A civilized dialog

Author's note: Although originally published in 2016, this is still timely today. The arguments are always the same. There has been one dramatic change to the landscape since then; the Supreme Court Bruen decision. They agreed with the Founders. As Mark Walters of Armed American Radio says, “By design, we’re not here to debate anybody. AAR is NOT a news program. The entire premise of the show is based on my belief that there IS NO debate. That debate ended on Dec. 15th 1791.” 

****************

When dialogue no longer works

How many times have you heard a gun-banner say, “We need to have a conversation about _________ (fill in the blank: gun control, gun safety, universal background checks, etc.).”

Recently, I read a letter to the editor* of my local paper that included a similar statement;

“Through civilized dialogue, we can create viable solutions to make our community safer and a better place to live today and in the future.”

So, I decided to take up the challenge and initiate a civilized dialogue.

Read the complete story at AMMOLAND.

NOTE:

The referenced letter was published in the Knoxville News-Sentinel online May 31, 2016.

Vindicated in Tennessee

 Almost twelve years ago, I wrote about the discrimination against young adults when it comes to buying handguns. Today I learned that the Tennessee Attorney General has conceded (https://bit.ly/3XUvNnd) that this class of citizens can lawfully carry a handgun like older adults. 

These are not exactly the same, but closely related.

This case is Beeler v Long. (https://bit.ly/3QZVvo6):

 ...Defendant and his officers, agents, employees, and all others acting under his direction and control, are permanently enjoined from implementing or enforcing the Challenged Scheme to prevent individuals aged 18 years old to 20 years old from carrying handguns or obtaining permits to carry handguns on the basis of age alone....

https://youtu.be/eRDLaSG6csA?t=50

People with AR's don't get in cattle cars

So reads the inscription on T-shirts marketed by my friend Yehuda Remer, the PewPew Jew. Yehuda writes this at his blog in response to someone doubting his Jewishness, 

“First, I’m an Orthodox Jew. Have been my entire life. So, let’s put to sleep the notion that no one believes I’m actually Jewish. Secondly, I believe the Never Again means nothing if you’re not willing to do something about it. 

I wish more than anything that there comes a time when firearms are never needed. We can live in peace without worrying about anti-Semitic hate crimes or war. Unfortunately, that time is not now. We can try and take guns away from everyone, but criminals will find a way. Guns are part of the fabric of our nation. The only thing we can do currently is defend ourselves with firearms. Remember, we are our own first line of defense. 

My heart broke when the murders at Tree of Life occurred. I understand we will probably have differences of opinion and that’s ok. But I believe in the sanctity of life and I choose to protect mine, my wife and children’s lives, and those in my community at our synagogue with a firearm.”

One has to wonder why it is that many Jews are so opposed to personal weaponry.

The case for constant carry

 We may never know the facts surrounding the Paul Pelosi attack. But we do know home invasions can occur anytime, anywhere.

In my previous post I made the case for the small discreetly carried 22 pistol. Now, here are some reasons for constant carry of the 22 pistol.

• The bad guy won't call ahead.
• If it is locked in the safe, it does you no good.
• It may take too long to even go get it in another room.
• If kids are about, you can't leave it lying about. The most secure, available place is on you.

I saw one report that said the police arrived in about two minutes after being called by Pelosi. That is an absolute rarity. The response time is, in most cases, going to be ten minutes and up. Ask yourself, what can happen in two minutes.*

Greg Ellefritz has recently written on carrying the 22. He discusses his reasoning here.

Could Pelosi have benefited from being trained and armed? What do you think?

---------------------------------------

*The electric toothbrush

The case for the discreet carry 22

 In this post, I will make the case for the small, discreetly carried .22 Long Rifle (22) caliber pistol.

22 HISTORY

 The 22 LR is an old cartridge, introduced in 1887, For a short history of the cartridge, see this page from Smith & Wesson. Many manufacturers around the world produce ammo in this caliber.

WHY USE THE 22 AS A DEFENSIVE PISTOL

There are several reasons for using the 22 pistol as a defensive weapon. 22 ammo is relatively inexpensive. One can get it in bulk quantities for as little as 6¢ per round plus shipping in quantities of 500 rounds (as of October, 2022). This ammo has very little recoil, since it is relatively low-powered. 22 pistols are not nearly as noisy as centerfire pistols. They are easier for the novice to learn to shoot.

There are 22 handguns that range in size from pocket pistols such as the Ruger LCP II 22 and Beretta M21; to mid size pistols such as the Smith & Wesson M&P 22 compact, the Glock 44, and Ruger SR22; to various full size handguns. This discussion will focus on the smaller handguns, since our primary objective is to look at discreet carry.

The Good Liberal

 Now we know. Thanks for this from friend David Cole:

The news of the day is that Tulsi Gabbard is officially leaving the Democrat Party. . . . . .

“I can no longer remain in today’s Democratic Party that is now under the complete control of an elitist cabal of warmongers driven by cowardly wokeness, who divide us by racializing every issue and stoke anti-white racism, actively work to undermine our God-given freedoms enshrined in our Constitution, are hostile to people of faith and spirituality, demonize the police and protect criminals at the expense of law-abiding Americans, believe in open borders, weaponize the national security state to go after political opponents, and above all, are dragging us ever closer to nuclear war.

Here are some of the main reasons I’m leaving the Democratic Party, in brief. I’ll be tackling each of these in more depth in the coming weeks.”

There is much to like about Tulsi Gabbard…she is an intelligent, articulate woman with an exemplary record of military service. She has long presented herself as a reasonable person who is legitimately open to a variety of ideas and opinions, and is respectful even of those she disagrees with. She seems like a person you could sit down with over a cup of coffee and have an honest discussion, and she would listen to what you had to say. In today’s politically divided society, that is extremely appealing. I certainly can’t disagree with her assessment of today’s Democrat Party.

Still, when it comes to the Second Amendment, she fails the test; . . . read the rest at DBC here.