no blood in the beers

Every single time the laws of this country are adapted to better protect and preserve the individual right of self-defense, the anti-rights cultists of America inundate the airwaves with prognostications of firearm owners wantonly mowing down innocent civilians in fits of rage, accidents with firearms claiming the lives of defenseless children, and various other doom-and-gloom predictions of "blood in the streets". Concealed carry? Blood in the streets. Open carry? Blood in the streets. Constitutional carry? Blood in the streets. Expiration of the "Assault Weapon" Ban? Blood in the streets. Expiration of the Brady waiting period? Blood in the streets.

And every single time they are wrong. Fortunately – at least if you are as perversely entertained as I am – that 0.000 batting average does not stop them from offering up the same conjecture again and again and again (What was that definition of insanity?), with one of the more-recent examples being allowing firearms into restaurants that serve alcohol here in Tennessee.

Where the hoplophobes were wrong. Again:

Tennessee’s so-called "guns in bars" law is almost a year old. It took two years, two vetoes by the governor and two legislative overrides, not to mention a couple of court cases before it took effect.

After such controversy, has anything really changed since the law allowed permit holders to carry their guns into places where alcohol is served as long as they are not drinking?

[…]

"Honestly, not a whole lot has changed. It isn’t like the okay corral with people walking in with guns in the restaurants," said Bart Fricks, COO of the Copper Cellar Corp., which owns more than a dozen restaurants in East Tennessee.

"A lot of it was much to do about nothing," Fricks added.

We got the same response at Mulligan’s in West Knox County.

"We haven’t seen anything. We do have music. We do have a bar, but we do welcome kids. It’s very family friendly. It really hadn’t bothered us at all," said owner Patti Anderson.

[…]

In fact, the Knox County Sheriff’s Office reports that out of 61 calls in the last year from businesses that serve alcohol, none of them involved a gun.

"This law hasn’t changed your job at all. Not a bit," said Knox County Sheriff’s Assistant Chief Deputy Rich Wilson.

Speaking personally, I have openly carried into multiple different restaurants that serve alcohol, and no one has complained, commented, panicked, called the police, or really done much of anything. Funny, that.

One thing I have noticed, however, is that a lot of places that serve alcohol, and a lot of places that sell alcohol, still have the old, "MISDEMEANOR STATE LAW PRESCIBES A MAXIMUM PENALTY OF ELEVEN (11) MONTHS TWENTY-NINE DAYS IMPRISONMENT AND A FINE NOT TO EXCEED TWO THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS ($2,500) FOR CARRYING WEAPONS WHERE ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES ARE SOLD OR SEARVED." sign (referred to as the "Misdemeanor/Weapon" sign by the TNABC). THAT SIGN IS NO LONGER VALID, in that the Tennessee State Code it cites no longer has that clause, and the TSC dictates you may lawfully carry at both places that sell alcohol and places that serve alcohol, but I have two questions:

1. Is there any truth to the rumors I have been hearing that the Tennessee Alcoholic Beverage Commission has been telling businesses they have to put up that out-of-date sign before they can have their liquor license?

2. Would that be considered "binding" signage indicating weapons/firearms are not permitted on the premises? Pretty much everything about them is wrong, but I do not exactly want to become a test case.

(Courtesy of Tennessee’s favorite whacky local politician.)

quote of the day – say uncle

When you get right down to it, your average Mark 1 Mod 0 anti-rights cultist is nothing but an attention whore – they employ the tragedies of victims to attract and sway public attention, they largely refuse to engage in any conversation they cannot control or overpower, they rely on logical fallacies to support their positions and themselves, they desperately claim victimhood while simultaneously attacking the rights of law-abiding citizens, and so forth. This attention-whoring nature also adequately explains why their weblog posts are so very often filled with hateful invective, inciting language, and demeaning insults (in order to prompt a response, of course), illuminates why those anti-rights nuts are largely unwilling to comment on weblogs that refuse to link back to their own discriminatory corners of the cortex (if no one is going to follow a link back to their page, why should they bother commenting?), and shows why the one post to bring Mike Bonomo out of his self-imposed silence was the one announcing the boycott and obliquely mentioning his intolerant weblog (“Oooh, he talked about me! Maybe he will pay attention to me again!?”).

And speaking of that boycott – given that the anti-rights nuts have intentionally crafted a situation wherein the majority of their traffic is pro-rights activists provoked into visiting those anti-rights weblogs, it is time to remind them of that. But it is also time to remind them of something else:

They are losing. “Gun control” has been a losing cause for over 15 years now, with the misnamed “Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act” and equally-misnamed “Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act” (otherwise known as the “Federal ‘Assault Weapons’ Ban”) being the back-to-back high points of that intolerant movement back in 1993 and 1994, respectively. Since then, the waiting period dictated by the former has disappeared without a ripple, the latter has expired and all attempts to revive it have been stillborn, concealed carry is the norm throughout the vast majority of America, open carry is not far behind, Constitutional carry is building up a head of steam, castle doctrine laws are being put on books, and there are now two, distinct Supreme Court cases identifying and preserving an individual right to keep and bear arms.

Yeah, the anti-rights nuts are losing, which brings us to the quote provided by Say Uncle:

Otherwise, they’re useless to me, ineffectual in the realm of public opinion, and failures at influencing government. Why bother?

Indeed. Our opponents can do little more than rehash the same, tired, ineffective, emotion-driven, factually incorrect, disproven, faulty, and flawed argments over and over and over again… which has yielded the almost-two-decades of nearly consistent failures on their parts. They can just keep on whinging about “common sense gun laws” and whatever else it is they keep prattling on about; we will just go on winning, protecting freedoms, expanding liberties, and defending our rights… and successfully, at that.

What better treatment for them could there be? Let them wallow in their own obscurity as they slouch slowly towards the wastebin of history – pointing and laughing is not only arguably rude, but it does get old after a while.

walking away is not the way to win

In an unsurprising turn of events, it would appear as though the psychological shortcoming of “running and hiding when one appears to be losing a conversation” is one that all anti-rights nuts, of all types and affiliations, seem to share

Next, a man stood up to tell me he had been offended by my comments about liberals. When I asked him what was so great about liberalism, he began by saying they were for social justice. Before he could pick up a full head of steam, I said that justice is justice, whereas "social justice" is code for one set of rules for the rich, another for the poor; one set for whites, another set for minorities; one set for straight men, another for women and gays. In short, I pointed out, it’s the opposite of actual justice. Before he could even reach the door, the president announced the meeting was over.

People who know they are right do not simply abandon conversations.  People who are sure of their arguments’ efficacy and accuracy do not stifle conversation. 

On the one hand, I am quite certain that iamboogie feels vindicated in her closing of her Twitter account in light of this similar behavior by other anti-rights nuts – after all, she seems to firmly think that if enough people believe something is the right course of action, it is the right course of action, regardless of whether or not it actually is.  And given that duly-elected representatives are following the same “get up and leave if we are losing” tactics, I dare say this wonderful little mentality is catching on… which, of course, creates a cute little recursive loop of “lots of people are doing this, so I should do it, and then lots more people are doing it, and you should do it” and ‘round and ‘round we go.  Talk about circular logic indeed! 

Why are anti-rights nuts so intolerant of dissenting opinions? And why do anti-rights nuts react so violently to people questioning their beliefs? Could it be those beliefs are not as sound as they might like?

(Courtesy of Smallest Minority.) 

quote of the day – robb allen

While my individual rights will continue to exist regardless of whether a majority of society likes them or not, it is generally far easier for me – and all pro-rights activists – when the majority of society not only recognize our rights, but also enjoy the benefits from them as well – in short, this is not a game of public opinion, but it surely does help. And over last weekend, one of Robb’s readers broke out the big guns when it comes to public opinion (trust me, you want to read the whole thing), which prompted the inimitable (and generally pantsless) Mr. Allen to write the following:

Do you think the Brady’s or the VPC got three hundred and eighty four women to give up guns this weekend? Do you think any of the gun control groups were able to put that many smiles on faces in one day?

This is why we win.

Indeed.

Pro-rights activists empower all people, men and women alike; “gun control” supporters seek only to force all people into being victims, whether they want to be or not. With empowerment comes the satisfaction of learning something new, the comfort of doing something right, and the happiness of being (in some small way) self-reliant… and what do the anti-rights nuts have that could even come close to comparing?

We are winning because supporting individual rights against the assaults of those who would abridge them is the right thing to do… but also because the shooting sports are fun, and people like being able to take care of themselves. When looked at in that light, our eventual victory is effectively guaranteed, though it will undoubtedly take a bit of time and effort to get there…

their silence speaks volumes

Now that the Project Gunrunner / Gunwalker scandal has hit the front page of Fox News, along with an ongoing investigation by CBS News, a thought occurred to me last night: where are the “gun control” advocates in this whole mess?

For years now, the anti-rights cultists have been trying to pin the myth that “90% of guns recovered in Mexico came from America” on law-abiding American citizens, despite the reams of evidence disproving that claim. And here we are, now finding out that of the approximately-11% of the firearms picked up at Mexican crime scenes that could actually be traced back to America, the BATFE is responsible for allowing over half of those across the border, and those same anti-rights cultists are silent?

A whole host of words come to mind to describe that silence, with a few of the ones suitable for public consumption being “duplicitous”, “self-serving”, “bigoted”, “predictable”, and “shameful”.

If the anti-rights cultists really cared about the gunrunner business in terms of reducing crime both here and in Mexico, then they should be coming down on the Bureau like the proverbial ton of bricks, demanding answers as to why the ATF “allowed” over 2500 firearms to just walk across the border. Instead? *Crickets chirp.* The resounding silence from the anti-rights nuts more than confirms that they only care about the firearms being trafficked across our southern border as a way to unjustly crucify and castigate law-abiding firearm owners and dealers.

No great surprise there.

*sigh* Here we have a golden opportunity to discover who has been responsible for allowing over 2500 firearms to simply waltz across the Mexican borders, and the hoplophobes would rather sit on their thumbs than deal with the specter of having to admit that they might, possibly, maybe have been wrong. It is so very kind of them to let us know where their priorities lie.

people of the gun, the sequel

Wow. Kind of surprising it has been that long.

Anywise, back in 2007, noted bigot, hoplophobe, and racist Laua Washington wrote a positively hysterical (in both meanings of the word) anti-rights column which precipitated the creation of the People of the Gun webpage in order to show her just how narrow-minded her world view is, and just how diverse firearm owners really are. For my own part, I designed some graphics that you can still purchase on a variety of products*, but even without my paltry assistance, the PotG rapidly grew to over 100 members.

However, times change, and Jeff at Alphecca decided to pass off the reigns to Ammo.net, who are now hosting the newly revitalized version of the People of the Gun, complete with its shiny new graphic shown to the left. If you are interested in being counted as part of the tribe, there is a helpful little “Join the Club” contact form at the bottom of the People of the Gun page – all you need to provide them is a display name, first name, email address, webpage (if you have one), and picture, and you, too, will be one of the many folks proud to be publicly counted as a firearm owner.

Is it any great surprise that no analog exists for the anti-rights nuts?

I know I said it before, but I will repeat myself here: thank you, Laura Washington, for providing the community of firearm owners a unifying concept to rally around. We never could have done it without you!

(* – The products at that CafePress store were never “official” merchandise, and with the recent rebranding of PotG, I would imagine Ammo.net (who needs to have more 7.62x54R options) will be offering merchandise with their new logo relatively shortly, at which time I will probably shut down my store to avoid any complications. In short, if you want my design, get it soon.)

fighting a losing battle

An interesting thing is happening to anti-rights nuts – they are alienating people, and those people are letting them know it.

In the past few months, thanks to the heavy-handed “moderation” demonstrated by Joan Peterson and “Baldr Odinson“, no fewer than two separate pro-rights weblogs – An NC Gun Blog and Uncommon Gunsense – have sprung up to combat the lies, misinformation, and petty authoritarianism of the cultists. Worse still for those “gun control” advocates are the fence-sitters they have likewise alienated with their unbridled hatred and intolerance… fence-sitters like my father.

In the midst of his 1911-shopping, my father sent me this additional email:

Ann Coulter presents an amazing encapsulation of the reality of the situation. Now, in the name of “fair and balanced” consideration of both sides of the issue, I offer Rob Woutat, one of our very own Kitsap Sun’s reknowned opinionators:

http://www.kitsapsun.com/news/2011/jan/27/rob-woutat-our-nation-151-armed-and-dangerous/

Prior to reading Ms. Coulter’s thoughts and based entirely on Mr. Woutat’s wonderfully constructed argument (drug-induced fantasy?), I had already reached the conclusion that the time had come for me to start carrying in one fashion or another. Unfortunately in the real world, Ms. Coulter’s bottom line is truly the bottom line.

Y’all be careful out there.

Read that again… my father agrees with Ann Coulter’s closing statement – “the only way to stop [the next killer] will be with an armed citizen with a gun” – but he decided to start carrying a firearm based on the hysterical, arguably insulting, “drug-induced fantasy” put forward by Rob Woutat. I will let you read that particular article for yourself – I have fisked so many bigoted screeds like it before, I see no reason to do so again – but suffice to say that “deranged” would be a polite way of describing the man’s writing, and thanks to that irrational desire to abritrarily and whimsically abridge on Americans’ Constitutionally-protected rights, my father has decided to exercise his.

Wow. Way to fail at converting folks to the Cult of Hoplophobia, Rob. I wonder if the anti-rights nuts will ever realize that hatred, bigotry, and intolerance stopped being effective recruitment tactics, much less socially acceptable, back in the ’60s. Either way, I definitely appreciate Woutat’s assistance in encouraging my father to consider carrying a sidearm!

Speaking of, though, Dad put down a deposit on the Remington R1 we discussed earlier, and at Bull’s Eye Shooter Supply LLC (of the “Beltway Sniper Attacks” fame), no less – apparently they have not been able to keep them in stock, and the guys there have an order of 25 coming in. He does not plan on making it his primary carry piece (maily due to concerns over concealing it, but I think I can show him that a full-size 1911 is no problem… as long as that 1911 is a little better tuned for carrying), but he does plan on bringing it with them when they drive across the country next month to come and visit (bearing in mind various states’ wide ranges of “guns in cars” laws, of course). As he said on the phone, this country is not what it used to be.