Ignorant Fool

Adam Zyglis is the editorial cartoonist for the Buffalo News of Buffalo, NY.

Just so we know who we are dealing with here.

While he is correct that there are guns at Ft. Hood, I just cannot reconcile the fact that they are all locked up in the armory. Since 2007.

Which, when an active shooter starts going nuts at the base, makes all those guns as useless as tits on a boar hog. They might as well be kept several counties over for all the good they will do locked up when they're needed.

But Our Genius here just instinctively knows that there are a ton of guns on a military base, and that they were no deterrent for an active shooter.

I just hope Our Genius didn't strain his brain too much to come up with this.

Laugh I Thought I'd Die

Surely we've all heard about the fake sign language interpreter at Nelson Mandela's memorial service, attended by heads of state from all over the world with this nimrod right beside them as they gave their speeches. Now we find this out:

A man being criticized by sign language experts for providing fake interpretations while standing close to President Obama and other heads of state at Nelson Mandela’s memorial says he becomes violent “a lot” and was hallucinating during the event.

Just the kinda guy you'd want standing next to Dear Leader. Just because, here is a clip showing the faker next to the President - so we know it really happened.


link

Now, I realize that the slip up in security is the fault of South Africa's security agency. Fine. However, as far as protecting Dear Leader, our Secret Service - the supposedly finest crack protectors on the planet - failed. How?

They trusted someone else to take care of their own security responsibilities.

Did they check each and every person who was going to be on the stage with Teh Won? Did they ask for complete background info on all these people? Did they verify this information?

Seems obvious they did not.

There are so many ways that the fake interpreter could have killed the President or any other leader that it's ridiculous. Where would we be if he had? What would our Secret Service have to say for itself then?

The point I'm working up to here is to just remember this little incident the next time someone tells you that you should not protect yourself because you should leave that to the police.

Are the cops as "high quality" as the Secret Service? Are they right beside us at all times?

Of course not.

Are we allowed to vet our protectors? Make sure they can shoot straight, can handle a weapon without negligent discharges? Guarantee that they won't show up in the middle of the night dressed in black, carrying military weapons and kill our pets even though they're at the wrong house? Tear the place down and never acknowledge that repairs will be needed?

Of course not.

How about maybe just show up on time when we need 'em?

Nope, can't even do that. What's more, if they don't make it, they aren't responsible. You paid for the service, but if it sucks, you have no recourse. Can't sue. No refund.

We've just seen the A team of personal security blow chunks internationally by trusting someone to take care of their responsibilities.

Why should I allow my right to personal defense to be abrogated in favor of an ineffectual law enforcement system?

So, when someone suggests that is just what we should do, I'm gonna be saying politely "You may piss off, madam/sir. It's my right, my responsibility, and no one is going to do the job effectively besides me."

I may not even be that polite.

Just A Little Info

As most of you regular readers know, I purchased a new Ford F-150 several months ago - three according to the service email I got from Rusty Eck Ford. I had to go to Wichita for an appointment with my endocrinologist and decided to get the thing serviced. Of course the seat had been moved when I got back in, which is to be expected since most people don't have their seats moved clear to the rear of the seat tracks. What I didn't know was that for some reason they had shut my headlights completely off from the "when it gets dark they turn on" setting.

So fast forward to that evening and I'm coming back home from Garden City, where I had to pick up some drugs (prescription, ya putzs) from Wally World. I had run out and needed 'em tout suite. And it's slightly after sunset and getting dark. And the new vehicles have dash lights that are on 24/7, so I thought I had my headlights on. I drove by a Highway Patrol car on the other side with a customer, and as I went by, I saw him pull out with his lights flashing.

Must have been someone towards Garden that was gonna get it.

Well, not so much. I drove a couple more miles before the white Charger appeared in my mirror (ease off the cruise set at 71 in a 65......), but it was too late. On came the disco lights.

He came to my window and informed me that he had come after me because my headlights weren't on and it was well after a half hour after sunset. Which shocked the crap outta me - of course when I saw the setting on my headlight switch had been changed, I changed it and told him what had apparently happened. He said he wasn't going to give me a ticket, but he still needed to see my license, registration, and proof of insurance.

Which are in my center console with the Glock 22 I carry in there, plus there was a Ruger Vacquero on the floorboards in it's factory case. After what I'd read in all the various gun boards and forums about being in this situation, I figured it would be a damn great idea for me to tell him about my weapons.

He was mostly concerned with the Glock - was it loaded? It has a loaded magazine but not one in the chamber. Well, I should go ahead and get it out and look for my paperwork. I pulled it out and set it on my console and finally found my other paperwork. He asked if I had CCW. I do not. He told me that I should consider getting one if I want to continue carrying the Glock in the console, because it was concealed when I did that and open carry laws didn't cover that. I told him I didn't want to argue the point, but my sheriff had told me it was ok. Which really only means he won't arrest me for carrying there, when you get right down to it.

Firearms may be openly carried in cars without any license except where localities have made open carry illegal; however, concealed handgun permits accepted by KS make the holder exempt from all local open carry bans.

According to the Highway Patrol and thus the State of Kansas, since I had it concealed in the console, it was not being openly carried.

He asked to take my gun with him. "For my safety" he said, and he wasn't speaking of me. Which I understood - should further investigation root out something pretty bad about me, when he came back I'd suspect he knew about whatever crime I was wanted for or whatever, and I'd ventilate him. Of course I'm clean as a whistle, but he honestly didn't know that. He sure figured as much, but he wasn't taking chances.

Honestly, I had NO problem with that. I couldn't and wouldn't do their jobs, just because there are people out there that will start shooting when they approach their stopped vehicle.

Also, when I got it back, he told me he'd put it under the seat. That is where he keeps his car gun, and it technically is out in the open, not under a sealed lid. Which is where it resides at this very moment.

And after all that, I told him that I'd driven many a mile over the country and dealt with many differents states' enforcement officers over the years, and it was my opinion that the best of all of them is the Kansas Highway Patrol. I wasn't blowing smoke - I do think that. I've run into quite a variety of personalities and some of them weren't cooperative or pleasant at all, but overall most of them are far superior. Most of my encounters with the others have generally been less than pleasant, and a lot of that had to do with their "bedside manner" and professionalism, which I found lacking in many. So, after all these years, I tend to say what is on my mind to these guys. If they were a pleasure to deal with, I'm all for giving them the props they are due.

Overall, I always say that dealing with various LEOs is like petting rattlers - sooner or later you're gonna get bit. So don't put yourself in the position to have to deal with 'em. But frankly, this time (and there have been plenty of other similarly positive encounters over the years) it was a reasonably productive and enjoyable encounter with a professional.

A Different Time

But the need still exists.

H/T Michael Z. Williamson on Facebook

Have Ya Noticed?

How the mainstream media has really been screwing the pooch lately? I mean more so than usual. Heh.

We would not be the only ones who have ascertained this fact.

The editorial cartoonists - even some of the liberal variety, have noticed as well.

This one pisses me off the most, as it outlines the ever present bias in our news media. Every time some idjut does something stupid, why then, it has to be tea partyin,' knuckle draggin,' mouth breathin,' redneck NRA members, radical religious right, Sara Palin lovin,' conservatives. Because we'uns have such a track record, doncha know. Eighteen years ago, hyperconservative Timothy McVeigh blew up the Murrah Building in OKC.

So "our" side is not without blood on our hands, even though it was put there by those who really had nothing to do with how conservatism works. The rest of the nutjobs have had definite liberal leanings. Judge ye conservative whacko until it's proven that is isn't, then don't judge so harshly when it's a liberal? How does that work, anyhow?

Frankly, I could give a rat's behind about the political leanings of these psychos. That they all need to die painful and memorable deaths is something I'm all in on. Never mentioning their names ever again would be another thought. But as long as there are those who'd try to use these acts of terror as triggers to obtain their political ends by destroying my rights, then I've as much use for those statists as I am the psychos who actually committed the crimes. Tar and feathers seems ever so applicable.

So Called "Gun Rights"

That was part of a comment left on this post by Erin Palette of Lurking Rhythmically. She was doing a bit of celebrating over the Senate's defeat of a slew of gun control bills, and one commenter wasn't happy about her stance on "gun rights," the chosen method of marginalizing her position.

The original post was a thing of beauty, but her response to the commenter is even better. Ms. Palette is a Pegasister (female brony), and spends a lot of her blogging time on that pursuit. Perhaps that might lead you to think she's a rollover, but you would be mistaken. Erin is heavily into self defense and the preservation of her rights, while still maintaining an overall progressive attitude. And she has a very good command of the English language and is quite adept at skewering those who piss her off. She does NOT care for condescending behavior, period.

So, go and read. Read her original post, then her followup. You'll appreciate the time you took.

Cry Me A River

The Senate can now officially consider it's ass has been chewed by Our Thwarted Dear Leader.

Nothing that was defeated would actually prevent or stop the killings that prompted this move. They were, however, infringing on our Constitutional freedoms. Obama claims the NRA "willfully lied" about gun registration. No, asshole, they didn't lie because your minions have said that registration is your goal. You, on the other hand, are lying when you and yours claim ninety percent support for the defeated legislation. You are also lying when you claim guns can be purchased without background checks on the internet.

Dancing in the blood of your constituents in order to advance your treasonous plans fails to impress us, Mr. President. Go back to ignoring the British and hide behind your teleprompter, before history rolls over you and your traitorous ass.

You may have guessed I don't care for getting my butt chewed for this shit.

Sunday Funnies

Been a while since I've done one of these, so here goes!

Nice to know the order of importance in Our Dear Leader's head.

Pretty much.

At least Crankshaft won't be driving the bus with actual children anymore until his broken arms heal.

As y'all probably know, I have little use for Jeff Danziger. However, even he sees that the jobs market is screwed.

 

As I was reading this I feared that the comics page would just never be the same. Turns out Marmaduke "marks" things differently than other dogs. Whew!

Turns out Snoopy is a stinking sellout. Of course, we've had clues (coff, coff, Metlife, coff). No surprise.

 Couldn't not post a Calvin and Hobbes Classic, now could I? Calvin shows he has a firm grasp on modern business principles.

I'm All For Liking This

This is an exchange I noticed on Facebook the other day. It's all local women posting, except for the instructor.

While the big robbery the other day was an influence, I know for a fact that it was just a tipping point. These women had been considering taking a class so they could carry concealed for some time and had been putting it off. The robbery was just a reminder.

I cannot tell you how much this gives me the warm fuzzies.

I am very happy indeed that our state and local laws allow and encourage women to be able to defend themselves effectively. They are completely aware that law enforcement is quite a bit of time away from them should there be any trouble, and that the local LEOs feel that women should be armed if they choose.

Plus, this is not the only thread talking about women taking concealed carry - there are others who are committed as well.

Like I said before: we don't care for this sort of thing in our town, and won't stand for it. This includes the women - not just us guys beating our chests. If someone is planning a repeat, best keep this in mind.

Edited to add: I had nothing to do with this - it was all from our local women! I just happened to see it on Facebook! And, I'm proud of them all!

So There!

link

I was in North Dakota for the better part of two days earlier this week, and I saw this ad tailored for that area. The push was to get the citizens of ND to let Senator Heidi Heitkamp know that they were for comprehensive registration. Oh, and it's funded by NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg. What a surprise.

Well, that was a failure.

Heitkamp tells Bloomberg to butt out on guns

GRAND FORKS — Sen. Heidi Heitkamp, D-N.D., responded sharply Tuesday to New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s TV ad campaign targeting senators who may be reluctant to support pending gun control legislation.

Bloomberg is personally financing the campaign in 13 states, including North Dakota, where he believes senators, Republicans and Democrats, need pressure from constituents to vote for requiring background checks for all gun purchases.

Of the roughly $10 million aimed at boosting support for the legislation across the country, about $156,000 is to be spent in North Dakota.

“North Dakota continues to have one the highest rates of gun ownership and lowest incidences of gun crime in the country,” Heitkamp said in a statement released Tuesday by her Washington, D.C., office. “Yet New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg insists on taking gun-driven crime statistics in his city and from other major cities and trying to force those numbers into a narrative that just does not fit in North Dakota.

“Frankly, there are far better uses for Mayor Bloomberg’s $156,000 than buying ads attacking a way of life he clearly does not understand.”

Heitkamp campaigned for the Senate seat in 2012 as a strong defender of the U.S. Constitution’s Second Amendment guarantee of the right to keep and bear arms.

Heritage, rights

“Gun ownership in North Dakota comes down to growing up in a culture where those rights come with an ingrained responsibility taught at a young age,” she said in her statement Tuesday. “We are proud of our outdoor heritage and will continue to protect the rights of our hunters and sport shooters, the rights of our farmers and ranchers to protect their crops and livestock from wildlife, and the rights of responsible, law-abiding citizens to protect themselves and their homes.”

She said she supports keeping guns “out of the hands of criminals and the dangerously mentally ill,” and that is why she supports “each state fully reporting into the FBI’s National Instant Criminal Background Check System.”

As North Dakota’s former attorney general, “I do not need someone from New York City to tell me how to handle crime in our state,” Heitkamp said.

“I know that we can go after and prosecute criminals without the need to infringe upon the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding North Dakotans,” she said. “I believe in using every tool available to find and prosecute criminals to the fullest extent of the law, and that includes criminals purchasing firearms or in the possession of firearms.

“I wouldn’t expect Mayor Bloomberg to follow my advice on how to run a major east coast city of over 8 million people, and I don’t plan to follow his advice on what is best for North Dakotans.”

Bloomberg’s ad campaign is not the first challenge Heitkamp has faced from gun control advocates since her election. In January, the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence placed ads in Politico and Roll Call as well as in North Dakota newspapers.

Heitkamp said she prefers “a balanced approach,” including a focus on the mental health aspect of gun violence, “and we need to live in reality, what can you actually get passed.”

And she is a Democrat, too.

And, as an aside, I know I was highly convinced this guy was a farmer and a father. After all, he's in a plaid shirt jacket sitting on the tailgate of a pickup fingering a shotgun, all of which I own (sans kids, anyway). Plus he has a beard. I'd just bet he wants his children to fill out 4473s for the time when he wants to pass on that shotgun and his obligatory deer rifle to one of them. Since he's a bona fide hunter and all. I really don't care for his finger placement, either - not in the trigger guard, but it sure isn't completely clear, either.

Lordy am I ever tired of these statists trying to control my life.

This News Makes Me Feel All Kinds of Good

A Tucson gun store owner has decided to rescind the sale of a military-style rifle to Mark Kelly, the husband of former U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, after Kelly said he had intended the purchase to make a political point about how easy it is to obtain the kind of firearms he's lobbying Congress to ban.

snip

But Kelly couldn't immediately take possession of the rifle because the shop had bought it from a customer. As a result, the store is required by a Tucson ordinance to hold the gun for 20 days to give the city enough time to make sure the weapon wasn't used in a crime.

Store owner Doug MacKinlay said Monday in a Facebook post of his own that he "determined that was in my company's best interest to terminate this transaction prior to his returning to my store."

"While I support and respect Mark Kelly's 2nd Amendment rights to purchase, possess, and use firearms in a safe and responsible manner, his recent statements to the media made it clear that his intent in purchasing the Sig Sauer M400 5.56mm rifle from us was for reasons other then for his personal use," MacKinlay said in the statement.
He added that the store will return Kelly's money, donate the rifle to the Arizona Tactical Officers Association to be raffled as a fundraiser and make an additional contribution of $1,295 -- the value of the rifle -- to the Eddie Eagle GunSafe Program.

As they say, read the whole thing.

 

I can tell you this - I'd buy something from this guy if I could just to give him some business. It's about time we gun rights supporters started sticking together and refusing to take money from those who wish us ill - such as states with severe gun control laws and their law enforcement organizations, and individual actions such as this. Maybe they'll catch a clue. Probably not, but it sure feels good.

Mr. Gabby

You may have heard that Mark E Kelley, Gabby Gifford's hubby, is in favor of gun control. I know I'm preaching to the choir, but I'm not sure how their efforts would have eliminated the threat to his wife, but there you have it. He's free to feel how he feels, but he isn't free to infringe upon my rights; like it or not.

But that's neither here nor there. The other day he was caught out purchasing an AR-15, and the act hit the news. He did not announce that he was going to purchase one, nor did he announce his intentions to purchase a .45. After the news came out, he then posted on Facebook

I just had a background check a few days ago when I went to my local gun store to buy a 45. As I was leaving, I noticed a used AR-15. Bought that too. Even to buy an assault weapon, the background check only takes a matter of minutes. I don't have possession yet but I'll be turning it over to the Tucson PD when I do. Scary to think of people buying guns like these without a background check at a gun show or the Internet. We really need to close the gun show and private seller loop hole.

He has not, to this point, announced what his reason for purchasing the .45 is/was, or if he will turn it over to the police as well.

Mmmmmmkay. I know if I want to make a well publicized point, I always step right out and do something without letting anyone know about it to achieve maximum publicity. Oh, wait.....

Or, for instance, let's assume I want to show how ineffective drunk driving laws really are. I'm sure I'd get plastered and drive all over, and it I happened to get pulled over, why I'd be just protesting. If I didn't, well, I'm sure I'd turn myself in. Promotion coming later and all. Yeah, that would work.

Nope, I'm not buying it. Mr. Giffords was caught with his hand in the cookie jar, and all this other crap is just playing CYA. Okay for me, but not for thee, until I'm shown as a flaming hypocrite.

Wonder what the odds are he's gonna keep that .45? Of course, he'll catch a break from any sort of investigative reporting from the mainstream media - if they didn't see it, it didn't happen, and they never see liberals being hypocrites.

H/T Breitbart

Not Quite His Point

Of course Mike Luckovich's point here is hahaha isn't La Pierre a hypocrite because he'll go through all the TSA screenings just to fly, but he won't stand for background checks when it comes to guns. What a moron, etc, so on and so forth.....

I'm sorry - well - maybe not so much - but you've been missing the point entirely, Mikey Luckovich. We are not wild about the screenings because they are just as effective in combating terrorism as background checks are combating criminals from getting guns. People who value their liberty object to both types of screenings.

Which is probably why we'll never reach a compromise with useful idiots like Luckovich. In his world, the TSA screenings are A-OK because there is someone doing something that makes him feel better. No matter if it works, it makes him feel better. Same with gun control measures - someone in charge is doing something. Actual operational effectiveness is not a criteria for judgment. Feeling good about it is.

So "they" don't care how or what we think about personal liberties, as long as their collective feelings are massaged. Which is why we need to beat 'em at the ballot box, out organize them, and outmaneuver them in every way to preserve and regain our rights. Let 'em whine, they sure as hell think that way about us. Why do we think we owe them something?

Great Speech!

link

Short, sweet, to the point, and spot on. If you cannot relate to what this guy says, there is no hope.

I had no idea who this gentleman is, but the complete story is here. Dan Bongino is a former Secret Service agent who ran for the US Senate in Maryland and lost. Too bad he wasn't out here in red country - we'd vote for a guy like this in a heartbeat. I guess he has too much common sense and says what needs to be said.

H/T Doug M. at SondraK

Just An Idle Thought

All of us Second Amendment types really wonder what would happen if "they" came for our guns - how many would resist and shoot back, what would happen, how the police and military would handle it, and on and on and on.

I gotta tell ya though, the thought occurs to me if one guy can make the LAPD go completely chicken with their heads cut off, trying to kill innocent citizens without following due process, and just being general failures at their jobs because they have lost their heads, what would it be like if thousands of bitter religion clinging gun bigots across the nation started doing the exact same thing?

I must note that I do NOT condone anything Christopher Dorner Jordan has done. Going after the daughter of the person he felt wronged him is reprehensible. He is on a vendetta for revenge, not trying to defend his rights. Big difference.

From Chuckie's Mom's Fridge

Picture from SondraK

How Chuckie Shumer has any business messing with my gun rights half a continent away is beyond me. Guess that means I can tell him how to run his life, too? If so, eff off you statist SOB.

H/T SondraK

"I Feel Like Our Media Isn't Being Honest About This."

link

He is much nicer and more polite than I. I've pretty well lost patience. But, this gentlemen presents his arguments logically and he's backing it up with actual data, rather than just "feeeeeeeelllllings."

No, Danziger, He Is Not

This twisted individual is NOT the NRA. He couldn't even pass a background check to buy a gun, remember? And you seem to deliberately forget all the educational efforts, training, safety and other areas the NRA undertakes in order to make a non valid irrational hyperbolic and sensational invalid point.

You, on the other hand, are a bigot wallowing in statist dreams of dominance and superiority over those less enabled than your fine self. Go away, I'm tired of your bleating.

Stick to Sportcasting

This is but one of many meme pictures floating around on Facebook tonight. In case you missed it, Bob Costas went on a rant during halftime of the Sunday Night Football game on NBC in support of gun control. He mostly quoted an opinion piece of Jason Whitlock's, apparently another bigoted and ignorant statist.

I could go on and dissect his arguments: they are certainly simple enough and have been debunked and proven wrong so many, many times before by about anyone with a brain, but what I want you to read is this open letter to Costas and Whitlock.

Gentlemen: I see that you have chosen to use the horrific crime of the murder of Kasandra Perkins to express your belief that guns are the problem, not the men who wield them. I am utterly certain that you believe that you have the moral high ground on this matter. I am equally certain that such a belief is appallingly wrong, not to mention terribly misogynistic. Why do I say this? Because had your desires on gun control been in place, I would not be alive to be writing this now. 

 I have an Ex. I have an Ex who, in the process of becoming my Ex, made credible threats to kill me. Why did I believe these threats were credible? Because among the primary reasons why I left him were that he had anger control issues, that he was a problem drinker well on his way to full blown alcoholism and that the things he was throwing at me were getting ever closer to my head. I decided to leave before finally snapped and actually hit me. He was displeased by this and made such displeasure known. 

 Do you know what kept me safe? Not some piece of paper. Not a judge tut tutting at him and shaking his/her finger and telling him to leave me alone. Not the police, who, after all, would only be able to respond once he had caused me harm. No, what kept me safe was my Glock. What kept me safe was my Glock and the fact that he knew I had both the ability and the will to empty a clip into his chest if he made good on his statements that if I did not come back, I would not see the next week. He never tried to do any of the things he screamed he would because he knew that not only would I defend myself but that I could. My Ex was nearly a foot taller than me and, at the time, had about 150 pounds on me. If he had been able to get close enough to me to harm me, there were very few options I had to protect myself. But with my Glock, well, I would be able to stop him before he got that close. I am alive today because he knew that if he tried to make that otherwise, there was a better than even chance he would be the one lying there in a pool of blood instead of me.

Now go and read the whole thing, what she says is very powerful and far more persuasive than any sort of logical conclusions I could imagine.

Helping Out

Got this in an email:

               

September 20, 2012

The Poor Farmjeffrobodine@gmail.com

Dear Friend:

In the last 15 days, supporters of the 2nd Amendment pledged nearly $15,000 for support of the important new film “Assaulted: Civil Rights Under Fire”

 that exposes California as the front line in the civil rights battle between public safety and the 2nd Amendment.  The Second Amendment Foundation and the Calguns Foundation have each contributed $5,000.00 to get this project off the ground. 

As a blogger and the writer of The Poor Farm, you are at the cutting edge of communicating with the online Pro-2A community and we are asking you to join us in supporting this project. Your help is necessary to make this happen.

Please go to http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/assaulted/assaulted

 and make your pledge now. Also, of equal importance, we are asking you to reach out to your readers and let them know about this project.

Thank you for your support,

 Ray Carter
Director of Development

12500 NE 10th Place
Bellevue, WA 98005
O:(425) 454-7012

F: (425) 451-3959

www.saf.org

Hey, I'm not even sure how I registered on their radar, but I'll do what I can.