We're Almost There

So, the state legislature is working on another bill for the state to go Constitutional Carry.

The first one went down in flames due to some adolescent pissing contest with one of the state gun rights group.

The last information I had was that a replacement bill had been introduced.

So it is with great pleasure I announce that CC has passed a giant hurdle and been passed out of committee.

Fingers crossed it comes to a floor vote.

You're Right. What Could Possible Go Wrong?

Do you ever get the feeling that maybe there's just too much technology out there? That sometimes, the human factor just can't be replaced?

Well, check this out.

The money quote?

'The new classification relies on data input when determining if an inmate is ready to be released in the community."

Right. What could possibly go wrong?

Pissed Me Right Off It Did

While doing a little Googling this afternoon I came across this.

Oh. My. God.

Can you say RCOB? (Red Curtain of Blood for the uniniated...)

By the third paragraph I was starting to get pissed. By the fifth, I was livid. And by halfway through the article, I was ready to throw my computer out the window.

What kind of petty tyrannical BS is this? Just sitting here trying to put this outrage into words, I'm getting pissed all over again.

Arresting a man because his daughter drew a picture of her Dad with a gun? Have we lost our ever-loving minds?

So in all this, how do you charge someone with possession of a firearm because their daughter drew a damn picture? Can someone explain this to me?

And to top it all off, after being cuffed, led out of his daughters school in handcuffs, violated by a strip search, kept in the dark for several hours about why he's been arrested, had his children taken from him, they want him to sign a piece of paper absolving them of any wrong doing by authorizing the search....AFTER THE FACT!

I find it telling this article doesn't allow comments, as I believe their server would have melted down after word of this got out.

I'll tell you one thing, I wouldn'tve signed that piece of paper if they had a gun to my head. After all that, my name would be on the city hall because I would be owning me some local government.

And just put perfect to the whole article, it's in Canadia. That sure explains a lot, but still.

The Blame Is Strong In This One...

Huh. So an Executive Agency in the government decides it wants to push a meme about US guns fueling Mexico's violent crime problem, can't get the corroborating trace data to support such claims, and resorts to taking the matters into their own hands.

And it's all the NRA's fault.

What we know for sure at this point. (Obviously abridged, since to try and capture the entire timeline here would take up wayyyyy to much space. You can check out the Gunwalker time line at the National Gun Rights Examiner, here.) The ATF forced multiple gun dealers in Arizona to sell guns (2000 plus at this point, it could be more) to people those merchants knew were straw buyers, but were told point blank by the ATF to sell to anyway.

Those buyers were surveilled and were NOT interdicted before their purchases were turned over to gun runners. As a result, Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry was killed in a fire fight with gun runners in Dec 2010. Found at the scene were two guns traced to Operation Fast and Furious. Another federal agent, Jaime Zapata, was killed in Mexico with a gun linked to a similar operation in Texas.

We have senior Justice Dept officials on record as using the results of this operation as a justification for the border states rule on multiple sales of long guns.

But all this is the NRA's fault? Really?

As Ron White would say, I don't think so, Scooter.

Wait...Whuh?

Am I reading this right?

Did they actually ask the question why the NRA is hot after the prez on guns, because the firearms industry is farther into the left side of the ledger now than they have ever been?

Evidently, they haven't looked at his voting record as an Illinois state senator. Or his record as a US Senator. Or that he was on the board of directors of the Joyce Foundation, one of the biggest contributors to phony and fake astroturf anti gun organizations in the country.

Or that under his watch, an Executive Agency in the US government was caught supplying guns to some of the most violent criminal gangs in the western hemisphere, and has been stonewalling and lying about it ever since.

Nope. We're supposed to completely let down our guard and go home because a couple of pro gun bills have passed.

Gun friendly. HAH!

We're Gonna Have to Work On That

So, the annual irrelevancy of a certain gun ban organization is out.

What is that, you may ask?

Why it's annual Brady Scorecard!

So how did South Dakota do?

Well, we only got 4 out of possible 100 points. Not as good as Florida's 3, or Louisiana's 2, or Utah that got a perfect score (0).

We're trying to get that number down. We really are. What with debate starting about allowing Constitutional carry, and striking down parking lot gun bans, we're on our way to getting down to that magic number.

Coincidentally, our western neighbor, my home state of Wyoming, started out with a score of 4 out of 100. But they got a 2-point demerit for allowing Constitutional Carry. The Brady's are going to have a fit if Florida style preemption gets passed over there.

It's Baaa-ck!

Just when you thought Constitutional Carry was a dead issue in South Dakota, BAM! There it is again!

I don't know what was up with all the juvenile antics surrounding the last version, but this version doesn't sound much different.

Granted, South Dakota's permit system is largely symbolic, in that we don't have the training, fingerprinting, or serial number requirements of other states.

But still, it's the principal of the issue. In no other instance do we require a permit to exercise our rights. Imagine the uproar if we were to require a permit to attend church. Or to buy a book. Or have certain politically correct medical procedures done. The outrage would be unimagineable.

So why do we continue to put prior restraints on the rights that, to a shrinking minority of people, is politically incorrect? (Although that political incorrectness is becoming more and more irrelevant by the day.)

Well Ain't That Special

To send a statement about the flow of weapons into Mexico, El Presidente presided over the creation of a sign that reads 'No More Weapons' that was placed near the US-Mexican border.

Here's the rub. It was made from weapons seized from Mexican nationals and crushed under the tracks of a tank. (Funny, that's one thing I can never find at any gun show I've ever attended, well, that and those rockets and greanades. And I've been looking!)

One has to wonder how many 'Fast and Furious' guns are involved in this publicity stunt. Because as we all know, nobody else in the world could provide weapons to the Mexican people except those damned old American gun shows/stores and those merchants of death themselves, the NRA. Not the caches of weapons from all over Central/South America. Not the black market, and certainly not the arsenals of the Mexican military itself. Nooooooo. Nothing to see here, move along.

Flipping through the photo gallery, they have all kinds of firearms. Bolt action, semi-auto, etc. What I find interesting is flipping through, I can't see the 7500 'assault rifles' they're proclaiming.

I've got to wonder though, was 'Furious Mike' Bloomberg involved in this?

I Saw That Flick!

So the folks over at the CSGV have got their knickers in a knot over gun sales numbers. As usual, Thirdpower has been all over this like a fat kid on a cupcake.

But something ole Josh said in the last couple of lines struck a memory.

Faced with a stagnate customer base that has declined precipitously over the last 35 years-the gun industry has purposely and continuously manufactured firearms for one of its most important market segments: traffickers and prohibited purchasers (i.e. children, criminals, the dangerously mentally ill, domestic abusers, etc.). All in the name of profit.

Ooo! Ooo! Pick me, Pick me! I think I saw that movie. It was supposed to be good movie when it came out, heck it had Col Rhodes and John Cusack in it. Couldn't be all bad, right? Boy was I wrooooonnnnng. This was back before I got my 2A and evil semiautomatic rifle thing going. By the end of the movie, I was so disgusted I threw it away (brand-spanking new DVD chucked in the trash). Which was kind of odd for a John Grisham movie up to that point, he usually had some pretty good flicks.

I think that was the last time the anti-gun movement scored a victory in court. It's also the only way they can win anything at this point, and that is in the world of make believe. (Coincidentally this is also the only place those pie-in-the-sky anti pipe dreams actually work, such as ballistic fingerprinting.) They have nothing left. Trying to pass off the plot of a not-so-great lawyer movie as fact shows just how bankrupt their ideology really is.

Packaging Fail

Why do you package up a gun cleaning kit, where everything has a place all nice and neat, only to GLUE the damn thing shut?

Note to the manufacturers of Winchester's nifty little cleaning kit. When you want people to be able to use the packaging over and over again, this is not how you go about doing it.

Not Sure What To Make Of This

First off, let me say that the reasons for killing Constitutional Carry in the State House were among the most asinine and childish I've ever heard of. C'mon, really? You can't put aside your teenage angst long enough to look at a bill objectively? Sometimes you really have to wonder about the idi...I mean folks that get elected to statewide office.

Anyway, there's been a bunch of talk recently about South Dakota finally cashing in on some that Oil Boom going on in western North Dakota. If you're not aware, the Bakken Oilfield in ND is among the biggest in the world and makes the reserves of the Arabian Peninsula look like a mud puddle.

It seems that the Sheriff up there in Belle Fourche is, not surprisingly, worried about what effects an oil boom would have in his county. I can understand, the whole boom town thing: I was born in the middle of oil boom, and grew to adulthood through 3 different coal booms. His fears are real.

However. I'm not sure what to make of his comments yesterday. In the linked piece, he is discussing the potential negative aspects a boom would have in the area, and the very next line, he says something very troubling. For the life of me, I can't figure out why an increase of women getting concealed carry permits is a bad thing. I'm not sure if he's intimating the increase in permits is bad thing or if the quote is taken out of context.

Me personally? I'm all for the fairer sex having the ability to defend themselves, especially if this boom comes and the assorted riff-raff that accompanies it shows up.