Tags Posts tagged with "NRA"


by -
11 553

Sixty years ago, some high schools had shooting clubs. Guns were a part of everyday life. Kids grew up around guns.

But not anymore.

These days, many kids are likely to learn what they (think that they) know about guns from Hollywood and from music videos. Gun education has to be sought out instead of having responsible gun owners all around you to teach you the basics. One of the main reasons that gun violence is a problem in our society today is that people aren’t taught about guns or gun safety at any age. They just think that it’s as simply as pointing at someone and pulling the trigger like in a music video.

And it is that easy to do something horrible to someone else. Which means it’s also that easy to ruin your life if you do something stupid with a gun because that’s how the media taught you to use one.

So, the question is: Are you going to teach your kids (and any other kids within earshot) gun safety and, if so, starting at what age?

Well, first of all, use common sense. Keep weapons out of the reach of children. Yes, you want them accessible if you need to use it for self-protection, but keep it where those too young to understand could do something to hurt someone.

Once they are old enough to understand (and this means starting them at four and five years old or younger if the child is mature enough to grasp this), teach them the four rules from the National Rifle Association’s Eddie Eagle program. That is, if a child sees a gun, they are to stop, don’t touch, leave the area, and tell an adult. John Boch quotes a retired FBI agent about this:

“When do you teach kids about guns?  About the same time you teach them about hot stoves, electricity and fire.”

Once those children have the maturity to handle a weapon (and certainly only after some training and a period of supervised usage) should a child be able to ever have access to a gun.

Our children are precious. Protecting them is one of the reasons that we own our guns, but protecting them also means making sure that they know gun safety and that, once they are old enough and mature enough, they know how to properly use them.

by -
20 1177

As an adult, you know that, even when you do the right thing, that doesn’t mean that you’ll have immediate victory. There is an unfortunate story in an anti-gun stronghold which confirms this fact of life.

You see, the Michigan Supreme Court recently upheld a University of Michigan rule which banned guns on its campuses. The Associated Press notes,

In a 2-1 decision, the court said a 2001 ban doesn’t violate the U.S. Constitution. The court also said the university isn’t covered by a state law that prevents local governments from putting limits on guns.

The university is a “state-level, not a lower level or inferior level, governmental entity. More specifically, it is a constitutional corporation of independent authority,” judges Mark Cavanagh and Deborah Servitto said.

All University of Michigan properties are gun-free for students, non-police staff and the general public, unless a waiver for “extraordinary circumstances” is granted by the public safety department.

Judge David Sawyer wrote a dissenting opinion, saying the university is exceeding its authority by adopting its own restrictions. The appeals court decision was dated Tuesday [June 6, 2017] but released Wednesday [June 7, 2017].

With all due respect to the majority justices in this case, this is the kind of ridiculous thinking that only can come from a state which starts from an anti-gun viewpoint. In the first place, any limitation that doesn’t involve a conflict with another right has no reasonable limitation.

Clearly (and you don’t have to be a Constitutional scholar or a genius), this ban on guns on college campuses only violates the Second Amendment rights of college students (and any visitors) in the State of Michigan. It makes those college students even less safe.

And this gun ban comes from the people crying for safe spaces who say that they are concerned about rapes on campus. But, if they really wanted to keep college students safe, then Constitutional carry would be the rule.

It’s ridiculous, and those majority justices need to be sent back to a real law school to learn their jobs.

by -
1 642

A Bernie Sanders-supporting rapper goes on a liberal talk show. It sounds either like a set up to a joke or to a story from some anti-gun blowhard who has no idea what he is talking about, but, no, this is a true story. You may be pleasantly surprised about the outcome, though.

Comedy Central has a new talk show called Problematic with Moshe Kasher. Ryan Girdusky described it as “one of the countless comedy talk shows featuring a white progressive lecturing millennials about why conservatives are wrong.” Interestingly, though, on the May 16, 2017 episode, rapper Killer Mike told Kasher why he is a gun owner and a member of the NRA. Girdusky fills us in:

Mike said that he’s been using guns since he was a small child and that his grandparents owned guns in the Deep South to help fight against threats from the Klan. He even admitted he’s a member of the National Rifle Association. […]

The host was stunned and disappointed, trying to reason with the rapper “you’re a Bernie guy, you’re a progressive.”

“Human beings are complex, and in matters of politics, you go with the stronger lobbying group for the things that you f*cking want,” Mike said.

[MTV’s Ana Marie] Cox said that she was a gun owner and wanted some forms of gun control, especially on handguns. However, Killer Mike disagreed saying handguns were the most efficient way of self-protection.

Additionally, Piper Laurie Smith, a member of the Pink Pistols, a LGBTQAI pro-gun group said, “When seconds count, the police are often minutes or hours away. A 100-pound female has a chance against four linebackers if she’s carrying.”

Whether you agree with their politics or their lifestyle choices, Killer Mike and the Pink Pistols get it. Guns protect people from people who want to kill people, and the choice to have guns must remain available for all Americans.

by -
2 898

A new study destroys anti-gun narratives and sheds more light on the reality of murders in America. A mere 1% of counties in America account for 19% of our murder rate. Murder is highly concentrated in a few areas of the country. Most of America has an extremely low murder rate which is skewed by a few insane high crime areas.

The anti-gun lie is that, because America has more guns than most European nations, gun ownership is to blame for our higher crime rates. In fact, research is continually showing that most of America has extremely low rates of crime despite having much higher rates of gun ownership.

Check this out:

This week, a new report from the Crime Prevention Research Center (CPRC) revealed just how concentrated murders are in the U.S. Citing county level data from 2014, researchers determined that a small fraction of all counties are responsible for a majority of the murders in the U.S.

According to the report, just 2 percent of all of the counties in the country account for 51 percent of the nation’s murders. The top 5 percent of counties account for 68 percent of all murders. Further, 69 percent of all counties experienced one murder or less in 2014.

It is correct to expect that counties with large population centers are going to necessarily account for more murders. However, as the report details, the most dangerous counties account for an outsized proportion of murders given their population. The report noted, “The worst 1% of counties have 19% of the population and 37% of the murders. The worst 5% of counties contain 47% of the population and account for 68% of murders.”

CPRC also pointed out that murders are often highly concentrated within a given county. Citing Los Angeles County, which experienced 526 murder in 2014, CPRC showed that there were wide swaths of the county with virtually no murders.

CPRC’s data dovetails with other research on the concentration of criminal violence. In recent years, researchers from Yale University have studied the concentration of violence in certain social networks. In a 2015 piece for the Hartford Courant that succinctly outlines some of this research, Yale Ph.D. candidate Michael Sierra-Arévalo explained that Yale University sociologists determined “70 percent of all shootings in Chicago can be located in a social network composed of less than 6 percent of the city’s population.” Sierra-Arévalo also cited a study from researchers at Harvard and Yale, that examined violence perpetrated with guns in Boston. This research showed that violence is heavily concentrated even within a given city, determining that “between 1980 and 2009, 89 percent of Boston streets never experienced an episode of gun violence,” and that “more than half of all the gun violence during the almost 30-year period occurred in only 5 percent of the city’s streets.”

The bottom line is that the vast majority of murders happen in an extremely small area, amongst a small segment of the population; that is engaged in the gang culture. In places like Chicago the vast majority of murders happen with guns that are illegal to begin with.

Wether it’s the murder rate in Chicago or South America, the cause of high murder rates is crystal clear. Gun control has no correlation with murder rates and the existence of gang culture has everything to do with it.

Europe has a lower murder rates because they have fewer MS13 gangbangers killing each other (duh!). Brazil and Chicago, IL have high murder rates because they have a small percentage of the population in the gang culture, shooting each other.

The ability of law abiding citizens  to possess guns has never been correlated with murder rates. Both Brazil and Chicago have intense gun control laws but high murder rates, meanwhile 69% of American counties had one murder or less despite having some of the highest rates of gun ownership in the world.

by -
9 1491

Judge Dredd would be at home carrying this massive integrally Maxim 9 silenced pistol from SilencerCo. Building the silencer into the pistol might not be a passing fad, it actually makes sense for law enforcement and military use. Furthermore, with the pending Hearing Protection Act, the general public can serve as early adapters to prove the worth of the concept.

This particular pistol is probably too expensive and bulky to handle the task of an everyday duty pistol. However, it’s still freaking awesome to behold.

So behold it:

We really are in the golden age of firearms. With more gun owners than ever and gun friendly laws in many red states, the free market is doing what it does: creating, innovating, and cutting costs. Some of these new guns are just fads while others just might be the beginning of a whole new era. It’s too early to be sure where this gun fits in. With a price tag pushing $2,000 it’s not going to be mass produced. However, it is a real trailblazer with a unique action that includes locking lugs. Behold!

by -
3 738

Speaking at the NRA’s annual meeting on April 28th, Donald Trump will be the first sitting president to do so since Ronald Reagan. The NRA threw aside tradition and endorsed Donald Trump well before he even had the Republican nomination secured. Given that Trump has supported banning so-called assault weapons in the past, it was highly unusual for the NRA to endorse Trump so early.

The move paid off big time for the NRA. Getting the President of the United States to come to your annual meeting is a big deal, from fundraising to prestige it’s a huge win for the NRA. For Donald Trump it’s also a win-win. He can shore up some support with some of his disgruntled his conservative/libertarian base. Support he has been slowly losing by getting involved in Syria and failing to repeal Obamacare. Normally, the media would raise a huge stink about the president helping on the NRA like this, but the left-wing media has already maxed out the outrage factor. Trump is already being portrayed as a fascist dictator who spawned from Satan himself. Visiting the NRA at it’s annual meeting isn’t going to hurt Trump politically, it’s just another story that will be lost in the noise of the anti-Trump machine.

The NRA realized that Trump was going to win the nomination long before most pundits did and they also realized that Trump would be rewarding loyalty to him. While some angry Ted Cruz fans may have canceled their memberships for understandable anger, the NRA played the long game and won. Trump has put himself in a position where violating campaign promises on guns will be much more difficult than it will be with other issues. America is now discovering the difference between presidential candidate Trump and President Trump, to the relief of gun owners President Trump likes the Second Amendment just as much as candidate Trump did. Here’s the NRA announcement.

by -
11 1539

You don’t normally hear of tech companies offering to help the NRA. Snapchat probably didn’t have pro-gun motives when they made this hysterical threat to Bloomberg’s gun control group Everytown for Gun Safety.

Check this out, from A.V. Club:

This comes from a series of leaked emails that indicate that Everytown had approached Snapchat about doing some kind of branded content about preventing gun violence early last year, with Snapchat’s head of political sales Rob Saliterman quoting the nonprofit at least $150,000 for whatever it was planning. Then, separate from that potential deal, Snapchat’s news team approached Everytown about working together to promote gun safety with a big event that would feature videos of families talking about loved ones they lost to gun violence alongside celebrities like Kim Kardashian and Amy Schumer talking about the importance of gun safety. This project also wouldn’t cost Everytown any money, so it gave up on the other deal and moved forward with the free one instead.

Eventually, Saliterman found out that he was losing out on advertising money, so he sent this message to Everytown:

I just learned our News Team is doing a Live Story on National Gun Violence Awareness Day. I would urgently like to speak with you about advertising opportunities within the story, as there will be three ad slots. We are also talking to the NRA about running ads within the story.

How hilarious is that? Snapchat threatened to sell the NRA advertising during a free project for Bloomberg’s astro-turf gun grabber group. Again, Snapchat isn’t pro-gun, they are just greedy. They obviously made the threat to try to grab some extra cash from Bloomberg.

Who could blame them? Bloomberg’s been flushing money down the toilet all decade long, with one after another failed gun control initiatives. Of the few victories Bloomberg did have, many are in the process of being rolled back by state courts or justice departments.

Ohh, and Trump is president. Looks like those campaign donations didn’t do much good, did they Mike? A fool and his money are quickly departed…



by -
3 994

Elections have consequences. Law-abiding gun owners across America keep reaping the rewards as a consequence of the 2017 election. The 2017 windfall now includes a solid defender of the Second Amendment as Attorney General of the United States.

Jeff Sessions could be the best friend gun owners ever had in the Department of Justice. The NRA made voting to confirm Sessions a part of it’s scorecard for legislators. Good luck getting an A rating from the NRA if you didn’t vote to confirm Sessions. That means that “pro-gun” Democrats will virtually all be taking a hit in their NRA ratings.

Here’s announcement from the NRA celebrating the Sessions confirmation:

“The NRA and our five million members would like to congratulate Jeff Sessions on his confirmation as attorney general. He will make America a safer place by prosecuting violent criminals while protecting the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding gun owners.”

Here’s how the NRA put the pressure on Democrats to vote for Sessions (from Politico):

Some of the most vulnerable Senate Democrats up for reelection in 2018 — including Sens. Joe Donnelly (Ind.), Jon Tester (Mont.) and Heidi Heitkamp (N.D.) — have expressed skepticism about Sessions but have not committed to voting for or against him yet. All three senators have enjoyed relatively favorable (for Democrats) treatment in the past from the NRA, which spent more than $50 million during the 2016 election, mostly supporting Trump and Republican Senate candidates.

The NRA endorsed Donnelly for reelection to his old House seat in 2010, and he and Tester had A and A- ratings, respectively, from the NRA during their 2012 Senate runs. The NRA barely spent any money on independent-expenditure ads opposing them or Heitkamp that year, according to Federal Election Commission records.

The new TV ad, backed by a six-figure ad national buy on Fox News and digital outlets, says that Sessions is “an attorney general who supports police” amidst dwindling respect for law enforcement.

“We were raised to respect law enforcement. They put their lives on the line for us. But now, cops are attacked. Gunned down in cold blood,” a narrator says in the ad. “[Sessions] will get criminals off our streets. And protect the Second Amendment.”


Ultimately, Joe Manchin, of West Virginia was the only Democrat to vote for Sessions. However, Manchin’s vote was important since the final tally was a close 52-47. The pressure the NRA put on supposedly “pro-gun” Democrats who voted against Sessions will continue to weigh on them in the future. Joe Donnelly, Jon Tester, and Heidi Heitkamp just voted against one of the best supporters of our right to bear arms ever, the NRA isn’t going to forget that, regardless of whatever other policy differences they had with Attorney General Sessions.



by -
14 2626

American Rifleman has a nifty way of figuring out what the top three selling concealed carry guns are. Instead of asking manufacturers, who are often pretty secretive about actual sales numbers, Rifleman asked six of the biggest holster manufacturers. This method reveals which guns people are actually carrying. They came up with this list. Can you guess what gun is number one?

Check out this video with the top three carry guns from Lock, Stock, and Barrel:

Off the top of my head, I might have guessed that Glock would have been number one. It turns out that the M&P Shield is the winner according to the impromptu poll conducted by American Rifleman. Since most gun owners have more than one gun, it’s interesting to see what gun they actually carry on a regular basis.

All three make fine carry guns, as the number of Americans who carry concealed continues to surge, it’ll be interesting to see which brands stay on top. What do you carry and why? Talk amongst yourselves in the comments section below.

by -
35 3504

Neil Gorsuch was just nominated by Donald Trump to replace Antonin Scalia on the United States Supreme Court. Exactly where he stands on the Second Amendment isn’t totally clear due to a lack of rulings, but here is the best information we have to go with so far:

From the NRA:

During his tenure on the Tenth Circuit, Gorsuch has demonstrated his belief that the Constitution should be applied as the framers intended.  To that end, he has supported the individual right to self-defense.  Specifically, he wrote in an opinion that “the Second Amendment protects an individual’s right to own firearms and may not be infringed lightly.”

“On behalf of our five million members, the NRA strongly supports Judge Neil Gorsuch’s confirmation to the U.S. Supreme Court. We will be activating our members and tens of millions of supporters throughout the country in support of Judge Gorsuch.  He will protect our right to keep and bear arms and is an outstanding choice to fill Justice Scalia’s seat,” concluded Cox.

So far, so good, at the very least he agrees that the Second Amendment is an individual right. Already, he is a thousand times better than any of the four liberal justices on the court! Ohh, and he loves to hunt and fish too. However it’s really not totally clear where he will stand on some of the other issues the court might face, such as concealed carry reciprocity. He is at least adequate, but is he great?

From Inverse:

Unfortunately, for those who might be wondering, there doesn’t seem to be much indication that Gorsuch feels any which way about the Second Amendment. He hasn’t ever ruled on this issue. In public statements and in his writing, he has not mentioned where he stands. For some, this may constitute a cause for concern, but the lack of information on Gorsuch’s stance likely comes more from the dearth of court cases relating to this issue than it does from any reluctance on his part to present his opinion.

There have been few notable court cases involving the Second Amendment, lately — because there have been so few gun control measures actually passed, leaving little to challenge in the courts. Still, there is enough related information to say that Gorsuch will at the very least be friendly, if not totally helpful, to the interests of gun advocates and owners.

Rest assured this guy is better than anything Hillary Clinton would give gun owners. He interprets the second amendment as an individual right to bear arms, Hillary doesn’t. Neil Gorsuch might not have the voting record to accurately assess where he stands in greater detail, at 49 years of age, we might literally have several decades to figure that out.



0 218
I'll be the first person to admit that I'm not really a country music fan. Now, before you start a flame war in the...