Wednesday, February 27, 2013

The modern liberator...

In 1942, the United States deployed “FP-45”, also known as the “Liberator”, in occupied areas during WWII. Its multiple components were farmed out to different manufacturers, and it was designated as a “Flare Projector” to hide its true nature. In short, it was intended to be a single-shot .45ACP pistol. It had 23 parts, mostly made from stamped steel, and was designed to be fired from a distance of less than four feet. Its' intended use was to kill or incapacitate a Nazi soldier, so a resistance fighter could take his weapons.

Now enter the 21st century. Today, the most popular model of rifle sold in America is currently the “AR15-type”. The AR15, originally designed by the Armalite Corporation as a selective-fire successor to the 7.62x51-chambered AR10, had its patent rights purchased by Colt. The AR15 “Sporter” semi-auto-only variant legal for civilian purchase was first introduced to the US market in 1963, roughly 50 years ago.

While it is not difficult to convert a civilian AR15 to a full-auto version, it is also not widely considered “readily convertible” because of the parts needed. A third pin hole in the receiver must be drilled in a very precise location and at a very precise size, and five additional parts must be acquired. While the full-auto bolt carrier has been readily available for use in civilian rifles for years, most manufacturers keep stringent controls on the sale of full-auto fire control group parts such as selector switches, triggers, hammers, and sears.

Even so, every single other part group on an on a military-issue M16A2, M16A3, M16A4, or M4 (henceforth referred to in this post as the “M16”) will fully interchange with the civilian-legal semi-auto AR15 rifle. One of the biggest selling features of most name-brand versions of the AR15-type rifles on the civilian market is the fact that they are “military-spec” on every level except for the fire control group.

Because of its origin as a military rifle that is still in use, along with its modularity, ergonomics, and familiarity, the AR15/M16 rifle is almost universally standardized as the issued long gun amongst domestic law enforcement agencies throughout the United States of America.

So, let's go over a few facts here.
  1. The AR15 rifle is the most popular civilian rifle ever sold or manufactured in the United States of America.
  2. Almost every part of the AR15 rifle is interchangeable with the M16 rifle, including its fire control group if the sear pin hole is drilled in the proper place/size and the FCG is replaced as a whole group.
  3. Almost every SWAT team in the United States utilizes an AR-type rifle, as does almost every police department that issues a non-shotgun alternate firearm to its patrol officers.
  4. Every federal agency in the US issues an AR-type rifle to its agents as a standard-issue long gun.
  5. Even though some NATO member-nations do not use AR-type rifles, they are part of the Standardization Agreement (“STANAG”), and will use AR-compatible magazines and ammunition.

With those facts in mind, you may remember the first paragraph of this post, regarding the FP-45 “Liberator” pistol, and its intended use. It was designed to be used by “resistance fighters” in an occupied area, it was intended to be used to kill a member of an occupying force so that person's weapon and ammunition could be acquired and used by the resistance.

Now imagine that the “occupying force” was using, as its standard-issue firearm, a rifle almost identical (save for a few mechanical parts that are easily swapped over) to a rifle commonly-owned by the people whose land they are occupying. The occupied people own a rifle that has the same capacity as the occupiers' rifle, with the exception that it is not a “full-auto” or “burst-fire” rifle. The ammunition and magazines are fully-interchangeable, and may be shared amongst those with both pre-existing semi-auto rifles AND newly-captured fully-auto rifles.

An occupying force would be in a world of shit, would they not?

Ever think maybe that might be why they don't want us to have 'em?

Some thoughts on unsolicited advice

Quite simply, DON'T BOTHER GIVING IT TO ME.  I'm most likely not going to listen, and if you harp on me about the same shit that you've been harping on me about since I back when I was flunking algebra in high school, I'm likely gonna just get pissed off.

Don't get me wrong, I'm more than willing to listen to an old man that was going through his 30s about the time I was first being thought of, because it's quite possible he's been through some shit and likely knows what he's talking about.  That said, I'm a grown-ass man.  I know a lot of things about a lot of subjects, but I do understand that I don't know it all.  That's why I ASK for advice when I think I need help with something. 

You'll notice that you don't see me telling you how to keep your kids in line, how to mow your lawn, how to maintain your car, or how to pleasure your wife.  There's a reason for that.  Two, actually.  First of all, it ain't my place to be telling you these things.  Second, YOU DIDN'T FUCKING ASK ME. 

When I was younger, there was a lot of things I wanted to do in life.  Two of my biggest dreams fell way short.  One was foreclosed upon by forces stronger than myself, and the other is attainable but simply isn't a dream of mine any more.  It's no longer the person I really want to be.

There are a variety of reasons for this...including the time, money, and effort that would need to be expended in order to obtain such an achievement.  The biggest reason, however, is that I DON'T FUCKING WANT TO DO IT.  When I did want it, it was "for all the right reasons".  I now know that those reasons don't really matter to anyone who does, and pissing away several years and several thousands of dollars to obtain a piece of paper ain't gonna change that. 

Stop trying to prod me into it.  I value your opinions, but I'll ask when I want to hear them.  I don't know where life is gonna take me...but you can rest assured that it ain't going where someone tells me I have to be.

Thursday, February 21, 2013

No sympathy for the devil...

They say that, in the state of Texas, you can indict a ham sandwich.  An indictment is not an indication or determination of guilt, it is a determination made by a grand jury stating that enough evidence exists to bring formal charges against the accused.

This morning, after being indicted by a grand jury, the chief of police of West Columbia TX was arrested on six counts of tampering with evidence and three counts of possession of a controlled substance.

Here's my issue with it.  Typically, a cop has to SERIOUSLY fuck up before any type of real discipline is ever meted out.  When they kill someone in a manner that most would consider to be outright murder, they are often found to have "acted within departmental policy".  Shoot someone's dog for no apparent reason?  The dog was being aggressive, and the officer "acted for his own safety".  Have a cop act like a total disrespecting asshole to the very people who pay his/her salary?  Well, the bogus charges end up dropped if you raise hell.

That's what generally happens for lowly patrol officers.  If you're a higher-up, there typically has to be videotape evidence or a serious paper trail before someone will even consider listening to a complaint.  This isn't a "local issue", this is known to occur across the country.  The "Thin Blue Line" (complete with its own logo, bumper stickers, etc) is an informal reference to the so-called brotherhood of "Law Enforcement", and they most typically look out for their own.

Don't get me wrong, not all cops are like this.  I know a pair of them that I would trust my life, liberty, and property to...and that's saying something, considering there's members of my own family that don't even rate such a thing.  We have disagreements about their chosen profession, but I know they are at least honest about who they are and what they do...and they walk the talk.

With that said, I personally know SEVERAL police officers, current and former, who are admitted (although not convicted) felons...with these felony offenses against the laws of this state having been either before they chose to be officers, or while wearing a badge.  I don't know a lot of cops personally, I'd say that it's probably about a dozen.  At least half of that number would fall into the category of "admitted felon", and I've been personal witness to at least three of these felonious acts.

I'm not suggesting that the laws they'd broken should be treated as felonious acts...or, for that matter, even prohibited at all.  I believe that a truly moral society has no business imprisoning, fining, or otherwise using force against a person whose actions have not actually harmed another non-consenting individual.

My issue with police officers is, quite simply, that they knowingly accept a job where their sole line of work is to use force against EVERY person that has violated the laws of this state, even when those laws have criminalized actions that do not harm anyone.

When a person is charged and sent to prison for possession of controlled substance, that person is not treated as an "individual who needs our prayers and support".  That person is treated as a convicted felon.  He will forever wear the scarlet letter of "Convicted Felon" upon any state-issued ID card he is ever issued.  He will be barred from voting.  He will not be allowed to purchase a firearm from a licensed dealer.  He will most likely never be given a real opportunity to have a decent job.  He will remain an undesirable second-class citizen by the majority of society.

I do not know if Michael Shane Palmer is guilty of the crimes he is accused of.  I do, however, know that his department has arrested and assisted in the prosecution of numerous individuals accused of the very same crimes he is accused of engaging in.  Not only was this considered "acceptable", it was encouraged...and is known to be a source of funding for the police force.  More dope busts = more "drug war" funding. 

He, as well as his officers, were more than willing to arrest, aid in prosecution, and even celebrate the destruction of peoples' lives while claiming it has "made the streets safer", "protected the children", or some such other statist nonsense.  You are participants in a so-called "War on Drugs", and you actively participate, claiming that grown adults are somehow not capable of making choices for ourselves...knowing that the actions you perpetrate will destroy the lives of those involved.  You write it off as saying, "well, they shouldn't have been involved in it, nothing bad would have happened if they'd stayed away from dope".

When an officer is accused of crimes, the most often statement that comes from his supporters will be something akin to "Who are we to judge the actions of another?".  Well, unfortunately, a police officer takes it upon himself to judge the actions of others, and does so through the barrel of a gun.  He takes it upon himself to decide when someone should be cited for "not stopping enough" at a stop sign, having a pot roach in the ash tray, getting into a fight at a local bar, etc.  When these officers have either committed such acts in the past, or even continue to do so even while serving as officers with a law enforcement agency, they are the epitome of hypocrisy. 

Sorry, but I have no sympathy for people who get caught up in the very system they wilfully decided to become a part of.  Fuck 'em and feed 'em fish heads...

Sunday, February 17, 2013

The Show Me State gets funny with their laws...

Random “blue states”, heavily-populated by members of and voters for the Democratic Party, are introducing and/or enacting legislation that will outlaw the sale, manufacture, transfer, or possession of certain items deemed to be “assault weapons”.

These proposed and/or enacted laws, interestingly, typically include language that instantly shows the legislation to not have been authored by anyone who knows anything about firearms and is most likely authored by someone working for the Brady Bunch.

 For instance, Missouri recently introduced HB545, outlawing “assault weapons” and “large-capacity magazines”. In the definition of “assault weapon”, as it pertains to handguns, they have outlawed the possession of short-barreled rifles that are already illegal under federal law unless a person has been on a 6mo-2yr waiting list to be cleared by the ATF and paid a substantial tax for the privilege of owning it.

As this bill pertains to rifles, they have outlawed every semi-automatic rifle with a detachable box magazine ever made, provided it has any type of fore-end stock.
(1) "Assault weapon", any:
(a) Semi-automatic rifle that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine and has one or more of the following:
a. A pistol grip or thumbhole stock;
b. Any feature capable of functioning as a protruding grip that can be held by the nontrigger hand;
c. A folding or telescoping stock; or
d. A shroud attached to the barrel, or that partially or completely encircles the barrel, allowing the bearer to hold the firearm with the nontrigger hand without being burned, but excluding a slide that encloses the barrel; 

Among the rifles outlawed by this legislation:

The Ruger 10/22, with traditional stock and standard 10rd detachable rotary magazine.

The Mossberg Plinkster, shown here in a synthetic pink stock with a standard 10rd detachable box magazine.

The M1 Garand, favorited by collectors and even sold by our government's Civilian Marksmanship Program by the hundreds of thousands. Its 8rd magazine is one of the few detachable magazines properly described as being a “clip”.

The Remington 742 Woodsmaster, prized by deer hunters for the past six decades, has a detachable 4rd box magazine.


 Now here's the real kicker.  The Soviet SKS rifle ("Self-loading Carbine, Siminov design") pictured below is actually not affected by the ban.  It does not have a detachable box magazine, as it is intended to be speed-reloaded via stripper clips that do not remain inside the rifle during use.  Its magazine is actually permanently affixed to the rifle, and requires disassembly of the rifle in order to remove or clean it.  In its standard form, prior to modification, it does not have the capacity to accept a detachable magazine.  Its only "assault accessory" that would be affected by the ban is the "barrel shroud", otherwise known as a standard traditional wooden the other hunting rifles shown above.    Please note the folding blade-type bayonet and rifle-grenade launching flash hider, features not listed in HB545.