Before I get into that, let me mention this: next time you hear some slimey politician or useful idiot celebrity or sychophantic talking head on one of the alphabet networks saying that no one wants to confiscate law abiding citizen's guns or mess with the Constitution think about these two first steps in the war on your rights:
Missouri Democrats introduced legislation, HB545 that would compel law abiding gun owners to turn in their assault weapons within 90 days or be charged with a class c felony. No word yet on how these Dems are expecting to find all the lawfully owned weapons they want to confiscate, but maybe they'll take a tip from this next bit of facist legislation:
Democrat Senators in Washington state put forth a bill, SB5737 that would enable police to search the homes of law abiding gun owners once a year to ensure that their assault weapons are properly stored. So much for that pesky 4th Amendment, eh? I think Piers Morgan just had an orgasm.
The gloves are off folks. These fascist lefties don't have the balls to try and rescind the 2nd Amendment, but they're going to try ever possible end around to disarm you and render you completely helpless. Just keep watching, there will be more of this to come. More brazen as time goes on if we don't put a stop to it.
Anyway, I'm curious what these pinkos are calling an assault weapon, since as I mentioned before, it's a made up term. So I took a peek at the MO bill to see what was in it. Very illuminating, to say the least.
Section 571.023 defines an assualt weapon as a (c) Semi-automatic pistol that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine and has one or more of the following: d. The capacity to accept a detachable magazine at any location outside of the pistol grip;
Hmmm . . . As a former competitive shooter, I competed in state and national competitions in Olympic and International courses of fire. Here are two of the firearms I used:
Yep, both of those Walther pistols are assault weapons under the MO law as the magazines attach forward of the grip. Btw, one is chambered for .22lr the other .22short, yep real dangerous killing machines there.
So what else can't we have? Let's see also defined as an assault weapon is (a) Semi-automatic rifle that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine and has one or more of the following: a. A pistol grip or thumbhole stock
Uh oh . . . looks like these two centerfire .22's aren't going to make the cut either:
Oh those damn thumbhole and pistol grips, they're the devil I tell ya. 'Cause we've got more -- also banned (d) Semi-automatic shotgun that has one or more of the following: a. A pistol grip or thumbhole stock; You guessed it, this little duck hunting number from TriStar is history too:
The bill also makes illegal any high capacity magazines and defines them as any ammunition feeding device with the capacity to accept more than ten rounds which makes the factory supplied magazines for these commonly owned handguns illegal to possess:
Like I said, this is just the start. Once it starts with these little steps, what rights will be next? You know the bit about absolute power corrupting absolutely? Well, once these fascists get on a roll with stripping away your rights for the greater good where will it stop? What do you have to have taken away before you'll open you eyes and say stop?
Danica Patrick won the pole today during quailifying for the 2013 Daytona 500. Congrats to her and the entire Stewart-Haas team as all three drivers were at one point holding down the top three positions.
I was hoping for a bit more during the telecast about the new cars, but perhaps that will come out in next weekend's pre-race stuff. NASCAR is making a big deal about their rebranding of the cars to more reflect the actual vehicles they are based on. Some long time fans (i.e., me) have complained loud and long about the generic design of the cars. Hoping to improve a bit on flagging attendance, which is more an economy driven thing rather than a disinterested thing, NASCAR is hoping that drifting away from the IROC-like quality of their cars will make for a more compelling product.
Ironically, Dodge was the first manufacturer to debut the new look cars last year, but the only team using Dodge -- Penske, has shifted to Ford, so no one is driving Dodge's in the Sprint Cup Series. They are still present in the Nationwide, with the very cool looking Challenger running along side Mustangs and other brands.
With no actual track experience with the new designs, variables like drafting and such will have to be worked out during the two Bud Shootouts and the big race itself. Could make for some exciting stuff next weekend. I'm looking forward to it.
yep, I spelled it poll originally . . . I'm blaming the concussion :-(
The Tampa Bay (formerly St. Pete) Times has begun a new bit on their editorial pages to highlight a letter of the month to the paper. Not surprisingly, their first winner parrots the paper's disdain for the second amendment.
William G. Emener of St. Pete Beach posits the specious argument that since he does not have the right to drive his car at any speed he wants, gun owners do not have the right to own any weapon they choose. He goes on to state that reasonable people have to forgo certain rights because of the misuse or abuse of those rights by unreasonable and irresponsible people.
A more accurate and logical, and thus easily disproved argument would be that Mr. Emener may own any vehicle he is legally allowed to own, but he may not operate that vehicle in a manner that is dangerous to the public at large. I may possess any firearm I am legally allowed to own, but I may not endanger the public by misusing that firearm. That is already against the law. No one is suggesting that vehicles be banned because of abuse that Mr. Emener may do with them. Indeed, Mr. Emener's own argument works against him as he is claiming that he is capable of responsible use of his vehicle therefore he should be allowed to own one despite the potential for disaster if it is misused. I make the same claim about owning an AR-15 or AK-47 or SKS or any other scary looking firearm.
I would be curious to hear what Mr. Emener defines as an "assault weapon" since that term is actually a non-existent classification of firearm. It is a term coined by anti-second amendment forces like the Brady group, HCI, and others. He also refers to guns with high capacity clips. Could you define "high capacity" for me Mr. Emener? It is 30 rounds? 20? 15? 10? 5? Many 9mm pistols have 15 round clips. Are those now to be deemed assault weapons? A model 1911 Colt and its clones can have 8 round clips ( and some double stacked models even more), are those assault weapons? This is why the original assault weapons ban was defeated by the courts -- too overly broad and open to wildly varying interpretations.
In his closing, Mr. Emener breaks out this frightening rationalization:
"Sometimes we have to give up certain rights...for the better good. Doing so...is being a mature, reasonable and responsible citizen."
Wow! How many tyrannies have been inflicted, how many rights trampled upon, how many lives lost because someone deemed it for the better good of society? 70 years ago, a charismatic leader convinced the citizens of his country that for the greater good of society, certain segments of that society had to be eradicated. And thus 6 million innocent Jews were murdered. Too extreme an extrapolation? I think not. Once we start erasing our constitutional rights to salve our consciences there is no end to the restrictions on the freedoms granted to us by the founding fathers and the Constitution.
I'm sorry Mr. Emener, you are not a mature, reasonable and responsible citizen, you are a sheep...a lamb being led to the slaughter by your own refusal to make the hard choices in life, to demand that people be held accountable for their actions, that criminals be punished not coddled, etc. You would bubble wrap the world, remove all choices in life and subjugate yourself to the whims of a government that is your employee not your superior!