Comments Subscribe to Personal Liberty News Feed Subscribe to Personal Liberty

Right On Target

October 5, 2010 by  

Right On Target

When firearms enthusiasts get to chatting about their favorite subject, bystanders might as well get comfortable. I routinely enjoy these discussions, if only to see guys nicknamed “Da’ GunZlinger” use “milliradian” in a sentence.

Over the weekend, I participated in one such impromptu panel of citizens. The original topic was “best scopes for a new AR rifle” (my suggestion: learn to shoot well with iron sights, then spend as much on optics as your wife will on that next pair of shoes she’s only going to wear once). True to form, the conversation trended toward liberal assaults on the Bill of Rights. One poster mentioned an interesting development in New Jersey, where State Senator Jeff Van Drew has introduced a bill to ease the burden on Garden Staters who wish to legally carry their firearms.

The bill is far from ideal; among its tenets is a requirement that New Jersey residents who wish to carry pay an annual fee of $500. However, closer examination of S2264 reveals some noteworthy details. 

I am troubled by the annual levy of $500. This is the United States of America, not the Pelosi Palisades Golf and Racquet Club. There is no membership fee in the Bill of Rights. In fact, the Constitution itself says so — most recently in the text of the 24th Amendment. The idea that any government, whether Federal, State or municipal, would apply an onerous charge to the exercising of a citizen’s rights is beyond repellent. 

But there are some aspects of Van Drew’s bill which pique my interest in a positive manner. Surprisingly, Van Drew is a Democrat, although I’m guessing he’s a bit lonely at party conventions. And his bill would begin rectifying New Jersey’s heavy-handed carry laws.

Under current law, seekers must convince their local police chief AND a superior court judge of dire “justifiable need” for a carry permit. Not to seem impolitic, but if the need in question is that justifiable, it’s probably too late to track down Sheriff Andy and Judge Roy Bean. Leave it to a liberal to put that point into perfect perspective by missing the mark entirely. According to Bryan Miller, Executive Director of some wingnut group called Ceasefire NJ:

"It’s very simple: Do we want to be standing in line at a grocery store, at a movie theater, sitting next to someone… not knowing whether that person is legally carrying a handgun?"

Um… that would be a resounding YES. Mr. Miller, I LOVE the idea of every half-baked crackhead, mugger, thug and villain having that exact question weighing on their minds. 

Currently, the Garden State requires fingerprinting and background checks for each handgun purchased, whether the purchaser intends to carry it — or use it to prop up the coffee table. And shooters had better plan ahead if they intend to go pop a few off at the range. During transport, each pistol must be placed, unloaded, in a fastened case and carried in the trunk of a vehicle. If the vehicle has no trunk, the unloaded handgun must be kept in a locked box out of reach of passengers. “See here, Mr. Carjacker. If you would kindly wait for me to unlock my trunk…” 

President Barack Obama’s “home” state of Illinois has among the most restrictive carry permit laws in the nation. And yet, when it comes to violent crimes per/100,000 population, the margin between the Sultanate of the Sainted Community Activist and Tony Soprano-ville isn’t exactly crosshair-thin, with Illinois suffering nearly 200 more annually per/100K. Washington, D.C., which has gun ownership laws nearly as restrictive as the Third Reich, would be a runaway No. 1 if it was a State, with nearly double the rate of any State. NJ-S2264 would set about correcting that extraordinarily bad math. 

Some might suggest that S2264 is a poor piece of politics. It adds unnecessary and illegal fees, layers of bureaucracy and will come nowhere near undoing the injustice current laws visit upon the law-abiding citizens of New Jersey.

But this is New Jersey — the reputed final resting place of Jimmy Hoffa. And in the last year, citizens have chosen Chris Christie as their Governor and now a Democrat State Senator is taking a chisel to the liberal wall around the Garden State.

Let’s look on the bright side and call S2264 a baby step in the right direction.

Ben Crystal

is a 1993 graduate of Davidson College and has burned the better part of the last two decades getting over the damage done by modern-day higher education. He now lives in Savannah, Ga., where he has hosted an award-winning radio talk show and been featured as a political analyst for television. Currently a principal at Saltymoss Productions—a media company specializing in concept television and campaign production, speechwriting and media strategy—Ben has written numerous articles on the subjects of municipal authoritarianism, the economic fallacy of sin taxes and analyses of congressional abuses of power.

Facebook Conversations

Join the Discussion:
View Comments to “Right On Target”

Comment Policy: We encourage an open discussion with a wide range of viewpoints, even extreme ones, but we will not tolerate racism, profanity or slanderous comments toward the author(s) or comment participants. Make your case passionately, but civilly. Please don't stoop to name calling. We use filters for spam protection. If your comment does not appear, it is likely because it violates the above policy or contains links or language typical of spam. We reserve the right to remove comments at our discretion.

Is there news related to personal liberty happening in your area? Contact us at

  • Bo

    Move to Texas !!!!!!!!!!! CHL land

  • TIME

    Hi Ben, I don’t own any gun’s but I know how to use them, and quite well too. I believe what I have is a natural talent for hitting a target, not unlike the fact I also have perfect pitch.
    So I also can play most any stringed instrument with very little effort, as well can copy most any voice.

    The point is I strongly feel that “everyone” should have to learn how to use both a Long Gun and a Hand Gun. When I was growing up we as kids were all tought how to shoot, we even used to shoot rabbits for dinner etc.. Not everyone will be good at it, but at least the can understand and respect a Gun for what they are.

    I also feel that just as I am able to defend myself with my hands as well other body parts, afterall you don’t start Karate at age 3 and end up at 60 with out learning something along the way.
    But most people don’t have that advantage so a gun creates a equal footing.

    To charge a fee of that much just to be able to carry a gun is rather greedy on the part of the politicians, as far as I see it.

    As that also allows the state the “advantage” to take gun’s away for lack of payment or other possible issues that can be made by way of a unilateral move.
    Afterall as we all know to well, if you start with any government tax, it never goes down, and seems to have no bounds in the head room area’s of upward added tax levels.
    let alone rules that seem to be endless in nature, most with little to no real time value. Just a few thoughts.

    • 45caliber

      “To charge a fee of that much just to be able to carry a gun is rather greedy on the part of the politicians, as far as I see it. ”

      It is mainly meant to prevent the poor people from being able to pay to carry. Just as the “Saturaday Night Specials” were banned to prevent them from even owning a gun. In the minds of the rich, only the rich should have the right to protect themselves.

      • Average Joe Patriot

        “In the minds of the rich, only the rich should have the right to protect themselves.”

        Nicely put, 45caliber. It leads one to consider: Why?

        1. Obviously because they feel they have more to protect (as though human life itself were less important than their wealth).

        2. Because if they didn’t immorally or unethically acquire these riches themselves, they almost certainly rub elbows with (or were perhaps born into a family of) people who did, and they acquire the mindset along with the wealth. The natural paranoia of the thief.

        3. They know on some level that being the beneficiary of a system which “redistributes” wealth by taking it from honest producers and pooling it in the hands of non-producers (starting with bankers and politicians and their legal lackeys, and channeling it through layers of bureaucracy and legal complexity to soulless corporations, with a large sop to the welfare state to keep the lid on things), is the sort of behavior which pisses people off. And while the rich don’t worry much about our being pissed off, an ARMED pissed off citizenry is something to truly fear.

        Hence police, military trained in urban and guerrilla warfare, and ultimately mercenary armies. All equipped and paid with your money to protect wealth earned by, and taken from, you: the producer. By threat of, or by actual use of, force. I.e., at gunpoint.

        When they come for the last weaponry held by citizens, they will do so with guns paid for by…you. Unless history, for some odd reason, fails to repeat itself.

        • 45caliber

          Sen. Feinstein was asked one time if she would give up her own gun (she carries) once she made it illegal to own one.

          “No, I can’t,” she said. “There are people out there who don’t like me and I must have a gun to protect myself with!”

          As if the rest of us don’t need protection. Perhaps because if we get killed it won’t matter since we aren’t important like she is.

          • JLC

            45cal — If I may, an aside to Sen. Feinstein: Diane, there is a reason that there are people out there who do not like you! Any idea of what it might be?

          • Average Joe Patriot

            You make the point, sir. Thank you. I carry for the same reason you do, and she does–I don’t fault her for it. Someone I’ve never met may try to kill me (or someone I like, or a family member I may or may not like, perhaps an innocent bystander) today, and I don’t want the bad person(s) to do that thing. Not even to someone whose politics I abhor.

            It’s up to me to be responsible in the situation. I don’t choose it (been there, not by choice), but I will deal with it to the best of my ability. Having a gun in one’s immediate possession can truly be a help, but you’re aware of the responsibility the moment you choose to carry. It’s no more a toy or an affectation than is a chainsaw or an automobile or a pile driver.

            One argument I’m sick of is: What if they take it away from you and turn it on you? (This is a reason NOT to carry, that bad people out there may want want to use a gun on you? Any gun? YOUR gun?)

            Apparently they came unprepared. Your advantage, your responsibility. Or…you can cower behind your shopping cart.

            Learn to use the thing before that happens. I would do my best to protect a lying senator or an illegal food-stamp-immigrant in a grocery line, any helpless fellow human being if I possessed the power to do so. Insofar as weapons go, I do possess that power, even in the supermarket checkout. I appreciate that I’m not alone in that. I know others around me may carry concealed, I just wish we were closer to 100%, the responsibility were not simply mine. It’s literally luck of the draw. Some idiot yanks a gun, if I or any other shopping neighbor is fortunately in good position the clown is down, janitor mop-food. Same as if he/she tries to drive a ballpoint into the cashier’s throat. (Dangerous things, pens…seriously, our elected officials should look into them sometime.)

            This may be wrong in many ways, but not as wrong as the senseless death of the girl running the cash register.

            We should, all of us, go armed (bees do it, note how well they get along). It’s Constitutionally legal (for good reason), and it’s a great deterrent to crime and tyranny. Which is what our founders intended by the Second Amendment, which they did not pen lightly or casually (in context, just why is it the second, right after freedom to speak one’s mind?). Freedom from tyranny…by return threat of force of arms. You don’t call out the militia when someone pulls a knife on people in your neighborhood grocery store. You or your neighbor shoots the silly bastard’s ass into its next incarnation.

            I believe in reincarnation. Not to worry, he’ll come back more polite, as a helpful produce stocker, perhaps. Meanwhile, while innocent bystanders are texting the constabulary on their electronic defense network behind their shopping carts, the cashier will still be alive to check them out when the dust settles and the janitor arrives.

            Too bad for the perp. His parents should have taught him not to stick his tongue in a light socket or grab a chainsaw by the front, either.

        • independant thinker

          “1. Obviously because they feel they have more to protect (as though human life itself were less important than their wealth).”

          Oh they do think life is more important than their wealth just not the lives of us “little people”. Only their lives are more important in their eyes.

          • Average Joe Patriot

            Independant: So’s your’s, in your eyes. In fact, perhaps in mine, depending on whether our mutual survival makes sense to us both. The problem I have is the same one Kate8′s pointed out repeatedly in several other threads: They clearly are trying to actually kill us. They want you, Independant, and me, most of the rest of us…dead.

            What THEY are doing is killing people. Us. Every defense we develop: vitamins, minerals, herbs, chiropractic, acupuncture, gardening, e-cigarettes, zip-guns for defense…THEY insist upon taking away. Immediately, or by increasing degrees. Our contributions to oppressed nations: nullified by the CIA, US foreign policy, NATO, the UN, etc. Our homegrown, grassroots organizations: co-opted from day one. (Forget the Tea Party, okay? They now own it.)

            At what point do we claim: “Foul!” and take up whatever weapons we possess against Them? They are, in point of fact, using our espoused causes against us, have we no unalienable right to stand up? No? You don’t think so?

            Then sit down and shut up. As you’ve been trained. We do not need your voice. You’re a mere individual.

            Like me. But I’ve a “disorder,” I can’t shut up. So I say, go nuts, all! Let your OWN voices be heard.

            Just make sure it’s your’s. Not that of some troll or party hack.

            What the hell, I won’t shut up either.

          • Average Joe Patriot

            And, Independant? To avoid confusion, the last part of that was not directed at you. I went off on a rant against the Powers That Be, lost sight of whom I was responding to (the website could use some simple re-engineering, so we could review that to which we’re directly responding…hello, owners?).

            My rage is against the PTB. Should I seek anger management counseling? Ask the ghost of Francis Marion. (Google, kids. Google! Some of the grownups know.)

      • BrotherPatriot

        The fee and all like it is utterly rediculous and an infringement upon the rights of the American citizen.

        As stated in the Bill of Rights…
        A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

        Nothing else needs to be said…as it’s self evident.

        Also, every elected official that tried (voted for or supported) to take our right to keep & bear Arms…should be fired…effective immediately. They are in direct violation of our Constitutional Rights. Period.

        • Jim H.

          BP, I agree, one shouldn’t pay a fee or need a permit to be covered by The Bill of Rights.

          • dan az

            Jim H
            That’s why I live in Arizona!

        • 45caliber

          Actually, I don’t think they should be fired … I think they should be fired ON.

          • Lawrence Edward Calcut

            @ 45Caliber

            I laughed when I read your reply to… whatever. We don’t have to shoot them, just vote them out of office, and pray they will shoot themselves.

            Why not declare Novermber as “Hunting Month for Varments” and make it open season at the voteing booths.

            45… I like all you say, nice work. By the way, what make is your 45.

          • 45caliber


            Actually, I have three right now. An Ithica, a Hansen, and a High point. The Ithica is a 1911A1. All are okay. The High Point is the cheapest and it is a good buy.

          • JeffH

            45caliber, the Ithica 1911A1, if it is a complete gun rather than a mis-match(Ithica slide/Colt frame etc.), is worth a few bucks They were made for only a short time during WWII.

          • JeffH

            $5caliber, I’m not familiar with a Hansen. Is it a custom?

          • Denniso

            Oh yes, the rants of children facinated by shiny objects…get a life.
            Don’t you understand that EVERYTHING in this country costs $$? You want to go to a park, you pay $$…you want to be included in ‘free speech’ you buy a computer or TV or books or newspaper…you want to have a protest march, you pay for a permit…you want to drive on a highway, you pay for the roads through taxes…you want to build a house, you pay for a permit…you want to stay alive as a citizen, you buy food and pay for drinking water,one way or another.

            This is a capitalist country folks…accept it.

          • 45caliber


            No, the Hansen is not. In fact, it is a lousy gun. I can normally hit the center of a target with the other two without trouble but I’m lucky to hit anything on the target with the Hansen. I wouldn’t recommend it to anyone. In fact, I’d dump this one but hate to farm it off on someone else thinking they are getting a good defence gun.

          • Vicki

            Denniso demonstrates an abysmal lack of understanding of capitalism when he says:
            Oh yes, the rants of children facinated by shiny objects…get a life.”

            Ignored. Ad hominum attack and not a very good one.

            “Don’t you understand that EVERYTHING in this country costs $$? You want to go to a park, you pay $$”

            No you don’t. Lots of parks around here have no “fee” at all. And any “park” (presuming you mean public) that charges admission is doing so to feed the government beast not a capitalist.

            “you want to be included in ‘free speech’ you buy a computer or TV or books or newspaper”

            You only need a soapbox and not really even that. TV, Book, Newspaper purchases are not you exercising “free speech” so are not relevant.
            Why to come to this very website you do not need a computer or even a cell phone. Go to any public library. One of the few uses of public funds I almost approve of.

            “you want to have a protest march, you pay for a permit”

            Paying the government beast again. Still not capitalism.

            “you want to drive on a highway, you pay for the roads through taxes”

            Rather obviously feeding the government beast.

            “you want to build a house, you pay for a permit”

            There is that government beast again. Still no capitalism.

            “you want to stay alive as a citizen, you buy food and pay for drinking water,one way or another.”

            Grow your own and there is lots and lots of drinking water all around. Especially during the rainy season.

            “This is a capitalist country folks…accept it.”

            Your attempted smear of capitalism is summarily rejected.

          • Denniso

            Ever hear of privately owned parks that charge a fee? And,you think that we would have the largest economy and the most powerful military
            w/o a good road system? You think the roads and railroads are a tragic
            result of big gov’t? Lucky for us you had nothing to say about anything in the country 60-70 yrs ago.

        • Average Joe Patriot

          Drop the first and last commas from the sentence. Earlier versions didn’t have them, I think (better check it out). Makes it clearer. It essentially says: Since the militia has guns, the general populace needs to have guns, too.

          An army of nitpicking lawyers can start WWIII over the placement, displacement, or misplacement of a comma, but that doesn’t alter the original intent of the message. Personal defense is a requisite of a free people. Not a prerequisite: rather an ongoing requirement. I may defend your ailing mom in the supermarket checkout line but, by God you’d better be ready to do the same. And so should she.

          As the founders realized that firearms are a part of modern human existence (were then, still are today), that tools and weapons are as they have always been, the sine qua non of human survival in the weird Darwinian absence of human razor claws, riving fangs, poison stingers, and so forth, the tool-making/tool-using capability in humans is what we have left to us.

          In what universe does it make sense for some humans to gain dominance over the rest using this God-given capability? By denying others use of this same innate tool-using capability?

          In Japan, sword ownership was banned among the hoi polloi, the commoners. So they developed other ingenious tools: notably the sai (could catch and snap a sword in two), manriki gusari (weighted throwing chains), shuriken (damn, my eye!), and nunchaku (also known as numchucks by people who can’t spell but fully understand the inertial physics and inalienable survival aspects involved).

          You just can’t keep a good tool-using species down.

          Keep your sharp-edged rocks dry-to-the-grip, people. We may actually be going back that far. (Some of us may pick up a few guns and ammo along the way, to maintain the skill set. And I say good for you!)

          I don’t want to come back as a toad.

          • Vicki

            just as a miner side note the whole argument about the militia being the only ones authorized by the 2nd amendment is specious since who is the militia? Why it is the whole of the people.

            George Mason: “I ask you sir, who are the militia? They consist now of the whole people.” (Elliott, Debates, 425-426)


      • JeffH

        Yep, the fee is onerous. I’ve been contemplating acquiring a CC permit in my county of Fresno, CA. I just have a hard time justifying the $300 or so it takes to get it. $300 can buy 1000rds of ammo too.
        Like NJ, California is also excessive, but I’m am lucky because Fresno county does issue CC permits unlike most of this state. Oh the decisions we’re faced with and besides, we at least can still open carry in most of the state, or can we.

      • CJ

        This was the exact objective of the Constitution in keeping States Rights and Federal Rights separate. The federal government shouldn’t homogonize the laws. Each state passes what they want, and if the residents don’t like it, they move to one they do. Eventually, the states who enact poor laws will have no one to enforce them against, and the laws change. But, unlike business related laws, where states try to entice businesses to relocate, people don’t, so easially, move when the laws are not to their liking.

        • 45caliber

          Like California.

          Last year if it hadn’t been for the illegal aliens, California would have LOST over a million population who decided the taxes were too high and moved somewhere else.

          • dan az

            Yea and guess where they came to?
            about 1000 per week!Now that they broke the bank there starting to leave!

          • Average Joe Patriot

            Dan and 45: Then come on over to New Mexico. You’d fit right in, we might could use a few more like you.

            (Think of the possibilities, we could secede from from Mexico and become our own State! Just kidding. I love this place, gunslingers and all.)

            Come strapped. We hate violence here.

      • Robert Smith

        Only the rich can protect themselves… Interesting point 45.

        I have to agree on that one.

        EVERYONE should be able to protect themselves.


  • FreedomFighter

    Notice Muslims are not targeting any Americans in the USA?

    The radical muslim entities pick disarmed socialist countries weakened by years of Marxist subversion, they have no guns, are hog-tied by left-wing laws, then subjected to attacks from easilly spotted, weakling, smelly, kneeling on a rug singing: “Death to America” muslim psyho-suicidle fanatics.

    Hey fanatic Muslim weakling try attacking we Americans in say LA subs. Let the fanatic muslims drive-thru-attack certain LA areas and start singing “Death to America”. The American Black and latino brotherhoods will not tolerate such insult on American turf.

    The citiZens ability to responsibly bear arms is central to free society. As usual the weakling fanatic muslim cowards attack the unarmed and the socially weak. Look at Germany, once proud, strong, being erased by these weaklings.

    Lose your right to bear arms, lose the country to the enemies of freedom.

    Laus Deo
    Semper Fi

    • 45caliber

      I’ve always laughed about a story from Israel. Not long after it was established, a group of Muslims came up with the idea of driving to an outside market (common there), getting out of the car, and spraying bullets at the (unarmed) citizens. Then they would go to another site while the police rushed to the first one to do it again. They figured they could shoot up half the country before the police could stop them.

      They pulled into the first site, stepped out of their car, brought up their guns … and stared into the muzzles of a lot of other guns the citizens were carrying. They were wounded but no one was killed.

      Needless to say, they were arrested and taken to jail (via the hospital). They kept saying, “It isn’t fair! They aren’t supposed to have guns TOO!”

      • Average Joe Patriot

        I laugh beause it beats crying. Thanks, 45.

    • Lawrence Edward Calcut

      @ Laus Deo

      re : Your last line : Lose your right to bear arms, lose the country to the enemies of freedom.

      Meybe you should have said “Lose your right to bear arms, lose EVERTHING.”

      Everything includes Freedom and… and… and … Everything.

    • Robert Smith

      From FreedomFighter: >>>The radical muslim entities pick disarmed socialist countries weakened by years of Marxist subversion<<<

      I believe that the Shaw of Iran would disagree with you.


  • JIM

    The politicians will never stop trying to take every cent possible out of the peoples pockets. They dream up the silliest projects either to put their kids/relatives to work or fill their buds pockets at the expense of the taxpayer. The bruhaha over concealed carry is kind of silly. I’m all for following the law but when it gets to protecting my loved ones the law can kiss my a@@. I don’t know why no-one seems to understand the concept of conceled carry,isn’t the point that no-one knows you have a weapon? GEE that’s different. Go to the sale papers/gun show/yard sales keep looking untill you find a small revolver that you don’t have to fill out the gov. papers to buy. Revolver because it doesn’t spit out the brass and most often the need to use it is close quarters. Just don’t shoot unless there’s no other choice. Then if you do have to it’s easily disposed of should that become necessary. Spray with WD b/4 dropping and dissable if you can.

    • 45caliber

      Throw it into a river. It works fine to get rid of all fingerprints.

      • Average Joe Patriot

        Use a rat-tail file inside the barrel, thoroughly, before discarding. Impossible ballistics match. Don’t attempt to file off serial numbers, the metal imprint goes deep and can be retrieved by forensics. Hacksaw that part of the weapon off and dispose of it elsewhere (after dipping in oil, of course).

        WD-40′s good, or dip in an any oil or motor fuel. In a pinch, try olive oil or Pam. Fingerprint dust will collect on any oil. They’ll have lots of fun with that.

        What are you people, nuts? We’re not hiding a crime, here. We’re talking about personal and public defense. You’re afraid of a mere swarm of cops and lawyers and a politically appointed judge?

        (Oh. Sorry. For a second there I thought I lived in America, where personal and public defense used to be, like, legal and everything. Didn’t realize being a victim could ruin your life, while no one looks back and fact-checks.)

        “Look! Isn’t she the one who shot that guy…?” Yup. And he’s not gonna harm or threaten anyone again. EOS in my book.

        • Average Joe Patriot

          End of story.

  • s c

    The Land of Lincoln seems more like the Land of the Lamebrain. Enter Mr. Obama, who seems bent on loosing the hounds of hellish anti-freedom and anarchy upon us.
    The element of fear via DOUBT will make potential criminals think more than twice about doing their evil in public. If a criminal has to “PROFILE” his victims, we will have a safer society. Any politician who has doubts about the 2nd Amendment is no better than a criminal who intnds to rob or steal.
    In fact, since they willingly suffer from a ‘drive-by’ mentality, then they deserve to be treated as the low-life criminals and people-hating slime that they really are. It’s THEM or US, and we demand FREEDOM.

    • 45caliber

      I’ve always said that if you want to stop violent crime, simply require all adults to carry. If you, as a criminal, were to KNOW that every person you saw was carrying a gun, would you want to risk robbing a store?

      • Robert Smith

        From 45: >>>I’ve always said that if you want to stop violent crime, simply require all adults to carry.<<<

        Done that, been there.

        The city of Kennesaw, GA, was selected by Family Circle magazine as one of the nation's "10 best towns for families".

        From 1982 please see city ordinance [Sec 34-21][13]:

        (a) In order to provide for the emergency management of the city, and further in order to provide for and protect the safety, security and general welfare of the city and its inhabitants, every head of household residing in the city limits is required to maintain a firearm, together with ammunition therefore.


  • Bob Wire

    If you are up to toting, ~ heel up and tote.

    But be a mindful citizen and accept the responsibility that comes with heeling up.

    I’m not one to ask for permission on such matters as criminals aren’t so obliged to comply.

    ” Badges? We don’t need no stinking Badges! “

  • Robin from Arcadia, IN

    November is getting closer. Time to vote out the vermin! IF a politician is not for the Constitution, out you go! Those who have no ethics, and those who have tax issues… out you go! It won’t be Nancy cleaning the swamp, it will be us! Remember in November!

    • 45caliber

      And vote at the polling places, not by absentee. Absentee votes are very seldom counted!

      • BrotherPatriot

        Yes, sir…I’m coming to the same conclusion. It’s to easy to do vote fraud on absentee ballots…I believe it’s part of the problem.

        • 45caliber

          Actually the absentee votes are seldom false. They don’t count them EXCEPT in a close race. As one voting official commented, “Why count them when the votes there won’t change the results of the election? It just wastes time. We only count them if the results are very close and the absentee votes might make a difference.”

          The real problem comes during the voting. ACORN voters, for instance, voting for fakes. Voting for persons in nursing homes who haven’t the ability or the mental capacity to vote for themselves. Miscounting votes.

          Supposedly the computer voting machines are safer. However, locally, there was a mistake made on entering some votes. Someone was called in to “fix” the problem. It took the guy less than five minutes to change the votes. It shocked the officials as to how easy it was to do. And it wouldn’t take much of a change in programming to have the computer change every second or third vote for one candidate to that of the other candidate.

          • Dogma-Free

            haha…I believe that’s how Baby Bush was ‘elected’. Twice. It pays to know how to tamper with the voting machines, I guess.

    • Average Joe Patriot

      “If a politician is not for the Constitution, out you go!”

      That would be just about all of them. The mistake would be in thinking there are sufficient candidates who ARE for the Constitution.

      In our two-party system? There aren’t.

      • BrotherPatriot

        Bingo…! All bought & paid for by the rulers of the money…and I think we have sufficient posts to now know who those degenerates are!

        • 45caliber

          Unless, as happened in Delaware, the voters decide they don’t like the person the “Party” provides for them to elect. Then the party gets excited and upset.

      • CJ

        You can’t replace one Constitution ignorer with another. If no one running actually follows the oath they take, the problem stays. Without an enforcement oversight to keep them in line, outside elections, there is no motivation to keep their oath. If they know they only have to make a promise, without intent of delivery, they’ll never change their habits.

  • John Hasse

    so why not spare a sentence of your diatribe to explain to the unwashed masses what ‘milliradian’ means? My ‘Webster’ doesn’t seem to know. I recall a sign at the edge of Pennsylvania saying ‘welcome to the USA’, which, having lived a couple of years in NJ (which I referred to by various other terms) I could appreciate temporarily. However, after living in Pa. for a bit I felt the sign was poorly placed.

    • 45caliber

      A radian is basically an arc of a certain span. A milliradian means “a thousandth of a radian”. It has fallen out of usage in most places but with guns it means to get your sights set so that you shoot at the target and not to one side of it.

    • JLC

      John — A radian is an arc of a circle whose length is the same as the radius of that circle. This works out, with the help of a little high-school trig, to approcimately 57.3 degrees. A milliradian is one one thousandth of this.

    • Ben Crystal (Author)

      Mr. Hasse:

      Looks like these fine folks beat me to it, and are correct – 1/1000 of a radian. A vital measurement in long-range shooting and range estimation.

      Remember when John Kerry suggested that our armed forces are filled with society’s intellectual castoffs? How many intellectual castoffs do you know who can run trigonometric numbers through their heads while in high-intensity combat situations?

    • CJ

      You’ve defined it, but not put value to the meaning. Simply, if your aim is off by only a milliradian (1/1000 of a radian) it translates that for every 1000 inches a bullet travels it will be off the mark by one inch. That’s only a little over 27 yards. You better be close up if your aim ain’t good!

      • Tango Uniform

        CJ: You got the math actually right for the sake of 4MOA (minutes of angle) where 1 inch at 100 yards is 1MOA. Translate out to 500 yards, a quarter-mile, and that 4MOA is 20 inches. A 20-inch wide target at 500 yards is capable of being defeated with that accuracy.

        Elaborating: A milliradian, being 1/1000th of a radian, is an angular measurement that describes an arc with a lenth equal to 1/1000th the radius of a circle. At 1000 yards a milliradian, or mil equals 1 yard. At 1000 meters, a mil equals 1 meter. At 100 yards (3600 inches) a mil equals 3.6 inches. (
        The Rights defined in the Constitution are from our Lord. You as the citizen are the sole defender of your God-given rights. Government borrows it’s power from the governed. This is a lesson that many of those vermin calling themselves politicians either refused to believe or look upon the Citizens with contempt. Paying a fee to carry your defense is ludicrous; I did this once, but I have since awakened to the reality of what the Founding Fathers knew we’d probably fail to protect. “Posterity, you will never know how much it cost the present generation to preserve your freedom. I hope you make good use of it. If you do not, I will repent in Heaven that ever I took half the pains to preserve it.” –John Adams

  • dan

    Federal Firearms Violation: five years unless the Grand Jury throws the case out or “ignores the charges” ….improper storage of a firearm
    is a federal charge,sooo,having a loaded weapon that isn’t in a locked/
    secure storage device….just sayin’,the law is NOT your friend and neither are the people that would enforce it….nor the people that wrote those (bad) laws.

    • 45caliber

      You are right. It is sad, really. They have thousands of gun laws but only enforce those against honest citizens if they can. Those such as requiring at least a 10 year sentence (and must serve ALL of it) for using a gun in a violent crime are to be ignored.

      • Denniso

        Have you ever heard of a kid playing w/ his fathers gun and killing himself or a friend?

        • Average Joe Patriot

          Yeah, Denniso. I have. Have you ever heard of a kid falling down a well or playing in traffic? How about dropping a hair dryer in his bath water or sticking his head in a dry cleaning bag or locking himself in an abandoned refrigerator? Sometimes kids do the darnedest things.

          Sometimes adults do, too. Like giving up their God-given right to protect themselves and, yes, even their children. Have you ever heard of criminals kidnapping, terrorizing, and murdering an entire family?

          Take the 2nd Amendment apart. It unequivocably states that our right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. Period.

          The foregoing part, about the need for a well-organized militia, gives a fundamental reason why. Because a “well-organized” militia is one governed and equipped and paid by authority (with our tax dollars, but that’s another topic; the admitted need for the existence of such an authoritarian armed force in our midst is the issue). The authors of the 2nd Amendment had had a LOT of experience with armed forces in their midst, ruled by authority, and they were very wary of both.

          They didn’t say that in the absence of a militia our right to keep and bear arms could be infringed. The said our right to keep and bear arms must not be infringed, and that the likelihood of the presence of an armed authoritarian force in our midst mandated this amendment.

          The colonists fought their very first battle in the war for liberty over this exact issue at Lexington and Concord. Not over some philosophic point, but to physically defend, with their lives, a large cache of guns, powder, and lead. Surely they had not forgotten that fact when ratifying the 2nd Amendment; it was so high on their list of priorities that they put it second on their list, right after freedom of religion, speech, assembly, and petition. You would almost think that, in the minds of the founders, these two amendments were connected.

  • randel

    Do the words “The right of the people to keep and bare arms shall not be infringed” mean anything to anyone. To require permits, licenses, or any other nonsense in order to “Keep and bare arms” is by defination un-constitutional. This is a right granted all citizens under the constitution of the United States and can not be denied by state or local governments. Anyone that advocates otherwise needs to be barred from any political position that requires swaring allegance and support of the Constitution of the United States.

    • 45caliber

      And they have well over a thousand laws stating just when you can exercise that right. Or perhaps I should say, when NOT to exercise that right! And the main time to NOT exercise it is when some criminal is attacking you.

      After all, if you kill the guy, you just cost some lawyer his client and cut the job requirements for some judge and prosecutor.

      • dan az

        Head shots only.

        • 45caliber


          Accurate ones.

          • Denniso

            Hey tough guys playing Clint Eastwood…it is absolutely legal to use deadly force to protect oneself against attack in most if not all states in the country. There are NOT a thousand laws telling you when you cannot use a gun.

            Has the genius above intentionally left out the other part of the 2nd ammendment? The part about a well regulated militia? What do you suppose that means? Do you think it means a mob of hot shots like you
            playing cowboy because you’re life is so boring otherwise?

          • Average Joe Patriot

            Hey, Denniso (again). Read my reply elsewhere in this thread, regarding the meaning and placement of the 2nd Amendment in the hierarchy of Constitutional Articles. It does not say you must join the militia to own and carry arms. It says you’re allowed to do so BECAUSE the militia does so.

            As for your condescending assertion there “are NOT a thousand laws” restricting gun use (when you may and when you may not use one), you did research on this, Denniso? 45cal might be understating the case, here. I’ve owned in three states, carried concealed in two, and am permitted to carry concealed in at least half a dozen. I’ve some familiarity with various states’ laws on weapons ownership (a prerequisite for use, mind you, which ipso facto makes unlicensed use illegal for defense), and assorted laws on weapons use. It would surprise me to learn that, on average, each state had less than 20 regulations restricting weapons ownership and use.

            There are 50 states. Now add in federal restrictions observed in states and in DC and US territories, etc., and do the math. There are most certainly more than 1,000 laws on the State and Federal books restricting gun use, even if 45cal were simply using a commonly accepted catch-phrase (like, “the ends of the earth,” and “the man in the moon,” “a million reasons”) to express his point. He needn’t be.

            There ARE a thousand laws restricting guns out there, the ones covering possession being merely the start.

            Ten years ago I owned a handgun in California, read a recommended book on the latest rules for handgun ownership, transportation, use, etc. Not a booklet, a whole book. Turns out the author makes serious bucks updating this book almost yearly, summarizing the CA laws in layman’s terms. Who buys this book? California law enforcement, who can’t keep the regulations straight from year to year, either. Never mind the poor civilian bastard who, in a life-or-death situation, has to not only unlock a damned gun case and somehow marry separately stored ammo to weapon, he must also review in his frantic mind a complex list of dos-and-don’ts in his head while under threat, possibly under attack.

            I’m curious where you live, Denniso. From your mindset it sounds like NeverLand. Or maybe you’re shacked up with Senator Feinstein, making this all theoretical. It is in no way theoretical or academic (nor theatrical, ala Clint Eastwood) to most of us here.

    • CJ

      If you haven’t noticed, our government wants us to be victims. Everything is about staying a victim. If you resist becoming a victim from a criminal, the government will make a victim of you with the laws. If you resist the laws that restrain your freedoms, the government will SEE TO IT you are made a victim. In other words, stop thinking you can get through this life without being a victim, and you will find it easier. Just accept it as a part of life, and plan for it.

      • Denniso

        See above…

        And, I’m pleased to hear someone stand up for the freedom of a woman to control her own body and keep the gov’t out of the decisions between her and her doctor. Glad you’re on board…

        • Jim H.

          Denniso, If a doctor kills the unborn baby because the mother doesn’t want it it’s ok? If you wait till it’s born, it’s murder. Do you need a belly button to be protected by the law? As for your other point think of the definition of militia for the late 1700′s, when it was written, not the 20th & 21rst century.

          • Denniso

            You’re not an extremist so you might listen…the fertilised egg is in the woman’s body,then becomes an embryo, then it is a fetus in the woman’s body, then it is an unviable baby in her body, then it’s viable and then born alive if all goes well. Do you want to hold the woman criminally responsible at any point in the developement all the way to birth, for the health of the egg, embryo,fetus,baby? If the woman doesn’t eat well,drinks alcohol or smokes,not to mention hard drugs, she is harming her baby before birth,and in the extreme,could kill the baby inside her. Should we imprison all pregnant women for the 9 months to ensure they stay healthy to deliver a healthy baby?

            The other aspect of ‘choice’ is that criminalizing it doesn’t work anyway…desperate women will find a way out if they don’t want the baby…what about rape/incest? Are you going to force a woman to give birth to her rapists baby? If you allow termination of the pregnancy
            for rape/incest, then how would you determine the truth of the case? Would you force a pregnant woman who says she was raped to prove it w/ legal evidence even though the rapist is not caught? And, if she can’t provide enough evidence then she has to have the baby?

            It basically doesn’t work to tell women what they can do w/ their bodies, and it is their body…not yours and not mine. Men should have very little to say about it as we have no real clue.

            It’s also a right to freedom and liberty that rightwing people should embrace because they claim to want a limited gov’t and to maximize freedom.

          • Jim H.

            Denniso, If a woman doesn’t eat right or MIGHT do something to harm the baby doesn’t mean we might as well just kill it any way. I’m not trying to control HER body, just protect the other HUMAN the is growing inside. Since Roe versus Wade 50 million sons and daughters have been killed. That’s one sixth of the population and that’s just the U.S. I would hope that wasn’t 50 million rapes. That isn’t something to be supportive of, or proud of.

          • Denniso

            JimH, you’re missing my point. Outlawing a woman’s choice does not stop abortion…many women will go to back allys,travel abroad,die doing it themselves. What it does do, is turn women and others who may help them into criminals. Do you think there was no abortion before Roe v Wade? Outlawing it would be as futile as the absurd drug war that wastes billions of $ and creates an entire criminal class, and we still have a drug problem…as bad or worse than before the war on drugs was began by the great mind of Dick Nixon and ramped up by Ronnie the communicator. Does anybody think that it’s working very well? We’ve spent a trillion $$ on the drug war and no end in sight.

            It doesn’t make sense to create an even larger police force to chase and imprison women and some doctors and have the gov’t intervene in the most private of human activities…pregnancy and child birth.
            Rightwingers who claim to be in favor of liberty and freedom and less gov’t interference in our lives should be on the side of privacy between a woman and her doctor.

          • JimH

            Denniso YOU”RE still missing the point. If it’s legal or back ally it’s still KILLING an unborb human. Yes, there was abortion before it was legal, it was still wrong then. Just because it will still go on like drug use, doesn’t mean you quit trying. Killing is still killing and dead is still dead. Rape is illegal, but it still happens. Should we just give up and make rape legal? You answered my first question,you do believe that if a doctor does it, killing baby’s is a good thing. Did you look up the definition of what militia meant in the 18th century, instead of the 20th& 21rst century? That was my second question for you.

  • J.C. in CA

    Thank You Ben, and I will agree with the Some might suggest that S2264 is a poor piece of politics. ‘ point that this is most poor legislation. As elected representatives continue to set the precedent and taking our money to ‘control’ our God-given rights, including to protect ourselves, we shall maintain vigilance and hold our representatives feet ‘to the fire’. Insitst your representatives keep all future legislation Constitutionally based and pure. Tell them all that if they protect us and our freedoms and our unalienable rights, we shall protect them and their choice to serve us. Help us help you. Let them know we are watching AND we are learning.

    By now most of us have learned what ‘their’ end goal is and we must remain ‘physically strong, mentally awake and morally straight.’

    • Vicki

      Make Congress cite the Constitutional authority for each law it passes.
      Go to and support The “Enumerated Powers Act” (EPA)

      The more of us that go the more attention they will pay.


    Just remember the old saying…”I’d rather be judged by twelve, than carried by six.” In Texas, we have a very good CHL law, and recently, over 31,000 women have applied and received their CHL. As an ex-cop, I strongly advocate being able to deter criminal activity by having state supported concealed carry laws! They work!!

    • momo

      Amen, brother!

    • 45caliber

      Also in Texas, men have been convicted of concealed carry without a license. But I’m not sure if any woman ever has been! I know that up until a couple of years ago none were. All they had to say in court was, “I’m a woman and weaker than any attacker would be. I need some way to protect myself if attacked.” The judge has let them go.

      I don’t recommend carrying without a license here but this has happened.

    • alpha-lemming

      And don’t forget……. “When seconds count, the police are only minutes away”.

    • Brad


      I live in Maryland one of the most communist states; I’m 50 miles from DC and Baltimore two cities plagued by illegal gun violence, as a citizen of Maryland I can’t obtain a CCL. The state will allow you to submit for a CCL but their requirements, if met, will only delay the state from saying no. Here are the requirements under which a private citizen in Maryland can apply for a CCW click the link

      Now the Obama administration wants this bill passed which gives the US DA office powers to call average citizens terrorists and confiscate their legally owned weapons; please get involved, vote on November 2nd.

    • dan az

      Rah Rah
      just check the facts of arizona and see the crime drop there!

  • http://none draper b. gregory

    Lets do something about it! Initiate a law suit against the NJ government on the grounds of unconstitutionality. Don’t wait for the ACLU to do it.All the best. Draper

    • 45caliber

      The ACLU? Filing a suit against stopping people from carrying a gun?

      What world are you living in? The ACLU LOVES anyone who can stop others from carrying a gun!

      I do agree, though. If those in NJ are smart, they will file.

  • x-trucker

    We have to stop the trend of “Big Government” stepping in and controlling our lives. The more we become dependent on government, the less control we have over our own lives. I don’t need government to tell me how to live my life. Nor do I need anybody’s permission to be able to protect my loved ones and my property. Some fat a## in D.C. doesn’t know how to run my life better than I do.

    • 45caliber

      I agree, exactly. I think the real reason they are so against guns in Washington is because they have a number of things they want to get passed that they KNOW would get the honest citizens upset. Notice that they aren’t concerned about the armed criminals.

      • dan az

        criminals dont pay taxes!


    The less the government does to protect and defend the more they encourage the right to carry and eventually the law will be ignored and carying a gun will become more of a necessity to encourage a polite and law abiding society. This idea that when the collection of taxes cannot be met by the government, the public’s safety can be reduced is one of the craziest aspects of cheapass political gambling by insane electees who cannot manage their positions of responsibility. This is who needs to be replaced, this is who needs to realize they exist only because of “we the people” and they are not there to enhance their own lives by getting rich of the public dime. There is no doubt that a individual should have access to self defense and be able to protect their families, protect life and property and it also reminds the politician who is in charge and to mind the laws and their manners.

    • 45caliber

      Sadly, in several countries of the world, self defense is not considered a legal reason to harm or kill someone else. Try using it in England or in Austrailia for instance! In fact, in Austrailia not too long ago a man attacked by five others with baseball bats and pipe in his own apartment defended himself with an old sword hanging on the wall. The police were still trying to determine what to charge him with, the last I heard. After all, he killed one of his attackers and seriously wounded another one!

      • dan az

        Also crime there went up some 90% when all the guns where taken from the people.Kinda funny how that works no guns more crime hmmmmm

      • honeybadger

        Nah….I think I’ll just stay outta England AND Australia. Let them deal with their problems there and I’ll deal with mine over here. No need in just looking for someone else’s business to jump into.

  • guyb

    Thomas Jefferson said in 1802— No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. Thomas Jefferson also said in 1802—The strongest reason for the people tp retain the right to keep and bear arms is,as a last resort,to protect themselves against tyranny in government. How did Jefferson know over 200 hundred years ago? Hello Pelosi and reid and obama,I am keeping my guns….. Hello America, I want to am I am going to keep my rights no matter what some socialist elected offical says. America,The time to wake up is now. Lets take back our country and stop letting our elected officals give it away…..

    • spike

      I just want to say that neither will my husband get rid of his ouzi, barringer, smith/wesson, …. and if they try to institute this martial law crap, which Obama is just looking for a reason to do, we better all be well armed….as Chip wood says “keep some powder dry”… we better all get smart and get arms.

    • honeybadger

      Human nature SELDOM changes even over long spans of time. We basically have the same problems mankind has ALWAYS had and in addition, we have acquired some NEW ones via PROGRESS, the ACLU, liberal courts, liberal parents and a few ‘other’ small items.

      • Denniso

        The ACLU defends the constitutional rights of every American…that’s all they do.

  • George

    Regarding a $500 fee for a permit to carry, it is the first step in what I would refer to as confiscatory taxation (a form of behavior modification/control). Get the foot in the door as easily as possible. Next step is to slowly raise the fee/tax, so it becomes increasingly difficult for the average person to pay what is really a tax. As the cost goes up, the number who can afford to pay the tax goes down. Using this example, at some point, only the wealthy will be able to afford the permit to carry. Your right to carry is confiscated through taxation. Perhaps an attorney could explain this better.

    • 45caliber

      One of the original taxes in the first healthcare fiasco was to tax everyone at $50 per gun owned. The IRS were to collect. And they were to pay up to $100 a gun to anyone who would report his neighbor. I’m not sure if it is the existing one or not. I haven’t thought to look.

      • Vicki

        Who has had time to completely read that 2000+ page legalese monster? :) One of the many reasons that no one knows how many guns I have.
        It is enough of a deterrent that I have more than 1.

  • NormP

    Give me liberty or give me death!!!!!!!!!!

  • Tango Uniform

    Molon Labe

  • PissMilkShake

    People are afraid of guns for the same reason they are afraid of snakes. They are afraid of the phallus. Ms. Pelosie, Ms. Clinton, and Ms. Obama have seen neither in years.

    • Denniso

      You and your ‘name’ are pathetic and disgusting…

      • JeffH

        Shut up already you stupid liberal a$$hole!

  • Ann Lindholm

    This country is getting more and more socialist by the blink. I am sick and tired of it. The criminals don’t get finger printed before their weapon purchase. The government, do they get finger printed before taking their oath to office, or carrying their weapon, on capital hill? True enough, everyone should be familiar enough with a hand gun and/or shotgun….however, it is not the government’s place to mandate these things. The sole purpose for why the government was created has long gone surpassed its intent. Research Austria, 1936 and after. No thanks. As for me and my household, we will maintain our weapons.

    • honeybadger

      Go ANN!!!! You sound as though you have it together!!! I am with you!


Sign Up For Personal Liberty Digest™!

PL Badge

Welcome to,
America's #1 Source for Libertarian News!

To join our group of freedom-loving individuals and to get alerts as well as late-breaking conservative news from Personal Liberty Digest™...

Privacy PolicyYou can opt out at any time. We protect your information like a mother hen. We will not sell or rent your email address to anyone for any reason.