• Category Archives Education
  • Seven Things You Don’t Know About Body Armor

    Here are some facts that you need to know to be an informed body armor consumer:

    1) Body armor is heavy and hot. The soft armor isn’t much more than about five pounds, but it will wear you out if you aren’t used to having it on. Plate armor is really heavy. You won’t be able to move as quickly or get in and out of shooting positions easily while wearing it. Both are REALLY hot. I think the heat is even more difficult to handle than the weight. Make sure you stay hydrated while wearing it. A casualty is a casualty, whether it comes from a heat stroke or a bullet

    2) Body armor will make breathing under exertion more difficult. You will want your vest to fit you snugly so that it doesn’t move around when you start taking rounds. That snug fit will make it more difficult to expand your chest when breathing hard. You will have to take shallower, more frequent breaths if your heart rate is elevated while wearing a vest.

    3) Body armor will alter your shooting stance. The hard plates are the worst offenders in this regard, but even soft armor will interfere with your shooting stance. I normally shoot a handgun with my elbows locked, but I am unable to fully straighten my arms when wearing my soft armor.

    Armor may also necessitate the adjustment of the length of pull on your rifle or shotgun stock. Having anywhere from 1/2 ” to 2″ of extra thickness alters how you mount your long gun. You’ll need to practice with both pistols and long guns to get used to these differences.

    Read More…

  • UN to Set Up a U.S.-based Disarmament Specialist in NYC! (Bloomturd, CuHomo Smile)

    It’s no secret that President Obama and the would-be global governors at the United Nations are anxious to disarm the American people. Now they’re looking to hire some help in getting it done.

    From the UN’s Programme of Action and Arms Trade Treaty, to his own executive orders, Obama is pursuing every available avenue toward de facto repeal of the Second Amendment and the God-given right to keep and bear arms that it protects.

    Over the next few weeks, though, the UN is looking to add personnel to its gun grabbing gestapo. In a job advertisement open until July 26, the UN is looking for a “Disarmament, Demobilization and Reintegration Officer.”

    What will this bureaucrat’s bailiwick be? Here’s a summary of the job description as posted by the UN:

    Act as a Focal Point for DDR [Disarmament, Demobilization and Reintegration] components for 2-3 missions, responsible for planning, support to implementation and evaluation;

    Advise, develop and review (as appropriate) initial DDR functional strategy and concept of operations for further development into a full programme by the DDR component and the National DDR Commission;

    Provide Headquarters support in planning the civilian and military logistics support for DDR;

    Continually review DDR programme strategy and implementation through relevant documents, reports and code cables;

    Conduct field missions to assess implementation of established DDR programmes;

    Identify potential problems and issues to be addressed and suggest remedies to DDR units in the field; and

    Liaise with others (UN, regional organizations [sic] and Member States) providing DDR training.

    As if the list of tasks assigned to the disarmament specialist isn’t enough to fire up patriots who own firearms and refuse to have them seized by the UN or the Obama administration, the UN wants to base this office in New York City!

    Read More…

  • The US Spy Agency Logo Boasting That ‘Nothing Is Beyond Our Reach’ Has A ‘Sinister’ Backstory

    Nrol 39 NRO patch

    The National Reconnaissance Office came under fire in December when its logo for a new satellite boasted “nothing is beyond our reach” along with the image of an octopus taking over the world, but new documents obtained by Business Insider through a Freedom of Information Act request show even the agency itself believed the logo was “sinister” and was apparently excited about this.

    The NRO coordination sheet, a document passed along with information about the logo meant for signatures up the chain of command contains an interesting handwritten note with the NRO Director’s approval: “Ok,” it reads, “A little sinister!!”

    While the agency came under fire for its choice of logo at a time of increased scrutiny on U.S. intelligence services, the documents show the logo was approved on Feb. 13, 2012, long before Snowden’s disclosures.

    Read More…

  • N.Y. top court says cyberbullying law violates free speech

    New York’s highest court said on Tuesday that a law designed to criminalize cyberbullying was so broad that it violated the First Amendment, marking the first time a U.S. court weighed the constitutionality of such a law.

    The 2011 Albany County law banned electronic communication intended to “harass, annoy, threaten…or otherwise inflict significant emotional harm on another person.”

    The law was challenged on First Amendment grounds by Marquan Mackey-Meggs, who at age 15 in 2011 pleaded guilty under the law to creating a Facebook page that included graphic sexual comments alongside photos of classmates at his Albany-area high school.

    The Court of Appeals in a 5-2 decision said it was possible to pass a law outlawing bullying via social media or text message that respected free speech rights, but the county’s statute went too far.

    “It appears that the provision would criminalize a broad spectrum of speech outside the popular understanding of cyberbullying,” Judge Victoria Graffeo wrote for the court, “including, for example, an email disclosing private information about a corporation or a telephone conversation meant to annoy an adult.”

    Read More…

  • 6 Reasons Liberals are Incapable of Governing

    When you think poor governance, you think liberalism. Barack Obama could fairly be called the worst President in history and one of his biggest competitors for that crown is Jimmy Carter, whose name primarily brings to mind the words “malaise,” “hostage crisis,” and “liberal peanut farmer.” Lyndon Johnson? Other than the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which more Republicans voted for percentage-wise than Democrats, his presidency was a complete disaster.

    Some Democrats might point out John F. Kennedy’s time in the White House, but in all fairness, he’d probably have more in common with Republicans like Scott Brown or Chris Christie than he would with liberals today. Bill Clinton could fairly be called a liberal, but after the Republican Revolution of 1994 that came as a reaction to his liberalism, he was so chastened that he spent the last 6 years in the White House banging chicks and trying to fight off impeachment instead of pushing an agenda.

    Of course, liberal incompetence isn’t just confined to the White House. Who botched the hurricane preparation for New Orleans so badly that tens of thousands of people were stuck in a city built inside of a geological soup bowl when Hurricane Katrina rolled in? Liberals. Who bankrupted Detroit? Liberals. Why are states like Illinois, Michigan, and California on track to default on their debts in the next few years? Liberals.

    Why are liberals so bad at governing?

    Read More…

  • 4 Things You Need to Know If the Police Try To Search Your Phone

    In a rare unanimous Supreme Court decision yesterday, all nine Justices agreed that, yep, searching your phone without a warrant is indeed illegal. So if a police officer ever does try to dig through your digital dirt unlawfully, this is what you need to do.

    The often controversial Chief Justice John Roberts summed the whole thing up with a few delightfully biting lines in the court’s decision:

    The fact that technology now allows an individual to carry such information in his hand does not make the information any less worthy of the protection for which the Founders fought. Our answer to the question of what the police must do before searching a cell phone seized incident to an arrest is accordingly simple – get a warrant.

    In other words, the law is on your side, and The Daily Dot put together a nice little primer on how to handle any unlawfully snooping cops. It all boils down to the following.

    Read More…

  • The face of ‘gun control’: Murderer of own parents wants more guns banned

    Joshua Cooke, currently serving a 40-year prison sentence for the brutal murder in 2003 of his adoptive parents, has become the “gun control” movement’s newest ambassador. His “reasoning” is that if not for the federal ban of so-called “assault weapons,” still in effect when he bought the shotgun he used in his butchery, he would have used an AR-15, and murdered far more people. From the Daily Mail:

    ‘If I had an assault weapon, things would have been much worse,’ Cooke told Piers Morgan Live [surprise, surprise] from his prison cell.

    ‘I thank God I didn’t have an AR-15 or some other type of assault weapon because the way I was back then mentally, I would have gone to the mall that night or to one of my old high schools the next morning and killed as many people as I possibly could,’ he said.

    One could, of course, point out that even in 2003, nine years into the 1994 AWB, AR-15s in various configurations that did not meet the arbitrary definition of “assault weapons” were still easily available (as the Violence Policy Center never tired of wailing about), as were aftermarket attachments by which one could easily transform an erstwhile legal rifle into a banned, supposedly far “more deadly,” “assault weapon.”

    Read More…

  • ATF Backs Down on southern border states Gun Sale Reports

    For nearly three years, federally-licensed firearms dealers (“FFLs”) in southern border states have been badgered by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (“ATF”) to report sales of two or more rifles to the same person during any consecutive five-day period. Purporting to need this information to stop arms trafficking in and out of Mexico, ATF issued so-called “demand letters” to require indefinite reporting of multiple rifle sales by thousands of dealers, treating the independent FFL businessmen as though they were government employees.

    ATF has no authority to require these reports. Although the Gun Control Act of 1968 authorizes ATF to issue demand letters, these were to be issued only when ATF is investigating certain specific buyers or specific FFLs, and this is how they were used for many years. They were not designed to impose a new permanent reporting requirement on dealers.

    Moreover, in the Gun Control Act, Congress decided to require reporting only of multiple handgun sales, but not rifle sales. However, instead of taking its case to Congress to change the law and enact legislation requiring reporting on rifle sales, ATF took the law into its own hands.

    Read More…

  • New Google ‘Dangerous Products or Services’ Policy Targets Protected Speech, Self-Defense

    Apparently, Google failed to use its own search engine product before announcing their new “Dangerous Products or Services” policy, which is slated to go into effect “around September [of 2014].”

    Under the policy’s “Guns and Parts” guidelines, ads that are or “appear to be” promoting “[f]unctional devices that appear to discharge a projectile at high velocity, whether for sport, self-defense, or combat” would be banned. The consequence for showing-off your Constitutionally-protected goods? “Disapproval and [account] suspension.”

    But, unfortunately, it gets worse. Not only is the Google ban-hammer going to be swung at [actual] firearms and firearm parts (including “[a]ny part or component that’s necessary to the function of a gun or intended for attachment to a gun” such as–but presumably not limited to–”[g]un scopes, ammunition, ammunition clips or belts”), it’s also a Google no-no to advertise training aides like “airsoft guns, paintball guns,” and yes, even the dreaded favorite of hardened criminals, “bb guns.” One wonders if Google’s policy-makers watched ‘A Christmas Story‘ one too many times as a kid.

    But Google’s policy isn’t entirely devoid of humor. They’re also going to ban–gasp–”dangerous knives” that “are designed or promoted as products that can be used to injure an opponent in sport, self-defense, or combat,” as well as [a]ny knife design that provides a confrontational advantage.” Shoot (pun intended), I feel safer already.

    Read More…

  • What Does Noel Canning Have To Do With The Second Amendment?

    In the course of reviewing the Supreme Court’s latest decisions, one article I found to be particularly intriguing is law professor William Baude’s “Symposium: What divides the Court, and what unites it.” While the NLRB v. Noel Canning decision turned on a Constitutional analysis of presidential authority and executive over-reach (regarding recess appointments), what struck me about the case was how differently the Court’s two opinions (concurring in judgment) reached their respective conclusions.

    What does Noel Canning have to do with Second Amendment analysis and jurisprudence? Perhaps nothing at all, but consider first Professor Baude’s commentary:

    “Stepping back from the question of interpretive methodology and into a narrower role as critic, I cannot resist making two other observations about the awkwardness of the majority opinion.

    First, because Justice Breyer rejects the textual/original limits on the recess appointment power, he is forced to come up with some other dividing line to explain when a break is too short to count as a constitutional recess. (Almost everybody agrees that it would be absurd to read the Constitution in a way that let presidents make appointments in the middle of the night, or even over a weekend). He comes up with two: “A 3-day recess would be too short.” That is a hard limit, with no apparent exceptions. But then there is a second limit: “a recess of more than 3 days but less than 10 days is presumptively too short” but maybe “some very unusual circumstance– a national catastrophe, for instance” could justify an exception.

    Since the majority has fought its way free from the text, these numbers are fairly arbitrary. The three-day limit has the virtue of matching the three-day requirement in the Adjournments Clause (which limits the Senate’s ability to adjourn without House consent), but it is not at all clear why the Adjournments Clause applies to the Recess Appointments Clause. The real virtue of the number three, from the executive’s point of view, is that it is the shortest plausible number that allows them to solve “the nights and weekends problem,” which is likely why the Solicitor General conceded it at argument.

    The ten-day limit is derived from “historical practice,” and therefore from the accident of when the case happens to have been brought. As Michael Rappaport has chronicled, the executive branch has made recess appointments during shorter and shorter periods as time goes on. Had the Court decided the case decades earlier, it might have picked a bigger number. Had it decided the case decades later, it might have picked a smaller one. Either way, the Supreme Court’s imposition of a ten-day limit has a whiff of magic. (Why not, say, fourteen days? Or thirty or sixty, as Professor Rappaport has suggested?)” (Emphasis added.)

    Now, consider for a moment how the majority’s analysis might be applied to, e.g., firearm magazine limits.

    In spite of significant historical evidence to the contrary, both the Northern District of California and District of Colorado federal courts have found that arbitrary limits on magazine capacity do not violate the Second Amendment. (See, e.g., Br. Amicus Curiae of Pink Pistols In Support Of Plaintiffs’ Motion For Preliminary Injunction at 7 n.7, San Francisco Veteran Police Officers Ass’n v. San Francisco, No. 13-CV-05351WHA (N.D. Cal. Jan. 15, 2014) (discussing historical prevalence of large-capacity magazines; “the 1896 Mauser C/96 could accept a detachable 20-round box magazine, the famous 1908 Luger could accept a detachable 32-round magazine, and the Browning High-Power pistol designed in 1926 came standard with a 13-round magazine.”).

    Read More…

  • Here comes the death spiral: Obamacare’s Prognosis Grows Dark (Stay Armed – Trouble Ahead!)

    It was already pretty dim for anyone who understands how insurance works. I used to be an insurance underwriter (property and casualty, not health) and I’ve been wondering since the beginning how anyone thought Obamacare was going to work. The risk size versus the pool of insureds doesn’t make sense. If insurance companies can’t adjust for risk (which for the most part they can’t under Obamacare) what bizarro mathematics is going to save this ill-conceived juggernaut of bureaucratic bull?

    The answer is there is no math which will make it work. Either it gets tons more money from taxpayers or it dies.

    I suspect that the people who threw Obamacare together just figured they’d get the camel’s nose under the tent and everything would work itself out. So what if it meant raising taxes and increasing the deficit and debt. They didn’t have a problem with that anyway. Once the thing starts to completely implode there will be no choice (in their political calculus) but to bail out the system. Heck maybe we’ll even get a VA style single payer system out of it. Won’t that be great?

    Read More…

  • How to control the untouchable caste of bureaucrats in Washington DC

    Multiple illegalities coming to light in the IRS scandal provide a composite sketch of why government is America’s oldest, biggest and most pervasive lawbreaker — with no close second. And, it’s getting worse.

    Government bureaucrats have become America’s caste of untouchables. Their arrogance was displayed by IRS Commissioner John Koskinen in hearings before the House Committee on Oversight & Government Reform.

    Koskinen refused to apologize for lost — or destroyed — emails of Lois Lerner and other IRS officials linked to the political targeting of conservatives, and claimed no criminal acts were committed at the IRS.

    Too many government bureaucrats believe that they are not merely above the law, but that they are the law. They are smug because they are beyond the reach of real consequences.

    Read More…

  • The Media Promotes Bloomturd Propaganda – Especially When It Is False

    Bloomberg Mad

    A free press is a good thing for America to have. A free press that doesn’t parrot and exaggerate anti-gun propaganda would be even better.

    For example, take Natalie DiBlasio’s article for USA Today on Wednesday, titled More kids die in shootings than statistics show. For starters, the title doesn’t even accurately reflect the article’s content. The article concerns the claim by Michael Bloomberg’s gun-control group “Everytown” that some firearm accident deaths among children are mistakenly classified as homicides by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Contrary to the article’s title, Everytown doesn’t claim that the CDC undercounts firearm-related deaths among children in general.

    The article’s title is wrong for another reason. As the tables below show, firearm-related deaths among children, which include ages 0-14, decreased dramatically between 1981 and 2011, the earliest and most recent years of data reported by the CDC.

    Firearm-Related Deaths Among Children


    Homicides and





























    Firearm-Related Deaths per 100,000 Children


    Homicide and





























    * Note: The trends for the per capita rates are greater than those for the numbers of deaths because the children’s population increased 19 percent between 1981 and 2011. Rates are presented to the nearest hundredth of a point, but their trends are calculated without regard for rounding.

    The corollary to Everytown’s accusation that the CDC misclassifies some firearm accident deaths as homicides and thus undercounts accidents, is that CDC over-counts homicides. Setting aside Everytown’s accusations, the table above shows that when homicides and fatal accidents among children are combined, the per capita rate decreased 57 percent between 1981 and 2011. Clearly, both homicides and fatal accidents have decreased, the question remaining being “by how much, exactly?”

    Statistical accuracy is not Everytown’s motivation, however. The reason that Everytown claims that accidents are more common than previously thought is to promote several initiatives that it claims would reduce firearm accidents. The real goal of these measures, however, is to reduce firearm ownership by restricting the manufacture of firearms and by frightening people into not wanting to have guns within their homes in the first place. In Everytown’s vision, the latter goal would be achieved largely by congressional funding of “research” purporting to validate by scientific methods, the benefits of gun control and the dangers of gun ownership. This would be accompanied by a public relations campaign designed to convince people that, all things considered, guns cause more problems than they could ever possibly prevent.

    Restricting firearms manufacture: Everytown’s report recommends, “Congress should earmark funding for the Consumer Product Safety Commission to evaluate and set standards for emerging technologies that promote gun safety. . . .” Whatever may be said for technology, however, there’s nothing “emerging” about what Everytown has in mind with this recommendation. Gun control supporters have long wanted the Consumer Products Safety Commission empowered to set standards for the manufacturing of firearms. The goal, of course, is to set standards so high that no manufacturer could achieve them, certainly not at a price that many Americans could afford.

    Frightening people into not having guns at home: Everytown continues, “States should adopt stronger laws to prevent children from accessing unsecured guns,” even though states generally already have laws against reckless endangerment and negligence. As NRA-ILA has noted (bottom paragraph), training — not stronger “access” laws — has contributed to the dramatic reduction in firearm accidents over the last generation. Everytown also claims, “Doctors should be allowed and encouraged to promote gun safety,” knowing that gun control supporters in the public health field encourage doctors to pressure their patients not to keep firearms at home.

    Anti-gun research: Everytown says “Congress should increase funding for public health research on children injured and killed in unintentional shootings.” But such research would likely be conducted by the same anti-gun researchers whose gun control-promoting “studies” caused Congress to prohibit the CDC from using taxpayer funds for such purposes in the 1990s. Last year, President Obama urged Congress to provide $10 million for “gun violence” research, and the Institute of Medicine held a conference to identify topics to be studied. The researchers attending the conference were mostly the same people whose work Congress previously deemed a waste of the public’s money.

    Had DiBlasio done her homework, she would have learned that Everytown didn’t even come up with its self-described “analysis” of firearm-related deaths among children. In September 2013, the New York Times claimed that its “review of hundreds of child firearm deaths found that accidental shootings occurred roughly twice as often as the records indicate, because of idiosyncrasies in how such deaths are classified by the authorities.”

    DiBlasio also would have discovered that Everytown spokesman John Feinblatt was wrong in claiming, “The NRA has successfully lobbied against any funding for the Centers for Disease Control to decide how they categorize deaths.” The CDC classifies deaths of any and all sorts according to the World Health Organization’s International Classification of Diseases.

    Bloomberg is currently in the process of rebranding his anti-gun operations. “Everytown” now refers to his original anti-gun group, Mayors Against Illegal Guns, combined with his more recent group, Moms Demand Action (which began as One Million Moms for Gun Control).

    But no amount of shape-shifting can change the statistics to show anything other than a dramatic reduction in firearm-related deaths among children over the last 20 years.

  • NYCG Radio Episode #73 – 6/24/14 “All You Need Are Balls”

    New York City Guns Radio Episode

    CuoHmo & girlfriend renovated home without permits (Tax Evasion?), Bloomturd’s War on RX Drugs CAUSED Current Heroin Abuse Wave, Rob Astorino Wants to be our Governor – Wants CuHomo Gone, When Brooklyn juries gentrify, minority defendants lose!, Central Park Five — wrongfully convicted in 1989 rape — settle with city for $40 million, PTR making commemorative gun for South Carolina, Common Sense ‘Pop Tart’ Gun Bill Becomes Law In Florida (Anti Pussification), Gary Oldman Blasts Liberal Hollywood, Defends Mel Gibson and Alec Baldwin (Anti Pussification), Oldman Folds Like a Wet Hankie to ADL Pressure…Tries to Use Hebrew in Mewlings!, We are Being Manipulated by the Redefinition of Everything, Emanuel pushes gun control while Chicago runs red, Chicago: A Model Town for ‘Gun Safety’, Mass Shootings: It’s Time To Go Back To Institutionalizing The Severely Mentally Ill, Red State Dems to Gabby Giffords, Mark Kelly: Please Stay Away, Colorado Gov. throws F-bomb at sheriffs, says never talked with Bloomberg over bills, Republicans Challenge Regret-Filled Hickenlooper to Support Magazine Ban Repeal in CO, U.N. ON ‘COLLISION COURSE’ WITH SECOND AMENDMENT, SAYS SAF, Mother banned from child’s elementary agrees to settlement, Las Vegas gunman killed by police, not wife, authorities say, Cincinnati Station Says ‘No’ to PC Reporting on Racially Motivated Crime, Advocates of splitting California into six states gathering signatures, Libtalker Mike Malloy Vows to Start Panic if He Sees Open Carry Permit Holder with Gun, America’s expanding police state.

    WARNING! This Content Contains AWESOME VULGARITY

  • Emanuel pushes gun control while Chicago burns

    Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel earlier this month insisted that his brand of gun control should spread nationwide, but this past weekend’s Windy City body count – with six dead and more than 20 wounded, according to this morning’s Chicago Sun Times – does not instill public faith in his strategy.

    In the eyes of gun rights advocates, Emanuel is just one more gun prohibitionist whose ideas have no foundation in reality. Indeed, as this column has reported recently, prominent gun control advocates have admitted that their ideas don’t work.

    Earlier this month when Mark Glaze stepped down as executive director of Michael Bloomberg’s “Everytown for Gun Safety,” he told the Wall Street Journal, “when a mass shooting happens…nothing that we have to offer would have stopped that mass shooting (in Santa Barbara).”

    Late last month, Washington CeaseFire President Ralph Fascitelli also admitted, “I don’t know of anything…that could have been done to prevent this tragedy in Santa Barbara.”

    Read More…