Seeing “RED”

Seeing “RED”

MIAC Post09

Above is the aftermath of a “Red Flag” LE incident in Annapolis, Maryland on Monday, Nov 5th, 2018. Here’s a quote from the Chief of Police. ““If you look at this morning’s outcome, it’s tough for us to say ‘Well, what did we prevent?’ Because we don’t know what we prevented or could’ve prevented. What would’ve happened if we didn’t go there at 5 a.m.?”.

Here’s something else that was mentioned in the article, “Police said Willis answered the door at 5:17 a.m. with a gun in his hand and initially put it down next to the door as he first spoke with the officers.” then, “Police said he ‘became irate’ when officers tried to serve him with the emergency risk protective order and picked it up again.”. Well I bet he did get irate. Tell me you’re gonna confiscate my firearms without my “Day in Court”, and I’d be “Irate” to say the least.They are called “Rights” and “Due Process”, PERIOD, END, STOP!

Here’s the deal. If you come to my door in the early morning hours, I answer it with a gun in my hand. What sane, situationally aware person wouldn’t? I know the kind of world we live in. On another note, I have been on the receiving end of a formal accusation in a situation that could have ended badly for me, at least from a livelihood perspective anyway.  Fortunately, my “Rights” and “Due Process” was intact and adhered to.

Approximately 4 years ago, while working for a State Law Enforcement agency, I got a call from an Investigations Unit Sergeant (“IU”, our Internal Affairs Dept.) sayin’ I needed to come to their office, regarding a complaint lodged with the Attorney General’s Office against me as an Officer. Upon arrival, I was read my Rights, and advised I was accused of being a “White Supremacist” and that I trained/was training Anti Government militias to overthrow the government.

My first response was to laugh. My second was to realize this could, if nothing else, get me suspended, let alone, possibly fired. Fortunately, the IU Sgt not only knew me, but had known and worked with me for well over a decade. The bottom line though was he still had an investigation to conduct. He asked who I thought would do this, and my response was that I knew of one guy who would go that way, and that he was an “Ex Felon, Federal Extortionist” that a few of my friends and I had tried to help out. Once we found out he was still up to the same old ways, we cut ties and made sure everyone, who knew of our collaboration, knew why.

MIAC Post07

The IU Sgt, said he couldn’t find anything on this “Courtland Grojean” character except the pic/website above. He said he’d look into it more, and if I found anything myself, to let him know. I went home and started digging, and found all the evidence I needed to prove the culprit was who I figured it was.

I reported it to the IU Sgt, and after it was cleared as an “Unwarranted” complaint (Three levels of complaint findings are: the worst is “Substantiated”, then “Unsubstantiated” and finally, total exoneration is listed as “Unwarranted”) , I got permission to run a story on my blog about it. The individual in question has since lost pretty much everything he was involved in except one of his blogs, and even that he doesn’t allow comments on anymore LOL. Wonder why?

My friend Kenny at “Knuckledraggin’ My Life Away” went through even more BS than I did with him, because the guy we like to refer to as “Scammy the IIITard” took him to court twice. Kenny and I pretty much “own” his other two “primary” blogs since he’s had the same post up about us for around two years now. I’d call that “ownership”. He doesn’t realize,”Nno one cares”.

I say all that to point out this. Both Kenny and I had “Rights”, “Due Process” and recourse. We both were vindicated, and except for the headache, some of out time and some money from Kenny’s pocket (Pete/CA at WRSA got a “Go Fund Me” going and had what Kenny needed for court in less than a day), we came out ahead against a guy who lived on the other side of the country from me (he did this from Idaho). We spanked him hard. He lost, and he’s been losing ever since.

This post is about the proposed TAPS (“Threat Assessment And Safety”) Act. No matter what they tell us, WE WILL NOT GET DUE PROCESSING OF OUR RIGHTS FROM THE GOVERNMENT IF THEY PASS “RED FLAG” LAWS! Is this clear enough for you? Below, I go through just a few glaring issues I found in the Bill they are offering up. When I think about what Scammy the IIITard could have done if TAPS had already been law, I’ll tell you right now, that could have ended tragically for all concerned.

MIAC Post02


You know where else I recently saw “And for other purposes”?

MIAC Post03

2019 Assault Weapons Ban Bill

Are you seeing a theme here? Unless you have ill intent and want unlimited power, you do not place the term “For other purposes” in a Bill/Law that will initially violate the Rights of a Citizen.

“This Act may be cited as the ‘Threat Assessment, Prevention, and Safety Act of 2019’.”

It is the sense of Congress that— (All caps are my focal points. words in bold are from the Bill or MIAC report). BTW, They used “Sense” and “Congress” in the same sentence. That’s how you know it’s BS.

(1) incidents of targeted violence are impacting our Nation FREQUENTLY and INDISCRIMINATELY;

It’s not really all that frequent or indiscriminate, from a historical perspective, unless you’re talking about the gang/drug violence in places like L.A., Chicago, Baltimore, etc.. If Congress wants to address a National issue and embarrassment with Federal force, they need to start addressing that problem. Of course those places are run by Democrats, and have been for decades so….hands off, right? By the way, how many “Mass” shooters, percentage wise, were Leftist/Communist/Democrats? How many were on some type of Psychotropic medication? Askin’ for a friend…..

(2) a collaborative, multi-disciplinary, and multi-jurisdictional BEHAVIORAL THREAT ASSESSMENT and MANAGEMENT process on a Federal, State, local, and Tribal level complements the development of better methods for STRATEGICALLY PREVENTING targeted violence in communities, INCLUDING SCHOOLS;

They have had the ability to “assess, “manage” and “prevent” (report) individuals with a “history” for decades, example: Devin Patrick Kelley, AKA, the Texas Church Shooter in 2017.

“He had served in the Air Force at a base in New Mexico but was court-martialed in 2012 on charges of assaulting his wife and child. He was sentenced to 12 months’ confinement and received a ‘bad conduct’ discharge in 2014, according to Ann Stefanek, the chief of Air Force media operations.”

Conveniently, the Air Force did not report his “indiscretions” to the FBI’s Criminal Justice Information Services Division which controls the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS). To me that is criminal and civil negligence on the part of the Air Force personnel required to report it.

Of course no one would be held responsible because it was just an oversight, right? Tell that to the families of the 26 murdered victims and the 20 wounded survivors. A man with a rifle, that would again be banned from production (an AR-15) if the AWB2019 gets passed, is the one who stopped his rampage. He readily admitted in an interview that he would have responded quicker if he hadn’t had to LOAD HIS MAGAZINES before he left his house.

“Strategically Prevent”? They can’t PREVENT it on an “Tactical” (Police response) level and usually get there too late, just in response. They definitely can’t do it on an “Operational” (State) or “Strategic” (Federal) level.

“INCLUDING SCHOOLS”? Cuz it’s “For the children”, right? It’s always mentioned, but rarely proves to be beneficial to children. “Gun Free Zones” are a perfect example. Tell this to the 28 kids who died in Waco in April 1993.

(3) the United States has the capability to RAPIDLY DEVELOP BEHAVIORAL THREAT ASSESSMENT and management guidelines and best practices;

   (A) identifying individuals who are exhibiting patterns of concerning behavior that indicate an interest, motive, intention, or capability of carrying out an act of violence;

Does this include violent video games? They say “Interest” but use the term “or” which means the terms, “interest”, “motive”, “intention” and “capability” are/can be mutually exclusive to the other terms mentioned. What about the military or Law Enforcement? They have an “Interest” in violence in regards to their vocation.

   (B) investigating and gathering information from multiple sources to assess whether an individual described in subparagraph (A) poses a threat, based on articulable facts; and

I’m pretty sure Facebook or other social media posts/rants with be considered “Articulatable Facts”.

   (C) the subsequent management of such a threat, if necessary.

See the above “management solution” worked out in Annapolis MD on November 5th, 2018.

The 2009 MIAC report was a threat assessment. That report gave Local, State and Federal Law Enforcement a “Behavioral Guide” to the “Who” and “Why” of…wait for it……….”RIGHTWING EXTREMISTS” and “WHITE SUPREMACISTS”.  How many of you have been accused of being a “Rightwing Extremist” or White Supremacist” in the last three years. I know President Trump has. The MIAC Report was a government sponsored ASSESSMENT of who would more than likely be domestic terrorists, and Vets were at the top of the list.

(4) the United States should encourage the sharing of such guidelines and best practices for STREAMLINED and COHESIVE use across the United States;

Think about that for a minute, then refer back to the “Texas Church Shooter” mentioned above. A military entity (The U.S. Air Force) could not properly report the conviction, sentencing and discharge of one of it’s Airmen, but we’re supposed to believe Local, State and Federal LE will be on board and efficient while dealing with yet another new bureaucracy?

(5) establishing such guidelines and best practices is an important step toward PREVENTING targeted violence;

Can you say “Minority Report”?

MIAC Post 05 Minority_Report_Poster

MIAC Post04

In our case, the “Precogs” could/would be any of the “Ex’s” in your life. The neighbor who hates your Trump MAGA hat or sign in the yard. A fellow employee wanting the promotion ahead of you (what, you think you having all your guns confiscated won’t make it to your workplace?). The FB “Enemy” who wants to get the upper hand in an online argument. Better yet, they will just “MIAC” categorize you and make you a “Bad guy”, “Cuz the Gov said so in the official ‘Threat’ report.”.

(6) such guidelines and best practices should account for DIFFERENT NEEDS of communities across the United States; and

“Different Needs”? So they’re gonna discriminate by location, but the law will be Federally, “All encompassing”? I thought “Lady Justice” was blind, and that as Citizens, we were to receive “Equal treatment under the law”? Does “Different Needs” mean things won’t be acted upon and/or officially reported after the initially report because conveniently, the individual in question is some sort of minority, whether racially, sexually or religiously?

That’s conveniently how the media and government normally play it when they find out the shooter being reported on doesn’t fit their desired paradigm (They need it to be White+Christian, Conservative, Heterosexual, Gun Owning, Trump Supporter) right? We are not allowed to address “Different Needs” throughout the country when it comes to other things like educational requirements, are we? When it comes to the Feds, it’s “One size Fits All” because they know best, right?

(7) it is in the national security interest of the United States to develop such guidelines and best practices.

“National Security interests”?  Getting control of illegal immigration and the threat posed by foreign actors from drug cartels and terrorist organizations who are infiltrating our border is “National Security”. The mentally disturbed, individual, American Citizen with a gun, bomb or vehicle, and an intent to harm specific or random people is not.

To add some context to what I said earlier on the 2009 MIAC Report. Below is their assessment from the official PDF of Vets returning from a war zone.

(U) Disgruntled Military Veterans 

(U//FOUO) DHS/I&A assesses that rightwing extremists will attempt to recruit and
radicalize returning veterans in order to exploit their skills and knowledge derived from military training and combat. These skills and knowledge have the potential to boost the capabilities of extremists—including lone wolves or small terrorist cells—to carry out violence.

The willingness of a small percentage of military personnel to join extremist
groups during the 1990s because they were disgruntled, disillusioned, or suffering from the psychological effects of war is being replicated today.
— (U) After Operation Desert Shield/Storm in 1990-1991, some returning military
veterans—including Timothy McVeigh—joined or associated with rightwing
extremist groups.
— (U) A prominent civil rights organization (The recently disgraced Southern Poverty Law Center [2 lies in 1], you know, the “Bastions” or was it bastards of “freedom” and “conservative thought”, who will protect you, as long as you’re a leftist/progressive/communist bent on tyranny and Rights violation)  reported in 2006 that “large numbers of potentially violent neo-Nazis, skinheads, and other white supremacists are now learning the art of warfare in the [U.S.] armed forces.”
— (U//LES) The FBI noted in a 2008 report on the white supremacist movement
that some returning military veterans from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have
joined extremist groups.

MIAC Post01

Excerpt from above: “embracing violent rightwing extremist ideology are the most dangerous domestic terrorism threat in the United States”-MIAC Report 2009.

Remember when I showed the incremental tightening of the restrictions in this AWB Post? They are doing it now, when describing the “Domestic Threat” as well. The above description was in an official report verbiage from ten years ago, below is CNN Anchor Don Lemon saying the biggest terror threat in the U.S. now is white men a few months back. Start at 30 seconds in.

The “Don Lemons” of the world have no problem generalizing and profiling their perceived enemies, but if we point out that the threats are “Leftists”, “Communist/Socialists” and/or “Muslims”, we are beat down for being some type of “Phobic”.

MIAC Post06

So it’s a “National Strategy”, but not a “National Standard”….but it’s Law? I thought “Law” and “Standard” were supposed to be synonymous? Law is applicable to all, correct? Is someone above the “Law” Standard? Finally, below is an excerpt at the end of the Bill. I thought section “9.b” was both funny and ironic.

MIAC Post08

I said this in this post, “The time is coming when you will have to make a decision. Will you stand up and fight when attacked, or will you grovel at the “master’s” feet hoping for the scraps of “Rights” he gives you?” You have got to figure it out your response before the figurative noose is around your neck while you’re sittin’ on the back of a high strung, skittish horse.


"Parata Vivere"-Live Prepared. 


They Learned From History: The Enacted 1994 AWB And The Proposed 2019 AWB.

They Learned From History: The Enacted 1994 AWB And The Proposed 2019 AWB.


The listed purpose under the header for H.R.1296 reads as such, “To regulate assault weapons, to ensure that the right to keep and bear arms is not unlimited, and for other purposes.”

Read that again, “TO ENSURE THAT THE RIGHT TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS IS NOT UNLIMITED”. The second half of the Second Amendment says, “The Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED. Another way to define “Shall not be infringed”, is to say, “Shall not be limited”. The header purpose for AWB ’94 said, “To make unlawful the transfer or possession of assault weapons.”. Sounds like the agenda has changed. Personally, I don’t think it’s changed at all. Obviously, they have just slid the mask down.

Here are just some comparisons I’ve noted between the 1994 AWB of September 1994, and the Proposed “Feb 15, 2019 H.R.1296” Bill.

Part 1 (1994) says, “The term `semiautomatic assault weapon’ means:

  • (A) On this line they show a list of nine weapon types with lists of the manufacturers and the model names/numbers. Look it up under the link above.
  • (B) “A semiautomatic rifle that has an ability to accept a detachable magazine and has at least TWO of the following:
  •    (i) a folding or telescoping stock;                    `
  •    (ii) a pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon;
  •    (iii) a bayonet mount;                    “
  •    (iv) a flash suppressor or threaded barrel designed to accommodate a flash suppressor; and                    “
  •    (v) a grenade launcher”
  • (C) a semiautomatic pistol that has an ability to accept a detachable magazine and has at least TWO of;                    “
  •    (i) an ammunition magazine that attaches to the pistol outside of the pistol grip;
  •    (ii) a threaded barrel capable of accepting a barrel extender, flash suppressor, forward handgrip, or silencer;
  •    (iii) a shroud that is attached to, or partially or completely encircles, the barrel and that permits the shooter to hold the firearm with the nontrigger hand without being burned;
  •    (iv) a manufactured weight of 50 ounces or more when the pistol is unloaded; and
  •    (v) a semiautomatic version of an automatic firearm; and
  • (D) a semiautomatic shotgun that has at least TWO of–                    “
  •    (i) a folding or telescoping stock;
  •    (ii) a pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon;
  •    (iii) a fixed magazine capacity in excess of 5 rounds; and
  •    (iv) an ability to accept a detachable magazine.”.

(31) The term large capacity ammunition feeding device’—

  • (A) means a magazine, belt, drum, feed strip, or similar
    device manufactured after the date of enactment of the Violent
    Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 that has
    a capacity of, or that can be readily restored or converted
    to accept, more than 10 rounds of ammunition; but
  • (B) does not include an attached tubular device designed
    to accept, and capable of operating only with, .22 caliber rimfire


Primary Arms Blog Post11

Under the 1994 AWB this rifle with 10 round magazine was OK for sale, according to the listed criteria from that Bill. That being a rifle with detachable mag could have the threaded barrel and be “Legal”. Under this proposed 2019 AWB, this rifle would be banned for sale.

“AWB: Part Deux” (2019) says,

(A) A semiautomatic rifle that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine and any ONE of the following:

  • (i) A pistol grip.
  • (ii) A forward grip.
  • (iii) A folding, telescoping, or detachable stock, or is otherwise foldable or adjustable in a manner that operates to reduce the length, size, or any other dimension, or otherwise enhances the concealability, of the weapon.
  • (iv) A grenade launcher.
  • (v) A barrel shroud.
  • (vi) A threaded barrel.

(B) A semiautomatic rifle that has a fixed magazine with the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds, except for an attached tubular device designed to accept, and capable of operating only with, .22 caliber rimfire ammunition.

(C) Any part, combination of parts, component, device, attachment, or accessory that is designed or functions to accelerate the rate of fire of a semiautomatic rifle but not convert the semiautomatic rifle into a machinegun.

(D) A semiautomatic pistol that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine and any ONE of the following:

  •   (i) A threaded barrel.
  •   (ii) A second pistol grip.
  •   (iii) A barrel shroud.
  •   (iv) The capacity to accept a detachable magazine at some location outside of the pistol grip.
  •   (v) A semiautomatic version of an automatic firearm.
  •   (vi) A manufactured weight of 50 ounces or more when unloaded.
  •   (vii) A stabilizing brace or similar component.

(E) A semiautomatic pistol with a fixed magazine that has the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds.

(F) A semiautomatic shotgun that has any ONE of the following:

  •   (i) A folding, telescoping, or detachable stock.
  •   (ii) A pistol grip.
  •   (iii) A fixed magazine with the capacity to accept more than 5 rounds.
  •   (iv) The ability to accept a detachable magazine.
  •   (v) A forward grip.
  •   (vi) A grenade launcher.
  • (G) Any shotgun with a revolving cylinder.

(H) “All of the following rifles, copies, duplicates, variants, or altered facsimiles with the capability of any such weapon thereof:”

This section goes on to list 88 different weapon types and models by manufacturer and model name/number. Here are a few of note:

  • (XIV) Colt Match Target rifles
  • (xii) Hi-Point Carbine.
  • (xv) SU–16
Primary Arms 1x Cyclops03

Under the this proposed 2019 AWB, they list the KelTec “SU-16”, with no exception for the CA (California compliant) models. It also is not listed in the exemption list of the “APPENDIX A—FIREARMS EXEMPTED BY THE ASSAULT WEAPONS BAN OF 2017” shown at the bottom of the 2019 BILL.

(I)”All of the following pistols, copies, duplicates, variants, or altered facsimiles with the capability of any such weapon thereof:”

This section goes on to list 42 different pistols by manufacturer and model name/number. Here are some to note:

  • (i) All AK–47 types.
  • (II) CZ Scorpion pistol.
  • (ii) All AR–15 types.

(J) “All of the following shotguns, copies, duplicates, variants, or altered facsimiles with the capability of any such weapon thereof:”

This section goes on to list 12 shotguns by manufacturer and model name/number. Here’s one to note:

  • (iv) All IZHMASH Saiga 12 types.

(K) All belt-fed semiautomatic firearms, including TNW M2HB and FN M2495.

(37) The term ‘large capacity ammunition feeding device’—

  • (A) means a magazine, belt, drum, feed strip, or similar device, including any such device JOINED or COUPLED with another in any manner, that has an overall capacity of, or that can be readily restored, changed, or converted to accept, more than 10 rounds of ammunition; and

      (I guess no ducktape allowed)

  • (B) does not include an attached tubular device designed to accept, and capable of operating only with, .22 caliber rimfire ammunition.


This is what the law says right now after subsection (u),

[(v), (w) Repealed. Pub. L. 103–322, title XI, § 110105(2)Sept. 13, 1994108 Stat. 2000.]

This is what the proposed 2019 AWB would put into the law,

(a) In General.—Section 922 of title 18, United States Code, is amended—

(1) by inserting after subsection (u) the following:

“(v) (1) It shall be unlawful for a person to import, sell, manufacture, transfer, or possess, in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce, a semiautomatic assault weapon.

“(2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to the possession, sale, or transfer of any semiautomatic assault weapon otherwise lawfully possessed under Federal law on the date of enactment of the Assault Weapons Ban of 2019.

“(3) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to any firearm that—

“(A) is manually operated by bolt, pump, lever, or slide action;

“(B) has been rendered permanently inoperable; or

“(C) is an antique firearm, as defined in section 921 of this title.


My takeaway from this is that they are playin’ the “Incremental” game (imagine that), but are definitely closing the perceived gaps they had in AWB 1994. I wonder how long it’ll be till bolt guns with detachable magazines and threaded barrels, or pump action shotguns with more than 5 round tubular mags are on the banned list? What, you think there will be a “Sunset Clause” if this gets passed? Fat chance! Remember, they learned from ’94 and their proposed Bill for 2019 shows that.

I’m not aware of this Bill makin’ it out of Committee….yet, but in the climate we’ve seen in the last few weeks, it’s only a matter of time. Is there a chance they will pass this bill without modification when it’s proposed? Probably not. Don’t be fooled though, if they win in 2020, this or something similar, but probably more draconian, will be out before the swearing in is completed.

The reason I went to the effort here is to show what they desire and have publicly put ON PAPER to try and take your RIGHTS away. The fact that they would propose this is treason. The first one in ’94 was treasonous as well, but we as a People did not call them on it (Americans weren’t mad enough, maybe?). What are you gonna do if they do pass it? Bury your guns? You better get a handle on your options and your possible courses of action before we get there. In the moment is not the time to decide.


“Parata Vivere”- Live Prepared.



Here Comes The “Fatal Funnel”….?

Here Comes The “Fatal Funnel”….?



Primary Arms Blog Post11

According to the ’94 AWB criteria, this M1A was still OK since it only had a threaded barrel and a detachable mag. 10 round AWB “acceptable” mag in gun. 20 rounder below it.

I haven’t written anything “Politics” related in a while. It’s mostly because I’m sick of feeling as if I’m beating my head against a brick wall in trying to convince those who might read what I write that certain things (like history) are important in weighing your present decisions.

Decades ago, I used to be involved with a group that was pretty squared away. We leaned towards training for offensive “Take it to the bad guy” type missions, instead of my present Survivalist defensive mindset. I realized in my late 20’s that all that “Offensive mindset” would do, as civilians, is get us killed needlessly and thus, I corrected my direction in preparedness and training. The situation described below was during my participation in the group mentioned above.

Training pic 93

A training pic circa 1993 before the ’94 AWB was implemented

Here’s the situation. The House of Reps passes the “Federal Assault Weapons Ban” in May of 1994. My friends and I thought we could read the writing on the wall, so we started preparing for what we thought was the inevitable “war”. Over the course of the Summer of 1994, I purchased about $2,000 worth of gear, weapons and ammo.

Hell, I remember making thirteen hundred dollars worth of purchases in one day from Centerfire Systems and Classic Firearms, that summer. This purchase involved two RPK type AK’s, 5 cases of ammo, and five 75 round drums. The group I was involved with at the time used the AKM type rifle as the standard, and well, you get the picture.

Some other things that impending (and what we believed was coming with it) ban brought about was a need for caches and a recon of areas to set up base camps and RON’s. We systematically went about checking and designating those areas in a 50 mile circle, and putting “under” (reports and all), excess/extra gear and needed equipment.

What were we thinking? Well, first we believed the Senate would pass the AWB (it was close like the House vote was) when it got to them (I think we were figuring the end of Summer). Second, we knew Clinton would sign it. Third, many of us were under the impression that Slick Willie would be more than happy to bring in UN troops to assist in a more draconian firearms ban that he was rumored to be floating with the help of certain Gov officials.

Training pic 1996

A training pic after the ’94 AWB taken in approximately 1996.

Were our preps in vain? I don’t believe so. The purchase of those firearms and mags at that time, paved the way for better purchases later after a few were sold for 3x the cost. Besides, that activity by the government PROPERLY motivated us to do something we should have been doing in the first place. Was the rumor (#3) correct? Who knows. It didn’t happen, but everyone knows he was definitely considering something like that. Keep in mind what Feinstein said about her gun ban opinion. She said she would ban every firearm from civilian possession if she could get 51% of the vote.

Good things that came from the AWB? The concentration on designing reliable, compact pistols like the Glock 26 and 30 because 10 round mags….. An appreciation for only having to pay $15 for a quality AR mag. Being able to easily find a large assortment of quality semi auto mil type rifles without having to drive 2 or 3 hours to that obscure, out of the way gun shop, then  payin’ $1500 for a “Pre Ban” rifle that was only $350 four years earlier.

I tell you that story from exactly 25 years ago to tell you this. Don’t panic (unless you don’t have anything gun related). Keep calm. Make a realistic purchase plan if you haven’t already, and concentrate on the basics (solid, reliable rifle with 7 mags, reliable pistol with 3 mags, and ammo for both) . I told you almost three years ago that President Trump’s election was nothing more than a brief reprieve. If President Trump does what many believe he wants to do on gun control, it was a little more brief than I believed.

Here’s the thing though. He hasn’t done it yet. He talks a lot of smack, then usually backs off the rhetoric a little. We’ve been at this point a few times in his last three years. Yes, he banned bump stocks. So what? Reagan banned the production of new machine gun receivers made after 1986. My personal belief is that bump stocks are an effeminate affectation of someone who wants to play, but isn’t serious about realistic weapon’s usage. Kinda like the “Operator” selfies by “Never Been-But Wannabees” on social media.

Regardless, I don’t believe he should have done anything to their availability or legality, useful or not. I personally think he banned them as a token on the alter of  the “Commie Gun Grabbers” so he could calm the BS after the Vegas shooting, but, who knows. He wheels and deals so it’s anyone’s guess.

The bottom line is that “SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED” is pretty cut and dried for those with a moderate education in the English language and some common sense. Will you go to war over a Federal “Red Flag” law passing? No, you won’t. For the three of you it will be a noisy version of suicide. Will “Red Flag” laws make a difference? NO, THEY WON’T! Why? Well because the institutions who are supposed to report things to the Feds for NICS can’t even do that or do it right. The Air Force was one of ’em, and people died in a church in Texas because the AF “employees” were criminally incompetent.

As an AP Staff member mentioned to our group the other day, “Conservatives” and the liberty minded are a lot more pissed off than they were 25 years ago. I agree. One of the reasons is that the last three years, if not the last three decades, have shown us what utter contempt, Gov elites like the Senior Executive Service members have for the working American.

They define the “This is for me and not for thee.” mentality. This is just a small issue in the “Mountain of Crap” the DC crowd is doing. Do I think those in President Trump’s Administration are trying to find, fix and eliminate the problem? I really don’t know. One step forward and two steps back seams to be the norm these days, and I haven’t seen any gas leak, let alone a gush, out of “The Swamp” that is the District of Criminals. It appears as if it’s just a big distraction from the economic “balloon”, and that “balloon” is leaking badly when you know what figures to look at.

The President has weaponized his Twitter feed, but even while the things he tweets about appear to point out a real problem, which the MSM dutifully and immediately calls “mean”, they still only end up as “fluff” and the follow on “substance” is generally, non existent.

So to the problem at hand, gun control/background checks/gun confiscation/weapons bans,….etc., etc., ad nauseam, and what to do about it. Just like 1775 at Lexington and Concord, YOU are not gonna start a war unless it is a reaction done in self defense to being attacked/fired on. As risky as letting it go that far is, you won’t start it because you/we don’t/won’t control the narrative, and most will not start a conflict with a narrative they can’t control.

On a side note, and speaking of “the narrative”. During a convo with friends and associates the other day, one of them asked why no CCW holders engaged and fired on the shooter in the Texas Walmart, with Texas being the firearms mecca that it is. The implication was that if you can carry it and have it on you, you should engage the bad guy. I mentioned that I have one prerequisite in that instance, to get those I care for, and am responsible for, to safety.

I will not draw my weapon until I see the shooter and he appears to be a DIRECT threat to me and mine. As a civilian I will not run to the sound of the shooting if I have others in my charge. If I don’t have them with me, I definitely will not run around with my weapon drawn and possibly be engaged by LEO’s or Armed Security and/or be labelled as “Shooter #2”. I don’t like it, but this is common sense in the day and age in which we live.

If they pass Fed “Red Flag” Law they pass it. If they pass another Assault Weapon Ban, they pass it. I don’t believe they will pass a total ban because they don’t have the personnel and logistics to deal with that kind of overt and deadly grief. Regardless, plan accordingly NOW! You should have read that writing on the wall three years ago, but that’s water under the bridge, isn’t it? So let’s try to be constructive.

Keep things like price in the aftermath of the ’94 AWB, and the Newtown shooting in mind. Glock 21 .45ACP 13 round mags were $80 in 1999 during the AWB, and even .22LR ammo went through the roof after the Newtown shooting as examples. Buy 20, 30 and 40 round box mags and drum mags for your weapons while they are cheap. Buy as much ammo as you can to feed those weapons while it’s relatively cheap. Buy at least one or two “Assault/Battle” rifles.  Buy a couple pistols while you can. Buy the gear needed to carry a fighting load for your weapons, and related survival equipment. Check in with John at UWGear for quality equipment that does the job well. Buy spare parts for all the weapons you have so you can maintain them after a ban. Buy and learn how to use reloading equipment, then stock up on components. Buy gear to cache your excess or back up equipment.

Gun ban post01

Things to get now if you don’t have them. 20, 30 and 40 round mags for your rifle. Drum mags if you can get them for your rifle. Standard and large capacity mags for your pistols. Gear to carry your mags, pistol and supporting equipment.

Finally, get training on not only how to use those weapons, but how to use them and survive in non permissive environments. Both Brushbeater/NC Scout and I (MDT) offer classes on small unit tactics, operating as a small team and survival. The time is coming when you will have to make a decision. Will you stand up and fight when attacked, or will you grovel at the “master’s” feet hoping for the scraps of “Rights” he gives you?

As a Nation, we’ve been at that juncture before. There is a good chance we will eventually be there again. Steel yourself to that eventuality by making your course of action decisions now. “In the moment” will be too late, and a falter on your part will only be survivable due to Divine Providence.

The bottom line is this. You don’t have a crystal ball, but you do have historical references to guide your decisions. Prudence, tempered with realistic, historical reflection creates it’s own path to sound decisions. Good luck.


"Parata Vivere"- Live Prepared.