How to Report Election Fraud

If we work together, we can make this election too big to rig!

Virtually all of us have the tools to report election interference, voter intimidation, and illegal voting in near real-time: smartphones with Internet access and the X (Twitter) service. If we use them, it will be much more difficult for the Democrats to steal this election.

Unlike 2020, we have a major platform on which to report election shenanigans, thanks to

@elonmusk

. We saw the effectiveness of this earlier this week when polls in Bucks County, PA were shut down early during early voting. Because it got reported on X, a lawsuit was filed and the court issued an order to extend early voting through Friday, November 1st. That got us a couple more days of early voting!

We also have a better ground game due to people like

@ScottPresler

in Pennsylvania. Scott worked his ass off getting voters registered and mainly due to him, Bucks and Luzerne Counties flipped from blue to red. He's also taken to task misbehaving county boards of electors.

Additionally, the RNC is now chaired by

@LaraLeaTrump

, not Rona (Romney) McDaniel.

First, join the X Election Integrity Community:

https://x.com/i/communities/1848518910653415584

If you see any irregularities at your polling place do your best to gather evidence:

• Take pictures and or video.
• If there's a vehicle involved, e.g., dropping off boxes of ballots, get a picture of the license plate.
• Report your findings to the X Election Integrity Community.
• Tag
  @ScottPresler
  (if you're in PA),
  @GOP
  ,
  @RobertKennedyJr
  ,
  @realDonaldTrump
  ,
  @TuckerCarlson
  ,
  @LaraLeaTrump
  and any other large pro-Trump account on X.
• Report what you've see to your state's Department of State or elections commission. Here are links for the swing states:
• PA:
  https://www.pa.gov/en/agencies/vote.html
• NC:
  https://www.ncsbe.gov/about-elections/election-security/investigations-division
• MI:
  https://www.michigan.gov/sos/report-fraud
• WI:
  https://elections.wi.gov/elections/election-security-integrity/election-complaints-concerns
• NV:
  https://www.nvsos.gov/sos/elections/election-information/report-potential-election-law-violation
• GA:
  https://law.georgia.gov/resources/election-fraud-complaint-hotline

Please repost this for a wider audience.

Let's go!

#election

#electionfraud

#CitizenJournalists

Biden's Speech Today

 Key points from President Potato Head's speech this afternoon:

-We were never there for nation building. (Bullshit. That was a clear aim from the get go. IMO that was always a mistake but let's not deny history.)

-"I opposed The Surge."

-Trump's Fault!!!!111!!!

-Threw allies under the bus.

-Threw Obama under the bus.

-Terrorism world-wide, so if we leave Afghanistan it's no biggie. (Hey fuckstick, how about that WIDE OPEN southern border?)

-Human rights must be the center of US foreign policy (but our policy will be toothless).

-The Taliban doesn't have an air force. (Yo dumbass, you just gave them one!)

-Failed to address all the equipment we left behind, from M4 Carbines to Hummers and drones, which now are in the Taliban's hands.

-This is not in our national interest. On this point I mostly agree, Afghanistan is an uncivilized shithole. That said, there was no planning for an orderly withdrawal that secured our assets and allies.

-"The buck stops with me." (But the current situation is everyone else's fault.)

-No questions, not even anything vetted ahead time.

Now he's going back to Camp David.

~~~~~~~~~

We did the same thing in Afghanistan that we did in Vietnam in the 1970s: We pulled our air support for indigenous ground forces, after which they shortly collapsed.

I'd be nervous if I was in Taiwan now.

What a disgrace.

1975 vs. 2021

1975 - US evacuates its embassy in Saigon.

2021 - US evacuates its embassy in Kabul.

1975 - We are at the mercy of OPEC.

2021 - We are at the mercy of OPEC.

1975 - Inflation.

2021 - Inflation.

1975 - The Bee Gees are popular.

2021 - The Foo Fighters (!?!?) release a Bee Gees cover album.

1975 - A year before a peanut farmer wins the White House.

2021 - The resident of the White House has the mental acuity of a peanut.

1975 - Communists fought the establishment.

2021 - Communists are the establishment.

Fuck.

Springtime for Biden

 With apologies to Mel Brooks...

America was having trouble

What a sad, sad story

Needed a new leader

To restore its former glory

Where, oh where was he?

Where could that man be?

We looked around

And then we found

The man for you and me

And now it's

Springtime for Biden and America

The US is happy and gay

We're marching to a faster pace

Look out

We'll help save China's face

Springtime for Biden and America

Winter for Trump and Pence

Springtime for Biden and America

Come on, Americans

Go into your dance

No more MAGA

And that's why they call me Kamala

Don't be stupid, be a smarty

Come and join the Democratic party

Springtime for Biden and America

Prancing the new step today

Bombs falling from the skies again

China is on the rise again

Springtime for Biden and America

Drones are striking once more

Springtime for Biden and America

Means that soon we'll be going

We've got to be going

You know we'll be going to war

On the Passing of Ruth Bader Ginsburg

Well, as if 2020 wasn't interesting enough, Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg died from pancreatic cancer yesterday, only 45 days before what is likely to be a hotly contested presidential election.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell issued a statement last night that whomever President Trump nominates to replace Ginsburg will get a confirmation vote on the Senate floor.

This is good, and I hope it happens before the election.

Unlike Obama when he nominated Merrick Garland for SCOTUS, Trump is not a lame duck president working with a Senate controlled by the opposing party. The Republicans were given control over both the presidency and the Senate by the people because the people preferred their vision. They should do their jobs to the best of their ability. That includes filling vacancies on the Federal bench, all the way up to the Supreme Court.

As for not politicizing her replacement, consider a few things:

RBG could easily have stepped down while Obama was president and allowed him to pick her successor. However, she was so confident that Hillary Clinton would win in 2016 that she stayed on the bench in the hopes that her seat would be filled by an HRC appointment. And in the wake of Trump's victory in 2016, RBG held on as long as she could in the hope that he would lose reelection, and a Democrat president would fill the seat. By her actions, RBG politicized her seat and the replacement process.

It's being reported that her last dying wish was that her replacement would not take place until after a new president is "installed." First off, "installing" leaders is some real banana republic shit right there. We elect leaders in this country. Second, what if Trump wins reelection? Do we wait another four years? That's ridiculous.

Let's not forget the Democrats' appalling conduct since Trump became the Republican nominee in 2016. A four year long tantrum of one faked, debunked scandal after another, all in an effort to stymie the peaceful transition of power that is a hallmark of American government.

Let's also not forget the Democrats' unforgivable conduct during Brett Kavanaugh's confirmation hearings, when they brought forth a slew of witnesses with no credibility to smear Trump's nominee as a rapist. This was merely the latest of a line of Democrat smear jobs against Republican Supreme Court nominees, e.g., Robert Bork and Clarence Thomas.

Finally, even before RBG's death, Democrats were already signalling that they do not intend to accept the results of the election if Biden loses, and are already assembling an army of lawyers to challenge a Trump victory in the courts. This, after a summer of civil unrest that was and continues to be enabled by Democratic politicians in several cities. We'll need a fully staffed Supreme Court if this comes to pass.

It would be insane for Trump to not nominate a replacement for RBG and for the Senate to confirm that person.

Video: Guns Rights Supporters Must Speak Up

Pennsylvania Second Amendment Rally 8 June 2020

Video: Jewish Americans, the Democratic Party, and the Right to Bear Arms

Some Facts About 3D Printed Guns

My G-d there is a lot of utter rubbish being spewed about 3D printed guns in the media over the past couple of days. Some facts:

1. You cannot "download a gun."

1a. On a related note, you cannot legally buy a gun off the Internet and avoid a background check. You can buy a gun over the Internet but it has to be shipped to a local, Federally-licensed firearms dealer, and you need to pass a background check before you take delivery. There is no "Internet loophole."

2. You can download plans, including 3D CAD files for various guns. Think of these as blueprints that can be turned into code for use by a 3D printer or CNC milling machine, which can be used to make a gun.

3. Speaking of which, it has always been legal under Federal law to make a gun for your own personal use. If you want to manufacture them for sale, that has been regulated for decades.

4. Some states do make it illegal to make a gun for your own use.

5. Most 3D printed guns are not undetectable. For example, if you 3D print the receiver for an AR-15 (the part that in the USA is legally the gun), you still need a lot of metal parts to have a functioning firearm. E.g., the barrel, bolt, firing pin, springs, etc.

5a. The exception to #5 appears to be the Defense Distributed Liberator, which is a single shot .22 pistol. Do you really think that a criminal is going to spend a shitload of money on a 3D printer so he can make an untraceable single shot .22 pistol? It's cheaper, easier, and faster to buy a stolen pistol like a Hi Point 9mm or even a Glock on the street.

6. For the most part, this hysteria about undetectable plastic guns is reminiscent of the BS spewed about Glocks in the 1980s. Despite what you heard in "Die Hard," Glocks are made largely of metal and stick out like a sore thumb if you try to pass one through a metal detector.

7. Even after Defense Distributed pulled their CAD files from the Internet in 2013, the cat was out of the bag. If you had a clue, they were not difficult to find. As per John Gilmore, the Internet interprets censorship as damage and routes around it.

Finally, gun controllers lie. That's what they do. They cannot make arguments based on facts, so they lie. For example, Senator Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) recently gave a speech about undetectable firearms with a picture of an AR-15 next to him. A rifle with a few pounds of steel and aluminum in it is going to be undetectable? Not hardly.

Think about any topic in which you have in depth knowledge. Then consider how the mainstream media covers said topic, and how inaccurate they usually are.

This is just the latest in the American left finding something to be outraged about and stir up shit.

Your Very Own Dictatorship

The following essay was Posted by an online acquaintance. I didn't write it. But I agree with it.


Your very own dictatorship.

Two or more sides disagree on who runs the country. And they can’t settle the question through elections because they don’t even agree that elections are how you decide who’s in charge.

That’s the basic issue here. Who decides who runs the country? When you hate each other but accept the election results, you have a country. When you stop accepting election results, you have a countdown to a civil war.

The Mueller investigation is about removing President Trump from office and overturning the results of an election. We all know that. But it’s not the first time they’ve done this. The first time a Republican president was elected this century, they said he didn’t really win. The Supreme Court gave him the election. There’s a pattern here.

What do sure odds of the Democrats rejecting the next Republican president really mean? It means they don’t accept the results of any election that they don’t win. It means they don’t believe that transfers of power in this country are determined by elections.

That’s a civil war.

There’s no shooting. At least not unless you count the attempt to kill a bunch of Republicans at a charity baseball game practice. But the Democrats have rejected our system of government.

This isn’t dissent. It’s not disagreement. You can hate the other party. You can think they’re the worst thing that ever happened to the country. But then you work harder to win the next election. When you consistently reject the results of elections that you don’t win, what you want is a dictatorship.

Your very own dictatorship.

The only legitimate exercise of power in this country, according to Democrats, is its own. Whenever Republicans exercise power, it’s inherently illegitimate. The Democrats lost Congress. They lost the White House. So what did they do? They began trying to run the country through Federal judges and bureaucrats. Every time that a Federal judge issues an order saying that the President of the United States can’t scratch his own back without his say so, that’s the civil war.

Our system of government is based on the constitution, but that’s not the system that runs this country. The Democrat's system is that any part of government that it runs gets total and unlimited power over the country.

If the Democrats are in the White House, then the president can do anything. And I mean anything. He can have his own amnesty for illegal aliens. He can fine you for not having health insurance. His power is unlimited. He’s a dictator.

But when Republicans get into the White House, suddenly the President can’t do anything. He isn’t even allowed to undo the illegal alien amnesty that his predecessor illegally invented. A Democrat in the White House has “discretion” to completely decide every aspect of immigration policy. A Republican doesn’t even have the “discretion” to reverse him. That’s how the game is played. That’s how our country is run. Sad but true, although the left hasn’t yet won that particular fight.

When a Democrat is in the White House, states aren’t even allowed to enforce immigration law. But when a Republican is in the White House, states can create their own immigration laws. Under Obama, a state wasn’t allowed to go to the bathroom without asking permission. But under Trump, Jerry Brown can go around saying that California is an independent republic and sign treaties with other countries. The Constitution has something to say about that.

Whether it’s Federal or State, Executive, Legislative or Judiciary, the left moves power around to run the country. If it controls an institution, then that institution is suddenly the supreme power in the land. This is what I call a moving dictatorship.

Donald Trump has caused the Shadow Government to come out of hiding: Professional government is a guild. Like medieval guilds. You can’t serve in if you’re not a member. If you haven’t been indoctrinated into its arcane rituals. If you aren’t in the club. And Trump isn’t in the club. He brought in a bunch of people who aren’t in the club with him.

Now we’re seeing what the pros do when amateurs try to walk in on them - They spy on them, they investigate them and they send them to jail. They use the tools of power to bring them down.

That’s not a free country.

It’s not a free country when FBI agents who support Hillary take out an “insurance policy” against Trump winning the election. It’s not a free country when Obama officials engage in massive unmasking of the opposition. It’s not a free country when the media responds to the other guy winning by trying to ban the conservative media that supported him from social media. It’s not a free country when all of the above collude together to overturn an election because the guy who wasn’t supposed to win won.

Have no doubt, we’re in a civil war between conservative volunteer government and a leftist professional government.

That is how WARS START from within.

The FISA Memo

This morning I downloaded and read the FISA memo prepared by Congressman Devin Nunes. I have some thoughts on the contents.

Before delving into the memo itself, we need to remember that before it was released, the FBI had the opportunity to review it. They stated that while some (as yet unknown) facts were not included, no allegations in the memo are inaccurate. This is key, because if we take the allegations in the memo as accurate, they are damning.

In the warrant application, senior FBI and DOJ officials -- including then-Director Comey and Deputy Director McCabe --  had to certify to the court that there was probable cause to suspect illegal conduct by the target of the surveillance (Page). The Steele dossier was an essential piece of evidence provided to the court in support of the warrant application.

However, it turns out that the Steele dossier consisted of fabricated allegations by a foreign national, and was paid for by the Clinton campaign and the DNC. When applying for the warrant, the FBI was under the duty to inform the court of all material facts, including those which would weigh in the surveillance target's favor.

Further, FISA warrants are only valid for 90 days. If the FBI wants to continue surveillance it needs to apply to the court for a renewal. Each time, the FBI must disclose to the court all material facts, including those which would favor the surveillance target.

The FBI made a total of four applications to the court: the initial application and three renewals.

At no time was the court informed of the role of the Clinton campaign or DNC in the dossier.

In other words, the FBI failed to exhibit candor towards the tribunal and via the electronic surveillance of the Trump campaign, acted as a part of the Clinton campaign. This weaponized the highest law enforcement agency in the land against the opponent of the previous administration and its desired successor.

That is appalling. It's worse than Watergate. It's the kind of conduct you'd expect to see in a banana republic.

Everyone involved in seeking the warrant and who submitted false and incomplete information to the FISA court should hang.

In opposing the release of the memo, the Democrats stated that release would endanger national security. That is clearly false. Their opposition to its release was clearly partisan politics. They have no claim to supporting the rights of Americans against rogue government agencies.

The entire document is only six pages. The memo itself is only about 3-1/3 pages. If you give a shit about the state of this country and the conduct by the people who would rule us, you owe it to yourself to read it and form your own opinion.

Some Animals Are More Equal Than Others

I am disgusted that FBI Director Comey did not recommend charges be filed against Hillary Clinton. When leaders flout the law, respect for the rule of law by the people soon vanishes. When George Orwell wrote that some animals are more equal than others he may as well have been writing about the USA in 2016, rather than Stalinist Russia.

That aside, consider what the FBI did go on record as saying:

1. She had unauthorized classified intelligence on her unsecured server. (General Petraeus lost his career over far less.)
2. She deleted evidence during the investigation. (That's spoliation of evidence or obstruction of justice. )
3. Anyone else who did this would be reprimanded and stripped of security clearance by their department, if not criminally charged. 
4. She mishandled classified intelligence and jeopardized national security. 
5. She lied about the nature of the investigation (claiming it was a security review, not a criminal investigation).

Consider the nature of her actions. She willfully, recklessly engaged in conduct which is statutorily proscribed for good reasons. As someone who's worked with telecom, computer networks, and mail servers since the late 90s, and practiced law before that, I'd be willing to bet my house that at a minimum the Russian and Chinese intelligence agencies hacked her server.

That means not only did she compromise national secrets, she is almost certainly vulnerable to blackmail by foreign powers due to the contents of her server. In other words, if she gets elected in November, Putin and others will have the President of the United States by the balls.

And yet half the voters in this country are willing to ignore this and cast their ballot for her, just because she is female.

The Framers of the Constitution Accepted Private Ownership of Fully Armed Warships

One of the canards trotted out by anti-gunners after every mass shooting is that the Framers could not have envisioned the power of modern weaponry, so that the Second Amendment does not protect civilian ownership of "assault weapons." All you need to refute that argument is that the Framers did indeed accept the private ownership of military weapons is to point out Article One, Section Eight, Clause Ten of the Constitution:

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defense and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
...
To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;

Emphasis added.

So what is a Letter of Marque and Reprisal? Essentially, it was a government license to attack, capture, and sell enemy ships. The letter of marque is what distinguished a privateer from a pirate. In order to do that, you need an armed ship yourself. Letters of marque weren't issued to US Navy ships, they were issued to the private owners ships who would outfit them for privateering, including naval artillery.

In the 18th and 19th Centuries, an armed warship was the closest thing extant to a weapon of mass destruction. And we haven't discussed the private ownership of artillery on land or inland waterways, which was common through the 19th Century. E.g., flat boat-mounted swivel guns used by fur traders in the West.

So can we agree that the Second Amendment does protect the right to own military weaponry, just as the First Amendment protects your right to spout uninformed bullshit on the Internet?

Concealed Carry Permit Holders Across the United States

Edit: Welcome Twitter users! Please poke around the blog. If you came here because of this post, you'll probably find something else of interest.

Back in 2004, I posted Percentage of Adults With Carry Permits in "Shall Issue" States. It's been probably the most popular post on this blog, and several times I've been asked if there's an update. Well, now there is.

Concealed Carry Permit Holders Across the United States is a new scholarly paper by John R.Lott, John E. Whitley, and Rebekah C. Riley. Here's the summary:

Since President Obama’s election the number of concealed handgun permits has soared, growing from 4.6 million in 2007 to over 12.8 million this year. Among the findings in our report:

• The number of concealed handgun permits is increasing at an ever- increasing rate. Over the past year, 1.7 million additional new permits have been issued – a 15.4% increase in just one single year. This is the largest ever single-year increase in the number of concealed handgun permits.
• 5.2% of the total adult population has a permit.
• Five states now have more than 10% of their adult population withconcealed handgun permits.
• In ten states, a permit is no longer required to carry in all or virtually all of the state. This is a major reason why legal carrying handguns is growing so much faster than the number of permits.
• Since 2007, permits for women has increased by 270% and for men by 156%.
• Some evidence suggests that permit holding by minorities is increasing more than twice as fast as for whites.
• Between 2007 and 2014, murder rates have fallen from 5.6 to 4.2 (preliminary estimates) per 100,000. This represents a 25% drop in the murder rate at the same time that the percentage of the adult population with permits soared by 178%. Overall violent crime also fell by 25 percent over that period of time.
• Regression estimates show that even after accounting for the per capita number of police and people admitted to prison and demographics, the adult population with permits is significantly associated with a drop in murder and violent crime rates.
• Concealed handgun permit holders are extremely law-abiding. In Florida and Texas, permit holders are convicted of misdemeanors or felonies at one- sixth the rate that police officers are convicted.

Well, that sure doesn't fit the president's or Bloomberg's narratives, does it? Especially the points about women and minorities.

Digging into the data, the state with the largest numbers of permits is Florida with about 1.4 million, followed by Pennsylvania with about 1.1M. C'mon PA folks, we're slacking.

If you look at percentages, the top five states are

• Alabama 12.64%
• South Dakota 12.3%
• Indiana 11.62%
• Pennsylvania 10.64%
• Tennessee 10.21%

From my post of 11 years ago, the top five states in 2004 were :

• 7.45% South Dakota 
• 6.79% Indiana 
• 6.76% Pennsylvania 
• 5.23% Connecticut 
• 5.12% Washington

If the Democrats are upset by this I have two things to say:

1. Good.
2. You have only yourselves to blame. You've been simultaneously beating the drum for more gun control, fanning the flames of racial tension, and tearing down our country's institutions. Don't be surprised when people decided they need to take affirmative steps to preserve their own security.

"Technical Glitches." Uh huh.

Unless you were under a rock, you know about the following three things:

1. The Chinese stock market dive.
2. "Technical glitches" grounding all United Airlines flights in the US yesterday.
3. "Technical glitches" causing all trading to be halted for several hours on the New York Stock Exchange yesterday.

On Tuesday, this was tweeted by Anonymous:

Unless the network and system admins at UAL and the NYSE are totally incompetent, they have major redundancy in place to prevent shutdowns like this from happening. There's simply too much money at stake to have single points of failure.

Now, was Anonymous responsible? Perhaps it was someone looking to divert attention from the Chinese stock market meltdown. Whatever really happened I doubt that the powers that be would share the truth, for fear of upsetting the apple cart.

My tinfoil hat feels a bit warm. It would be a good time to revisit your emergency preparations.

"Officer Safety" and the Second Amendment

Via AR15.com...

"A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

These words have meaning and purpose for the citizens of the United States. They also are vital to the continuity of our nation as a bastion of personal freedom in a world fraught with danger. The “security of a free State” by allowing the citizens to possess firearms seems counterintuitive to many people. These people believe that only the State should possess the implements that can make one person or a few people powerful enough to exert their will and desires over a much larger group of individuals.

There are many people that assume that the State behaves in an altruistic manner and gladly compromise their own personal freedom for guarantees of security provided by the State. The framers of the Constitution and Bill of Rights were conscious of the fact the State is comprised of a small number of people, governing a massive number of citizens with rules and regulations written by people. The framers understood that human behavior has remained very much the same for thousands of years and would continue on into the future. Their primary concern was that worst of human flaws: hubris. When given the power to rule over their fellow citizens, many politicians fall into the trap of hubris. This leads to a belief that one’s own ideas and agendas are so valid that they should supersede the rights and freedoms of the individuals they are purported to represent.

The Constitution and Bill of Rights are meant to protect the citizens of the United States from a government comprised of normal humans that are no more immune from the temptations of power than their constituents.

Today, government officials relish talking about “security” in regards to the security of the State, both the bureaucracy that has been created and those in its employ. To this end, not only does the military, National Guard, and Department of Justice have arms and armament, so do most of the large regulatory agencies. The IRS, FDA, DoE, NOAA and almost 70 other agencies now have armed agents. Yet, when these same officials speak of the Second Amendment, which clearly uses the word “security” preceding the use of the word “people”, those officials reference hunting and “sporting purposes”. These elected and appointed people are suffering from the human condition that many would term ego or pride; that somehow they and their political constructs are the only people in our nation worthy of the right to armed protection. The mere citizens they govern over should only be allowed protection from danger as provided by the state. They are infringing upon the right of the people (or individual citizen) to the same security they give themselves.

District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008) affirmed the individual’s right to lawful purposes, including the right to self-defense. This was also the decision of the Supreme court in McDonald v. Chicago, 561 U.S. 742 (2010). These decisions make some restitution to the eroded rights of the citizens of the United States. However, they do not address the current situation in regards to ammunition, armor, “sporting purposes” and the right of citizens to own specific variations of ammunition.

The term “officer safety” is being heavily used to provoke emotional responses and make any opposition to ammunition restrictions seem to be arguments against the health and well-being of sworn police officers. This is not the case. People that care about police officer’s actual safety are not the ones that would injure a police officer with a bullet of any kind, regardless of how effective the round is against armor. These people also follow laws and regulations already in place; ones that are in place against bodily harm of any sort towards their fellow citizens, of which police are a part of.

Those who would harm police and choose that course will use whatever implement is handy to accomplish their vile task. There have been officers killed in the line of duty with everything from fists, to pipes, to their own guns or even run over with vehicles. The decisions and actions of the individuals committing those heinous acts are the reason those officers perished. Regardless of the implement, criminals like that need to be punished and kept apart from law-abiding society.

Restricting specific ammunition because of a perceived danger to one subgroup of citizens, important as they are to the function of society, is a logical fallacy. Using the same reasoning, with everything from fists to cars having killed officers, the use and possession of those items should be restricted also.

The biggest danger to “officer safety” is criminals who will ignore not only the laws in place, but also common human decency towards others.

This raises the question as to why government officials are so driven to restrict those who pose the least risk to society in general and police officers specifically.

No one likes to mention the ultimate reason the framers of the Constitution and Bill of Rights wrote the Second Amendment. The framers were people who had lived under the tyrannical rule of a despot and his minions. Minions who controlled armed groups of people who regulated the lives of the citizens. When the citizens finally could no longer stand the oppression enforced by the arms of a government that was only interested in its own preservation, the citizens took up the only tool that could cut the metaphorical chains that bound them. Firearms and ammunition were used to release a nation from political bondage. The framers understood that people being people would lead government to evolve to tyranny again and only by giving citizens the same power as the government, could freedom be retained in this country.

So ask yourself, why would government officials want to limit the ability of law-abiding citizens to exercise their Second Amendment rights?

Originally posted on March 13, 2015 by "phatmax" on AR15.com at http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_1_5/1727892_.html.

New Mini CNC Mill from Defense Distributed

Cody Wilson, the guy who made the antigunners piss their pants with a 3D printed guns, is at it again. This time, it is a mini CNC mill that will retail for under $1500 and come ready to go out of the box. It's big enough to do 80% AR15 lowers and 1911 frames. Of course, it's not limited to making guns.

The hardware and software are open source. The website says that it'll be shipping for "Holiday 2014," and it's available now for pre-order.

https://ghostgunner.net

This has the potential to be more significant for the right to bear arms than 3D printed guns. This will allow you to make the receiver (i.e., the part registered and controlled in the US) out of metal, from which the majority of guns are made. With many traditional designs you cannot simply substitute synthetics, due to engineering constraints.

Making gun control moot via technology will be one of the greatest advances for personal liberty that we see in the 21st Century.

9/11

Last year I posted about the 12th anniversary of 9/11, and find that what I wrote one year ago still reflects my feelings. Only now, we’ve gone further down the rabbit hole and are facing a new enemy in the form of ISIS.

Unfortunately, after Obama’s dithering of the past few weeks, and last night’s lackluster call to arms, I fear we are no closer to confronting and repulsing this threat. With our wide open southern border and “leaders” who inspire neither fear nor respect by our foes, it is probably only a matter of time before more major attacks happen on our soil.

A pox on everyone in the White House and Congress.

Diary of a Reformed Democrat

No, not me. Posted by "Breathe_Squeeze" on AR15.com:

I'm not sure how to best put this in words so bear with me please. 

I've been doing some thinking over the last few days on how I have changed in the last year and a half and I figured I would share, as these thoughts/observations may help bring more people to our side. 

First off, some back story. Or "how D's are made" 

I was raised by Democrats. Working dad, stay at home mom, hippy-ish types. At least for the first 12 years. Not hippies but live and let live, to each their own, myob types. I was raised to think this way and taught that this was the fundamental standing of the D philosophy. We weren't into talking politics much other than Republicans were all greedy, dollar worshiping idiots who only cared about themselves and couldn't give a shit about me. And that we were the opposite. Except my lessons that the Government will do what it wants and there's nothing you can do about it, so why bother worrying. Just go about your day. 

Public school education pretty well enforced this and most of my friends and classmates were taught the same. No emphasis on researching or learning anything further on the matter. Instead, subtle pushes to do the opposite, as they were taught by their parents, and they by theirs. This, I believe, is where the D's get their strength. The blind leading the blind and children trusting that their parents are teaching them the right things. As we all trust of our parents growing up. 

I was raised, however, with a love of hunting and shooting. Plinking and target with my father and later on hunting and larger bore firearms with my step-father. My first firearm was a Ruger 10/22 for my 9th Christmas. 

The first 28 years of my life were lead that way. Voting D because I didn't pay attention to the world outside of my little bubble or think that I could change anything if I saw something I didn't like or agree with. I went to work, paid my bills, and enjoyed myself. I've always held strong beliefs about and love for this country and the principles on which it was founded. I just never saw how those were being eroded by the very people I thought were the same as me. 

I caught a bug for black rifles around 2010 and bought one in 2011. 

Then came Newtown and Furer Cuomo's Unsafe Act. WTF?  I'm about to be a criminal overnight? By the swipe of a fucking pen and the changing of a definition? I started paying attention. I woke up. 

Fortunately I was blessed with a very analytical thought process. I just never applied it to this before, I never needed or wanted to. I began reading, here and elsewhere. Learning what I could. I realized that I had been wrong my entire life. My basic beliefs were flawed, some/most outright backwards. I was fucking pissed, enraged.  I had been lied to. I had been suppressed. No more. Unsafe Act, Obummer's try (and fail) at the same on a federal level (I do thank Andy for that though), Obama care, the NSA, the fucking welfare state, National debt, and so much more. 

I've spent the last year and a half doing what I can to open others eyes and point out the false logic they have come to accept as fact. I've realized it takes a soft tough. No one wants to learn what I did. They don't want to know that they've walked through life with blinders on. They resist. It requires small points to be made, subtle suggestions on topics to learn about or small facts to be given. Like the trickle of water that created the grand canyon, just a little at a time until there comes a tipping point and you see the light dawn in someones eyes. 

I make these points to maybe help you, my brothers and sisters, in your efforts to do the same. Having been the person that I'm trying to convert lets me understand them and do so better. 

Or maybe I just needed to get this out, my disgust, my hatred, my realizations and rebirth. I welcome any comments or criticisms but I probably won't check this thread till later tonight or tomorrow as I'm off to work soon. 

A good day to you all and GOD bless.

Link to original. (Edit: I just realized that to see the original you will need to be an AR15.com Team member. However, the OP gave permission to foward his post.)

Welcome to the (less) Dark Side.

The First 3D Printed METAL Gun

The smart guys at Solid Concepts have created the first 3D printed metal gun, a 1911 in fact. Here’s a video of it being test fired.

World’s first 3D printed metal gun

Yes, it had a few functioning issues. However, as a proof of concept they’ve done a fantastic job. Now it just needs a bit of debugging.

The technology enabling this is not yet affordable for the masses. Remember when personal computers first came out? Your smartphone has vastly more power at a faction of the cost. Or remember when the first Apple LaserWriter came out and cost around $4,000? You can now get a better laser printer delivered to your door from Amazon for around a hundred bucks. Even if 3D printers capable of doing laser sintering for additive manufacturing don’t drop to similar levels, they’ll come down in price to the point where you can go in together on one with a few buddies without breaking your bank accounts.

Combine affordable 3D metal printers with easily downloadable CNC drawings or even the G-code needed to run the printers, and the statist dream of unilateral civilian disarmament fails utterly.

Hey Feinstein, Schumer, Obama, Bloomberg, Cuomo? You can’t stop the signal!