Respect Your Elders

Respect Your Elders

An old prospector shuffled into town leading a tired old pack mule. The old man headed straight for the only saloon to clear his parched throat.

He walked up and tied his old mule to the hitching rail. As he stood there brushing some of the dust from his face and clothes, a young gunslinger stepped out of the saloon with a gun in one hand and a bottle of whiskey in the other.

The young gunslinger looked at the old man and laughed, saying, "Hey old man, have you ever danced?"

The old man looked up at the gunslinger and said, "No, I never did dance . . . never really wanted to."

A crowd had gathered as the gunslinger grinned and said, "Well you old fool, you're gonna dance now," and started shooting at the old man's feet.

The old prospector, not wanting to get a toe blown off, started hopping around like a flea on a hot skillet. Everybody was laughing, fit to be tied.

When the last bullet had been fired, the young gunslinger, still laughing, holstered his gun and turned around to go back into the saloon.

The old man turned to his pack mule, pulled out a double-barreled shotgun, and cocked both hammers.

The loud clicks carried clearly through the desert air.

The crowd stopped laughing immediately.

The young gunslinger heard the sounds too and he turned around very slowly. The silence was almost deafening. The crowd watched as the young gunman stared at the old timer and the large gaping holes of those twin barrels.

The barrels of the shotgun never wavered in the old man's hands, as he quietly said, "Son, have you ever licked a mule's ass?" The gunslinger swallowed hard and said, "No sir . . . but . . . I've always wanted to."

There are a few lessons for us all here:

Never be arrogant.

Don't waste ammunition.

Whiskey makes you think you're smarter than you are.

Don't mess with old men . . . they didn't get old by being stupid!

(Thanks to the Z man)

Mattel's Tommy Burst Machine Gun ad.

Mattel's Tommy Burst Machine Gun ad.

Justices extend gun owner rights nationwide

Justices extend gun owner rights nationwide.

By MARK SHERMAN


The Associated Press

Monday, June 28, 2010; 10:46 AM


WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court held Monday that the Constitution's Second Amendment restrains government's ability to significantly limit "the right to keep and bear arms," advancing a recent trend by the John Roberts-led bench to embrace gun rights.

By a narrow, 5-4 vote, the justices also signaled, however, that some limitations on the right could survive legal challenges.

Writing for the court in a case involving restrictive laws in Chicago and one of its suburbs, Justice Samuel Alito said that the Second Amendment right "applies equally to the federal government and the states."

The court was split along familiar ideological lines, with five conservative-moderate justices in favor of gun rights and four liberals opposed. Chief Justice Roberts voted with the majority.

Two years ago, the court declared that the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to possess guns, at least for purposes of self-defense in the home.

That ruling applied only to federal laws. It struck down a ban on handguns and a trigger lock requirement for other guns in the District of Columbia, a federal city with a unique legal standing. At the same time, the court was careful not to cast doubt on other regulations of firearms here.

Gun rights proponents almost immediately filed a federal lawsuit challenging gun control laws in Chicago and its suburb of Oak Park, Ill, where handguns have been banned for nearly 30 years. The Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence says those laws appear to be the last two remaining outright bans.

Lower federal courts upheld the two laws, noting that judges on those benches were bound by Supreme Court precedent and that it would be up to the high court justices to ultimately rule on the true reach of the Second Amendment.

The Supreme Court already has said that most of the guarantees in the Bill of Rights serve as a check on state and local, as well as federal, laws.

Monday's decision did not explicitly strike down the Chicago area laws, ordering a federal appeals court to reconsider its ruling. But it left little doubt that they would eventually fall.

Still, Alito noted that the declaration that the Second Amendment is fully binding on states and cities "limits (but by no means eliminates) their ability to devise solutions to social problems that suit local needs and values."

Your Right to Own a Gun. (FoxBusinessNetwork)

I was listening to Fox News on my XM radio the other day and happened to listen to John Stossel promoting this piece.  What surprised me is during the promo interview John gave a quick background on himself.  He stated that he is a former/recovering liberal who has developed libertarian view because he truly investigated issues and strives to be intellectually honest with himself and the world.



Related post: The gun is civilization

The Gun is Civilization

My buddy the Red Bearded MeatHead sent me this. (Havent verified yet but is pretty good stuff) Now verified and propper credits given.

The Gun is Civilization
by Maj. L. Caudill USMC (Ret)
by Marko Kloos
Original  : The munchkin wrangler
Corrected by Larry in comments. (Thanks!)

Human beings only have two ways to deal with one another: reason and force. If you want me to do something for you, you have a choice of either convincing me via argument, or force me to do your bidding under threat of force. Every human interaction falls into one of those two categories, without exception. Reason or force, that's it.

In a truly moral and civilized society, people exclusively interact through persuasion. Force has no place as a valid method of social interaction, and the only thing that removes force from the menu is the personal firearm, as paradoxical as it may sound to some.

When I carry a gun, you cannot deal with me by force. You have to use reason and try to persuade me, because I have a way to negate your threat or employment of force.

The gun is the only personal weapon that puts a 100-pound woman on equal footing with a 220-pound mugger, a 75-year old retiree on equal footing with a 19-year old gang banger, and a single guy on equal footing with a carload of drunk guys with baseball bats. The gun removes the disparity in physical strength, size, or numbers between a potential attacker and a defender.

There are plenty of people who consider the gun as the source of bad force equations. These are the people who think that we'd be more civilized if all guns were removed from society, because a firearm makes it easier for a [armed] mugger to do his job. That, of course, is only true if the mugger's potential victims are mostly disarmed either by choice or by legislative fiat-- it has no validity when most of a mugger's potential marks are armed.

People who argue for the banning of arms ask for automatic rule by the young, the strong, and the many, and that's the exact opposite of a civilized society. A mugger, even an armed one, can only make a successful living in a society where the state has granted him a force monopoly.

Then there's the argument that the gun makes confrontations lethal that otherwise would only result in injury. This argument is fallacious in several ways. Without guns involved, confrontations are won by the physically superior party inflicting overwhelming injury on the loser.

People who think that fists, bats, sticks, or stones don't constitute lethal force watch too much TV, where people take beatings and come out of it with a bloody lip at worst. The fact that the gun makes lethal force easier works solely in favor of the weaker defender, not the stronger attacker. If both are armed, the field is level.

The gun is the only weapon that's as lethal in the hands of an octogenarian as it is in the hands of a weight lifter. It simply wouldn't work as well as a force equalizer if it wasn't both lethal and easily employable.

When I carry a gun, I don't do so because I am looking for a fight, but because I'm looking to be left alone. The gun at my side means that I cannot be forced, only persuaded. I don't carry it because I'm afraid, but because it enables me to be unafraid. It doesn't limit the actions of those who would interact with me through reason, only the actions of those who would do so by force. It removes force from the equation... and that's why carrying a gun is a civilized act.

By Maj. L. Caudill USMC (Ret)
by Marko Kloos

The Swiss, Guns, Genocide, and the right to defend oneself.

'Nuff Said.......

Assault weapon Ban

Here they go again.  The state government in Washington has introduced an assault weapons ban, SB6396-Banning the sale of assault weapons . 

No ugly black plastic allowed.  That is too scary!

UN's push for Arms Trade Treaty could affect American gun ownership.

Story: Ban by baby steps

"In Hillary's world, radical ideas progress at first with baby steps that ultimately become great strides to harness the destructive forces in society. That's why the current Secretary of State and the other Hillarys in her world are drawing a bead on gun owners, mainly those in the United States"

"Essentially, the international community doesn't understand why Americans respect and protect their Second Amendment rights because in most countries no such rights exist," said Sanetti, who is presiding over the annual Shooting, Hunting, Outdoor Trade (SHOT) show. "Of course, the Founders added the Second Amendment as one of the safeguards, and it's not something open for discussion as far as we're concerned.


"The current (Obama) administration has gone on record as saying it's time for this country to rejoin the community of nations and get more in line with various international goals. So, definitely, gun control is moving to the forefront, though not in such an-in-your-face, confrontational manner that we've seen before in this country. Gun control advocates go in one direction, try and fail, and then go in another direction. That's been the pattern."

Sergeant Kimberly Munley ---- Hero

Story: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article6906278.ece

Thank God for our first responders,  but if someone else was armed than the carnage would have been much more limited. The bad guy always gets the first shot in a "Non War" situation but being armed will almost always help you defend yourself and/or others from a lunatic, or in this case the Jihadist. Almost every person in that room had proven him or herself proficient in the use of firearms and I can not think of a safer location  than to be in the midst of dozens of armed US service men and women. One gun in that room could have saved 12 lives. Same thing in the Virgina murder spree. Fire arms should be in the hands of good people, it saves lives.

It has been reported that Hasan shouted "Allahu Akbar" - God is great - before carrying out the shootings.

Now, what this murdering P.O.S. did was an act of war. He not only violated his oath as an US Officer but his Hippocratic Oath as a medical doctor. After the trial it is my hope that this traitorous murderer hangs from the neck until dead. (And that's only because drowning in a vat of liquefied pork would be considered too unusual)

Fort Hood

I am so deeply saddened and friggin pissed off by what happened at fort hood.  the F-ing scumbag murderer that took the dozen lives did so knowing that he would be unopposed for the most part.  I wish there were just a few side arms present when the "scumbag future hell dweller" started his evil escapade.  Some return fire would have saved lives, but no.  Sarcasm Warning: Not allowed to be able to defend yourself,  it's the American way.  I think it is time to reinstate the practice of at least the officers of our armed forces openly carry loaded side arms at all times.   At most a situation like this should result in two dead , not twelve.  (I will not get into the "religion of peace" just yet but reserve the right.)

NYC Bllomberg Gun Sting.

Just announced on Fox News that New York City mayor Bloomberg is releasing video of Illegal gun transactions, reportedly "Thousands of dollars worth of loaded Firearms sold at or near a gun show."

Now I am not a big fan of NY gun laws, they are overly restrictive and often misused by officials who have little knowledge of the firearm culture.  Additionally Bloomberg has alligned himself with Chuck "The Schmuck" Schumer on ant gun issues  including suing of gun manufactures.  Article: Clicky Click

My gut feeling that this is being done to coincide with the current Supreme Court McDonald v. Chicago and to muster up public emotion support and possibly influence the court.

Updated!  Daily News Link

Lets break this down, if a person with criminal intent is willing to drive across many states, seek a private dealer and purchase a handgun, for criminal purposes, how would another restrictive law stop him from doing it.  It just would not happen in the gun show.  Luckily most people I have ever met behind the tables at gun shows are simply great people and fall into generally 3 categories,  the Professional Shop Owner/Dealer, the private collector/enthusiast, and the oddity/accessory types.

Since the general public is generally ill informed about fire arms and If you are un famlure with what I am talking about ley me decribe.

Balls of Fury!

NORTH RICHLAND HILLS — A couple of burglars caught a bad break.

Standing on her roof, a 27-year-old woman thwarted an attempted burglary Wednesday afternoon when she pelted two men at the front of her home with billiard balls.


Link to story: http://www.star-telegram.com/804/story/1648889.html

Question?:  Where was her gun? 
Thought: Must be a lot of puns I'm just not thinking of. (Help!  Reward for the best)

Pa. man fire replica cannon, hits neighbor's house

A PA man shoots a replica canon through his neighbor's house:
http://www.wsvn.com/news/articles/odd/MI130541/
and: http://www.postgazette.com/pg/09246/995476-100.stm#ixzz0Q8fYLIDf

Ammo was a 2"dia., 2lbs.  Gun was 80 lbs French and Indian War replica used in re-enactments.  The neighbor's hose was 400 yard away.  What the hell was he using for a backstop?  His neighbor's house? (dumb-shit) And  a 2 inch cannon is big by replica standards.  1.5 " is about as big as they get as replicas go. Hopefully they dont pile the charges on this dude.  Is he an idiot?  Yes.  Criminal?  No.

Video of a cannon about the same size:



Dude should stick to mortars if he is on that small of a chunk of land.

Video of bowling ball mortar:

Just what is/was the best Battle Rifle

I was thinking about this the other day after seeing one of the top 10 shows on the History/Military channel (Or as my domestic commander calls it "The damn black and white airplanes channel")    Now as it turned out the winner was the AK-47,  but I am in total disagreement.  A modern army that wants an AK is one that cant afford good weapons and/or training.  Sure its cheap and even a cave-man can use it but does it deserve number one billing?  I don't think so.  I have my opinion on what the all time best battle rifle is, and wonder what yours is. 
Criteria: Fire power, Innovation, Design, Length of service, and Historical significance.
Limitations: Shoulder fired, and modern rifle cartridge,

Go!