By 10 men wield knives in China
Connecticut banning and confiscating guns. Winds up with three cities in the Huffington Posts top 10 most violent cities.
How’s that over taxing and disarmament working out. So glad I moved.
But reading the article, it notes that gun sales are still higher than preceding President Obama’s re-election. (Which for those unfamiliar, were still far higher than just a few years before).
So apparently, the plunge is merely a leveling off after a 25% hike that coincided with President Obama’s re-election, which was shortly followed by a 40% hike after the Newtown tragedy.
Sounds more like things are just leveling off and stabilizing. The article notes that “ammo” is returning to shelves, while coincidently, the Department of Homeland Security has reduced their ammo purchases due to budget constraints.
Even CNN.com admits that when it comes to guns, it’s all about women these days. I have a feeling that in 30 years, guns may be like college, more women will own and practice with them than men.
But gun manufacturers need to shape up their image. Too often the marketing is “shiny guns, big boobs”. This = BAD MARKETING.
You want to hit it out of the park…I’d do an add campaign showing a “soccer mom” in various stages of life. Serving lunch to her kids, picking the kids up from soccer, etc, etc. All while wearing a concealed carry firearm, and photoshopping the image with translucency to show it beneath her garments. Don’t go super hot, go for chic mom appearance. I think that will hit it out of the park.
Also, start modifying your inventory. More adjustable rifles. Ruger…WHY THE HECK have you not released an adjustable stock 20 gauge shotgun? You think the LCP sold like hotcakes. What one gun can you hunt everything from pheasant to deer, and use for self defense. Put in the arms of a 6ft tall man or a 10 year old girl. Seriously, this is the gun that DOES NOT EXIST – BUT SHOULD!!!
- 80% of firearm retailers reported increase in female customers in 2012
- 22%/28% of Florida/Texas carry permits are held by women. (The latter up seven fold in the last decade.)
Several times I’ve pointed to an historical example of ammunition, and questioned whether we were perhaps missing out on an effective munition type. In the 18th and 19th century of naval warfare, cannons would be loaded with a number of different type of shot.
Primarily there was the cannonball. Big round heavy ball. Sometimes heated “hot shot” so that it could cause fires. This is essentially the typical bullet. Then there was “grape” shot. Smaller ballers packed in. The result did miniscule damage to a ship but was devastating to its crew. This type of munition was often used prior to boarding an enemy vessel. Essentially, this is the same concept as a modern day shotgun shell.
The last common munition was used to slow down the vessel. Chain shot…picture a chain strung between two balls. The resultant effect was particularly damaging to sails, masts and yardarms. By damaging those areas of a ship, you slowed it down, providing an opportunity to overtake and board her.
Many times I’ve pondered and raised the question, would a modern chain shot design be effective. Especially for unusual handguns like the Taurus judge. Which will donut shotgun pellets.
Advanced Ballistic Concepts
has innovated a new round that is essentially based on the chain shot concept. It has a primary core, and three satellites that are tethered (chained) by fiber.
Why is this advantagous? It has a wider area of impact (14″ for handguns, 24″ for shotgun). While maintain a larger more effective impact than pellets provide.
I may have to pick up a box and take them to the range. I’d be curious to know what effect the tethering has when only one unit impacts on a target of ballistic gelatin or water (rather than paper).
Article on CNN.com
Smart Tech Challenges Foundation, founded by a number of entrepeneurs is planning to give awards for innovations that makes guns safer.
Ya, sounds pretty much gun control fare, and the article states most entries are biometric. That said, nothing prevents us pro-gun folks from submitting.
- Anyone have any ideas for an automatic squib round detector?
- Or idiot detector has detected idiot not following the 3/4 rules.
They did say the initiative “In no way do our efforts challenge the right to bear arms” focusing on safety rather than gun control. That said, always skeptical of such claims.
That said, clicking on the applications only seems to collect “user information”, with no place to submit proposal. And frankly, I see no reason to collect date of birth. If you want to verify an age, just ask for year of birth, that’s wholly sufficient. Frankly, the website is piss-poor, especially for one claiming venture capitalist funding – I could throw up better in a couple of hours. I’ll laugh if CNN got taken by a SCAM contact harvesting group…
But it wouldn’t surprise me if it’s just gross incompetence common in the gun control group world.
As for innovations, smart technology, etc. I am fine with it…even mandating it for new guns. Just require every police officer to utilize such, and I’ll accept it. Cause if it’s good enough for the line of duty, then it’s good enough for me. And if it’s not good enough for the line of duty, it surely is not good enough to keep my precious family safe.
Part of me is happy that the Mexican government is recognizing the vigilantes, and using an old part of their defense system to essentially “officialize” the militias.
But I’m not sure I’d trust the call of “You can keep your prohibited rifles, so long as you register them with the military.”
If I were the militia leaders, I would argue that we will register ourselves as active in the militia. But not our arms. You should be able to simply verify that if any members is active in the militia, then they are justified in their arms. No need to know what arms specifically.
But as for registering their guns….IMHO “DON’T DO IT!!!”
Also interesting is this bit…
“the agreement also allows those who qualify to join local police forces. “The majority of us want to get into the police …”"
Interesting, perhaps this will allow enough fresh blood to enter the Mexican law enforcement to bring it back to being a legal policing force.
Lastly, just goes to show “outlawing” such weapons does NOT make them cease to exist.
A recent review by the federal government’s Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board concluded that the NSA monitoring programs “implicates constitutional concerns under the First and Fourth Amendments, raises serious threats to privacy and civil liberties as a policy matter, and has shown only limited value.”
All while their effectiveness was likewise shown to be questionable to non-existent. “We have not identified a single instance involving a threat to the United States in which the telephone records program made a concrete difference in the outcome of a counterterrorism investigation,”
Another article, though with it’s own bias being an anti-war site, makes some valid points looking at the historical perspective of monitoring. And how it near uniformly takes on a political/economical focus.
It is my opinion, that the NSA’s present activities constitutes a threat far more dangerous than any posed by Al Qaeda. And that these activities constitute a threat to the Constitution so grave that every active and prior service person who has sworn an oath to uphold the Constitution is duty bound to act.
Let me exemplify…
Our congressmen are sleaze balls. We all know that. But there is one thing we can always trust them to do… that which is in their personal interest. The problem with the NSA’s grand spying, which they’ve essentially admitted includes Congress. Is that it endangers Democracy. It enables them to manipulate Congress.
Recently Diana Feinstein a Liberal Californian Democrat, who surely would of objected to these actions under President Bush, came out in support, exclaiming the necessity, for the NSA’s programs.
OR DID SHE????
Maybe Senator Feinstein has a bit O’dirt on her. (Do you think there is a Senator who does not?) Maybe she hates the NSA programs. But they called her and said you either support us or we will reveal those unscrupulous financial deals and you can spend a few decades sitting in prison. Next thing Senator Feinstein knows is that she’s speaking at a press conference in their support and praising the necessity of their programs.
Did that happen? We have no way of knowing, and therein lies the problem.
It doesn’t matter if it happened or not. Regardless we can no longer trust that out elected officials are in fact making decisions based on ours or even their interests.
Let’s exemplify further, just say the crazy notion of President Obama having been born in Kenya was in fact true. (I am not saying that such is true or not, just using it as a poignant example.) And the NSA has acquired evidence to that fact. They call up President Obama and inform him of their acquisition and blackmail him. Suddenly the President who preached withdrawal from the Middle East, the danger of raising the debt ceiling, critical of the Patriot Act, etc, etc, has policies indistinguishable from his predecessor. And there in lies the danger.
Service people take an oath to protect the Constitution and follow the chain of command and take orders from the President. But what happens when something so grievious puts doubt even to the authenticity of the President’s orders? Do you not see how that is a grave and agregious threat to the U.S. system of government?
It is my opinion that the NSA is now actively an enemy of the state and that Americans have not faced a threat this dangerous since WWII. A threat that I feel obligates any “oath taker” to act.
So am I calling all service men to raise up arms? No… What I’m asking is that every service person, active or prior, raise up their vote. That we do not let ANY candidate get on the ticket unless they vow to oppose this abomination. And that vote AGAINST every sitting Senator or Representative who votes in support of the NSA. Even if it means voting against your party’s candidate, this issue suppasses all others. We must vote against this threat to the Constitution and the U.S. government. This is OUR DUTY.
Folks can debate the merits of such a design. Regardless, it’s a pretty nifty look.
My initial thoughts on the merits and demerits are thus:
+ reduced weight
+ reduced materials
+ advanced engineering structures can in fact be stronger than solid members (we see this in architecture all the time, where a beam is designed to direct the flow of forces providing far far more strength for the weight)
- open areas provide places for objects and dirt to get into and cause jams
- impact durability is reduced
Okay, now with all that said, is it just me…or do you want to paint this red and blue and add a launch tube to shoot sticky nets, and call it the “SpidAR Gun”
Something akin to this cycle but done to a skeletonized AR15.
“felony vandalism probe on allegations of egging his California neighbor’s home.”
Okay, I can’t stand Justin Bieber/Miley Cyrus, I think the best thing we can do is force them to marry and send them off into space. (Granted, the recent mug shot of Bieber next to Miley has many suspicious they are one and the same.)
But when did there mere egging prank of a young twit constitute a felony? A misdimeanor, sure, no problem there. But this is ridiculous.
As I’ve oft pointed out, every crime in America is becoming a felony. Share a digital song with a friend and you’re a felon. Meanwhile, we diminish actual felonious crimes such as armed robbery, rape, etc.
And yes, talking about Bieber is a low point for this blog. Have I jumped the shark? Perhaps….but we need to be concerned when egging or toilet papering someone’s house is placed on par with robbing and raping another person.
If we have no heirarchy of crimes, than miniscule crimes will result in draconian judgments, and heinous crimes will receive pats on the wrists.