Guns, ethics, morals and the left

as·sault and bat·ter·y
the crime of threatening a person together with the act of making physical contact with them.


1) verb
make a physical attack on.

2) noun:
a physical attack.
“his imprisonment for an assault on the film director”
synonyms: battery, violence; More

as·sault ri·fle
a rapid-fire, magazine-fed automatic rifle designed for infantry use.

Assault weapon

The origin of the term has been attributed to legislators, gun control groups, the media, and the firearms industry itself. It is sometimes conflated with the term “assault rifle”, which refers to selective-fire military rifles that can fire in automatic and / or burst mode.

The legal term, “assault and battery”, is the legal basis for the term, “assault”, which essentially means to provoke someone and “battery” is the actual contact. But the legal concept seems wrong and people have “adjusted” the original noun for a different noun supplemented by a verb.

The same thing happened with “assault rifle”. And assault rifle is used in combat and is fully automatic unlike civilian “assault rifles” which are single shot; one shot, one pull of the trigger.

In the “adjusted” version of the noun, “. . . . the term assault weapon refers primarily to semi-automatic rifles, pistols, and shotguns that are able to accept detachable magazines and possess one or more other features.”

That is a political term, not a legal one though written into law. There are many political agendas written into law which may be why so many people are disgusted with the law and the way it seeks to entrap people.

“If a reasonable person finds something wrong, then it is wrong and to be corrected in concert with others through statute or trial in the simplest manner possible with awareness of the spirit of the law.”

But I diverge . . . . what are termed “assault rifles” in the civilian world, can only be termed such because they can assault another person. But that opens a can of worms as any rifle is an assault rifle. The term can be extended any weapon that can inflict harm on another whether it is deadly or not. A pistol, a knife, and umbrella . . . . and as with the original term, badmouthing someone, which is becoming an increasing issue of college campuses with students insisting on no bad language that diminishes them, like calling someone a dork.

The term assault rifle was started my soldier wannabes and picked up by the gun industry because it sounds “sexy” and sold rifles to people. Then anti-gun people picked up on it because it made those rifles sound more menacing and suited their agenda. But in all this the real problem is ignored – people.

Since the end of WWII, every generation has tried to make life easier for the next so that the next generation wouldn’t have to suffer as their parents did, and it has worked – too well. It has gotten to the point where the most recent generation feels entitled to whatever they want and not subject to punishment; free to do as they wish.

That could be handled if it was just one generation, but the attitude is contagious. It becomes, “if they can do it, so can I”. In providing a better life for our kids, a lot of parents failed their kids and forgot to teach them reasonable behavior based on ethics and morality. But ethics and morality are so boring and limiting, so why should our kids be stuck with outdated rules like we were?

And teachers, being parents and of the same mind, spread that throughout the education system and now we have thin-skinned kids wanting special treatment they don’t deserve and haven’t earned.

To paraphrase Bill Clinton, “it’s the people, stupid”. Teach ethics and morality and enforce it equally and gun violence will be much less a problem though it won’t go away because psychopaths will still exist.

And for those that want to twist my points and say it’s just religion, remember this, the teaching of ethics and morals pre-dated religion and are the basis of philosophy since ancient times. Religion hijacked the concepts to enhance their power as the final arbitrators of responsible behavior. The attack on religion nowadays by liberals is not about improving the lives of people. It is about assuming the mantle of final moral authority to dictate people’s lives . . . . and they do that by ignoring cause (people) and concentrating on effect (guns).


Liberator undetectable gun

When I first saw that the “Liberator” had actually been made, I saw the perfect weapon for terrorists and assassins. It has one metal piece, a nail for a firing pin and easily taken apart and reassembled. It’s waht was feared with the first Glock and it’s polymer construction – a gun that could not be detected by x-ray or metal detector. That had to scare the living daylights out of politicians everywhere

But it’s too late now because 1) the plans exist, and 2) people know it can be done and there is 3D drafting software out there that is free.

There is the “Clock to Doomsday” and should be a “clock to 1984” and the 1984 clock’s hands were just moved back but Doomsday’s were moved forward

Link to article

S.I.N. at work

I couldn’t help but notice the anti gun crowd, at yesterday afternoons press conference where the Sandy Hook families were exploited by obama, tried to use the S.I.N. strategy. It blew up in their faces.

The S.I.N. strategy was used this way.

S – switch the subject – from violating the 2nd amendment it was switched to a sobbing story about grieving parents.

I – ignore the facts – in fact, obama didn’t just ignore them, he made up facts

N – name calling – meaning those who defeated the attempt at violating the 2d Amendment were coerced by liars…

Watch the liberals next time they whine about something. It is their strategy.

Thank you Herman Cain for identifying this.

Spotting Bias and Prejudice in the Media

There is this headline from the Times Business and Money web site, “The Disturbingly Hot Tourist Activity in Hawaii, Vegas: Shooting Guns”. By inserting the word “disturbingly” the article is re-shaped from being a report on a lucrative business activity to a moralistic play for gun control. It becomes that if you like to shoot guns there is something wrong with you. It’s no longer about skill, it’s a perversion of nature and such people should be reeducated. What next? Being sent to the reeducation camps that Communist Russia and China made infamous?

This is a case of, “I think I’m right and therefor I am right”. This article shows not only a personal bias but an institutional one with a plan and a agenda to force gun control even on people and businesses operating lawfully by placing a stigma on even lawful activities. 

No one, right or left, has the right to tell anyone how to live their life as long as they are law-abiding citizens and not doing anything wrong.