Wednesday, January 30, 2013

Almost Finished With AR Build!

Actually, a rebuild of an older gun I'm building up as a gift to a really good friend...and, no, you're not that good a friend! It's a pretty basic build....Magpul MOE furniture, 3-pound Timney trigger (I'll swap it out if my friend wants a heavier trigger pull), DPMS lower and J&T upper, assorted CMMG parts. Should be a nice little gun!

While the vast majority of Colorado Sheriffs have stood up and said they will NOT enforce unconstitutional federal gun laws, the Sheriff of Arapahoe County, Grayson Robinson, has bucked the trend and announced he would enforce the federal gun laws, should any pass. What's next there, Grayson? Black uniforms? "Safe Streets" collar pins that look like lightning bolts? Repaint all the cars to read, "To Serve, Protect and Confiscate?"

BTW, to the people I shoot with in the Arapahoe County Sheriff's Department, before you send me hostile emails I suggest you sit your boss down and talk to him, maybe ask whether he takes his oath seriously, maybe even suggest that he read the Constitution. It applies even in Denver suburbs!

In another testament to the efficacy of gun control, Chicago   — that gun-free paradise home of Maximum Leader Barry O — now has more deaths than Afghanistan. More people have died (4797) in the gun-free paradise over the last decade than in Afghanistan Operation Enduring Freedom (2166). This according to a WND report. And remember that great comment from Chicago Police Superintendent Garry McCarthy: "When people say concealed carry, I say Trayvon Martin."

Funny, but when people say get slaughtered in a cesspool of an American city totally controlled by gangs, organized crime and an utterly corrupt political system, I say Chicago!

Good luck on the Illinois "Shall Issue" legislative proposal!

And speaking of Constitutional issues, it's looking more and more like those "signature" gun-ban ideas might not pass Constitutional muster in a post-Heller, post-McDonald world. From Georgetown Constitutional Law Professor Randy Barnett:
So, when considering the constitutionality of bans on so-called military-style assault weapons, or restrictions on the capacity of magazines, senators should begin by asking whether the weapons being banned are in common use by civilians. When it comes to so-called assault weapons, like the AR-15, or 30-round magazines, the answer is clearly "yes." Millions of such weapons and magazines are in private hands. 
That should settle the matter, but senators can go a step further and ask whether these or other measures are actually rational -- to articulate the end they are seeking to accomplish, then assesses whether the means adopted actually match up with the purported end. Would they actually have prevented a mass shooting or ameliorated real crimes? This heightened "rationality review" could help ensure that the reason being articulated is the real reason for the law.
For example, "assault weapons" are a made-up category of weapons that is based solely on cosmetic features that make them look like the fully automatic weapons used by the military. Banning them leaves other rifles that are functionally identical in their lethality and rate of fire completely legal. Moreover, far more powerful hunting rifles are left untouched by the law, as are shotguns. This is simply irrational and therefore unconstitutional.
The New York state laws are already facing legal challenges and are likely headed to the Supreme Court.

I know this is hard to believe, but I actually read something I agreed with in HuffPo! Of course, it's from a Cato Institute researcher, but there you are:
First and foremost is the oppressive and ineffective drug war that has destroyed inner-city neighborhoods and severely harmed the life prospects of millions of Americans, most acutely, young, African-American men. 
As Prohibition-era America showed, banning a highly in-demand substance increases the violence surrounding that substance. When legal methods cannot be used to settle contract and other disputes, extra-legal methods (i.e., the point of a gun) will be used. Moreover, unsavory characters will tend to traffic the prohibited substances, further escalating violent business practices. These new businessmen also facilitate the illegal gun trade, brazenly ignoring assault weapons bans and other cosmetic limits on gun ownership. Those guns then flood the black market, giving easy access to would-be criminals and mass shooters. A 2001 Justice Department study found that 20 percent of prison inmates received their guns from a drug dealer or off the street. Comparatively, only 0.7 percent of the weapons were obtained at gun shows. Which "loophole" should we be focusing on closing?
Amen to that!

Finally, on yesterday's "rabbit hole" topic, this morning I read this amazing letter from the more than 1000 active and retired Green Berets, and I found myself tearing up. Please, everyone needs to read this letter, then forward it on to every one your legislators. Hell, schoolchildren should be required to read this letter out loud in their classrooms!

The Green Berets list an 8-step course of action. This is the eighth point:
8. This is our country, these are our rights. We believe that it is time that we take personal responsibility for our choices and actions rather than abdicate that responsibility to someone else under the illusion that we have done something that will make us all safer. We have a responsibility to stand by our principles and act in accordance with them. Our children are watching and they will follow the example we set.  
The undersigned Quiet Professionals hereby humbly stand ever present, ever ready, and ever vigilant.
Our country has ever been protected by men like these. God bless them all.


Dock said...

is that the yellow Doublestar that Shooting Gallery watchers know so well?

Trevor Shepherd said...

It would make the case for common use more securely if we actually knew how many AR's were in private hands. The gun grabbers will simply tell the Supreme Court that there are no published data to even remotely suggest that these firearms are in common use beyond a few thousand in the hands of extreme gun enthusiasts, and that furthermore, 99% of the sales have been to law enforcement, not to civilians.

So, I think it is high time for the spokespeople of the NSSF to step up to the mic and start giving us the data that many of us have been asking for repeatedly over the past 10 years.

Anonymous said...

For the love of... Can we stop referring to them as "assault rifles," or "so-called assault Rifles." That is following the anti-Constitutional Left's lead. They keep repeating that garbage enough to give the concept traction. Let's follow Janet Napolitano's lead over at DHS. These are Personal Defense Rifles, Personal Defense Pistols, and Personal Defense Shotguns. That is, in fact what they are. Repeat those phrases multiple times at every opportunity, and repeatedly, at that. When someone says anything related to laws, bans, assualt, or assault style, high capacity or whatever, repeat the mantra - Personal Defense Rifle, Personal Defense Pistol, and Personal Defense Shotgun. Spread the word.

Keep up the good work!

The Freeholder said...

I had the good fortune to make the acquaintance of a couple of Green Berets once upon a time. Very serious men. Those they are writing to would be well advised to treat them and their words seriously.