at them.

    And, instead of seeking common ground among groups of disparate politics, lets drive one of the most divisive issues possible. Let’s not discuss metal detectors or improvements in FBI tip managing systems. Let’s raise the issue our country will not agree upon.

  14. “You’re not “saving lives,” you’re not “promoting gun safety,” you’re flapping around like an idiot and making a scene.”

    Picked this up (finally) on my second read. This is very well said, Robert. Two ears and a tail . . .


    By Patrick Tomlinson , Contributor | Aug. 1, 2017, at 8:53 a.m.
    My name is Patrick Tomlinson, and I am a lifelong firearm enthusiast.

    I started shooting at age 10, when my father got me a Crossman 760 Pumpmaster air rifle with Tasco scope. He was one of only three National Rifle Association training counselors in the state of Wisconsin for many years, certifying volunteers who would later go on to instruct citizens in rifle and handgun use, and self-defense. I began shooting competitively through 4-H Club, not long after, eventually shooting air rifle, air pistol and shotgun trap through the program. After 4-H, I went on to shoot small-bore rifle in local competitions. Today, I own four firearms of various kinds, make time to shoot several thousand rounds per year and am licensed through the state to carry a concealed weapon, which I do routinely with a modded Glock.

    As a gun owner and defender of the Second Amendment, I’m here to tell you the NRA has lost its ever-loving mind.

    The nation’s largest firearms organization began its slide into moral degeneracy as late as the early 2000s, when actor Charlton Heston became its five-term president (a feat for which the NRA’s rules had to be changed to allow him to serve longer), before going public with his battle with Alzheimer’s disease and retiring. Under Heston’s firebrand leadership, the NRA’s rhetoric shifted its focus from working with lawmakers across the country to defend Second Amendment rights, to recasting the group as the front-line warrior in a crusade against the entire progressive movement in a culture war that they claimed had engulfed the country.

    [READ: Hackers Demonstrate How Vulnerable Voting Machines Are]

    This took many forms, but included especially harsh attacks on members of the left that opposed the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and equated any sort of compromise on gun-related issues as existential threats to the continued existence of the Second Amendment itself. This period was met with an explosion of gun rights victories at both the state and national level, including the sunsetting in 2006 of the Clinton-era Federal Assault Weapons Ban, rapid adoption of concealed carry licenses across the nation, “stand your ground” laws and the landmark 2008 District of Columbia v. Heller ruling, which cemented the Second Amendment as an individual, rather than a collective right.

    The simple fact is Americans have not enjoyed the degree of freedom and protection in firearms related matters since the passage of the National Firearms Act of 1934, a law ironically supported by the NRA of the time. One would think after a rash of such successes, the organization could afford to tone down the apocalyptic rhetoric, but no. Less than a year after Heller, Barack Obama was sworn in as president, and the NRA’s war on the left entered a new phase.

    For eight years, we heard nothing but fearmongering, hate and vitriol about the insidious intentions of our first black president. Unhinged, fact-free screeds about how he was “coming for our guns” became fixtures of the Rifleman, the NRA’s official magazine. At every convention, at every public event, the fear was ratcheted up among the faithful that at any second, waves of gay-married illegal alien shock troops would come sweeping through our small towns in heels and miniskirts to confiscate our weapons to be melted down to make Tony Awards. This fear pushed gun sales through the roof, causing a run on ammunition that sent prices of both skyrocketing, and only now returning to normal.

    All for a president who, after two full terms, ended with a legislative legacy that only expanded gun rights. No, seriously. Obama only signed two firearm related bills into law. One which allowed concealed carry permit holders to carry on Amtrack trains, and the other which allowed us to carry within the National Park system. Seriously. Look it up.

    [SEE: Gun Control and Gun Rights Cartoons]

    Which brings us to today. With Trump infesting the White House and no convenient Democratic boogeyman (or woman) to scare the children with, the NRA’s rhetoric has moved from merely unhinged to dangerously inflammatory. With the GOP in nominal control of the government, CEO Wayne LaPierre and his cadre of frothing-at-the-mouth lunatics have adjusted their sights away from politicians and turned them onto American citizens en masse.

    In a one-minute ad narrated by the NRA’s newest spokeswoman, Dana Loesch, a conservative talk show host, the organization accused the media, Hollywood, academics, protesters and its favorite target Obama of assassination and terrorism, imploring listeners to “fight the violence” of lies with the “clenched fist” of truth. LaPierre echoed these sentiments during a speech at this year’s Conservative Political Action Conference, or CPAC, where he conflated progressive protests against Trump with the Islamic State group’s desire for violence to bring about a worldwide caliphate.

    As if that wasn’t bad enough, NRA TV host Grant Stinchfield accused the Black Lives Matter movement of trying to start a race war, warning that if the group is successful in its goal of containing the epidemic of unarmed black men being shot by police, white families will be tortured and killed just like in South Africa.

    These are the words and beliefs of a political movement that has utterly lost its way and wandered off the path into fomenting a new civil war.

    A responsible NRA would be working for, not against, universal background checks on all firearms sales. As a responsible gun owner, it’s my job to ensure anyone I transfer a weapon to is in fact legally permitted to possess one. That’s the bare minimum due diligence that should be expected of me, and the vast majority of Americans and even gun owners agree. But not the NRA.

    A safety-conscious NRA would be working for, not against, thorough training requirements for concealed carry permits. Instead, they’re pushing absurd “constitutional carry” laws across the nation that remove all certification requirements to carry a hidden, loaded handgun in public.

    [PHOTOS: The Big Picture – July 2017]

    An NRA worried about guns in the hands of criminals would be working for, not against, better data-sharing between federal and state agencies to tighten the net on felons and domestic abusers who have previously slipped through the cracks. However, even this is somehow a bridge too far for these nut cases.

    And finally, an NRA that was genuinely concerned about defending the Second Amendment rights of all Americans would have pitched an absolute fit over the murder of Philando Castile, a man licensed to carry a weapon by the state of Minnesota, who was gunned down by police while trying to comply with contradictory instructions. I have had half a dozen interactions with police while armed, and I took the exact same actions he did. Guess why I’m alive? Now guess why the race-baiting NRA made no public comments of any kind in defense of Castile’s rights being violated with such violent finality.

    The NRA has moved so far and so fast to the right of the political map, they’ve fallen off land and entered the unknown territories marked only by “here, there be monsters.” They are rapidly becoming one of them. And it’s long past time the majority of truly responsible gun owners stood up and said in a clear voice, “Not in our names.”

    • Note that is just one man’s opinion, or more accurately, hit piece. No doubt some of Bloomberg’s silver lines his pockets.

      Nothing commented by me can be taken seriously as I am fully in the pocket of Bloomberg.

Comments are closed.