Articles by Herschel Smith

From Military Arms:

It’s no secret that many in the media have been holding the NRA accountable for their actions as of late. There are very powerful people within the NRA who stand to lose a lot by the continued loss of members and revenue.

We have friends all over the world and in many communities which include those who reside and work within the realm of the Dark Web. It has been brought to our attention by a source we deem to be credible within this community that a bounty has been placed by a high level NRA operative against all detractors of the organization. The bounty calls for the deplatforming of the media person(s), the hacking of their bank accounts, mortgages, mail servers, etc. The stated goal is to cause  so many personal problems that the person will be focused on that vs. talking about the NRAs activities.

I represent several media people who have been approached with this information. I’m only posting this message so that there is written record that should we be deplatformed, should our accounts be hacked, or should anything else occur that might be destructive to our personal and financial well being, the likely source will be the NRA or an agent acting on their behalf.  We truly hope this information isn’t accurate but we must proceed as if it is given the serious nature of the warning. To this point we have not been victims of any such targeted attacks. If something were to happen after this post is made public, the culprit will be crystal clear.

I will not answer any questions about this statement.

Thank you for the continued support. The fight for our rights will continue and we will not be deterred.

Well, I hope he isn’t deterred.  I am in 100% agreement with his views.

On the other hand, this is a serious allegation and the dark web is a known hide-out for Larpers and liars.  Would the NRA do something like this?  I suppose it will be easy enough to watch and see what happens.  Frankly, I rarely believe much of anything I have ever read over at 4Chan (not that I spend much time there, but I’ve seen a few threads).  Most of the threads are without merit or evidence, with long posts by Larpers followed by replies from people who sound like they’re on dope and can’t construct a complete sentence.

I think I would have waited to see this manifest itself before saying anything.

I think this is fairly well established, and I’m surprised he’s getting any pushback in the comments.  There is this comment though: “Come on…You know as much as I do that the “recoil impulse” you are showing has wayyy more to do with the Center Mass of the bolt being on the center line of the stock on the ar15, and OFF the centerline on all the other rifles!!!”

Not quite.  It has something to do with the recoil impulse being along the axis of the muzzle and the stock, not CoG.  Still, the observations by Tim Harmsen are useful and, in my opinion, correct.

News from Representative Chris Lee of Hawaii.

“The open carry states are ones where everybody gets shot so I think we have a very good record in Hawai’i for gun safety protection and and the fourth lowest gun violence in any state in the union.  It’s a combination of things but one of most important parts of it is that we have strict gun laws.”

Representative Lee says it could be years before the Young case is settled but the top priority for Hawai’i lawmakers is public safety.

“I’ve owned guns in the past; I don’t today but we have an obligation on our part in Hawai’i to make sure that we have the adequate legal protections in place to make sure that it’s not gonna be the wild, wild west …

Drama queen much, Ms. Lee?

From the comments, “The open carry states are ones where everybody gets shot.” Oh yeah, Vermont is a really dangerous state.

Texas too, huh?  Blood in the streets, it is.  Everybody is getting shot.  Everybody.  Because open carry, that’s why.  Everybody.

No exaggeration.  Everybody.  From open carry.

Via reddit, I found this interesting.

I simply cannot see that fully automatic M14 being controllable by anyone, and by any stretch of the imagination.  And why would you have a fully automatic M14 that is magazine-fed, only to interrupt fire to change magazines?  To me, an M249 SAW (fed with drums) is a much better weapon for the purpose.

On the other hand, if all you have is the M14 series of guns, having one capable of selective fire isn’t a bad idea.  It’s just inferior to the SAW.

The Guardian:

In Washington state, a freshly implemented ballot initiative and a raft of new bills may produce some of the tightest firearms regulations in the US. But standing in the way is a group of rural law enforcement officers who say point blank that they won’t enforce any of it.

The Klickitat county sheriff, Bob Songer, is one of them. He told the Guardian that the initiative passed last November “is unconstitutional on several grounds. I’ve taken the position that as an elected official, I am not going to enforce that law”.

Songer also cited ongoing litigation by the National Rife Association gun industry lobby and others which aims to demonstrate the laws violate both the second amendment and the state’s constitution. He also said that if other agencies attempted to seize weapons from county residents under the auspices of the new laws, he would consider preventively “standing in their doorway”.

In November, the state’s voters handily passed an initiative, I-1639, which mostly targeted semi-automatic rifles. As of 1 January, purchasers of these weapons must now be over 21, undergo an enhanced background check, must have completed a safety course, and need to wait 9 days to take possession of their weapon. Also, gun owners who fail to store their weapons safely risk felony “community endangerment” charges.

Feeling the wind at their backs after the ballot, gun campaigners and liberal legislators have now gone even further in the new legislative session. Bills introduced in the last week to Washington’s Democrat-dominated legislature look to further restrict firearms. Some laws would ban high capacity magazines and plastic guns made with 3D printers. Others would mandate training for concealed carry permits, and remove guns and ammo during and after domestic violence incidents.

Washington’s attorney general, Bob Ferguson, who proposed several of the bills, said in an email: “Now is the time to act. Washingtonians have made it clear that they support common-sense gun safety reforms.”

Kristen Ellingboe, from Washington’s Alliance for Gun Safety, which has long campaigned for more firearms restrictions, said that “for a long time our elected officials thought that gun violence protection was somehow controversial, but they have been behind where the people of Washington are on this issue”.

But like other west coast states, Washington exhibits a deep cultural and political divide between its populous, coastal cities and its more sparsely populated rural hinterland.

I-1639 passed on a roughly 60-40 split; in the big, blue counties west of the Cascade Mountains, such as King county, where Seattle is located, the margins were even bigger.

However, 27 of Washington’s 39 counties rejected the ballot measure. Many of those counties are in the state’s more rural, sparsely populated districts.

It is in these counties that many – including sworn officers – are promising to resist the laws.

In Ferry county in eastern Washington, more than 72% of voters rejected I-1639. In the county’s only incorporated city, Republic, the police chief Loren Culp asked the council in November to declare the city a “second amendment sanctuary”. That vote has been delayed until March, but in the meantime, like Songer, Culp says he will not enforce.

The sheriff in Ferry county, Ray Maycumber, told the Guardian that he would not be enforcing the laws either, at least until the NRA’s litigation is completed.

“There’s a window of time when I get to make the assessment”, he said. Should the NRA not succeed, he said, he would “consider if I want to go on in the job”.

The “sanctuary” idea has caught on with other rightwing activists. Matt Marshall is the leader of the Washington Three Percent, a patriot movement group which has held several open carry rallies in downtown Seattle in the last year.

Marshall is attempting to persuade rural Washington counties to adopt local second amendment sanctuary ordinances. Next week, together with the Patriot Prayer founder and former Senate candidate Joey Gibson, he is addressing a meeting of Lewis and Pierce counties to try to persuade them to adopt resolutions which would mean that the gun laws were not enforced.

The refusal of law enforcement officers to enforce the new restrictions plays into a longer history of so-called “constitutional” sheriffs resisting the gradual tightening of gun laws. There are also hints, in the stance, of the doctrine of “county supremacy”, long nursed on the constitutionalist far right, which holds that county sheriffs are the highest constitutional authority in the country.

Oh no.  Please, not more of the nullification crap that’s never going to happen?  I don’t really care if there are Sheriffs who refuse to enforce these laws.

Here is my question for those Sheriffs: “When hard times come, and the state police, or the ATF, or some other agency, comes to enforce those unconstitutional laws, will you then use the power of your office to arrest those trying to enforce the laws and throw them in jail?”

Actually, I have two other pragmatic and related questions.  “Do your direct reports all support you in this project?”  And “Do you have an understanding with the local judges to keep them in prison so that your project doesn’t get scuttled on the legal system?”

Tell me those things, and then I’ll make up my mind on your project.

WSJ:

Dustin Coleman has bought a booth at the National Rifle Association’s annual convention for his shooting accessories company for the past three years.

But last month, he canceled his reservation and donated the $1,400 rental fee to a rival group, the Firearms Policy Coalition. His reason: The NRA, the nation’s leading Second Amendment group with 5.5 million members, is no longer pro-gun enough.

It’s their own fault.    It doesn’t matter if there was “overwhelming legislative support for proposals that went far beyond these specific devices,” and there is still no evidence to this day that bump stocks were used in the Las Vegas shooting.  I defy the authors to produce it.  A picture proves nothing at all, and given that the ATF was never allowed to examine the firearms by the FBI, I doubt anything the FBI has to say about the incident.  This is one of the reasons I recommended that independent analysts be contracted to examine the firearms and crime scene.

The NRA could have thrown their weight around, threatened to score every vote, pour money into reelection campaigns coming up, and expose every politician for their work behind the scenes.  Or in other words, the NRA could have done their jobs.

Instead, Trump did it for them in an end run around the constitution.  That tells me that the politicians were scared.  Good.  They should have been, and we should have queued this up for them to deal with in order to expose them.  The NRA gave Trump cover to keep the politicians covert.

I don’t want to hear any excuses.  I consider all of them completely unacceptable.

Is the NRA in trouble with its base?  That depends.  The Fudds will always defend the NRA – right up until their bolt action hunting rifles and shotguns are confiscated and taken down to the local armory for “safe keeping.”  Or in other words, right up until their own Ox gets gored.

David Codrea:

Is it realistic to expect companies to turn down lucrative law enforcement deals? Probably not, because the activist portion of gun owners is but a fraction of the total population, those selling to enforcement agencies inarguably make some of the finest guns in the market, and the citizen militia system needed to take up the slack has been suppressed by a political design that in turn has been allowed by apathy. But what we can do is be aware of who’s involved in such deals, use what sway as customers that we have to influence corporate decision-making, individually boycott those companies we take umbrage with, and importantly, to patronize the enterprises that have taken a public stand on the side of “We the people” even when it affects their bottom lines.

Most of the sway we have is in pressing back against it when gun manufacturers toy with support for gun control efforts, such as when Marty Daniels courted “Fix-NICS.”  I doubt that we would be successful in persuading large manufacturers like Savage or Ruger to examine the politics of their contracts before they fulfill them.

But the answer to David’s question is ‘yes’, and I’m not sure that can be changed.

Fox News:

Liberal billionaire Michael Bloomberg bemoaned the lack of a private armed security force at Johns Hopkins University, his alma mater, due to the murder rate in Baltimore.

The former mayor of New York City, who’s likely to run for president in 2020, has long been an advocate for gun control, but his comments on Tuesday raised eyebrows and accusations that his support of an armed private force on campus were at odds with his views on gun control.

“When you have a city that has the murder rate that Baltimore has, I think it’s ridiculous to think that they shouldn’t be armed,” Bloomberg told reporters after a meeting at Maryland’s Statehouse in Annapolis with Democratic lawmakers and state Attorney General Brian Frosh, according to the Baltimore Sun.

Bloomberg: “I believe in guns, but only for my peeps who protect and defend me.  You don’t get them.  Suck it, peasants.”

Via Kenny and WiscoDave, this:

There aren’t many places in the U.S. where coyotes aren’t breeding pups, including Central Park in New York City, Scotten said. The canines’ native habitat was once the dry, open expanses of the western United States. But like humans, coyotes have slowly expanded their territory across the nation by quickly adapting to disturbances in their natural habitats.

Coyotes have learned to thrive in the same urban development that has caused other predator populations to decline. They can cross bridges, swim canals, and navigate sidewalks while hunting for food, Scotten said.

A coyote’s dream home, though, would be in a suburb like Bloomingdale, where densely packed developments are surrounded by farms and pastureland — a small taste of the open range prairies they used to roam.

“Now, especially in areas like Bloomingdale, the coyotes appear to be living in rural environments but coming in to urban areas to get food since its easier,” Scotten said.

Humans likely brought the first coyotes to Florida to train hunting dogs in the 1920s, but many scientists believe they now fill the role in Florida’s ecosystem that red wolves left behind. The animals help keep Florida’s rodent, raccoon and fox populations in check, but are known to prey on cattle, turkeys, chickens or unsuspecting house pets.

And humans too.  Like The Alaskan says:

Lethal control works. Alaska uses aerial wolf control to manage wolf populations as well as long term hunting and trapping seasons with generous bag limits. Wolves will have dramatic impacts on moose and caribou populations if allowed to increase in numbers unchecked. Natives in western Alaska will tell you that there was never any moose in western Alaska until wolf suppression was initiated. Moose in Alaska have been expanding their range because of wolf (lethal) control. State Fish and Wildlife personnel use aircraft to control wolf populations. Abundant moose and caribou populations are the result.

Your pig problems could be managed the same way. Aerial lethal suppression coupled with an open hunting season on pigs until you achieve the numbers, in terms of managed populations, that you want.

If eradication is your goal, then lethal removal is the only option. If the State is serious, your pig problem can be solved.

Remember, countless millions of bison, packs of wolves, plains grizzles and the prairie chickens (extinct,) were removed from the great plains with single shot front-stuffers (in large part.)

The scoped AR seems IMO, to be the best platform for ground based pig control. What fun!

We’re just not killing them.  If we don’t kill them because of gun laws, then they’ll kill your pets and sometimes hunt you down too.  Make your choice.

Yahoo:

The Supreme Court agreed Tuesday to jump back into the national debate over gun rights after nearly a decade on the sidelines.

The justices agreed to consider a petition backed by gun owners’ groups asking them to strike down New York City’s strict rules for carrying legally owned guns outside the home.

[ … ]

City officials argued that more liberal transporting policies in effect until 2001 were abused. While the policies were intended to allow gun owners to take unloaded guns only to target ranges outside the city, some guns were found loaded, or far from ranges, or on airplanes.

“Unlike golf clubs and musical instruments, firearms present public safety risks that the city has a legitimate interest in protecting against,” their brief to the court said. “Limiting their possession and use in public minimizes the risk of gun violence.”

Slate:

There are good answers to these questions. Right-to-carry laws, like those in Texas, appear to contribute to violent crime and increase homicide rates. Individuals carrying a weapon are more likely to escalate incidents of road rage and domestic conflicts into fatal shootings. Cities and states have a strong interest in curbing individuals’ ability to bring deadly weapons into the streets.

The bolded sections indicate the naïve belief in myths and fairy tales.  The myth is that prohibition effects law-abiding citizens in people who would otherwise be criminals.  The entirety of history runs counter to this myth, but myths and fairy tales die hard.

But the perpetrators (cops) don’t believe the myths.  They just don’t want to give up their “only one” rights.  The real believers are folks like the author at Slate, who must be mistaking the law abiding – who rarely will use firearms due to the knowledge that most prosecutors put another notch in the belt for every law abiding gun owner they can prosecute – for the real danger, i.e, cops.

Cops, who shoot Chihuahuas, invade the wrong home, pull guns on people for no good reason, kill each other in the line of duty, shoot the wrong person, routinely lose their guns, discharge firearms at moving vehicles in a busy intersection, engage in more wrong home raids, aim poorly, shoot unwisely and kill the wrong person, shoot people who are not the intended targets, fight with lawful gun carriers, cause negligent discharges, engage in more wrong home raids, engage in rolling gun battles where they discharge 600 rounds in crowded streets, shoot innocent people, burn toddlers in SWAT raids, lose their guns in dance floor moves, shoot innocent children, engage in more wrong home SWAT raids, have more negligent discharges, shoot heroes who stop shootings, shoot more heroes who stop shootings, shoot kidnapping victims, engage in more wrong home SWAT raids, use their guns like hammers, shoot more innocent people, shoot an innocent man during a SWAT raid, lose machine guns, shoot themselves, pull guns on the wrong people, engage in more negligent discharges, shoot photographers, shoot each other, violate the rules of gun safety, shoot innocent victims, unholster guns in road rage incidents, shoot dogs, kill more innocent people, shoot each other, point guns at each other, shoot more innocent people, engage in more rolling gun battles, have more negligent discharges, throw grenades at babies, shoot people with dementia, shoot their own children, shoot into day care facilities, shoot each other, engage in more wrong home raids, pull guns on seven year olds, shoot more dogs, engage in more wrong home SWAT raids, point guns at each other, violate the rules of gun safety and shoot each other, shoot more dogs, engage in more negligent discharges, shoot more dogs, point guns at each other, engage on more negligent discharges, shoot each other, engage in more negligent discharges, engage in more negligent discharges, kill more dogs, engage in more negligent discharges, engage in more negligent discharges, shoot each other, engage in more negligent discharges, kill more dogs, kill more dogs, engage in more wrong home SWAT raids, kill more dogs, point guns at politicians, fire guns in court, kill more dogs, engage in moe wrong home SWAT raids, engage in more negligent discharges, lose more machine guns, engage in more wrong home raids, engage in more wrong home raids, lose more machine guns, kill disabled war veterans in their own home, shoot each other, shoot more dogs, and I could go on for hours more.

So I don’t want to hear another damn word about gun safety.  Can you grok that?

And by the way just to reiterate what I’ve said so many times before, my rights come from the Almighty maker of heaven and earth, not the constitution.  The constitution is a covenant between men, nothing more.