Straight Case

Re-purposed blog

Straight Case, formerly a simple gun-blog dedicated to older cartridge weapons, will now become the home of Straight Spine, a prospective new organization which I am putting together.

Watch this blog for details.

Tweeting again

...on Twitter here: @Straight_Case

PayPal up to their usual Anti-American tricks

Cross-posted at Rivrdog blog, here.

Via Tom Tancredo, former congressman from CO, "Sheriff Mack", who's about to announce for Congress out of TX, was putting on a "Constitutional Sheriff's Convention" in Vegas, apparently last weekend or about now. Donations had been solicited to defray the expenses, and apparently, the Sheriff made the mistake of using PayPal as a medium of exchange.

After $40,000 had already come in through PayPal, PayPal froze Sheriff Mack's money, mumbling some excuse about the legality of his organization to receive donations.

I've got news for PayPal, they likely just committed Federal Wire Fraud, by allowing the donations to come in and build up a sizeable kitty, then seizing the money, without warrant, lawsuit, court order, anything. Good luck getting any Obama-appointed US Attorney to file those charges, though.

This is about par for PayPal, which never saw a Defender of the Constitution they didn't want to screw over. You will recall, I'm sure, the flap a few years ago about PayPal doing the same thing to one or more gun-auction companies.

The ownership of PayPal evidently just hates the Bill of Rights, there's no other way to express it. Next week, I'm beginning to solicit funds for my new political action company which will seek to end the hegemony of the Greens over motorized boating in Oregon. I've spent several hours at my business bank, JP Morgan Chase, with my very patient business banker teaching me the ins and outs of handling money online. One of the first questions he asked me was if I was going to use PayPal. I said no, and told him why. He then said I had made a wise choice, since of the many ways to handle money online, PayPal was the most expensive, at 4% of each transaction. The one I am going to go with will charge me either 1.35% or 1.78%, depending on whether I scan a card or key it in. No one else charges as much as PayPal.

PayPal are not only Anti-Constitution, they are robbers to boot. Make a firm vow now to never use them again, there are too many other good choices. You can start with Google Wallet, for one choice that's about half the price of PayPal, and so far, Google doesn't seek to trash the Constitution with their business dealings. Google Wallet goes both ways, you can pay with it or collect with it. Opening a merchant account takes only seconds (if you are incorporated). There are other choices for taking in funds via the Internet, but you have to watch three things: the percentage fees, any monthly (minimum) fees, and equipment cost. Some, like The Square, throw in the equipment, but charge a higher fee to make up for it, and some, like Merchant Anywhere, charge less fee but the charge for equipment to connect to your smartphone or tablet is substantial.

Whatever you pick to make or take payment electronically, a patriot will never pick PayPal.

H/T To Brother Michael, up on the Mountain.

"USA Today" firearms poll re-do may be a scam - UPDATED !

***************************************************************************************************************************

UPDATE: 011211 1303 PST: Thanks to Joe and Uncle, my fears are somewhat relieved on this old, moldy poll. Joe explained it in comments, on the Rivrdog post. I guess that means that the only real worry, if you want to spare some, is that USA Today has a garbage dump where they should have a Web bureau in their org chart. However, since neither Joe nor Uncle could say that data is NOT being mined from the responses to the old, moldy poll, we should still be on our guard about it. My advice is stay away. We gunnies proved 4 1/2 years ago that we can put more fingers to more keyboards faster than the anti-2A crowd, and for the life of me, I don't see any value in continuing that fight. We WON for Christ's sake! The Brady Bunch KNOWS we won. Put that trophy back in the trophy case, people, we don't have to keep playing the 2007 playoffs over and over again.

***************************************************************************************************************************

I've gotten an email which purports to link to the USA Today poll on support for the Second Amendment. Since I knew that this was a pre-Heller poll taken back in 2007, I began to sense something might be wrong.

Someone is probably collecting/trapping the IPs of those favorable to the Second Amendment. It COULD be a beneficial organization, but it also could be a nefarious one. I suspect the latter.

Here's my evidence:

First, the link location, and do NOT paste this link, just remember it. Break out a medieval quill pen and parchment if you have one, and ink it down.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/quickquestion/2007/november/popup5895.htm

Now, go to a real USA Today site and look for polls; you'll find that there is no way to access any. The paper (at least the online edition) doesn't have a web page devoted to a daily poll. There IS something called a USA Today/Gallup poll. Here's the latest one of those which I can find using Google and Ask.com, and it's a month old:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/story/2011-12-12/2012-election-swing-states-poll/51844930/1

OK, compare the two URLs I have on this post so far.

The URLs are NOT similar in any way.

Now, search on "usa today quick question polls". There is nothing on that search page to indicate that USA Today ever ran a "quick question" poll after the 2007 firearms poll, and I suspect the reason for that is because the huge response from gun owners (and anti-gunners) thrashed their host so badly they quit doing it.

Now, I'm not a real geek. I have ZERO technical training in this area of Internet technology (and I slept in my own bed last night, and didn't get close to a Holiday Inn Express, heh). That disclaimer aside, I suspect that this latest "re-issuance" of the "USA Today" poll is a fake.

Some evidence of the fake.

All the previous REAL USA-Today polls come up as a full page when you visit their site, but this one does not, it comes up at about a one-sixth page or less, tucked into the top left of a large, otherwise blank page. Also, it is unusual for ANY poll to be presented just as a simple "yes-no-no opinion" box. Any outfit with a reputation to uphold, like USA Today has, would have some other writings and explanations on the page, and probably some links to take you back to a page with more of their content (and some ads, which pay the bills). Survey Monkey is the standard for polls you don't want to pay for but need to post nowadays, and their poll page will always link to back to their website.

I firmly conclude that this is not an actual re-issuance of the 2007 USA Today poll, but is a fake, and that leaves the Big Question: whose fake is it? Also another important question: when you visit a page, any page, you leave a trail to that page. Who is mining the data from these trails to that page? Are they friend or foe?

Unless you know the answers to the above paragraph's questions, don't punch the "send" button on this ersatz "poll".

Now, if some REAL geek wants to set me straight, and offers the science to refute my suspicion here, I will gladly publish that information, with or without retribution at the request of that author, whatever is desired.

Until then, take warning and don't fall for this phishing attempt.

Re-posted from the main blog.

Reloading bleg

Need some ideas here:

Suppose you're into reloading. I am, and most serious gunnies I know are as well. Now, modern smokeless powders last a long time in their original containers, but there is some degradation over time. If you wanted to store some powder against an uncertain future of the sales of such, would it be in your interest to vacuum-seal it?

With modern vacuum-sealing systems so easy to use and available for reasonable dollars, most modern households have one of them on hand.

Would the vacuum bags work to seal quantities of smokeless powders? Would any Feddle laws be broken in doing so? If repackaging is an issue, what if you repackaged it small enough so the packages could be stored inside the original containers?

Inquiring minds want to know.

Cross-posted at Rivrdog blog.

Analysis: Joplin, MO as a mini-Armageddon

I've seen two of these analyses now, and this one, by Brownell's (the mega gun-parts place) is the best. Go read it.

OK, I'll save you the trouble of reading it again...you're right, it DOES NOT MENTION firearms as Emergency Equipment, either to have on hand (Shelter in place) or to take with you (Bug Out Bag).

There are two ways to look at this omission:

1. The writer believes we are smart enought to add guns in ourselves, and since mention of them is controversial, to say the least, in a major declared Emergency, he thought it better left unsaid.
2. The writer somehow feels that there won't ever be a need for self-defense during a major Emergency.

On the first hand, since the title of the author's ongoing series is "Frank talk about Guns", I think that he should have "talked frankly", and NOT left it up to our imaginations to fill in the blanks.

On the second hand, if he really feels this way (no need to consider self-defense), the writer is an air-head who should never have written ANY article on surviving Armageddon.

Frank Brownell, you owe us an addendum to this article. In that addendum, you need to tell us who advised you to NOT mention firearms and their place in any Emergency scenario. If it was yourself, tell us that. We don't need another Bill Ruger in our midst, and if you are of his persuasion (selling guns, but not selling the Second Amendment) we need to know that. If it was someone else, and YOU control that person's job, fire their un-Constitutional butt NOW. If you don't control their job, at least "out" them so we can be advised, should their garbage hit the web again.

Mr. Brownell, the Second Amendment IS controversial, and none of us can afford to shy away from that controversy. If we do, each time we do, it opens a little crack in our defense of our civil right to keep and bear arms.

Let's hear from you, Mr. Brownell: as much as you might want to think it, you're NOT above the fray.

Anti-gunners getting personal?

...according to Joe, who should know. He once lost a job because of his pro-gun stance. See also this post on Snowflakes in Hell.

My take on it? I've actually used my real name on my Rivrdog blog a couple of times, and I refer to my home town over there all the time, so I won't consider it much of a threat if anyone actually READS those old blogs and puts two and two together with the aid of the snoopy Google.

What I WILL and DO consider a threat is actual trespassers. They should be advised that they WILL be physically arrested, with force appropriate to their compliance to arrest, and booked into jail (at the option of the local PD, they might get a cite-in-lieu if they've turned nice by the time the squad car shows up). Trespassers' recording devices, if any, will be seized (I don't need a warrant, I am a private person on his own property), searched for evidence of illegal recording of private activity (illegal in OR without permission). If such evidence is found, additional charges will be added as appropriate.

If my interrogation of the trespasser(s) (again, I can do it, I'm a private person on his own property, having just made a lawful arrest and detention) demonstrates that an organization sent the trespasser(s) to my property to harass me, then I will engage counsel and sue that organization using the Federal RICO statutes. Having been the target of such types of suits myself when I was an active cop, I know how THAT game is played. Treble Punitive Damages is a powerful tool. That's a threat to CSGV's very existence, and they should think twice before sending anyone here.

To the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence I say this: come here (you know where I live) and do your worst. If your worst crosses the line, you will pay the price. Period.

I'm not going to lose any sleep, and I ALREADY go strapped to the mailbox up the street, so nothing much changes, except for CSGV, who has had their 15 minutes of fame, and can now crawl back under their rock, because the sunshine of the Internet is shining on them, and that's what cockroaches are supposed to do: avoid sunshine.

Stand by for PSH* over a stupid statistic

* PSH = Pants-shitting hysteria. This news will certainly set off the anti-gun people, or as we now see them here, the anti Civil Rights people (under the Second Amendment, you and I have a Civil Right to Keep and Bear arms).

Maybe, just maybe, we can put the PSH to good use to spread some sunlight under the cockroach-sheltering rock of the TSA called the "terror watch-list".

Considering that it's likely I could be on that watch-list because I write a gun-blog and maintain a Founder's View of the Second Amendment (i.e., it's a check on the Central Government), any sunshine on that dark place is beneficial.

I'm a retired cop, and did some work on the fringes of the FBI's Joint Terrorism Task Force during my last 3 years in police service, so I know how the game is played. I am about ready to call for the end of the Terror Watch List, and the end of the Transportation Security Alliance and the  Patriot Act as well. None of these policing tools of National Security is being managed well under either the TSA's or the FBI's usage policies. The TSA is well-known for it's ham-handed approach to things, and the FBI uses the machinery of the Patriot Act to save them time and money, that's all.

It's a considerable stretch of the Constitution to even say that such things as an un-appealable placement on the Terror Watch List even passes Constitutional muster, and we're not supposed to STRETCH the Constitution, we're supposed to give Liberty the benefit of the doubt, according to the very Spirit of that guiding document.

 

Ballistics Data resource

...for real-world ballistics, most examples with photos of bullets fired into ballistic gelatin. I can't believe I've never used this before.

H/T to Oleg Volk.

JPFO outs the 900# Gorilla

[beamed over intact from my Rivrdog blog]

...in the never-ending debate over the Second Amendment.

Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership can be counted on to pointedly remind us of the seamy side of gun control. That would be seamy as in the seams in the shrouds that must be sewed up to contain the bodies of all the victims that tyranny has killed with the aid of gun control (that figure is estimated at 100 million, in the past century alone).

Continuing in that frame of reference, they started a "buy-cott" to encourage freedom-loving individuals to purchase high-capacity pistol magazines as a way to telling Rep. McCarthy of NY that she supports tyranny with her AWB-2 ban on NORMAL and high-capacity magazines. Their original literature listed 5 reasons to support the "buy-cott".

Now the JPFO has added the "Sixth Reason".

This is why we need to support the JPFO. Alone among major outfits claiming to support the 2A, the JPFO will actually FRONT the REAL reason we have the Second Amendment: to provide a constant reminder that an armed populace makes government tyranny of the overt kind difficult to pull off.

If you follow Sipsey Street Irregulars, you've seen this line of thought before, but you won't find it as a conversation-starter with the NRA, nor will you find the NRA headlining it as a reason to donate to their coffers. If you dig deep into some NRA discussions, you will find the REAL history of the 2A, but you have to dig deep.

Yep, it's the "Invisible" Gorilla in the Room.

[On my Rivrdog blog] I followed the NRA's lead a few years ago, and toned down my postings about a modern American Insurgency. I lost over 2/3 of my readers when I did that. It seems that almost 2,000 people a day came to THIS (Rivrdog) blog to be informed about how to stay awake to the possibility of having to engage the Government in acts of armed resistance. I cut those readers off at the knees, and they went away forever. That was MY decision, and MY bill of consequences to pay.

A few years older, and hopefully, wiser, I've come back to the REAL Second Amendment. No, it's not about hunting, which is NOT even mentioned in the Constitution, probably because it was taken for granted by the Framers. No it's NOT about collecting firearms, about shooting competitions, or even directly about commerce in firearms.

The Second Amendment exists because the Framers were wise enough, and knew their History well enough, to predict that Government would eventually get too large, and would likely trend towards tyrannical when it did. The only EFFECTIVE solution to that possibility, if it were to happen, would be an armed citizen uprising that removes such a tyrannical government from power. 

I hope the bold statement above didn't scare anyone. Heavens no, we don't want to scare anyone. It is useful, however, to identify those who ARE scared by the Second Amendment and it's possibilities, because those folks will be the new "King's Loyalists", and will have to be recognized as a force supporting tyranny themselves, when and if the time comes.

Now you know where I stand. I'm with the JPFO, and I'm NOT about to lay down this sharp stick I prod the NRA with. As I see it, the NRA, being the largest and most effective 2A lobbying group, has a DUTY to talk, OPENLY, about the REAL SECOND AMENDMENT. As gun-bloggers, WE have a DUTY to remind the NRA to get back on the job.