Archive for the 'Guns' Category

Our stolid friend James Fallows at The Atlantic has yet another dense post up mainly consisting of letters to him and a few lines in reply.  There’s not much to see, except that he does make an admission that brings a much-needed breath of fresh air.

I understand that the AR-15 is not functionally unique. Thus anyone who argues that the AR-15 should not be in civilian hands should be willing to extend the argument to similar weapons. That’s what I think about the AR-15, and and I say the same thing about functionally similar weapons.

Good.  It’s a healthy and helpful thing to speak honestly about such matters.  This whole thing began some years ago with arguments over select-fire and the definition of assault rifle, the smaller caliber cartridge and whether it is any good for deer hunting, the value of a pistol grip, the “scary looking” features of the AR-15, the standard capacity magazine, its semi-automatic design, and on and on it went.

These were merely the first steps in the dance.  We’re way past that now.  Honesty has demanded that the progressives admit their demands, and honesty has demanded that we reply.  The definition of “military” is nonsensical anyway, and we all know it.

There was an article recently about Glock making their “military-grade” pistol available to civilians.  This means that it’s a Glock with a flat dark earth finish and pretentions of being modular.  Nothing more.  And truthfully, all weapons are “military grade.”

Let’s talk 30-06 bolt action deer rifles.  Yep.  Ask those whom Carlos Hathcock killed in Vietnam to speak from the grave and tell you all about that 30-06 round that hit them from a Winchester bolt action gun.  Marines were still using Winchester bolt action rifles for DM guns at the beginning of OIF, and most sniper rifles in military use today are bolt action.  How about 30-06 semi-automatic?  Yep.  The M1 Garand.  WWII.  And how about semi-automatic or automatic carbine?  Yep.  The M1 Carbine.  WWII.

How about shotguns?  Yep.  The Marine Corps was using Benelli M4s for room clearing in Now Zad, Afghanistan, during OEF.  How about revolvers?  Yep.  They were the sidearm for many years, and today .357 Magnum and .44 Magnum wheel guns are still in use defending homes and against big predators in America.

No one who knows anything should have to ask about Browning’s best design of his life, the 1911, which is still the most expensive handgun that can be purchased.  The point is that there is no such thing as a weapon that hasn’t been used on the field of battle between countries or various actors, and it makes no sense to argue over whether something is called “military grade.”  We’ve got virtually everything the military has ever had, and vice versa (except that the professional precision rifle shooters probably have better guns than the military).

The freshness about what Fallows said is that he admits that there is no stopping point, and that’s good, because logically he’s right.  And the freshness for us is actually not all that fresh, I just don’t think Fallows is hearing it, or perhaps he’s hearing it, but he just doesn’t believe it.

No.  We won’t give them up.  Period.  Your move.

Every time a new contract is issued for weapons and ammunition, the typical cacophony of comments follow.  Those who think that the FedGov has too many guns and too much ammunition weigh in, and invariably (perhaps some of them are trolls or paid commenters?) some people weigh in with support.

Terrorism.  Bad people.  Every agent with a gun needs range rounds and personal defense (PD) ammunition (JHP or whatever).  Think of how many rounds you shoot per year, and multiply that times the number of agents, blah, blah, blah.

The commenters yammer and yak and go on about how we need to support law enforcement, not understanding the deeper meaning of things.  That was true of the recently released contract on behalf of the DHS.

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) recently awarded Federal Premium a major ammunition contract. Starting delivery in 2018, the contract provides for up to 180 million rounds of .40-cal. Tactical HST duty ammunition to multiple Department of Homeland Security law enforcement components and other federal agencies for up to five years. This contract will provide the organization’s agents and officers with .40 cal. duty and training ammunition.

“Law enforcement and federal agencies put it all on the line for our safety and freedoms,” said Mike Holm, said product director at Federal Premium.” They should expect nothing less from their ammunition.”

Notice the sleight of hand?  “Multiple Department of Homeland Security law enforcement components and other federal agencies.”  While wrapped in a patriotic cloak of border security, this contract so hidden as to its real import that you have no idea what’s in it or who receives the ammunition or for what purpose.

I suspect various commenters will come to the rescue of the FedGov on this one as well (I’ve seen it every time something like this is announced), but the fact remains that 180 million rounds is a lot of PD ammunition.  Note: this isn’t range ammo – it’s duty ammo.  I have faced the usual suspects before, like “Well, the FedGov has to protect the American nuclear facilities.”

No, I reply, go back and try again.  Commercial nuclear power plants owned by utilities in America must provide their own security, and sometimes they are utility employees, while sometimes they are contract workers.  But always, the FedGov has nothing whatsoever to do with it.

Next up, “Well, FedGov must supply security for our nuclear weapons facilities.”  No, try again, I reply.  The real shooting in any incident effecting our nuclear weapons facilities will be done by Marine Corps FAST teams, and if you’re stupid enough to perpetrate an incident against such a target, you’re likely to be staring down the barrel of a Mark 19, operated by men who, as the Gunny would say, are “Ministers of death, praying for war,” and just waiting on someone like you.  I know some of them (or at one time I did).

Finally, the commenters always mention our national laboratories, and I’ve visited multiple labs on multiple occasions.  Most of the security is done by contract employees, and doesn’t get counted in any of the weapons or ammo purchases made by FedGov.

It is against this backdrop that this insightful report must be read.

In the aftermath of the Orlando terrorist attack, many Washington politicians tried to shift the conversation to the Second Amendment and called for an assault weapons bans. But former U.S. Senator Tom Coburn, our Honorary Chairman, had another idea. In this interview on CNBC, Coburn said we should improve our system of background checks, but said it was IRS officials and non-military federal personnel who should be subject to an assault weapons ban, not the general public.

This week, our organization at OpenTheBooks.com released our findings in an editorial at The Wall Street Journal that quantified the growing federal arsenal. The number of non-military federal officers with arrest and firearm authority (200,000+) now exceeds the number of U.S. Marines (182,000). Spending on guns, ammo and military-style equipment at 67 federal agencies – including 53 regulatory, administrative agencies amounted to $1.48 billion between 2006-2014.

The IRS gun-locker is an example  of this growing federal firepower. Nearly $11 million was spent on guns, ammo and military-style equipment for 2,316 ‘special agents’ during this period. The IRS stockpile includes pump-action and semi-automatic shotguns with buckshot and slugs; and semi-automatic AR-15 rifles (S&W M&P 15) and military-style H&K 416 rifles. (See the OpenTheBooks Oversight Report – The Militarization of America.)

The recent growth of the federal arsenal begs the questions: Just who are the feds planning to battle?

In 1996, the Bureau of Justice Statistics officially counted 74,500 federal officers who had arrest and firearm authority. By 2008, the Bureau quantified over 120,000 such officers. Newly updated counts were supposed to publish by this July but the Bureau now admits that over 80% of federal agencies ignored or stonewalled responses to their latest survey. What are they trying to hide?

Even though our organization at OpenTheBooks.com estimated the number of non-Department of Defense federal officers at 200,000+, the current number of non-military federal officers and security personnel could be much larger. Here’s why:

• The feds refuse to disclose the number of Transportation Security Administration (TSA) officers, claiming a national security exception.
• The growth of officers within the 53 administrative, regulatory agencies since 2008 is uncertain. Our officer count estimate used a no-growth figure of 30,000 – the same count as in 2008.
• Likewise, the count within the Department of Homeland Security is unclear. We found conflicting sources citing figures at 70,000 and 63,000. We used the more conservative figure for our analysis.

At Health and Human Services (HHS), it’s also unclear just how many ‘special agents’ are currently employed. Yet, research uncovered a multi-million-dollar program for HHS ‘Office of Inspector General Special Agents’ that used a sophisticated military-style weapons platform with Special Forces contractors training the agents on domestic special operations.

Today, HHS is operating from a brand new “National Training Operations Center” within the Washington, D.C. area they describe as “an operational readiness, emergency response, crisis room and command post for HHS headquarters and staff.” That’s serious business for an agency supposedly preoccupied with “health” matters.

The author, Adam Andrzejewski, goes on, and you can read the entire report at Forbes.  But the founders were opposed to standing armies for good reason.

So if America’s founders would be disappointed in the United States today, how much of that disappointment, if any, might be directed at the military and what has come to be known as national security affairs? It is a question especially worthy of our attention, since the American people have repeatedly said in polls that, of society’s major institutions, the military is the one they most trust.

Let us start with the Preamble to the Constitution. Whatever the framers’ intent, however aspirational the wording, and notwithstanding the fact that national security wasn’t part of the vernacular of the day, the Preamble stands as America’s enduring security credo.

Its importance is essentially threefold. It lists providing for the common defense (in lower-case letters) as merely one — not the first, not the most important — of the national aims the governing apparatus called for by the Constitution seeks to achieve. Semantically, it captures the normative essence of military affairs as self-defense (not aggression, not power projection). And it thereby implicitly cautions against purchasing defense at the expense of these other strategic priorities — national unity, justice, domestic tranquility, the general welfare, liberty.

[ … ]

Madison famously provided one of the most powerful statements ever on war:

“Of all the enemies to public liberty war is, perhaps, the most to be dreaded, because it comprises and develops the germ of every other. War is the parent of armies; from these proceed debts and taxes; and armies, and debts, and taxes are the known instruments for bringing the many under the domination of the few. In war, too, the discretionary power of the Executive is extended; its influence in dealing out offices, honors, and emoluments is multiplied; and all the means of seducing the minds, are added to those of subduing the force, of the people. The same malignant aspect in republicanism may be traced in the inequality of fortunes, and the opportunities of fraud, growing out of a state of war, and in the degeneracy of manners and of morals engendered by both. No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare.”

Today, we live in a state of constant, potentially endless war — always, without exception, undeclared; invariably by choice (rhetorically disguised as necessity); frequently in secret (to increase the license to act, while minimizing oversight and accountability); often labeled war (to engender fear and urgency), but just as often labeled something other than war (for reasons of expediency, convenience and legal circumvention); initiated and prosecuted by a now permanently imperial presidency, largely devoid of congressional consultation and consent before the fact, sometimes even with minimal congressional notification after the fact.

Such concentration of executive power, such abrogation of legislative authority and responsibility, such marginalization of popular consent would seem to be the ingredients of tyrannical government the founders said the people had the right and the duty to overthrow.

It’s instructive and expedient to understand the FedGov and its actions under 3P’s: [1] Protect, [2] Perpetuate, and [3] Promote.  It isn’t by accident that the FedGov wants a disarmed population and continually presses gun control (supported all the way by the court system up to and including the SCOTUS).  A disarmed population is a corollary and a couple to government control and subjugation of the people.  An armed population cannot be subjugated – and thus the population must be disarmed.  It all works together, and without each part none of it works.

But in America that’s difficult, so one answer to the difficulty is to arm the FedGov better and with more.  Note well that the rulership has created a caste system of peasants who will protect the FedGov because it’s their livelihood.  Too old and not in good enough shape to join the military, and not desirous of the decrease in income, there is nothing much else a gun toting agent can do except work for the government.  Family support is a strong motivator, and provision for wife and children can cause all sorts of word twisting and reinterpretation of oaths and vows.  The job of this peasant class is to keep the other peasants in check.  It is to protect the rulership.

The rulership by its very nature perpetuates itself by patronage and largesse to its families, friends and allies.  This is the value of high taxation and federal ownership of land.  Finally, promotion of the FedGov and rulership occurs via the public education system where willing subjects are molded, and also through the MSM where willing “journalists” parrot talking points.

There are those who say that the constitution contained in it the seeds of this despair and destruction.  And there are those who say that we need a new constitution because the last one failed.  While I am no defender of the notion that the constitution was infallible or perfect, I don’t subscribe to this being the ailment or the proposed remedy.

If I’ve tried to teach anything in these last years, it’s that men are to blame.  The constitution is a covenant, or agreement with the appurtenant blessings and cursings for obedience and disobedience, respectively.  It is nothing more, and nothing less.  We don’t get rights to ownership of weapons from the second amendment – we get them from the very fountain of rights, the Almighty Himself.

But America has broken covenant with the Almighty.  After this, everything else is duck soup.  It’s easy to break covenant with men when you have no fear of God.  Blaming the constitution for the malfeasance of men is like blaming the marriage covenant for an adulterous spouse, and demanding a new marriage covenant because the last one let your spouse engage in infidelity is demanding more of the same and expecting a promise to mean something to an adulterer.

To answer the question posed by the author, “Just who are the feds planning to battle?,” the answer is that the answer is crystal clear for those who would see it.

Prior Featured: AR-15 Ammunition And Barrel Twist Rate

Via reader Fred Tippens, this.

What North American and South American territorial predator is a voracious hunter of livestock and deer, weighs up to 220 pounds and can reach short speed bursts exceeding 45 mph?

If your answer was the cougar or mountain lion, give yourself a pat on the back and enjoy a soft drink.  A pair of residents in the suburbs West of Milwaukee had the fortune of encountering a big cat through the magic of video, as a transient male was seen literally peering into the window of the home.

This is in an urban setting.

The Nation:

But Chipman says that the reality is that, even though they undergo extensive training designed to inoculate them against natural human stress reactions, it’s not uncommon for soldiers to freeze up the first time they experience combat. It’s not a sign of cowardice. In most cases, those same troops perform well—or even heroically—after that first exposure to real-life combat. We can’t expect police officers to behave any differently.

[ … ]

So I think that unless you are trained—and you’re trained over and over again, and you practice like you play, which means you’re training in simulated life or death environments—the likelihood of you even firing your gun is small. And then the likelihood that you would actually hit a moving target surrounded by other moving targets—any trained operator knows the fallacy in that. It’s highly unlikely that it would turn out well.

Wow.  You’d think this guy did room clearing in Fallujah with my son in 2007.  But on to his points, these sound like the same ones made by “military expert” Ralph Peters.

When the shooting starts, even the best-trained, most disciplined soldiers and cops — US Army Rangers or NYPD SWAT members — don’t put every round on target. The notion that a guard or teacher who goes to the range once a quarter would keep kids safe is profoundly divorced from reality. “Friendly fire” would simply add to the danger.

Well, this is depressing.  For some oddball reason, I’m recalling some happier times here at The Captain’s Journal.

Like the mother who chased away a home invader using a handgun, protecting her children.  Or the sixty year old Texas woman who shot and killed one of two home invaders using a handgun.  Or the Indiana woman who used a gun to scare off home invaders.  Or better yet, the 23 year old woman who used a handgun in self defense with someone pointing a gun at her own head.  She had the presence of mind to draw from her own holster, present and discharge her weapon.

Maybe I need to ask these women to talk to the SWAT cop or Ralphie so they can be told, “Since you don’t have all of that super secret Ninja warrior stress management training, you can’t do that.  So don’t do it again.”

Finally, would you want to be the one trying to defend the cop who hid while children were being executed?

Minnesota gun owners explain.

Anthony Bieker.

Do you keep them in a gun safe?

Yes. Always.

Jay Daley.

Do you keep them in a gun safe?

Yes, locked full size safe.

Mike Potter.

Do you keep them in a gun safe?

Yes.

Richard Troxel.

Do you keep them in a gun safe?

No, a locked closet.

Peter Boelter.

Do you keep them in a gun safe?

No, but they are not readily available for use.

Nick Booth.

Do you keep them in a gun safe?

Always. We have a daycare in our home.

Isaac Lees.

Do you keep them in a gun safe?

No. I live in a small town where we don’t even need to lock our doors because there is no crime. There are also no children in my house. If I lived in a high-crime area like the Twin Cities or had underage children in the house, I would absolutely use a safe if I kept guns in the house, but safes are extremely expensive both to purchase and to have installed, and since it is not necessary in my situation and I can’t really afford one I don’t use one.

Julie Mills.

Do you keep them in a gun safe?

Yes.

Ron Smith.

Do you keep them in a gun safe?

Most of them. I keep two pistols handy for self-defense/home protection. I keep a rifle handy for varmints.

Brad Leeser.

Do you keep them in a gun safe?

Of course.

Daniel Becker.

Do you keep them in a gun safe?

No, my rifles are kept in cases and stored. My handguns are out of sight and kept unloaded but are accessible for self-defense purposes. If there were children in the house all firearms except my handgun used for my concealed carry [would be in a safe], but my girlfriend and I don’t have children. I’m former infantry and she grew up with a firearms instructor father.

Melissa Timm.

Do you keep them in a gun safe?

Yes.

First of all, I realize that these gun owners aren’t exactly apologizing for anything, but there’s an undertone here I don’t like.  It’s a man’s own business what he does with his guns and how he keeps them (I’m not giving legal advice or recommending that you keep firearms unsecured with children around).

Furthermore, while I get the idea that you want to keep firearms secured with children around, there are many ways to do this, including putting them out of reach, not allowing children unsupervised time where there could be firearms, and perhaps the most effective, putting your home defense gun in a biometric safe where you can open it immediately with a thumbprint.

But let’s be clear about one thing.  When one respondent says “my rifles are kept in cases and stored. My handguns are out of sight and kept unloaded but are accessible for self-defense purposes,” he’s just kidding himself.  An unloaded gun is not for self defense or defense of home and hearth.  It’s an expensive paperweight.  An unloaded gun may as well not be considered accessible at all.

Having them “accessible” means the home invader has a loaded weapon and you do not, and thus when he sees you attempting to load a weapon he has two choices: (1) risk the outcome, be that death, injury, and/or prison, or (2) shoot you.

Don’t give him that choice.

Those who follow firearms, shooting, and tactical channels on YouTube know about the travails of Hickok45 on YouTube.  Venerable and old school, Hickok45 tests and comments on firearms manufacturers send him.  Sometimes he shoots his own firearms, but always, he shoots, comments and often provides history and mechanical commentary on the machines he is using.  Sometimes it is with admiration, sometimes slight disdain, but always honest and interesting.

Hickok45 met with disapproval from some redditors when he supported the NRA in light of the compromises the NRA recommended (e.g., bump stocks, enhanced background checks), but being a former LEO and old school like he is, I wouldn’t have expected anything else from him.  Just as interesting to me is Jeff Quinn of Gunblast, especially when shooting and commenting on revolvers, but always interesting.

Hickok45 met with several bans on YouTube for promoting products, but he never really did that and always appealed the decision, mostly meeting with reinstatement by those who run YouTube.  But all of these folks may need to find new homes.

Full30: I received an email from my Google/YouTube rep at 9:30pm tonight. He requested an emergency meeting tomorrow to discuss YouTube’s new policies regarding firearms content.

This is really bad. Please read this carefully and a couple of times, and let it sink in. 1/3rd of my videos or more will need to be removed. If you don’t have them removed in 30 days, your channel will be deleted for policy violations.

I wish this were a joke. It’s not. I feel horrible for reloading channels or NFA channels. Showing how to make ammo or even showing the installation of a silencer is prohibited. Hell, showing the use of a magazine larger than 30 rounds is prohibited! Belt feds are a no go.

I’ll try to find out as much as I can from my rep tomorrow. I mean, are legal machine guns and silencers being demonstrated really going to get us account strikes now?

Please read this guys… I’m in shock, but then I knew this day wold come. It looks like it’s here in 30 days. I’m at a total loss for words. ~Tim

Redditors are up in arms, because the Google guidance says the following.

“YouTube prohibits certain kinds of content featuring firearms. Specifically, we don’t allow content that:

Intends to sell firearms or certain firearms accessories through direct sales (e.g., private sales by individuals) or links to sites that sell these items.

These accessories include but may not be limited to accessories that enable a firearm to simulate automatic fire or convert a firearm to automatic fire (e.g., bump stocks, gatling triggers, drop-in auto sears, conversion kits), and high capacity magazines (i.e., magazines or belts carrying more than 30 rounds).

Provides instructions on manufacturing a firearm, ammunition, high capacity magazine, homemade silencers/suppressors, or certain firearms accessories such as those listed above. This also includes instructions on how to convert a firearm to automatic or simulated automatic firing capabilities.Shows users how to install the above-mentioned accessories or modifications.”

“Manufacturing a firearm.”  Reddit understands that this means if you teach someone to field strip an AR-15 or replace a bolt carrier group and check head space (Brownells), you fall into this category.  If you comment positively about a particular firearm, part, accessory, or manufacturer, you fall into these categories.

Their temporary answer is to start downloading targeted videos.  But make no mistake about it, they’re pissed off.  There is also no mistaking the fact that at the moment, there is no replacement for the information and firearms channels on YouTube.

This could possibly effect other related videos such as tactical instruction where firearms are discussed, such as with Kyle Lamb, Travis Haley, Chris Costa, and John Lovell.

I’ve long thought that an alternative needed to be developed to YouTube other than Live Leak, but to date there is nothing.  Suffice it to say that the progressives at Google are winning this battle.  What happens in the longer term war will be up to someone other than Google.

You might have noticed that I rarely embed or even link YouTube videos any more.  I’ve made my choice – has the rest of America?

Via reader Fred Tippens, Yahoo:

And thus I carry a gun all the time, for predators of the four-legged kind and the two-legged kind.  The two-legged concern me more than the four-legged, but it’s best to be prepared.

It may have been a Coyote, but more than likely a mixture such as Coywolf.

This transcript (which was bot-generated, so it’s not fit for human consumption unless you’re patient and forgiving), is interesting and informative.

So a little research battle kings mountain which you may be familiar with just west of here over in Cleveland county. Was one of the turning ports in the American revolution. And in researching that battle … One of the things I found Is that for people who were in the battle where they knew their ages. Over eighty of the participants were under the age of eighteen.

So don’t bother me with debates about why 18-year olds cannot be trusted with rifles unless you want to live under British rule.

Via Codrea, this from Daily Signal.

1. Harris County, Texas (2013)

A 15-year-old boy saved both his life and the life of his 12-year-old sister by fending off a pair of home invaders with his father’s AR-15.

2. Rochester, New York (2013)

Two armed burglars retreated from a college student’s apartment after coming face-to-face with an unloaded AR-15. The rifle itself instilled enough fear to cause them to flee.

3. Ferguson, Missouri (2014)

During the Ferguson, Missouri, riots, nearly all businesses within a particular 2-square-mile area of the city were looted or destroyed—except for one. African-American men guarded the gas station and convenience store of a white friend from looters and rioters. They did so armed with an AR-15, a MAC-10 “machine pistol,” and a variety of handguns.

4. Houston, Texas (2017)

A target of a drive-by shooting successfully fended off the attack by using his legally owned AR-15 against his three armed attackers. He was able to hit all three men in the moving vehicle.

5. Broken Arrow, Oklahoma (2017)

A homeowner’s 19-year-old son used an AR-15 to defend himself against three would-be burglars who broke into the home in broad daylight. The 19-year-old was later determined to have acted in justifiable self-defense.

6. Sutherland Springs, Texas (2017)

After a gunman opened fire on congregants inside First Baptist Church, a man living near the place of worship grabbed his AR-15 and engaged the shooter. The shooter subsequently dropped his own firearm and fled the scene as the courageous neighbor pursued him.

7. Oswego, Illinois (2018)

A man with an AR-15 intervened to stop a neighbor’s knife attack on a pregnant woman. The rifle’s “intimidation factor” was credited as a reason why the attacker dropped his knife.

8. Catawba County, Illinois (2018)

After his 17-year-old relative successfully used his own firearm to fend off three would-be robbers who attacked him in the driveway of his home, a man used his AR-15 to stop a threat from one of the would-be robber’s upset family members.

Nice list, and thanks to author Amy Swearer for compiling it (most of which I’ve covered, just not compiled).  However, she missed the case of Mr. Stephen Bayezes who defended himself and his wife from home invaders.  There is also the case of Patrick Hale who apprehended two criminals who might have taken life again.

Dear Marty,

I see that you weighed in with support for the “fix-NICS” bill.  I was sad to see this, so I wrote you a note that went something like this (in abbreviated form).

Sir,

I feel that this will be a huge mistake and I wish there was a way to undo this.  Unfortunately, there isn’t.  My readers have already sent me this information, and I was wondering if there was anything I could say to them about this?

I haven’t received a reply from you Marty, but I assume you’ve been busy, sir.  I also assume you’ve heard an earful about this, because you’ve withdrawn your support.

Very well.  I’m a forgiving sort of person and it’s the same position I took on Rock River Arms when they flirted with gun control in their own state, intentionally or not.  I’ve made many mistakes in my life, and my aim is to learn from them all and become a better person.

But this episode requires a little bit of unpacking.  You clearly demonstrated bad judgment in the initial endorsement of this bill.  I know that you are a Christian and a defender of the gospel of Jesus Christ.  This means a lot to me, and more than anything else will earn my trust and patronage.  This is also why I recently purchased a CMMG gun – they are a Christian company too.

As a Christian, you must be wiser and more circumspect than those around you.  You cannot be thrown about by the shifting tides and the changing winds.  You must understand that the results of the fall in Adam and his federal headship over all mankind causes sin, and sin causes the very things that the progressives use to foist their schemes of control over others.

You must understand that firearms were ubiquitous in early schools, so much so that gun clubs were a thing.  The changes wrought by society are entirely due to rejection of the very gospel that you claim to support.  And no rejection of the gospel can be repaired or ameliorated by a law or new scheme of control.

Gun control is evil in all of its forms.  It was Dr. Greg Bahnsen who pointed out the utter wickedness of gun control schemes.

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.

Furthermore, you must understand that the progressives are incrementalists and have been at this a very long time.  They are patient in achieving their goals.  Here is a perfect example.

The only way we can truly be safe and prevent further gun violence is to ban civilian ownership of all guns. That means everything. No pistols, no revolvers, no semiautomatic or automatic rifles. No bolt action. No breaking actions or falling blocks. Nothing. This is the only thing that we can possibly do to keep our children safe from both mass murder and common street violence.

Unfortunately, right now we can’t. The political will is there, but the institutions are not. Honestly, this is a good thing. If we passed a law tomorrow banning all firearms, we would have massive noncompliance. What we need to do is establish the regulatory and informational institutions first. This is how we do it.  The very first thing we need is national registry. We need to know where the guns are, and who has them.

This is why a registry is the Holy Grail for the progressive.  They won’t stop with their initial victories.  Oh no.  In fact, they’ve told you so.  As for this so called “fix-NICS” bill, you must understand what while you might intend something like that for good, the state will never work it that way.

Any increase in the registry of people who cannot own guns will sweep into its chasm veterans who were diagnosed with PTSD, didn’t know they were on a prohibited list (because Obama’s VA reported them as prohibited), try to buy a gun, and then find out they have committed a felony and end up being arrested under this new bill.

Any increase in the registry will sweep into its chasm men and women who someone wanted to be on the list and [falsely] reported them as mentally defective, with the village witch doctors – or psychiatrists – employed by the state now an integral part of the process.

All of that bypasses the right of due process.  One of my readers observed this about court appointed mental health professionals.

Control freaks love psychiatry, a means of social control with no Due Process protections. It is a system of personal opinion masquerading as science. See, e.g., Boston University Psychology Professor Margaret Hagan’s book, Whores of the Court, to see how arbitrary psychiatric illnesses are. Peter Breggin, Fred Baughman and Thomas Szasz wrote extensively about abuses of psychiatry. Liberals blame guns for violence. Conservatives blame mental illness. Neither have any causal connection to violence. The issue is criminal conduct, crime. Suggesting that persons with legal disabilities are criminals shows the nonsensical argument of this politician and his fellow control freaks. Shame on them.

And just today, another astute reader made this observation.

Just as a gun registry is a precursor to gun confiscation, a mental illness registry is a precursor to the “confiscation” of the mentally ill.

The denial of second amendment rights for a certain category of people is a precedent for the denial of any and all other rights held by people in that category.

All men have certain inalienable rights. U.S. citizens have those rights guaranteed in the Bill of Rights.

Denial or abridgement of those rights for any portion of the population, absent act or crime by each individual, is premised on a determination of one or the other of two things: 1) No human or citizen has any rights that may not be abridged or denied by government at will; or, 2) A certain segment of the population may be deemed to be neither citizens, nor fully human.

Our founders correctly believed that it’s never a good idea to give the state more power, or to centralize what power does exist in the state.  If America is suffering from a lapse in moral constitution, it has nothing to do with the laws or lack thereof.  As a Christian, you know the corrective for that problem.

Again, you must be wiser than your opponents, if indeed the controllers are your opponents.  Even the so-called National Association of Evangelicals, which is anything but national or evangelical, has flirted with gun control because they want to be cool, hip, modern and progressive.  You need to be better and smarter than that.

When the teachers of religion go their own way, you need to remember the Bible.  When the state sings its siren song of more peace for more power, you need to remember that, as Dr. Bahnsen pointed out, all gun control is based in wickedness, and the state is always lying to you.

Please, please, please do not ever let this happen again.  It will take time and hard work to rebuild trust with the gun community.  Please invest the time and work to do just that.