Racism And Guns: Why The Left Keeps Painting Gun Owners As Racist

Leave a comment

H/T Bearing Arms.

The media know their lies will be believed because people are too lazy to investigate and find out the truth about gun owners.

A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes.”

― Mark Twain

Gun owners get an awful rap in the modern media. While it’s fine for a Hollywood action hero to be loaded down with guns, the average citizen who does so is a ticking time bomb in their world. It’s worse with the news media, which routinely paints gun owners as being every kind of bigot imaginable. Recently, Bearing Arms has run two stories where this has come up. The first one, anti-gunners were trying to paint pro-gun folks as racists. The second, run just this weekend, liberal gun folks talked about the NRA’s supposedly “racist” policies.

Now, we all know this isn’t true. Gun owners are incredibly open to new folks, regardless of ethnicity. We love seeing new people shoot. Race is irrelevant for the vast majority of us.

I’m not saying there are no racist gun owners because we’re not some monolithic group, but you’ll have a far easier time finding racists at the Democratic National Convention than at the NRA’s annual meeting.

And that, my friends, is why the left tries to paint gun owners as the racists.

By now, many pro-Second Amendment advocates and activists understand the racist roots of gun control in this country. Even the more mainstream political site, The Hill, understands it.

One month after the Confederate surrender in 1865, Frederick Douglass urged federal action to stop state and local infringement of the right to arms. Until this was accomplished, Douglass argued, “the work of the abolitionists is not finished.”

Indeed, it was not. As the Special Report of the Paris Anti-Slavery Conference of 1867 found, freedmen in some southern states “were forbidden to own or bear firearms, and thus were rendered defenseless against assault.” Thus, white supremacists could continue to control freedmen through threat of violence.

Congress demolished these racist laws. The Freedmen’s Bureau Bill of 1865Civil Rights Act of 1866, and Civil Rights Act of 1870 each guaranteed all persons equal rights of self-defense. Most importantly, the 14th Amendment, ratified in 1868, made the Second Amendment applicable to the states.

Because of the 14th Amendment, gun control laws now had to be racially neutral. But states quickly learned to draft neutrally-worded laws for discriminatory application. Tennessee and Arkansas prohibited handguns that freedmen could afford, while allowing expensive “Army & Navy” handguns, which ex-Confederate officers already owned.

The South Carolina law against concealed carry put blacks in chain gangs, but whites only paid a small fine, if anything. In the early 20th century, such laws began to spread beyond the ex-Confederacy. An Ohio Supreme Court Justice acknowledged that such statutes reflected “a decisive purpose to entirely disarm the Negro.”


The anti-gun left paints gun owners in general, and the NRA in particular, as racist because they don’t want anyone to see their own racist past. They’re the mean kid in school who picks on everyone so nobody will look too closely at their own flaws.

Unfortunately, most folks who don’t know the gun culture don’t realize that no, we’re not a bunch of racist rednecks. They don’t understand that we’re just good folks who want to protect ourselves and our families.

They might know an individual gun owner or two who they don’t think of a racist, but the media paints a picture that makes it easy for the average American to believe those are the exception, not the rule. The anti-gun left likes it that way because it makes it easier to disarm law-abiding gun owners if the rank and file voter thinks we’re all hood-wearing Klansmen.

Meanwhile, they hide the racism in their past all while still trying to keep inner city blacks from obtaining weapons to protect themselves.

They’ll paint us a racist because


Armed Men Try To Rob Bar. Who Was In The Bar At The Time Made It A Very Bad Idea

Leave a comment

H/T Bearing Arms.

These two idiots could have become Darwin Award Winners very quickly by picking the wrong bar to rob.

Robbing a bar might seem like a solid idea. For one thing, inebriated patrons have slower reaction times and thus easier to deal with. For another, due to many states freaking out over the possibility of someone carrying a firearm having a drink, bars are no-go places for concealed carry license holders.

Assuming, of course, criminals think that far ahead.

However, one thing the crooks in our story this morning weren’t expecting was for the bar to be full of police officers at a retirement party for one of their own.


Police arrested two men quicker than ever on Tuesday evening after they attempted to rob a bar at gunpoint, where a group of off-duty cops were also having a retirement party.

Local authorities said the two masked men who held up Monaghan’s Pub in Baltimore, which sits just across the street from a police station, barged into the business demanding money from the register before taking off.

“I’m sure that they weren’t planning on there being a large room filled with police officers,” Baltimore County police Officer Jennifer Peach told WBAL-TV .

Peach said the officers were gathered in the main room of the bar for the celebration when an employee was held up at gunpoint.

The employee knew the bar had a number of officers in it, so he went and alerted the officers, who then chased down the two suspects.

Yeah, it’s a little disappointing. I was kind of hoping it would be like this scene (Warning for language, thus not safe for work):

Still, the alleged bad guys were caught, arrested, and no one got hurt.

Isn’t it funny, though, how many states won’t recognize a private citizen’s right to carry in a bar–regardless of whether he consumes any alcohol or not–but police officers are free to do so?

Don’t get me wrong, I’m not begrudging our boys and girls in blue carrying anywhere they want. They can and should be carrying at all times. Even (especially?) in bars where people can easily get stupid and try to start stuff with deadly weapons such as broken beer bottles, knives, or firearms they bring into the bar illegally.

Instead, my point is about the rest of us. Had this situation been two guys wanting to hurt people while robbing a bar, and the police officers not been there, there’s literally nothing anyone could have done except become a victim.

Luckily, that wasn’t the case this time. The good guys caught the alleged bad guys and, if convicted, these bad guys will have to explain how they were dumb enough to rob a bar filled with cops while they’re in prison. Frankly, that kind of adds to the punishment if you ask me. Luckily, though, the court won’t consider that if and when sentences are passed down. At that point, only their crime will be considered.

Assuming, of course, they don’t end up with some ridiculous deal that keeps them out of prison and on the street despite committing a violent felony. In this day and age, that’s a possibility too.

NJ Candidates Use Scare Tactics Over Gun Range Opening

Leave a comment

H/T Bearing Arms.

One more reason not to go to the communist state of New Jersey.

One of the challenges many shooters throughout this country face isn’t buying a gun. With the exception of a handful of states, a purchase is relatively straightforward. A bit of a pain in the rear, but straightforward.

No, the issue many face is finding a convenient place to shoot.

In Wayne, NJ, capitalism looks to take care of that thanks to the opening of an indoor gun range.

Unfortunately, despite local leaders signing off on the plan to open the range, Democrats running for state office are latching onto this as an issue and are wanting to block the opening of the range.

Three Democratic state legislative candidates have denounced a gun range that will be built on Route 23 South, saying a loophole in state law gives people easy access to firearms.

The Planning Board Aug. 28 approved a state-of-the-art gun range with 15 shooting stalls on the former Fuddruckers property. No variance was required so residents within 200 yards of the facility did not have to be notified of the application.

State Legislative District 40 candidates Paul Vagianos, Christine Ordway and Thomas Duch have come out against the shooting range.

At issue are what these candidates claim is a lack of safety precautions that will protect residents in the range’s area.

You see, anyone with a valid license will be able to rent a firearm for use at the range after watching a gun safety video. To these candidates, that’s insufficient because…well, because.

“Municipalities should not approve any gun ranges until Trenton closes this loophole,” Ordway said in a statement. “We must take steps to protect our residents with more than a short safety video.”

Bear in mind that these rentals won’t be taken from the range. They’ll be under the supervision of trained safety personnel at all times in addition to the video. They’ll be indoors, thus making it far less likely for a stray round to actually do anything with the neighborhood around the range.

In short, there’s no loophole. Ordway and her fellow candidates are simply grasping at straws because they’re part of the crowd that thinks guns are bad.

The problem is, these candidates are getting in the way of gun education. People learn how to safely handle firearms at gun ranges. The four rules of firearm safety aren’t complicated. They don’t require an all day class in order for reasonable people to understand them. But there’s more to handling a firearm than learning to keep the booger hook off the bang switch and not to flash folks with your muzzle. Those are the things learned on a range.

The fact is that these three candidates haven’t presented any real evidence that anyone is in danger. While the article notes that a couple of people committed suicide at a range last year and that six people have been hurt on New Jersey gun ranges between September 2014 and July 2016–which seems like an awfully arbitrary date range to me–it misses a couple of points.

Primarily, six accidental injuries in two years are easily six too many, but it lacks any scale. How many people were using New Jersey gun ranges during that period? While it’s difficult to tell, it’s not hard to estimate that out of tens of thousands of shooters who used gun ranges in New Jersey, the idea of six injuries is still a fairly low rate.

Further, there’s no information indicating that any of these injuries took place outside of the range, which is what these candidates are kvetching about.

While shooting has some inherent dangers, so does everything else in life. The Wayne, NJ range is doing what it can to mitigate those dangers. Too bad politicians looking to score points with a firearm-ignorant electorate can’t see the reality of what they’re doing.

Or do they see it and just simply not care?

Hat tip: Cam & Company.

Sig Sauer Issues Recall Notice On Limited Number Of Rifles


H/T Bearing Arms.

Please help me spread the word of this recall.

It’s shaping up to be a rough quarter for Sig Sauer. First, there was the controversy over the P320 firing if dropped in a certain manner, and now it seems the venerable firearm manufacturer is having some issues with some of their rifles.

From a company press release:

Newington, NH (September 15th, 2017) – SIG SAUER, Inc. has determined that a limited number of rifles in the SIG716 DMR®, SIG516® Carbon Fiber and SIGM400® Predator models were built with a two-stage SIG SAUER trigger that may have an improperly heat-treated hammer. Over time this could result in a trigger malfunction creating a significant safety hazard. SIG SAUER is issuing a mandatory recall to replace the hammer and trigger assembly in these specific rifles. This recall does not affect any military or law enforcement rifles or any SIG MCX®/SIG MPX® products.

SIG SAUER will correct any of the affected firearms at no cost to the customer.

To determine if a specific firearm is affected by the recall, go to and utilize the serial number identifier and visual inspection instructions.

If you are a customer who is affected by the recall, stop using the firearm immediately and follow the instructions on the website or call SIG SAUER Customer Service by dialing 603-610-3000, option #1. Have the rifle’s serial number available.

I encourage anyone with any of the Sig Sauer rifles to utilize the above link and make sure their rifles are good to go.

In the meantime, it’s my hope that whatever issues Sig is having, they can get in check quick, fast, and in a hurry. While they won the lucrative military contract for the MHS model of the P320, that means squat for the civilian market if safety hazard becomes synonymous with the brand.

To be sure, this seems to be a bit of a rough patch for the company which has long been known to be a manufacturer of quality firearms, but all it takes is a few too many recalls and “voluntary upgrades” for a pistol that has been shown to have an unusual defect before suddenly the company is no longer considered quality.

That said, if any company can, I suspect it’s Sig Sauer. Like I already said, they have a reputation for quality and have for years. That reputation comes from the fact that the company normally doesn’t let things like this get by, and I have no reason to believe that the corporate culture that has created so many quality weapons has changed that fundamentally.

For what it’s worth, despite the aches and pains the company has been experiencing, I’m still considering the P320 Compact for my next carry pistol. Why? Because I have every confidence they’ll get the ship back on course. I won’t say the Omaha Outdoors drop test won’t be playing in the back of my mind, but even that isn’t enough to make me rule out such a good pistol outright.

Just something to think about.

In the meantime, check your rifles and get them taken care of if needed.

H&K Announce It Will No Longer Sell Weapons To This Country Among ,Others


H/T Bearing Arms.

H&K better realize they are alienating may American gun owners as we proudly stand with Israel.

Heckler & Koch make some fine quality firearms. Few people disagree with that statement. However, many of us in the gun community have wondered if they actually give a flying flip about civilian gun owners. A buddy of mine once referred to them as the most anti-gun owner gun company in the world.

I don’t know that I’d go that far, but I will say that for a company that’s wanting a bigger chunk of U.S. market share, the latest move by the company might not be the way to go.

Heckler & Koch, the German weapons manufacturer whose guns are estimated to have killed more than 2 million people since the company was founded in 1949, has quietly adopted the most ethical sales policy of any gunmaker in the world.

The company has pledged no longer to sell arms into warzones or to countries that violate corruption and democracy standards, including Saudi Arabia, Israel, Egypt, the United Arab Emirates, Turkey, Malaysia, Indonesia, or any African countries.

Though never officially announced, the new strategy was included in Heckler & Koch’s latest yearly financial report, and confirmed at an annual general meeting in August. A spokesman said that the firm had “withdrawn from the crisis regions of this world”.

Heckler & Koch – sometimes called Germany’s deadliest company by activists – said it would now sell only to “green countries,” which it defined according to three criteria: membership of Nato or “Nato-equivalent” (Japan, Switzerland, Australia and New Zealand); Transparency International’s corruption perceptions index; and the Economist Intelligence Unit’s democracy index.

Look, almost no one gives a damn if H&K refuses to sell to Egypt, Saudi Arabia, or Indonesia. No one really cares if they refuse to sell to any nation in Africa.

Yet American gun owners, the very people who create the U.S. civilian market that H&K supposed wants deeper penetration into, are typically conservative politically and tend to stand behind Israel. The idea of cutting off the West’s one faithful ally in a deeply troubled region won’t sit well with many in the firearms community.

Don’t get me wrong, I don’t think the Israelis are losing sleep over this announcement. They have local companies that make pretty good weapons as it is. (Disclosure: I lust for a Tavor.) The lack of H&K firearms is probably not going to have much of an impact on Israel as a nation.

That’s not the point for many, however. Instead, they see it as a tacit endorsement of the left’s anti-Israeli rhetoric which presents the state as a rogue actor and oppressor of innocent Palestinians who do nothing wrong. Those rockets that fly out of Palestine are irrelevant, as are the countless terrorist attacks Israel has endured through the years.

The reality that H&K would do well to accept is that American gun owners, as a general rule, stand with Israel. If they want to eat deeper into a market dominated by companies like Smith & Wesson and Glock, it’s probably not a good idea to alienate that market by refusing to sell guns to a country that has that market’s support.

National Reciprocity Reportedly Going Nowhere Due To Paul Ryan

Leave a comment

H/T Bearing Arms.

WTF is wrong with Paul Ryan?

Republicans are supposed to be pro-gun. Not only is that how Democrats paint them, but it’s how Republican lawmakers paint themselves. After all, the Second Amendment is a sacred right and must be defended.

Following the shooting of Rep. Steve Scalise at the hands of a deranged liberal terrorist, Rep. Thomas Massie introduced a bill for national reciprocity. This bill would make it so concealed carry license would be treated like marriage licenses or drivers licenses; a permit in one state would be recognized in every other state.

The bill, however, has stalled, and Massie points the finger for this squarely at Speaker of the House Paul Ryan.

Speaker Paul Ryan will not allow Congressional action on national concealed carry reciprocity to move bills forward, Rep. Thomas Massie told host Mark Walters Thursday on Armed American Radio.  The reason given is Ryan thinks the timing isn’t right to consider H.R. 2909, the D.C. Personal Protection Reciprocity Act, a supplement to state reciprocity provisions of H.R. 38.

“We’ve got over 80 cosponsors at this point,” Massie told Walters when asked the status of his bill, which is currently and procedurally in the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform because Congress has oversight responsibility for Washington D.C. He’s “pressing for a hearing on it.”

“Why haven’t we seen movement over either 38 or 2909 since the horrific events in Virginia?” Walters asked, noting the Republicans control the House and the Senate and both Ryan and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell appear to be blocking bills advancing the right to keep and bear arms.

“You know what?” Massie replied, “The Speaker told me he didn’t think the timing was right. And I think this is the exact timing to bring this bill.”

I’m forced to agree with Massie. This is exactly the right time. The GOP has control of both chambers of Congress and the White House. That may not necessarily be the case in after the midterms.

Unless Ryan is thinking the right time is just a couple months away, he’s wasting this opportunity to strike a meaningful blow for the Second Amendment. Assuming, of course, what Massie says is accurate.

Yet, despite this, he’s likely to maintain his pro-2A credentials. After all, those good grades from pro-gun organizations are typically dependant on how they vote on Second Amendment-related legislation. Vote against gun control bills when they spring up, vote in favor of repealing gun control laws, maybe propose a few pro-gun bills, and you get a good grade from the gun groups.

In fairness, that’s all they have to go on. The backroom deals are, by definition, out of the limelight and hard to quantify. As it stands, all we have is Thomas Massie’s word for what’s transpiring, which means groups like the NRA may be hesitant to base any part of their grading on such claims.

However, none of that really matters. National reciprocity, as well as other pro-gun legislation, needs to move forward, get passed, then signed by President Trump.

Frankly, I’d be delighted to hear just how the timing could be any better.

New App Seeks To Connect Gun-Owners With Gun-Friendly Doctors

Leave a comment

H/T Bearing Arms.

This will be a great app to help gun owners find a gun friendly doctor.

I have a good doctor she knows a large majority of her patients are gun owners and she has no problem with that fact.

Have you ever been to the doctor and had him or her ask if there was a gun in the home?

I’m not talking about a psychiatrist asking this when someone has expressed a desire to hurt themselves or other, but when you’re just in there for a routine physical or you’ve brought your child in for a check-up. Has that ever happened?

Being from the Deep South, I haven’t experienced that, but I’ve had numerous people tell me they have, and that’s a problem. Frankly, it’s not my doctor’s business whether I have a gun or not unless he’s inviting me to go hunting or to the range. That’s about it.

Yet the medical community seems pitted against guns as a whole, and it can be confusing what your options are when you find out that your doctor has an anti-gun bias.

Luckily, Doctors for Responsible Gun Ownership has launched a new app that seeks to connect gun owners with pro-Second Amendment medical providers.

Frankly, medicine has an institutional bias against guns. To counter this, DRGO has launched, a referral service that will connect patients with healthcare providers who respect their second amendment rights and who won’t engage in anti-gun activism in the patient exam room.

In February of 2017, the 11th circuit court struck down key provisions of Florida’s Firearm Owners’ Privacy Act in the Wollschlaeger vs. Governor of Florida case (commonly termed “Docs vs. Glocks”). That ruling gives uninformed and anti-gun doctors legal cover to abuse the doctor-patient relationship to further a political agenda.

This was an unfortunate conclusion to a nearly decade-long saga. In 2010, Amber Ullman and her daughter were terminated from their pediatrician’s practice for refusing to tell the pediatrician whether she had a gun in her home on the grounds of privacy. Many other such instances had occurred, leading to the creation of Florida’s Firearm Owners’ Privacy Act.

DRGO believes that a patient’s gun ownership is none of their healthcare provider’s business. Only in exceptional cases, where specific clinical circumstances warrant, should a healthcare provider inquire about gun ownership or discuss any aspects of ownership.

In response to a growing number of inquiries to DRGO for recommendations of healthcare professionals who respect patient privacy and the right to keep and bear arms, DRGO conceived as a way to help patients find healthcare providers who respect their constitutional rights.

I’ll be honest, I don’t mind a doctor who wants to make sure my 5-year-old daughter can’t get her hands on my gun any more than if he wants to make sure she doesn’t have ready access to the bleach. So long as it’s framed as essentially the same thing, that is.

When a doctor decides he needs to push an anti-gun message on me, then it’s time to find a new doctor. Yet, as was noted above, that’s a lot easier said than done. Thanks to the wonders of technology, finding a replacement seems to be easier than ever before.

Currently, DRGO is encouraging all medical providers who respect our Second Amendment rights to sign up so potential patients can find them through the app. After that, the free market will do what the free market does. If pushy anti-gun doctors lose enough patients, maybe they’ll come to understand the meaning of the phrase, “Stay in your lane.”

Older Entries

%d bloggers like this: