Articles by Herschel Smith

Morning Sentinel:

In his current constituent response about the gun-control discussion and legislative proposals, Sen. Angus King says he has serious reservations about limiting “assault weapons” as there is “too much emphasis on the cosmetic appearance of particular firearms rather than their actual functionality.”

A carefully presented NRA tutorial is being circulated among pro-gun control folks about the “assault weapon” misnomer. It’s real intent, though, is to say that if you can’t distinguish an “assault weapon” by definition, then your case for limiting anything is questionable.

The gun control effort is not about cosmetics nor technical definitions of weaponry and does not seek to obliterate anyone’s Second Amendment rights.

This so-called “assault” on gun owner’s rights is not a high-capacity, rapid-fire onslaught against all guns nor their owners. It is, however, a limited capacity onslaught where the outcome will be a lessening of deaths.

Limited capacity onslaught.  It’s okay if only 15 or so people die.  Exceeding that threshold crosses the line, however.  It rankles the sensibilities of all good Americans.  Just kill fewer people if you’re going to perpetrate such a heinous act.  We won’t talk about what higher capacity could possibly do for the man who’s trying to stop the heinous act.

Limited capacity onslaught.  There you have it.  Schoolchild logic in today’s America.

The media outlet biases the report for the readers:

It’s a case where it appears concealed carry worked.

West Allis Police confirm that early this Tuesday a man used a gun to stop an attack on a woman.  That man had a concealed carry permit for the weapon.

A man who knew that victim was attacking her near 102nd and Lincoln.  The good samaritan happened on the attack.  He jumped into action, pulling out his gun.  He never fired, but he used the gun to hold the suspect until police arrived.

“It appears to have worked well where nobody was injured as a result of the use of the weapon,” West Allis Police Chief Charles Padget told us.

Police arrested the suspect and the woman is recovering.  The chief says it appears the good samaritan did everything right.  The District Attorney’s office will still review the use of the weapon.  The DA will also investigate the original attack.

It’s amazing, no?  It’s actually a case where “concealed carry worked.”  First of all, the tools that write this claptrap should read a little more.  Guns are used every day in America to stop crimes and save lives.

Second, concealed carry only worked because this person happened to be concealing his hand gun.  Wisconsin is a traditional open carry state, and it’s possible that the perpetrator wouldn’t have even committed the crime had he seen someone openly carrying a weapon.  It would have “worked” equally well if the individual had been openly carrying and had used his weapon to stop the attack.

The hint in the article is also that it “worked” because the weapon wasn’t discharged.  Let’s be clear.  If the perpetrator had attacked the person with the weapon and he had discharged the weapon in response, it still “worked.”

It always “works” when a weapon is used to stop a violent crime, as long as we stipulate that a life was in peril.  That’s the point.  The only thing he couldn’t do – and neither can the LEOs because of Tennessee Versus Garner – is detain the perpetrator by discharging his weapon.  And he didn’t.  So that worked too.

It “worked” all around, and it does in American every day.

Liberal rag The Raw Story has a piece on Ted Nugent.

Gun rights activist and musician Ted Nugent claimed in a radio interview on Monday that he killed more than 450 pigs with a machine gun while shooting from a helicopter. According to the website RumorFix, Nugent made the claim in an interview with Brett Winterble on Sirius XM Radio and said that he dedicated the kill to HBO host Bill Maher and “all those other animal freaks out there.”

“I took my machine gun in the helicopter — in the Texas hill country – me and my buddy ‘Pigman’ … his name is ‘Pigman’ – I’m the swine czar,” said Nugent. “I killed 455 hogs with my machine gun. i did it for Bill Maher and all those other animal rights freaks out there.”

Boasting that the weapon he used fired 750 rounds a minute, the right-wing provocateur said, “My haters will hate me more for that.”

According to the Associated Press, the state of Texas awards prize money during an annual three-month event in which hunters are urged to kill as many feral pigs as they can. The animals have bred out of control in the Texas wilderness and cause millions of dollars in crop and property damage every year.

“We saved the environment from the destruction of these out-of-control pigs,” said the Michigan-born rocker, “and I’m not talking about Washington D.C. or San Francisco … I’m actually talking about actual pigs.”

He went on to say that “we distributed tons of the most delicious pork to the soup kitchens and homeless shelters of this state. Everything we did was perfect – win win win. I had to adjust my halo as I was machine gunning hogs.”

Given the blight on the landscape that feral pigs are, Ted did a good thing, of course.  But take a look at the comments.

Ah.  To be so hated.  One can only admire and hope.

The Obama administration is planning never before seen intrusions into the private affairs of U.S. citizens.

The Obama administration is drawing up plans to give all U.S. spy agencies full access to a massive database that contains financial data on American citizens and others who bank in the country, according to a Treasury Department document seen by Reuters.

This will split our fiber backbone signals and dump every 1 and 0 that transverses it into government computers.  Every detail of life of all citizens is now subject to inspection and assessment by government overlords who can and will make decisions as to so-called “terrorist activity,” which could be al Qaeda or perhaps unorganized militia who prepare for any threat against the U.S., foreign or domestic.

This knowledge should be coupled with another stunning intrusion into our God-given rights we learned about today.  Bob Owens has a report for us.

Chuck Schumer’s S. 374, the Orwellian “Protecting Responsible Gun Sellers Act of 2013,” has been an empty shell… until he slipped in Amendment ALB13180 (PDF) today, which shows the “teeth” of the bill.  It is an extremely aggressive attempt to destroy the Second Amendment by isolating and criminalizing extremely common behaviors among gun owners.

Doubt me?

Take a looking at a sampling of what it Sebastian notes it would outlaw:

• If you leave home for more than 7 days and leave anyone at home, that becomes a felony illegal transfer. 5 years in prison for each of you.

• if you take a friend shooting and allow him to fire your gun, that is a felony illegal transfer. 5 years in prison for each of you.

• If you have a gun lost or stolen and don’t report it within 24 hours, you’ve committed a felony. 5 years in prison.

• If you lend a gun to someone for to try out at the range, provide a loaner for a student in training, let your son shoot a rifle you purchased while hunting, or provide a gun to a woman for self-defense, you’ve committed a felony. 5 years in prison for each of you.

Bob ends his assessment with the following almost desperate interdiction.

It’s inching closer.

May God have mercy on us all.

See also reaction at WRSA.  It’s possible, of course, to forestall such an eventuality, even if unlikely.  For example, the states who are currently considering or have passed laws against enforcement of federal gun laws could actually take their state laws seriously.

If such a federal law were to pass, a state could decide to confiscate and immediately destroy all form 4473s in all FFLs in their state, and warn FFLs to contact state police if any ATF agents enter their premises.  State police could arrest any federal agents who attempted to enforce federal gun laws and place them into the general prisoner population in state penitentiaries.  Threats to arrest state police or stop these actions could be met with National Guard troops to further effectuate the arrest of federal agents and enforce a cease and desist action to all federal employees, including federal judges who moved against such actions.

But this would have to happen all across the nation for it to be effective, and I find it unlikely that a governor would take these actions, regardless of the posturing that we currently see by the states.  The concept of States’ rights has fallen too hard and too far, and federalism has lost its appeal in the U.S.

Short of something like this, I am becoming increasingly pessimistic about a possible recovery of our national character.  When the people demand cradle to grave security and overwatch, the state responds with cradle to grave demand for omniscience for itself and cradle to grave compliance by the people.  It’s a deal with the devil for our soul, and America has made it a long time ago.

If this sounds judgmental, then I plead guilty.  Based on religious doctrine, which the epistemologists might call strongly held truth value, or incorrigible beliefs, I hold that gun control is evil.

The Bible does contain a few direct references to weapons control. There were many times throughout Israel’s history that it rebelled against God (in fact, it happened all the time). To mock His people back into submission to His Law, the Lord would often use wicked neighbors to punish Israel’s rebellion. Most notable were the Philistines and the Babylonians. 1 Samuel 13:19-22 relates the story: “Not a blacksmith could be found in the whole land of Israel, because the Philistines had said, “Otherwise the Hebrews will make swords or spears!” So all Israel went down to the Philistines to have their plowshares, mattocks, axes, and sickles sharpened…So on the day of battle not a soldier with Saul and Jonathan had a sword or spear in this hand; only Saul and his son Jonathan had them.” Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon also removed all of the craftsmen from Israel during the Babylonian captivity (2 Kings 24:14). Both of these administrations were considered exceedingly wicked including their acts of weapons control.

Gun control is like control over everything else.  The key word here is control.  It is at one and the same time a function of wicked rulers and a benchmark, or barometer or gauge, to measure their wickedness.  God doesn’t cede or relinquish rule over His creation for mankind, and totalitarian governance usurps the authority He demands over the actions of mankind.  God will not be mocked – He does the mocking.

God sits in the heavens and laughs and scoffs at the designs of man (Psalm 2:4).  Here is a warning to totalitarian rulers.  “Do homage to the Son, lest He become angry, and you perish in the way.”  Judgment will come, here or in the hereafter, and perhaps sooner and more unexpectedly than you think.

The only explanation for Senator Schumer’s totalitarian dictates is that he believes that Americans will go along with it.  To be sure, there are many who will … who will take measure of the situation and decide that they value peace and security over measurements of right and wrong.

But there are many who will not go along with such laws.  They will not allow themselves or their children or their friends or loved ones to be imprisoned for failing to take their weapons to a public armory when they go on trips, or loaning a rifle to their son to learn to shoot at the range.

We have covered this ground before.  Bob reacted the way he did because he understands in a way that the totalitarians and wicked rulers in Washington do not.  These measures will not stand.  They will fall, one way or the other.

Will our wicked rulers turn back before it’s too late?  Only God knows, but only time will tell us.  Here is a final warning: do not cross lines from which there is no return.

In the mean time, this isn’t your father’s country.  Welcome to Amerika!

UPDATE: Thanks to David Codrea for the attention.

The professor:

WOULD MANDATORY GUN OWNERSHIP violate citizens’ constitutional rights? No, because it’s an exercise of Congress’s power to arm the militia under Article I, section 8. In fact, the Militia Act of 1792 required adult males to own guns and ammunition.

I would also point out that it wouldn’t diverge at all from common practice during colonial America.

In the colonies, availability of hunting and need for defense led to armament statues comparable to those of the early Saxon times. In 1623, Virginia forbade its colonists to travel unless they were “well armed”; in 1631 it required colonists to engage in target practice on Sunday and to “bring their peeces to church.” In 1658 it required every householder to have a functioning firearm within his house and in 1673 its laws provided that a citizen who claimed he was too poor to purchase a firearm would have one purchased for him by the government, which would then require him to pay a reasonable price when able to do so. In Massachusetts, the first session of the legislature ordered that not only freemen, but also indentured servants own firearms and in 1644 it imposed a stern 6 shilling fine upon any citizen who was not armed.  When the British government began to increase its military presence in the colonies in the mid-eighteenth century, Massachusetts responded by calling upon its citizens to arm themselves in defense.

The seventeenth century was a long time ago, no?

David Codrea:

Dear Capt. Kelly,

Houston, we have a problem: Your story makes no sense.

You’re against rifles like the semiautomatic AR-15, which look like weapons of war, when you know full well the military doesn’t use them, but instead uses the select fire-capable M16. Yet you go to a dealer to buy a .45, a sidearm, which was actually, in your words, “designed for the military.” I’m not following your logic here.

You say as you were leaving the gun store, you noticed a used AR-15 and bought that, too. You then complain about your background check, and use that to attack private sales which don’t undergo background checks. I’m not following your logic here.

Consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds.  Or at least this is so for progressives.  Recall:

Yes, the left still loves guns.  There is no other reason for the fawning acceptance of the vulgar SWAT raid tactics in which innocent men like Mr. Eurie Stamps get shot and killed.  These tactics are repeated all across America every day. The left just doesn’t love guns in the wrong hands, and anyone who isn’t an agent of the state is the wrong hands.

Read the rest at Examiner.  Mr. Kelly doesn’t feel the need to be consistent like he demands for the little people.  He’s special and we’re not.  We’re the little people.  We look to the government for our protection, but he decided that he can do better than that for himself.

So thinks and lives our elitist rulers.

In the spirit of the amusing names we have been called, from Stone Age Vigilantes, to Tinfoil Hat Bircher NRA Peckerwood With A Long Gun, to finally the realm of people without much education or any sort of consistent dental care who live in trailers with 30 cats and have an NRA sticker on their $400 car, today brings a new one.

Gun paranoiacs.  I’m so conflicted.  I can’t decide which one I like the best.  I think stone age vigilante appeals to me the most.  How about you?

Ammoland has two extremely depressing reports.  We already knew that Eric Cantor and Paul Ryan were pretend conservatives with plans to cave on universal background checks.  This first report makes it sound even worse.

[The] Republican Majority Leader is leading the charge to cut a deal with President Obama.

The following are just some of the threats to innocent school children and our God-given 2nd Amendment liberties that Republicans are about to shove down our throats:

1.The NRA is cutting backroom deals to centralize gun owner data collection into the Obama/Holder massive government data base.

A centralized system is less costly to fight and far more lucrative for the NRA to appear to be “fixing“.

Like all establishment political lobbies the key to their job security is assisting in making problems they end up being called upon to “fix“.

2. Republican Majority Leader Eric Cantor is leading the charge to give Obama and Holder what they want in exchange for appearing to be “fixing” the problem of innocent children being butchered in our public and private schools.

3. Newly appointed Republican Judiciary Chairman, Bob Goodlatte R-VA 6th District, is providing political cover for the sneaky back room gun control deals and gun grabbing sell outs that his political masters – – John Boehner and Eric Cantor – – are cutting with Obama and his corrupt Attorney General, Eric Holder.

Political insiders have confirmed to me,  that Goodlatte earned his brand new chairmanship by ignoring the constitutional demands and grievances of every Republican Unit Chairman in his own 6th district.

And for the second report.

You might think that with Republicans in control of the US House of Representatives there would be no way ANY gun control legislation could reach the floor.

But sadly we are already beginning to see so-called “conservative champions” folding to pressure from the anti-gun media to sell-out gun owners.

Former Vice Presidential candidate, Congressman Paul Ryan, has stated that he would support legislation that bans private sales at gun shows.

In the House, Majority Leader Eric Cantor, along with the help of Rep. Scott Rigell (VA), Patrick Meehan (PA) and others, have stated openly that they will work together with anti-gun Democrats from Maryland and New York to tighten restrictions on private firearms sales and expand background checks.

Possibly even more upsetting has been Senator Tom Coburn’s willingness to work alongside anti-gunner Chuck Schumer (NY) to propose “bi-partisan” anti-gun legislation in the Senate.

Make no mistake, so-called “expansion” of background checks is little more than a blatant attempt by anti-gunners to register all firearms and gun owners in America.

That is why Representatives Steve Stockman (TX-36) and Paul Broun (GA-10) have drafted a letter to Speaker Boehner and the Republican leadership urging them to require the support of the majority of Republican members in the House before bringing any anti-gun bills to the floor.

This so-called “Hastert Rule” would mean that 117 Republicans would have to support a particular bill before it had any chance of getting a floor vote, not just the support of the anti-gun elitist in leadership.

Such political ploys would be unnecessary if the GOP weren’t filled with such weasels.  I cannot vouch for the accuracy of these reports, but I have followed Cantor and Ryan for a while now on firearms freedoms and gun rights, and it doesn’t surprise me in the least.

It’s fascinating that the GOP leadership would be willing to sacrifice their careers on the altar of political correctness.  And it will cost them their careers.  I don’t know how else to say it other than to keep repeating myself.  The gun owners who recently waited in lines for three or more hours to pay exorbitant prices for guns were not repeat buyers (long time gun owners like me already had most of the firearms we wanted and so we are purchasing ammunition now).  They were first time buyers.

I’ve watched them at the ranges.  I have overheard their conversations, I have watched them at the gun stores and gun shows.  I have heard their relatively ignorant questions (not ignorant because they’re stupid, but because they’re in the process of learning).  They are not us.  We already have guns.  These are new gun owners.  The polls they are trotting out to show the number of gun owners  decreasing are all lies.

I don’t know whether the questions aren’t being honestly answered or what other source there could be for the error.  But the polls are in error.  Don’t believe them.  And as for older gun owners like me, and even the newer gun owners like I have monitored for the past half year, we have made it clear with our voices and wallets.  No new gun laws.  None.  Period.  Not one more inch.  Not one.

Is this so hard to understand?  Note to legislators.  Tread carefully.  Don’t cross lines from which there is no return.

UPDATE: Sebastian believes that this is weak tea.  Whatever.  Look, I said that I could not vouch for the source of this information.  What I did say is that Cantor and Ryan are essentially dead to me.  They have both advocated universal background checks before, and that fact is undeniable.  Coming to their defense is strange and not at all something I would do.  What I also said is that the general thrust of the reports doesn’t surprise me based on my previous work to follow these two sellouts (and I do mean to say that Paul Ryan and Eric Cantor are sellouts – you simply cannot convince me otherwise because you don’t have the evidence).  Also, not that I dislike Breitbart.com, but I have never read anything they had to say about this issue.  What is the source behind the Ammoland reports?  They will have to answer that.  Finally, I note that Sebastian didn’t interact with me on this issue, just Ammoland.

After some mind numbing repetition of things we already knew, this Fox Business article does a good job of updating us on the status of things with at least some of the gun manufacturers.

According to a report from the NSSF, Connecticut stands to lose 1,768 jobs, $13.5 million in business tax revenue and $450 million in economic activity if Colt, Mossberg & Sons and Stag Arms move elsewhere.

Overall, the firearms industry accounts for $1.75 billion in economic activity and 7,340 direct and indirect jobs in Connecticut.

“A lot of these manufacturers have called Connecticut home for years, but now that they continue to be vilified, they have to consider if they want to stay,” McGuigan said, adding that local communities heavily rely on many firearms manufacturers.

Stag Arms is one of those companies. Located in New Britain, Conn., Stag Arms has become a well-known manufacturer of modern sporting rifles and employs nearly 200 people. It hired 40 new people last year amid 60% growth, and is working on a one-year backlog of 70,000 rifles. But with the uncertainty there over a potential ban on its products, Stag Arms put further expansion in a fourth factory building on hold.

Would the company consider moving in the wake of a Connecticut gun ban? “Absolutely,” Stag Arms President and CEO Mark Malkowski said. “If the state’s not going to be supportive, we have to consider moving.”

The possibility that Mossberg or Colt would relocate had occurred to me.  However, I was unaware that Stag Arms would consider moving.  This is a positive sign.  I’m also waiting on Magpul to announce their formal plans to relocate, if their words are to be believed.

Bob Owens was first to the report about Remington remaining in New York, and in fact, expanding their production facilities there.  This is disappointing to me, and – mark my words – this decision will harm Remington.  Just recently it was announced that Remington won an $80 million contract for a new sniper rifle for the U.S. Army.

Big news, right?  Well, take a quick look at comments over reddit/guns.  No one is thrilled, no one is congratulating Remington, no one is praising the civilian unavailability of this rifle, and no one is willing to pay this price for a weapon like this.

We await decisions by Beretta, Stag Arms, Magpul, Mossberg, Kimber, Springfield Armory, and Rock River Arms.  Contact me at any time.

Kurt Hofmann deals with this silly notion in the MSM these days that the number of gun owners is declining.  It’s a false assertion, but after addressing it, Kurt observes:

The gun prohibitionists want lowered gun ownership not only because they dislike guns and gun owners, though. The NYT article cuts to the chase:

“It also raises questions about the future politics of gun control. Will efforts to regulate guns eventually meet with less resistance if they are increasingly concentrated in fewer hands — or more resistance?”

The notion that gun ownership is declining is an article of faith among advocates of oppressive gun laws, because it is, after all, easier to trample the rights of minorities, as we have discussed before. As noted in that column, this is likely the reason that groups like the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence so often describe the U.S. as a “democracy,” rather than acknowledging that we live in a republic.

Yes, and here is another article that describes an analogous concept, where local LEOs are in charge of deciding who may have a concealed handgun permit (or even permit to purchase) in lieu of “shall issue” statutes.

South Carolina is currently considering legalization of open carry.  Texas is also considering such a law, and while there are all kinds of irrational fears that grip legislators when they consider this kind of thing, I can assure them that nothing they fear comes to pass.  I live in an open carry state, and the sky does not fall every day.

These are Jim Crow laws, and the idea behind them is the same as the one behind demonization of gun owners in general that Kurt analyzes.  The difference here, and something that the legislators should consider, is that we won’t be easy to trample underfoot.  We have guns.

Note to legislators.  Tread carefully.  Don’t cross lines from which there is no return.