Is it Politicians, or Are We Just Bad Parents?

I did not come from a hunting, shooting, fishing or any other outdoor sport household. I fished for sunny’s in our lake, but that was about it. My parents didn’t teach me any of that because they didn’t know very much to teach me. But if they had, I think I would have learned. This is an interesting article about how we’re becoming a “we used to,” society.

I have gotten to know a couple of my son’s friends, and it shocks me that here ,in a really rural area, surrounded by lakes and streams, most of them don’t even bother to go outside very much if at all.

I’ve certainly seen this: kids that grow up playing video games and doing not much else. They’d rather bury their faces in the phone than talk to anybody.

I don’t ever recall my parents strictly regimenting my TV watching, but neither my sister nor I grew up glued to a TV. My parents both did a lot. I don’t think if I had tried, I would have been allowed to glue myself to a TV or video game controller. I don’t know why we are letting our kids do that today.

I think we’ve gotten absolutely abysmal as a society in passing down our values and interests. I don’t think politicians are to blame for that. That’s something deficient in our parenting. What is it?

No Respect!

They don’t respect you Mike. They aren’t jumping on the Bloomberg train. They aren’t taking you seriously. You’re just a wallet to them. Ingrates! Every one of them! I think you should cut them off and make them fend for themselves. That’ll show ’em who’s boss. Save all that money for your campaign, and people that respect you.

Let Him Run!

I, for one, don’t see a downside to Bloomberg flushing his money down the toilet running for President. I do, however, see a pretty big upside (sorry about the paywall, but the headline pretty much says it all).

I’d say I don’t think Bloomberg has a prayer of taking the Dem nomination, but I would have said the same thing about Trump when he threw-in. Bloomberg has enough money to fund a Presidential campaign to the hilt while still keeping gun control groups at the same lifestyle they have become accustomed to.

I’d say his money is not to be underestimated, but it does look like enough key Dems are worried about this on Twitter. I think it hurt Creepy Joe. Probably helps Liz Warren and Bernie, since they will be the contrast. Bloomberg’s entry tells me that the money is worried about Biden’s ability to close the deal. They are right to be worried.

Join, Be Polite, Get to Know People, Volunteer to Help, Build a Movement, Save the Club

This seems to be going viral in the shooting community on social media. So much so that a reader from Colorado on Facebook sent me a message asking if it was my club. Then I noticed Illinois folks I know commenting. It is not my club. We were never this Fuddy at our Fuddy-Fudd Fuddiest, and we’ve gotten rid of a lot of the rules like this. This is a club up in Lycoming County, PA:

The rifle rule won’t even allow for high-power practice, and even bullseye rapid fire is 5 shots in 10 seconds. I suppose you could do your rapid fire string, and wait 50 seconds, and then shoot another one. But this does show this is not a club for actual shooters of shooting sports people are shooting today. Despite the fact that we’ve had our share of dumb rules, my club has always had the advantage of having membership that, for the most part, love the shooting sports. That’s not the case everywhere.

Yes, this club will likely die with the generation promulgating rules like this. The comments I see on social media are correct on that count. But I also think it’s incumbent on younger shooters to do what it takes to save places like this. Once we lose a place to shoot, we will never get it back. The club culture is also something unique that is worth saving. You won’t always succeed. There are clubs that are too far gone. But I found this advice seen on Facebook to be telling.

Fudds. I get it. But complaining will not help. Showing up at membership and board meetings will help. Showing up with a lot of guys helps more. Letter writing helps. Running for office helps. Being professional about it all helps. And if you “walk in the Fudd’s shoes” for a month you may discover the new policy may not be as stupid as you think. Sadly… 99% of rules exist only for the 1% that seems to mess things up for everybody. I would not put up with the new rules either and there may be an intelligent solution around it. Fudd’s do not care about complaining. They hear it all the time. You have to become a force.

That’s absolutely spot on, except for the part about “not be as stupid as you think.” I’d bet it’s about as stupid as you think. But that was clearly written by someone who has been very involved in club life. In most cases, club leadership is not as Fuddy as the caricature you’ve built in your brain suggests. Just in that position, you see a lot of idiocy, and it becomes temping to deal with that idiocy by rules. It’s the same temptation lawmakers face: when the only tool you have is a hammer…

The drive to do something, is huge. It’s not restricted to anti-gun people. There’s plenty of that attitude to go around.

Doesn’t Fit Narrative

Bitter has been watching coverage of this possibly foiled mass shooting from her old neck of the woods. Once the local news mentioned the shooter was confronted by an armed citizen, the Facebook Live feed was cut. I’m not kidding I heard that and shouted out to Bitter, “Kill the story! Kill the story! Priority one! The rubes must not know!” Not a minute later, Facebook cut the feed.

It’s looking like a domestic. So possibly the armed intervention wouldn’t have mattered. The local news is covering the armed intervener, but I can promise you this will not make any national news.

BOHICA

The media will run this up and down and sideways, unless it interferes with a narrative, in which case it will quickly disappear. Their coverage, their endless obsession with the shooter, will plant the seed in the brain of the next unhinged loser, and the cycle will continue. I’m sure, as we speak, the media are looking for narratives: did he buy the gun at a gun show in Arizona? God help us if he did. California has all the gun laws the antis could dream of, but that will go unmentioned. There will always be a pretext for needing more of the cake.

This is Officially the Dumbest Things I’ve Read in a While

Look out, The Inquirer is op-eding! Seriously, this displays so much ignorance about guns and ammunition, it’s astounding. This is the kind of stuff I’d expect children to come up with. But this was vomited onto paper by an adult and put up as an op-ed by presumably adult editors:

Today, one can walk into a gun shop and purchase, for instance, a .22, .38, or .44-caliber handgun. Most firearms are built to accommodate one size round only. So here’s what would happen if the manufacture of today’s standard-size rounds were outlawed, and .23, .39 and .46-caliber rounds took their place: Eventually, gun owners would run out of the old ammo, and their weapons would become paperweights.

Oh my God. Seriously? I don’t even know where to begin. But I’ll hit a few points:

For most firearms, this would be a barrel change, and that’s about it. Criminals will have no trouble obtaining new barrels for old guns.

Ammunition can be manufactured in basements. At this point the only parts I order out for are primers and powder. I know someone who casts and polycoats bullets in his basement, with a machine that makes thousands at a time. This very very stupid proposal by a very very ignorant person isn’t going to change that. I have enough brass to keep shooting for a decade or more. And for new brass? Presumably the police and military aren’t going to be made to retool, so there will still be plenty, and you can’t regulate it. It would be more pointless than regulating pot, which at least smells bad.

Lastly, does it matter if someone gets shot with a .22 or a .23? Seriously. Grow up. Even after this law is passed, what have you accomplished? Nothing. Absolutely nothing. Mexico has restrictions on ammunition similar to what this guy proposes, and Mexican cartels have no trouble obtaining restricted firearms and restricted ammunition, and a .38 Super will kill just as readily as a 9mm.

Huge Hole Blown in PLCAA

The Supreme Court has denied cert in the Remington case. At issue is whether Remington violated Connecticut’s Unfair Trade Practices Act. From the Connecticut Supreme Court ruling that was on appeal to SCOTUS:

Specifically, if the defendants did indeed seek to expand the market for their assault weapons through advertising campaigns that encouraged consumers to use the weapons not for legal purposes such as self-defense, hunting, collecting, or target practice, but to launch offensive assaults against their perceived enemies, then we are aware of nothing in the text or legislative history of PLCAA to indicate that Congress intended to shield the defendants from liability for the tragedy that resulted.

The end result will likely be that states pass laws that eliminate or frustrate the firearms manufacturers ability to market. Much like happened with tobacco. Clearly now there’s significant legal hazard in marketing firearms.

UPDATE: Dave Hardy, who actually practices appellate law, has a take on this as well. He seems to suggest the plaintiffs still have quite an uphill climb. But discovery will now proceed.