Tuesday, February 7, 2023

How Many Mass Shooters Have Been Members Of The NRA?


by Michael Snyder, The Economic Collapse Blog:

The left is using the tragedy in Sutherland Springs to demonize the NRA.  Personally, I am so sick and tired of these relentless attacks, and I am proud to stand with the NRA, the Gun Owners Of America and every other organization that is working hard to defend our 2nd Amendment rights.  As you will see below, it was actually the intervention of an NRA instructor named Stephen Willeford that saved countless lives in Sutherland Springs.  And would you like to know how many mass shooters have been members of the NRA?  The answer is zero

Based on the arbitrary definition of a shooting involving at least four deaths, there had been 130 mass shootings in the United States as of June 6, 2017, going back over the last 51 years. (This does not include gang killings, killings that began as other crimes such as robberies, and killings that involved only the shooter’s family.)

Information about how the guns were obtained is incomplete, but 248 different guns were used, at least 141 of which were obtained legally and at least 39 of which were obtained illegally; handguns were the most common weapons used, usually more than one, each of which takes about two seconds to reload, making limited magazines (commonly incorrectly referred to as “clips”) a minor inconvenience. None of the shooters were known to be members of the NRA.

The bad guys in our society are always going to find ways to get guns.  Just look at what is happening down in Honduras for example.  They have some of the strictest gun laws on the entire planet, and yet their entire nation has become a war zone.

Some say that we have a “mental illness problem”, but I would describe it as a moral and social decay problem.  Culture really matters, and our culture has been going down the toilet for decades.  If we don’t do something about the rampant decay in our society, violence is going to continue to get worse.

And as violence continues to escalate, I want as many responsibly armed citizens around as possible.  Instead of vilifying the NRA, we should be thankful that men like Stephen Willeford are willing to act like heroes

So much for those who want to vilify the NRA in the wake of the Texas massacre in Sutherland Springs, Texas, on Sunday: Stephen Willeford, the man who shot and chased the man who killed 26 people in a Texas church, is an NRA instructor. Willeford insisted, “I’m no hero; I am not. I think my God, my Lord, protected me and gave me the skills to do what needed to be done.”

It is a fact that most mass shooters tend to be to the left on the political spectrum, and most of those that have attempted to attacks presidents throughout history have also been on the left.  Just check out this list

  1. Andrew Jackson – shot at by Richard Lawrence (Suspected Democrat plot, no proof.)
  2. Abraham Lincoln – 3 attempts – Democrats, Baltimore, 1861; Democrat confederates, Aug, 1864, Shot at from ambush; shot dead by J.W. Booth, Democrat, April, 1865
  3. James A. Garfield – shot and killed by Charles J. Guiteau, utopian communalist. (Modern progressive.)
  4. William McKinley – shot and killed by Leon Czolgosz, Far left Socialist
  5. Theodore Roosevelt – shot, wounded, by John F. Schrank, Anti third term motive.
  6. Franklin D. Roosevelt – Shot at by Giuseppi Zangara, Marxist, (He missed and killed Chicago Mayor Anton Cermak.)
  7. Harry S. Truman – attacked by Oscar Collazo, Griselio Torreslo, Leftist revolutionaries who wanted a Socialist Puerto Rico.
  8. John F. Kennedy – shot and killed by Lee H. Oswald, Communist.
  9. Richard Nixon – Samuel Byck thought Nixon was oppressing the poor, attempted airplane hijack to crash into White House.
  10. Gerald Ford – Lynette Fromme, Anarchist, Manson girl, waved gun, failed to properly load it;  Sara Brady, shot at the president, progressive Socialist, lousy shot.

I have pledged to never move a single inch when it comes to defending our 2nd Amendment rights, and I am asking all of my supporters to stand with me.  The left is making gun control one of their highest priorities, and we must never, ever back down.

I really like how Charlie Daniels made this point in his latest column

Opportunistic politicians rush to judgement to write meaningless laws that would further muddy the waters, and leftist ideologues who don’t know a .22 from a .357 condemn all guns and gun owners, wanting to outlaw all firearms, leaving the villains who obtain their guns illegally to continue the mayhem while ordinary citizens would be left with no way to protect their families.

The same people who self-righteously insist on having sanctuary cities for lawbreakers are the ones who scream the loudest for more gun control, completely ignoring their potential for harboring murderers in their midst.

Read More @ TheEconomicCollapseBlog.com

Here’s the Story about the Texas Church Shooting Gun Control Advocates Don’t Want You to Hear


by Daisy Luther, The Organic Prepper:

By now, everyone has heard about the horrific shooting yesterday in Sutherland Springs, Texas, in which a man dressed in tactical gear entered the First Baptist Church and opened fire. 26 people were killed and 20 others were injured.

Of course, the tears were still wet on people’s cheeks when the anti-gun folks began screaming for gun control. Chelsea Handler, struggling to be relevant, made this ignorant Tweet:

If the pro-gun control people want to blame someone besides the man in there pulling the trigger, the man who illegally got a weapon, maybe they should look in the mirror. Maybe they should consider their own complicity in making guns more difficult for law-abiding citizens to carry. Maybe they should look at their part in this war on guns and gun owners. Perhaps their derision played a part in seeing to it that no one in that church had the means to stop that killer.

If these folks had their way, none of us would be allowed to be armed…except, of course, the criminals who wouldn’t follow the laws anyway. The New York Times published an op-ed solemnly titled, “It’s Not Too Soon to Debate Gun Control” immediately on the heels of the shooting. Okay. If that’s what you want, then here’s my side of the debate. And it’s based on facts, not on emotional rhetoric.

Let’s be honest. The person to blame for this tragedy was the shooter.

Devin Patrick Kelley got his gun illegally.

It’s essential to note that the shooter was dishonorably discharged from the Air Force for assaulting his wife and child, and due to this, it is illegal for him to have a gun.

Huh. What a shock. A criminal who broke the law (by lying on his background check) and got a gun.

Let me just emphasize that the shooter circumvented our existing gun laws and got a gun anyway.

Because people who are going to commit a crime like shooting 46 people do not worry about silly things like lying on a background check.

A good guy with a gun stopped a bad guy with a gun.

What the gun-control people are missing is that it was a neighbor with a gun who ended this cowardly attack on unarmed churchgoers. This is the part of the story that gun control advocates don’t want you to hear. It’s the part that they conveniently ignore while screaming that guns are the problem.

If it hadn’t been for two brave men and judicious marksmanship, Kelley’s killing spree could have continued. There could be more dead bodies in Sutherland Springs, Texas this morning.

Because the police didn’t show up until this situation was long over.

Here’s the part of the story we SHOULD be talking about.

According to the Texas Department of Public Safety, church neighbor Stephen Willeford “grabbed his rifle and engaged the suspect.” Willeford was alerted by his daughter, who called him and said that a man in body armor was shooting people in the church.

He grabbed his gun and bravely headed down to confront the killer.

The local said that while Willeford has no military experience, he is an excellent shot, and when he came face to face with Kelley, he didn’t hesitate; he shot in between Kelley’s body armor, hitting him in his side.

The 26-year-old had dropped his Ruger assault rifle and climbed in an SUV to flee the scene.

He said that Kelley had taken a hostage in the passenger seat as he fled. (source)

Read More @ TheOrganicPrepper.ca

BREAKING: Texas church shooter was stopped by armed citizen with rifle


by Mike Adams, Natural News:

Instantly nullifying the gun control argument that’s always pushed by the left-wing media following every mass shooting tragedy, today’s Texas church shooter was stopped by an armed citizen with a rifle.

The armed citizen engaged the shooter with rifle fire, according to media reports, causing him to drop his rifle and flee the scene. The shooter was later found dead in his vehicle, most likely after bleeding out from the gunshot wound inflicted by the armed Texas citizen. This has all been confirmed by the Texas Rangers.

Via Grabien.com:

Freeman Martin, a major in the Texas Rangers and a spokesman for the Texas Department of Public Safety, says the suspect dropped his rifle and fled after being confronted by a local man who had grabbed his rifle.

Freeman provided a timeline of the tragedy in a press briefing Sunday evening.

“At approximately 11:20 this morning a suspect was seen at a Valero gas station in Sutherland Springs, Texas,” Martin said. “He was dressed in all black. That suspect crossed the street to the church, exited his vehicle and began firing at the church.”

“That suspect then moved to the right side of the church and then continued to fire,” he continued. “That suspect entered the church and continued to fire. As he exited the church, a local resident grabbed his rifle and engaged that suspect. The suspect dropped his rifle, which was a Ruger AR assault-type rifle and fled from the church.” 

“Our local citizen pursued the suspect at that time,” Freeman went on. “A short time later as law enforcement responded that suspect right at the Wilson/Guadalupe County line crashed out and was found deceased in his vehicle. At this time we don’t know if it was a self-inflicted gunshot wound or if he was shot by the local resident. We know he’s deceased in the vehicle. “

This demonstrates yet again that armed citizens stop violence and help save lives. Remember: In a shooting where seconds matter, the police are only minutes away…

If this armed citizen had not stopped the shooter in Sutherland Springs, Texas, there’s no telling how many more innocent victims might have been killed.

If you want to protect yourself and your fellow citizens, carry a concealed weapon, learn how to use it and be prepared to deploy it in the interests of protecting your community and your family against senseless violence. Finally, do not give in to gun control zealots who want to turn the entire nation into a “gun-free” kill zone where citizens have no ability to defend themselves at all.

Read More @ NaturalNews.com

Mass Shooting At Texas Church Shows Why Every Church In America Needs To Have Armed Security


by Michael Snyder, The Economic Collapse Blog:

The mass shooting at the First Baptist Church in Sutherland Springs, Texas on Sunday morning is already being called the deadliest church shooting in modern U.S. history, and we need to be in prayer for the victims and for their families.  At about 11:30 AM, a heavily armed man entered the sanctuary and began shooting.  At this point it is being reported that “at least 27 people have been killed” and at least another 30 have been injured.  Tragically, reports indicate that several small children are among those that were murdered.

As I write this, we are still waiting to hear from authorities about a motive.  We do know that the gunman is dead, but we haven’t been given any information about his identity.

But whatever the motive was, this just goes to show that something like this could literally happen anywhere.  Only about 400 people live in Sutherland Springs, and I am sure that nobody ever expected something like this to happen on a Sunday morning…

At least 27 people have been killed and 30 people have been injured in a mass shooting at a church in Sutherland Springs, Texas.

A witness reported seeing the as-yet unidentified man walk into First Baptist Church and began shooting around 11:30 a.m. Sunday.

Wilson County commissioner Albert Gamez Jr. told a CNN reporter that the gunman fled in a vehicle after the shooting and is now dead after a brief pursuit.

Of course Democrats were already calling for gun control within minutes of this being reported by the national news.

But gun control won’t stop tragedies such as this.  The bad guys are always going to find ways to get guns, and so disarming the rest of the population is a really, really bad idea.

What we really need to do is to make sure that there is armed security at every church in America from now on.  If there had been armed security at the First Baptist Church in Sutherland Springs on Sunday morning, a whole lot of lives could have potentially been saved.

Instead, the gunman was able to murder innocent people at will, and at one point he even stopped to reload his gun

The gunman was said to have fired a semi-automatic weapon into the packed congregation of about 50 during the middle of the service – stopping only to reload his gun, before fleeing.

So many of us are victims of “normalcy bias” when it comes to tragedies such as this.  Since we grew up in an America where things like this rarely ever happened, we just assume that we don’t need armed security at churches, schools and other public events.

But times have changed, and so must we.  Islamic terror is on the rise, Republican members of Congress are being attacked, anti-Christian hate is at unprecedented levels, and the number of mentally unstable people running around in our society has never been higher.

So let’s do a couple of things.

Number one, like President Trump let us grieve with the people of Sutherland Springs.  The following comes from Fox News

President Trump, who’s currently traveling in Asia, tweeted: “May God be w/ the people of Sutherland Springs, Texas. The FBI & law enforcement are on the scene. I am monitoring the situation from Japan.”

Number two, let us push for armed security at all of our churches from now on.  Someday it may be your church that is attacked, and when that happens having armed security on hand will make all the difference.

Read More @ TheEconomicCollapseBlog.com

Poll Finds that Opinions are Unchanged on Guns following Vegas Shooting


by Tim Brown, Freedom Outpost:

A poll conducted by the Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research has found that people’s opinion about guns and gun rights are largely unchanged after nearly 60 people were murdered and more than 500 wounded in the Las Vegas mass shooting.

People who favor the law that restricts government, not citizens, regarding arms rights are shown in a minority, according to the poll, but the opinions of those who want to infringe on others’ rights with tighter gun laws, which only lead towards gun confiscation and prohibition, are seen to be in the majority.

The Associated Press reports:

The survey was conducted from Oct. 12-16, about two weeks after 64-year-old Stephen Paddock fired on a crowded musical festival taking place on across the street from his hotel room, killing 58 and wounding more than 540 before killing himself. It’s the deadliest mass shooting in modern U.S. history.

In this latest survey, 61 percent said the country’s gun laws should be tougher, while 27 percent would rather see them remain the same and 11 percent want them to be less strict. That’s similar to the results of an AP-GfK poll in July 2016.

Nearly 9 in 10 Democrats, but just a third of Republicans, want to see gun laws made stricter.

Of course, this is consistent with political ideology.  Those opposing stricter gun laws are actually siding with God-given rights and the law while the opposite side longs to violate law, and I’m betting it isn’t just on this issue.

The AP continued:

About half of Americans said they think making it more difficult to buy a gun would reduce the number of mass shootings in the country, and slightly under half said it would reduce the number of homicides.

About half felt it would reduce the number of accidental shootings, 4 in 10 that it would reduce the number of suicides and only about a third felt it would reduce gang violence.

Again, there is nothing that will stop a criminal from obtaining a gun, and making it more difficult for a person bent on murder to obtain a weapon “legally” will not stop them from obtaining one “illegally.”

I love how the AP words things too, which gets at the heart of the issue.

“About half felt…,” the report stated.

This is the problem.  People feel and respond emotionally rather than rationally.

Even the notorious gun grabbing senator from California, Dianne Feinstein, continues this little escapade.  She responds emotionally to every single shooting that goes national with a call for bans and more laws against law-abiding citizens.  Then, 

However, she continues to push the delusion that more gun laws will stop mass shootings, just like many of these people in the survey, even though they know it to be a lie.

The AP continued:

Some 59 percent voiced disapproval with Trump’s handling of the issue, while 40 percent said they approved. About half of Americans age 60 and over approve of how he is handling the issue, compared with fewer than 4 in 10 of those under 60. Politically, 79 percent of people who identify as Republican approve of Trump’s handling of gun issues, while 61 percent of independents and 89 percent of Democrats disapprove. Sixty percent of gun owners approve of Trump on the issue.

The poll also showed Americans divided over which party, if any, they trust to handle gun control. Close to a third give Democrats the edge while 28 percent prefer Republicans, and 31 percent say they don’t trust either party.

Well, I’m not necessarily happy with Trump’s response nor the NRA’s either, but I’m not surprised at it.  I assumed that sooner or later he would begin to “consider” certain violations of the Second Amendment, and the NRA has a long history of compromising our rights, though at times they do stand up for them, for which I’m thankful.  I just wish they were a bit more consistent in that regard.

Neither Republicans nor Democrats have been given any authority to handle gun control.  That’s why neither party would be good at handling it.

The Second Amendment is abundantly clear, which politicians and citizens want to trample all over.

“…the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”

Read More @ FreedomOutpost.com


How To Stop All Future Mass Shootings

by Brandon Smith, Alt Market:

In my last article ‘A Tactical Analysis Of The Las Vegas Mass Shooting Incident,’ I outlined the precarious nature of the mainstream narrative and why the Vegas event in particular requires serious independent investigation into the possibility that Stephen Paddock did not plan or execute the event alone, or, he did not plan or execute the event at all, and someone else with far more tactical knowledge and shooting experience committed the murders outside the Mandalay Bay Hotel. Given that the FBI and Vegas sheriff’s timeline seems to change every few days and that Mandalay surveillance footage is locked up tight, I think it is safe to say that someone more professional, and not muzzled by bureaucracy, needs be involved.

Setting aside the inconsistencies in the official narrative, questioning the motives behind this particular attack does not really bring us any closer to a practical solution. Of course, if you are one of those people that obsessively embraces the “crisis actor” theory, then you likely think that nothing much needs to be solved because “no one actually died.” I am not very interested in this impractical theory reminiscent of ‘The Truman Show’, nor the people that promote it. It reminds me of the 9/11 hologram plane theory — remember, the theory designed to discredit the more legitimate 9/11 truth movement which included hundreds of scientists, architects and engineers with real arguments and evidence? Yeah, those establishment disinformation tactics did not go away; they are still being used today to undermine honest and rational investigations of other potential false flag events.

Ask “fake event” theorists for ANY concrete evidence that a single death was theatrical and that thousands of concertgoers and their families are part of the conspiracy, and these guys will demand that YOU show them the dead bodies and prove that the event “wasn’t faked.”  In other words, you must prove a negative, which is of course impossible.

Tell them you happen to know people with friends and family who were harmed in the event and they’ll call you a liar or a government “agent.” Show them numerous photos of dead bodies and they’ll claim the bodies are actors. Show them first hand accounts of people on the ground — hey, all those people must be actors, too. Ask them for proof again and they’ll try to pawn the burden of proof off on you; proof that they will then again deny when it is presented. It is a pointless circle of idiocy that makes alternative research look ridiculous.

If the establishment is seeking to stage a false flag, why go through the trouble of an elaborate, costly and harder-to-contain Kabuki play with numerous actors that might not keep quiet when they could simply shoot some real people with real bullets and be done with it?

Moving on…

This article will be focusing on the very real shooting (and attacks like it) which did in fact occur. Perhaps not the way that the mainstream media and the FBI claim, but still taking place all the same. How do we prevent such attacks in the future? What about Gladio-type false flag events(the Vegas event has numerous Gladio markers)? Can those be stopped, or is this an impossible task?

As far as false flag attacks are concerned, the long-term solution would be to nullify the people who fund and plan these scenarios. Until the day this is accomplished, though, we need some short-term protections.

I believe it is indeed possible to stop future mass shooting events, and to be sure, the solution does NOT involve further gun control measures or confiscation. Why? Because gun control does nothing to prevent mass shootings.

Just take a look at the Paris attacks perpetrated by ISIS. France has strict gun laws in line with what gun control advocates in the U.S. would like to see implemented. Even off-duty police officers in France were not allowed to carry their sidearms until after the Paris attacks in 2015.

French gun laws did nothing to stop ISIS terrorists from killing over 130 people in a single night using weapons already highly restricted in the country. All they accomplished was disarming innocent citizens and making them easy targets.

The nation of India also has some of the strictest gun laws in the world, yet this did nothing to prevent the Mumbai attacks in 2008 in which 164 people were killed.

Norway had extremely tough gun laws in 2011, but these were easily circumvented by Anders Breivik who murdered 69 members of a Workers Youth Camp on the island of Utoya.

As I noted in my previous article, the Vegas attack was initiated using more complex sniper-like tactics as evidenced in the choice of the shooter’s perch as well as in the calculations for bullet drop from an elevated position. I believe this was done quite deliberately; most mass shooters tend to be poorly trained and attack a crowd haphazardly at point blank range in order to achieve maximum casualties in the shortest amount of time.  However, in Vegas, and Nevada in general, the likelihood of running into a person with a conceal carry weapon is rather high. Paddock (or whoever) might not have lasted more than a minute before being confronted with multiple defenders armed with their own sidearms.

The Vegas shooter was smart to avoid a point blank, ground level confrontation. But how do we make future shooters think twice about longer range attacks at crowded events?

The federal government and DHS will probably call for stricter security measures in locations in which many people congregate. I would not be surprised to see demands for TSA-style security in streets in major tourist areas and at concerts, sporting events, etc. Body scanners and luggage scanners in major hotels? Count on it, eventually. Hardcore anti-gun ordinances within major cities, much like the gun measures in places like Washington D.C.? Do not be shocked.

As mentioned above, none of this will really stop a determined mass shooter or terrorist (and certainly not a false flag), but without an alternative solution, frightened people have a tendency to go along with the deluded notion that more government means more security.

Vegas is not a stranger to crisis, but it seems to have forgotten how to prevent it. Many Americans are unaware that back in 1992 during the Rodney King riots, Las Vegas had to deal with its own major civil unrest with millions of dollars in damage and multiple deaths. This was barely reported because of Vegas’s habit of burying stories that might stain the tourist destination’s fun-loving image. But, it did take place.

West Las Vegas erupted in violence in the wake of the Rodney King trial, including snipers shooting at police officers and bystanders, but the Vegas Strip went largely untouched. This was perhaps because hotel and casino private security at that time had a reputation for being rather well armed and vicious. Many hotels had their own rooftop shooters ready and waiting. Given, Vegas was still highly “mobbed up” in the 1990s, but one must admit that their security was not to be trifled with.

No major federal measures were needed and intrusive security was minimal. Can this effect be achieved again (without the mob)?  Yes.

Read More @ Alt-Market.com

An Open Letter to Women Who Want Gun Control


by Daisy Luther, The Organic Prepper:

Dear Women Who Are Fighting for Gun Control:

Please give me just a few moments of your time so I can talk to you, one woman to another. We truly do want the same things. This is not an attack on you or the things you believe in, but rather, a discussion of empowerment.

I am sure that your heart is in the right place when you tell us that guns should be banned for the good of humanity. You see the aftermath of horrific events like the Pulse nightclub shooting and the concert in Las Vegas and you are horrified. I am too. You are convinced that the world would be a better place with no guns at all. I am not.

You hear the impassioned pleas from celebrities like the ones in the video below and you are inspired to take action to make America a safer place.

But I hear this and the hypocrisy of it makes me sick.

These people in the videos who are begging for our Second Amendment rights to be abolished to do not have anything in common with women like you and me. They are protected by gated communities with armed patrols. They have burly bodyguards. They have monitored home security systems that would rival that of the Louvre. Many of them are insulated and protected in their homes, their cars, and when they’re walking down the street.

But are you?

Or do you have nothing more than a locked door and the hope that the police will arrive in time standing between you and a home invader? Do you put your keys between your fingers when you walk through a parking garage, hoping that if someone tries to rape you that you’ll be able to gouge his eyes with it an run screaming for help? What would you do if someone broke into your home and was heading to your child’s room with the intent of doing harm? Would you just hide and pray that the stall door of the bathroom you were hiding in didn’t get kicked open by the criminal who had just opened fire on the restaurant you were in?

What is your plan?

I believe that your premise (personal safety) is valid but your conclusion (gun control) is wrong.

I beg you to read the following with an open mind.

Hiding, calling 911, and hoping you can inflict enough damage to protect yourself from someone, bigger, stronger, and meaner than you is not much of a plan.

If you really, truly want to be safe, equal, and empowered, what you need to do is get a gun, learn how to use it, and carry it everywhere. Encourage your daughters to do the same. Treat your girlfriends to a day at the range instead of a day at the spa. Give your mom a gift certificate for shooting lessons. Campaign to banish gun-free, target rich zones and stop relying on a flimsy lock and 911 for your personal safety.

There is no greater equalizer against a culprit intent on doing you harm than a firearm in the hand of a woman who knows how to use it.

Let me share a personal story.

I can tell you from personal experience that my daughter and I are unharmed today because I was carrying a gun one night.

It was after supper when the dogs in the back began barking. A car had come down my long private driveway and pulled to a stop. I live way down a long country road, and my driveway is the last one on the road.  Uninvited visitors are extremely rare. We’re too far out there for the usual smattering of Jehovah’s Witness, little girls selling cookies, and neighborly drop-offs of homemade jam.

I looked outside and saw that two men had gotten out and approached my daughter while one waited in the driver seat of the car. My daughter, 15, was doing some of the after dinner chores. I had a bad feeling immediately. I knew it, because I was adamantly told by that gut instinct that doesn’t hint something is wrong, but pounds your heart like a drum to get your attention, and screams it inside your head. 

I stopped for just long enough to grab my loaded Glock 19 and for the first time since purchasing it, I racked the slide and chambered a round for a reason other than target practice. For the first time, I did so because of another human being. I did so because there were 3 men out there with my child and they were bigger than both of us. They were undoubtedly stronger, and we were outnumbered, and I knew that there was the potential for something bad to happen.

I stuffed the gun into the side pocket of my hoodie and hurried out. I asked the men brusquely, “Can I help you?”

One was the talker. He was bearded, overly friendly, and ingratiating. The other hung back. He was blond, thin, and moved constantly. I never got a good look at the driver due to the tinted windows in the vehicle. But I noticed the older, beat-up vehicle had no license plate. Another warning sign that this was not right at all.

The bearded one, the talker, told me that his vehicle was overheating and that they needed to come in and make a phone call. I said, “No, you’re not coming in.”

He asked if they could at least have some water.

I wanted to hustle my daughter into the house right that moment and lock the doors and call 911 and wait for a speedy rescue, complete with sirens and flashing lights.

But they were closer to my daughter than she was to me, so that was not an option.

I let them have a bucket of water, even though I could tell that the car was not overheating. There was no smoke, no sweet smell of antifreeze. The bearded one kept up a friendly patter the entire time, pretending that the radiator cap was hot, jumping back as if to avoid billowing steam that didn’t exist. While he pretended to work on the car, the antsy blond fellow was whispering to the driver. Without me bringing it up, the chatty one said, “Can you believe our license plate just fell off? If you noticed we don’t have one, that’s what happened. We just discovered it at the gas station.”

“Wow, that’s a shame,” I said, playing along. “They’ll charge you an arm and a leg at the DMV.”

I finally positioned myself to the point that I was between them and my child. Whether they’re 5 or 15, in moments when you fear for them, they are your precious child, and they are every age they ever have been and ever will be. Any person who has ever loved a child can easily imagine the relief I felt.

“You need to leave.”

The bearded one looked hurt. The blonde one looked watchful. I still couldn’t get a good look at the driver.

“I just need one more bucket of water and then we’ll be on our way,” the bearded one said, putting his hands out in a manner meant to calm me down.

“No. You need to leave now.” I put my hand firmly on the gun at my side.

Suddenly, there was a shift. I wasn’t the one backing away. The bearded guy slammed the hood of the car and walked slowly backward to the passenger side, while the blonde guy got in the back.

I never drew my firearm.

I never pointed it at them.

I never shot them.

But the very sight of my hand on the butt of it, and the fact that I was clearly determined to use it if necessary was all the deterrent that was needed in that particular situation.

Suddenly, a woman and a child were more than 3 grown men wanted to tangle with.

Suddenly, we weren’t weaker. We weren’t victims. We had the power to protect ourselves.

Read More @ TheOrganicPrepper.ca

Gun Violence Would Immediately Plummet If We Just Called Off the War on Drugs

from The Anti Media:

Ending the War on Drugs would have a significant impact on the number of gun fatalities across the board.

(FEE) — With the horrific shooting that recently took place in Las Vegas, debates over gun control have been given center stage in our media and politics once again.

And while every pundit seems to have their own surefire way of combatting gun violence, they all gloss over the elephant in the room. Which is, although mass shootings have taken on a repulsive popularity recently, the gun violence surrounding the War on Drugs has created more casualties than every mass shooting in the US combined. And despite the fact that these commentators tirelessly argue the merits and faults of one another’s ideas, one thing is certain; we can and should end the Drug War, immediately.

What the Numbers Say

News outlets and politicians currently promulgating their agendas would like you to believe that every public venue in America carries an overt risk of involving you in the next mass shooting. The truth, however, is quite different.

There has been an average of 32,000 gun fatalities in America each year from 2003 to 2010. Of those deaths, 63{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528} were suicides and accidents, leaving approximately 11,000 homicides a year. Of which, more than 13{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528} were gang-related. Of the remaining homicides, victims of mass shootings made up only 1.5{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528} – equating to 0.1{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528} of all gun deaths and 0.3{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528} of all homicides.

Now, if we are to believe the intentions of those pushing for an end to gun violence, it should be glaringly obvious that focusing on mass shootings, an issue that is responsible for one hundred times fewer deaths than gang-related homicides is an illogical way of achieving their goal.

Luckily, the immediate and long-term effects of ending the War on Drugs would have a significant impact on the number of gun fatalities across the board. The most immediate of these would result from reducing the number of people who are imprisoned for victimless crimes, thereby drastically cutting the number of children who grow up in single-parent households.

Currently, 46{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528} of our federal prison populations consists of non-violent drug offenders, while a massive 70{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528} of gang members grow up in broken homes. Even if only 5{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528} of those who are currently imprisoned for drug crimes return to have a positive impact on their families, that’s over 100,000 fewer recruits for gangs across the country.

The Drug War has created an endless cycle, whereby people unnecessarily are thrown in prison, often leaving children behind to grow up impoverished in single-parent householdsand far more susceptible to join gangs. In this way, the War on Drugs ultimately contributes to more gun violence, more people ending up in prison, and the perpetuation of a generational cycle.

Read More @ TheAntiMedia.com

Reload Your Own Ammo, If You Want To Be A Good Shot!, by Steve Collins


by Steve Collins, Survival Blog:

Common Sense and Facts About Shooting

Common sense tells us that if you want to be a good shooter, you need to shoot often. Facts tell us, though, that our wallets won’t allow us to shoot as often as we want or need to. While resorting to the .22 caliber firearms is often cited as an acceptable alternative, at some point you need to shoot your primary gun. The answer to buying factory ammo is to reload your own. I started reloading in 1984 when I got my first Colt 1911 .45 auto. Shortly thereafter I received a Smith & Wesson Model 29 .44 Magnum revolver for Christmas, along with my first reloading kit. Mom must have known something, or it was Divine Providence, that led her to get both of those items at the same time, because I found out very quickly how expensive .44 ammo was!

Not Somewhere Between Rocket Science and Black Magic

Reloading is seen by many as being somewhere between rocket science and black magic. Nothing could be further from the truth! Reloading is a safe activity, as long as you pay attention to what you’re doing. Making our own ammo allows us to tailor a particular load to our particular situation. We also aren’t left at the mercy of the manufacturers during times of short supply, such as we saw in 1994 and again in 2008. While a lot of folks were scrambling to find practice ammo, I was at my loading bench making as much as I wanted.

If you’ve chosen a caliber that isn’t that common, such as .38 Super, 10mm, or .41 Magnum, reloading isn’t just a nice hobby but becomes almost a necessity. Making your own ammo can allow you to shoot that old rifle that belonged to your grandpa and for which you can’t find factory ammo anymore, too.


Preparing to Reload

Basic Overview of Beginning Reloading

This is going to be a basic overview of beginning reloading, since reams of paper have been written on the subject. I’m just hoping to get you started down the right path.

Let me put this note in right now: Reloading is a potentially dangerous activity. Neither I nor the publishers assume any responsibility in your loading practices. My loads are safe in my guns. Take appropriate precautions when handling reloading components.

Get Reloading Manuals and Read

First, get a reloading manual, preferably three or four of them, and read them from cover to cover. They all say many of the same things, sometimes just a little differently. Every company has their own way of measuring velocity, pressures, et cetera. My personal favorite is the Lyman 50th Edition Reloading Manual, which has data from many different sources. It’s usually the first one I grab when I’m looking up a new load or caliber. They will all cover the basics of what goes on when reloading your own: de-priming and resizing the case to factory configuration, seating a new primer, adding gunpowder, and seating and crimping a new bullet. The manuals usually have good pictures in them to help you along.

Talk to People Who Reload At Local Gun Shop

Next, go to your local gun shop (or two or three) and ask to talk to the individual who knows the most about reloading their own ammo. I’m pretty lucky in that I have a friend who has been reloading for nearly 60 years, making my 25 years seem paltry. They can probably answer a lot of your questions and give you some good recommendations. If you have a friend or family member who is willing to help you along, that’s even better. Getting some hands-on experience before venturing out on your own will help assuage some of the fear that most have about making their own ammo.

Obtaining a Reloading Press

Begin With Single Stage Reloading Press

At this point, we’re going to assume that you’ve decided to continue on with learning how to reload your own ammo. Now you have to get a reloading press, but which one? Should it be a progressive or single stage? I always recommend that a beginner use a single stage press. A single stage press means that each operation has to be done to every round you intend to load. Then you go on to the next operation and the next. Yes, it can be tedious and slow, but you will get a better feel for each operation, and you can inspect your brass at each step to see what is really going on. Plus, you will always have the opportunity to use the single stage press later on, even when you decide to move on to something more advanced.

My single stage press, an RCBS Rock Chucker, is 35 years old, and it is still going. I’ve seen some older presses in gun shops that were made in the ‘50s and ‘60s and worked just fine. I use it for developing new loads for my pistols and for my rifle ammo, since I don’t shoot near as much rifle as I do pistol.

Progressive Press by Dillon Reloads Over 100 Calibers

My progressive press is made by Dillon Precision and is their model 550B. This press will reload over 100 calibers (and yes, I have friends that reload that many or more!) A progressive press means that with each pull of the handle, a new fully loaded round is made. It’s accomplished with the use of a turret style head of some type, allowing each round to be moved to the next phase of the operation. We’re going to focus primarily on the single stage though, since it’s easier to show you each step.

Basic Accessories For Reloading

Reloading Dies

Reloading dies are next. These come made for each individual caliber, and you’ll need new ones for every caliber you decide to reload. Most of the reloading companies make dies, but some, like RCBS, make them for nearly every caliber ever made and then some. Dies come in two, three, and four die sets, depending on what caliber you’re loading for. Once again, this comes back to reading the manuals and asking questions. A shell holder is needed and may be purchased separately, or it is sometimes included with the dies. This is what holds the case in the reloading press. One shell holder can hold several different sized cases, such as the 30-06 shell holder that will also hold .243, .270, and .308 because they have the same case head size.

Powder Dispenser

A powder dispenser is necessary, since it holds the powder you’re going to put in the case. You adjust it for a certain amount of powder, whatever amount the reloading manual says. This gets measured on your powder scale. The powder scale lets you precisely measure the amount of powder that you are putting in the case. Follow what the manual says; do not guess at how much powder to put in!

Those are the basic accessories you need to reload. But, you also need to get the components, i.e., what bullet do you want to use, what primer, what powder? You thought we were done? Not quite…

Components for Reloading

Unless you’re doing something task specific (hunting, precision shooting, et cetera), your basic full metal jacket bullet or lead bullet will be fine for practice. I do use specific bullets for certain things and have my own preferences. Only through a lot of study and experimentation will you find your own.


Primers come next. They’re made in small and large pistol, and small and large rifle. They’re also made in magnum versions, which we won’t worry about right now. You can get them in packs of 100 or an entire sleeve of 5000. The manual will tell you which size you need for your particular cartridge.


You also need gunpowder, and there are many different kinds. Some are specific for rifle, pistol, or shotgun, and some are multi-purpose. Powders are not all the same! Do not substitute one for another! The results can be disastrous. Use the powders specified for your cartridge in the manual. (See the recurring theme here?) Also, you may find references to very popular loads from famous gun writers in print and on the internet. Do not jump in and start using these without a thorough knowledge of what you’re doing! Some of these “legendary” loads were developed several decades ago. Over time, powders and primers have changed and those old loads may not be safe in your gun. With any new load you work on, the story stays the same: start low and slowly work your way up.

Read More @ SurvivalBlog.com

Only Stupid People Demand Banning Guns


from BATR:

How many times has this country been subjected to the same old canards that if we only ban firearms, some kind of mythical conveyance will shine over the aggressive nature of the American public and the altar boys will emerge to bless the rest of the law-abiding citizens? Get REAL. There is no magic bullet that will curve around the aiming path of a shooter unless Senator Arlen Specter can be resurrected to explain how the laws of physics can be bent to fit the narrative. For the armchair prognosticators let them enjoy the sport of dissecting the Las Vegas “situation“. Sorry, at the end of the distraction; nothing but a footnote in the long saga of diverting the public away from the true fundamentals of oppression, the Stephen Paddock’s in this violent society will just melt into obscurity.   

With all the fanfare that always accompanies the hysterics from the limousine liberals, who routinely are protected by their gun packing security teams, the celebrity moralists continue to preach why ordinary citizens must relinquish their self-protection firearms as a necessary price to keep La La Land safe.

The rebuttal comes from World Net Daily which provides a good overview in the Top 5 anti-gun proposals and why they’ll never stop a madman. According to “Dr. John Lott says the proposals either already failed to stop killers or would do little more than serve as a political win that doesn’t make anyone safer.”

Such arguments never will shut up Mr. loud mouth himself. The Fox Insider reports that Michael Moore Calls for Repeal of ‘Ancient & Outdated’ 2nd Amendment. “He acknowledged that we can never eliminate murder, but we can join the community of “enlightened nations” where gun violence is not a “daily tragedy.”

For Moore’s Facebook statement read, My Proposal to Repeal the Second Amendment and Replace It with This:


“A well regulated State National Guard, being helpful to the safety and security of a State in times of need, along with the strictly regulated right of the people to keep and bear a limited number of non-automatic Arms for sport and hunting, with respect to the primary right of all people to be free from gun violence, this shall not be infringed.”

I, Michael Moore, along with all who support an end to this epidemic of gun violence, propose a new Amendment to our Constitution that repeals the ancient and outdated 2nd Amendment (which was written before bullets and revolvers were even invented), and replaces it with a new 28th Amendment that guarantees States can have State militias (a.k.a. State National Guards which are made up of citizen-soldiers who are called upon in times of natural disasters or other State emergencies), allows individuals to use guns for sport and gathering food, and guarantees everyone the right to be free of, and protected from, gun violence (i.e., the public’s safety comes ahead of an individual’s right to own and fire a gun).

This amendment would allow states and the federal government to pass laws that would regulate gun ownership in the following manner:

Read his entire list in his repeal of the 2nd Amendment from a man who has A Love Affair with Wall Street Capitalism.


WOW, America should become one of those “Enlightened Nations” that have been stripped of their natural right to effective self-defense by banning guns from the common man. If you want to make society safer, put in place the Swiss model of an armed citizenry and refute the European Union version of defenseless prey to criminals and terrorists.


Coming from a genuine enlightened celebrity James Woods shreds Geraldo Rivera for attacking Second Amendment on Twitter.


“Since the tragic Las Vegas shooting, anti-gun liberals have used whatever means available, including social media, to spread anti-Second Amendment propaganda and distortions, no doubt hoping to see the amendment repealed.

As one can imagine, these attempts have only revealed the ignorance of the anti-gun left.  Unfortunately, instead of educating themselves on the issue, liberals have simply doubled down on the “stupid,” showing their true colors.

A post at the Gateway Pundit correctly observes that “‘psychos’ and terrorists can easily purchase or rent a vehicle and plow over people as we have seen numerous times…”

So we have to ask: Why aren’t these same liberals demanding vehicle control?  What about background checks for those who wish to rent a van or a truck?”

Appreciate the stupidity of Geraldo Rivera, a lifelong progressive who masquerades as a converted moderate and a reliable journalist, for the apologetic guilt ridden privileged class of establishment gatekeepers.

Just so folks do not misconstrue that only progressives are dim-witted, there are many mainstream right learning pundits that fit the bill as dumber than dirt. The Hill reports that one such self-proclaimed “conservative New York Times columnist Bret Stephens called for a repeal of the Second Amendment in a Thursday op-ed.” Mr. Stephens writes:

“The Whiskey Rebellion of the 1790s, the New York draft riots of 1863, the coal miners’ rebellion of 1921, the Brink’s robbery of 1981 — does any serious conservative think of these as great moments in Second Amendment activism?”

Well, Mr. NYT federalist, authentic paleo-conservatives would vigorously side with those confronting the tyranny of the central government during the Whiskey Rebellion and side with the resistance against the Union draft for funneling cannon fodder to wage the War of Northern Aggression.

Such faux conservatives are sorely lacking in a proper education of what it means to have a society based upon individual liberty.

The proper viewpoint why the second amendment is crucial to the survival of America as a free nation of sovereign citizens is provided by Richard Ebeling in The Daily Bell.

“The taking up of arms is a last resort, not a first, against the intrusions and oppressions of government. Once started, revolutions and rebellions can have consequences no one can foretell, and final outcomes are sometimes worse than the grievance against which resistance was first offered. However, there are times, “in the course of human events,” when men must risk the final measure to preserve or restore the liberty that government threatens or has taken away. The likelihood that government will feel secure in undertaking infringements on the freedoms of Americans would be diminished if it knew that any systematic invasion of people’s life, liberty and property might meet armed resistance by both the victim and those in the surrounding areas who came to his aid because of the concern that their own liberty might be the next to be violated.

As a people, we have swum against the tide of collectivism, socialism and welfare statism to a greater degree, for the most part, than have our western European cousins. As a result, in many areas of life we have remained freer, especially in our market activities, than they. The fact that other peoples in other lands chose to follow foolish paths leading to disastrous outcomes does not mean that we should follow in their footsteps.”

Yes, those that advocate people must submit to the demands of the collectivists are the real fools. Being an idiot is a constitutionally protected practice. It is hard to argue against that most sophisticated “PC” neophytes have a diminished political weight for their opinions. After all, a marginal voter seldom becomes an activist in working the political system. Blowhards may vent steam from their overheated heads, but few enlist in the grunt work to lobby the careerist government parasites that they need to apply constitutional protections and restraints to their official duties.

Legislatures rarely have the courage to defend the Bill of Rights. The hard effort falls to groups like the National Rifle Association and Gun Owners of America when it comes to the Second Amendment. Most citizens would like to avoid any confrontations or avert engaging in the serious topics of a responsible citizen.

Read More @ BATR.org