Home - About -Advertise - Contact Us - Newsletter - Site Maps - Survival PDF Files - Donate

Common Sense Gun Owning?

Posted 08/13/2016 5:49 pm by with 1 comment

I saw this glaring headline in the newspaper that said Donald Trump incited people to violence against Hillary Clinton. After reading 80% of an article telling me why I should think he had, I finally came to what he actually said. What the…?! That’s incitement to violence? Where? There are song lyrics out there that actually do incite violence, but no one can criticize those because then you’d be doing guess what? Censorship, right. Ok, well, this all began because Hillary is beating the “common sense gun laws” tom-tom with much fervor and pantsuit aplomb.

 

Let’s try something new. Let’s not worry about her getting elected and successfully banning the so-called “assault rifles” and “high-capacity magazines” (the panty-twisted screech sirens actually call them “high-capacity clips”, which they are not.) So what if she does? How’s that going to affect people that actually know a thing or two about effective firearms? Excuse me, but the AR-15 is the civilian version of a pile of crap the army was arm-twisted into buying by the air force who got it from an aerospace defense contractor and not an actual firearms company. Once the army dolefully accepted the plastic and aluminum tinker-toy, then the Marines were not long afterward browbeaten into taking this pathetic example of squirt gun technology gone awry. This is a souped-up .22, okay? If this weapon defends our freedom, beg pardon, but we need to get a new pair of glasses.

 

See here, folks. The weapons that actually defended homesteads back in the day they often came under attack by various folks were as follows: Shotguns, lever-action rifles, and revolvers. The revolver alone successfully brought us through a Gold Rush, Mississippi riverboat shindigs, the Civil War, untold numbers of wagon trains, lawless cowtowns and mining camps, the frontier, and so on and so forth. The lever-action rifle was the “assault rifle” from the Civil War up into the early 1900s. And the shotgun was “everyman’s” on-the-premises law-and-order. Read up on U.S. history from the 1840s up into the early 1900s and tell me how the AR-15 and a 9mm could have done it better.

 

I’m not saying people shouldn’t own AR-15s and so on. Of course, they should be able to own them. The government has no right to fiddle-fart around with peoples’ rights to own firearms. Excuse me, but does anyone know that the Wounded Knee Massacre was the result of a gun confiscation scheme? The government went to take away the firearms and bows of some starving, freezing Native Americans who weren’t bothering anyone. And, rather conveniently, the government had on hand a couple mountain howitzers to make sure the women and children died along with the men as per policy. Right, they made the world safe from compassion.

 

But listen, there’s a bigger point here and that is the government tends to be attracted to hot-button issues like these “assault rifles”. Ok, so whatever. Own a lever action rifle. They’ll never be able to successfully ban or restrict that rifle. It’s too closely tied to Americana, John Wayne, and Old West nostalgia for anyone to start up a campaign against those. This is one rifle that you can “top off” the magazine while it has a round in the chamber. This is a weapon that, in the case of the .30-30, ammo can be found everywhere from Big Box stores to hardware stores to rural gas stations. The lever action rifle is simple, reliable, unthreatening to even many anti-gun weenies, does not attract attention, and can be counted on for any task where one needs a rifle. No magazines to lose or stop working. No “red flags” popping up on anyone’s radar about it.

 

Moving right along on rifles, does anyone remember that the Afghans were engaging in a very successful guerilla war against the Soviet army, in the beginning, using old, bolt-action Lee Enfield rifles? They basically outranged the Soviets with it. The iron sights on a Lee Enfield go up to, what, about 1000 to 2000 meters? And it is effective to that range. The AK bullet has to find a gas station and stop for gas and directions when it gets to 300 meters. The CIA, in the early 1980s, scoured American gun shops for all surplus .303 ammo they could find and shipped it over to the Afghans for their Lee Enfield rifles. Right, so, the AK is so fearsome it can outmatch a good bolt action rifle? Hardly. It has to actually hit something first. The government will never be able to ban bolt action rifles. This is a hunting weapon. They could never do it.

 

Let’s discuss everyone’s favorite: The 12 gauge pump shotgun. This is the weapon that has cost more people their underwear upon hearing the slide racked than any other weapon in American history. And, again, a tube magazine that can be “topped off” while it’s got one in the pipe. This is the real jack-of-all-trades. Buckshot, birdshot, slugs, it can do it all. Big game, small game, home defense, and virtually government-proof. This is a hunting weapon. They might be able to ban so-called “riot guns” but the only difference between a “riot gun” and a sporting pump shotgun is about 2 or 3 extra rounds in the magazine. What difference does that make with a tube magazine easily topped off? The short barrel is justifiable for deer hunting as a slug barrel. There simply is no more effective weapon within shotgun range than a shotgun. And the government will never be able to successfully ban these, either.

 



How about handguns? Well, that’s a sensitive one for the government. They’ll probably be able to successfully restrict or ban high-capacity magazines. But my question is this: How come so many people own 9mm pistols in the first place? What, the shop ran out of .45s? Most of the best .45ACPs are single-stack magazine pistols. Meaning, there’s a magazine of around 7 to 9 rounds. For some reason, the “magic number” of rounds the government says ought to be the limit is 10. Who knows how they arrived at this figure. But they probably couldn’t figure out why there were pistols that could hold 17 rounds. Well, because they’re 9mm pistols, you guys! They need that many. But a .45 does not. That caliber was invented by to stop religious fanatics hopped up on drugs. So, hey, own the stuff the government isn’t whining about. It’s usually better.

 

And let’s not forget revolvers. The old .45 Colt is the caliber that inspired the .45ACP, after all. Since revolvers have no magazine, no muss no fuss. There’s a lot of other advantages such as a .357 Magnum can also use .38 special ammo. And there are lever-action rifles in pistol calibers such as .357, .44, and .45 Colt for people into simple living. One caliber fits all. No one can deny the effectiveness of the .357 or .44 Magnum. One reason the cops went from the .357 to the 9mm was because some bean-counter told them to. Easier to train cops with the 9mm. Right, and that was about the time it started taking 58 rounds to stop some hopped-up freak and the liberals came unglued about such brutality. Well, it used to only take a couple rounds of .357 back in the day, I guess. Or someone went and got the 12 gauge out of the squad car. Problem solved.

 

So, hopefully, I have not incited anyone to violence here with such talk of firearms. Hey, I’m just saying that we’re not all clueless out here, married to AR-15s and disarmed if we haven’t got the black plastic “pile”. Even better, lever-action rifles, good .45ACPs, revolvers, and shotguns can be had for a fraction of the cost of these black plastic wonder weapons that always need some tuning and fiddling to actually function correctly. “Oh, it must be the magazine lips are bent…” What? Did it get a Botox injection? Yes, Molon Labe and all that jazz. But how about: “I ain’t got anything you government fellas care about. Now, if you’ll excuse me, I’ve got meat what needs skinnin’…” Keep your powder dry and hold on to your topknot.

 

 

 
 
Do you enjoy reading Patriot Rising?
 
 
Check out The Survival / Homesteading / Preparedness / Sustainability PDF Page! (Nearly 3000 free .PDF Files)
 
 
[wysija_form id="1"]
 
Loading Facebook Comments ...

One response to Common Sense Gun Owning?

  1. joe August 14th, 2016 at 8:39 am

    Well, nope.I wonder why the military does not use Lee Enfields today. You cannot win with Mosin Nagant and Lee Enfield only these days. How much ammo can you carry with you for those rifles ? What happens if you miss the first shot ?How quickly can you shoot the second round? You cannot face a modern equipped infantry with those guns..I’ll keep my AK and My AR together with my Lee Enfield and Mosin….

        Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *