Thursday, September 26, 2013

Open Carry: Casual vs Activist and Handgun vs Longgun.

An interesting discussion going on in the comments here.

Well if you ignore the "All OC bad trolling."

This bit from Chris from AK is very interesting.

And I'll give a taste on Sebastian's thoughtful reply.

I have no problem with OC as a tactic in the right circumstances, and I have no problem with people who casually open carry as part of their normal routine. The problem is that I think the circumstances where it’s beneficial as a tactic are much much more narrow than most people open carrying are willing to admit. A lot of the benefits you mention an come about from mere casual OC, and don’t require putting activism or organization behind it, or open carrying some place just to make a point, or to get attention.

As always if you're going to do an activity as a political activist one should have a goal as to what your activity will result in.

Tuesday, September 24, 2013

Attn Virginia Gunnies: Terry McAuliffe is after your guns.

He put up a big statement today about his plans if elected governor:

Support common sense gun control measures As Governor, Terry will support mainstream and majority supported gun control measures like universal background checks, limiting the size of magazines, and a return to the 1-gun-per-month rule. These measures respect Virginians’ right to bear arms while reducing gun violence.

He calls it Colorado-style but Colorado didn't have a one-gun-a-month limit.  In fact none of the gun control this year went to that well.

Do I need to mention that Terry's good buddies with Bloomberg?

That might put into context why Terry McAuliffe bothered to say this.  You'd think if you were in the lead of a race in a purple state with a strong 2nd amendment history you'd play down the gun control rhetoric.

Especially if you're a New Yorker transplant who is chummy with Bloomberg and the Democrat-Fundraiser-Party complex.

Points for honesty I guess.

Wednesday, September 18, 2013

Starbucks wants out.

So Starbucks decided to make a carefully, weaselly worded memo on how they don't want people carrying guns in their stores and using them for protests.   But they won't actually do any pat-downs, put up any signage, or say anything if they see a person carrying.

For something so legal-speak they did step in it with how they're well...  offending gun owners with the "No Irish" mentality.   Sebastian has more.

Robb Allen talks about how this is a self inflicted loss, largely done by "in your face OC" tactics.  Give him a read given he's an expert on smart OC tactics.

Weerd has some comments too.  Basically how it's not an overt changing.  Starbucks didn't want to be dragged into a political fight or used as a prop.   And Weerd brings up a good point

I personally have one Starbucks gift card I’ll need to use up, and then I’ll be done. I wasn’t a Starbucks Customer before this political side came to light, I won’t be a customer after. No harm, no foul. No offense, but I’m not a fan of their products or prices, but I was willing to overpay for mediocre tea, or down right terrible coffee to support them, and offset alleged “boycotts”.
I will cease and desist, and will do so with no hard feelings. They are not an anti-gun company like other groups are that directly ban firearms on premises, and support anti-rights politics with corporate monies. They simply don’t appreciate us bringing politics into their shops, and I can fully respect that."
I don't like coffee or tea so without any motivation to go Starbucks has lost another customer.  And I'm thinking there's gonna be quite a few of those.

Of course this isn't enough for the Anti;s
Now some truth:
Starbucks’ new policy stops short of a ban, and Moms Demand Action will continue to pressure the company if there are additional instances of accidental shootings and open carry rallies inside stores.
Sorry Starbucks, I think the gunnies will be more than willing to acquiesce to your request, but the other side isn’t as willing.  
Best wishes to you.

Now If Starbucks is more worried about negative publicity from people OCing rifles and using them as a protest stage, then this works.  If they're worried about negative press from gun-grabbers, then they've just encouraged them.

JayG has some thoughts on the "don't be a dick" rule.  With this reminder:

It's the sad predictability of the "in-your-face" factions that carry rifles around (Tam's comment about "'Battle of Fallujah' reenactors' club meeting" hits the mark perfectly IMHO) and the response that has me shaking my head. What did y'all think was going to happen when you walked into a trendy urban coffee shop full of hipsters with a rifle on your back? Did you think the latte-sipping Apple fanboi was suddenly going to be seized by divine inspiration, tear up his Brady membership, and suddenly convert to the Church of John Moses Browning (PBUH)? 

Those in the OPEN CARRY BECAUSE 'MURICA camp sometimes use the "Gay Pride" analogy - that it took waaaay over-the-top marches in order to focus the conversation on gay rights and acceptance; that those "in the closet" would have remained so their entire lives if not for brave members of their ranks who were willing to risk ridicule, personal danger, and worse to shine light on the inequality of treatment they received by society. There's a fair amount of truth to this line of thinking, however there's one very important piece missing: the media - who still shape opinions in this country - were 100% behind the gay-rights campaign. 

Aircover is very helpful.

And this bit on Free Beacon about who the CEO of Starbucks Feared more "People with guns or People on the left"  But the author is ignorant of the long term memory gun owners have for grudges. (The tell is that he thinks Open-Carry Permits exist).  See he thinks in a few months gun owners will have forgotten about this.

Naw, gun activists tend to be vindictive and love nothing more than stabbing "traitors" in the back.

As for my thoughts?

What'll really make the leftists heads spin is if a gay couple asked to do an open-carry wedding at a Starbucks.

Primary Lesson learnt:  Do not confuse tolerance with approval.
Or as Stuart the Viking said on Robb Allen's:  "please quit setting up your soapbox in our lobby"

Just because a vendor does not *object* to X does not mean that they support you using their facility, their brand, as an endorsement of X.

This can be hard to grasp because today's overculture demands this of many vendors (when it comes to "trendy" issues).

Another is: Don't sell past the close.

Starbucks was already allowing OC and CC et al.  Tactically, what goal was staging protests at Starbucks intended to acomplish?  Showing up with a gun on your hip for a cup of Joe to normalize carry well... that normalizes carry.

But going in a group with slung rifles is not exactly normal.  Ignoring the legal issues, what was the intended goal of such an action?

Oh and this from Tam wins.  Just wins.  And here's her thoughts.

I'll end with this preview:

 When I am politely asked to not give someone my money, it would be rude of me to ignore their request. 

Tuesday, September 17, 2013

This is why you wait...

So it turns out that the Naval Yard shooter was one man and not three.  And furthermore instead of getting an assault rifle and a plastic glock from a private sale through the internet...   he bought a Biden-approved shotgun from a plain-Jane gun shop.

But don't let the utter lack of an AR15's use in this tragedy stop the media and gun grabbers.  The New York Daily News had a particularly ghoulish cover today.

But hey, don't let that stop them from telling you they only want common sense laws that won't infringe on your gun rights and will stop mass murders like this.

Saturday, September 14, 2013


Why yes,  my url does contain fourtens in it.

And that's terrible.

Thursday, September 12, 2013

Screw you; I got Mine! (Drug legalization edition)

Often I've praised Cracked for giving some real counter-culture messaging.

But today they'e got a post on why Legalizing Marijuana might be *bad*.

Reading this I got the vibe of someone with a May Issue card clutching their pearls about Shall Issue or someone wit a Machine Gun ranting about how Repealing Hughes is a bad idea.  It was very much in the "We can't let the commoners into our clubhouse!"

With such lines like: "Don't let the words "medicinal use" lead you to believe otherwise. If you can't get a weed card in a medical marijuana state, you just plain don't want to get high."

And moaning that if weed isn't "Medicine" then it'll be restricted like tobacco and seen as a recreational drug like booze. 

And then weed will get all commercial with obnoxious ads and profits going to big corporations! And it'll be like beer.... with a bunch of giant conglomerates making crap but a lot of selection of good stuff. Which the author readily admits,  but is, apparently, not good enough for him.

And oh yeah, full legalization would avoid the whole "This requires me to commit medical fraud."
Nevermind that in the current medical pot setup many places operate with a supplier monopoly...  And that many of the big corporate growers are actually fighting to *fight* full legalization.

And really, you don't want people to be able to pick what they want because the commercials will be inane and you might be treated like those other dirty recreational drug users?

Well hey, you got your .gov permit card. Screw those who can't get 'em.

Wednesday, September 11, 2013

Colorado that much closer.

So both goons were recalled.

Giron by a very impressive margin.  It was high risk, and they threw everything they had into it.

And now...  they're pretending it didn't happen.  Or that it doesn't count because the control of the Senate didn't flip  or that the laws are still active (wow legislation wasn't removed due to a recall vote!).

Sebastian has a roundup. 

Dave Kopel also points out what really struck a nerve.   More than pushing for gun control it was how they treated the opposition:

As it turns out, Morse and Giron sealed their fates on March 4, the day that the anti-gun bills were heard in Senate committees. At Morse’s instruction, only 90 minutes of testimony per side were allowed on each of the gun bills. As a result, hundreds of Colorado citizens were prevented from testifying even briefly. Many of them had driven hours to come to the Capitol, traveling from all over the state.

Rushing and squelching dissident is not the mark of someone confident in their laws.

Well, at least they didn't try to pass the law at midnight and after the Governor had falsely declared a state of emergency.   (Why?  Because New York has a waiting period for legislation, and Cuomo wanted to bypass it. Gee, waiting periods are dandy for guns but not laws eh?)

Also if Cuomo was really confidence he would have let the bill stand for the legally required time,  but he didn't.

Why it's like these goons are scared of people finding out what they're up to?

Course things are getting "interesting"  in NY.  With many Sheriffs saying they won't enforce SAFE.

Tuesday, September 10, 2013

ATTN: Colorado Gunnies: Recall is TODAY

If you live in Colorado check to see if you are in one of the two recall districts.

If you are:  VOTE.  Bring as many friends as you can.

A successful recall today will devalue the promises of Bloomberg's money and Obama's support.

Tuesday, September 3, 2013

ATTN Colorado Gunnies.

The recall effort is a week away.

If you live in the state you should look to the get out the vote effort on the districts where a recall is happening.

It seems the dems are suddenly very interested in this.