Things That Go Bump Stock in the Night

Paddock1Stephen Paddock bump fired the National Rifle Association into showing their true gun control agenda. Wayne LaPierre will gladly assist the gun-grabbers of the world, who happen to occupy both sides of the political aisle, if it means he can keep his position as King of Gun Rights and the donations flowing in from poor suckers he has bamboozled into believing he is on their side. The days of Neal Knox are long gone, and any hope of the NRA protecting the true reason for the Second Amendment died with him.

You soft-hearted types, who have trouble wrapping your heads around dispassionate after-action analyses of facts, may want to skip the next section or two. Go sit with the women and fret a while.

Listening to the audio of the Las Vegas shooting, two thing struck me. Naturally, the first was the high rate of fire. Under stress, even a moderately trained person can shoot himself dry surprising fast, but the booger hook working the bang switch tires quickly. Fatigue overtakes adrenaline with the first magazine swap, and most people come down from peak twitch pretty fast. The continued high rate of fire clued me in to a few things.

Pay attention to the pattern of fire. There were distinct pauses, but the spacing of each report sounded off. It didn’t jive with the reports of “automatic gunfire.” However, I couldn’t put my finger on the reason.

Stephen Paddock strikes me as the sort who enjoyed having his guns more than using them. Based on the crime scene photos, his firearms were pristine. Anyone who carries a gun or uses them on a regular basis knows they wear and have a tendency to get beat up. Finishes dull. They wear in a predictable pattern. Guns that are actually used also tend to carry big, ugly scratches and gouges taken out of them from being dropped occasionally. It happens. Working guns look they were dragged behind a truck and run over by a tractor. You can trust a man with a beat-to-Hell gun because it’s just a tool to him.

Stephen Paddock was a Mall Ninja, who bought his way unto being able to lay down a base of fire.

By comparison, Omar Mateen, the Pulse nightclub shooter in Orlando, killed forty-nine people versus Stephen Paddock’s fifty-eight. The vast majority of carnage in both instances occurred in the initial ten to fifteen minutes. The big differences were in the number wounded and the number of rounds expended.

In Orlando, the active shooter portion was ten to fifteen minutes, before he barricaded himself in a bathroom with hostages and didn’t fire a shot during negotiations. He initially exchanged fire with an off-duty police officer doing security duty, but things didn’t really start to turn against Omar Mateen until several more good guys showed up with guns. Funny how that works.

Pistols are for emergency use until you can get your mitts on a long-gun and get to work.

Stephen Paddock picked a great shooting position, but it was a lousy escape position. His options were through a door into a hotel hallway, down thirty-two floors, and out one of a limited number of exits on the ground floor or out a window about four hundred feet above the pavement. He definitely would not have survived option number two, but it would have been fun to watch.

Omar Mateen had a better chance of getting out of the Pulse nightclub alive. Several hours of negation was a three hour window, during which time he could have surrendered. His chances still weren’t good, but a negotiated surrender increases the odds of survival over the chaos of an assault. However, once the SWAT team initiated the rescue by blowing a hole in the bathroom wall, there weren’t many ways for the operation to end that included Mateen seeing the sun rise.

SWAT guys are the sorts who enjoy winning. They expect to come out on top in an operation, and woe be unto any who get between them and the goal. Botching the wall breach by not blowing a big enough hole to fit through is as infuriating as it is embarrassing.

Nobody may ever know how many rounds Stephen Paddock expended, but so far, the number two thousand is being thrown about. That may be a number put out by politicians to gin up public appetite to ban bump stocks, but let’s accept it, for the sake of argument.

That is some piss poor shooting. He was hosing that crowd down and relying on 22,000 people being crammed together butts-to-nuts. Stephen Paddock could have achieved a much higher death tally with a conventional firing method, or at least, some trigger control on his bump stock. He was a rank amateur.

Has anyone besides me noticed the conspicuous lack of disciplined, well-trained, mentally healthy, non-drug addled perpetrators of mass shootings?

Full-auto fire is conducted with controlled, aimed three to five round bursts. What is heard on the recordings is a man who does not have a firm grasp on how to run his weapon system. There was no skill, discipline, or commitment to craft. It seems like a last hurrah in a come-to-life game of Call of Duty by a rage-filled man bent on suicide, but who lacked the guts to do it himself absent the pressure of the police closing in on him.

By definition, the insane don’t act rationally. That can be an advantage once the shooting starts because of the gaps left to exploit by the responders. Then again, shooting up a crowd of strangers at a concert is highly irrational, in the first place. Just crazy enough to initiate the shooting is actually worse, in this case, than being nuts to the point of not being able to effectively plan and carry it out.

These shooters occupy a sweet spot on the spectrum of crazy where they are rational enough to concoct a plan and put it into action, but, luckily for everyone, not rational enough to understand the fix when their skills suck. So, just like a lot lazy, but perfectly sane and law abiding, shooters, the Stephen Paddocks of the world attempt to purchase their skill set.

You don’t improve your shooting by hanging crap off the gun. You get better by running rounds through it until parts break.

Fast is great. Accurate is greater. But living to testify in front of the Grand Jury is greatest, so I’m not too picky about how I get there. For my money, the best gunfight would more accurately be described as a “shooting” because the other guy wouldn’t get any rounds off in my direction. Hell, if I had my druthers, the other asshole wouldn’t even know the fight had begun.

Mrs. Cunha has a strict policy that I return from my adventures alive, and preferably, without any additional scars.

Based on the number of weapons in the room with him, Stephen Paddock did seem cognizant of the tendency for heat and gunk to render a weapon inoperable. I suspect the plan was to use a variant what old timers called a New York Reload; drop the gun that doesn’t go “bang” anymore and pick up one that does.

Fair fights are overrated. The objective is to win.

Some reports indicate Stephen Paddock had recently been prescribed diazepam, typically used for anxiety, muscle spasms, and seizures. This doesn’t mean he was taking the drug, so toxicology tests will be interesting. There is evidence to suggest that benzodiazepines, such as diazepam, can lead to aggressive behavior.

It’s also coming to light that he was a drunk and a fan of cocaine. The guy definitely liked to party and weekend-long video poker benders don’t sustain themselves. With all three of these things possibly going on inside his body at once during the shooting, it’s no wonder he sucked at his task.

Then again, bat-shit crazy is a thing, and that may be the only reason discovered. Life is full of unanswered questions.

What is not an unanswered question is what to blame in the wake of the Las Vegas shooting.

A single, solitary man named Stephen Paddock is to blame.

Bump stocks, assault rifles, and silencers are no more to blame for the loss of life in Las Vegas than tall buildings, country music concerts, or hammers. To believe otherwise is to abandon any pretense of personal accountability and turn society over to voodoo practitioners. An item’s existence neither influences its wielder nor creates an impure heart. A hammer that builds a house can just as easily be to put to use crushing a skull. It’s the workman who chooses to put the tool to use; whether that purpose be good and creative or twisted and evil.

With a moderate degree of skill and a milling machine (or a high degree of skill and access to a file and drill press), an ambitious home machinist can turn out a fully functioning and aesthetically pleasing boom stick, which is completely legal, as long as it meets AFT length requirements, is semi-auto only, does not fire from an open bolt, etc. Throw in plans downloaded from the internet, and the production process speeds up a whole bunch.

What mental defect afflicts gun grabbers?

If our ambitious machinist of moderate skill loads plans downloaded from the internet into his CNC milling machine, turns out a functioning BAR, and tests it out by shooting up the nearest grammar school, exactly what would gun grabbers want to ban?

Manufacturing a full-auto firearm is already illegal.

One option is to put firearms blueprints on par with child pornography by criminalizing its possession, dissemination, and creation. That is a moral equivalency I’m sure hoplophobes would be glad to defend and, I’m sad to say, most Americans would let pass without comment.

There are simply too few Americans hogging out their own AR receivers or having AK Bending Parties. The fact that most people reading this article have no idea what I’m talking about in the previous sentence, much less have ever participated in either activity, lends weight to the statement.

Perhaps, just like bump stocks, gun grabbers would prefer to go after the tool, instead of the man who employs it? The government could create a registry for CNC machines and license their operators. That way, they could keep tabs on every machinist in the United States and have a database from which to begin investigations on the off chance one whacked out loser out of 330 million people decided to go rogue with his weekend workshop project.

A type of bump stock called a bump board can be made with a length of board and a nail. Running a loop of 550-cord through the trigger guard and around your shoulder gets the same rate of fire as a bump stock. There is an old technique using a shooter’s thumb through the trigger guard and a belt loop that yields the same result.

Knowing how to do something is lightyears away from putting it to an evil purpose. Twisted minds and wicked hearts cannot be controlled by regulating objects.

Honestly, what surprises me is that we have so few Las Vegas type shootings.

Lawmakers, on the left in particular, but ever increasingly on the right, are more than willing to slowly suffocate every right we possess. It’s not just gun rights, but rights in general. However, firearms and any piece of gear that puts the average citizen on par with the average government actor strikes fear in politicians’ hearts because deep down in their souls, politicians know they possess the capacity to become tyrants.

As part of the Washington political establishment, organizations such as the National Rifle Association are loath to admit the Second Amendment was instituted to give the citizenry the ability change the government in the event it became tyrannical.

We are far from any such situation, and it’s a horrifying thought. However, much like mutually assured destruction through nuclear weapons during the Cold War, it kept both sides sober and honest. The prospect of having to put the threat into action encouraged everyone to keep talking to work out their differences.

The NRA long ago abdicated its mission statement of protecting firearms rights in favor of being the public relations firm for friendly, well-dressed sport shooing enthusiasts, who are too upper-middle class to entertain the notion that our descendants might possibly, one day in the distant future, run out of political options and be forced, with heavy hearts, to dismantle what our ancestors so painstakingly created.

But, hey, as long as the dues money keeps rolling, so the NRA Board of Directors don’t have to get day jobs and Wayne LaPierre continues to be invited on television and to all the Washington parties, the National Rifle Association is totally willing to play political patty-cake with our God-given rights.

To preserve their rock star lifestyles and social clout, the NRA has come out in favor of regulating bump stocks.

A small, ferocious mutt makes a better attack dog than a friendly, dopey behemoth.

As such, I would advise anyone serious about protection of the Second Amendment support more aggressive and ideologically pure champions. They are smaller organizations and may not carry the same clout in Washington, but they also aren’t buddy-buddy with those who would strip us of our rights.

Here are my favorites:

Gun Owners of America

National Association for Gun Rights

Jews for the Preservation of Gun Ownership

I’m not saying to quit the NRA in protest for them being pansies. They won’t care what you have to say. What I am saying is to let your membership expire and put that money where it will be used to protect your rights, instead of political deal making with people who have no qualms about marginalizing you and dictating what freedoms you may maintain.

And before some Liberal asks, the answer is a resounding “yes.”

Every one of those fifty-eight lives is worth sacrificing for the right to have a bump stock. So is mine. So is yours. So is everyone’s. That’s the nature of rights. They transcend the individual.

The more important question is why aren’t you willing to protect those rights?

3Thank you to all my readers. I appreciate every one of you. Please visit my Patreon account for members only content. Becoming a supporter gets you additional articles, behind the scenes access, and unique Thank You gifts for your support.

Don’t forget to preview my novel L’homme Theroux and consider purchasing it, if you enjoy the sample chapters.


Why, Yes. That is a Pistol in my Pocket.

1concealed2The New York Times opinion piece, “The Concealed Carry Fantasy,” cast all gun owners as literal murders roaming the streets of America, in search of innocents to kill. According to the New York Times Editorial Board, they have the statistics to prove it, too.

I mentioned a couple of articles ago that I neither trust nor rely on statistics to prove my points. Not so much because I can’t count, but because I spent so many years in the belly of the beast manipulating numbers to prove whatever the boss wanted to show.

Statistics are the refuge of those unable to take a principled stand and unwilling to hang their enemies from the nearest light pole.

The foundation of the piece, drawn from the Concealed Carry Killers website, “a resource maintained by the Violence Policy Center that includes hundreds of examples of non-self defense (sic) killings by private citizens with permits to carry concealed, loaded handguns in public,” and their fifteen page “Analysis of Federal Bureau of Investigation and National Crime Victimization Survey Data” titled Firearm Justifiable Homicides and Non-Fatal Self-Defense Gun Use, shows the sharp critical thinking, intense intellectual rigor, and deep statistical acumen of a seventh grader banging out a Social Studies paper the night before it is due.

According to the report (and I use that term in the most generous meaning), the United States experienced 763 homicides by concealed carriers since 2008 that were not ruled self-defense. Fine. We’ll play their game with their numbers.

Here’s the problem: All murders are homicides, but not all homicides are murders. Not only can the unnamed writers at the New York Times, with their fancy educations and urbane understanding of nuance, not grasp this nuance, but neither do they understand most shootings do not end in death. As a matter of fact, most don’t, so to focus solely on deaths in the attempt to discredit concealed carriers is disingenuous in its sloppiness.

These are the same assholes who make their Sunday crossword puzzle virtually unsolvable just for the sake of being elitist showoffs. Y’all can go fuck yourselves.

In the South, we have the phrase, “He needed killing.” It’s a concept that is more widespread than Liberals and Yankees want to admit.

1concealed1Every jurisdiction in the United States has the concept of justifiable homicide, called excusable homicide in some places. For the uninitiated and purposely deceptive, “homicide” is the killing of a human being. It comes in several different flavors; intentional, unintentional, justifiable, negligent, and accidental. Even murder comes has different categories, depending on the amount of premeditation and malice involved. The exact wording may vary from place to place, but the basic idea is that not all killings are equally bad or equally deserving of punishment.

I’d go so far as to say the act of killing another human being is morally neutral.

It’s neither good nor bad until assessment of the circumstances. The robber who kills a little old lady in a home invasion is by every measure the scum of the Earth. However, the little old lady who shoots the home invader dead will find herself being apologized to by the responding police officers for tracking mud across her carpet. Depending on the town, the cops might not even take her gun as evidence.

And if you live in a place where you don’t think what I just described would happen, I feel sorry you. My suggestion would be to move away from there as soon as possible. Just don’t come down South, unless you plan to conform to our ways. We’re busy enough driving out the carpetbaggers we already have.

Liberals, the group of people who love nuance and shades of gray when explaining why a fetus is not a human being prior to severing the umbilical cord, suddenly love all life when it comes to gun confiscation.

In the blatant lie pushed by the New York Times Editorial Board, the 763 killings committed by concealed carriers were wonton acts of murder perpetrated by hardened criminals possessed of an insatiable blood-lust. I call what the New York Times is doing a lie because they present their number as some sort of hard statistic. A click of the mouse and six minutes of plain old reading show the basis of the article, the report from the completely unbiased Concealed Carry Killers website, to be a manipulation of FBI statistics to fit their anti-gun agenda.

It’s magnificently clear the Violence Policy Center is simply another organization formed with the ultimate goal of complete firearm prohibition by dividing gun owners into smaller, more easily defeated groups.

I’d link to the study and the organization’s website, but I refuse to send petty tyrants the traffic. Neither do I want their stink on my web stats.

Quite honestly, the Concealed Carry Killers website is nothing more than a collection of anecdotes collected from news reports masquerading as research. The numbers, which are the furthest thing possible from statistics, are intentionally worded to double-count incidents and inflate the results to support their agenda. They disclose on the site that the data set is incomplete, but then whine about “the gun lobby” keeping the data under wraps. What a bunch of cry-babies.

1concealed4Isn’t that just like a Liberal to completely discount millions of occurrences where nothing bad happened to focus of the minuscule number sensational enough to make the papers? Commercial air travel (especially in the Western world, and double especially in the United States) is safer than it’s ever been, but if the anti-gunners magically became “anti-air travel,” the website would be called “Death in an Aeroplane” and completely omit mention that your odds of being struck by lightning next Tuesday are better than the chances of you ever dying in a commercial airplane crash.

I have neither the space nor the desire to numb my readers’ minds pointing out each instance of obfuscation and cherry picking these retards engage in. Let me just say that considering there are 11.1 million currently valid concealed carry permits, 763 deaths spread over eight years is minuscule to the point of absurdity. And once you consider that, by the website’s own admission, half of those deaths were suicides, concealed carriers come out as far less dangerous to the lives of others than choking to death on a chicken bone or passing out drunk in a hot tub.

I tried to calculate a percentage, but the calculator on my computer can’t handle a result with so many zeros between the decimal point and the first whole number.

By the way, that 11.1 million number isn’t even counting people carrying concealed in the last of the free states, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Idaho, Kansas, Maine, Montana, Puerto Rico (surprisingly enough), Vermont, and Wyoming, that don’t require any licensing at all.

And more are coming. All of this drives the gun grabbers bat-shit crazy.

“But Carlos, isn’t every life precious and worth saving?” No, not really. I can think of half a dozen people I know who aren’t worth shouting “look out,” if a runaway taxi was headed toward them. However, I’m willing to agree to that statement as soon as Liberals agree that life begins at conception.

I’ve always said that personalization is the last resort of a losing argument. Beat a Liberal down with facts and well-reasoned, articulate logic that appeals to any concept higher than personal avarice, and you will immediately be met with, “Well, what if it happened to you?”

This tactic reveals the Liberal mindset. At the end of the day, every policy decision is reduced to personal feelings and individual gain. It matters not what builds a self-reliant society with a strong economy. All that matters to Liberals is how they feel about themselves and what they stand to gain.

The Liberal world-view is based on three basic factors:

Mistrust of their neighbors

All Liberals are brilliant, compassionate, and sophisticated; just ask one, and he’ll tell you. They possess the answer to all of life’s questions, and a few more that could only be formulated by someone with a lot of free time on his hands.

I once worked with a Liberal jackass, a distasteful little wretch of a man who nearly got me killed on two separate occasions in two different ways, whose view on gun control was that of complete, forcible confiscation.

His reasoning? He neither trusted anyone to handle firearms without a negligent discharge that would pierce every obstacle between him and the muzzle nor be able to control the impulse to begin blasting away in a moment of anger.

Let that sink in for a minute.

According to this logic, every human being on Earth is utterly incapable of controlling his emotions. I didn’t bother to ask what he proposed be done about knives, hatchets, claw hammers, baseball bats, large rocks, or people’s fists, since the response would have been equally condescending and asinine as the first assertion.

His concern had more to do with his own lack of self-control than anything else. It was demonstrably wrong because the other seven guys who worked with him managed every day to control their own urges to throw him off a Hetco and let Hajji have at him.


There isn’t a Liberal alive who doesn’t believe he’s Albert Einstein, King Solomon, and Johnny Appleseed all rolled into one and tied with an environmentally friendly, forty percent post-consumer, recycled green bow. It’s a good thing they reject Christianity. Otherwise, they’d all claim to be Jesus Christ.

Actually, I can think of a few Liberals who already think they are Christ.

Yankee Liberals are particularly obnoxious in this regard, but West Coast Liberals aren’t much better.

I read an article about the prolonged drought in California and the unexpected side effects from the gubernatorial fiat to reduce water consumption from his Executive Highness Jerry Brown, the man who should have called his life’s work complete boinking Linda Ronstadt and was re-elected Governor after a twenty-eight year break by an electorate largely too young to remember that his first stint wearing the black top-coat with “GOV” across the back was about as enjoyable as watching a live sex show staring your grandparents and a Mexican donkey.

To the state’s credit, they have reduced their water consumption by nearly a third (assuming their numbers can be trusted, which is a suspect proposition from the start). Water is an important resource, but California is going to pay for it. An unintended consequence is there is not enough water flowing through the sewer systems to operate properly. All the nastiness is building up in the sewer pipes, corroding them prematurely, and causing sewage backups in low-lying areas.

I shit you not, if you’ll pardon the pun. California is constipated and in desperate need of an enema.

The various damage, plus reduced water bills from less use, has left the state with over a billion dollar shortfall in their budget. Not only are water-desperate trees and plants sending out roots that block and damage pipes carrying any sort of moisture that then have to be augured out by hand, but the sewers have to be flushed out in a process I will be just fine never knowing the details of. But on the bright side, there will be plenty of work for the illegal Mexicans looking to do jobs Americans don’t want to do.

Lust for Power

The biggest fear of a Liberal is the prospect of someone, somewhere doing something that the Liberal does not approve of.

Bonfires on the beach, off-roading in the desert, and hunting from the back porch, while not explicitly protected by the Constitution, are freedoms that have been hemmed in and picked away at over the years, largely by left-leaning busybodies.

It’s not that Liberals don’t like to have fun. They just don’t always know how to do it right.

My idea of fun generally involves activities that are hazardous, bad for my health, or annoying to anyone within three leagues; that’s a smidge over ten miles, if you were wondering. Hence, one of the reasons I live out in the boondocks.

Liberals hate that about me. When I lived in California, Liberal neighbors were always the first ones to call the cops because I was butchering a deer in the front yard (it was the only tree strong enough to hold it up) or skinning and fleshing a coon in the garage.

Not content to bury entrepreneurs in regulation, impose speech codes in universities, ban guns, and generally suck the fun out of everybody else’s life in their own communities, they descend like Liberal locusts on new, free areas of the country, populated by independent souls, to impose the guiding Liberal philosophy of “If I don’t like it, you can’t do it.”

Arizona and Texas, in particular, have experienced this. Waves of Liberals, after destroying the economies of their own states, look for greener economic pastures, generally in the South, where strangers wave at each other, most doors are unlocked, and “Had a deer tag to fill” is counted as an excused absence on school attendance sheets.

In the interest of full disclosure, I’m one of those California transplants. The difference being that like any proper immigrant, I came to assimilate. I, like many other Adopted Sons of the South, escaped social oppression and economic despair for somewhere we fit in. None of us asks the South to change. Quite the contrary, we hope she doesn’t change. Unfortunately, there are precious few of us.

What these insidious carpetbaggers do is infiltrate positions of authority, usually starting with school boards and city councils. Then they wait. They bide their time voting on the colors for homecoming, while secretly steeling their knives, as like-minded friends are surreptitiously added around them. It’s a similar tactic as is being used by Muslims all across the Western world. And in both cases, they are winning.

Back to gun confiscation and what to do about it.

1concealed3The price of our freedoms is not fighting Nazis or Russians or ISIS. The threat is internal. It comes from family, neighbors, co-workers, and people who pretend to be your friends. These well-meaning people, who are bemused at your old fashioned adherence to concepts such as honor, American exceptionalism, and that the Founding Fathers really did mean rocket launchers, hand grenades, and machine guns when they wrote “arms,” are the same ones who are trying to disarm all of us in a slow process of weakening in preparation for slaughter by our eventual invaders, while the Liberals collaborate their way into survival.

Don’t associate with people who would see you a slave in the name of their feelings. Do not socialize with them. Do not patronize their businesses. Do not go out of your way in the slightest for them. Shun them at every opportunity. Heap scorn upon them, if you feel the urge. Consider moving out of Liberal infested areas and leaving them to rot. They will eventually collapse under their own weight like Detroit, Chicago, or the entire state of California.

It’s time to stop being the polite, friendly, welcoming group of firearms enthusiasts the NRA wants us to be. The NRA hasn’t represented gun culture since Neal Knox was forced out, anyway. They are firmly a gun control organization. Join Gun Owners of America, The Firearms Coalition, or Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership, if you want to support a group that actually believes in the Second Amendment as it was written.