Big Head Press

L. Neil Smith's
Number 772, May 25, 2014

Walton & Johnson. I hereby guarantee
that there is absolutely nothing else
like it on the air or on the Internet.

Previous Previous Table of Contents Contents Next Next

Neale's (combined) Gun Rant for the week(s) of 5-18-14 & 5-25-14
by Neale Osborn

Bookmark and Share

Special/Attribute to L. Neil Smith's The Libertarian Enterprise

Before I start this rant (actually, as I finish this rant, but you'll see what I mean in a minute), I'd like to take a few moments to explain how I write these things, and why I missed last weeks, and why chronologically, Mama Liberty's SECOND contribution to this rant is at the beginning. I write these things using a certain blog-site's article writing section, then copy it, paste it, and send it off to various places for publication. Why? Because I like the format the site has. But it has one HUGE fault. The whole article stays on ONE page, so the more I write, the farther away from the Block-quote, italics, bold face, and other use-full shit I get. in addition, I start writing NEXT week's rant about 15 minutes after THIS week's goes out. So each time I write, I start it at the top of the page, to keep the toolbar closer to where I'm working. This means the LAST thing I write is the FIRST thing you see. Last week, three hours before I would normally wrap my rant up, my computer died. Soooo, I broke out my spare. It died. Thus, I had a complete rant, stored online, I couldn't access except with a computer that takes 23 minutes just to open an e-mail. And that's why you got no rant last week. I got my computer back last night, and have been typing furiously for the last 24 hours (okay, probably for 2 hours IN the last 24, but you get the drift). Ennyhoo.... That's why the links get older the closer to the bottom you get, and that's why Mama Liberty's "FIRST" contribution references "last week", yet that contribution is the "second" in this rant.

With that taken care off, enjoy the rest of this labor of love.

Mama Liberty's first contribution to the rant for this week. [Link]

Last week I wrote about the priorities of training, with ongoing situational awareness and realistic analysis of your individual risk factors as potentially even more important than your gun handling skills, vital as those are. This week I'd like to start with one of the specific risk factors and some of the things that can be done to avoid problems and improve one's overall readiness to respond appropriately if and when the trouble you don't want comes along anyway.

Do you live alone, or spend a good part of your time at home alone? Do you travel alone, staying in motel or hotel rooms and eating out alone? Do you find yourself alone at night in strange neighborhoods and parking lots because of your work or other obligations? Do you ride a bus or take a commuter train, subway or other public transportation?

Follow the link. Read on.

My wife (and her mother, who lives with us) loves Chipotle's burritos. So I get them every time I drive to Rochester—100 miles away. When I visit my Mom, I get them (and Chik Fil A for me), put them in a cooler, and bring them home. I have been in Chipotlle's dozens of times, never leaving without spending at least 40 bucks. But no more will I give them money, because they have wet their pants, and kissed the asses of a bunch of whiney anti-Constitutionalists, and put up signs telling me not to shop there. And, as a restaurant in North Carolina just learned a few days ago, that does not work out well in the long run. [Link]

Yesterday a restaurant in North Carolina was robbed at gunpoint despite having a sign up prohibiting guns on the premises.

The armed robber paid no attention to the sign, or maybe he couldn't read it. Surely, if he had he would have promptly put his gun in his pants and just ordered a BBQ sandwich, averting disaster. That's what criminals do, right? Avert disaster? They oblige warnings, respect authority and comply with official policy. Yeah, uh huh. Dream on.


On May 19, Moms Demand pressured Chipotle [restaurants] because a group of customers openly—and legally—carried their rifles into a Dallas Chipotle restaurant over the weekend.

Twitchy published Chipotle's response to Moms Demand:

Recent participants from an "open carry" demonstration in Texas brought guns (including military-style assault rifles) into one of our restaurants, causing many of our customers anxiety and discomfort. Because of this we are respectfully asking that customers not bring guns into our restaurants, unless they are authorized law enforcement personnel.

This makes Chipotle the newest gun free zone in a long list of zones like Ft. Hood, the Aurora movie theater, Sandy Hook Elementary, the DC Navy Yard, Arapahoe High School, and on and on...

I do not give my business to businesses that don't want me on their premises. I'm an American, I'm armed, and I'm not going to take it any more. The funny thing is, I carry concealed. They'd never know I was carrying there UNLESS I needed to defend myself (and, coincidentally, their customers and restaurant). But unlike them, I respect private property rights, so I will NEVER carry on private property where I am not wanted. Of course, as the story points out, criminals will obey these signs, too. NOT!!

I guess I must be a terrorist, because I've played hangman for decades, and I homeschooled my kids, using variation of it to aid in getting them interested in reading and spelling. But now, that's the action of a terrorist. [Link] SERIOUSLY???

However, anyone participating in Hangman in school these days will find themselves suspended and grilled by the local police department as possible criminals or terrorists. At least that's what happened to a 13 year old in Beaverton, Oregon last year.

According to a lawsuit filed by the student's father, Robert Bernard Keller, his son was doodling in class and drew the Hangman game. When the teacher saw what he was doing, Keller's son was taken to the principal's office where he was suspended and then grilled by Beaverton police officers. It seems the teacher interpreted the Hangman game as threat.

A comment made by Mike Miller with Independent Journal Review concerning this dangerous 13 year old:

"Kudos to the Beaverton School District and Police Dept. for apprehending this potential criminal before it was too late. Who knows? His next move might have been to chew a Pop-Tart into a gun— just like that dangerous 7-year-old boy did in Maryland last year."

Where are the brains of the creatures we call teachers? It seems to me that they are located in their rectal cavities these days....

Ve haff vays to make you zink correctly, Ja! Ve are ze Thought Police! [Link] sending an 8 year old to the office for THINKING about a gun!

The thought police are at it again, and this time the victim is an 8-year-old boy. As part of a school "imagination" project, the boy drew a picture of a gun. Of course, the school freaked out and claimed the boy's action demonstrated "bad behavior." What is going on in this country?

What is going on indeed?

We pause in the middle of the rant a nice piece by Mama Liberty, because computer problems prevented a rant last week. [Link]

I read quite a few shooting and personal defense type blogs, and occasionally participate in such forums as well. Most, of course, reflect the interests of men, and young men seem to be fairly dominant. Even the blogs that showcase shooting and self defense for women seem geared toward the young and physically active. The training usually encouraged, then, is most often the vigorous and intensive sort, usually in a formal shooting school such as "Front Sight"—or at least fashioned after that level of experience. I can always tell that when the first sentence starts with: "I trained with three Navy Seals" over the weekend..."

Now, I don't know about you, but I'm not ever going to be able to "train with Navy Seals." My 68 year old body has received a good number of insults and injuries over those years, and all that running, crouching and crawling around on the ground is simply not something I can do.

But older folks, and those of any age with limited physical abilities, have as much—or more—need to defend themselves than the young and fit. I think that goes without saying—but I said it anyway.

Follow the link to see where this leads. It's worth it.

I've bitched about this before, but hearing a cop admit WHY they want them makes it far more scary.... [Link] Armed to fight our returning veterans who are now considered to be "terrorist threats" for doing the jobs asked of them (and being a group that over 90% of whom oppose the actions of the sitting government).

Sgt. Dan Downing of the Morgan County Sheriff's Department states, "When I first started we really didn't have the violence that we see today," adding, "The weaponry is totally different now that it was in the beginning of my career, plus, you have a lot of people who are coming out of the military that have the ability and knowledge to build IEDs and to defeat law enforcement techniques."

Downing goes on to relate how citizens approach the vehicle when it stops at gas stations to express their concerns that the militarization of police is about arming cops with the tools required for mass gun confiscation programs.

"We were actually approached when we'd stop to get fuel by people wanting to know why we needed this...what were we going to use it for? 'Are you coming to take our guns away?'" said Downing. "To come and take away their firearms...that absolutely is not the reason why we go this vehicle. We got this vehicle because of the need and because of increased violence that we have been facing over the last few years.... I'll be the last person to come and take anybody's guns."

Sorry, pal, but you do NOT have a need for military vehicles to fight "growing violence" when overall, violent crime is down 70% since 1993. Try another lie. You want them to use in the fight against the Bill of Rights, and the American citizen.

I really want to see gun companies say "none of your business" and simply refuse to supply cities who demand such irrelevant information. [Link] The very title of the article shows the bias of the authors.

Jersey City has begun requiring gun companies that supply its police department with weapons to disclose more about their business practices, an effort that is being watched by law-enforcement agencies in other cities.

Gun-control advocates and firearms industry representatives said Jersey City is the first municipality in the nation to demand such information.

Questions include how firms dispose of old weapons and comply with background-check laws, and whether they make semiautomatic rifles—often called assault weapons—for sale to civilians, according to bid documents viewed by The Wall Street Journal.

Intimidation of businesses IS business as usual for New Jersey, though. And even the article admits the city law is a deliberate attempt to intimidate the companies into thinking they cannot get contracts without caving in to their demands.

The requirement went into effect earlier this year for gun and ammunition contracts worth at least $500,000 for Jersey City's 800-member police force. The purpose: to try to change the firearms industry through the power of the city purse.

"It shows municipalities and police departments have the ability to shape the dialogue," said Steve Fulop, the Democratic mayor of New Jersey's second-largest city, about gun buying.

The effort is setting up a fight with gun makers and supporters of Second Amendment rights.

"These politicians are politicizing the purchase of firearms for law enforcement, when law enforcement should be able to buy whatever best suits their needs," said Andrew Arulanandam, managing director of public affairs for the National Rifle Association.

As the article points out,

There is skepticism that law-enforcement agencies could have much impact on the nation's $15 billion market for guns and ammunition. Jersey City typically purchases about $250,000 in ammunition and guns each year—more this year because more police officers are being hired—a tiny piece of the market.

Even if other police departments demanded such information, a survey of large firearms manufacturers found that law enforcement accounted for up to 10 percent of their total sales, said Maksim Soshkin, guns and ammunition industry analyst for IBISWorld, a market-research firm. Mr. Soshkin was skeptical that the industry would change in response to the wishes of a small segment of the market.

Let's hope the companies stand strong.

Hasn't the Ft Collins PD ever heard of gun shops? Most gun shops run an FFL NICS check for about 25 to 50 bucks. Their excuse for keeping the gun sounds fishy to me. [Link]

Sara Warren of Fort Collins works as a maid, cleaning the homes of numerous strangers. She has a conceal carry permit for her Ruger compact SR9 handgun that she carries for protection. On March 28, Warren was involved in an auto accident which resulted in her being taken to the hospital for treatment of her injuries. When police checked out her car, they found her gun and took it into their possession.

Upon checking her out, they discovered that she legally owns the gun and she was not in violation of any firearm laws. However, they say that they are not legally able to return her gun to her.

According to the new state anti-gun laws, Sara Warren has to have a Federal Firearms License check run on her and the Fort Collins police say that they have no procedure for running such a background check. Fort Collins Deputy Police Chief Jim Szakmeister told the local media that the city attorney met with the district attorney and they concurred that Warren's gun cannot be returned to her without the FFL background check. Therefore, they cannot return her gun to her even though she is the legal owner and already has a conceal carry permit.

One must hope that the Ft Collins Police Chief is deliberately doing this to spark a lawsuit that will end with the revocation of the anti-Constitutional law Colorado has rammed down the throats of the People.

Quote(s) of the Week.

"Both the oligarch and Tyrant mistrust the people, and therefore deprive them of arms."

"No law ever written has stopped any robber, rapist or killer, like cold blue steel in the hands of their last intended victim."
—W. Emerson Wright

"The sheer immorality of victim disarmament aside, one would hope every law enforcement officer out there would stop to consider all the possible ramifications of kicking in several million doors because the occupants are well armed."
—Carl Bussjaeger

This concludes this exercise of the 1st Amendment in celebration of the 2nd Amendment.

Was that worth reading?
Then why not:

payment type

This site may receive compensation if a product is purchased
through one of our partner or affiliate referral links. You
already know that, of course, but this is part of the FTC Disclosure
Policy found here. (Warning: this is a 2,359,896-byte 53-page PDF file!)

Big Head Press