Political commentator and actor Steven Crowder decided to set up an experiment to see just how well people that want “common sense” gun control knew about firearms.
He set up a tent for “Citizens Coalition for Common Sense Gun Reform” to ask people that do not own or are interested in guns to see how much they knew about firearms and which ones should be banned based on “common sense.”
Crowder quickly finds out that the people who are in favor or “common sense” gun control know very little about guns in the first place and what they are capable of. The people justdecided which guns should be banned based on how it makes them feel.
For example, many people wanted more “tactical looking” firearms banned, but yet other kinds of rifles displayed on the table were fine, such as hunting rifles. Crowder does point out on the side that the AR-15 is actually a popular small game hunting rifle but because it looks tactical, it should be banned.
People were also not well informed on what types of guns were used in crimes and thought that the AR-15 is used in many cases, but as Crowder points out, from 2007 to 2015, 70% of shooting murders are from handguns.
Source: American Military News
“For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong”.
— H. L. Mencken
Democracy? In Moderation, Please.
Buried somewhere in the above Daily Beast article is probably a perfectly decent, arguable case for a certain kind of small-ball, incremental legislation. Unfortunately, but predictably, its case is comically undermined by hateful, shallow, silly, dishonest writing.
Ohh! Those evil Republicans! They should be taken out and horsewhipped! Here, hold my drink. I’ll do it. Get outta my way. I’ve got some GOP ass to beat. Oh, never mind.
Never mind that this advocacy item masquerading as journalism doesn’t even attempt to demonstrate how the measures will have any impact whatsoever, to “avert mass shootings”. Which is understandable. One; averting mass shootings is not, and never was, the goal of activist gun-control legislation. And two; There’s no evidence that “averting mass shootings” can be accomplished by legislation in the first place.
Think the gun debate isn’t polluted with toxic stupidity from the Left? Read on:
“…But with the substantial distortion of our democracy around guns, they are the issue with which this particular method most adheres to the original intentions of the progressives who created it a century ago, at a time when large interests such as timber and railroads blocked popular reforms in legislative bodies around the country.”
The progressives who created it a century ago. Right. Wait, you mean the puritan, racist, anti-constitutional Wilsonian reformers of that era, the progressive activists who gave us segregation, prohibition, and Jim Crow laws, those guys?
The early 20th-century progressives’ “original intentions” are in stark contrast to the intentions of our founders. Cautious, deliberative men, keenly aware of the historically destructive effects of “direct democracy“.
Ever notice how our most sacred and treasured rights are intentionally safeguarded, hardwired in the Bill of Rights? Completely out of reach of voters?
The founders were no fans of democracy.
“When two wolves and a sheep decide what to have for dinner.”
Benjamin Franklin definition of democracy is as clear now as it was over two centuries ago. Read the rest of this entry »
‘If you cross that sidewalk onto my property, there’s going to be another shooting.’
Cyrus Farivar reports: The way William Merideth sees it, it’s pretty clear-cut: a drone flying over his backyard was a well-defined invasion of privacy, analogous to a physical trespassing.
“Are you the son of a bitch that shot my drone?”
Not knowing who owned it, the Kentucky man took out his shotgun and fired three blasts of Number 8 birdshot to take the drone out.
“It was just right there. It was hovering, I would never have shot it if it was flying. When he came down at my girl’s room, and came with a video camera right over my back deck, that’s not going to work. I know they’re neat little vehicles, but one of those uses shouldn’t be flying into people’s yard and videotaping.”
“It was just right there,” he told Ars. “It was hovering, I would never have shot it if it was flying. When he came down at my girl’s room, and came with a video camera right over my back deck, that’s not going to work. I know they’re neat little vehicles, but one of those uses shouldn’t be flying into people’s yard and videotaping.”
“We have a lawyer and there’s a court date and then there’s going to be a hearing. It’s not going to stop with the two charges against me, which I’m confident that we’ll get reduced or get dismissed completely.”
Minutes later, a car full of four men that he didn’t recognize rolled up, “looking for a fight.”
“Are you the son of a bitch that shot my drone?” one said, according to Merideth.
“The people that own the drones and the people that hate guns are the only ones that disagree with what I did.”
His terse reply to the men, while wearing a 10mm Glock holstered on his hip: “If you cross that sidewalk onto my property, there’s going to be another shooting.”
The men backed down, retreated to their car, and waited for the police to arrive.
“Now, if I’d have had a .22 rifle, I should have gone to jail for that. The diameter of those things are going to come down with enough force to hurt somebody. Number 8 birdshot is not. Number 8 is the size of a pinhead.”
“His only comment was that he hoped I had a big checkbook because his drone cost $1,800,” Merideth added.
“The bottom line is that it’s a right to privacy issue and defending my property issue. It would have been no different had he been standing in my backyard. As Americans, we have a right to defend our rights and property.”
The Kentuckian was arrested Sunday evening in Hillview, Kentucky, just south of Louisville and charged with criminal mischief and wanton endangerment. He was released the following day. The Hillview Police Department did not immediately respond to Ars’ request for comment. Read the rest of this entry »
Speaking of guns…
When the opponents of “assault weapon” bans argue that it is preposterous for the state to ban firearms based on the way they look, they really mean it. It is. The rifle in the photograph above is no more or less powerful than the one that has been banned; it just looks different. And, because the SAFE Act was, typically, interested only in cosmetic questions, a simple change to its aesthetic rendered the rifle legal once more. As Clash Daily’s Jonathan S. explains:
Prototypes for the newly designed AR-15 are hitting gun shops across New York, as gun shops and machinists have designed a rifle that complies with the anti-gun law. At least one gun shop has received a letter from state police saying that the new AR-15 style rifles should be legal in the state as long as they don’t have some of the features that the law prohibits.
According to a Military.com interview with TrackingPoint, Inc., the Army bought six different smart rifles from the company for a price of $10,000 to $27,000, each of which includes a built-in Linux-based computer that uses sensors and scopes to maximize accuracy amidst a variety of conditions like terrain, weather and even the Earth’s rotation.
This technology turns even a neophyte into a marksman, at least within a 500-yard range. The user simply “tags” the target, and the gun and ammo do the rest, all for a mere $9,950—the starting price for the new series.
In fact, the system is so accurate that a user will have up to five times the accuracy of an experienced shooter, said Oren Schauble, the company’s marketing director.
The gun can track a target moving at up to 10 mph and allows for rapid engagement, meaning a person can shoot multiple targets quickly.
According to TrackingPoint, the company’s unique rifles are meant to “dramatically enhance the hunting and shooting sports experience while delivering a powerful tactical advantage to military and law enforcement organizations.”
A Canadian rifle maker has successfully fired a 3D-printed rifle, based on firearms designer Cody Wilson’s work on a homemade handgun crafted from thermoplastics.
Mashable.com reports that “Matthew” has successfully fired 14 rounds from a .22 rifle created from a 3D printer.
The rifle represents Matthew’s second prototype and is called Grizzly 2.0. The barrel of the first prototype cracked after firing just one round, so he adjusted the barrel’s thickness and fired 14 rounds from the next model before experiencing any problems.
The Grizzly 2.0 is a single shot rifle. The user reloads it after each shot by taking off the barrel, clearing it of the spent shell casing, and loading another round.
The Grizzly 2.0’s creator has uploaded video of a purportedly successful firing test.
Cody Wilson’s Defense Distributed, an organization dedicated to creating designs for 3D “wiki weapons,” revealed a single-shot pistol created with a 3D printer in May of 2013. The “Liberator” personal firearm made headlines when Wilson successfully tested it, and days later the Department of Defense demanded he pull the gun’s design from his website. Defense Distributed claims to have plans for the next step in 3D firearm creation: “the lower receiver of an AR-15… rifle.”
Photo source: Slashgear
Follow AWR Hawkins on Twitter @AWRHawkins
Now everyone can shoot like a trained marksman. For a price.
A Texas-based applied technology firm has launched new smartgun technology that gives novice shooters the chance to participate in “extreme distance hunting.”
TrackingPoint’s new precision guided firearm technology, XactSystem, allows the shooter to lock onto a target before allowing the gun to fire upon the intended target, much like a fighter jet’s “lock-and-launch” technology.
And the firearm can consistently hit a target from over 1,000 yards away, the maker says.
“Think of it like a smart rifle. You have a smart car; you got a smartphone; well, now we have a smart rifle,” CEO Jason Schauble told CNNMoney.
The rifles fitted with the XactSystem technology can accurately shoot from over 1,000 yards, and TrackingPoint claims the company record is shooting a South African wildebeest at 1,103 yards.
The system and bolt-action rifles run from $22,500 to $27,500.
The rifles are WiFi equipped to allow the shooter to record their shot and immediately send it to a tablet or smartphone to view and upload to social media sites.
Schauble told CNN Money this is the first technology of its kind, even within the military, and that his company is planning on selling 500 TrackingPoint rifles this year, mainly to clients who want to hunt big game from long ranges.
With the technology, the shooter “tags” a target using a red button on the trigger guard. After the tag is set, the shooter aims the gun and holds down the trigger. Once the tag and the crosshairs of the scope line up, the gun fires.
“There are a number of people who say the gun shoots itself,” Schauble said. “It doesn’t. The shooter is always in the loop.”
The network tracking scope’s technology takes environmental factors, such as temperature, wind speeds, and gravity, into account to ensure a clean shot.
Some in the security sector, however, have reservations about the long-range rifle.
“There are a handful of snipers who can hit a target at 1,000 yards. But now, anybody can do it,” Rommel Dionisio, a gun industry analyst for Wedbush Securities told CNN Money. “You can put some tremendous capability in the hands of just about anybody, even an untrained shooter.”
via The Daily Caller