Tragic. I’ll miss that little guy.

He weeps for he has but one small tongue with which to taste an entire world.

So, I wonder if this guy was on the terror watchlist?

And then you need to put that fury to good use.

Read the whole thing. You’ll be glad you did.

I dunno about training but I’d recommend you keep your weapon in a holster with the trigger covered.

Seems that 44 people on the suspected terrorist watchlist were permitted to buy guns despite a NICS check. Of course, NICS doesn’t check the terror watch list so who cares? Anyway, even if you’re on a watchlist, you’re not convicted of a crime so due process and all that.

They keep using that term. I do not think it means what they think it means.

Or rather my county. Seems the federales are looking into police purchases of confiscated items taken by the drug task force. Now, I’m not in anyway assessing guilt or innocence here but am I the only one disturbed by the fact that the police can buy items that they’ve confiscated? I mean, one bad apple decides he likes your car? I think it’s bad policy.

And why the military won’t change easily. Someone tell HL.

S&W 39.

In an update to this, that’s what they get for buying American. They could have just left the country and ordered suppressors made in another country.

Our gun laws, at times, are inhibiting.

Locally, on WBIR, they’ll be covering handgun carry permit holders. And they have interesting stats here.

And, in Nashville, The Life of a Gun will air. They apparently had a gun show up in a murder that was sold once by the police. Also, they note the number of traces in Nashville. Well, a trace does not always indicate a crime has occurred and, often, doesn’t indicate a violent crime has occurred.

Looks like Blackwater is now in trouble for exporting suppressors without dotting i’s and crossing t’s:

Federal agents are investigating allegations that the Blackwater USA security firm illegally exported dozens of firearms sound suppressors — commonly known as silencers — to Iraq and other countries for use by company operatives, sources close to the investigation tell NBC News.

Investigators from various federal agencies, including the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, the State Department and the Commerce Department, are digging into the allegations that the company exported the silencers without getting necessary export approval, according to law enforcement sources, who spoke to NBC News on condition of anonymity. The sources said the investigation is part of a broader examination of potential firearms and export violations.

Translation: Blackwater lawfully buys suppressors and deploys their folks with them. I would think that the term export would indicate exporting for sale, which this is not the case.

Update: In comments, Paratrooperjj notes: Any time a NFA weapon leaves the country, export forms must be approved.

Future supply siders in the making. Awesome. Though you should point out to your kids that, you know, that’s the price they pay to live under your roof and get room and board.

You can send your United Way contributions to CMP.

No, not me. But HL asks:

For my class, we’ve got an assignment to write a 3-4 page essay on something, preferably materiel related, that we think the Army needs to change.

I’ve chosen the 5.56 round.

AC asks if the media fear Ron Paul.

Seems TeeVee stations are spamming the blogs.

They have gun shot sensors in DC. Not sure why, since guns are illegal there.

Via the Google Snooze Alerts came this, which notes that Fred Thompson managed to get all of his facts wrong on guns and the UN. It links to this bit by Mark Leon Goldberg which notes things Fred gets wrong. Such as:

As you can see, these are pretty broad directives. And as you can see, no country is required to do anything. In fact, the only UN body that can require something of a member state is the Security Council, on which the United States has a veto.

Here’s the report (via David Hardy) that Fred was referring to. I can’t get Goldberg’s links to work so I figure he’s referencing something else since I can’t find his excerpts there. But, the actual report notes that:

Minimum effective measures that States must adopt to comply with their due diligence obligations to prevent small arms violence must go beyond mere criminalization of acts of armed violence. States must also enforce a minimum licensing requirement designed to keep small arms out of the hands of persons who are most likely to misuse them. Other effective measures should also be enforced to protect the right to life, as suggested by the draft principles on the prevention of human rights violations committed with small arms that have been proposed by the Special Rapporteur.

Now, I’m no big city lawyer either but the phrase must adopt seems to be a requirement to me. But, as is noted, the UN has about, err, zero enforcement capability with respect to, well, any thing. So, I think Fred got it right and Goldberg’s criticism is also valid. But Goldberg continues with:

Thompson next gets philosophical and channels Grotius. Really! Says Thompson, “the UN report remarkably denied the existence of any human right to self-defense, evidently overlooking the work of Hugo Grotius, the 17th century scholar credited as the founder of international law, who wrote, ‘It is to be observed that [the] Right of Self-Defence, arises directly and immediately from the Care of our own Preservation, which Nature recommends to every one…’ and that this right is so primary, that it cannot be denied on the basis that it is not ‘expressly set forth.’

Back in 1945, the framers of the UN Charter were not going to take any chances, so they expressly included the right to self defense. See Article 51 of the UN Charter, which affirms the Grotian view that self-defense is an ‘inherent’ right.

So, Fred Thompson says this report says X and you respond by saying that this other thing says Y?

If you look at the report, it states clearly:

“20. Self-defence is a widely recognized, yet legally proscribed, exception to the universal duty to respect the right to life of others. Self-defence is a basis for exemption from criminal responsibility that can be raised by any State agent or non-State actor. Self-defence is sometimes designated as a “right”. There is inadequate legal support for such an interpretation. Self-defence is more properly characterized as a means of protecting the right to life and, as such, a basis for avoiding responsibility for violating the rights of another. “

Uh, Mark? Seems to me he managed to get all of his facts wrong.

Update: More alleged logic and facts. Seems, once again, Fred said one thing (the correct thing) so look, a pony.

Update 2: Even more on logic and facts from Gunstar1 in comments:

Report, bottom of page 2:

Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations applies to States acting in self-defence against armed attacks against their State sovereignty. It does not apply to situations of self-defence for individual persons.

At the HuffPo. Seems she thinks she didn’t really equate NRA members with a murderer. I mean, poster child for the NRA is so ambiguous. Sebastian lets her have it.

NinthStage notes her language choices.

More pink guns. They’re everywhere.

Reaction is what can be expected.

Or 50. Literally. Because whenever I’m on Alcoa Highway, there’s always a turtle race involving two cars doing about 40.

Well, the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Ownership has to:

To bolster their claims, Brady’s report contains an appendix of stories where alleged CCW licensees broke the law. Of the two cases researched so far, both of these incidents have proven to be self-defense, while Brady insinuates both cases were murder.

Their claims about CCW holders again go *poof*.

So, Bostonians are getting terrorized by turkeys. In Tennessee, we’d be happy that Thanksgiving came early. In Boston, people run away.

It always amuses me that anti-gunners think we pro-gun activists are paid shills. Particularly, since anti-gun activists often are paid shills. Anyway, they have to believe that. No matter the evidence. See?

If gun makers acted like anti-gunners said they did.

Gander Mountain is marketing more pink guns to get women into the shooting sports.

Update: Pink Taurus.

Seen Les Jones’ joint. Unsurprisingly, a Glock won. But there were far more Glocks in the competition than 1911s.

More allegations of a barrage death threats from gunnies. Ya know, without actually showing said barrage.