In life change is inevitable. Sometimes change is good. Other times, change is not so good. Then there are times where change is merely a change that we might individually do not care much for.

The New Hampshire Union Leader, once a reliably conservative publication established in 1863 out of the Frank Knox moderation strain, (moving decidedly right under the leadership of William Loeb III and Bernard J. McQuaid) is now part of a "new media era" sometimes showing Moderate tendencies. And if I am not accurate, we can just call it, "Anemically conservative," from time to time.

Despite Union Leader endorsement of Newt Gingrich in his run up to the New Hampshire primary, no other political or social issue "de jour" brings a sharper, more crystal clear focus to political dialogue than do guns or second amendment. So suffer me a moment to understand the larger context of the Union Leader as the Second Amendment chameleon today.

In The Union Leader's first Editorial on December 18th, following the Newtown Massacre, The NRA's clout: It comes from the people, The UL writes,

"Gun rights are not popular in America because the NRA is so politically influential. The NRA is politically influential because gun rights are popular..."

and,

"The group would have little clout if it did not have 4 million members and the support of millions of non-member gun owners who see a need to become politically active to protect their right to bear arms from liberals who openly advocate eroding it..."

The Union Leader does a fine job clarifying the lens through which to properly define the contemporary role of the NRA. As the UL points out, the left is hell-bent on vilifying, demagoguing and mischaracterizing the NRA, its members and its leadership. The anti-gun crowd has gone even so far as advocating the death of NRA leadership and its members.

On December 22, the UL Editorial staff came out strong with an editorial entitled, An individual right: Obama and the 2nd Amendment, questioning the strength of Obama's commitment to the Second Amendment, despite his rhetoric. Moreover, the UL underscored, "why" the second Amendment was came about in the first place:

Writing of militias in Federalist 29, Alexander Hamilton put it this way: "if circumstances should at any time oblige the government to form an army of any magnitude, that army can never be formidable to the liberties of the people while there is a large body of citizens, little, if at all, inferior to them in discipline and the use of arms, who stand ready to defend their own rights and those of their fellow-citizens."

And finally on December 29th, An editorial entitled, "Holding steady: Gun rights after Newtown," the first suggestion emerges for advocacy of what is referred to as, "modest changes," citing a poll where 62% of Americans supposedly support a ban on ammunition magazines with capacities higher than 10 rounds and checks at gun shows.

In all respects, (notwithstanding a magazine or specific types of semi-automatic rifle) The Union Leader appears on its' face to have crafted a solid Second Amendment narrative.

What I find utterly troubling, however is the complete and utter checking of what I refer to as "Faux Second Amendment advocacy". On December 17, Professor Wayne Lesperance wrote in Another View citing some CNN/Washington Post/ABC polls,

But (Americans) also believe there are reasonable restrictions that can and should be implemented to restrict who can own a firearm, what sort of weapon they can own, and the amount of ammunition that can be loaded into the weapon.

December 27, again in, "Another View," David Sherman is the lone writer correctly pointing out that a culture of violence is at the heart of Mass murders, not the so-called, "black scary gun, with the misnomer attached, "assault weapon."

All the while, I am wondering, "Gee, I kind of wonder what Kathy Sullivan is going to write,"All the while fully knowing what is to come, prejudging the content and context. Not to disappoint, New Years Day brought us a rant from the reliably shrill Kathy Sullivan entitled, We need to take the guns away now!

Some people mistakenly think she irks me. Nothing could be further from the truth. In fact, I often look forward to rebutting her arguments in blog posts with what I call, "The Shrill Kathy Chronicles" Its all part of the fun of having a sharp stick with which to poke people.

Occasionally, I send something to the UL as a counterpoint. But perhaps what I write is too sharp for them, even. No matter...I get it. The UL achieves a higher click count with Kathy Sullivan and her rants, as often evidenced by the rank number of trolls and Kool-Aid drinkers weighing in with comments. I would lay odds she finds the UL Editorials Irksome. It is all just good laughs.

David H. Lee weighs in on January 3 asserting, Dick Swett was right about the assault weapons ban. David H. Lee was a research guy for Dick Swett, ergo...an anti-gun Democrat. His rank pandering is noted here:

"Dick and others who voted for the ban "laid down their seats in Congress so that police officers and kids wouldn't have to lay down their lives under a hail of assault weapon attack."

Dick Swett fell on his sword, "for the children." And a heck of a lot of good that did, "for the children. What David Lee fails to disclose is that Dick paid the price for gong back on his word. Yet another in the sea of many who fails to conceptualize that criminals do not follow laws. Bans do not work.

Finally, on January 6, Ron Godbout from Northfield goes on a self-aggrandizing litany about the guns he owns, his competitive shooting experiences and his paper-thin sensitivity to Wayne LaPierre and the NRA. in a "Your Turn" UL Op-ed column. Godbout, "qualifies" himself in order to call for a ban on black scary guns..."Ban those guns, just not the ones 'I' own..." is the essence of his plea. He states,

"I concede that assault rifles have no functional role in the private sector, and I believe they should be well-regulated. Taxing them would be one partial solution, but placing stricter controls on them, like those already in place for fully automatic weapons, would help immeasurably."

Kevin D. Williamson, writing for National Review on Line, could not have said it more eloquently,

The answer to this question is straightforward: The purpose of having citizens armed with paramilitary weapons is to allow them to engage in paramilitary actions. The Second Amendment is not about Bambi and burglars — whatever a well-regulated militia is, it is not a hunting party or a sport-clays club. It is remarkable to me that any educated person — let alone a Harvard Law graduate — believes that the second item on the Bill of Rights is a constitutional guarantee of enjoying a recreational activity.

Ron Godbout drank too much of the anti-Second Amendment Kool-Aid. He let the emotional diatribes of the anti-gun left dumb him down. He is now a faux-Second Amendment supporter, advocating for the disarming of law-abiding citizens.

Sour grapes because the UL didn't publish what I had to say? Not a chance. It's nothing personal, I am sure. I still think Joe McQuaid and Drew Kline are, "stand-up guys." Besides, I got published on other local and regional publications, one as big, if not bigger than the UL. Inversely, what I wrote hardly fits within the moderate backdrop of what other citizens are saying.

On the one hand, it appears the UL has a solid and sound position on the second Amendment. But juxtaposed with the overwhelming opposite editorials calling for an assault weapons ban, perhaps things are now out of balance, if indeed, balance is being sought. Only the folks at the UL can speak to that.

Piers Morgan does not like guns. That is okay with me. A great many people in this country do not like guns. Some people from here are particularly noisy about not liking guns. I suppose that is okay as well. What I take issue with are those instances where foreigners step upon our soil, and wag their finger at us, telling how we should not have guns. Piers Stefan O'Meara...Morgan is just one such scroat.

When a foreigner says, "you should not have guns," it is entirely fair game for us to look at his or her world view. And Piers Morgan comes from a societal and cultural norm where guns are banned and that society has nothing comparable to the Second Amendment of the United States.

In Piers Morgan's worldview guns do not belong in any society. Morgan uses his CNN bully pulpit to propagandize and to arrogantly lecture Americans on his Anglocentric gun paradigm... Well, I object.

First, Piers has a very short memory in World History. Over 200 years ago our ancestors drove Piers Morgan's ancestors off of this continent. Again in 1812, King George III and his British Empire decided to have another go at us...and failed. The Mighty Army of the British Empire...repelled by a band of ruffians (In today's vernacular would be bitter clingers to guns and religion) with guns. Still for many years thereafter, America had no standing Military.

The British Empire on the other hand, touts over 600 year experience with trained, organized standing Army in service to it's progressive imperial Kings and Queens. It was once said that the sun never sets on the British empire.

Alas, We can rightfully assume Piers Morgan is thoroughly familiar with the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. And why not? Although, "not from the states," the anti-gun liberals that Piers Morgan," sips tea and nibbles crumpets with, have likely educated him on their convoluted and utterly twisted contorted confabulation of what, the second amendment means. Bottom line: He knows how it reads.

And again, History is an inconvenient interloper in strident anti-gun dialogue. I say Again, The UK has nothing even remotely resembling the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. In fact, The English history sets the standard for disarming it's subjects. It is historical experiences that provides the cultural context for why America has a "Second Amendment." Piers Morgan is devoid of that very experience.

The Catholic minority along with non-Protestants were prohibited from possessing arms in the ongoing campaign of general political oppression. The Act of Disenfranchisement was the standard of the day when the founding fathers were writing the U.S. Constitution. Certainly, that bore great consideration during the drafting by our founding fathers.

The Second Amendment embodies the very nature of the relationship between citizen and Government. Yet, many progressives turn their noses up and laugh at this as a relic of the 18th century. Progressives are not honest. Debates about the very meaning of the second amendment are a mere foil to the larger scheme of an unarmed America where criminals rule the day.

I have met many people, living here now who are from the UK and Piers Morgan clearly is an aberration. The Brits I know have purchased many guns, enjoy the fellowship, friendship and camaraderie of membership American sporting clubs offer. The have a crystal clear understanding of out Second amendment, find it novel and fascinating and they embrace it. To them, America is the standard-bearer for liberty.

Finally, Piers Morgan comes from across the pond with a questionable journalistic ethic. Where Lord Leveson chastised him for his clear knowledge of criminal behavior and was unembarrassed sufficiently to make jokes about it.

Like a churlish powdered up "rent boy" parading before the CNN cameras, Piers Morgan is an arrogant toerag who comes to America to impose his worldview on the viewing public with his finger-wagging and name-calling of our citizens. Not that its a huge deal, his ratings are abysmal..."The Big Bow Wow," got higher ratings than Morgan garners.

A petition was brought forth and garnered in excess of 100,000 signatures calling for his deportation. All is fair play: The UK won't allow some noted American Journalists there. Besides, We kicked the British Army to the curb twice, whats one more Nancy-boy?

VOX HOPLOPHOBUS...

On Sunday, January 6, The Nashua Telegraph featured a, Letter to the Editor from Andrew Mazer of Hollis. Ordinarily, letters like Mazer's are piss-poor subject matter for any edifying blog. But painfully, the nation is rife with Middle-aged sensitive new-aged progressive guys like Andy Mazer. We use to call them, "Whiners," or, "Wimps." Now they are called something else. Pick whatever "PC" label that doesn't piss anyone off. Just don't call them wimps because you will have to go to PC rehab.

Mazer takes issues with a statistic David Hunt uses in his December 20th LTE asserting "Gun Control Does not work." Using Wikipedia as a source Mazer states,

"A more meaningful metric would be to compare homicide rates in the United States to that of the United Kingdom. According to Wikipedia, in 2009, the U.S. had a firearm-related death rate of 10.2 as compared to 0.25 in the U.K. – a rate more than 40 times greater."

First, Wikipedia is not a valid source, Andy. (But seeing the reference kind of made me laugh, so Okay!) Citing a Wiki source is akin to reading Dr. Seuss and deciding that Green Eggs and Ham are not good for you.

This is where the real UK homicide numbers live. While the UK has considerably less gun crime, ( and, I wrote about why that is in earlier articles) but three times the violent crime as the U.S! Three times, Andy! Mazer shares that he wrote a letter to Senator Kelly Ayotte asking her to support a ban on "assault weapons and high capacity magazines. Ergo, the liberal-guy, "Hand-wringing."

"Restricting the availability of assault guns, hollow-point bullets and high-capacity magazines is the least we can do to protect schoolchildren – and, for that matter, ordinary citizens – from these all-too-frequent murderous rampages."

And there you have it: Hoplophobia. Guns and bullets and mags, Oh my! Ignorance is bliss. My guess is that Andy Mazer has had little or no experience with how guns, bullets or magazines operate. Andy Mazer is one in a sea of many, drinking the leftist Kool-Aid errantly thinking the guns are at the heart of the problem. Imagine their disappointment and dismay when they later find out that levels of violence does not change, even after they get their gun ban, if they get it.

Hollow-point Bullets? You want them banned? A hollow-point bullets are used to control penetration in an effort to keep over-penetration in check as not to inflict unintended damage to people nearby.

U.S. crime keeps going down unlike others places where Guns are banned and the crime rate is still at epic high levels. As American citizens buy more guns, society become a more tenuous place for n'er-do-wells and thugs.

Paul Ali Slater is a criminal who broke into a home where a mother and two children were doing nothing than what they usually do. Armed with a .38 caliber handgun she shot him in the face and neck five times. He now clings to life in a Hospital. The mother and children are okay.

It is fruitless telling these "vox hoplophobus" to dummy up on their facts. These martyrs of metrosexual, manicured "she-ish" men, have become comfortable in their skins drinking the Kool-aid Whine, and thinking big brother government will protect them from the bad elements life visits upon us.

Obstinate continuance in a particular course of action despite ongoing and continued opposition encapsulates the very definition of Persistence. Such is the case of Representative Jose Enrique Serrano, a DemocRAT , representing New York's 15th South Bronx District.

As Fox News Reports, Serrano proposes the constitutional amendment ending presidential term limits. The resolution dates back 15 years Serrano bringing it forth with each foray into public life.

I would be remiss if I neglected to mention that Señor Serrano is a member of the Congressional Progressive Caucus. H.J. Res. 17 now goes to the House Judiciary Committee for its, "licks."

It is probably a fair characterization that with the re-election of Barack Obama, the social-progressives (Marxists, Socialists, Liberals, Communit-wits...all feathers on the same bird) now feel emboldened, heartened even, to push through big chunks of their progressive, oppressive agenda.

Remember when people would point and laugh, calling us paranoid when we insisted this country is headed in the direction of being a Marxist Socialist state? Yeah, those were the good old days, now weren't they?

Not so much. Yes...The internet is awash with all sorts of conspiracy theories that spin tales of how the government is going to disarm the populace and tyranny shall rule the day. A considerable amount of what is out there amount to no more than "Tin-foiled hat-wearing" doomsayers who probably didn't get enough attention, Ritalin or positive feedback as kids. It's there.

But on the other hand, Some of the stuff is well-written and compelling enough to literally scare the "bejesus" out of impressionable young souls. Am I dismissing much of it? Yes. But not for the reason I state above.

Survival Blog makes some very good points. Points worth rehashing. There are in excess of 316 million privately-owned firearms in the U.S with less than 10 per cent documented via state registries. Up to 30 per cent have Form 4473s filed with the FFL dealers where they were first purchased, and the shelf life on such documentation is limited.

There are a great many guns in these United States. And I don't care who you talk about, people do not easily give up their guns. Australia has roughly 4 million guns and their compulsory buyback program netted 640,000. 16 percent of all guns. Germany experienced similar results, as did the UK. I suspect an even lesser result in the United States were it to implement a gun grab, given our history and our gun culture. Citizens have the guns. And more citizens are buying guns....But lots of guns in the hands of law-abiding citizens does not amount to government respect and discomfort.

In July of this year, Small Wars Journal featured a article entitled, "Full Spectrum Operations in the Homeland: A “Vision” of the Future" The Authors, one a retired Army Colonel and the other a History Professor at Princeton, paint this fictional scenario where:

"In May 2016 an extremist militia motivated by the goals of the “tea party” movement takes over the government of Darlington, South Carolina, occupying City Hall, disbanding the city council, and placing the mayor under house arrest. Activists remove the chief of police and either disarm local police and county sheriff departments or discourage them from interfering."

So now we have Military Hacks and Academics teaming up planning for scenarios on our home soil where the U.S. Military has to intervene because of an insurrection. The article is plain nutty and goes into lengthy detailed discussion of the considerations and contingencies of waging war against the Tea Party. The discussion is very technical, detailed and scary.

But...let us, for the sake of conversation, accept their premise. In reality, none of us have to be PhD graduates of Naval War College to understand Historical realities.

The Malayan insurgency, Northern Ireland, Philippines, Afghanistan, Chechnya, Kashmir, Northeast India, Yemen, Djibouti, Colombia, Sri Lanka, and Democratic Republic of the Congo and (Soviet) Afghanistan, Vietnam and insurgencies faced in Iraq and Afghanistan most recentlyare all insurgencies of more or lesser degree.

Many People say that citizens cannot fight governments. It is those same folks who quickly forget Lexington and Concord, or the Mujahedeen in Afghanistan. Citizens most certainly CAN fight the government, and they usually win when they try.

An organized army does well when it fights against another organized Military. Fighting people is an entirely different metric and the government is at a disadvantage. When one looks at world today, it becomes clear that "guerillero" have the upper hand.

Given the deep-rooted American patriotism that has bolstered so many generations, How many active American service men and women will stand and take on their fellow citizens in a pitched battle? Many of these so-called insurgents served in the same Military forces. Many have the same training in weapons, tactics and skill, but are now civilians. Intelligence gathering against the populace by the Armed forces would be an absolute nightmare.

The American culture is smart, well-trained, educated and quick on its feet. Fighting an insurgency on American soil would be the downfall of all who brought such a plight. Americans would be far more armed and well-heeled than any other such insurgencies in the world.

It has been said countless times that nothing matches good old fashioned American know-how ingenuity, and self-reliance. How do these tin horn war college hacks factor that American will and might into their quixotic mix? It would be a blood bath. We, the insurgency could do a great deal with so little while the hack planners plan.

Certainly, it is neither noble nor desirable goal to wish for such circumstances, as the personal suffering and austere conditions brought about by such iniquities would be immeasurable. Truly evil is he or she that wishes this, but you hacks in DC, don't think for one second that the people of this nation would not rise to the fight, it tyranny began to rule the day.

While some will read this and likely say, "Rick Olson is nutty!"....So be it. But, remember, I didn't write, "Full Spectrum Operations in the Homeland: A “Vision” of the Future" A Military Planner and an academic did.

I still remain a skeptic. I say that it is unlikely to happen here, at least in my lifetime. But that is not to say it won't, either.

CROSS-POSTED AT GRANITE GROK

CROSS-POSTED AT GRANITE GROK

Last Wednesday, the new leadership in Concord saw fit to forgo the Committee on Redress of Grievances. And they did.

Enter State Senator Martha Fuller-Clark. She found a "petition of Redress" from twenty black slaves in Portsmouth dating back to 1779.

According to the Concord "Fishwrapper" Monitor, "On Nov. 12, 1779, 20 black slaves in Portsmouth sent a petition to New Hampshire’s General Assembly. Amid the rhetoric and battles of the Revolutionary War, they asked lawmakers to free them and make sure “that the Name of Slave may not more be heard in a Land gloriously contending for the Sweets of Freedom.”"

The current legislature saw fit to dispense with the "Redress of Grievances" committee, so the question remains, why revisit this now? Moreover, in the 233 years since the petition, a great much legislation and social change has occurred...Suggesting that Nero Brewster, Pharaoh Rogers, Prince Whipple and the 17 other men who signed the petition did in fact, obtain some measure of closure.

Enter the Senate Jesters

While a very noble effort on her part, none will make the case this advances the lives of Granite Staters. More symbolism over substance on the part of Senator Martha Fuller-Clark. Like the Senate and Legislature don't have anything substantive to do already?

This ranks right up there with Ted Rokas' resolution demanding the return of the Elgin Marbles to Greece. All of it, mere white noise in the macro scheme of legislative affairs.

CROSS-POSTED AT GRANITE GROK

On December 30, Steve shared with us about the Journal News and its' December 22nd publication of each and every address of gun owners in Rockland and Westchester Counties, NY...replete with interactive maps. Moreover, Steve provided the names and addresses of the principle players at Journal News.

Steve makes a valid point here:

Because turnabout is always fair play, a blogger went and dug up the names and addresses (phone numbers and other contact info) of the folks at theJournal-News.

The Journal-News thought it would be fun to release all the names and addresses (with interactive map) of registered gun owners in New York’s Westchester and Rockland Counties, and this is just more “public information,” right? It is all just sitting out there or on the internet. But I have wonder if that was the response the employees of the Journal-News were expecting?

Steve also made this particularly sobering point:

"…but in my experience there are a lot of dopey liberals (which includes most people in media) who are too busy being excited about how clever they are–and how much they are likely to impress their peers–to think about the potential side effects of their “great ideas...”

To quote Reverend Jeremiah Wright, "(The) Chickens have come home to roost."

ENTER, Walter T. Shaw, considered the world’s most notorious former jewel thief. According to Fox News, the FBI blames Shaw for more than 3,000 break-ins netting upwards of $70 million during the 1960s and 1970s. This guy is an expert.

"That was the most asinine article I have ever seen.“Having a list of who has a gun is like gold - why rob that house when you can hit the one next door, where there are no guns?" The 65-year-old Shaw told Fox News. Side note: "Do criminals fear citizens with Guns? Sounds like Shaw qualifies that as a, "yes". Shaw continues, "“What they did was insanity.”

Inversely, anotherex-crook, Bob Portenier asserted, “(The Jounral News) just created an opportunity for some crimes to be committed and I think it’s exceptionally stupid,” Portenier, 65, now a crime prevention consultant, is a former burglar and armed house robber.

While some burglars may use the newspaper’s information to avoid guns, Portenier said others will target homes with guns. The newspaper’s decision could even lead to legally-owned guns proliferating on the street, he said.

Portenier maintains that for some Burglars, guns are on the top of the list of contents to steal. Shotguns and handguns can be sold on the street for $300 or $400 each (more than the LAPD Gun buy-back). In all likelihood guns are sold to a gangbanger who ends up killing another.

Frank Abagnale was portrayed by in a 2002 Fim, "Catch Me if You Can" with the leading role played by Leonardo DiCaprio. Abignale called the newspaper’s actions, “reprehensible.”

Abignale went on to say,

“It is unbelievable that a newspaper or so called journalist would publish the names and addresses of legal gun owners, including federal agents, law enforcement officers and the like... This would be equivalent to publishing the names of individuals who keep substantial sums of money, jewelry and valuables in their home.”

So there you have it: Three major crooks weighing in on this, providing insights from the criminal-element side of life. Yet the Journal News Publisher Janet Hasson issued statements supporting the disclosure of private information, relying on New York States, Freedom of information Laws (FOIL).

Most recently, Putnam County Clerk Dennis Sant has refused the requests of the Journal News for information there. Editor Rex Smith of the Times Union in Albany calls resistance to the FOIL application, "Intolerable."

New York Assemblyman Steve Katz in supporting Sant's decision, says the Journal News gives no compelling reason to expose the names gun owners other than,"that they can."

This is yet another gun control ploy typical of barn burning Gun control extremism. And as Dr. Mike Adams says, Gun Control Extremists have at least two things in common with Islamic extremists. They have a willingness to die for their fundamental beliefs, and the sanctimony to demand that others die with them.”

Like my colleague Steve Mac Donald says, "Turnabout is always fair play," I once again bring to you this list below"

EDITOR: Cynthia Lambert
Miss Royle’s married name is Lambert. She lives in White Plains and here is her Facebook page complete with pictures of her and her kids. Hello Sanctimony. http://www.facebook.com/CynDeeRoyle

Cynthia R Lambert
17 Mcbride Ave
White Plains, NY 10603
(914) 948-9388 Work: 914-694-5001
croyle@lohud.com https://twitter.com/croyle1
https://www.facebook.com/cyndee.royle.7https://www.facebook.com/CynDeeRoyle Drives a red convertible:
Family photo:

Publisher:, Janet Hasson,
3 Gate House Lane,
Mamaroneck NY, 10543
(914) 694-5204

Reporter: Dwight R. Worley
23006 139 Ave
Springfield Gardens, NY 11413
(718)527-0832

“Visual Editor” responsible for the map itself is:
Robert F. Rodriguez (w)
Stephanie Azzarone
(212) 222-4566
420 Riverside Dr, Apt 7A
New York, NY 10025-7748

Publisher: Janet Hasson
(@janhasson on twitter)
3 Gate House Rd,
Mamaroneck, NY 10534

GANNET CEO:
Gracia C Martore
728 Springvale Rd
Great Falls, VA 22066
(703) 759-5954

CAN THE MEDIA GET MY INFORMATION IF I HAVE A PISTOL REVOLVER LICENSE IN NEW HAMPSHIRE?

NO!

CROSS-POSTED AT GRANITE GROK

Yeah! not so much...Forgive my side-splitting laughter, but this is one of those, "gotcha moments" when the Lame Stream Liberal Hoplophobic Media gets sucked right in and then, "Punked."...But one guy is not laughing because back in the hood, a Military collector who likely paid 300 bucks apiece for the tubes is now missing pieces of his Militaria collection; All so that Junior could run down and cash them in for a government-issued gift card. Just that thought alone cracks me up.

The LAPD was duped! Anybody can buy these on E-bay and fifty other places on the internet! (note to self: purchase 3" PVC piping, paint Olive drab for next buy-back.)

So, what exactly was turned in? Based on what I saw in the photo, they appeared to be, (1) a Bophors Dynamics AT-4, 84 mm Anti-armor Weapons Tube; and, (2) an M72 Nammo-Talley 66 mm Light Anti-Tank Weapons Tube. (the links above are items that are, for sale, or recently sold)

But, not to be denied, this made "hellaciously" great press! would you not agree?  NBC News was just all over it! And, not just them...look at the headlines below!

 Gun buyback program in Los Angles takes 2,000 weapons off the streets - including two rocket propelled grenade launchers —New York Daily News

"Rocket-Propelled Grenade Launchers" says, NYDN...Dumbasses...

 Cops get two rocket launchers in LAPD gun buyback: Two rocket launchers are officially off the streets of Los Angeles. —UPI.com Laughing out Loud, here....Schmucks...

The total breakdown is as follows:

• 901 handguns
• 698 Rifles
• 363 Shotguns
• 75 "Assault Weapons" (a/k/a semi-automatic firearms classified as such based on their appearance.)
• and two "Rocket Launchers"(not).

The LAPD Blog went on to say:

"An initiative of the Mayor's Gang Reduction and Youth Development (GRYD) Office, the Gun Buyback rewards the voluntary surrender of firearms while engaging the community towards a common goal of reducing gun violence."

Anyhow, now that I've had my fun with the whole "Rocket Launcher" debacle, down to business with the small arms (Military term for hand held or shoulder fired arms, to you in the Lame Stream Hoplophobe media).

So the LAPD collected up 901 handguns. At some point will there be a breakdown of guns such as autos and revolvers? calibers and type? age? This is relevant in the macro scheme of the gun control arena.

And of the 901 handguns, how many were found to be stolen? missing? used in crimes? Most curious to me is the rifles and shotguns action types (single action, bolt action, semi-auto, lever, break?) I would lay odds most were crappy old guns of little value. 75 "Assault Weapons." Not very many if you ask me.

If the goal is to reduce gun violence by, "Getting Guns off the Street," I question the efficacy of such programs if data is not being kept on the particular guns. Inversely, perhaps the data is being kept, just not released. How is the public to know the effectiveness of a gun buy-back program?

I hypothesize these buy-back programs produce next to nothing in results, other than to socially condition sheeple to hand over guns to the government in exchange for cash. Those of us who are responsible citizens that own guns, know the value of the guns we own. $100 to $200 is not even half the value of modern firearms. A police source told the New York Sun, Stolen guns have an average street value of $300-400, and in the wake of the current anti-gun campaign, values increase. So why turn them in for $100-200 gift card when more money can be made selling it on the street?

Thankfully, here in the Granite State, law prohibits these nonsense Gun Buy-Back programs. Buy Back programs are yet another example of symbolism over substance. Do you honestly think the gangstahs, thugs and criminals in LA turned in guns?

CROSS-POSTED AT GRANITE GROK