This Tweet:

AR 15 is complex & difficult to operate & clean. Shotguns with buckshot have been the recommendation for home defense. BuckShot scatters so you have a better chance of hitting or wounding perp. Shaking hands with AR 15 not going to hit anything when home invasion occurs.

— 🌻 FlyAway🏳️‍🌈⚢ (@Tejaas23) June 5, 2021

This is the bio for @Tejaas23:

This is a woman that is both a US Army veteran and an engineer from the University of Southern California.

She thinks the AR is too “complex & difficult to operate & clean” and that you don’t have to aim with a shotgun full of buckshot.

Could she prove any more succinctly that just because someone was in the Army, doesn’t mean they know fuck-al about guns?

Also, from an engineering standpoint, let alone a gun owner’s standpoint, I’d rather break down and clean an AR-15 than a Mossberg 590 or Remington 870.

The engineering behind the AR-15 is marvelous.

And let me be clear on this, when I talk about the engineering of guns, it’s not my armchair opinion.  I have been and continue to be a gainfully employed engineer in small arms design.  Trust me, I know what I’m talking about.

In one Tweet, this woman has given me the ammunition to shoot down all of her opinions as ignorant, partisan horseshit.

Update:

I can dissemble & reassemble a M-16 blindfolded. I’m sure I’ve shot more sophisticated weapons – like .50 Val’s, LAWs & TOWs & M1A1 120mm main rounds, 20mm Gatling gun mounted on helos & several foreign made weapons.

— 🌻 FlyAway🏳️‍🌈⚢ (@Tejaas23) June 5, 2021

“Dissasemble blindfolded” is no something anyone in the military is trained to do, that’s some shit that Hollywood came up with.

Second, what does a TOW or 120mm have to do with anything?

Lastly, how did she shoot both an M1A1 and a helicopter 20mm?

The only 20mm I’m familiar with for helicopters is the M-197 which I’m only aware of being mounted on Navy helicopters.

She would have to jump both MOS and branches to shoot both a tank main gun and helicopter automatic cannon.

This seems more and more like bullshit.

That’s Judge Roger Benitez, a death-worshiping fascist who has never noticed that the word “own” – or anything like it – is absent from the 2nd Amendment.

We can no longer tolerate gun nuts in the judiciary https://t.co/8s0xL4VVNL

— Keith Olbermann⌚️ (@KeithOlbermann) June 5, 2021

A death-worshiping fascist?

Born December 30, 1950, in Havana, Cuba.

His childhood was the Cuban Revolution.

This is a man who has seen death-worshiping statists destroy a country with his very own eyes.

There is a reason Benitez’s decision contained the wording: ” the popular AR-15 rifle is a perfect combination of home defense weapon and homeland defense equipment.”

This is a man who knows firsthand what happens when people do not have the weapons to defend themselves or their homeland.  They get stood up against a pot-marked wall by some death-worshiping statists.

I’m 100% positive that what went through his head when he was coming up with his decision were images from the news of Antifa waving Communist flags and wearing Che shirts.

The reason Olbermann is so angry is that Olbermann imagines himself leading the firing squad, giving the orders to shoot the people that stand in the way of his Progressive utopia.  Now he has to imagine trying going door to door, leading his Antifa goon squad under withering fire from knuckle-dragging Redneck Trump supporters.

Specially the Only Three Boxes per Customer rule. They had around 40-50 boxes and leaving just with three was painful.

This comes from none other than National Progressive Radio.

California Assault Weapons Ban ‘Disrespects’ Freedom, Federal Judge Writes

For more than three decades, California has banned certain types of semiautomatic rifles including the AR-15 under an “assault weapons” ban. On Friday, a federal judge threw out the ban, ruling that it violates the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

“The Second Amendment is about America’s freedom: the freedom to protect oneself, family, home, and homeland,” Judge Roger Benitez wrote for the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California. “California’s assault weapon ban disrespects that freedom.”

“If the lower courts were following Heller directly … that would be the end of the case,” said David Kopel, a constitutional law professor at Denver University Sturm College of Law, and adjunct scholar at the libertarian-leaning Cato Institute.

Among similar cases that have been heard across the country, Benitez’s opinion is “by far the most thorough in its careful examination of the evidence,” Kopel said.

“This case is not about extraordinary weapons lying at the outer limits of Second Amendment protection,” Judge Benitez wrote. The firearms that the California legislature had deemed “assault weapons” are actually “ordinary, popular, modern rifles,” he said.

That’s good news.

Judge Benitez did a deep dive into the AWB and thoroughly took it apart.

Granted, the Supreme Court can do whatever it wants, but it is going to be much harder for them to reverse this decision the more thorough the opinion is.

Roberts is the sort of Iron Law of Bureaucracy Justice that is more interested in maintaining the image of the Court than he is in any individual case decision.  It makes it much harder for him to throw out a decision that is thorough and well-argued, especially when it comes from a fellow Bush appointee.

If the Supreme Court decides to take this case, if California successfully appeals it, it seems like it has a good chance of surviving and possibly putting an end to future AWBs in this country.