Texas - I Ain't In NY Any Longer...

 ...and some of the best proof of that are gun friendly laws that were passed during the 2021 legislature. Take for instance House Bill 1927 which allows for license free carry of a handgun by law abiding citizens over the age of 21 or House Bill 1500 that "...establishes that firearm and ammunition manufacturers, distributors, wholesalers, suppliers and retailers are essential businesses that shall not be prohibited by state or local officials from operating during a declared disaster or emergency". Several more new gun friendly laws, in Texas, can be seen at the source: https://www.nraila.org/articles/20210601/texas-legislature-adjourns-after-groundbreaking-session-for-gun-owners

 

Dang, the politics here are much more to my liking than those in Cuomoistan! This may not be the most gun friendly state but as I indicated it sure ain't NY!

 

Edited To Add: House Bill 1927 was signed into law today by Texas Governor Abbott; it goes into effect September 1, 2021! (Source.)

All the best,

Glenn B

Arthur Frommer - Is He Just A Travel Author or Just Another Rights Bashing, Intolerant and Bigotted Leftist?

Hmm, I would never have thought that a guy like Arthur Frommer, the man behind all those Frommer travel guides, would be an extreme intolerant leftist bent upon denying others their Constitutional and states' rights, but maybe such is exactly the case. You see Mr. Frommer has come out of the closet so to speak in his blog. In his blog post: Do Guns at Political Events Disturb You? Then Consider Skipping Arizona for Now he in essence states that he will avoid traveling into the state of Arizona because extremists are allowed to carry firearms outside of political rallies. He states that this is not due in any manner to the political affiliation of President Obama whose rally was the one in question and says he would do the same if it had been a rally held by Ronald Reagan. In exercising my right to freedom of speech, allow me to address Mr. Frommer further:

Mr. Frommer - shame on you for saying such because truth be told plenty of people have carried firearms outside of political rallies before but you have never opened your mouth or typed away on your keyboard about it before now have you; then again neither has the mud slinging media - has it! As a mater of fact - did you decide to boycott states in which the Black Panther Party is found. I seem to remember, unless I am mistaken, them showing up in force with openly exposed weapons outside of polling places during a recent presidential election where they seemingly (at least it seemed that way to many who reported on it) intimidated potential voters among others. Heck that could potentially threaten free elections couldn't it; but then they did support then Senator Obama in his run for the presidency so I suppose that made it okay in your eyes. As for Ronald Reagan, whom you brought into this debate, he was the first presidential candidate ever endorsed by the NRA. He likely would have welcomed such activity outside of his political events when carried out by law abiding citizens who were merely exercising their right to keep and bear arms, their right to free speech and their right to assembly.

Mr. Frommer - This is the United States of America - we do not live in a totalitarian regime such as that of Cuba, the former Soviet union, the former Taliban controlled Afghanistan, or North Korea. People within the United States of America, including the state of Arizona have rights, are guaranteed those rights by our Constitution, and are at liberty to legally exercise those rights. Have you forgotten that? The people who carried those firearms outside of the rally were simply exercising their rights as a way of making a political statement. They posed no threat to the life of the president. They were not extremists, they were regular citizens sir; yes regular citizens do carry firearms. I have carried a firearm at every political event I have ever attended but have never been a threat to anyone while doing so. Now you may think that a clever statement on my part because I am a federal agent and I have attended many political events in my official capacity but let me assure you I also carry when off duty and have done so at political events in the past.

Of course, you may also think yourself clever in making the blog post that you did in which you apparently implied those legally exercising their rights to be extremists. You seemingly also blatantly stated that others should consider avoiding travel to Arizona, then basically denied doing so:

I mean come on now Mr. Frommer what did it mean in the title of the post when you said:

"Then Consider Skipping Arizona For Now"?

Then in the post you said this:

"For myself, without yet suggesting that others follow me in an open boycott, I will not personally travel in a state where civilians carry loaded weapons onto the sidewalks and as a means of political protest. "

Wasn't that statement in the blog post title a suggestion for others to at least consider boycotting travel to Arizona - or did you mean they should do it covertly at first? Then again, maybe you meant they should hop, skip and jump through the state when you said they should "... consider skipping Arizona..."? It sure seems to me like it was meant to mean they should boycott travel to Arizona but of course you being more liberal minded than me could have a totally different interpretation of that statement - couldn't you?

By the way, you made a broad, and my bet is pretty hollow, statement there when you said:

"I will not personally travel in a state where civilians carry loaded weapons onto the sidewalks...".

So does this mean you will not travel in the great majority of states within the United States, or was that just a rash statement on your part? You see, almost every state within our Union allows citizens to carry firearms while they walk the sidewalks - some with more, some with less, restriction than others but almost all allow some form of open or concealed carry of firearms. In no state is a citizen, legally or otherwise, allowed to carry a firearm into a presidential rally whereby the president could be under threat - such is simply not allowed for by the United States Secret Service. By the way, the Secret Service was not concerned about a threat from these folks were they. Had they believed any of these armed citizens to have been credible threats they would have detained them for questioning - don't you think? It certainly is within their authority to do so, and they do so regularly with even unarmed citizens who are apparent threats to the well being of any of our presidents. So tell me, if these armed citizens were such extremists, if they posed such a terrible threat to the safety of the president, or even to attendees at the rally, then why did the Secret Service or the police not remove them from the scene. The truth be told is that there likely was no real threat and there were only some citizens exercising their rights and liberties - rights and liberties you quite frankly do not seem to like others to exercise.

I think you goofed with that blog post, and with the apparent suggestion that others avoid Arizona and states where citizens can carry firearms in public (as in on the sidewalks). I would be willing to bet on that. While you, and some leftists, avoid travel to the state of Arizona - and to other states wherein others like myself who enjoy our liberties and rights - citizens who exercise their rights and liberties will flock there in order to counteract any damage you may have tried to do. Likewise while your travel guide sales may increase among the leftists, I can assure you that I for one will never knowingly again add one penny to your coffers by purchasing anything you have written, edited, endorsed or published. I would urge others who value their rights and liberties to consider doing likewise, or to protest your views in any legal way, as a form of exercise of their freedom of speech but my guess is I do not need to do so. I figure that they will not require any prompting from me to do so because you have shot yourself in your foot on this one without any help from me.

*********

Folks, if you are about to take a vacation or short getaway trip, I urge you to travel to Arizona. Travel there frequently if you can. Visit the Grand Canyon, see Sedona, fly into Flagstaff, visit the Saguaro National Forest, climb the mountians at the Chiricahua National Monument, go back in history at Tombstone, be amazed by the colors at the Painted Desert, go to the Petrified Forest, see Native American cliff dwellings, visit the Navajo Nation, go to the Buffalo Soldier Museum, enjoy all that Phoenix and Tucson have to offer, drive through the White Mountains - there is a lot to do in this wonderful state. Let the Arizona governor and state legislature know you are doing so despite Mr. Frommer's apparent suggestion to do otherwise. Let them know you travel to and enjoy Arizona because of its stance on the right to keep and bear arms and on its stance regarding freedom of speech. I was just there for 4 months, and would go there again tomorrow if I could. While I was there for work, I must point out that I decided to spend all of my free time there. I could have easily visited other nearby states such as New Mexico, Nevada, or California. While I considered both New Mexico and Nevada, travel by me to California for leisure was simply out of consideration by me due mostly to its extreme leftist stance on almost everything - especially gun rights.

All the best,
Glenn B

Vote On The 2nd Amendment - Do it Now

I removed the link to the so called poll on the 2nd Amendment. Why? Well because every time I visited the link, and no matter how many more thousands or tens of thousands of votes were tallied, the end result was always 97% in favor, 2% opposed and 1% undecided with regard to the right to keep and bear arms being an individual right. Obviously the poll was a sham. Sorry to have bothered you with it.

It's Official: Kirsten Gillibrand Named NY Senator

I suppose that for a state like New York, it is a step in the right direction. Yes she is a democrat, but yes she also has a track record of being somewhat friendly to those of us who are willing to fight to maintain our right to keep and bear arms and enjoy our liberty to exercise said right.

"As a lawmaker, she has projected a down-home image in tune with her rural
district, which stretches from Lake Placid past the state capital of Albany.
Besides the backing of the NRA, she has the strong support of the New York Farm
Bureau, which described her as ``a leading advocate for agriculture in Washington.'' Her Web site's homepage includes a picture of cows."

Source of the quote: http://www.1010wins.com/Little-Known-Congresswoman-Picked-for-Clinton-Seat/3712805.

For more info, see: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/01/22/new-york-gov-paterson-rep-gillibrand-clintons-senate-seat/

Maybe this guy Patterson will turn out to be a better governor for NY than I had thought. If nothing else, the selection of Gillibrand as senator for NY may cause The Honorable (by pomp and circumstance only in my opinion) Carolyn McCarthy to have a heart attack moment of pause to reconsider her own rabid anti-gun stance. Of course that will not be the case as McCarthy has already vowed to opose Gillibrand. I imagine Senator Charles Schumer will do likewise; and that pompous buffoon Michael Bloomeberg is already ranting in opposition to her appointment. The thing is though, they do not have squat to say about it that can keep her from becoming a senator as I understand. It's nice to see the antis squirm for a change here in an anti-gun state like NY. Now one can only hope that Gillibrand is a true supporter of the right to keep and bear arms and not just a fly by night friend who takes what she can get, such as support from the NRA, to further her career and then dumps what friends she has made once she is in power. Time and her legislating will tell.

All the best,
GB

Barack Obama - Gun Grabber?

Well this is what the NRA had to say about Barack Obama, and I glommed it from their website here because they said it MAY be reproduced:

"On the Second Amendment, Don’t Believe Obama!

Friday, June 06, 2008

The presidential primary season is finally over, and it is now time for gun owners to take a careful look at just where apparent nominee Barack Obama stands on issues related to the Second Amendment. During the primaries, Obama tried to hide behind vague statements of support for “sportsmen” or unfounded claims of general support for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms.

But his real record, based on votes taken, political associations, and long standing positions, shows that Barack Obama is a serious threat to Second Amendment liberties. Don’t listen to his campaign rhetoric! Look instead to what he has said and done during his entire political career.


FACT: Barack Obama voted to allow reckless lawsuits designed to bankrupt the firearms industry.

FACT: Barack Obama wants to re-impose the failed and discredited Clinton Gun Ban.


FACT: Barack Obama voted to ban almost all rifle ammunition commonly used for hunting and sport shooting.

FACT: Barack Obama has endorsed a complete ban on handgun ownership.

FACT: Barack Obama supports local gun bans in Chicago, Washington, D.C., and other cities.

FACT: Barack Obama voted to uphold local gun bans and the criminal prosecution of people who use firearms in self-defense.

FACT: Barack Obama supports requiring law-abiding gun owners to register their firearms.

FACT: Barack Obama refused to sign a friend-of-the-court brief in support of individual Second Amendment rights in the Heller case.

FACT: Barack Obama wants to eliminate your Right to Carry.

FACT: Barack Obama was a member of the Board of Directors of the Joyce Foundation, the leading source of funds for anti-gun organizations and “research.”

FACT: Barack Obama supported a proposal to ban gun stores within 5 miles of a school or park, which would eliminate almost every gun store in America.

FACT: Barack Obama voted not to notify gun owners when the state of Illinois did records searches on them.

FACT: Barack Obama voted against a measure to lower the Firearms Owners Identification card age minimum from 21 to 18, a measure designed to assist young people in the military.

FACT: Barack Obama favors a ban on standard capacity magazines.

FACT: Barack Obama supports mandatory micro-stamping.

FACT: Barack Obama supports mandatory waiting periods.

FACT: Barack Obama supports repeal of the Tiahrt Amendment, which prohibits information on gun traces collected by the BATFE from being used in reckless lawsuits against firearm dealers and manufacturers.

FACT: Barack Obama supports “one-gun-a-month” sales restrictions.

FACT: Barack Obama supports a ban on inexpensive handguns.

FACT: Barack Obama supports a ban on the resale of police issued firearms, even if the money is going to police departments for replacement equipment.

FACT: Barack Obama supports mandatory firearm training requirements for all gun owners and a ban on gun ownership for persons under the age of 21.

Copyright 2008, National Rifle Association of America, Institute for Legislative Action.

This may be reproduced. It may not be reproduced for commercial purposes. "

I have got to tell you, this guy Obama is a scary dude. I can only imagine that his apparent disregard for our rights and liberties probably are shameful on other Constitutional issues as well as the right to keep and bear arms. Besides that I have seen him to be, in my opinion: an ultra liberal kook, an evasive person on the actual issues, an opportunist extraordinaire without regard for truth, and basically in essence a simple liar using his lies to get over on all of America. As I said though that is just my personal opinion of him, but I am sure it will keep me from voting for him. As to your vote, you have to make up your own opinion and then vote your on conscience.

Happy and safe shooting,
Glenn B

Keeping The Right To Keep & Bear Arms...

...is something we need to work at in order to accomplish it. It isn't easy that is for sure, what with the millions of anti-gun fanatics who are out there. One way to help overcome their influence is to support groups that support the RKBA. National groups like the National Rifle Association, or the Gun Owners Foundation, state/local groups such as the New York State Rifle & Pistol Association. I try to do my part, and I support these three particular organizations. I am a life member of the NRA, an annual member of the NYSRPA, and a yearly supporter of the GOF. I recommend that if you want to keep your RKBA, you should do something similar.

By the way, every now and then, it is nice to get something more than continuous solicitations for funds (like those I receive from the NRA) or newsletters (like I get from the NYSRPA). Yes every now and then it is nice to get a letter thanking you for what you have done. In that regard I have to hand it to the GOF because an acknowledgement like the one they sent me let's a person know that not only is their donation being used to fight for our rights, it is also appreciated by those who received it. That appreciation, coupled with a job well done, goes a long way toward making sure I will donate to them again.

All the best,

Glenn B

Let Freedom Ring ala Pike County, Illinois

Go here quidini pro quo and read her blog; or go directly to the blogger's source at:

http://www.theoutdoorwire.com/tow_final.php?date=2007-4-26, and scroll down about half the page to see the article. My thanks to her for this heads up about a revolutionary event, revolutionary in the name of freedom and protecting our rights and our Constitution.

It is amazing that you most likely will not see this on any of the media's Internet sites. I just searched for it and could not find it at FoxNews, CNN or the BBC (maybe it is there and I missed it, but I sought of doubt that they would write it up - it probably is too right sided revolutionary for the leftists to want to bear). The gist of it is that Pike County, Illinois has told the state of Illinois that it will disregard any and all anti-firearms legislation as the county believes such legislation to be in violation of our Right to Keep and Bear Arms! Bravo to them, it may turn out yet to be the cannon shot heard round the world.

Hopefully the NRA will start publicizing this, so more people hear about it.

All the best,
Glenn B

Some Other Rationale As Why We Should Be Armed, or Blogs About Gun Rights...

... can be found in these blogs:

http://greybeard.igogg.com/archives/365

http://michellemalkin.com/archives/007331.htm

http://penofjen.blogspot.com/2007/04/conclusions.html

http://www.theothersideofkim.com/index.php/tos/10503/

http://anarchangel.blogspot.com/2007/04/point-counterpoint.html

http://armsandthelaw.com/archives/2007/04/column_by_v_tec.php

http://www.debbieschlussel.com/archives/2007/04/2nd_amenment_ri.html

http://thelawdogfiles.blogspot.com/2007/04/we-license-cars-yackyackyack.html

http://bloodletting.blog-city.com/22_dead_on_the_altar_of_gun_control.htm (this one written by a doctor)

One last link, but this one is not to a blog simply because there were no blogs when it was written. It is an article length letter called: Letter from An Angry Reader that was sent into Esquire magazine many years ago by a once upon a time anti-gun person. If the link does not work, go to: http://www.keepandbeararms.com/information/XcIBViewItem.asp?ID=3499, it is quite worth the read.

Some of the reads at the above links are short, some are lengthy. All are pro gun-rights, and no matter what side of the gun issue you find yourself on, I suggest you read them all. I will leave it to others to rant against the right to keep and bear arms, as for me I support that right (free speech), and the right to keep and bear arms 100 percent.

All the best,
Glenn B