Fun With the Ruger 10/22

I had a fun trip to the range today and fired 100 rounds of my very valuable .22lr down range. I've gotten a lot better- because there wasn't a 20mph crosswind and it was 20 degrees warmer than last week's trip. My groups are a lot tighter with controlled breathing.

I am shooting high and to the left- I'll look at seeing if I can adjust elevation in the future.

Confiscation Coming Soon to Connecticut

Understanding the Declaration, the 2nd Amendment and Inalienable Rights

Thomas Jefferson, in the hayday of the creation of our country was a freshman on all counts. No one wanted to be bored with the pleasantries of writing the formal Declaration of Independence, so all of the old guys gave a parchment and a pen to Thomas Jefferson and said 'here, have at it'.

Today's post will analyze this historical document in the context of your civic duties as an American citizen. Among items such as voting and (unfortunately) paying taxes, you have a civic duty of non-compliance with a government that is tyrannical. Let's read the text.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

We're not here to debate whether God exists or not- I could have written the Declaration of Independence and said 'they are endowed by the flying spaghetti monster' and it doesn't make it any more true or false. A statement is not evidence. Off of that tangent.

The Bill of Rights, in addition to Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness are guaranteed to all persons in this country. In order to secure these rights, a government will be elected from the consent of the governed (you and me). This means that the purpose of government is to protect the rights of the people and to run the country.

Whenever a government becomes destructive in abolishing the fundamental rights of law abiding citizens, it is the right of the people to change the government or to dissolve it, and to institute a new government in its place that is laid upon the foundations of our founding documents.  Dissolving the government can come about in many ways- including a vote, protest, or by force.

Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.

Here, Jefferson advocates that the government should not be changed for light or 'petty' reasons.

But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

Despotism is defined as one group, such as an oligarchy, or an individual ruling with absolute power. When there is a 'long' train of abuse and usurpations of our rights and founding principles, under the guise of purposefully eroding these rights, the people have a right, and a duty (whether you like it or not) to remove such a Government and to institute a new one which will secure their rights for the future.

To change the government, in a time when it has its own survival in mind (rigged the system); without active force means the application of non-compliance through civil disobedience to any unconstitutional law. The law or action must be unconstitutional- and not merely something that you don't like. If Congress passed a tax on soda tomorrow, that is constitutional, I have a right to be pissy about it and a right to complain. We are in a different realm; in a class of actions that clearly usurp and undermine the Constitution. In our context, let us read the 2nd amendment:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

To secure the rights of a free nation, and to establish the security and well being of the people, the right to keep and bear arms shall not be undermined or infringed.

The right to keep and bear arms, like the entire Bill of Rights are enshrined in these amendments. Removal of the amendment by Congress does not mean the destruction of the inalienable right. Again, the Bill of Rights enshrines these inalienable rights into a paper document.

Any law or action by a government of the United States which is contrary to any amendment of the US Constitution is to be met with non-compliance, in a hope to raise awareness and to passively change a corrupt government without the use of force.

It's quite simple. Whether you like it or not, it is your civic duty to vote, pay taxes, and apply non-compliance to a tyrannical government in their pursuit to undermine our rights. Failure to perform your civic duties... well I will let your peers judge you.

If the US government is uncomfortable with the ideas in our radical document; written by the people for the people, then it has self-interest in mind over serving the people. 'Controlling' the people's rights and taking them away runs contrary to what our nation was founded upon.
 

  

Glock Confirms what the Model 42 Is

Well the hub bubb about the Glock 42 can be put to rest. Glock officially announced the technical specifications of their new glock model 42. Again, I am more interested in a double stack pistol because I can get away with concealing one. I am looking at a Glock model 19 for a future upgrade, but my needs are currently still met by my Bersa Thunder 380 loaded with Winchester JHPs.

.380 Caliber 101

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: A Historic Week for the State of Illinois and the Right to Bear Arms

NY Defies the Constitution to Institute Draconian Laws

Article II
Section IV
United States Constitution

"The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors."

Effective immediately, I call on legislators, watch dog groups and private citizens to file suit against every elected politician who voted for the violation of the 2nd Amendment by violating the citizens of New York rights to keep and bear commonly used firearms, now dubbed "assault weapons". The new draconian laws ban 80% of commonly used firearms today.

Registration of said firearms breaks the law set forth in the Obamacare act and violates the Constitution by undermining the right to keep and bear arms.

The individuals who voted "aye" on this legislation are traitors to the United States of America under the high crime of violating the US Constitution in an attempt to usurp their political agendas over it. These people should be thrown out of office effective when the law is signed into office.

Associated Press Uses "Assault Rifle" Misnomer And Aids "The War on Guns"

A couple of days ago, a story came up in my news feed regarding Blaec Lammers, the 20 something who planned to shoot up a movie theater and then slaughter people at a nearby Walmart. This story was written by Associated Press. In the third paragraph, they said that Lammers purchased "two assault rifles" weeks before his dastardly deed.

Associated Press would not confirm whether the weapons were "fully automatic", or if they used a common misnomer for "semi-automatic" firearms. I sent an email to them a week ago and never heard a response. They either did not read the email, read the email and did not care, or were told by superiors not to reply to the message.

The TL;DR version of all of this is that Associated Press has lost my trust as a trustworthy news source. As a matter of fact, my "trust" for information without accurate sources has now fully evaporated. Whether AP has sinister motives against firearms or not, their actions by this author, HEATHER HOLLINGSWORTH, the AP has certainly painted a picture against firearm use.

________

Here is the email  I sent to Associated Press.

________

Hello AP,

My inquiry is regarding an article written by a Heather Hollingsworth in Kansas City, Missouri.

The author uses the term "assault rifles" in paragraph 3 of the text. Could you please cite the source that investigators claimed the weapons were fully automatic? An "assault rifle" is a pejorative term for a select fire (3 round burst) or fully automatic weapon, firing multiple bullets with one pull of the trigger. Was this information gleaned off of similar news articles, a mistake on the part of law enforcement or the journalists, or is there something more sinister lurking in the background that the author is attempting to convey?

A fully automatic "assault rifle" is a class 3 weapon in the United States of America, as as such, every owner who has one MUST register the weapon with the government. To my knowledge, I have not learned of any gun store in the United States that is selling fully automatic firearms to unqualified individuals. Does Mr. Lammers have a permit and tax stamp for such a weapon? There has been only one crime committed in the United States in the past 30-40 years with a fully automatic weapon.

A semi-automatic firearm does not require a class 3 weapons license, and can be purchased by an individual with a proper background check. Semi-automatic firearms are not select fire or fully automatic, and the trigger must be pulled every time a bullet is to be fired. One trigger pull, one bullet fired.

There is a very heated debate right now regarding whether a person should be able to own a semi-automatic weapon or not, and I know the mainstream media is misleading readers into believing that semi-automatic firearms are the same as assault rifles, when clearly they are not. You need to clarify whether the weapons were fully automatic or not, and begin citing sources when posting your articles. “federal authorities” does not tell me anything.

I have trusted Associated Press for years to bring accurate reporting to the forefront. “Assault Rifle” is an extremely common misnomer used by the major media corporations and the common layperson, and I would trust that an honest media corporation would make the distinction and not attempt to mislead readers.

-Robert

________


I have received zero comment from AP.