You knew this was coming and more will be coming. The Islamic War on Women… kinda has a not-so-nice ring to it.

Then again, it was not a woman who hijacked two of your planes, killed 100 passengers and crew and helped kill 3,000 other Americans. I am guessing United will continue to cater to their every whim or risk having their planes used as lawn darts.

Hat tip Eddie C.

And the damned dog had better weapon manipulation than a lot of the tacticool videos we have seen.

I was walking minding my own business at the parking lot of local Bog Box retailer when a young lady coming the opposite way,  looked at me briefly, turned her head, stopped looked at again me and gave me the Eyefuck. I am not talking about the new definition which for old geezers meant “come hither” but the one that cops get after a criminal knows they have him by the short and curlies and is about to spend a lot of time wearing orange and staring at vertical bars.

Back to the young lady: Her look was one of surprise/fear, followed by shock as in “it can be” and then a slow turn to seething hate mixed in equal parts with disgust. You could tell by the twisting of one of the corners of her lips and the shrugging of her nose she was trying to detect the emanations of sulfur from my body. She looked at me as Beelzebub on Earth, a vampire that needed to be stalked, something, no idea what.

I admit it was a bit of a shock initially: I don’t recall even seeing this particular woman and I don’t recall pissing anybody off in Real Life for a long while, I was confused. Why the hate? The answer came soon… she looked up at the top of my head and her face grew even more intense with hate. It was my cap that incited that much, this cap:

I could not help myself but smiled and continued walking past her.  I did look back a couple of times to ensure she was not going to go stupid on me, but she eventually carried on to her destination.

And I have to say it: It was sweet. Sorry, I guess I am supposed to be shocked at the hate that those three letters inspire, but I am done trying to be the nice one when coming up against fanatical idiots.  Let them be consumed on their own hate, I will enjoy their self-demise.

PS: I read about the “Eyefuck” reference from David Simon’s excellent book “Homicide: A Year on the Killing Streets.” If you haven’t read it, put it on your list.
PS2: Yes, the TV series comes from that book.

Let’s go backwards on this one:

Guns aren’t the answer to violence; sensible legislation is | Opinion

Julie Morrall is a long-time Fort Lauderdale resident, with a master’s degree in Public Administration. She previously worked with the Florida Legislature and is now active in the League of Women Voters gun safety committee and Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense.

OK, now we know where the “opinion” piece is coming from.

“While my family did not face the terrible situation that occurred in Terminal 2 at the Fort Lauderdale airport, we were in Terminal 3 when there were reports of a second shooter. We experienced terror — instant and complete — as a SWAT team with guns raised appeared in our terminal and passengers began running through our area shouting “Second shooter!”

My three children, my husband and I scrambled, hid and prayed that our safe zone would not be breached by the shooter. In time, the police secured the area and thankfully, we eventually arrived home safely.”

I am a firm believer in hiding when the SHTF. Praying when things have gone stupid? Not so much, I rather be pro-active. Although I do believe in God, I also know he ain’t there like some sort of miraculous butler to fix stuff on demand.
And another thing, “Safe Zone”? Is it me or the fact that Esteban Santiago shot up Terminal 2 made a lie to the concept of Safe Zone inside the airport terminal?

“Having experienced firsthand the fear we felt when we thought there was an active shooter, I want to share my perspective on this situation. I am convinced that defensive weapons carried by multiple civilians would have made a terrible situation worse.”

And here we go. Let’s forget that we already had Active Shooter situations where Armed Civilians intervened and police arrived and the “situation” did not get worse. But the False Narrative must be maintained.

“In those split seconds between panic and self-preservation, there is no way to distinguish a good guy with a gun from a bad guy with a gun. If I had drawn a defensive weapon, I would probably be dead.”

I like this. She is saying that anybody that has a gun in that situation, including cops, is a moron that will react at the object and not at the action. It is amazing that undercover and plain clothes cops don’t get shot more often in our streets. I mean Uniformed Officers are so stupid that they will shoot anybody with a gun!

“Based on the behavior I witnessed, there was every possibility that my good intentions would have been misinterpreted by the police or others with defensive weapons. Had I had a weapon and seen one drawn, I would have shot first and asked questions later.”

Wait one second. But you stated that you have a gun and a permit, that, by your definition should make you untrustworthy as being unable to decided what is right and what is wrong.

Why should we pay attention to what you have to say?

And the way Moms Demand has riled against Gun Owners with permits and doing everything they can to make sure we have fewer and fewer places to carry and trying to eliminate laws and rights to avoid unnecessary and untoward prosecution, the “fact” that you have a permit and a gun makes you a hypocrite at best and possibly a liar.  Or you are one of those “superior” citizens that thinks themselves above the rest of the plebes? “I can have all the guns I want, but why allow them Cubans or Haitians that come mow my lawn carry?” I don’t want to speculate and make her uncomfortable while she sips a cool alcoholic beverage at the well-guarded Coral Ridge Country Club.

I saw this posted over at Everytown’s Facebook Page:

Lets look at that last sentence again.

We’d like to know if Judge Gorsuch is committed to the current understanding of the Second Amendment, or will he threaten our fundamental gun safety laws?

I’d like to know what color the sky is in the world that Everytown lives in.

Judge Gorsuch is a believes in Constitutional originalism and is a “textualist.”  In a nut shell, originalism or textualism is a legal philosophy in which judges focus only on the words written in the Constitution and try to understand what the Founders meant when they wrote our foundational document.

Like [the man whose seat he’d assume, the late Justice Antonin] Scalia, Gorsuch is a proponent of originalism — meaning that judges should attempt to interpret the words of the Constitution as they were understood at the time they were written — and a textualist who considers only the words of the law being reviewed, not legislators’ intent or the consequences of the decision.

Critics say that those neutral considerations inevitably lead Gorsuch to conservative outcomes, a criticism that was also leveled at Scalia.

Taking Gorsuch’s textualism into account, what “current understanding of the Second Amendment” is Everytown talking about?

The watershed moment in modern American gun rights was Heller vs. The District of Columbia which held:

The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home.

Two years later, the Supreme Court doubled down in McDonald vs. Chicago.

McDonald argues that the right to bear arms is a fundamental right that states should not be able to infringe.

In a very short time, the Supreme Court delivered a one-two punch for gun rights.

Some people just can’t accept that reality.

Too bad for Phil White, SCOTUS dealt with just that issue in Heller.

   (a) The Amendment’s prefatory clause announces a purpose, but does not limit or expand the scope of the second part, the operative clause. The operative clause’s text and history demonstrate that it connotes an individual right to keep and bear arms. Pp. 2–22.

        (b) The prefatory clause comports with the Court’s interpretation of the operative clause. The “militia” comprised all males physically capable of acting in concert for the common defense. The Antifederalists feared that the Federal Government would disarm the people in order to disable this citizens’ militia, enabling a politicized standing army or a select militia to rule. The response was to deny Congress power to abridge the ancient right of individuals to keep and bear arms, so that the ideal of a citizens’ militia would be preserved. Pp. 22–28.

         (c) The Court’s interpretation is confirmed by analogous arms-bearing rights in state constitutions that preceded and immediately followed the Second Amendment . Pp. 28–30.

        (d) The Second Amendment ’s drafting history, while of dubious interpretive worth, reveals three state Second Amendment proposals that unequivocally referred to an individual right to bear arms. Pp. 30–32.

        (e) Interpretation of the Second Amendment by scholars, courts and legislators, from immediately after its ratification through the late 19th century also supports the Court’s conclusion. Pp. 32–47.

  We are the militia and we have the right to keep and bear arms.  That has nothing to do with a commissioned uniform service.

Gun rights have been winning in the high court.

If Gorsuch is “is committed to the current understanding of the Second Amendment” he is committed expanded gun rights and individual freedom.  There is nothing in the current understanding of the Second Amendment that preserves gun safety.  Everytown is delusional.

And so are their supporters.

That is just a little bit unhinged.  Looking at Judge Gorsuch’s opinions on the restraint of government and individual rights, this man is a hero.  I guess Gorsuch only threatens the very existence of Everytown’s brand of petty tyrants.

Because if they can’t win on ideas, there is always mob terrorism.

Everything that Everytown believes is antithetical to the concept of individual rights.  They live in a world where the right of the nanny state supersedes your Constitutional right to … anything.  How else to these people get it into their heads that there is a “hate speech exemption” to the First Amendment.

They hate your freedom and are wrong about the Constitutionality of gun rights.

But what else is new?

I know it is legal and it is cold and you are an activist, but you walk into my place of business manipulating  a rifle across your chest, with a face mask and an attitude, you will not get a nice warning like Mr. Cop gave you to lay down. It will be a continuous dosage of 9 mm rounds to your brain pan till you stop moving.

Cause of death will show as “He was being a dick.”

The ATF’s White Paper Options to Reduce or Modify Firearms Regulations is just that, a paper with no regulatory power. It is the thoughts of one person about what should be done and the little freak paranoid in me is screaming that it is just BS from somebody aiming to keep his job, but  does not mean a word of it.

Let me go through a couple of things, nothing sophisticated or FFL related which I know squat.

Since that time, ATF has been asked to hold off on any AP ammo 4 determinations. Continued inaction on these requests poses significant litigation and reputational risks to ATF. ATF can readily mitigate these risks by using the criteria established in the framework to process and approve many of the applications, while leaving the 5.56 “green tip” AP ammunition exemption intact.

We know the Green Tip controversy, but who asked ATF to stop making determinations? The why? More than likely to shaft gun owners.

(the projectiles/calibers at issue will generally penetrate body armor regardless of whether AP-classified metals are used in the manufacturing process).

Holy crap, finally somebody gets it! Soft body armor will not resist most rifle calibers out there, including the venerable and well over a century old 30-30.

The State Department and ATF have worked over the past several years with the Administration on requests for the importation of U.S. origin military firearms, ammunition, and parts that were once sent overseas to support allies. There are surplus rifles, pistols, ammunition, and other importable U.S. origin Curio and Relic (C&R) defense articles (including M1 Garand and Carbine rifles) and pistols (M1911) overseas awaiting importation authority. There is no clear public safety reason why taxpayer-funded US-origin C&R defense articles should be denied re-importation to the American public, while many non-U.S.- origin C&R items are approved.

The only reason to stop their importation was the pettiness of the past administration.

Additionally, these items do not represent any discernable public safety concern, as demand lies with collectors of vintage military firearms. Importation and sale through licensed dealers would effectively regulate the lawful transfer of these firearms through a licensee and a background check.

One word: Duh!

Since the sunset of the Assault Weapons ban in 2004, the use of AR-15s, AK-style, and similar rifles now commonly referred to as “modern sporting rifles” has increased exponentially in sport shooting. These firearm types are now standard for hunting activities. ATF could re-examine its almost 20-year old study to bring it up to date with the sport shooting landscape of today, which is vastly different than what it was years ago…Restriction on imports serves questionable public safety interests, as these rifles are already generally legally available for manufacture and ownership in the United States. Low cost foreign made firearms are also still imported and converted into “non-sporting” configurations. These restrictions have placed many limitations on importers, while at the same time imposing a heavy 6 workload on ATF’s Firearms and Ammunition Technology Division.

Is it saying “let’s get rid of the Sporting Purpose” bullcrap or at least modify it heavily?

Creation of a Database of Agency Rulings: ATF lacks a consistent internal database to maintain and readily access private letters and ruling. The public also has no direct access to public rulings in a manageable format. The inability to access these rulings can create inconsistent agency interpretations of agency guidance. ATF can create a retrievable database for internal use that includes access by the public for open rulings.

That would be interesting to see happening, but I also know that the “invisibility” of these regulations was not a bug but a feature.

If such a change were to be considered, a revision in the definition of a silencer would be important. The current definition of a silencer extends to “any combination of [silencer] parts,” as well as “any part intended only for use in” a silencer. Compared to the definition of a firearm, which specifies the frame or receiver is the key regulated part, any individual silencer part is generally regulated just as if it were a completed silencer. Revising the definition could eliminate many of the current issues encountered by silencer manufacturers and their parts suppliers. Specifically, clarifying when a part or combination of parts meets a minimum threshold requiring serialization would be useful.

This is pretty much an admission that some of the latest lawsuits they had (IE: SIG) are the death bell tolling for such an arbitrary set of regulations. Old heads know damn well about ATF agents arresting people for owning “Silencer parts” that were nothing more than rubber gaskets from garden hoses. The “Oil Filter” silencers need to be sent back to the manufacturer in order to change what is basically a $5 common filter you can buy at your local auto part store because it is considered a silencer.

There is a bunch more stuff in the paper linked at the top of this post. But remember, it is just a proposition that somebody inside ATF made and it has no regulatory power at all.

And we still need a Director for the ATF which is maybe the reason Ronald Turk wrote the White Paper thinking the new Administration will see him Gun Favorable and thus material for Director.