Should America Subarm its Citizens?

From Town Hall:

Alan Korwin
July 27, 2015

There’s a point between fully armed and disarmed that is subarmed. Being subarmed is dangerous. Officials would never stand for it themselves. It’s the point where you don’t have a very good gun, or certainly not the type you’d prefer, or not the type your police prefer for their own safety, and not the right ammo, or certainly not enough of it. It isn’t the caliber you want, and the magazine is too small. You’re subarmed.

It seems there are people at work in the government and the euphemistic gun-control movement who have figured out if they can’t disarm the public — because the public will not stand for it and put up intense opposition — they can subarm the public (that’s you) a little at a time. If you’re subarmed, and they’re fully armed, that’s pretty much victory for them and a shift in control.

Because it happens by bits, the big picture is obscured. Little by little the power shifts from the public to the authorities. We used to have parity with government, and this kept government in check, made America the liberty capital on Earth. We the people were equal with our hired hands. Both sides were in a state of stasis, equilibrium. They had matchlocks, we had matchlocks.

They had flintlocks, we had flintlocks. They got cap and ball, we all had it. We grew up together, we were partners in this, developed the field together. Self-contained cartridges, rifled barrels, bolt action, revolvers, semi-auto, improvements to everything, optics, full auto… the story starts to rag out right there.

Two Gun Laws: Tectonic Shift in American Freedom

In 1968 our employees in government decided it was time for us to fill out paperwork for any gun purchased from any manufacturer. It’s been that way ever since, despite the enormous trash piles generated by “news” media to the contrary. It’s no big deal — maybe — but every gun made and sold legally to an American since then comes with government paperwork.

Twenty-two years later, in 1986, the scales of equality tipped over. The Gun Control Act basically said members of the state could have machine guns but the peasants (that’s us) could not — only one-shot guns for us. Matching firepower was no longer for the masses — it was for the hired help only. Two centuries of Gun Equality between government and the public was over. Now that’s a big deal.

Oh, the few full autos in public hands at the time could remain, but this was subarming on a grand scale, an order of magnitude, it made the two sides totally unequal. The miniscule number of now collectible machine guns people owned could be cherished, lost to wear-and-tear and jealously safeguarded — thanks to five-figure price tags instantly springing upon a closed finite market.

Say Goodbye to Officer Friendly

The rapid decline in freedom everyone has been noticing was catalyzed. The rise of the police state became more intense. SWAT raids (multiple battle-equipped specialists with machine guns and overwhelming power) have gone from 3,000 per year in 1980 to as many as 80,000 per year now. The Andy Griffith Show was solidly in the past. Officer Friendly was on his way out.

We weren’t a police state then and we’re not one now, we’ve just started looking more like one than anyone would like — and toe the line, pal. Not to worry, our morals are still intact. Or are they.

You’re overwhelmed when a dynamic entry team of eight masked, body-armored men storm through your door with flash-bang grenades at two in the morning, like the state does these days. You’ve been subarmed to the point of being gunless when they have MP-5 machine guns and you have the civilian single-pull-of-the-trigger AR-15 you’re so proud to own. It’s the gun you insist is OK because it’s the one-shot model, not the machine gun it looks like, which ignorant gun haters fear it really is. And they want to confiscate that too.

Continue reading at:

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Would Gun-Banners Rather Nicole Carney Had Been Murdered?

From America’s 1st Freedom:

by Darren LaSorte
Thursday, August 3, 2017

Every time I learn of another abused, desperately scared woman who uses a firearm effectively to defend her life and her children’s lives, I cannot help but wonder how the so-called “gun safety advocates” would have wanted things to turn out. Of course, they almost never admit it publicly, but most of them want a world without guns. For these at-risk women, it means a world without protection.

It’s not about gun safety for these anti-gun advocates. That is the NRA’s domain. Gun-ban advocates refuse to accept or acknowledge the simple and unavoidable fact that if their dangerous dream were ever realized, it would leave the weak helpless to the desires of the strong. The rules of the Stone Age would dominate once again.

Significantly, this would leave the vast majority of women defenseless against male attackers. Once a fight becomes physical, a stronger male will nearly always dominate the weaker female. Yes, there are always the exceptions, like Ronda Rousey, who would break 99 percent of all males, including me, upon contact. But she is, indeed, an exception. And this why the nature of a firearm as a defensive tool is so important. It allows physical distance to be maintained. Guns are, without question, the most efficient of defensive tools.

One of the common refrains from the gun-ban crowd is that guns should be confiscated and melted into sculptures in the public square because they are used in half of all domestic violence murders. What they seem to miss is that this necessarily means that half of these murders involve hands, feet, knives, ropes, hammers and other improvised contact weapons. Do they really believe that the other half of these rage-motivated murders wouldn’t happen if the guns were melted? I hope they aren’t that naïve. The truth is, operable firearms give at-risk women a fighting chance.

This past week, the New Hampshire Attorney General’s Office reported, “Individuals do have the right to protect themselves, and that is what Nicole Carney did.” The office announced that they would not prosecute Nicole for shooting and killing her estranged and abusive husband, Michael Carney, this past February. Thankfully, she chose to ignore the shrill voices that come from groups like Moms Demand Action and Violence Policy Center, and availed herself of what she knew was her one and only fighting chance.

Nicole and Michael had been married for seven years. She had finally decided to separate herself and her two children from the violence. He had thought she was living with her mother but, on the day of his demise, he had learned through an inadvertent disclosure from his internet service company that she had bought a new house and was living in a different town.

He became enraged that she was now clearly moving on with her life, and texted and called to demand that she meet with him. She refused. He told her that he would see her regardless of her wishes. She armed herself with her adult son’s rifle. He was not there with her, but she called to tell him that it was the only means of protection she had available.

Continue reading at:

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

How To Build An AR-15 Upper

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Premier Gun Show at Big Town in Mesquite This Weekend

It’s been two whole weeks since we did the Show up in Allen.

It’s that time of year when folks around here start wiping the sweat from their brows and asking that famous question:  “Hot enough for you yet?”

We the AC at Big Town is working so don’t let the heat keep you from joining us this weekend. Pretty soon it will be time for back to school shopping then Labor Day, State Fair etc.

We are adding in more and more Microtechs and I have a real nice Randall Akaska Skinner.

Saturday 9 am – 5 pm
Sunday 10 am – 4 pm

Admission is $8, Kids 11 and under are FREE and Parking is FREE! Tell the cashier the word “TRIGGER” for a dollar off admission.

Bring your friends and we’ll see you this weekend!

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Keanu Shredding with Taran Butler Chapter 2 Director’s Cut

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Spyderco Suing eBay Over Counterfeits

Counterfeits are a natural result of everyone demanding ever lower prices.  Businesses cannot charge less than they pay wholesale plus their costs of doing business and stay in business.

Not even on Amazon or eBay.  So to meet the demand so many of you place on them for ever lower prices they are forced to sell counterfeits.

Making America Great Again starts with you and is dependent on your actions and how you choose to live.  Bottom feeding destroys businesses and sellers integrity.

From Knife News:

Spyderco has filed a lawsuit against eBay, one of the largest eCommerce retailers in the world. The suit centers around the sale of fake Spyderco knives on, and alleges five offenses including trademark infringement.

According to the complaint, filed in the US District Court of Colorado last week, Spyderco has tried to help eBay address the problem of counterfeit knives on the website since early 2009. “Spyderco has sent eBay more than 500 Notices of Claimed Infringement (“NOCI”) by at least 300 individual registered sellers identifying thousands of Fake Spyderco Products.”

Spyderco contends that eBay isn’t taking “the reasonable means” to halt services to sellers of counterfeit Spyderco knives. “eBay continues to allow to be used by thousands of Unauthorized Sellers to advertise Fake Products that display unauthorized Spyderco trademarks that infringe on Spyderco’s Marks.”

The lawsuit alleges that eBay knowingly ignored the complaints of intellectual property infringement. “eBay cannot continue to enjoy the enormous profits derived from the proliferation of Fake Products sold on the eBay website if the unauthorized sellers are excluded from selling their counterfeit goods.” Spyderco says the ongoing presence of counterfeit Spyderco products in eBay listings causes confusion for consumers and damages Spyderco’s reputation.

Continue reading at:

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Brits Vs. Guns

From America’s 1st Freedom:

Will a society that has long turned its back on armed self-defense ever be able to find its way back?

This feature appears in the August ’17 issue of NRA America’s 1st Freedom, one of the official journals of the National Rifle Association.

For a while after Sept. 11, 2001, a hideous question would flit uninvited across the back of my mind. “If they can do that,” I would wonder, “what can’t they do?”

If I allowed it to, another inquiry would swiftly join the first: “If the Twin Towers were rendered as easy a target as they were, then what institution can truly be deemed to be safe?”

Or, put another way: If they could hit that, what couldn’t they hit?

America, to its immense credit, is a remarkably open society. As Alexis de Tocqueville observed all those years ago, this is a place in which civil society flourishes without the leaden hand of authority to guide or to constrain it. It is a place, too, in which individuals are secure in their rights. In the United States, we travel, we assemble, we debate, we protest—and we do so while reserving the title deeds to our elemental liberties. The risks notwithstanding, we expect to retain our privacy, to own our consciences and to maintain our right to bear arms. More than any other people in the history of this world, Americans have proven resistant toward those who would coddle them. Here, “But you have to,” has rarely been a persuasive argument.

This model does make us more vulnerable than most. For a long while, the answer to my implied opening question—“Why doesn’t al-Qaida just walk into a mall?”—was that al-Qaida simply didn’t want to walk into a mall. As it turned out, Bin Laden and Co. had a penchant for the spectacular and the grotesque, and, in consequence, they hoped that each successful attack would prove more egregious than the last. The downside to this approach was that it considerably raised the stakes—there was no body count, it seemed, that would have been deemed too high. But there was an upside, too, if one can call it that: The sort of routine, attritional guerilla warfare that can grind a people down was off the table. New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco—these were all targets. That nursing home in the Poconos? Probably not on the list.

This, alarmingly, is no longer the case, for as al-Qaida has faded and ISIS and its acolytes have risen, the modus operandi of distributed Islamist terror has been dramatically reversed. As we have seen lately in the great cities of the free and democratic West, no event is now safe from barbarism; no location cordoned off from threat; no victim deemed innocent of perverted infidelity. In Paris, a rock concert, a soccer match and a Bastille Day party have been targeted. In England, terrorists have hit a pre-teen pop show, a much-used bridge and a pub. Here in America, we have seen attacks at a gay nightclub, on a Christmas party at a rural disability center, in a mall in St. Cloud, Minn. (stopped, mercifully, by a concealed carrier), at a military recruiting station, on a college campus in Ohio and at an art exhibition in Texas. In 2017, the answer to the question, “Why don’t they just walk into a mall?” is, “They do.”

Continue reading at:

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment