Mike's Home Page

Just caught a bunch of pages and videos on this.

https://amzn.to/36SYrv9

 

You can buy these from me, too, but Amazon carries them at the same price.

Here's the idiot myth on every single page:

"The back isn't a good saw."

"The primary use of that knife, the reason it was designed, was as a general purpose escape tool from the wreckage of an aircraft. You could punch a hole in the fairly thin skin of the craft and saw your way out. It’s a fairly specialised knife that can work as a field knife but it’s not the best choice for a general purpose knife."

No, it fucking isn't.  If the plane is that fucked up, you're not getting out. That's a load of bullshit up there with the myth of, "You can't legally use a .50 cal against troops, but you can use it to shoot their web gear," and "Mattel made M-16s." The knife is stowed in a kit under the seat. You're not getting it out in time to do any cutting. If it's a fighter, you're ejecting. If it's a cargo/transport/bomber, there's a half dozen different ways out of the plane-every hatch, ramp, window, port and door is an egress.

"Hey, the guys need a tool to cut through the fuselage."

"How about a metal shear and a springloaded punch?"

"I guess, but I was thinking of giving them a knife."

"A knife?"

"Yeah, to punch a hole in the plane and saw their way out."

"Like you'd do with a spring-loaded punch and a metal shear?"

"Yeah, but a knife!"

No one is going to cut their way out, and 7075T6 aluminum is rather tougher than you think it is--they use it for M-16 receivers.
 
The saw isn't a very good saw, but it's a combinaton file/rasp (and not a very good one, but better than not having one).  It's for shaping wood, cutting rope, abrading roots, whatever you might need a non-slicing edge for. The knife is used for everything you use a knife for on the ground. You know: Camping and surviving while waiting for Pararescue to recover your butt.

I'm waiting for someone to insist what it really needs is a launchable spring loaded blade "like the Spetznaz used" as a "last ditch weapon."

And the CQC6 "Quartermaster" knife wasn't used for "prying open crates and hammering the lids," either. As dumb as the Army can sometimes be, they DO know what hammers and prybars are.
 
Jesus Christ, you people are stupid.

I just acquired a wall thickness gauge to assist with my addiction to classic shotguns.  Before you shoot something a hundred years old (or even fifty), you want to ensure it met proof, hasn't been reamed, compare chamber specs to the proof marks, if any, determine chamber length, load, and wall thickness. For example, 12 gauge shotguns might be spec'ed for anything from 2" all the way to 3.75" long shells, and while the longer chambers can take the shorter shells, the inverse is most definitely not true. Then, have the barrels been filed and refinished?  The bore polished?

And given the investment some of these represent--we're talking guns that come in their own custom fitted luggage with their own monogrammed accessories, and a label that notes the maker was "By Appointment to Her Majesty" (Queen Victoria) and about a dozen princes and dukes, you damned sure either pay someone to check the gun over for you, or get the tools to do it.  So I dropped $600 without thinking twice.

I had some problems learning to calibrate it, because I was way overthinking things. A call to the manufacturer cleared that up, and I was good to go.

What you need to know is that shotguns have most of their propellant impulse inside the chamber, and don't need barrels as heavy as rifles do.  So the recommended minimum wall thickness for a shotgun is .020".  Below that you really shouldn't shoot it, and should consider replacement of the barrels, having them relined, or sleeved.

The conversation with the guns went like this:

Stoeger, Brazil: I am a tactical shotgun! .020" doesn't allow for extra heavy loads or crashing through doors.  .035" is much better.

Williams and Powell, Liverpool: These barrels were replaced in 1954 after 70 years of honorable service. The new ordnance steel barrels are proofed at 3 tons pressure and have a minimum thickness of .028".

Luciano Rota, Italy: Pfah.  Leeway is good.  .030" will remain reliable, and it's easy enough for anyone with muscle.

Westley Richards, London:  I am 141 years old, and after being refinished, my double twist Persian damascus bores are right at .027, with one eroded ring at .020." I am a fine gentleman's gun and have the balance to show for it. Not to mention better lines than you'll find in most Soho nightclubs. They will probably still proof for nitro as well. (Leans back in chair and puffs fine cigar with sherry.)

Robert Faller, Freiburg: (Drags off cigarette.) Ze English are wimps! A gun is a tool for MENSCHEN!  There's that one thin spot from wear, down around .028", but otherwise these tubes are .035" to take hunting loads worthy of the Black Forest.



Mortimer, Edinburgh:  (Sips single malt.) Damned right they are. Old school percussion guns with laminated barrels are .040", in case the whisky causes you to lose track of the charge.

W&C Scott & Sons, Birmingham: (Leans back on cane.) You kids are all wankers.  Not only am I 10 gauge and laminated, I'm walled at .045". Do you want to dance? Or do you want to bloody shoot? 

Henri Pieper, Liege: (Pulls out pipe, blows huge cloud of smoke.)  Va te faire foutre! I am a professional and there are no chances here!  Three bar twist laminate barrels.  Walls are .050" up to .070" and threaded into a solid steel monobloc, which I patented. You have improved the pressure curve of your modern propellants, you say?  DO YOUR WORST! Phallicly stuff your nitrocellulose shells into my 137 year old chambers, and pull the trigger.  PULL THE TRIGGER! Pull it, ta chatte! BE A MAN!



So, yeah, some of these old guns are fucking tanks. The myth that you can't possibly shoot old guns at all, and if you can, you have to use half loads, is BS.

The inability of the internet generations to use 10 seconds of their search engine of choice is pretty pathetic.
 
From Wikipee, who's rarely unbiased, but in this case managed some basic facts (Infogalactic is better):
 
Under current law, all male U.S. citizens between 18–25 (inclusive) years of age are required to register within 30 days of their 18th birthday. In addition, certain categories of non-US citizen men between 18–25 living in the United States must register, particularly permanent residents, refugees, asylum seekers, and illegal immigrants.[2]
~~
The illegals better run. I need popcorn for the Demorrhoid reaction.
~~
 
In February 2019, the male-only military draft registry was ruled to be unconstitutional by a federal district judge in National Coalition for Men v. Selective Service System.[52] Following the ruling, the Selective Service's Legislative Liaison Jacob Daniels told reporters: "Things continue here at Selective Service as they have in the past, which is men between the ages of 18 and 25 are required to register with Selective Service. And at this time, until we receive guidance from either the court or from Congress, women are not required to register for Selective Service."[53]
~~
That was your guidance from the court. At any point you attempt to implement, you'll be shut down.
~~~
The Selective Service System considers the term "male" in the federal law to refer to the sex observed at birth, so trans women are required to register, while trans men are not.[54]
~~
Yeah, I need popcorn for the GOP response now. And the Demorrhoid freakout that transfemales might actually have to be treated like males. Basically, neither side has any intellectual consistency on this.
~~
First draftees are inducted: According to current plans, Selective Service must deliver the first inductees to the military within 193 days from the onset of a crisis.[75]
~~
After the President asks, and a Congress determined to fight everything he does agrees (good luck with that). Though they might do it just to be able to blame him. Because The Demorrhoids excel at fucking their own people in the ass to make a point that didn't need made.
 
And then you have to train them to do something useful.  And make sure they're reliable and not going to sabotage anything, which even volunteer millennials have done to high profile (That little bitch Bradley Manning for example).
 
So, at least a year. 
 
There are zero foreseeable future conflicts in which that timeframe will ever be relevant, and it's much cheaper to offer bonuses than fight the lawsuits or convene the boards, especially when a bunch of recruits never actually make use of the benefits in the first place.

So I'm going to disagree with a friend on a board that Selective Service is "Alive and well."  It's a barely breathing, corpulent relic that serves no purpose and exists due to the bureaucracy's inability and unwillingness to ever euthanize a terminally ill patient.

And speaking as a retired vet--we don't want the pathetic kind of untermenschen who need to be ordered to backfill support roles we can fill with reservists, retirees, civil service, and contractors for cheaper per-slot costs.  And we sure as shit don't want you pretending to be line troops. If you could pass the physical training. Which most of you soibois cannot. So bleat on Twitter, drink your energy drinks, eat your junk food or "organic" bullshit, watch your Youtube, and play CoD.  And otherwise keep quiet. The men will handle this.

And let's look at the history of these protests:

Rescue run to Grenada: "ZOMG! DRAFT!"
Dig out a guy in Panama: "ZOMG! DRAFT!"
Several debacles in the Balkans, Africa and Caribbean under Bill Clinton: INFORMATIVE SILENCE.
Expedition to Kuwait: "ZOMG! DRAFT!"
Operations in Iraq: "ZOMG! DRAFT!"
Operations in Syria under 0bama: DEAFENING FUCKING SILENCE.
Angry tweet about NK. "ZOMG! DRAFT!"
Single fucking missile on a legit target. "ZOMG! DRAFT!"

It's a childish protest bleat.

EDIT: in response to that last:

In response to my snarking commentary on hemorrhoid pussies shrieking about a draft, 
some liberal shithead called
Rebecca Anne Smith said: I strongly doubt that pattern exists anywhere outside of Mr Williamson's memory and that of people equally effected by bias confirmation.
Me: I strongly doubt you have a clue what you're talking about.

Nixon ended Vietnam and the draft, but somehow gets blamed for the war started by Truman.

Carter reintroduced Selective Service. Now, which party was he?  Oh, right.

I moved to the US in 1978, and was SERVING IN THE US MILITARY from 1985-2010 and watched nearly every minor operation lead to Demorrhoid pussies shrieking about a draft.  Except from 1993-2000.  The Balkans never happened and we don't still have troops there (except it did and we do) and "Clinton ended that war and brought the troops home" except they're still there.  Mogadishu never happened.

From Bush down, officials say there'll be no draft--but makings are there WAR IN THE GULF
https://www.baltimoresun.com/news/bs-xpm-1991-01-20-1991020013-story.html


Charlie Wrangel re-introduced a draft in 2003, shrieked to the press that Congress was considering a draft and it was all Bush's fault. No one else supported it, and his grandstanding stunt died in committee.


"Sooner or later, the government will need a draft to fight a longer or larger-scale war, or to maintain a permanent occupation force in Afghanistan, Iraq,"
https://hasbrouck.org/draft/draftandwar.html (which also contains the liberal lie that the Mujahideen became al Qaida)

"Widespread fears of a new draft crash selective service system."
https://www.militarytimes.com/flashpoints/2020/01/05/world-war-iii-trending-on-social-media-crashed-the-selective-service-website/
 
The earlier ones are not easily found online, but I remember plenty of people railing about them both in person (including a couple of my alleged "educators") and in the press.

So anyone thinking otherwise can take their OWN selection bias and fuck themselves with it.  

[Chorus]

And it’s down in Blacksburg Forest is where I long to be
Lying in the dark with a Luau company
A comrade on me left and another one on me right
A mag of ammunition for me little Armalite

[Verse 1]
We were insulted by the governor, he said “You all are scum
Clinging to religion and your compensating gun,"
We tried to argue logically, our manners were polite
But all the time I’m thinking of me little Armalite

[Chorus]
And it’s down in the swampland is where I long to be
Lying in the dark with a Boogaloo company
A comrade on me left and another one on me right
A drum of ammunition for me little Armalite

[Verse 2]
Well this brave State Policeman came marching up our street
Six hundred National Guardsman he had lined up at his feet
“Come out you cowardly criminals, come on out and fight”
He cried “I’m only joking” when he heard the Armalite

[Chorus]
And it’s down in Appalachia is where I long to be
Lying in the dark with an Igloo company
A comrade on me left and another one on me right
A crate of ammunition for me little Armalite

It's inevitable that when you're in the process of pointing out that the state is stealing something or someone for the "greater good," for social purposes, that some soiboi leftist cog will bleat, "That isn't socialism."

I like how "real socialism" is whatever they want it to mean at a given moment, so they can tell you you "Don't know what socialism is."

Venezuela--it was real socialism, until it failed, which was somehow capitalism sneaking in there.

Sweden--is real socialism, despite having multibillion dollar corporations. But wait, we'll come back to that.
 
The American welfare state--Someone actually told me that, "It's not socialism. It's just taking resources from those who have them and distributing them to those who need them."  Which is LITERALLY THE FUCKING DEFINITION of socialism. But it's not real socialism. Except they want it to be universal for everyone.  

Roads--socialism, even though they date from the Palace Economy of the Bronze Age and had as their primary purpose (when government built), enabling taxation to bring assets TO THE PALACE. There were also privately built roads in Celtic nations, thus disproving the myth that only governments can build roads. And this is 4000 years ago. But that's not convenient to the narrative that only governments can build roads, roads are socialist, but somehow "right wing" governments are also socialist in this regard, despite not being socialist.
 
National Socialism--actually capitalism, even though the government nationalized half the corporations, set up socialized medicine and transport, and fixed most prices. Oh, and outright confiscated land, and outlawed "Speculation." It was "Right wing socialism." That's sort of like "male pregnancy" or "libertarian socialism" or "Fictional reality." All of which are things leftards believe are real. After all, these are people who still believe legions of Russians are monitoring Fecesbook and blogs to downvote their comments, and that somewhere Donald Trump really has a Russian birth certificate, because Russia magically has something he needs or wants.
 
Fun Fact:  99% of liberals have zero fucking clue what a "right wing" actually is, and even think America is "right wing," to the point that "The democrats would be center-right in Europe, not left wing."  This is based on the mutiple mistaken notions that: anyone should give a shit what Europe or anywhere else in the Third World thinks about politics--remember that we told them to fuck off a couple of hundred years ago, and my family personally told them to fuck off in 1978 when we moved here. And that: The Euro peon baseline is relevant and unbiased. HINT: it's not. Almost all of those nations have Marx's cock 12" down their throat and up their ass, you'd have to be Howard Zinn or Joseph Stalin to actually cross their line to the left.  Also, that's one hell of an accomplishment given that Marx had a 2" dick on a good day.

But wait!  Let's go back to Sweden, a western democracy with a large capitalist sector--it's "real socialism" when the "liberal" thinks they've accomplished something the US hasn't (They actually haven't), but switches to "not real socialism" when they claim "Real socialism has never been tried." It's Schroedinger's Socialism!
 
I could parody this with, "You don't know what drugs are," and "pot isn't a real drug," and "everyone uses drugs, so drugs are good" (including meth and carfentanyl). Except I've actually heard that bullshit from leftists.
 
What was my point here?  Oh, right--most leftists are hypocritical shitheads, and you should always throw them from the helicopter.

Ironically, the ACTUAL hardcore socialists (Trotskyites and such) actually have a grasp of capitalism and see it as a useful tool. Which is why most of the left hates them, too.
 
So whenever one of them opens their facial anus, pre-empt the debate by first informing them that THEY don't know what real socialism is, and then the undisputable fact (they'll try anyway) that real capitalism has never been tried.

Oh, yes--and get them a helicopter ride. Because whatever Pinochet was, he wasn't really right wing. Though you could use an autogyro, since it's not a real helicopter.

The Gender Mafia
Dec 16, 201912:41AM

There's a an Op-Ed, or maybe a Pre-Op-Ed at the WaPoo about how to address people who refuse to use the gender norms human languages have had literally forever.

I think I was 13 the first time I was called "ma'am" on the phone. I didn't bother correcting the business because I understood as a young male youth my voice could be mistaken. It didn't break my emotional well-being, and I lived through the experience.

The entire article is drivel, and...well, here: https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/please-stop-making-jokes-about-gender-pronouns-when-people-tell-you-theirs/2019/12/11/

First of all, fuck you, I'll make any fucking jokes I like about any fucking thing I want, any time I fucking feel like it. Don't like it? Fuck off.

In a serious note, I will address you as you present. If you're at an historical re-enactment wearing 10th Century Norse female garb, I'll assume you are "miss," "damen," "my lady," or "ma'am," accordingly.  If for some reason you want to dress and present as a female, but not be called one...then you need deeper therapy.

If I am not sure (and this applies to status, rank, sex presentation, class, etc), and it's relevant, I may ask, "How should I address you?"

And then we will get on with our lives.

If you have to start with, "My pronouns are she and hers," I'm going to tell you, Our pronoun is "The Shitlord," and We are only addressed in the third person. Also, you will have to do it in this language I just made up that changes every week. Or in my native Gaelic. Or you can just fuck off.

What you don't get to do is dictate how other people talk.  Here's a relevant excerpt:

The backlash was instantaneous. By the end of the night, Cuomo had apologized on Twitter, noting his sorrow as “an ally of the LGBTQ community” — but still not managing to state his pronouns. And I wondered, not for the first time: Why can’t cisgender people be semi-normal about this?

~~~

Why does he have to play your game and "State his pronouns"?

Why do you display the bigotry of accusing him and us of being abnormal? "Cisgender" is an external, false euphemism you have assigned to NORMAL PEOPLE, identified as the 99.995% of the population who are male or female (whether or not they accept that is another issue). One can be straight, gay, bi, asexual. One is male, female, or has a chromosome or physiological mismatch (rare). Those latter are the only non-"cis" people. Claiming you're with them actually denigrates them.

Why do you assign us the identity "cisgender" over OUR protests, but expect us to kowtow to your preferences?

This is the fascism of a minority culture, full of hatred, intolerance, and refusal to accept the norms of the majority.

The first big step toward terrorism.

And anyone who doesn't believe it borders on terrorism is invited to "misgender" some high-profile freak on TWITter and wait for the screaming backlash and attempts to dox you.

There was even wailing about someone being called "it," except there IS a high profile freak of some sort who has publicly stated their pronoun is "it."  

You see how this game is played?  Worthless failures who can't get attention any other way are demanding that everyone address them in a clever, unique fashion known only to them, changing at whim, with no set rules.  There was also another article that people who DO use these terms are "patronizing."

So, no, Kat, you're a fucking freak, and an obnoxious one, and you need to grow the fuck up and grow some balls, or boobs, or something, or else take some tequila and sleeping-pill therapy. You not only have issues, you have entire subscriptions that make Publisher's Clearinghouse look sedate. But they are not my subscriptions and I'm not buying any.

Our story so far:

Virginia's legislature got taken over by the Dems since the GOP failed to run quite a few candidates, and due to some gerrymandering and population density issues that are apparently only a problem when they work against the Dems.

As often happens, when one party gets a significant majority, they want to go all-in on achieving their dreams of molding society to their image.

The Dems proposed some very heinous gun control, without any pretense of care about the Constitution either federal or state, morality, or reality.

A whole bunch of counties and towns pre-emptively declared themselves "Sanctuaries," which is apparently A-OK if you're refusing to arrest, jail, and deport illegal alien child rapists, but "treason" if you're refusing to steal people's property under color of law. At least according to the Dems.

So, one US Rep Donald McEachin (D-Deep State)(that's sarcasm, okay?) has proposed having the governor "Nationalize the National Guard" to deal with the problem. (Give him credit. At least he didn't threaten to use nukes, like a certain former presidential candidate. OTOH, if VA actually had nukes, he might have.)

Let me explain this:

The governor can't "nationalize" the National Guard. He can call them to state active duty.

Per Posse Commitatus, they can't engage in law enforcement on Federal orders anyway.  On state orders, yes, but, keep reading.

It would also still require a search warrant for every single domicile if they could.

Other than a handful of MPs, none have training for this process. Even if you squint hard at qualifications and add a few others, the actual number of troops qualified to do this is a few HUNDRED at most. The entire VA Army National Guard is about 7500, mostly support.

The National Guard does not keep ammo on hand in any relevant quantities.  A small amount for training is it.

Per US Constitution and federal law, the governor CANNOT arm the NATIONAL Guard with federally owned weapons and ammo. He'd have to provide that. 

Nor can he arm them without consent of the feds anyway.  There are reasons for this. This is one of those reasons. It is not a bona fide emergency that does not permit of delay.

And the threat to do so is LITERALLY WHY WE HAVE THE SECOND AMENDMENT.  Congrats, jerkwad! You've actually threatened to have the military repress people, and you're surprised that they're going to oppose you? EVERYONE should be opposing you. It's outrageous of itself, and outrageous precedent if allowed.

Not to put too fine a point on it, but there should be politicians hanging from lampposts over this.

Our society started to fail when we stopped tarring and feathering.

But if despite all that, you make the attempt:

First, if they haven't already (US Army NORTHCOM hasn't said anything), I guarantee the Adjutant General and his staff will ask National Guard Bureau for an opinion on any orders, and likely DoD proper, as well as their own legal staff, for opinions on exactly what the orders mean, and their scope and limits.  Because with a dual state/federal mission, every one of those officers is putting their career on the line in such an instance.  The wrong use or misuse of any federal money or equipment is court martial offense.  Low end enlisted can "just follow orders" for the most part, but leadership is expected to know or ask.

On State Active Duty, the troops get paid the same to sit at the armory eating catered meals (because federal funds can't be used and armories don't have huge pantries), and wait for specific orders, or to draw up "plans," as they would to drive around in Hummers looking mean. Which is all they could do because of all the above.

So what will happen is a bunch will call in sick, or "out of state," or "employer really needs me."  Volunteers will be few (and not too bright to want to get into the Boogaloo).  If you try to issue orders, state level orders don't carry the obligations or penalties of the UCMJ, and the reality that the Guard is part time means they do in fact have a lot of leeway on how fast they report, and what you can actually do if they don't (HINT: very little).

Once they get there, They can't be issued federal weapons or ammo. And of course, if the supply sergeant, armorer, and a couple of others aren't present, the Arms Room can't even be opened. Unless the CO personally wants to issue the order and unlock it. (He doesn't want to do this.  The Feds would end his career.)

I suspect the Adjutant General and his staff have already had a lengthy discussion with their own lawyers, the National Guard Bureau, and any relevant active duty installations regarding what equipment they can use. The Feds certainly don't want dragged into this, and while the Guard can use equipment for an "emergency" with compensation afterward, enforcing a badly thought out and contested law almost certainly doesn't meet the standard. So any activated Guardsmen may not even be able to use body armor, web gear, or vehicles.  And there are probably zero officers willing to risk their Federal commission over a State matter.

And then they make "plans" and wait for "guidance," because no one is putting their name on the dotted line without someone they can point a finger at. They'll be playing phone games, posting memes on Farcebook and TWITter, and generally kicking back and enjoying their SAD pay, which is usually tax exempt at the state level.  I haven't looked up what that rate is for VA, but it's probably better than $100/day. (EDIT: Very generously, it's the same as active duty pay. Far better than the $75/day flate rate IL paid us for the 1993 flood.)

If it gets that far, they then drive around and look mean, as I noted, because they literally can't go door to door without police leading the way with a warrant.

If you try to make them do so, most are going to refuse. Good. Because the last time some states took this direction, they got put down hard. This isn't an earthquake, a foreign attack, or even an out of control football riot. You're asking to use military force to attack US citizens for code violations.  You thought using SWAT for warrant service was bad? (It is.)

If by some freak of circumstances you get some small number to do so, people are going to die. Given how many veterans are among the population, and there's an entire network of retired special operators and CIA types in that area, the mayhem might even be BIBLICAL. You know:  Earthquakes, volcanoes!  The dead rising from the grave! Human sacrifice, dogs and cats living together, mass hysteria!

Yeah, I mean it might be a bunch of young, naive Guardsmen who die in three way crossfires by tired old vets who've spent a lot of time in Asia.

I spent 19 of my 25 service years in the Guard. I don't want to see EITHER side of this.

This is why more and more counties are deciding to be "sanctuary" and totally sit this one out. Good for them.

If you're willing to use military force and murder people over ownership of anything, we're back to tar, feather, and lampposts.

Frankly, since McEachin is theoretically a lawyer, he should already know this.  That he doesn't, or couldn't take 10 seconds with Google to find it, speaks poorly of his intellect. I wonder how much actual legal work he did before running for public office.

There were also some idiots on our side railing against the Virginia Adjutant General not "refusing," but merely noting he has no orders and legally has no opinion.  Hey, geniouses (sic)! He can't comment on orders he has not received about events that have not taken place or been ordered.  The complete non-response was the only legal thing he could do.

WHAT VA RESIDENTS NEED TO DO NOW:  Watch for "Compromise."  It's standard for the Dems to demand the confiscation of all firearms, and then "Settle" for any number of smaller intrusions--"Assault weapon" bans, "universal" background checks, purchase limits, etc.  Don't fall for any rhetoric about how a lesser proposal is "Reasonable." None of it is reasonable, and this is a good opportunity for a peaceful resistance to an outrageous movement.

WHAT EVERYONE ELSE NEEDS TO DO NOW:  Keep calm. Spread the word.  Agitate against such outrages. Buy more guns.  Buy them legally. Buy them privately if you can.  Buy more, more, and yet more. There's always the risk we'll reach the point where America tips over. But that's a chance we'll have to take.

Because if it's impossible for the government to seize 300 million weapons (the lowball estimate), it's way more than four times as impossible for them to seize 1.2 billion.

BTW, if you are not familiar with my work, this recent anthology is actually quite relevant to staging a resistance/rebellion, is a National Bestseller, and has excellent reviews. https://amzn.to/2ZO0Og0 

I remember when Usama bin Laden (his preferred spelling) was Man of the Year, and they had to remind people the criterion was "generates most news," not an endorsement. That Hitler had once been their Man of the Year, for example.
 
This year, the most news was either:
 
The Hong Kong protestors, or
 
President Donald J. Trump, since the fucking Demorrhoids in and out of the media literally cannot shut the fuck up about him for 10 seconds, and obviously crave the dopamine response from reading his laser-pointer tweets every morning, and all day long.
 
But they are such morally corrupt, intellectual dishonest cocksuckers, they refuse to acknowledge their own deranged creepy stalker obsession. So they went with the retarded meat puppet with Soros' hand up her ass, wailing about "Climate catastrophe" that her dropout brain can barely spell, and about how her dreams and childhood have been stolen to the point where she has to sail around the world in a multimillion dollar "sailboat" using diesel engines and expensive artificial, carbon-dense material for its construction.
 
So if you had any delusion that Time was anything other than cat shitbox liner, this should disabuse you of it.

As I told her, I have 35 years professional experience with weapons, 25 of it in the military. I don't need pussyplained to.

Let's unpack some of her Shitter bullshit here (assuming she doesn't dump the post from the well-deserved ratio she's getting).

https://mobile.twitter.com/designmom/status/1198580238533439488?

"There are far better ways to protect your family than a gun. Get a life insurance policy."

Do you even understand how life insurance works, bitchtard? You have to fucking DIE. The whole point of self defense is NOT TO DIE.

"Yes, an intruder shot my husband and raped us all, but hey, I got $100K, so there's that. It almost paid for the funeral, the medical treatment, the therapy, the replacement door and jewelry, and my wheelchair and ramp."

"I know you truly believe that you'll need to defend your family at gunpoint. You need to let that go. Statistically it's just not going to happen. I know it's boring, but if you want to protect your family, things like seatbelts, fire alarms, and life insurance are your best bet."

I have those, too.  And I HAVE defended my family at gunpoint, so fuck your "Statistics." Which you must have shit out of your fat, liberal mom ass.  But even if that were true, you'd be making the case that GUNS AREN'T A PROBLEM as far as crime.  Are you retarded? Or just a fucking moron?

The reality is, you're probably going to die of heart disease or diabetes, or just old age and natural causes. I know it's not as cool-sounding as an armed-standoff, but it's still true.

Well, actually, statistically I'm not going to die of any of those, because I carefully chose ancestors with superior genetics. Well, old age, yes. Everyone dies of that if nothing else.  And there's nothing "cool" about an armed standoff, speaking from experience.

I'm probably not going to die in a house fire either. Even though that's really cool-sounding, I guess.  I still have extinguishers.  Which you didn't mention. Just "alarms."  Typical fat liberal bitch expects a man to come rescue her. (Conservative and libertarian women don't seem to have this problem.  My wife is pretty handy with a shotgun and pistol, as several predators who went after livestock can no longer attest).

If the topic of protecting your family comes up, a gun extremist will immediately imagine an armed intruder who has come to murder. That's not going to happen. It's rare enough that it's not something people need to worry about or make decisions based on.

You repeat it, hoping it will catch on.  But if so, then why does it matter if people have guns? You've just stated they're not going to be used for murder.  So what's the problem?

Other than the fact you have no fucking clue what you're talking about, about anything. Including about being a mom. (I was a single parent for several years, have been the primary parent for 22 years, and the solo parent for lots of time the other parent was professionally absent.  I'm a better mom than you, too.)

Also, at least 50% of households have firearms.  If that's "Extremist" to you, you need to take a long, hard, look in a mirror.

If the topic of protecting your family comes up among people who actually interact and care for children each day, they think of things like using car seats, preventing hormones and dangerous chemicals in food, child-proofing the cleaning supplies, and schoolyard bullying.

I actually interact and care for children, and apparently a lot more than you, who's too busy lecturing the internet.  The "Dangerous chemicals in food" suggests you're a GMOtard, which means you're ignorant of yet another subject, and a racist (Which we already knew from your pollyanning that home invasion doesn't happen. You have to be white privileged as fuck to hold that belief).

Hundreds and hundreds of you have explained to me that a life insurance policy won't protect against an armed intruder. I never said it would. The thing you don't understand: There isn't going to be an armed intruder. That's just your paranoia.

Hundreds and hundreds of people are smarter than you, you ignorant cockholster.

There were 2.5 million burglaries in 2017, per DoJ.

A gun in the home is FAR more likely to kill or maim a household member than it is to protect them. Enjoy your daydreams about armed stand-offs. But that's all they are. Daydreams.

That stupid claim has been debunked more often and more thoroughly than "Vaccines cause autism" (which I'm going to assume this bloviating narcissist believes also).  Repeating that one just proves you're a completely ignorant shithead in this subject.

And no one "daydreams" about armed stand-offs. Except, apparently, you.

Update: A shocking number of you are CONVINCED that armed intruders will enter your home at 2 AM. And specially at 2 AM. Is there like an NRA ad about a 2 AM break in? Some meme I missed? Don't answer. I don't actually want to know. Muting this thread now.

You don't actually want any information that will crush your racist white privilege worldview? That was obvious.

Ask any cop when the most calls for burglary are.  Do you even know what number to call for the police?  Or do you have the maid do that, too?

You are a complete fucking waste of a human being, and pretty fucking smug about your ignorance, weakness and privilege.

You know, the one accused of planting drugs on over 1000 black men, that's been going viral again four years later.

Well, it turns out that wasn't exactly the case. And by "not exactly," I mean "complete bullshit."

https://www.dothaneagle.com/news/crime_court/fbi-no-evidence-of-systematic-drug-planting-by-dothan-pd/article_8d1e3796-ab18-11e9-a36f-67a971db69de.html 

 
So I contacted the below newsgroups to see how they respond:
 
Debunked before the below publication date. The FBI found nothing of "1000" cases, and all of about 5 complaints, all fraudulent. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Even the professional race-baiters at SPLC couldn't corroborate it.
 
(The SPLC was early to post Carroll’s article on Twitter and was partly responsible for it spreading it as far as it did; this afternoon, however, the organization formally retracted the tweet after determining that they could not vouch for the truth of the article. “We shouldn’t have given it a platform,” SPLC digital media director Alex Amend told me.) 
 
 
As was Reason, as often but not always:
 
As you are all no doubt utterly honest reporters, you will obviously update your articles and note the correction on your sites, yes?
 
Or am I going to uncover evidence that the media has published thousands of fake stories about police?
 
Because what we have here seems to be one of the rare, completely above board, earnest about the regs and propriety, police departments, being slimed as one of the worst, with what looks like fabricated evidence, or as we technically call it in the biz, "bullshit."