— Is It An “Assault Rifle”, or a “Contech Rifle?”

Expecting Firearms to NOT evolve despite the natural progression of technology, would be akin to expecting the car NOT to evolve.  Think about a 1955 Mercedes 300 SL and a 2016 Mercedes Gullwing.  Both cars share a direct lineage, and were/are the height of automotive technology at the times they were built, and the 1955 SL is considered one of the most beautiful cars designed by humanity.  The 2016 ‘Merc, on the other hand is astonishing,  but is a far more capable vehicle.  It has Air Conditioning, Anti-lock braking, traction control, night vision radar, GPS navigation, power steering, carbon fiber, Airbags, bluetooth, and ‘oh yea, a sound system.  These features do not make it a new type of vehicle.  It is still a “car”; but it is a car that contemporary technology has NATURALLY made quicker, faster, more safe, more powerful, and more efficient; even while making it much heavier and larger.  The contemporary Mercedes is an all around better vehicle, due to technology.  Logically, shouldn’t technological advances affect firearms in the same manner?

But today, America is filled with people, many of which, know NOTHING about firearms, but who despise the idea of a “firearm”.  They particularly hate the bigger, scarier one… ‘even though, they are not the cause of most firearm related carnage…  They particularly despise the rifles they mistakenly like to call, “Assault Rifles”.

The Assault Rifle

Despite our collective insistence on NOT judging a book by its cover, it is apparently legitimate to judge a firearm by how it looks.  It doesn’t matter how it works, or what the definition of “Assault Rifle” is.  All that matters to some people who know little about firearms… is that some rifles look scary.  The “Assault Rifle” is based upon one,

Sturmgewehr 44

The Sturmgewehr (Assault Rifle) 44 from 1944.  It Is where the term “Assault Rifle” comes from.

specific rifle.  The German Sturmgewehr 44 (or STG-44).  The reason for its name, was that it was a rifle (gewehr) designed to “storm” (or assault) the enemy.  It had a 30-round detachable magazine, intermediate powered round, and SELECTIVE FIRE… meaning, it could fire a single round per trigger squeeze OR multiple rounds per trigger squeeze (“automatic mode”, like a machine gun).  By looking at the STG-44, you may note that it has the exact same general configuration that modern military rifles have.

The Contemporary Technology (Contech) Rifle

“Contemporary art” is art RifleARproduced at the present period in time.  “Contemporary Technology” describes current technology.  “Contemporary Technology Rifles” (ConTech) describes firearms produced with technology of the modern day.  Instead of a lever-action, or bolt action rifle, contemporary technology includes a gas-system that reloads rounds in a semi-automatic operation, instead of loading round metal balls into the barrel (as on a musket).  Magazines hold multiple rounds instead of forcing the user to manually load each round between each shot.  Instead of a one size fits all shape, adjustable stocks allow the operator to adjust for his/her body size and shape.  Instead of using costly wood for the stock, polymers and plastics are used (just as in contemporary cars).  These are merely upgrades in technology.  Did anyone think that technology would stop just because we’re dealing with firearms?

Just as in Cars, TV’s, stereo systems, homes (or any other product, service, or good). Firearm technology advances make contemporary firearms more effective and easy to use.  Features such as a Flash Hiders, Pistol Grips, Optical Sights, Detachable Magazines, Adjustable Stocks; increase the reliability, utility, and effectiveness of the firearms.  That is what technology does!  Would you really expect contemporary firearms to be as difficult, inaccurate, and inefficient, as firearms from the Revolutionary, or Civil War eras?

brown-bess

Technology does not stop merely because it is on a product that some do not like, but perhaps, we shouldn’t call all Contech rifles, “Assault Rifles”.

K. Pinckney

—The Hypocrisy of [SOME] Conservatives

They label themselves as Conservatives, but they have always been in the Republican Party.  Poor babies; they didn’t get their way and now they don’t want their party’s nominee to win. Why waste time reminding them that they are, in fact, Republicans?  Why confirm to them that the next President WILL BE either a Republican or Democrat?  More specifically, why remind them, that the next President will have the last name of either Trump, or Clinton?

Instead of recognizing the facts, they proclaim “Never Trump”!  They say that they must vote their conscience!  They say Trump is not conservative concienceenough for them.  It becomes apparent that these conservatives would rather lose than have the nominee from their own political party in the White House.  They are so distraught that the best opportunity in a generation, to get a “Conservative” to the head of government is floating away, just as a body on fire at a ceremonial Viking funeral floats from the shore into sunset.

The truth is, that they are hypocrites.  Not the kind that party like drunken rock stars on Friday and Saturday night, but ensure they get to church on Sunday morning; but, they are the of kind of hypocrites that, to paraphrase Ronald Reagan, “know so many things that aren’t so.”  They think they are the enlightened and others… are ignorant or being fooled.

The same people who despise Trump now, are the same people who supported McCain, who are the same people who supported Romney.  Hold-Nose-600-LAIF they got it so wrong then, why can they get it wrong now?  They seem to think they’re voting for the second coming of Jesus, when they’re only voting for a guy to run their government.  They can’t see that they don’t need to love him, nor pledge allegiance to him… ‘again, because he’s not sacred.  They only need to vote for someone who will lead to their political outcomes.  Smaller government? Strong defense? Lower Taxes? Repeal of Obamacare?   […if that is their goal]

Some Conservatives truly want to put their collective faiths, into another human being!  But they only want one who thinks, and believes, exactly as they believe.  They’d rather lose the opportunity to have a President who shares their political party, to someone who despises their Party, them, and their beliefs.  It is a form of Conservative Supremacy.  They feel their Conservatism trumps their party (when it should only be their Religious beliefs that do).  They fail to recognize that they are doing exactly what those of ‘that other religion, say in nearly every poll regarding Sharia. Many Conservatives, just as Muslims do, seem to be confusing their religion with their politics.  Obviously, they’ll say they cannot separate the two… just as Muslims say!

A President is merely a man, or soon, maybe a woman.  He’ll just be a guy who signs or does not sign Bills put in front of him by a chaotic Congress.  He’ll just be a guy who does, or hclinton-trumpdoes not play golf immediately after a terrorist attack.  He’ll just be a guy who will, or will not sign a repeal of Obamacare.  It’ll be a person who will organize how government taxes American citizens. It will be a person who will use their judgement to sign or counter-sign the plethora of Executive Orders signed by the current dude.  She’ll just be a person who will appoint judges to the Supreme Court.  She’ll just be a President who will continue all of the same policies, that you despised from the current President for the last 8 years.

You believe yourself, both patriots and Conservatives… ‘and we all know that you would dump your patriotism for your conservatism.  But RINOwhat if you were just a symbol of a party that is trying desperately to save itself; and who is begging you to protect your beliefs, and not your country?  Why are you so keen on assisting a lady who wants nothing more, than to see you and your beliefs obscured?  Isn’t it curiously IRONIC, that many of you who attacked others in your party for being Republicans In Name Only (RINOs) over the past few years, are all but admitting, that you are in fact, Republicans In Name Only, who will only vote for “Conservatives”?

But it’s OK Conservatives!  Give up voting for a guy that played by the rules and won your party’s nomination, in favor of allowing someone, NOT in your party, to walk away with the Presidency.  Perhaps that’ll show them all that you’re serious; and that you’re a “true” conservative!

Instead of #NeverTrump, you might consider #ConservativeSupremacy

— BREXIT from one American’s Perspective

Two days until the vote (23 June 2016).  The British people have a referendum on the “BREXIT”.  BREXIT, is the term used to describe a BRitish EXIT from the European Union (EU).  The EU experiment has Britain's exit from the EUgrown into a 28 nation-state economic, and socio-political group meant to protect and stabilize the individual nations, by YES, socializing the efforts and energies of all of the participating nations.  The belief was that they can build a powerhouse economy with every nation that joined.  They also believed that Security would be improved by such a vast alliance, which is, no doubt, an honorable mission.

But alas, if it worked so well, why do any countries want out?  Well, Because being a part of the “European Union” required that the individual sovereignty of the many nations, take a back seat, to the “Union” of all other nations.  It enforces the same rules on all nations, even though, they may not believe in the same concepts, or ideals.  It is the same problem socialism has wherever it is used. Individual (in this case national) liberty, freedom, and choice is minimized, and options are directed by others.

The Irony Of America

America fought to get away from the British Empire, who was once America’s colonial master.  It is ironic that now, Britain has to make the very same choice those Colonial Americans had to make.  Does Britain stay and allow a distant entity to make rules for her.  Or does Britain fight for her freedom?  Currently, Britain allows, and accepts, that a group of unelected Europeans in Brussels get to establish laws, and determine basic sovereignty conditions regarding important items such as trade and immigration into Britain.  Shouldn’t a country be able to determine its own immigration policy and establish its own trade policy.  Or should it allow a foreign entity that has an interest in boosting the economic performance of other nations, determine the future of a country whom it does not want to boost the economy of?  Should it stand by as an external force supports the idea that the British currency, the Pound, would go away in favor of the Euro.  A force that, when it feels the need, can take an entire country to a foreign Supreme Court in Luxembourg (another country).  Does any of that sound like freedom?!?!

Obviously, this is Britain’s decision!  The British must decide if they will stay or go from the EU, but I, as an American, find this ironic.  Luckily Britain does not have to fight to get away from what has become its regulatory master.

In The End

It is supremely unfortunate, that many British people, organizations, and politicians within the “Remain Campaign” are suggesting, that Britain won’t survive if it is not part of the European Union.  This of course ignores the fact that Britain Brexit-Grexitsurvived outside of the EU for centuries, before the EU was ever established.  That somehow, life is so different that Britain would shrivel away, and/or whither into insignificance if it were to BREXIT.  It is the thinking of enslavement that makes many feel that freedom, and sovereignty is a threat.

‘And there is reason to panic if you’re the European Union.  You survive, solely because there are countries that pay your way, ‘and it’s the rich countries in the union.  It is NOT the poor countries.  Britain is paying for decisions… that do not benefit Britain.  That is always a losing business model.  It is likely, that if Britain exits, so will others.

As much as I despise when others interject themselves into American politics, I find myself in the position of observing BREXIT from the outside.  I cannot wait to see what the British voters do on Thursday 23 June 2016.  I think I know how I’d vote!

K. Pinckney