Starvin Larry

Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”—George Santayana

“We never learn.

In the right (or wrong) hands, benevolent plans can easily be put to malevolent purposes.

Even the most well-intentioned government law or program can be—and has been—perverted, corrupted and used to advance illegitimate purposes once profit and power are added to the equation.

The war on terror, the war on drugs, the war on illegal immigration, asset forfeiture schemes, road safety schemes, school safety schemes, eminent domain: all of these programs started out as legitimate responses to pressing concerns and have since become weapons of compliance and control in the police state’s hands.

Mark my words: red flag gun laws, which allow the police to remove guns from people suspected of being threats, will only add to the government’s power.

These laws, growing in popularity as a legislative means by which to seize guns from individuals viewed as a danger to themselves or others, are yet another Trojan Horse, a stealth maneuver by the police state to gain greater power over an unsuspecting and largely gullible populace.

Thirteen states now have red flag laws on their books. That number is growing.

As The Washington Post reports, these laws “allow a family member, roommate, beau, law enforcement officer or any type of medical professional to file a petition [with a court] asking that a person’s home be temporarily cleared of firearms. It doesn’t require a mental-health diagnosis or an arrest.”

In the midst of what feels like an epidemic of mass shootings, these gun confiscation laws—extreme risk protection order (ERPO) laws—may appease the fears of those who believe that fewer guns in the hands of the general populace will make our society safer.

Of course, it doesn’t always work that way.

Anything—knives, vehicles, planes, pressure cookers—can become a weapon when wielded with deadly intentions.

With these red flag gun laws, the intention is to disarm individuals who are potential threats.

“We need to stop dangerous people before they act”: that’s the rationale behind the NRA’s support of these red flag laws, and at first glance, it appears to be perfectly reasonable to want to disarm individuals who are clearly suicidal and/or pose an “immediate danger” to themselves or others.

Where the problem arises, of course, is when you put the power to determine who is a potential danger in the hands of government agencies, the courts and the police.

We’ve been down this road before.

Remember, this is the same government that uses the words “anti-government,” “extremist” and “terrorist” interchangeably.

This is the same government whose agents are spinning a sticky spider-web of threat assessments, behavioral sensing warnings, flagged “words,” and “suspicious” activity reports using automated eyes and ears, social media, behavior sensing software, and citizen spies to identify potential threats.

This is the same government that keeps re-upping the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), which allows the military to detain American citizens with no access to friends, family or the courts if the government believes them to be a threat.

This is the same government that has a growing list—shared with fusion centers and law enforcement agencies—of ideologies, behaviors, affiliations and other characteristics that could flag someone as suspicious and result in their being labeled potential enemies of the state.

For instance, if you believe in and exercise your rights under the Constitution (namely, your right to speak freely, worship freely, associate with like-minded individuals who share your political views, criticize the government, own a weapon, demand a warrant before being questioned or searched, or any other activity viewed as potentially anti-government, racist, bigoted, anarchic or sovereign), you could be at the top of the government’s terrorism watch list.

Moreover, as a New York Times editorial warns, you may be an anti-government extremist (a.k.a. domestic terrorist) in the eyes of the police if you are afraid that the government is plotting to confiscate your firearms, if you believe the economy is about to collapse and the government will soon declare martial law, or if you display an unusual number of political and/or ideological bumper stickers on your car.

Let that sink in a moment.”

Read the rest @

https://www.rutherford.org/publications_resources/john_whiteheads_commentary/red_flag_gun_laws_yet_another_government_weapon_for_compliance_and_control

https://www.zerothposition.com/2018/11/16/private-imperialism-colonialism/

Not too long ago, we covered the steps for zeroing or sighting in a rifle. Generally done at 50, 100, or maybe 200 yards, that’s only the first step to preparing to shoot at longer ranges. While zeroing verifies that your bullets are impacting at a fixed distance, say 100 yards, calibration goes much further to make sure that your scope, rifle, and specific ammunition are all in sync at farther distances.

Precision Rifle Data

When you zero your rifle at 100 yards, you’ve done a couple of things.

You’ve adjusted your scope to make your specific ammo type hit a certain point on the target when shooting from a certain distance. You’ve also adjusted your scope’s turrets to read “zero” for both windage and elevation. In theory, with that accomplished, you can just dial in distances changes to your scope’s elevation turret and hit a target at some farther distance down range. In theory.

Here’s the problem. While your ballistic computer may be precisely accurate in telling you that exactly 23 clicks will get you on target at some more extended range, that may not happen in reality.

Read more @

https://www.ammoland.com/2018/11/precision-rifle-data-long-range-shooting-range-logs/

https://www.americanpartisan.org/2018/11/prepper-medicine-what-you-think-you-know-can-kill-you/