You really should spend some time reading this.  You won’t be disappointed.

Part I

Part II

Part III

Part IV

NY Daily News:

Rifle-owning South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham and a handful of his fellow Republicans are standing up to the biggest bully in Washington — the National Rifle Association.

Graham and a growing group of GOPers are getting behind a burgeoning bipartisan effort to keep suspected terrorists from buying guns, and they’ve vowed they won’t bow to pressure from the powerful gun lobby.

“On every issue, Senator Graham does what he thinks is right and lets the chips fall where they may,” Kevin Bishop, a spokesman for Graham, told the Daily News in a statement Wednesday.

Hey Lindsey, you fossilized piece of shit.  Yea you.  You don’t belong in South Carolina.  Don’t go home.  Send the moving trucks to pick up your things and tote them to one of the communist states like New York, California or Connecticut.

If Lindsey doesn’t cooperate, the good folks of S.C. have some work to do.

Monica Lindstrom:

This week Arizona Senator Jeff Flake introduced a bill to prohibit the sale of guns to persons on the No Fly list. This comes on the heels of the deadliest mass shooting in America that occurred June 12 at Pulse Nightclub in Orlando. It’s not surprising to see a flurry of proposals and argument regarding gun control and gun rights after a tragedy involving firearms and typically nothing changes.

The legal argument against Senator Flake’s proposal, and others before it, has to do with due process. Since the right to bear arms is given to us by the Second Amendment to our Constitution and has been affirmed in case law, a person must have due process before that right can be taken away. In other words, they must have their day in court. They must be made aware they are on the list and be afforded the opportunity to fight their presence on the list. Currently this is not done. Those on the list often do not know they are on the list and there are few opportunities, if any, that allow them to fight the designation.

This huge hurdle was recognized and suggestions are contained in the bill that would give some modicum of due process. However, the bill has a long way to go before it becomes a law and, even then, it will face many challenges in court and will likely make its way to the Supreme Court. So, mark your calendar, you could be reading about this anticipated case a couple years from now in #LegallySpeaking.

Let’s be clear about one thing Monica.  The second amendment grants me absolutely nothing.  The constitution is a covenant wherein parties agree to honor commitments made to each other.  A covenant has all the blessings and curses and consequences appertaining to said covenant.  The second amendment, like all other rights outlined in the bill of rights, merely codifies the recognition of an already-existing right.

God grants me the right (and even duty) to go armed and conduct myself in a manner consistent with self defense.  Not you, and not the constitution, and not black robed tyrants.  That means that whatever the outcome of this “day in court” to which you refer, the right to self defense is still present because God said so.

It would actually be a service for you to warn others of your ilk that your designs for control over others will run afoul of God’s commandments.  The consequences of this are too numerous to detail here, and include effect both now and in eternity.  And tell Jeff Flake we never forget.

Or otherwise called, “thumb over bore” grip.  As I’ve pointed out, it started in the gaming community, and it was taken up by SpecOps, and so you see folks like Chris Costa and Travis Haley using it.

I ran across this report today of a 3-gun competitor who is also using the C-clamp grip.

The folks at Magpul explain why they like the grip.

Remember when we said this:

They will go after you by the terrorist watch list, the no-fly list, and any other assortment of executive powers and decisions and regulations and rulings.  They will never confiscate your guns.  They will prevent you from renewing your driver’s license, your hunting license, your fishing license, your professional license, your bank cards, your concealed handgun permits, and in short, all the framework you have built your entire life as a law abiding, peaceable citizen.  Then they will go after your wife and children and their ability to enroll in education.  They will go after what matters most to you.

Scott Shackford and Jacob Sullum reporting at Reason do some very good investigative work on this very subject.

Under Feinstein’s 2015 bill, the attorney general can stop the transfer of a firearm if he “1) determines that the transferee is known (or appropriately suspected) to be or have been engaged in conduct constituting, in preparation for, in aid of, or related to terrorism, or providing material support or resources for terrorism” and “(2) has a reasonable belief that the prospective transferee may use a firearm in connection with terrorism.” The amendment Feinstein introduced last Wednesday, by contrast, lets the attorney general block a sale if he “determines, based on the totality of the circumstances, that the transferee represents a threat to public safety based on a reasonable suspicion that the transferee is engaged, or has been engaged, in conduct constituting, in preparation for, in aid of, or related to terrorism, or providing material support or resources thereof.”

In the revised version, there is no additional requirement that the attorney general have reason to believe the weapon the suspect is trying to buy will be used in a terrorist attack. Hence an old lady who cut a check to a Hamas-affiliated charity (thereby “providing material support” to terrorism and arguably threatening public safety) could be stopped from buying a handgun for self-defense even if there was no evidence that she planned any sort of attack with it. Feinstein’s amendment also expands the dragnet beyond the FBI’s so-called Terrorist Watchlist, which is believed to include more than 1 million people, to cover anyone who was under investigation for “conduct related to a federal crime of terrorism” during the previous five years. The Justice Department would be notified of attempted gun purchases by people who fit that description, giving it a chance to block the sales.

Frankly I’m not concerned about the little old lady who wrote a check to a Hamas-affiliated charity.  What concerns me much more is that there is no due process, no chance for trial by jury.  The federal executive is the only sovereign, the singular potentate behind these decisions.

That means that if you’re an NRA member, or a patriot, or you believe in the second amendment and your God-given rights to own firearms, or believe that gun ownership is the best surety against tyranny, the executive might just label you a terrorist or low-level extremist, and prevent gun purchases.  He might also garnish your wages, prevent driver’s license renewal, prevent renewal of your professional license, or remove your children from the home and place them in the custody of DSS.

Do you get the impression that someone wants you to be disarmed and controlled?

Understanding The Threat:

More precisely Mr. Higgins said, “To bring it back to the point earlier about the United States being put to work fulfilling the objectives of the Brotherhood:  the Brotherhood was killed en masse by Saddam Hussein – we removed him.  Qaddafi killed the Muslim Brotherhood – we removed him. We asked Mubarak to go. We are their instrument because they control our deliberate decision-making process.”

[ … ]

Mr. Haney reiterated what UTT has been teaching and publishing for years:  “The gravitational force of the Global Islamic Movement is not radicalization, the gravitational force of the Global Islamic Movement is the implementation of sharia Law.”

So if you sometimes ask yourself why America sucks and we’re such screw-ups, you’re asking the wrong question.  We’re very good at what we do.  Everything that has happened has occurred by design.  There is intentionality behind this design.

Your well-being isn’t part of the calculus.

Fiscal Times:

Top U.S. Air Force generals are floating the idea of buying a new warplane to support ground troops better and more cheaply than the venerable A-10 Warthog.

In addition to its utility against militants and other light-to-medium forces, Air Force leaders hope this new close air support, or CAS, plane will help them win the fight to retire the A-10. And they are even beginning to envision an aircraft beyond that, in concepts variously known as the “arsenal plane” or “flying Coke machine.”

“I’d love to build a new CAS airplane right now while we still have the A-10 [and then] transition the A-10 community into the new CAS airplane,” Gen. Mark Welsh, the Air Force chief of staff, said Wednesday at a Defense Writers Group breakfast. “We just don’t have the money to do it and we don’t have the people to keep flying the A-10 and build a new airplane and bed it down.”

Of course you don’t have money to do it.  You’re throwing away billions of dollars on the F-35, a piece of shit that can’t do anything well and does a lot of things wrong, and you’re doing it because you’re enamored by this stupid idea of fifth generation warfare.

Only the U.S. Air Force could promote such idiots.  Elsewhere in the news, here is a video of a crew getting an A-10 ready for launch.

The A-10 is the manliest, baddest aircraft ever to be invented by mankind.  Leave it to the Air Force to be in love with something else.  Look, if you’re a proponent of the F-35, except for throwing away our money (for which I want to beat you up one side of the road and down the other), you can still hang out with the boys, but we’ll have to wait in the car for you to put on your lipstick and skirt.

The Washington Post:

The Supreme Court declined Monday to review bans on a lengthy list of firearms that New York and Connecticut have classified as “assault weapons,” the latest example of the justices turning down an opportunity to elaborate on an individual’s right to gun ownership.

With an emotional debate about gun control reigniting across the street at the Capitol, the justices without comment said they would not review lower-court decisions upholding the laws.

Connecticut’s ban was expanded shortly after a gunman used one of the military-style semiautomatic weapons on the list to kill 20 students and six educators at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown in 2012.

The decision Monday was not a surprise, as the justices have previously declined to review other lower-court decisions that uphold bans passed by cities and states. Maryland, California, Hawaii, Massachusetts and New, Jersey as well as many cities and towns, have similar laws. None of the legal challenges to them have been successful in lower courts.

None of the challenges have been successful (and this wouldn’t be either) because jurists today don’t believe in the constitution, and because the Heller decision gave away too much.

David French does a nice job of upbraiding people who say that the second amendment doesn’t mean what it says.

First, the history. It is simply remarkable to see liberals flood the Internet and social media with allegations that the Second Amendment either does not protect an individual right to keep and bear arms or that — incredibly — that right is restricted to single-shot, flintlock muskets. All meaningful historical evidence points toward the conclusion that the Second Amendment merely recognized a pre-existing right to bear arms. This is plain from the text of the amendment, which protects the right of “the people,” and from its historical context. Indeed, writing in 1803, St. George Tucker updated Blackstone’s Commentaries to declare that the United States “may reasonably hope that the people will never cease to regard the right of keeping and bearing arms as the surest pledge of their liberty.”

This understanding is buttressed by dozens of state constitutional provisions, the vast majority of which clearly and unmistakably establish an individual right to gun ownership — not the mythical “collective” right so beloved by the Left. Alabama, for example, declares that “every citizen has a right to bear arms in defense of himself and the state.” New Hampshire’s constitution states that “all persons have the right to keep and bear arms in defense of themselves, their families, their property, and the state.” These provisions aren’t part of a right-wing plot; they reflect long-defended American liberties.

But in spite of the malfeasance of jurists who deny God-given rights, I confess that I have a difficult time getting worked up over this refusal of the Supreme Court to play nice.  I know this is easy to say and much more difficult to do, but if you live in a state like Connecticut or New York where the collectivists want to control you in this way, you need to move, change the laws, or disobey the laws to arm yourself as you see fit.

Don’t expect anyone in a black robe to look out for your interests.  Interests are local, and it’s probably best that way.  You can effect change locally easier than you can nationally.

The American Prospect:

As we have yet another round of our repeated and possibly fruitless arguments about the role of guns in American society, there’s one thing I desperately want to hear gun advocates say. It’s not complicated, it would have the benefit of honesty, and it might enable us to move this debate to ground where we could actually make choices about what kind of society we want to have.

What I want to hear gun advocates say is, “This is the price America has to pay for the right some of us cherish.”

The reason I want to hear this is that on no other basic debate over constitutional rights that I can think of does one side argue that there are no tradeoffs, that exercising a particular right, even in the most extreme way, doesn’t actually involve any cost whatsoever. Only gun advocates say that.

But it doesn’t work that way.  Paul has tried to force us into a formal logical fallacy, and you can think of it as a “Hobson’s Choice” (not a Hobbesian Trap, but Hobson’s Choice), where someone puts forward what he claims to be a free choice, but where only one option is really presented.

Don’t bite on things like this.  Here is the answer.  Criminals and terrorists will get their guns anyway because only peaceable people obey the laws.  Paul knows that, and so does everyone else.  It wouldn’t matter if every gun in America was confiscated (something that would lead to bloody civil war, and which I am only granting for the sake of argument).  Weapons will still flow from across the American border.  Or another way for criminals to get their guns is to attack police, kill them, and steal their weapons.  This happens frequently in South American countries.

Another way to get weapons is to buy fertilizer.  Or gasoline.  Or any of a number of fire accelerants, or acid to throw in the face of other people (this happens more than you care to know in far Eastern countries like Japan).  You see, Paul is in that category of people who want the state to have a monopoly of force, and dresses his designs for control up in all sorts of sympathy for victims.

Don’t believe him.  He isn’t being honest about things, and you know that because he isn’t advocating that the police be disarmed.  Because all animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than other animals.

Daily Mail:

She writes of one occasion, when developmentally challenged children were having difficulty picking up the eggs at a traditional Easter egg hunt on the grounds of the governor’s mansion during Bill’s tenure in the Arkansas state house. 

Reluctant hostess Hillary had enough.

‘The frustrated Me-First Lady demanded, “When are they going to get those f*****g ree-tards out of here?”‘ Dolly writes.

That’s what she has to say about those precious little ones who bless us so much and have the eye of God upon them.  Well then.  Perhaps that special place in hell is being warmed for her as we speak.

ABC News:

“When I said that if, within the Orlando club, you had some people with guns, I was obviously talking about additional guards or employees” … Trump’s latest comment clashes with a number of his previous remarks about the shooting at Pulse nightclub. For example, Trump said on Friday night, “If some of those wonderful people had guns strapped right here — right to their waist or right to their ankle — and one of the people in that room happened to have it and goes ‘boom, boom,’ you know, that would have been a beautiful sight folks.”

It’s difficult to triangulate when you’re trying to make everybody think you’re awesome.  Always carry a gun, and stay away from confined spaces and crowds.  Don’t expect anyone in government to support what you do.  Ever.