This from the article scares me: “It scares me that, in a recent PEW poll of “journalists,” 55 percent say every side of an issue DOES NOT deserve equal treatment.”  

    I try to listen to both sides, I really do.  But on some issues, like guns, it is almost impossible to hear both sides.

    When trying to read Jesse Jackson’s Griffin Daily News July 14 Editorial “Assault weapons are weapons of war” I had to stop in the second paragraph.  When he wrote “They are useless for hunting” I knew I was wasting my time. 

That proved to me he was clueless about his topic and was just pushing an agenda. Nothing that came after such an inaccurate statement could be relevant. When I read something patently untrue, I cannot keep reading.

First, the 2^nd Amendment has nothing to do with hunting. 

    Second, “Assault weapons” are a fake term given to what sportsman call “Modern Sporting Rifles.”  One of the most common designs is the ArmaLite Rifle Model 15, usually shortened to AR 15.  It is a type gun that comes chambered in more than 60 different calibers. The vary from rimfire calibers like the .22 long rifle, bullets usually used for squirrel hunting, to .30 Remington, specifically designed for deer hunting to even larger calibers.

The .223 caliber is one of the most common in the AR platform and it has been legal for deer hunting in Georgia for years.  That cartridge is a relatively small caliber and does not have a lot of powder, so it has much less kick than rifles like by old Marlin 30-30, but it is legal and efficient for killing a deer.

It is a good choice for young hunters and those that don’t want a gun that kicks hard. I am using mine for deer hunting rather than my 7 mm Mag since I have a port in my right shoulder and am afraid to expose it to too much recoil.

    It scares me that, in a recent PEW poll of “journalists,” 55 percent say every side of an issue DOES NOT deserve equal treatment.   The same poll found that 76 percent of all Americans say both sides SHOULD get equal coverage.

Maybe that is why a recent Gallup poll shows only 11 percent of Americans trust television news and only 16 percent trust newspapers.

Almost as bad is a PEW poll showing 64 percent of US adults approve the recent gun control laws passed by congress, but 78 percent say the law will do little or nothing to affect crime.  But 63 percent say they want more useless laws like the one passed that they know will do little to no good.

Maybe the reason they support useless laws is they hear only one side. Most mall shootings are hyped 24/7 for days, but the recent shooting in Indiana got little coverage. Was it because a good guy with a legal gun killed the shooter before he could kill many people?

As long as only one side is pushed by the media, I will adamantly oppose any gun control legislation, not matter how often those pushing the agenda call it “sensible” or “reasonable.”

Their call for compromise always means “do it my way” even if you know it is useless.

A current political ad says the recent “Constitutional Carry” law in Georgia makes it easier for criminals to carry loaded guns in Georgia.  I question any law enforcement officer that claims criminals would not carry guns if it was just against the law.

A good example of the mindset of the gun banners is New York Governor Hochul. When the Supreme Court overturned a state law that made it almost impossible to get gun or carry it in her state, she got laws passed to make it a felony to carry guns in almost every building in the state.

Her reason? In response to a reporter’s question if she had any data to prove her claim that citizens carrying guns would endanger millions of New York residents, she said “I don’t need to have numbers.  I don’t need to have a data point to say this.”

I will fight “feelings” from gun banners like her with facts and truth, if I can be heard.

                                                                                                                       

    “We have got to do something.”

    Any shooting like the one in Uvalde, Texas where innocent children are killed is horrible, but do not blame me and other law-abiding gun owners.  Blame the low-life evildoer that did it.

    Unlike the gun ban vultures that started circling and crying the “do something” mantra before the first body was recovered from the school in Texas, I tried to listen to all the conflicting reports and wait for valid information.

    The “something” gun banners always demand is “common sense” gun bans.  There is nothing “common” about their demands and if they made “sense” they would not have to exaggerate and tell half-truths to outright lies.

    I have been disappointed and amazed, but not surprised, by the bald face lies and stupid comments to uninformed babbling from everyone from personal friends to the president. 

    Biden’s comments have been weird.  First, he said something about the 2^nd Amendment not really meaning “shall not be infringed” because citizens could not own cannons when it was passed.  When he was told by constitutional scholars like John Turley that he was wrong, in fact you can still own a cannon today, he continued to tell that lie.

He then began babbling about how a .22 caliber bullet would lodge in the lungs, but a 9 mm “big caliber” bullet would blow the lungs out.  That is an inane comment by anyone familiar with guns and bullets. 

But somehow it relates to banning “assault” weapons, meaning the AR-15.  AR stands for the company that developed the gun, Armalite, is in no way an “assault” weapon, no military in the world uses it.  And the most common caliber for it is .223, apparently less dangerous to Biden than the dreaded 9 mm.

One TV commentator said it was ridiculous an 18-year-old could go buy an automatic rifle and more than 300 round of ammo without a background check.  Fortunately, a guest on the show pointed out the rifle was not automatic, he went through a background check and it is not uncommon, especially in that area to buy large amounts of ammo. 

Personally, I have purchased more than 1000 rounds of 7.62×39 ammo at one time for target practice to save money.  Shooting more than 100 rounds in one target shooting session is not uncommon.  And common .22 long rifle bullets I shoot in my semiautomatic squirrel gun I have owned since I was eight years old come in boxes of 525 rounds.

Calls for extended background checks are another “common sense” waste.  The background check in place for years did not work this time so let’s make you get one on your child before giving them a gun for Christmas with an “extended” background?

All guns bought from licensed gun dealers must go through the current background check. The proposed “extended” check would have made no difference since the shooter in Texas bought his gun from a licensed dealer, already covered in the current law.

The sale of over 100 brands of rifles defined as “assault” guns were banned for ten years, from 1994 through 2004. One liberal commentator told this lie: “Mass shootings dropped by 40 percent during the ‘assault weapons’ ban.” 

Here is what Factcheck.org says: “A RAND review of gun studies, updated in 2020, concluded there is “inconclusive evidence for the effect of assault weapon bans on mass shootings.”  Seems a 40 percent drop would be pretty “conclusive” evidence, if it was true.

It didn’t work the first time, lets lie about it and do it again.

I keep hearing “Nobody needs an assault weapon.”  Yet they can’t define what they consider an “assault weapon,” it is a constitutional right and there are many reasons to own one. That is why there are somewhere between 10 and 20 million correctly called “modern sporting rifles” in the US.

One senseless murder is too many, but if these guns were the problem such shootings would be much more common.

Confiscation of all guns is the ultimate goal of some.  But if you confiscate all rifles, from my old .22 through all deer rifles to modern sporting rifles, you might somehow eliminate guns that are used in 2.9 percent of all homicides in the US. 

The most recent data I can find from the FBI shows homicides by all rifles in 2019 was 364, compared to 1476 by knives, 1591 by blunt objects and 600 by fists and feet.

If you want to have a rational discussion on gun control, don’t exaggerated, tell lies and make up numbers to try to push your agenda.  I will rely on facts, not emotions.

If you just have got to do “something,” go spit on the insane murderer’s grave. It may make you feel better and it will be just as effective as all the proposed gun control laws put together.

I try to listen to both sides, I really do.  But on some issues, like guns, it is almost impossible to hear both sides.

    When trying to read Jesse Jackson’s Griffin Daily News July 14 Editorial “Assault weapons are weapons of war” I had to stop in the second paragraph.  When he wrote “They are useless for hunting” I knew I was wasting my time. 

That proved to me he was clueless about his topic and was just pushing an agenda. Nothing that came after such an inaccurate statement could be relevant. When I read something patently untrue, I cannot keep reading.

First, the 2^nd Amendment has nothing to do with hunting. 

    Second, “Assault weapons” are a fake term given to what sportsman call “Modern Sporting Rifles.”  One of the most common designs is the ArmaLite Rifle Model 15, usually shortened to AR 15.  It is a type gun that comes chambered in more than 60 different calibers. The vary from rimfire calibers like the .22 long rifle, bullets usually used for squirrel hunting, to .30 Remington, specifically designed for deer hunting to even larger calibers.

The .223 caliber is one of the most common in the AR platform and it has been legal for deer hunting in Georgia for years.  That cartridge is a relatively small caliber and does not have a lot of powder, so it has much less kick than rifles like by old Marlin 30-30, but it is legal and efficient for killing a deer.

It is a good choice for young hunters and those that don’t want a gun that kicks hard. I am using mine for deer hunting rather than my 7 mm Mag since I have a port in my right shoulder and am afraid to expose it to too much recoil.

    It scares me that, in a recent PEW poll of “journalists,” 55 percent say every side of an issue DOES NOT deserve equal treatment.   The same poll found that 76 percent of all Americans say both sides SHOULD get equal coverage.

Maybe that is why a recent Gallup poll shows only 11 percent of Americans trust television news and only 16 percent trust newspapers.

Almost as bad is a PEW poll showing 64 percent of US adults approve the recent gun control laws passed by congress, but 78 percent say the law will do little or nothing to affect crime.  But 63 percent say they want more useless laws like the one passed that they know will do little to no good.

Maybe the reason they support useless laws is they hear only one side. Most mall shootings are hyped 24/7 for days, but the recent shooting in Indiana got little coverage. Was it because a good guy with a legal gun killed the shooter before he could kill many people?

As long as only one side is pushed by the media, I will adamantly oppose any gun control legislation, not matter how often those pushing the agenda call it “sensible” or “reasonable.”

Their call for compromise always means “do it my way” even if you know it is useless.

A current political ad says the recent “Constitutional Carry” law in Georgia makes it easier for criminals to carry loaded guns in Georgia.  I question any law enforcement officer that claims criminals would not carry guns if it was just against the law.

A good example of the mindset of the gun banners is New York Governor Hochul. When the Supreme Court overturned a state law that made it almost impossible to get gun or carry it in her state, she got laws passed to make it a felony to carry guns in almost every building in the state.

Her reason? In response to a reporter’s question if she had any data to prove her claim that citizens carrying guns would endanger millions of New York residents, she said “I don’t need to have numbers.  I don’t need to have a data point to say this.”

I will fight “feelings” from gun banners like her with facts and truth, if I can be heard.

    I am the NRA.

    For years I had that bumper sticker on my truck and it is true. I became a life member in the 1980s, joining about 5,000,000 other like minded gun owners.  When politicians, taking heads and others claim I am responsible for shooting deaths, I take it personally.

    Contrary to the hype, half-truths and outright lies about the NRA, it is the oldest civil rights organization in the United States.  It was started by two Union Army officers in 1871 to “promote and encourage rifle shooting on a scientific basis.”  This was in response to the awful marksmanship of union soldiers in the Civil War.

    Safety has always been a prime concern of the NRA and many free programs are offered to promote gun safety.  The Eddie Eagle Program has been locally to teach kids to stay away from guns unless an adult is present.  Gun range safety gets funded through various NRA programs, and many law enforcement gun training programs are directly supported by the NRA.

The organization has evolved to protect the 2^nd Amendment rights of citizens as they have come under fire. After its founding the NRA quickly got involved in stopping Jim Crow laws that prohibited blacks from owning guns.

    When gun banners whine about the power of “The Gun Industry” through the NRA, they are being specious. The power of the NRA lies in its 5,000,000 members.  It is fairly easy to find information on membership in the NRA; not so easy about the gun ban groups like the Brady Campaign.

The most up to date information I could find shows the NRA with about 5,000,000 paid members, with a donation income of about 55 million and spending about 17 million in political races. The AARP compared that to 500,000 members of the Brady group with an income of 6.3 million and political expenses of 1.7 million.

    The number of voters agreeing with the NRA is its power, not industries or anything else.  Votes count.

    The most egregious lie about the NRA is it got a law passed to exempt gun businesses from product liability.  The NRA did help get a law passed that puts gun businesses on the same level as all others.  For a time the gun banners were trying to sue gun manufacturers out of business by claiming they were responsible for their product being used in a crime. 

    If business are responsible for misuse of their product, Chevy can be sued when a driver crashes into a parade and kills people.  Texaco can be sued when their gasoline is used to start an arson fire.

    The NRA is not without its problems. Some gun rights folks claim it is not strong enough. Like any huge organization, it has had internal problems. And it is hated by those that hate guns.

    When you hear “NRA,” know they are talking about me and millions of law-abiding gun owners. Another radical gun ban group the Violence Policy Center, did extensive research a few years ago and crowed they found ONE NRA member that used a gun to kill and was charged with murder.

    Search the data yourself and try to find crime committed by folks like me, NRA members.

Now we know some of the “somethings” the democrats and Biden administration are demanding. From VOX, here are the proposals in the current democrat gun ban wish list legislation and my thoughts on them:

• The Raise the Age Act: This bill raises the age to purchase certain semi-automatic rifles from 18 to 21.  Two 18-year-olds commit horrific murders so let restrict all 18- to 21-year-olds. I got a semiautomatic rifle for Christmas when I was 8 years old.  These same folks want to lower the voting age to 16 and let five-year-olds choose their “gender.”

• Prevent Gun Trafficking Act: Already illegal, so the “coulds” and “mights” in this act are irrelevant.  They are trying to stop gun sales by individuals. Same folks that sent guns to the Mexican drug cartels during the Obama administration.
•  
• The Untraceable Firearms Act: The ridiculous “ghost gun” law – it is already illegal to remove the serial number from a gun. But this tries to make it illegal to use a 3D printer to make gun parts.

• Ethan’s Law, the Safe Guns, Safe Kids Act, and the Kimberly Vaughn Firearm Safety Act: Also known as “Lock up your guns so you can’t get to them when you need them” act.  If you are so irresponsible as to leave guns where kids can get to them, no law will make a difference.
•  
• Closing the Bump Stock Loophole Act: Former President Donald Trump banned bump stocks – so lets do something already done?

The Keep Americans Safe Act: – by banning “high-capacity magazines.”  Already been tried, from 1994 to 2004 such magazines were banned, as were a laundry list of “assault weapons.”  Contrary to the lies, there is no evidence that ten-year ban made any difference, the Columbine school shooting, the worst at that time, was committed in 1999, right in the middle of it, and it was allowed to expire after 10 years because it did nothing to help.

From the same VOX article, here is the real goal: Democrats could still think bigger

“The House’s expedited consideration of the gun control bills would likely help reduce gun violence if the bills became law, but as German Lopez ecplained for VOX, the policies that could have the most impact are ones that reduce the number of guns that people have. These include proposals like gun licensing, which would curb the number of guns that are sold because it makes it more difficult to obtain them.”

    Reduce the number of guns law-abiding citizens can get and own.  That is their goal and they will not be happy until it is zero.

I will ask my usual request.  Give me factual information, not emotional “mights and maybes,” showing how your proposal would have made a difference in any of the recent shootings.

Till next time – Gone fishing!

Are you a member of an organization that uses your dues to promote gun laws and won’t even let any business dealing with guns advertise in their magazine? If you are a member of American Association of Retired Persons you do.

In a 12/10/04 press release AARP states “AARP supported the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act, which went into law in 1994 with bi-partisan support, but was allowed to expire this year.” On their website under advertising guidelines they state: “Unacceptable Ad Messages – AARP deems some industry sectors as unacceptable for its publications. These include: Guns, Firearms, Weapons.”

Would you donate to a charity that refuses to allow anything dealing with guns or hunting? If you donate to the “Make A Wish Foundation” you do. This group claims to grant wishes to dying children and they do – as long as the wish does not involve guns or hunting. Some other groups have stepped in to grant hunting and shooting wishes, but if you donate to Make A Wish your money will not be used to grant the dying wish of a child wanting to go hunting or shooting.
Would you join a group at work and pay annual dues to them if they wanted to take your guns away from you? If you are a member of the National Education Association or the AFL/CIO you have. Both groups are listed as supporters of gun control laws by the NRA at http://www.nraila.org/Issues/FactSheets/Read.aspx?ID=15. They say “The following organizations have lent monetary, grassroots or some other type of direct support to anti-gun organizations..”

Check the list and see if you give money to any of them and how many you belong to. You will find the usual suspect groups like the ACLU, American Federation of Teachers and Common Cause but you might be surprised to also find the American Medical Association, American Bar Association, and the Episcopal Church, Washington Office. Be careful which groups you pay money to. They might be fighting against your right to own a gun and your right to defend yourself.
What action can you take if you do? In February 2000 Citibank turned down a business account because the business dealt with guns. In a 2/23/00 report the following quote sums up Citibank’s policy at that time: “Citibank spokesman Mark Rodgers told WorldNetDaily, “Citibank’s consumer business has a longstanding policy of not engaging in financial relationships with businesses that manufacture or sell military weapons, military munitions or firearms.”

Gun owners groups publicized this policy and called for a boycott. Within two months Citibank announced it eliminated that policy. I am not sure I want to do business with a bank that had that policy just seven short years ago and with bankers that started it who probably still work there, but the boycott worked there and it will work in other places.
Be especially careful of gun friendly “sounding” groups like the American Hunters and Shooters Association. They claim to support gun ownership but this is from there no2w defunct web site under Who we are : “an overwhelming majority of hunters support proposals like background checks to purchase guns, keeping military style assault weapons off our streets and the elimination of cop killer bullets.”

So this group would support banning guns that have a certain look, make you jump through hoops to buy a gun and outlaw ammo like the 30-30 and 30-06 bullets. Their name sounds good and they might support some gun rights but they support way too much of the same things the gun ban fanatics support.
Apparently some deaf dumb and blind kid at Field and |Stream magazine wrote this: “If you haven’t heard of the American Hunters and Shooters Association let me introduce you. The AHSA is an organization in its formative stages, and claims to be a viable alternative to the NRA which, it says, has alienated hunters and shooters by its boorish political tactics, unwillingness to compromise, and refusal to support conservation in any meaningful way.”

AHSA is defunct even with Field and Stream shilling for them and the founder is dead yet the NRA still works to protect ALL gun rights.
Even more troubling, the NRA says AHSA Executive Director Bob Ricker worked as a paid shill for the anti-gun lobby and its lawyers. Board member John Rosenthal is founder of the anti-gun Massachusetts state group “Stop Handgun Violence.” Now they want our support.
Not from me!

 A popular meme on social media says “The Founding Fathers had not just returned from a hunting trip when they wrote the 2^nd Amendment.” 

    That immediately came to my mind when reading Mona Charen’s emotional ”we gotta do something about guns” editorial in the June 8^th Griffin Daily News.  I think was the fourth or fifth such editorial in the past two weeks. 

    Charen says “less than 4% of the population hunts.”  She uses that figure to call for eliminating a right in the Bill of Rights.  I wonder what other minorities she would restrict just because of low numbers. 

It’s ironic that the same folks that say hunters don’t need 30 bullets to hunt now try to say hunters guns should not be considered when gun bans are brought up. 

Among other proposed restrictions are so called “red flag laws” where someone can report a gun owner, claiming they have some kind of mental problem, and get the police to confiscate their guns.   

None other than a California congressman, Eric Swalwell, immediately claimed that would be great, he could report anyone he didn’t like and get their guns taken away. He was specifically talking about a conservative writer, but the same scheme would apply to any gun owner.  Most proposed red flag laws have no due process in them. 

Charen lists many mass shootings and shows all were committed by individuals that either met all the laws about guns to get one or broke current gun laws to get one.   

How rational is it to call for more of the same things that are not working?  If gun laws worked there would be no need for additional laws. 

As always, convince me new gun laws would help by showing facts on how they would have stopped any of the shootings. 

If folks wanting to take our guns and destroy the 2^nd Amendment could be honest and factual they might have more influence. But with the garbage they put out they become laughable.  Dick Polman and John Micek proved this in their June 20 columns.

    Poleman wants to “play ball” with civil rights and Micek is mad that other matters are more important to people than his desire to end our civil rights.  As usual, like vultures circling road kill, both use the shooting at the ball field of a congressman and other Republicans to push their agenda.

    Poleman is upset that congress may ease the restrictions on guns suppressors, calling them silencers.  He “knows” that suppressors make guns as quiet as what he sees in movies and does not have a clue how much noise a “silenced” gun makes.  In his imagination guns with suppressors make no sound so a shooter could spray bullets forever without being heard.

    Guns are loud.  Shooters at matches at the Griffin Gun Club and other places are required to wear hearing protection.  They are so loud they can damage hearing, especially if you shoot a lot, but even if you shoot only while hunting. It is impractical to wear hearing protection while hunting, so suppressors would be a big help.

    Even with a suppressor a gun is louder than any other sound you are likely to hear at a ballfield or anywhere else in daily life, unless a power transformer explodes, a jet breaks the sound barrier or cars hit head on at high speed.

    He also uses the attempted murder by an insane liberal to call for more background checks, although the shooter went through an FBI background check to get his gun.  If something does not work it is not rational to call for more of it.

    Poleman is incensed that there is an effort to allow citizens with a state weapon license to use that license in other states.  As it is now, my drivers license allows me to drive in all states, but if I go to some states with high crime rates but strict gun control laws, things that seem to go together, I must be unable to protect myself. 

    He also talks about “automatic assault weapons,” something almost no citizen owns due to the high license costs, but he also wants to ban semiautomatic guns based on their looks.  He says bad guys can “spray” bullets with them.  The ball park shooter fired fifty shots in about five minutes and wounded five people.  I am not surprised a liberal would “spray” bullets rather than fire effectively.

    Thank goodness the Bernie Sanders supporter that tried to kill Republicans didn’t know enough about guns to use a bolt action deer rifle.  A normal person could shoot 50 rounds effectively, hitting the target, in five minutes with no problem.

    And of course, he blames me, an NRA member, for the shooting.

    Micek uses the same shooting to show his ignorance, spouting the same silly claims about “silencers.”  He is further upset Republicans are doing the same thing with their improvement on health care that the democrats did with the Obamacare disaster.   And he laughably says, “but Russia, Russia, Russia” repeatedly.

    Change the 2^nd Amendment protection to the 1^st Amendment protections in their rants to see how silly they look. Anytime you read an opinion piece on guns or anything else, including this one, don’t believe it without checking facts.

from 6/25/17

Now we know some of the “somethings” the democrats and Biden administration are demanding. From VOX, here are the proposals in the current democrat gun ban wish list legislation and my thoughts on them:

• The Raise the Age Act: This bill raises the age to purchase certain semi-automatic rifles from 18 to 21.  Two 18-year-olds commit horrific murders so let restrict all 18- to 21-year-olds. I got a semiautomatic rifle for Christmas when I was 8 years old.  These same folks want to lower the voting age to 16 and let five-year-olds choose their “gender.”

• Prevent Gun Trafficking Act: Already illegal, so the “coulds” and “mights” in this act are irrelevant.  They are trying to stop gun sales by individuals. Same folks that sent guns to the Mexican drug cartels during the Obama administration.
•  
• The Untraceable Firearms Act: The ridiculous “ghost gun” law – it is already illegal to remove the serial number from a gun. But this tries to make it illegal to use a 3D printer to make gun parts.

• Ethan’s Law, the Safe Guns, Safe Kids Act, and the Kimberly Vaughn Firearm Safety Act: Also known as “Lock up your guns so you can’t get to them when you need them” act.  If you are so irresponsible as to leave guns where kids can get to them, no law will make a difference.
•  
• Closing the Bump Stock Loophole Act: Former President Donald Trump banned bump stocks – so lets do something already done?

The Keep Americans Safe Act: – by banning “high-capacity magazines.”  Already been tried, from 1994 to 2004 such magazines were banned, as were a laundry list of “assault weapons.”  Contrary to the lies, there is no evidence that ten-year ban made any difference, the Columbine school shooting, the worst at that time, was committed in 1999, right in the middle of it, and it was allowed to expire after 10 years because it did nothing to help.

From the same VOX article, here is the real goal: Democrats could still think bigger

“The House’s expedited consideration of the gun control bills would likely help reduce gun violence if the bills became law, but as German Lopez ecplained for VOX, the policies that could have the most impact are ones that reduce the number of guns that people have. These include proposals like gun licensing, which would curb the number of guns that are sold because it makes it more difficult to obtain them.”

    Reduce the number of guns law-abiding citizens can get and own.  That is their goal and they will not be happy until it is zero.

I will ask my usual request.  Give me factual information, not emotional “mights and maybes,” showing how your proposal would have made a difference in any of the recent shootings.