Gun Free Zone

According to Ballotpedia:

Nate McMurray (Democrat) is a candidate for New York’s 27th Congressional District in the U.S. House. The general election is on November 3, 2020. The primary election is on June 23, 2020.

McMurray was a candidate for the same seat in 2018. He lost the general election on November 6, 2018, after advancing from the primary on June 26, 2018

With that out of the way, enjoy the tweet.

I do believe that this guy thinks people didn’t depend on hunting for a living back then and actually dropped by the local Kroger’s or Publix to but a couple of pounds of steak on their way home from the barn.

50 shades of sheer stupid.

Understand that this is a long term plan.

As a history buff, I love the story of Radio Free Europe.  We destabilized Eastern Europe by saturating them with pro-Western entertainment.

I want to do something similar with China.

But instead of pro-Western entertainment, we saturate them with Critical Gender Studies and Social Justice.

We won’t have to worry about them taking over the world if they are too busy trying to list their preferred pronouns in every dialect in the country.

Just a thought.

I stole this video from EDR DEFENSE GROUP LLC. We can see (or guess) several low cost safety implementations that help give you a chance of mounting a proper counter offensive while waiting for the police to arrive.

The screen door was no match for the bad guys (open under 20 seconds), but I added a layer of time delay and specially noise. I believe the main door was metal or very solid wood, with good long bolts and strike plates with long screws deeply driven in the frame. It made what it was supposed to be an instant breaking and entering into a long hard job.

And the camera. What a beautiful thing is to know what is making all that racket on the other side of the door and specially how many.  At around 00:25 you can faintly hear somebody inside the house, possibly making a verbal inquiry and the bad guys immediately went with “Police!” or rather the slang-ish “Pooolice” which kind of defeat the purpose since cops do not talk that way.

Unfortunately that is all the video there is plus no story found that would tell us what happened and how long it took. Also, the fact that seven crooks wanted to break into  home is the best possible example of why you actually need magazines with as many rounds as you can handle. It goes without saying that if the crooks managed to finally get in, there were baptized in the Church  of Armalite or the Church of Avtomat.

Check Youtube for videos on how to reinforce your door. There are simply stuff that is worth pennies like 3 inch nails to not expensive plates for the door and door frame.  As for security cameras? take you pick, there is a flood of new and affordable stuff in the market. I have been thinking about adding another camera up front in case the bd guys decide to cover my door bell cam. I want live tracking!

I do have one doubt that I may send over Andrew Branca for examination (If he has not covered it already and I missed it). Doing a Joe Biden and shooting blindly through the door is legally very risky, but how about this case when we have seven individuals at what looks the wee hours of the night pretending to be cops trying to break in and you have them live ans in color on camera?

I have written several posts about what I call the gun maker blood libel.

That is the talking point the Democrats use that the firearms industry fights against gun control because it is at best indifferent to and at worst supportive of mass shootings and the deaths of children, simply because they want money.

Usually, this is put as “profits over lives” or something similar.

There are many reasons this dehumanizing language is ugly, but I am now growing more concerned with it.

We have seen members of the NYPD harassed, with water and food thrown on them while trying to do their jobs.

During yesterday’s Philadelphia gunfight, some people were harassing the cops while they were trying to capture the suspect that shot six officers.

I mentioned this at 10 and since I was harassed during that live shot, I’ll mention it here too. A major moment of disappointment this evening was watching a crowd of people taunt police officers, laughing and yelling at them in the midst of the gunfire. #PhiladelphiaShooting

— Alexandria Hoff (@AlexandriaHoff) August 15, 2019

Last month, a man associated with Antifa tried to firebomb an ICE center in Tacoma, Washington.

On Tuesday, there was a politically motivated shooting at an ICE office in San Antonio, Texas.

Then there were death threats leveled against the San Antonio donors to Donald Trump, publicized by Congressman Joaquin Castro on Twitter.

With the gun maker blood libel, what is next?

Are we going to start seeing harassment and perhaps even violence directed at gun maker or gun store employees?

I can picture that, especially if any gun ban legislation fails to make it through the Senate when they reconvene.

Watch Senator and Presidential candidate Kristen Gillibrand discuss gun control on CNN.

“I believe we need to absolutely pass universal background checks as well as a federal anti-gun trafficking law,” 2020 presidential candidate @SenGillibrand tells @PoppyHarlowCNN. https://t.co/9EaZJc2lzV pic.twitter.com/lLyWbv6oHs

— CNN News Central (@NewsCentralCNN) August 14, 2019

She supports gun buybacks.  She is clear that she wants to ban assault rifles and non-arbitrarily limited capacity magazines, and she does not want them grandfathered in.

The CNN host asks her if that means prosecuting gun owners who refuse to participate in the buyback.

Senator Gillibrand then goes into hemming and hawing.  I think she realizes that saying “yes, I’m going to charge millions of gun owners with a federal crime because they refused to sell their guns to the government” sounds bad.

But, she’s painted into a corner where without enforcement the law is meaningless.

So she says she’ll only go after people who “use assault weapons.”  My takeaway is not people who commit mass shootings, because after you kill a dozen people, does the upcharge from using a banned gun make a difference?

I think she means anybody caught using an assault weapon.  As in, if you take your rifle to the range and get caught with it in public, that becomes an aggravated felony.

Then she goes into some nonsensical part about “a special certification” for a suppressor.  By that, I guess she means the tax stamp.

So now she’s equated assault rifles to NFA items, which are not outright banned.  So is she saying that my AR will become an NFA item or am I totally banned from owning it?

Lastly, she goes into what to me is the most disqualifying part of her whole interview.

She says that the NRA is funded by the gun makers and the gun makers don’t care about people’s lives, they only want money.

This is the gun maker blood libel.  It is an absolutely despicable position to take.

It dehumanizes every single person who works in the firearms industry and turns them into a caricature of a super-villain that somehow turns suffering into profit.

When your talking points include writing off hard-working, tax-paying, patriotic Americans as people who don’t care if children die for money, the conversation is over.

From this interview what I can surmise is that the Democrats who want to run this country want to put millions of gun owners in prison for life because they hate us personally.  I feel like we all knew that already, they are just getting closer and closer to actually saying it.

Miguel pointed out the stupidity of a Tweet by Harvard student David Hogg.

If you want to know how a dumbass like that goes to Harvard, you have to understand the standards they have for their professors.

Professors like Elizabeth Warren, who Tweeted this:

I'm heartsick for the Philadelphia officers and their loved ones, and grateful for the brave first responders helping people get to safety.

We don't have to live like this. We must pass gun reform laws to end the gun violence epidemic—now. https://t.co/r0OKa1tVnc

— Elizabeth Warren (@ewarren) August 15, 2019

So we have a felon with “an extensive criminal history for weapons offenses” who was being served with a drug warrant, who got into a firefight with police.

Exactly how does Warren think that another law would have stopped this guy from getting a gun?

What reform would have made possession by a felon more illegaler?

When the professors know nothing but bullshit talking points, you can’t expect the students to be any better.

The Formerly Relevant David Hogg gets the honors.

I have to admit, I had no idea of the depth of Hogg’s stupidity.