Monthly Archives: August 2013

This holiday weekend, hit the shooting range and patron pro gun businesses…here’s how.

Standard

If, like many Americans you find yourself on a long weekend, be it near home or on a trip, here are 2 sites that you might want to consult in order to maximize your enjoyment this holiday.

For anyone who shoots on a regular basis you probably know where all the ranges are near your house.  But what about when you are visiting family or friends, or just out of town on vacation?

Well, if you are in need of finding a range to squeeze off some rounds look no further than wheretoshoot.org

This site gives you a list of ranges that you can easily find either by state or zip code.  The site even breaks down the ranges by what they offer and provide, such as Archery, handgun, rifle, retail, rental, women or youth programs etc.

Not only that, if you have a range that you like and it is not listed, the site is a cooperative in which you can submit the range and bolster their catalog.

If you are like me, and considering how many “I like guns and coffee” folk read this blog many of you are, you like to patronize businesses that support your rights to keep and bear arms.  Or at the very least are not actively supporting the infringement of the 2nd Amendment.

While you may know of the businesses around you that have pro and anti gun policies when you are on a trip or vacation, how can you know that your businesses as a gun owner will be welcome?

The answer can be found at friendorfoe.us

This site is also a cooperative catalog of experiences and interactions that gun owners have had with businesses around the country.  Using google maps as their template, friendorfoe.us allows you to easily find businesses and read the experience and ratings that gun owners who have gone their before had.

While I admit that some areas are vastly underrepresented, it is a work in progress and as more gun owners utilize the site the information and number of businesses covered will improve.

All in all, have a fun safe and enjoyable holiday weekend.

 

http://wheretoshoot.org/

http://friendorfoe.us/

 

Advertisements

Obama only cares if you get shot BEFORE you can beat a man to death.

Standard

While some of the circumstances are different in regards to the Trayvon Martin attempted murder of George Zimmerman and the actual murder of Delbert Belton at the hands of Demitrius Glenn and Kenan Kenard, I find some things rather telling in their respective fallouts.

Most notably, the deafening silence by those who were so outraged by Trayvon Martin being stopped before he killed Zimmerman.  If it wasn’t for the internet reporting on the death of Delbert Belton I doubt many would ever have heard about it.  It’s not like the “mainstream” media is covering it with circus-like aplomb.

And heaven forbid if anyone even hinted at the idea that two black street thugs killed an 88 year old white man based in part because of racism.

Also, did you even know the names of Demitrius Glenn and Kenan Kinard before you read this?  I recall Martin and Zimmerman being household names for the past 2 years.

Then we have the president,  Mr. Obama.  A while back he went on the air and recounted how if he had a son, he would look just like Trayvon.  First of all, big friggin deal, what does that matter other than to incite some racial overtones on the situation.

Guess what, there are probably MILLIONS of people who have grandfathers and fathers who look like Delbert Belton.  President Obama being one of them.

obama-maternal-grandparents2

But no.  Because Delbert Belton was the wrong color his murderers won’t get the added scrutiny of being racists.  In fact, as I wrote yesterday, people such as the Spokane Chief of Police will even try to mitigate their crimes by saying they weren’t hugged enough as children.

The more I think about it the less doubt I have that if Delbert Belton shot and killed his attackers the race baiting machine would have ratcheted up full force against him and President Obama would have found himself with 2 more imaginary sons.

obamaboyz

Spokane Police Chief Straub prefers you just roll over and take it

Standard
Spokane Police Chief Straub prefers you just roll over and take it

In a story that enraged me so much I took a night to calm down so this article wouldn’t be laced with f-bombs and other expletives, Spokane Police Chief Frank Straub blames 88 year old WWII vet Delbert Belton for his own death.

How did this octogenarian cause his own death?  Did he hurl racist comments at two black teens?  Did he follow them around and make them uncomfortable?  Did he start the fight and/or threaten the thugs?

No.  According to Chief Straub, Delbert Belton caused his own death because he had the audacity to fight back when he was being robbed.  Straub basically is letting the two killers off the hook because they really just wanted to do a quick robbery but that uppity old guy just had to make trouble.

No…seriously.  In Straub’s own words:

“Our information is that the individual (Belton) fought back and that may have made this, you know, a worse situation”

Straub quickly realized that he might have let a little too much truth sneak out there and tried to backpedal from that statement.  Yet after that he went on to blame society coupled with Belton’s courage as reasons that two young people have their lives ruined.

THESE SCUMBAGS MURDERED AN 88 YEAR OLD MAN BY BEATING HIM WITH FLASHLIGHTS AND STRAUB IS MORE WORRIED ABOUT THE THUGS!?!?!

Straub continues:

“It was a robbery that two young people, one of whom was at one point actively involved in basketball, committed on what they perceived to be a victim, and a ready victim,”

Whiskey Tango Foxtrot does it matter that one of them was actively involved in basketball?!?  Does that somehow negate the brutal beating death of a man who took a bullet on Okinawa nigh 70 years ago?  Once again Straub indicates that Belton should have just been a ready victim and he would be alive.

Straub wasn’t done trying to make these murderers into sympathetic victims:

“One of these individuals was pretty much a standout basketball player — and because nobody wrapped their arms around him, nobody cared enough about him, he’s now going to face murder and robbery charges and, probably, he’s looking at the rest of his life being significantly affected — if not destroyed — by this.”

You know whose life was actually destroyed by this?  DELBERT BELTON.  The innocent man these hooligans beat to death.  And how does Chief Straub know if they were hugged or not growing up?  How does he know anything about them?

Chief Straub should be immediately stripped of his position and fired.  His asinine and cavalier actions with regards to this case show that he doesn’t care about protecting the innocent but more so in coddling and excusing the guilty.

But Straub’s mental disorder goes deeper than this one case.  It is a line of reasoning that is echoed by many gun controllers and others who are anti-self defense.

They believe that fighting back is bad, especially bad if you do so with a gun.  They want you to let the crime just happen for a number of reasons.

They might not have the personal courage to fight back and be responsible for their own safety and therefore they think no one should.

They feel that every criminal just needs a hug and as such shouldn’t have to face injury when committing their crimes.

They believe that a government agency will protect them and as such believe that everyone should just forfeit their right to self defense…because apparently we are just lowly peons who cannot grasp the nuance of being beaten to death and just being beating for a robbery.

I wish Delbert Belton had a gun on his last night on Earth.  I wish he shot those two rabid animals to death and went into his lodge to play pool and never gave them another thought.

Of course, the race baiters of the world would come out of the woodwork and make Belton out to be some racist murderer, because according to Straub it is better to be beaten to death then kill two teens who weren’t hugged enough.

And Straub would probably be railing against the actions of Belton because these two teens would NEVER have really hurt him and they were just misunderstood.

All I can say is that 70 years ago, Delbert Belton answered the call and fought for his country.  Last week he fought for his life and in doing so died a hero.

DelbertBelton

It is a shame that Chief Straub fights for his murderers.

kenankinarddemitriusglenn

 

Bloomberg…dude…when no one shows up perhaps 90% just ain’t so

Standard
Bloomberg…dude…when no one shows up perhaps 90% just ain’t so

Bloomberg’s dog and pony show, aka No More Names Bus Tour, has a bit of a logistical problem.  No one is showing up.

In case you haven’t heard of this bus tour, it is a bus with a bunch of names of people killed by firearms that Bloomberg says he is honoring (like the Boston Marathon Bomber) and the gun ctonrollers drive across the country and try to hold rallies to push their agenda.

The funny part is that in order not to be overwhelmed by people who believe in liberty and freedom the bus tour doesn’t actually announce publicly where it is going to be.  It just kind of shows up and hopes that the magical “90%” of Americans who agree with them will show up.

What they get is more like this:

Atlanta

GCminneapolis

Des Moines

GCdesmoine

Minneapolis

GCminneapolis1

Chester PA

GCchesterPA

Missoula, MT

GCmissoula

(the above picture isn’t of her alone for effect, there are no other shadows on the ground, their is no crowd around her)

Now remember, a lot of the people you see in these photos are RIDING THE BUS.

And while I jest that Bloomberg’s magical mystical bus tour doesn’t tell anyone about where its stopping, they don’t promote it openly but DO tell their ardent supporters of where it’s going to be.  Mostly through social media, emails and the like.

THESE are the ardent supporters of gun control?

Sounds about right.

When even your billions of dollars cannot generate minuscule results of “astro-turf”, I believe it is telling on who has real support.

And what happens when they were publicly announcing their tour dates (or gun owners found out anyways)?

People who actually believe in a cause showed up.  Unfortunately for NYC’s number 1 nanny it was these people:

Atlanta (outnumbering GC’ers 3 to 1)

GRAtlanta

Not overwhelming numbers mind you, but then again its not our rally, it a counter rally.  But with a three to one margin you get the sense of where the real energy is.

Besides, when we do feel the need to make our voices heard, we don’t need the prodding of a New York City billionaire.

Lansing

GRlansing

Philadelphia

GRphilly

Olympia

GRolympia

Albany

Gun Rallies NY

Of course, as gun owners we don’t really care who knows about our rallies because we truly are grassroots and the billionaire nanny can rail against that fact all he wants but the truth is in the turnout.

And look at the location of these gun rights rallies.  Philadelphia, Lansing, Olympia and ALBANY.  These aren’t the stereotypical hotbed of 2nd Amendment activism.  Just another chip away at the big lie the gun grabbing press and those they work with.

Belief in the 2nd Amendment and the liberty it ensures transcends geography, race, economic standing and gender.

It’s hard to get excited about someone else controlling your life and as such our rallies will continue to be bigger than theirs.

 

 

Edit: thanks to one of our readers for providing this photo of a pro-gun rally in MARYLAND of all places

GRmaryland

Thousands show up in a rights infringing state like Maryland.  Just goes to show, like in Albany NY, where their is tyranny, there are those willing to stand up and fight against it.

Who needs a gun? How about old people

Standard
Who needs a gun?  How about old people

It is often regurgitated by the gun grabbing zealots that firearms are just an unnecessary holdover from our country’s founding.  That the 2nd Amendment is some anachronism that should be purged from the modern era and relegated to the pages of history.

Even if we set aside the understanding that the 2nd Amendment is included in the BIll of Rights as one of the pillars of our liberty in order to defend against tyranny, the need for firearms is ever present.

Why?  Because bad people exist in the world.  And those bad people prey upon those who are weaker than they.  Sometimes these cowardly curs join with others like them to form packs.

And with size and numbers these bottom feeding scumbags have little fear of the unarmed person they will victimize.

Unarmed people like 88 year old Delbert Belton of Spokane Washington who was  robbed and beaten to death with flashlights by two black punks while he was going to play pool.

Unarmed people like 99 year old Fannie Gumbinger who had her Poughkeepsie NY home broken into and was beaten to death by the burglar.

Unarmed people like 92 year old Arteria King who was beaten to death in earshot of his bedridden wife and then his wife’s 50 year old aid was sodomized by the home invader and murderer, while Arteria lay dying on the floor.

Unarmed people like 63 year old Richard Eley of Philadelphia when he was beaten to death inside his own home by his 23 year old neighbor.

Would being armed have saved the lives of these elderly people?  Maybe, maybe not, but it would have given them the chance to fight or scare off their attackers instead of being snuffed out like lambs to the slaughter by people 60 years their junior.

It is said that “God made man, but Samuel Colt made them equal”.

I do not expect many octogenarians to fight off a pair of teenage hooligans, but I can imagine our senior citizens have the ability to squeeze a trigger and either force the attackers to stop or at least reconsider their intentions.

There are too many stories like Delbert Belton.  There are too many rabid dogs in the world.  It is a good notion for the elderly (and others) to have the means to put down these mongrels when they are being beset by them.

Being Gay trumps being a Gun Owner in New Mexico

Standard
Being Gay trumps being a Gun Owner in New Mexico

The Supreme Court of New Mexico has ruled that, by refusing to photograph a gay wedding, a photography studio violated the law.

Long story short, private business owners, Jonathan and Elaine Huguenin don’t agree with gay marriage and chose not to provide photography services to a lesbian couple.

According to the New Mexico Supreme Court,the case

“teaches that at some point in our lives all of us must compromise, if only a little, to accommodate the contrasting values of others. A multicultural, pluralistic society, one of our nation’s strengths, demands no less.”

Compromise.  Funny, this doesn’t seem like a compromise but rather forcing a someone to do something they are diametrically opposed to.

The court goes on to say:

The owners of Elane Photography, Jonathan and Elaine Huguenin, “are free to think, to say, to believe, as they wish, yet in the world of the marketplace, of commerce, of public accommodation, the Huguenins have to channel their conduct, not their beliefs, so as to leave space for other Americans who believe something different.”

Doing so, Bosson said, is “the price of citizenship.”

Ok.  So the price of citizenship is being forced to run your private business in a manner you disagree with on a religious level.  Plus, the court has the hubris to actually geld the 1st Amendment by stating “you are free to say what you believe but it doesn’t matter as you have to still do as we say.”

And to liken this to Blacks being refused service in the south is a false analogy.  It would be more akin to the Ku Klux Klan hiring an all black photography studio to film a cross burning and having the courts force the studio to do it.

(and before you start with the “why would the Klan hire blacks?” talk, i don’t know what goes on in the minds of racists, maybe they’d like forcing blacks to serve them, whatever.  I mean, why didn’t the lesbian couple just find another photography studio instead of suing Elane?)

But speaking of refusing service to blacks in the south, there are civil rights abuses going on in New Mexico that line up more closely to it.

Every day over 22,000 New Mexicans have their civil rights violated by being refused service at businesses around the state by statute*.  They simply exercise their right to keep and bear arms yet are discriminated against by these businesses.  Peaceful refusal to accept this bigoted stance results in the civil rights activist facing a 4th Degree felony which carries an 18-month prison sentence and a $5000 fine.

I believe in the rights of a private business to refuse service if they so choose.  I believe they have a right to allow smoking in their establishment, to serve trans-fats and salt and wash it down with oversized beverages and in general dictate how their business is to be run.

BUT…

If the New Mexico Supreme Court is ruling that, as a business owner, “the price of citizenship” is to “compromise your beliefs” and “leave space for other Americans who believe something different” then the statute allowing the banning of firearms in private businesses must be struck down.

And the 2nd Amendment is not a choice.  I was born this way, with the right to defend myself by use of martial arms and as such it is my civil right as an American to have that protected from bigoted anti-gun business owners.

Regrettably, I can’t help but feel that the New Mexico Supreme Court picks and chooses who they believe deserve to have their civil rights protected.  But who knows, maybe this is the verdict that brings down the state backed bigotry toward gun owners in New Mexico.

 

 

*NMSA 29-19-12 C. C.   provision of authority for a private property owner to disallow the carrying of a concealed handgun on the owner’s property;

 

 

Anti-gun cities, where the rich pay for protection while the poor pay with their lives

Standard
Anti-gun cities, where the rich pay for protection while the poor pay with their lives

The story in New York City is one often told.  While about 8 million souls reside in the city only a scant proportion  (.00375%) are allowed to carry a gun for their own protection.  And with the steep, non-refundable application fee many people just cannot afford to even try for the likelihood of getting turned down and losing nearly $500.

But the rich, famous, and connected have no issues footing that bill and getting a CCW issued to them.  Yet for every Jon Lennon there are THOUSANDS of John Q Publics murdered because they have had their constitutional rights denied them,  not to mention the tens of thousands raped, robbed or beaten.

Even if the privileged few didn’t feel like getting a gun and CCW, like say hypocrite Rosie O’Donnell, you can just pay armed guards to protect you and your family.

It’s a nice option, but one the vast majority of American’s cannot afford.

But New York City is not the only place where the infringement of the 2nd Amendment finds the well to do buying armed security while the less well off are forced to fend off the wolves unarmed.

In Oakland California, where crime rages in the gun control environment forced upon the state by the brain trust in Sacramento, people are also paying for armed security. That is nice if you are rich enough to afford it, or live in a neighborhood affluent enough to have the disposable income in order to share the bill.

For the people who live in a neighborhood that cannot or just won’t pay for private armed security the options are limited due to the fact that getting a ccw in Oakland is almost as difficult as getting one in New York.

In Baltimore, Maryland, they even have separate neighborhoods that pay higher tax rates in order to pay for Private Security.  Though I can assure you those higher tax neighborhoods aren’t in poor neighborhoods.  Once again, the people with money pay for security while the right to defend oneself is denied to those who cannot afford it.

To put it succinctly, the right to defend yourself should NOT be dependent on how much money you have.  

Yet in places where the issuing body has discretion on which citizens can carry a firearm which cannot you end up with 2 America’s.

“May Issue” is more arbitrary than Jim Crow era voting laws ever were.  At least Jim Crow put obstacles that could be overcome (literacy test, poll tax, etc.).  “May Issue” is just simply saying “no, you cannot exercise that right because I say so”.

Rights that can be denied on a whim is not what the founders fought for.  This country is one of liberty and liberty should never be stripped due to one persons discretion.