Bay area police: Take out active shooters!

February 21, 2013 by · Leave a Comment
Filed under: Gun Rights 

Story here.

Law enforcement agencies have begun adopting a new policy on so-called “active shooters,” encouraging civilians to take safety into their own hands and take down gunmen who threaten them at work or school.

So we have finally realized that the tactics have to change. Great! Now isn’t the next logical step ensuring that the people have the tools to do what you have asked them to do?

And the list keeps growing

February 20, 2013 by · Leave a Comment
Filed under: Gun Rights 

Sean has updated the New York Boycott list. Go take a look.

Why didn’t I think of that?

February 20, 2013 by · 2 Comments
Filed under: Economics 

So, the US Postal Service is slowly going bankrupt under a crushing load of unfunded pensions and union wages.  Fortunately, there is an obvious solution.

What?  Re-negotiate the labor contracts to something sustainable?  No, no, no.  The answer we were looking for was promote brand awareness by starting your own clothing line.

“It will make a contribution, but it’s bigger than that,” Betts said. “It’s really brand reputation, brand awareness, in addition to revenues.

I can totally see how this plays out: “Man, what a cool jacket! I think I’ll go home and send some *correspondence*, yo!”

I personally can’t see how this could possibly fail.

On ignorance

February 20, 2013 by · Leave a Comment
Filed under: Idiots 

Other bloggers have commented on the, oh shall we say, breathtaking stupidity that was Joe Biden’s “tactical advice” to women looking to defend themselves.  I console myself with the thought that maybe he isn’t deliberately giving bad advice to women to advance a political agenda, advice that could potentially get them arrested.

Maybe he is just an ignorant blowhard.

Ah ha!

February 19, 2013 by · Leave a Comment
Filed under: Gun Rights 

So that’s who they are at war with!

h/t Robb

Another addition to the New York boycott list

February 19, 2013 by · Leave a Comment
Filed under: Gun Rights 

Sean adds Armalite to the list…sadly on the “Naughty” side.

Seems Chris at Arma Borealis had an exchange with the company. It did not go well.

You can read the whole thing, but I wanted to pick out one part of the the response by Mark Westrom, President of Armalite

We are well familiar with the fact that most rifles serving Police Officers are purchased by the officers themselves, and that they shouldn’t be punished for the actions of their political elite.

Baloney. Why should police officers be any more insulated from the negative effects of the actions of the state than the citizens who they serve?

One of two things is true here:
1) As President Obama says, “These are weapons of war, and have no place on our streets!” If this is true, then it raises the obvious question “Who are the police at war with?”
2) These are defensive weapons, in which case they should be available to everyone who needs defending, citizens and police alike.

I’ll add one more thought, and that is to say that by definition, a boycott is an attempt to solicit a particular behavior from someone who isn’t doing what you want them to. In other words, it is by definition a hostile action. Armalite’s policy is misguided. The political leadership in New York has demonstrated that they won’t listen to the citizens of their state. Maybe they will listen to their police.

Sean for the win

February 12, 2013 by · Leave a Comment
Filed under: Gun Rights 

My buddy Sean at An NC Gun Blog has set up the “New York Boycott” page to heap praise on those manufacturers who are applying consistency in state gun laws.

Olympic Arms joins LaRue in consistency

February 12, 2013 by · Leave a Comment
Filed under: Gun Rights 

Olympic Arms has joined LaRue Tactical in announcing that they will consistenly apply state law to citizens and police:

Legislation recently passed in the State of New York outlaws the AR15 and many other firearms, and will make it illegal for the good and free citizens of New York to own a large selection of legal and safe firearms and magazines. We feel as though the passage of this legislation exceeds the authority granted to the government of New York by its citizens, and violates the Constitution of the United States, ignoring such SCOTUS rulings as District of Columbia v. Heller – 554, U.S. 570 of 2008, McDonald v. Chicago – 561 U.S. 3025 of 2010, and specifically the case of United States v. Miller – 307 U.S. 174 of 1939.

Due the passing of this legislation, Olympic Arms would like to announce that the State of New York, any Law Enforcement Departments, Law Enforcement Officers, First Responders within the State of New York, or any New York State government entity or employee of such an entity – will no longer be served as customers.

In short, Olympic Arms will no longer be doing business with the State of New York or any governmental entity or employee of such governmental entity within the State of New York – henceforth and until such legislation is repealed, and an apology made to the good people of the State of New York and the American people.

Well done, folks!

h/t Sebastian

A note on language

February 11, 2013 by · Leave a Comment
Filed under: Gun Rights, Newbie Info 

In writing yesterday about the courageous stand being taken by LaRue tactical, I realized that one thing was bugging me about their press release.  It had to do with a word choice.

Gunnies are a notoriously picky lot when it comes to nomenclature.  Calling a magazine a clip, for example, will almost certainly cause a cacophony of protest.  But gun banners are a tricky lot, and they are very good at controlling language.  For example, inventing the “assault weapon” and the “high-capacity magazine.”  We’ve gotten better about perfecting our responses.  Replacing “assault weapon” with “modern sporting rifle” and calling the factory magazines “standard capacity” are subtle changes, but they go a long way to change public opinion.

Which brings me to the heart of the matter.  There is one word that LaRue used in their press release that I thought was unfortunate.  That word was “civilian.”  This is not to take anything away from what LaRue is doing.  We all use the word incorrectly from time to time, but it is a bad habit to get into.

I’ve been using an alternative word in place of civilian that I think sums up my position quite nicely.  That word is “citizen.”  Note the difference:

“There is no reason for a civilian to have an assault weapon!”

vs

“There is no reason for a citizen to have an modern sporting rifle!”

What about:

“There is no reason for a civilian to carry a concealed weapon!”

vs

“There is no reason for a citizen to carry a concealed weapon!”

A subtle distinction to be sure, but one implies equality, and one does not. And I think it is important to draw that distinction.

LaRue Tactical steps up

February 10, 2013 by · 3 Comments
Filed under: Gun Rights 

I was very impressed with the response by the gunnie community to Reed Exhibitions’ bigotry at the Eastern Sports and Outdoors Show.  Vendors of all sizes, including some small vendors who’s products had nothing to do with black rifles, put their money where their mouths were and pulled out of the show.  Now is seems LaRue Tactical has taken a page from the Ronnie Barret playbook, and has said that they will be applying the same rules to law enforcement agencies as apply to citizens in their state.  From their Facebook page:

Due to the recent and numerous new Anti-gun/Anti-2nd Amendment laws passed and/or pending across our country, LaRue Tactical has been forced to reconsider how we provide products to state and local agencies.

Effective today, in an effort to see that no legal mistakes are made by LaRue Tactical and/or its employees, we will apply all current State and Local Laws (as applied to civilians) to state and local law enforcement / government agencies. In other words, LaRue Tactical will limit all sales to what law-abiding citizens residing in their districts can purchase or possess.

First, major, major kudos to Mark LaRue and the folks at LaRue Tactical.  Well done, and thank you for your support.  Second, Grass Roots NC is asking SIG, Glock, and Smith and Wesson to do do the same.  Their alert is below:

Do other manufacturers support the Second Amendment only when it’s profitable to do so?

The Second Amendment has always had fair-weather friends. LaRue Tactical, manufacturers of firearms and firearm accessories, is one company that will never be accused of being our fair-weather friend. When New York State passed its unconstitutional anti-gun law, LaRue swung into action. In a move reminiscent of Barrett Firearms’ banning of all sales to California law enforcement (http://www.thegunzone.com/rkba/rkba-50.html) after California banned .50BMG rifles, LaRue has stated that it will not sell anything to local law enforcement that it can’t sell to you and me.

In a news release dated 2-8-13, LaRue states:

Effective today, in an effort to see that no legal mistakes are made by LaRue Tactical and/or its employees, we will apply all current State and Local Laws (as applied to civilians) to state and local law enforcement / government agencies. In other words, LaRue Tactical will limit all sales to what law-abiding citizens residing in their districts can purchase or possess. (http://www.facebook.com/LaRueAccuracy#!/LaRueAccuracy/posts/529849683721877)

Lest you think that LaRue, more famous for accessories than anything else, is making an empty statement, take a look at the AR style rifles they manufacture (http://www.laruetactical.com/rifles). New York banned them for sale to citizens, so LaRue won’t sell them to the NYPD either. Will other firearm manufacturers have the guts to stand up like LaRue and Barrett do?

The NYPD allows officers to select one of three firearms for duty carry: (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_City_Police_Department#Firearms):

• SIG P226 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SIG_P226)
• Smith & Wesson 5946 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smith_%26_Wesson_Model_5906)
• Glock 19 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glock_19#9.C3.9719mm_Parabellum).

All of these pistols are equipped with a greater than 7-round magazine, making them illegal for sale to law-abiding New York residents.

IMMEDIATE ACTION REQUIRED!

• Send the following letter to SIG, Smith & Wesson, and Glock and ask them to follow LaRue Tactical’s lead. Tell them to adopt the same rule: If it can’t be sold to citizens, it won’t be sold to State and local government.
• Go to LaRue Tactical’s Facebook page and thank them for standing up for your Second Amendment rights: http://www.facebook.com/LaRueAccuracy#!/LaRueAccuracy/posts/529849683721877

Contact

Cut and paste email list: publicsafetysales@sigsauer.com, dgrier@smith-wesson.com, LE.info@glock.us

Deliver This Message

Suggested Subject: If it’s illegal for us, don’t sell it to police!

Dear Law Enforcement Sales Manager,

Recently New York rushed an ill-advised and unconstitutional law infringing on the rights of law-abiding gun owners. Other states are poised to write similar laws. I urge you to follow the lead of LaRue Tactical which has adopted this policy: If it can’t be sold to law-abiding citizens, it won’t be sold to state and local police agencies either.

There are 800,000 sworn police officers in the entire United States. The FBI reports a total of 2,495,440 NICS checks, and thus firearms sales, in January alone. Police sales are not your major business. It’s time for firearm manufacturers to send a clear message that you will not participate in the slow erosion of our Second Amendment rights.
(NICS numbers Source http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/nics/reports/20130205_1998_2013_monthly_yearly_totals.pdf)

Signed,

A Concerned Gun Owner

Take some time to send an email, and let them know that you support this.

Next Page »