Thursday, November 13, 2008

Well What Now

So, disaster struck America, something most of us refused to believe could happen.

An avowed leftist, empty suit will now become the leader of the free world.

How long will our freedoms last with the black Messiah?

Not long, I suspect.

Within six months an Assault Weapons ban will be up for a vote.

An that will just be the beginning of the attack on your gun rights.

So...for the sometimes supporter of the second amendment.....just expect to lose what you have.

For those willing to march, write, and convince others....get ready to act.

Buy all the guns you can now....and all of those high cap mags you may never need. Pick up a couple of AKs....ARs and anything that is not a single shot.....because your tubular lever action will be outlawed in a few months....if it holds more than five rounds.

America has voted for change.....

So you will get what they voted for....mindless, blind, outrageous change that will set the stage for the collapse of this nations economic and social order beyond the current mess we are in.

If you think I am just to negative....think about it may be just too naive.

Friday, July 11, 2008

Yahoo Tell Second Amendment to Drop Dead

For the last month or so, I have been advertising my web site for gun sales using Google and Yahoo.

These technological giants have editorial policies that are more in line with the Washington Post and the New York Times and therefore they take liberty to deny the right to advertise for certain products and services.

No one would argue with their right to limit advertisements for things like sex, or illicit drugs etc. But they also have policies that deny the right to advertise if your selling guns.

Somehow, these liberal, elitist, technocrats, feel the word a dirty word. A gun should not be sold....they should help sell guns etc. Somehow they feel that a product that supports your right to protect yourself, your family or engage in a sport like hunting, target shooting beneath their elitist standards....not worthy of their support and somehow advertising dollars earned from gun ads would be like blood money.

So after one month of having my ad run in Yahoo for my site Cutler Sport Services , Yahoo decided to stop my add. They just pulled the plug.

They didn't care that I am an FFL holder, that I transfer weapons only to other FFL holders. No distinction between a casual seller of used guns versus a business selling guns or shooting supplies. Of course not. Subtle distinctions are used by liberals only when it promotes advancing rights that they support. Otherwise there is no gradations of color. Its all black and white. Guns = Bad. If I was selling Breast Enlargement that would = Good.

No big deal - their running my add cost be around $30 and generated zip.

But the principle is what matters here. So far, Google is not acting so anal.

So, dear supporters of the Second Amendment please take note.

If you use Yahoo you are supporting an Anti-Gun anti-Second Amendment company. So don't use them. Truth is Yahoo doesn't have the market share anyway - and who knows maybe tom morrow my Google add will also be killed.

But for now - get the word out: Yahoo views consumer need for firearm information in the same way it views pornography. I suspect Yahoo would conclude that not all sex advertising is bad - but any gun ads are forbidden. Lets send a message to Yahoo - drop your subscription to any of their services today - just one small step you can take to support your Second Amendment rights.

Thursday, July 10, 2008

God Condems Guns

Well if you side with some religious groups - a gun lover is not a God lover.

I find it sad, but predictable, that so many religious interest groups whose members have historically been oppressed, and even murdered for their religious beliefs, now find it appropriate to condemn those of us who cherish our Right to Keep and Bear Arms, as being less in tune with what the Devine desires of us.

The last time I read the Old Testament, God did not advocate surrender of one's life to a thief, rapist, killer, or a wild animal.

Perhaps it is simple the pacifists among us, and among them, who are outraged that the Supreme Court has affirmed your right to own a firearm.

More on their narrow perspective - here

Monday, June 30, 2008

Second Amendment Momentum

So, now liberals are saying the Supreme Court's decision affirming the Second Amendment is really just the opening round in a series of new court cases which may ultimately negate the impact of the Heller decision.

They now argue that the ruling should narrowly be applied to just the District of Columbia, which is not a State. They are hopeful that another Supreme court case down the road will hold that states can assert their interests over that of the individual.

Liberals will never stop...trying to get the government to permit a broad spectrum of behavior - except for behavior that empowers the individual to protect themselves with a weapon.

They still can only see weapons as a force for evil - this viewpoint however engraved in their minds, will not be altered by common sense or countless tales of individuals protecting their lives. To the liberal - a gun is un-civilized - something to loath. Those that are attracted to weapons are small minded blue collar red necks - of the kind that Oh!Bama speaks of.

Now the NRA has started legal action based upon the recent Supreme Court ruling.

It may take years for this decision's ripple effects to be fully felt in places like Chicago, San Francisco and New York City. But the momentum is with those who savor liberty.

Now will the NRA attempt to get those poor citizens of the District of Columbia the ability to purchase a handgun in Maryland and Virginia. The Heller decision won't mean a thing until these folks can legally buy a gun outside of D.C. You can bet that it will be many months before D.C. allows any FFLs to be established within it's borders. Thousands of D.C. residents want to legally buy weapons today.

When will the ATF issue special regulations to allow FFL holders in Maryland and Virginia to sell handguns to the law abiding residents of D.C. ?

Don't hold your breath!

Thursday, June 26, 2008

Your Right to Bear Arms is Upheld

Well it's no surprise to most 2nd Amendment advocates; The Supremes endorsed your right to keep and bear arms. I am disappointed that the margin of victory was slim. To win 5-4 just shows how the court is divided on ideological grounds.

The next President can stack the deck so that a later court decision can overturn this victory.

As for Oh!Bama. Mr. flip-flop now is trying to sound like this decision is welcome.

I hope and pray that you all are not so stupid.

This man will say and do anything. He is more of an opportunist then Bill Clinton ever was....and he is more dangerous.

The media is buzzing with the implications of this Supreme Court decision. It was highly anticipated- and it will bring the downfall of other extreme laws- but it will not cause the wholesale reversal of generic gun control measures.

John McCain is on the right side of this issue.

He is on the right side of the Energy issue also.

As each passing week provides a more revealing look at what this Oh!Bama person portrays himself to be, it becomes evident that you don't really have much choice in this election.

Oh!Bama is a danger to your life, liberty and everything else you hold dear. His approach will invite our enemies to test our lack of metal. He will raise your taxes. He will ensure that gas prices stay high.

Only liberals in denial won't admit the truth about what he represents.

I hope John McCain deals with Oh!Bama as ferociously and as wily as he dealt with his Vietnamese captors.

Wednesday, June 4, 2008

Success and Challenges

The NRA reports success in blocking the city of Philia from proceeding with it's latest gun restriction plans.

But now we all know that Oh! Bama will lead the charge for the Democrats - and 80 million gun owners are now at risk at losing parts of their Second Amendment rights, piece by piece.

This election is historic. Not just because Oh! Bama is unique - but because it will mark a watershed moment in American history, where this country took a nose dive to the left or stood solid in the center.

Imagine what a Democratic Congress, with a Democrat in the White House will be able to do to move on their liberal agenda. Imagine....a revived and renewed Assault Weapons ban that takes away almost all semi-autos from the market. Imagine living with five round magazines. Imagine new taxes on ammunition, imagine a law banning the environmental hazards of black powder.

80 million American gun owners must awake. The danger is greater now than at any previous time in recent history. There is only one choice in this election - and not voting is not one of them.

Thursday, May 1, 2008

National Parks May Allow Firearms

Those of you who have a favorite National Park in your area will benefit if current proposed Interior Dept. rules are implemented.

While it may confuse some to have to consider local state law, the concept of posting signs saying firearms allowed or no firearms allowed is a welcome change to the current 25 year old complete ban on carrying firearms in National Parks.

While it is statistically true that National Parks are safe, it would be safer if hikers like myself could carry our loaded handguns to guard against the potential for an attack by man or beast.

The fact that mountain lion attacks or robberies are rare is of no comfort to someone after they have been killed. Carrying a weapon is after all, an insurance policy that one hopes they will never have to employ.

This is a common sense rule change, which needs to have your support.

You have 60 days to tell the Interior Dept. what you think.

Saturday, April 26, 2008

Poor Oh! Bama

The tide has begun to turn. The magical miracle that Oh! Bama thinks he dissolving amid the contradictions and disconnects that arise from his history and his mouth.

Now....finally, the liberal media is beginning to critically focus on issues of character and even perhaps weakness. Even the left leaning Washington Post has the intellectual honesty to allow some pundits to articulate what is wrong with Mr. Hope.

As far as Oh! Bama's attitude towards firearm is increasingly clear that he is not even believed by Democrats. The recent Penn. primary results showed 60% of gun owners supported Hillary Clinton.

So what can we predict at this point? More and more it looks like a strategic disaster for Democrats. Only John McCain can rescue them by shooting himself in the foot. McCain is very capable at self inflicted wounds by disregarding his Republican base, while wooing Reagan Democrats and Independents. It's a balancing act that is treacherous. His recent attempt to silence the N. Carolina GOP's anti-Obama add - because it played up the Rev. Wright association shows a naivete about the political warfare ahead.

For the poor Democrats, we can foresee Hillary taking the fight to the convention floor. Why should she stop. What does she gain by caving in before Denver? When the Democrats nominate Obama they will seal their fate for November. He is clearly now viewed as the weaker national candidate....not that she is really much stronger. The Democrats have boxed themselves into a corner by letting their own left wing call the shots. McCain will hopefully skillfully play his cards by providing an alternative to the dis-affected Hillary supporters who can't help but remain so bitter - and 25% of them may well see McCain as a viable alternative.

Oh! Bama is dangerous. The future does not hold well for this ethereal candidate who exists on vaporous rhetoric with no real underpinning in experience or demonstrated leadership or character. America will not elect Oh! Bama. The Democrats don't offer any viable centrist choice - they miscalculated their moment with a sense of arrogance about the country's readiness to accept any new long as it was not Republican. From Pelosi, to Reed to Dean to Clinton to Oh my God Oh! Bama....they show a consistent pattern of burying their head in the sand.

Thursday, April 10, 2008

California Bans the San Francisco Gun Ban

In a victory for the un-fruits and nuts in San Francisco, the Calif. state supreme court has over-ruled the San Francisco ban on handguns.

But...don't expect SF pacifists to give up.

Quoting from an old Peter, Paul and Mary song.....Where have all the flowers gone

"When will they ever learn, when will they ever learn"

Tuesday, April 8, 2008

The Real Oh! Bama

If you trust Oh! Bama....Well I have a bridge I would like to sell you.

Friday, March 28, 2008

Oh Bama - The Last Angry Man

John Lott writes insightfully about the true nature of racial anger in America and hints at the true nature of Oh Bama.

Dangerous Gun Handling Rules Endanger Pilots

Last week a gun went off in a cockpit. No it was not an attempted hijacking. It was simply a pilot trying to secure his weapon while attempting to land.

Are cumbersome gun handling rules imposed by Homeland Security endangering pilots and the public?

Wednesday, March 19, 2008

The Supreme Question

The following is a verbatim copy of the latest NRA report on yesterday's oral arguments before the Supreme Court regarding the Second Amendment.

Supreme Court Hears Arguments in D.C. Gun Ban Case

Fairfax, Va.-Today, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in District of Columbia v. Heller, a case the Court has stated is "limited to the following question: Whether Washington, D.C.'s bans [on handguns, on having guns in operable condition in the home and on carrying guns within the home] violate the Second Amendment rights of individuals who are not affiliated with any state-regulated militia, but who wish to keep handguns and other firearms for private use in their homes."

The case came before the Supreme Court on appeal by the District of Columbia, after a panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit declared the city's gun bans unconstitutional. The panel's decision was upheld by the full Court of Appeals.

The Court of Appeals decision--consistent with the views of the Framers of the Bill of Rights, respected legal commentators of the 19th century, the Supreme Court's ruling in U.S. v. Cruikshank (1876), numerous court decisions of the 19th century, the Supreme Court's ruling in U.S. v. Miller (1939), the position of the U.S. Department of Justice, and the vast majority of Second Amendment scholars today-concluded that "the Second Amendment protects an individual right to keep and bear arms. That right existed prior to the formation of the new government under the Constitution and was premised on the private use of arms for activities such as hunting and self-defense, the latter being understood as resistance to either private lawlessness or the depredations of a tyrannical government (or a threat from abroad)."

In today's argument, the Justices aggressively questioned advocates for all sides, including Walter Dellinger for the District, Solicitor General Paul Clement for the Department of Justice, and Alan Gura for the plaintiffs challenging D.C.'s law.

While it would be a mistake to predict the outcome of a case from questions at oral argument, some justices' questions clearly suggested where they stand-as when Chief Justice John Roberts, questioning the District's Dellinger, scoffed at the idea that a citizen awakened by an intruder in the middle of the night could "turn on the lamp . pick up [his] reading glasses," and disengage a trigger lock. Dellinger back-pedaled from D.C.'s longstanding position that its laws prohibit self-defense, claiming that D.C. actually supports citizens having functional firearms for defense.

Justices extensively questioned all three attorneys on the meaning and effect of the Second Amendment's "militia clause," with Dellinger taking the extreme position that unless a state "had attributes of [a state] militia contrary to a Federal law," the Second Amendment would have no effect as a restraint on legislation. Several justices seemed to disagree strongly with that view, with Justice Antonin Scalia noting that even if the militia clause describes the purpose of the Second Amendment, it's not unusual for a law to be written more broadly than necessary for its main purpose.

Justice Anthony Kennedy questioned the attorneys very actively, especially on the importance of self-defense in the Founding era. Justice Kennedy suggested that even the Supreme Court's 1939 Miller decision-which gun control advocates have often wrongly cited as protecting only a "collective" right-was "deficient" and may not have addressed the "interests that must have been foremost in the Framers' minds when they were concerned about guns being taken away from the people who needed them for their defense."

Plaintiffs' attorney Gura-in addition to responding to many hypothetical questions-noted that the Second Amendment was clearly derived from common law rights described by Blackstone and other 18th Century commentators. Although the militia clause "gives us some guide post as to how we look at the Second Amendment," Gura said, "it's not the exclusive purpose of the Second Amendment."

NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre and NRA-ILA Executive Director Chris Cox (who both attended the arguments) commented, "Washington, D.C.'s ban on keeping handguns and functional firearms in the home for self-defense is unreasonable and unconstitutional under any standard. We remain hopeful that the Supreme Court will agree with the overwhelming majority of the American people, more than 300 members of Congress, 31 state attorneys general and the NRA that the Second Amendment protects the fundamental, individual right to keep and bear arms, and that Washington, D.C.'s bans on handguns and functional firearms in the home for self-defense should be struck down."

Amicus briefs filed with the Supreme Court in support of the Court of Appeals' decision included those by the National Rifle Association and the NRA Civil Rights Defense Fund; Vice-President Dick Cheney (in his capacity as President of the Senate) and Members of Congress; the state attorneys general; and noted Second Amendment scholars. All the briefs in the case are available at

Listen to the audio recording of the oral arguments (RealPlayer required)

View the transcript (PDF format)

Sunday, March 2, 2008

When Will The Pacifist Die

There is a growing discussion in this country that threatens to drown out the insipid pacifism that permeates the upper and middle layers of the liberal establishment.

The voices now being heard are shouting...."enough!"... defenseless victims in shopping malls and schools. We the people of these United States have the unalienable right to life, liberty and to defend ourselves.

Despite the surrender to violence crowd, more Americans are agreeing that students and just plain shoppers, should have the right to protect themselves from the crazies in our midst.

John Stossel's view is enlightening.

Saturday, February 23, 2008

National Parks Now Open to Firearms

Per the NRA, looks like the Interior Dept. has got the message.

Grass Roots efforts made this happen....with a little help from the NRA.

Saturday, February 16, 2008

National Parks Firearm Vote Pending

Well Congress is now poised to vote on an ammendment to an important Interior Dept. bill which would legalize the carrying of loaded firearms in National Parks.

This amendment is strategically proposed to achieve what the Interior Dept. has thus far failed to voluntarily do, despite over half of Congress voicing support of the change.

It is a political opportunity to show Obama and Clinton for what they are. Will they support a common sense proposal to expand gun rights....or continue to pander to the leftist pacifists in their party?

Law abiding citizens who pass through National Park land, should not have to worry about being arrested. If they are in compliance with state and local law there is no good reason to prevent them from having weapons, loaded or unload in a National Park.

Frankly, I visit National Parks several times a year - and I am concerned about running into trouble in the woods. Yet, I have to make a decision not to carry, even though I have a permit to carry. It does not matter that the odds of running into a dangerous animal or person is remote.
What is the Interior Department's concern.....that I may illegally hunt on federal land? That I may get mad at a hiker and shoot them? The reality is....there is no issue here. Hunters, sportsman, hikers, nature lovers should be allowed to exercise the same freedoms they enjoy outside the parks when they are within the boundaries of a national park.

I doubt if the Dems will allow this amendment to come to a vote. They hate to be forced to make a stand that might offend their base, or jeopardize what ever weak support they currently have among sportsman, hunters and other gun owners.

We Can Have Safer Schools

In light of the Illinois campus shooting, we can see more evidence that schools that allowed concealed carry are indeed safer schools.

We may yet learn that the shooter in this most recent case was confined to an institution, but that state mental health authorities did not forward his name to the NIC system, and therefore he passed the background investigation. Obama and Clinton have already reacted to the latest shooting with their appropriate sound bites. It is noted that Obama both supports an Individual's right to bear arms and supports D.C. Governments handgun ban. Now there's a man who can eloquently speak out of both sides of his mouth.

We will find out once again, the gun laws if properly administered in this case could have prevented a tragedy - given the fact that the ACLU, and mental health professionals are loath to have patient data provided to the federal government.....more of these incidents will occur.

Campus police just can't cope with this. The only solution is concealed carry on Campus.

Let's see if this issue - with this solution - can be framed as a question in upcoming Presidential debates.

Thursday, February 14, 2008

Campus Bloodshed Again

Well, here we go again. Another Campus shooting.

Defenseless in Illinois.

Of course the state legislative would not dare allow law abiding citizens to carry a concealed weapon on campus.

When will the madness end. Well we know that nuts will always be with us and they will likely have access to weapons. Can't we at least even up the odds a little, and give some innocents a fighting chance.

Forget the Campus police.....everyone knows they can't stop this.

Saturday, February 9, 2008

Supreme Court Case Gets More Support From Congress

Dick Cheney has joined a majority of Congress in a "friend of the Court" brief to be filed with the Supreme further support the proposition that the Second Amendment is being violated by the D.C. gun ban.

As it becomes clearer each day that at least politically, D.C.'s gun ban is on the way out...we may not know for several more months how large a victory will be achieved.

While it is likley that an individual's right to own a firearm will be uplheld, the power of government to regulate the sale and possession of firearms may also be sustained.

We can only hope that Dracarion laws, like those in D.C., New York City and Chicago will be undone and a clear message sent to the anti-self-protection crowd.

As for the current moment in Presidential least John McCain had the good sense to re-afirm his support for the Second Amendment in front of CPAC.

Their will be only one choice for gun owner's in November....and sitting out the election is not one of them.

Sunday, February 3, 2008

A Right to a Safe Education

The Guns on Campus debate continues as the Right to Carry on Campus comes closer to law in some states.

How many more Virginia Tech's will it take to change the pacifist mind set of the elite liberal establishment.

Of course they won't change their minds.....only state or national legislation will make the change a reality.

The liberal left will continue to support an Obama....who not too long ago advocated confiscation of all handguns.....except for those like Cho....who likely would find a way to evade such a the left's ultimate vision of a safe society would remain incomplete....since only criminals would be safe....and safe to harm you.

Saturday, January 19, 2008

Time to Check Your Briefs

The Supremes are getting to those briefs....filed in the DC Gun Ban Case.

Some are predictable....others enlightening.

Friday, January 18, 2008

Guns on Campus

Kentucky is considering a bill to allow guns on long as they stay locked in a car.

This is the latest in the growing debate which was spawned by the Virginia Tech killings.

Frankly, I don't see how a gun locked in a car is going to protect the owner when things get bad. Pepper spray would be a better deterrent.

A better approach would allow those with Concealed Carry Permits to carry on campus. CCW folks are already the least likely to mis-use their weapons and most have had at least some certified training.

The liberal establishment that rules most Colleges in this country won't move towards a liberal approach on this issue....until....perhaps....another tragedy occurs. Even if more defenseless students are killed....I don't see anything changing.

Thursday, January 17, 2008

Dems Want a New Assault Weapons Ban

Surprise....surprise, at the recent Las Vegas Democratic debate all of the contenders vowed support for a new assault weapons ban.

Their conventional wisdom is that more crime is being committed with AK-47s.

Of course they are ignorant of the facts. Of course they fail to mention that AK-47s were allowed during the previous ban...just not those with flash suppressors etc.

Hopefully.....there unambiguous support for a failed law will further alienate gun owners and bolster Republican chances in the fall.

Sunday, January 13, 2008

Have We Been Betrayed?

The Solicitor General has asked the Supreme Court to uphold the position that the Federal Government has the right to regulate the ownership of firearms - this is part of the Governments brief in the D.C. Gun Ban Supreme Court case.

Is this a betrayal of Republican support for the Second Amendment?

Many think so.

A WEB petition invites you to register your view.

Personally, I never expected the US Government to not assert it's authority to regulate firearms as part of this case. What is more important to most of the prevailing view....that this case should establish....that the right to bear an Individual Right.

San Francisco Values

Those poor libs in San Francisco. Seems like they just can't get their way no matter how extreme they are.

The SF loons voted for a complete gun ban. This well suited 58% of the wimps living there.

Too bad for the other 42% of the population that might have just cared a little about protecting their own lives.

Luckily, a court just ruled the gun ban law is illegal.

Perhaps there is still some justice left in California.

Friday, January 4, 2008

Not All Gun Control is Unreasonable

The New Jersey Legislature is on its way to pass 3 laws that will increase penalties for gun violations and are targeted against illegal purchasers and gang violence.

On the surface these proposals do not seem unreasonable. gun owners, are we better off resisting all new gun laws.....or as I believe aren't we smarter to support changes that will reduce gun violence but resist those that go beyond addressing reasonable concerns and unfairly limit the freedom of law abiding citizens.