Opening a beer with a sheet of paper. Related, 1,000 ways to open a beer:

I am currently 100% on my beer bets for political contests. I did lose that one to Chris over American Idol, but that’s not political. So, here’s my latest:

I will bet one beer that Obama will not be elected president. I will bet another that he will not get the nomination.

Sean upped the ante:

I will take that bet, and I will raise with a six-pack that Fred Thompson will not be the next President.

I’m not willing to take that one, yet.

The BillingsGazette:

Wyoming will appeal in federal court to try to defend a state law that allows some people convicted of misdemeanor domestic violence to regain their right to own firearms.

U.S. District Judge Alan Johnson ruled earlier this month that the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives was correct to reject the 2004 Wyoming law.

[snip]

Although states may restore a convict’s right to own guns by expunging a domestic-violence conviction, the federal firearms agency had protested that Wyoming’s law didn’t suffice. The law leaves alive the possibility that state courts could still use the original misdemeanor conviction to enhance the penalty for any subsequent convictions.

The consequences:

The federal firearms agency had warned Wyoming that if it persists in allowing people with misdemeanor violence convictions to buy guns, that the federal government would no longer recognize more than 10,000 concealed-carry permits issued by the state as a substitute for federal background checks for firearms purchases.

There also exists, at the federal level, a means to appeal to have firearms rights restored. However, that program is not and never has been funded.

You can’t spell nanny without authoritarian. Well, you can technically . . . but you see what I’m saying.

Hey, did you know you can get a degree in guns? I already have three suffixes after my name, what’s one more?

Seems whenever those Nashville blog gals get together, there’s cleavage.

Over at Alphecca’s, Sigivald takes me to task on my coverage of libertarians, constitutionalists, gays and gun nuts getting a second glance as potential terrorists:

SaysUncle is dead wrong about his, as he has been (oddly) about all of that series.

Wouldn’t be the first time. But:

Not “groups that make you a terrorist for being in them”, or “groups that have lots of terrorists in them and a few non-terrorists”, but “groups that could include terrorists”.

The most militant gay-rights groups may have a few fringe members who’re willing to use violent intimidation or destruction to influence policy (definitionally terrorism).

Sure. But so does any group. There are militant Democrats and militant Republicans and militant feminists and militant Christians. But those didn’t make the list. Among any group, there are potentially crazy militant factions who would engage in terrorism. No one is questioning that. But singling out particular groups (who historically have been mostly harmless) seems to be more politically based scaremongering than legitimate concern. He concludes with:

I don’t see any particular overreach or threat to civil liberties here; the actual websites, if you bother to read the text and think about what they say rather than applying a hysterical template (as I unfortunately think most of the comments on them have done) are neither particularly inaccurate nor dangerous to the Republic, freedom of association, or any other civil rights.

I don’t disagree. But I still like to know what sorts of people the .gov is keeping tabs on. And, frankly, I don’t like the .gov keeping lists. But then, I’m a bit jaded. You get that way when the federales come to your door and quote your website to you.

Ouch. That hurts to watch. Pull that stock into your shoulder. A friend’s mom once got scope head. She was out firing a rifle (a 300 WinMag, IIRC) and wanted to use the open sights and not the scope. That, of course, put the scope at forehead level. Pulled the trigger and had a nice circular bruise on her noggin.

Here.

Wendy Pitts Reeves wants some from my sheriff.

Amazing. I still have trouble believing it.

All the stupid anti-gun arguments in one convenient place! Complete with cites to anti-gun hacks like Hemenway and Miller.

Update: well, that was fast. In other news, I don’t even have to do my own fisking anymore.

In an update to this, I’m disappointed that I only have an excuse to buy just 15 boxes of ammo.

There’s a site that counters them called The Real Gun Guys. You can follow the money here.

Anti-gunner Robyn Ringler:

The notorious Washington, D.C. sniper-killers used the fifty caliber sniper rifle to kill their victims.

They did? Funny. You may want to tell the MD police since the guys they found had a .223 cal. She did offer a correction.

And her facts get better:

A guy walks into a gun shop to buy a gun. The gun shop’s employee performs a background check. The information from the background check which links the gun to its new owner and its origin (the gun shop) must be destroyed WITHIN 24 HOURS.

[snip]

So, now, a crime is committed with a gun. Any record of where that gun originated has been destroyed. How do we trace it? How do we figure out where it came from? It is impossible to follow the gun’s journey when we destroy the records after ONE DAY.

Really? Well, that’s a shock to those of us that actually, you know, know what we’re talking about:

The NICS check does not, and was never officially intended, to link a gun to it’s owner. That is what Form 4473 is for. The 4473 has been the law of the land since GCA68 was passed (1968). The 4473 is required by law to be retained for 20 years. There has not been any repeal of this records keeping requirement as Ms. Ringler believes. She is confused. But that’s not surprising, bigots confuse and warp the facts to maintain internal consistency with their world view.

Poor anti-gunners imagining laws that aren’t there. But, hey, it’s another reasonable voice, right Gonzo?

And what’s with a newspaper hosting an anti-gun site? What media bias? And what media standards? Since, you know, two seconds of Googling and you could have had the answers right the first time.

Feewings. Nothing more than feewings:

I am absolutely sick and tired of the very phrase “Self Esteem”; embodying as it does the concept that one should have warm fuzzy feelings about one’s self for no adequately explained reason whatsoever, as though by simply existing, one was doing something inherently good rather than merely converting oxygen into greenhouse gas.

Is that Fred Thompson, after some speculation, continues to think about considering the possibility of maybe trying to ponder chewing over the prospect of flirting with running for president. Maybe next weekish, if, you know, you’re not busy.

A new resource: National Firearms Act Handbook from the ATF.

Behold, the Full Auto Glove! Heh.

It’s amusing. From Joe, I learn that Gun Guy Gonzo linked to me stating we gun bloggers are full of venom and vitriol, cursing and overcompensating masculinity, and instead of providing insight on the news, they provide rehashes of decades-old NRA lies and propaganda. This is particularly amusing when you’re in the know that this guy (who also is affiliated with Buzzflash) is a hack bought and paid for by the Joyce Foundation, who also funds Mayors Against Guns (that group Knoxville Mayor Bill Haslam is a member of). It’s called projection, Mr. Karlin and Associates, when you accuse me of having your traits and characteristics. He’s also some comedian/voice actor you’ve never heard of. More background here. But that’s not the best part, this is:

It’s no secret that the gun guys seem to have a much larger voice on the Internet than those against gun violence– maybe there’s something about posting angry blogs from their parents’ basement that just appeals to them more, but when you go looking for intelligent commentary about gun laws on the ‘net, mostly you’ll just find idiotic rants about how the Second Amendment grants everyone the right to own an AK-47, and how it doesn’t matter if children die, as long as we can all shoot up wrecked cars with military grade weapons on the weekend. When it comes to reasonable insights about firearms and gun laws on the Internet, there isn’t really much out there except for us here at Gun Guys.

Well, that’s because no one is buying what you’re selling. People don’t like liars and propagandists. And, as evidenced from my site stats, no one is reading you. And here’s the other thing: I’m not paid by anyone. I’m not a member of the NRA. And I get no talking points dictated to me. At all. I do it because I like to. And I do it to entertain me. And I don’t do it from my parents’ basement, I do it from either my own basement (which is in my 3,800 square foot house) or my executive suite.

What scares these guys most is that in the last 20 years, there have been tremendous gains in the right to arms. Sure they passed the ban on weapons that look like assault weapons but it sunset and good riddance. 48 states now allow concealed carry permits of some kind. Also, the justice department for the first time in 4 decades views the second amendment as an individual right, as does the Congress and both major party platforms. The DC circuit supports an individual right, as does the fifth circuit. States are passing castle doctrine laws so fast, my head is spinning. And they’ve expanded self-defense laws. The Democrats won’t touch gun control with a ten foot pole. And anti-gunners like Romney and Giuliani are recanting their old positions. We, the real gun guys, are winning. And that scares them. Bad.

So, here’s the SayUncle challenge: For every unique visitor I get from The Gun Guys between yesterday and tonight at midnight, I will buy one box of ammo. So far, in the roughly 16 hours the link has been there, that’s a whopping total of four boxes. If it weren’t for Joe, I’d have never noticed you.

Update: We are now up to 6 (count them 6) boxes.

I dunno but I’m thinking if a white gun nut had said that, it’d be front page news.

It seems that not only being a gun nut, constitutionalist, or libertarian warrants a second look as you might be a potential terrorist, but also being gay does too:

The Alabama Department of Homeland Security has taken down a Web site it operated that included gay rights and anti-war organizations in a list of groups that could include terrorists.

The Web site identified different types of terrorists, and included a list of groups it believed could spawn terrorists. The list also included environmentalists, animal rights advocates and abortion opponents.

And this may well be enough to get you put on the terrorist watchlist and, if the Lautenberg bill passes, you lose your right to own a firearm, which is fine with the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Ownership.

In other news, I see this made the Washington Post. But I recall no mention of the other groups as potential terrorists making the press. That was all reported via blogs. What media bias against guns?

Anyway, if I were Jeff, I might pay extra attention to any unidentified vehicles I see around my place since he belongs to all those groups.

Via the NITwit.

I am having a disagreement with Carter at Volunteer Voters and Brittney of Nashville is Talking. They are confused as to why I take offense with their literal suggestion that “Soldiers are pawns”.

The idea that those who defend our Nation and Constitution are pawns is repugnant because it diminishes and marginalizes the nobility of those soldiers who give the greatest sacrifice.

This all started when Carter praised a Moveon.org type of attack piece on Fred Thompson. What Fred Thompson said was from an old poem. He did a good job saying it and it needs to be said.

There is a noble bearing of the soldier. They are the keepers of our freedom. They are not pawns. You either get it or you don’t.

Had a great weekend doing the usual foolishness up on the farm. This included putting guns in the hands of about a dozen people who have never shot. Half of them are women, which is even more gratifying. We have great photos of the faces people make while firing their first round.

One thing I’ve noticed is that the first time somebody shoots with us, they typically fall in to two camps. The first wants to run a thousand rounds through every gun and spends the entire day talking about how much fun they had. These people are hooked and they’re the ones who will be shooting every chance they get. They are now on our side.

The second camp will barely empty one magazine before politely saying thanks and leaving. I used to worry about that second group. We just weren’t reaching them the way I wanted to. I feared that instead of turning them on to the fun and safety of shooting we’d just scared them away.

Now that I’ve been doing this for a few years, though, I’ve realized it’s not the case. The people who consistently only run one magazine are never going to be enthusiasts, but I’ve discovered that they are happy for the experience, enjoyed shooting and are mildly interested in doing it again in the future. Most of them eventually do shoot with us again, and some of them even try out other guns. The important thing is that they all get to see what responsible gun handling looks like. I’ve stopped pressing those people to shoot and instead just let them come to us when the desire strikes.

And now the bleg: In the course of the weekend, my prized knife went missing. It was a folding Bear with a gorgeous brown wood handle. The blade was 4 to 4.5 inches, took a sharp edge and held it well. It fit nicely on my belt and in my hand. That knife had great balance.

I’m looking to replace this knife and seek suggestions for a quality knife that meets the above description. I’m willing to spend some money on this, although I want good functional value for my money. Thanks.

M-40, keep scrolling.

I have a Leatherman I use a great deal and I like. But I am considering a new addition. Any thoughts from SayUncle readers?

The candidates:

Gerber Legend™ Multi-Plier® 800

Leatherman 830039 New Wave Multitool

Victorinox SwissTool Spirit Multitool

A good review of Multi-tools can be found on Amazon.

You are bankrupt.

Have a nice day.

Remember that big ass pig that kid killed? Well, he’s getting hate mail from Peta.

And there’s a website.

Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Ownership:

“In countries like the United States it’s perfectly legal for members of the public to own certain types of firearms. If you live in such a country obtain an assault rifle legally, preferably an AK-47 or variations.”

– AL QAEDA TRAINING MANUAL

Like the Brady Camp, Al Qaeda seems to be either 1) confused or 2) misrepresents gun laws. An AK-47 made after 1986 is illegal to own in this country. A semi-automatic variant of the AK-47 made after 1989 must meet certain import requirements but, assuming those requirements are met, is lawful to own (1989 is the year the import restrictions went into effect; 1986 was when the FOPA went into effect). That said, here’s what the Brady Bunch is yammering about:

In the last few weeks, Senator Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) and Congressman Peter King (R-NY) have introduced bills which say that people on the terrorist watch list should not be permitted to buy guns. Most people are shocked when they learn that this common-sense step in fighting terrorism is not already in place.

We welcome and applaud this effort by the Bush Administration and Congress to begin to plug the terrorist loophole in our nation’s gun laws, and the gun loophole in our nation’s war on terror. Under current law, suspected terrorists who are deemed too dangerous to fly on airplanes, are not classified as too dangerous to buy assault weapons or other guns unless they fall into some other prohibited category. This makes no sense.

That’s right, denying constitutional rights without due process of law is a common-sense step.

I wonder if they support denying people the ability to buy box cutters, gasoline, and fertilizer?

Update: In comments, thirdpower points out:

Doing a little Googling, it’s not from the (or any) AQ training manual. It’s from some crappy little pamphlet alledgedly printed in the UK by “Azzam Publications”. So a little more disinformation from the BC and the VPC.

Ayup. Here’s one such manual. The quote is even wrong.

A while back, I noted:

In the middle of the night when you’re not quite conscious and attempting to soothe a fussy baby with a bottle, a bottle of Similac looks an awful lot like a bottle of International Delight Chocolate Caramel Coffee Creamer.

Well, the other day the Mrs. noticed a distinct similarity between these two product labels:

Poor Junior. Yuck.