More Government Employees Failing where Guns are the Real Solution

Here’s what I get tired of hearing about when it comes to these mass shootings, they most of the time are caused by some institutional failure but are then opportunities for descriptions of heroics by that same institutional failure. All the while, the moment that a gun is involved in anything, before the facts were even published politicians like Bernie Sanders started talking about why we need even more institutional regulation to protect us from some unknown menace. This is of course regarding the latest shooting incident, this time at Virginia Beach by a long-time public utilities employee who had access to a building and opened fire on 12 innocent people and injured many others. Why he did what he did likely has something to do with government’s failure in the workplace. Members of government engaged in a shoot-out with the guy who was shot. Government employees administered First Aid to try to save him, but the shooter died of his injuries. And Bernie Sanders within just a few hours wanted more gun control without even knowing the specifics of the case, and was demonizing the NRA.

By the way it all sounded, from the knuckle dragging antics of the shooter to the police on the scene it came across like an episode of the Keystone Cops and more people died as a result. The police were supposed to have a shoot out with an attacker, its part of the job just as a fry guy at a fast food restaurant is supposed to drop fries when an order comes in until the timer goes off. Shooting at people or processing fries are all part of jobs that are out there, but you can tell that when the police start bragging about their “heroics” that government is essentially trying to keep the public in believing more government action instead of dealing with the real problem, like why the gunman wanted to shoot at people in the first place. After all, that is the only motive that matters.

Personally, I don’t trust government employees of any kind to resolve those kinds of problems, because the systems they function from are not fast enough. Military and police departments are often too late and make decisions way behind the curb of needed action because of their command structure. I get the need for police to be there to keep some sort of structure present, which does prevent more of these kinds of events, but they are certainly not the cure all for violence. In this case and in many others, the real solution to gun violence is of course to have more concealed carry holders present who could have taken that shooter out in seconds rather than minutes. And to do that the NRA should be listened to and counseled by government because they are the real professions with a solution, not socialist losers like Bernie Sanders. The NRA knows a lot more about gun handling and in using them for defense than all these government employees that are all at the center of many of these mass shootings.

Whether we are talking about school shootings or public breakdowns like the one at Virginia Beach by Dewayne Craddock—or even going back to the Vegas shooting, the 9/11 terrorist incident, or the San Bernardino massacre that the FBI allowed the media to destroy the scene of the crime for who knows what reason, more trust in more government is the dumbest thing anyone could propose. Often, they are slow to get where the danger is, and when they do get there the body count is higher because for them its just a job, like those idiots at the Parkland school shooting in Florida where the police had gotten used to a pampered lifestyle and driving really nice squad cars. When the bullets started flying, they were hiding and looking for every excuse in the world not to engage. The NRA has much better solutions to those types of matters then the government who fails to act when needed, as fast as they are needed, and also failure to properly understand why shootings occur at all.

But to insist that guns be kept away from the public and that our safety and security be put completely in the hands of the government, whether it’s the local, state or federal level is preposterous. Likely when shootings happen there is always some lunatic out there working for government that will have access to guns while the rest of us don’t, and they statistically are the ones we should be watching the closest. When one of them snaps due to some emotional problem we certainly don’t want to be at their mercy, which was the very first thing that liberal politicians proposed after the Virginia shooting. The real villain will likely be some medication either legal or illegal that set off an emotional imbalance which is what we should always first be looking at. Its too early to tell in this latest case, but marijuana is a common factor in many of the mass killing incidents especially in cases like the Boston Bombers and the shooter in the Pulse Nightclub in Orlando, Florida a few years ago. The gun is just a tool that losers use to kill other people. The desire to kill other people is the real problem, and government doesn’t have a solution to that because in most cases they look to drug sales to generate vast amounts of tax revenue for their unionized work demands so they don’t really want a real solution. They just want to talk about their long gun battles and their administering of First Aid at the scene of a crime. They don’t really want to solve the problem because they are part of it.

The proposal for citizen gun ownership and carrying them in public is to keep the solution closer to the problems and not expecting to expand government to deal with every little tragedy. In the building at Virginia Beach where this shooting occurred should have been other employees who could have shot the shooter within 30 seconds instead of a half an hour. Fewer people would have been injured and killed. Instead a place like that had metal detectors to keep guns out of people’s hands making it a gun free zone, and an easy target for some deranged lunatic which always pushes up the body count. So why would anybody propose more government control when it was government rules, procedures, and impediments that actually cause the death toll to be as high as it was? Because nobody on the government side of things wants to admit that they can’t detect lunacy in people and to stop them before they become a menace to society, and that when tragedy does strike that they are too late to do anything about it. For the rest of us who without guns, are all potential victims to the stupidity of government employees who are much more concerned about their pensions then running into gunfire to cut minutes off the clock of terror while innocent people are bleeding out waiting for help.

Carrying guns and shooting back when danger presents itself isn’t for everyone. But it is for those who are most prone to use them to save innocent people when the call for it is needed. This case in Virginia Beach is no different. If there had been good guys with a gun there to stop the bad government employee with a gun, then a lot more people would have gone home on that sad Friday afternoon. But unfortunately, that wasn’t the case and many more people died. Then, rather than dealing with why it happened the political class immediately went to more government power by taking away guns and putting more trust into their systematic approach that obviously never works. It’s also why it keeps happening.

Rich Hoffman
Sign up for Second Call Defense here: Use my name to get added benefits.

Golf and Guns

My problem in the world is that I enjoy too many things. But to be successful, traditionally, we have a culture that values specificity, where we immerse ourselves into one particular thing. For instance when it comes to this blog site, there is a political context and a narrative that has to be fulfilled for it to work. And since my audience is largely Trump supporters and Second Amendment advocates, going off the rails too far on a tangent doesn’t fulfil that market necessity. So I talk about guns and my love of Cowboy Fast Draw a lot as opposed to other kinds of sports, like baseball and golf. But to my mind they are all the same. In fact, I view Cowboy Fast Draw as another kind of game not at all unlike golf or bowling. We make games at life to represent our culture in various ways and to me they are all the same. The gun and their use is purely a sporting activity and are directly applicable to other sports. Truth be told, I enjoy every sport though. When I go to a sporting goods store, I am absolutely in heaven because every section is something I enjoy. I love baseball, I love football, I love the outdoor section, I love soccer, golf, I love everything. And to me they are all one big story.

I do resent being put into a classification with people who are limited in their scope of enjoyment of life though. I understand their limits and I hope that at some point they overcome them, but it certainly isn’t my task to yield myself to their handicaps. This is an issue that has come up more than once recently among several people. A politician friend recently asked me to take them out of a video they appeared in many years ago because their life had changed and they now had a much higher social profile, and political enemies were using it against them. One of the weapons that was used against this person was that I am a “gun advocate dressed to kill” which is shown on this blog site quite audaciously. But that’s not how I see it. To me a gun and holster rig with the gunfighting garb of Cowboy Fast Draw is no different from a group of people hitting the golf course with a dress code that would otherwise be laughed at during a visit to any local mall. Or a baseball player stepping off the field and without changing going to a nice restaurant. The baseball outfit would be considered odd in any other public setting except for a game. So the gunslinger outfit to me is something of an American heritage, no different from the Japanese reverence for their samurai or some other warrior reference that a culture wants to remember honorably. If you take away the politics all these sports are fun and have their place and I enjoy them all.

I was thinking about all this while I was looking for a nice golf bag and I found one, a really cool red, white and blue patriotic golf bag that I thought was really cool. Then I found a great baseball bat that was all decked out in patriotic colors, and so it went for several hours that day, I had a great visit to the sporting goods store. But I was also thinking about the objectives of those games and how they fit culturally into our society. And also specifically, they have a very unique style of dress for each of them. Something we have culturally come to accept. Except somehow the way I dress on this blog site was considered by some to be politically dangerous, and divisive. But the game of golf wasn’t? Both sports had the object of hitting targets. In shooting there are obviously targets to hit and you are measured by your success or failure in hitting them. And in golf the whole point of the game is to hit the target in as few strokes possible. Where is the problem with guns, other than they have been made politically volatile by a political class that has sought them out for their own purposes? In America guns are a sport like any other sport and I am personally offended that its even an issue.

One of my very good friends, an old radio guy, who was very talented had to completely erase his social media imprint into saving the Republic of America, which he felt very strongly about. But to work for this company they made him make a choice. A six-figure income or he couldn’t be promoted into this new position and as I held that American flag baseball bat I couldn’t help but think of how dangerous that offer really was. I understand the decision he made; he picked the money. A lot of people would. I obviously haven’t. I’ve had similar offers and I picked the blog, my books, my guns and the generalities of my life because in the end those are the things that the people who really matter to me care about. But such a choice should never have to be made, and honestly, we have been stupid as a civilization to let people make such divisiveness over anything, especially among our sports.

A visit to a sporting goods store shows just how rich our American culture is. I’d love to explore them all but unfortunately there is only time for a few of them. However to allow politics to ruin any of them is what I consider reprehensible. To allow a censorship of some with an emphasis on others is a further hypocrisy. Golf especially in the business world is considered a game for upper management, and I can see why. The goals of the game are very similar to those in the business world. Get to the goal in the shortest way possible using the various tools in your golf bag to get there. We don’t think about the people who actually kill other people with golf clubs every year when we play the game even though often the number is higher than with rifles. Yet liberals want to ban rifles and the game of golf is promoted, especially in business as if the two were radically different. But they aren’t different. Both sports, guns and golf are all about hitting targets. Both represent aspects of culture that are valuable and metaphorical, yet one is attacked and one is supported and that standard is very hypocritical.

I think we should enjoy everything, and I do. And I personally resent any judgments cast against me when what I do is part of the sport of shooting. The views that I value about an America that predates this liberal censorship trend that is going on in our media, companies and our politics is dangerous. That it is even considered radical to proudly display a gun rig that I am very proud of is a disgrace. Now if I was in a picture with that new golf bag which would cost about half as much as the gun and the holster rig then the world would be happy. That is not how things should be and it’s a shame we’ve let it become that way. I’m certainly not going to change the way I do things, but it’s a shame that so many people are forced to, just to fulfill a social norm that has been shaped by anti-American forces. It is my assertion that we shouldn’t have such limits.

Rich Hoffman

Sign up for Second Call Defense here: Use my name to get added benefits.

Guns and Teachers in Florida, an answer to a problem that won’t go away by itself

It passed the House in Florida with a comfortable vote of 65 to 47 after hours of debate. Now it goes to the desk of the governor, Ron DeSantis to be signed. The bill that has now passed and will become law in Florida is their answer to the long debated question about guns in schools, and now at least their teachers will be able to take a course and qualify to carry guns to protect students which is the ultimate answer to the whole school shooting debate. I personally have never thought it was a debatable situation and have said so in my own school district in Ohio. Guns are the answer to the tendency of violence, not the cause. But just like other aspects of culture that involve liberal input, the government tampering on the matter has created a more dangerous situation, not less of one and the only thing that needed debate was how people are afraid of guns are going to have to deal with a world that made them in the first place, out of necessity. The eradication of guns from society was never an option. Having guns in more places more often is, because of the nature of humanity, which invented them for a reason.

Listening to the debates against guns in schools in Florida was interesting. It was all emotionally driven and largely preprogrammed. The fear based diatribes were not conducive to a proper sentiment. In essence, we know from trial and error that we cannot trust the government network to protect us, and that includes police, firefighters, FBI agents, the military—if given the opportunity to fail, they often will. As it is true that we do hire those types of people for our government the truth is that they are often too slow to react or when they do, they don’t have enough skin in the game to act properly. So when there is the potential for danger, those with the most to lose and who are at the heart of a matter should be armed with deadly force so that they can protect whatever threat might come about. It’s a perfectly logical element to a problem that permeates human thought, the temptation to abuse other people for failures of others.

During the recent California synagogue attack by a nineteen-year-old kid it was a border patrol agent who was in attendance who was able to put a stop to the rampage and thwart the advance of terrorism, otherwise a lot more people would have died. There is no way to deal with mass shootings but to confront them at the point of the attack. Waiting for a 911 response simply isn’t an option. Violence has to be confronted, not avoided, and the fantasy that guns can be removed from society and that therefore opportunities for attackers to conduct themselves in such violent ways will be diminished, is simply a false hope evolved under a premise of utopia that is grounded in reality as a fantasy story. Guns are not the villains; they are the answer to villainy.

As everyone knows I have a long history with public schools and feeling that the teachers are overpaid and are dangerous in what they teach our children. But I have been willing to say that I’d support pay increases for teachers in my school district in Ohio if they are willing to carry guns while on the job, and taking on that extra responsibility. That would prevent mass shootings. It may not prevent the intent to violence, but it could minimize the impact such as what happened at that California synagogue. When the danger erupts a person comfortable with a gun needs to be there to confront the attacker. And in essence, that is the only logical answer. Nothing else will work, not metal detectors, not more school security because like the police, it’s just a job and that doesn’t always promise that in a tenuous situation, they will act properly—and certainly not more gun laws. The reliance on more centralized authority, which is always the liberal perspective gives precisely the opposite result. Only people who are highly motivated to solve a problem like that, who are in that life and death situation can really be trusted to act in their own self-interest. And when they do, they need a gun to perform that task. It was out of protecting self-interest that guns were invented in the first place and why they are such an important part of American culture.

Schools and places of worship, or any place where would be attackers know that people do not have guns are made so much more dangerous by the insistence that gun restrictions be present. Anywhere that a lot of people conduct themselves, guns should be frequent. To my experience even at bars and nightclubs, people who become gun owners don’t go around trying to shoot everyone. Guns require discipline and those who learn to use them become better people not worse in the exchange. Most of these young attackers such as end up in these school and synagogue shootings do not have that background. Even in a bar fight it’s not the NRA supporters who pull out a gun and start firing. Using guns tends to make people more responsible, not less. So gun owners are less prone to suddenly become a lunatic while at such places. More guns are better for society, not the other way around. Most gun owners who carry are by default much more careful about engaging in a conflict with another person because they are aware they are carrying deadly force and that responsibility tends to regulate irresponsible behavior. Even for that driver who cuts you off at an intersection and they give you the finger in anger provoking you. Gun carriers tend to blow it off because they know that they have the ability to control the situation and that self-assuredness brings about a much more mature outcome.

The problems occur when you take away that natural tendency and replace it with government enforcement which not even they want. The responsibility for good conduct needs to fall somewhere and experience tells us that people who carry guns tend to be the type of people who will take responsibility for a situation quicker than waiting for a centralized authority to respond to danger. So in all public places guns are the answer to less violence. Not fewer guns and more government authority. The difficult things for liberals to admit to themselves is that more government isn’t the answer. More cops in schools, more people to work security who might end up paying union dues for their job at a metal detector—those are not options because they cost too much and they do nothing to solve the problem. We’ve seen it too often, when gun fire does erupt, cops aren’t always willing to throw themselves in front of the bullets. To some of them, often a ratio that is not acceptable, it’s just a job to them and like the cops in Parkland Florida, they run and hide like everyone else. But not everyone is like that, some people are naturally inclined to leadership and those are the people we want carrying guns, everywhere. And its good to see that Florida is moving in that direction. Maybe the rest of the country will get it and follow before more school shootings occur.

Rich Hoffman

Sign up for Second Call Defense here: Use my name to get added benefits.

Guns Teach Responsiblity, if we want a safe world, ban liberalism

I was just a little impressed that my youngest grandson wanted desperately to see what I was doing at my workbench and decided to help me reload some ammunition for my Cowboy Fast Draw practices. It’s kind of a reload 101 type of thing that isn’t difficult for an adult to learn, but for a 2-year-old, I wouldn’t expect him to put a wax bullet into a .45 caliber casing then put a primer in place for shooting. I thought it was just a little advanced. But the young guy wanted nothing to do but what I was so he sat up on my bench stool and went to work helping me eventually taking over all together loading up 50 rounds all by himself. We had a great experience together and so it has been like that in American life really since the beginning. Young people learning from older people the basics of survival in the world and having fun with the exchange of information. It was a reminder to me exactly what guns mean to our culture and how important they have traditionally been in teaching young people basic values and skills in life.

Guns have been in a lot of talks lately and most of the diatribes I have found disgusting, especially the case where the liberal Colorado legislature has voted in a Red Flag law for which the governor is expected to sign. Sheriff Steven Reams from Weld County has indicated that as a member of law enforcement, he will refuse to enforce the law even if he must go to jail for it. I would hate to see that happen, but the Sheriff’s position is the correct one, the Colorado Red Flag law is an abomination of legal abuse, grossly anti-American Constitution in its premise and deserves serious scrutiny on a national level. The premise for the Red Flag law is that judges would be allowed to take guns away from people who are found to be a danger to themselves or others. The provocation of such a status would purely be the word of mouth of family, friends or neighbors. So if some such person recommends that you are a menace in some way, a judge can take away your guns and put you as a gun owner in a position to prove your innocence just to maintain them.

This law literally comes from a state that has gone to pot. Colorado as everyone knows by now has turned into a state turning toward recreational marijuana to raise additional revenue but also to fulfill a long time progressive dream, the legalization of mind altering substances such as pot which in my opinion is far more dangerous than any gun would be. Sure, guns shoot bullets that could kill people, but destroying a person’s mind is far more catastrophic toward the ambitions of mankind than any gun could or would be. That makes this Red Flag law in Colorado that much worse because it likely won’t be a sane person making assessments about the danger of an individual and whether or not a judge should get involved in gun ownership, but the chances are it will be some drug crazed lunatic high on life with a barely functioning mind induced by the effects of marijuana. Imagine the illusion this gives the typical stoner, handing them judicial power over their neighbor so that protection of private property would be stripped away in favor of the loser hippie and their fenceless world view of free love, free education, and free money. All these pieces fit into the same ugly puzzle so its good to see a sheriff willing to put up a fight. But the real punches have to come from the nation at large. Colorado used to be a nice state, but it is becoming like California more and more, just a cesspool of liberalism that is going out of fashion, but not fast enough to leave behind some residual damage.

Ohio is getting gun laws right with its own approaches which is moving toward not even needing a permit to carry a gun. I personally don’t see any danger in guns, they are the paramount foundation of western civilization and they protect intellectually the premise of our republic. (We are not a democracy) Gun ownership has typically been the foundation of good family upbringing and served as a natural bond between generations such as the example I proved regarding my grandson. That activity is a normal thing for an American family to do together and it has been since the start of our country. The people who are against guns happen also to be against families and are pro-abortion. They are for drug use. They are for wealth confiscation and redistribution. They are for open borders and a loss of American sovereignty in the world. Essentially, they are against everything that makes America a great country because they want to undo the nature of it and change it into something much more European.

Guns should be carried everywhere and used when needed to stop bad guys from ruining the world. Sure there is great responsibility in gun ownership but that’s part of the beauty of it. The act of learning about guns from a responsible adult has been paramount in shaping the young minds of particularly boys in our culture. When things go wrong such as they do during mass shootings it’s not hard to identify why people become lunatics and use guns to hurt people maliciously, the failures are often in liberalism, in defunct fatherless homes where a loose mother loses control of her son because there is no father, or the men in the young boy’s life are losers that can’t help the young person affirm himself into adulthood. Or that the people who have lost their minds put too much trust into public education, public wealth redistribution, and functioning as a mindless automaton high on drugs and not taking responsibility for their own lives. The real solutions to a dangerous society is to ban liberalism, inspire families to stay together for the sake of the family as a whole unit, and to put guns in the hands of children as soon as possible and teach them how to use them and make that understanding one of their first acts of responsibility in the world. Once they learn to handle guns correctly from a father, a grandfather, an uncle or even a family friend, they will then as young men and women be able to go out into the world and act responsibly in other aspects of life. That’s how things are supposed to work and Colorado is going in the wrong direction.

It was for me nice to see the lights coming on in my grandson. For him sitting at his grandpas work bench reloading ammunition and watching me shoot a bit was a treasure he’ll carry with him for the rest of his life and he’ll likely continue to want as much of it as he can get. And it is my job to make sure he gets it and gets it right. Guns aren’t dangerous, they are great teaching instruments of how to live responsibly in the world. We can’t look to government to decide what kind of world we should live in the way that liberals propose it. It’s not a judge’s responsibility to take away guns off the whim of some pot head’s opinion. And it’s not for government to step into a family and rob them of the intellectual discourse that often does happen when the older generation teaches the young how to live in the world with the basic skills learned during the transaction. At the heart of the gun control debate is on how we control danger in our world. Liberals want more centralized control. Conservatives want more individualized control. But what we end up with shouldn’t be a combination of the two which most case-law on the Second Amendment comes to. There is a right and wrong answer. Both sides aren’t partially correct. And you can see that correct answer on my grandson’s face, and that is all lawmakers need to know.

Rich Hoffman

Sign up for Second Call Defense here: Use my name to get added benefits.

Guns and the Meaning of Life

It continues to be frustrating to read gun defenders getting tricked into arguing the merits of gun ownership against the position of the liberal aggressiveness that has far-reaching implications which I established in an article I wrote yesterday on the real fight in the world between eastern and western civilizations. The intent by liberals to enact gun control is to achieve their not so thinly veiled objective and that is to destroy all of Western Civilization and to replace it with the values of the orient. This has never been in dispute yet many people just don’t seem to understand the big picture, so they can’t defend it in an argument. To do so you have to understand the big game that the East has always been playing and to deal with them on those terms. It was last year that I visited the Indianapolis Children’s Museum and noted that they had an entire section dedicated to just the country of China, as if we were all going to be adopting to that reality soon anyway, so they were there to instruct visitors to what that world would look like. It can’t be argued that this is the world that the political left and even many on the right want for the United States, a gradual surrender economically to China and the spread of their communist system from there to here.

It’s all about state control over individual activity. When I talk about Western Culture I’m talking about a long boil of ideas that were in conflict with each other through many thousands of years, something that didn’t occur in the orient. Even within that Western culture the best of it was the sentiments of individualism that came out of works of art such as in Wolfram von Eschenbach’s Arthurian romances, specifically of the Parzival Grail quest. There are some really wonderful passengers about individualism that emerged quite radically against the state control of kings and territorial oversears typical in 13th century Europe that evolved over time into what the American gunfighter mythologies on the western frontier of North America evolved into that are worth protecting. That is after all why gun rights in America are necessary and need to be less restrictive, not more so. To find the Grail castle and eventually the Grail itself, the night Parzival had to ride his horse with the reigns limp and to find these treasures through authenticity to himself not to the obedience to a social system. That is a very important distinction that is at the core of all Western thought. And it is that which having gun ownership is meant to protect.

We have allowed the enemy to define the grounds for which we fight, which is to allow gun rights to become a safety issue, and that we should all give them up for the benefits of more security. But to do that we have to yield more power to the state, and to apply the Parzival metaphor to the situation, to guide the horse more directly and to seek the Grail Castle through institutionalized inquiry, for which it would always remain invisible to us. The harder you look, the less you find especially in the context of institutionalized perspective. But as we know through history, this always leads to collapse of society in one fashion or another. There is never any real safety in such a quest in life so the issue is never about safety, it’s about preserving ideas and concepts that were strictly part of western civilization for thousands of years of evolution. The moment that those ideas aren’t protected, the state controlled sentiments of the East desire to creep in and destroy everything humanity has worked so hard to build for thousands of years of trial and error.

The way it has been framed, the gunfighter of the American west was a whore and gambler representing the worst of us and is an image we should run from, not to. But I see them quite differently, as the latest additions to Eschenbach’s quest to define individual authenticity to the mandates of institutionalism. The individual effort of America’s gunfighters both in real life and through the emergence of Hollywood westerns is quite a statement about individuality and the merits that such contributions have on society as a whole is quite astonishing, and important. But without the gun, it wouldn’t have been possible. It was the gun after all that destroyed the Indians, who were the representatives of the orient in place within North America as immigrants of their own centuries before. I wouldn’t go so far to call them domesticated inhabitants. The strange culture of the Adena people with their obsession with Ancient Alien conspiracies, their elongated heads, their sometimes unusually tall stature with obvious roots from the Middle East and the Salisbury Plain and excessively sophisticated mathematics were not the same people as the Shawnee who were the Indians who fought the first stages of westward expansion in my home state of Ohio on the very ground that my home sits to this day. Not by a long shot. There is a deep and distant past that has many complex cultures coming in and out of it that have nothing to do with “indigenous” people. The Indians had their chance and they failed like all cultures around the world to get their grips into reality and to sustain the growing ambitions of mankind with fresh new philosophic concepts. But in Western Culture, such thoughts did percolate. Often the perpetrator would find themselves beheaded in Europe, or burnt at the stake, or even hung on a cross, but the effort was there and ideas did evolve. It was the gun and the American frontiersman who actually found the Grail Castle of Eschenbach in North America, not in some Heavenly light of Utopia but in the casinos and whore houses of upstart towns high in the mountains of South Dakota and California. The individual behavior may have been disgusting, but it was authentic and behind that effort came the greatest economy and civilization yet to emerge from human minds. And it all started with personal autonomy and the gun that protected that right.

A vast majority of our fellow human beings are much like Parzival. Often by accident while they are reckless in their youth treating life with their hands on the reigns loosely, they find their Grail Castle. But they do as Parzival did, they don’t ask questions when they should or act authentically to their nature, so they get kicked out of the kingdom even though they still stand where they always stood. The keys to the great Heavens are not as Jesus said, out there somewhere but are all around us. We must find them ourselves through our own authenticity which is the meaning of life, which can be and is often different for each one of us as individuals. Only by living an authentic and individual life can we find our own meaning and then give the value of that meaning to those of our civilization. And while we are searching for this individual meaning there are always villains who come along to pull us back to the mandates of institutionalism. For the first time in all human history there were very charismatic individuals roaming around the American West much the way Parzival did under King Author’s knighthood. The goal of such knights wasn’t loyalty to the court but honor in the individualized efforts of personal authenticity. Maybe only less than 1% of all people find such a Grail Castle in their lifetimes, but the treasure that springs forth from such a society is literally boundless, and worth the trouble. And to protect that opportunity in the face of mankind’s tendency toward detriment, we need personal guns to keep the effort alive, and deep into the future.

Rich Hoffman

Sign up for Second Call Defense here: Use my name to get added benefits.

Take All Their Security Clearances: Can’t trust the government, can’t trust the media, but you can trust the gun

Let’s get something straight, John Brennan, Bruce Ohr, and many, many others are losing their security clearance not as some form of censorship to a media looking for the next leak coming from them, it’s because they can’t be trusted. We do not have a free press if they are all pulling for one political party and are working in conjunction with villains who want to destroy the concept of American independence. Trump is the head of the executive branch of government and he was elected to drain the swamp and by looking at the list of people he is considering revoking their security clearance especially those attached to the government case against him, every one of them would be justified. The media and their leakers are not part of any resistance that I want to be a part of. I voted for Trump to resist them and they should consider themselves lucky, because they wouldn’t have liked the alternative.

I had a very nice visit to the Premier Shooting range this past week with my son-in-law so that he could get a chance to shoot my Desert Eagle. The people working at Premier are always good to talk to and the general environment is very representative of the type of gun enthusiasts that are pretty common in the county that I live in, mostly conservative, mostly affluent, and extremely family friendly. Premier Shooting in West Chester is more of a country club for shooters where the traditional venue for that kind of thing is golf. They have a very nice lounge area with a fishing lake to go along with their various classroom settings and sales floor. But shooting is their business and the range was very busy on a Thursday in the middle of the day during my lunch hour. So busy in fact that there was only one lane open for us to shoot on.

The people attending are not a bunch of slack-jawed hippies or tattooed freaks. They were nice, clean-shaven affluent West Chester, Fairfield, and Liberty Township residents enjoying their firearms in what I think is the best range of its kind in southern Ohio. Everything is clean and well-lit, as well as safe. It’s the perfect venue for my .50 caliber Desert Eagle which always provokes a lot of discussion these days whenever I get it out. It’s hard to believe that I’ve only had the gun since May and by August I had already put 1000 rounds through it. But that was a bit of cause for celebration. Going there during my workday with people who I share my day with often is my way of managing stress, so I use the place often for that purpose and it doesn’t take long to go through 50 boxes of ammunition in a three-month period. My son-in-law and I went through two boxes in just twenty minutes so it doesn’t take long. The other people around us were in similar situations, shooting for them was part sport, part philosophy. It was the joining together of a lifestyle that mattered which made the whole Premier experience part of the magic.

We don’t go shooting thinking about killing anybody. I go, and I know that the other West Chester people who share those lanes with me often do the same to enjoy the ballistics of the craft, of a finely tuned gun dispensing a lead projectile toward a target at a distance appropriate to the effort. But always under the layers of endeavor is the reminder that the gun is key to the Second Amendment and that means private ownership and possible militia gathering should it become necessary. Having a gun on your hip or in your bag at the range is a distinct reminder that you are a free person in charge of your life. The government isn’t there to rule you, it’s there to manage affairs on our behalf and if they get out of control then we as people have the means to reel them back in to a properly managed society. Getting to know your firearms is part of the fun, but having them is part of a philosophy of independence that keeps the government from getting out of control.

Over several years of thinking about it now I realize that the NRA isn’t enough. I love them, they do good work, but just their very existence is a kind of appeasement toward the big government gun control lobby. I am of a mind that the government has no business in the regulation of firearms in any manner, because the purpose ultimately of them is to prevent the kind of corruption that we have witnessed as a direct result of the Trump presidency, where massive corruption has been revealed because he was in office to expose it. It was always there, but it was hidden from us by a corrupt media, and many corrupt officials. It has been stunning to learn just how many high-level intelligence officials are part of a culture within the Beltway that have involved relationships with the press. It reminds me of the kind of relationships that form at Premier where people of alike mind join to enjoy shooting, only the like-minded behavior of the advocates of more state control are joined for the opposite intentions.

We do not have a free press with the corporate media types. I am not one who dislikes corporations, but the big names in media have hired and evolved along the lines of big government state controls, likely because they all went to the same type of schools and learned the same values which have evolved on the coastal regions of America. But in the Midwest a different culture exists that does not like all that proposed state control. We put Donald Trump in charge to fix it hoping that things wouldn’t have to get messy. But if they do, that is the next alternative. Giving more power to people like John Brennan was never part of our plan. Not that we wish to be a bunch of crazy radicals, we really just want to be left alone to run our businesses and families. We don’t want the state to assume they are doing anything for our benefit. They aren’t smarter than we are and they are not qualified to herd us all into little groups, to steal our money through taxation and regulate us into everything being such a pain in the ass that running companies isn’t even worth it.

Security clearances are not a right. Brennan lost his because he had a big mouth and acted in ways that were not conducive to traditional American values. His friends within the intelligence community are no better off, they should all lose their access to any security information. It’s not Trump doing these things because he wants to be mean, he’s doing them because he’s fulfilling the objectives that people who like to shoot guns at Premier Shooting in West Chester, Ohio voted for him to do so that they wouldn’t have to take up guns against a corrupt government selling itself to the public through a corrupt media. We know the difference. But by listening to the reaction of people on the other side responding to John Brennan’s loss of clearance, I don’t think they understand much of anything of what is going on in my neck of the woods. They don’t have a choice. Trump is doing exactly what we wanted. There wasn’t a single person at Premier Shooting that day who disagreed with anything that Trump was doing. We’d all give him an A+ on a report card. If there was anything different we’d have him do is to do it all faster. He has the power to shut down these expensive investigations that are only meant to attempt to hurt Republican majorities in the house and senate. Why would we want to help Democrats with that? Its time to kick all those people out of office and take away their security clearances. Its time to cut off the media from the nation’s secrets with their contacts in the intelligence community. I’m not sure we can trust any of them, let alone some of them. But we don’t have to trust them. In many cases we don’t even need them. Because we are gun owners and most of the time, that’s all we really need.

Rich Hoffman

Sign up for Second Call Defense here: Use my name to get added benefits.

The Ghost Gunner 2: Everything you need to know about the moral, and legal need to manufacture guns in your home

The Ghost Gunner 2 is a wonderful mini milling machine that can produce gun parts without a lot of machining expertise. It is the device that senatorial candidate for the GOP Austin Peterson of Missouri is giving away to a lucky recipient to make a point on Second Amendment protections. Since gunpowder was first contemplated in around 142 AD in China society has evolved along its advancements. While many think of guns and gunpowder as a destructive device, its widespread use and development has greatly decentralized civilization allowing the concept of an “America” to evolve. Prior to the invention of gunpowder empires largely controlled the lives of mass civilizations through emperors and kings. It took about a thousand years but with the invention of gunpowder and guns slavery was ended in the civilized world, nations were born, and scientific development has flourished. So, guns are not bad, and neither is gunpowder. But to put it mildly to the lefty politicians who clamor for more gun control and stricter background checks, it is not the job of the federal government to regulate firearms. It is the mandate of private citizens to use firearms to keep government in check. So, it only makes sense to have the ability for every household to manufacture their own firearms any time they want and in whatever quantities they desire. The Ghost Gunner 2 makes that home manufacturing of firearms very practical.

In the United States I think the major gun companies are real treasures. I love Ruger, Smith & Wesson, Henry Repeating Arms, Magnum Research—I love every one of them. The people who work in these places are genuinely good people making a great American product and I personally think every American should add one gun to their collection every year to support these fine businesses. But we need to get something straight about all this sudden concern about “ghost guns,” firearms made off 3D printers from plans downloaded from the Internet, the Genie is not going back into the bottle. We can’t “uninvent” guns without destroying society itself. Because honestly, it is the gun and gun powder that has brought about our advanced society. Without the invention of firearms, common people would have never have gained the opportunity to overthrow their kings and emperors and our society would be a much different one today. It’s highly likely mankind would have never gone to space if not for the invention of the gun and the emergence of America as a direct result of personal firearm ownership.

The political concern isn’t so much over the 3D printed guns which produces a kind of hard plastic AR lower that isn’t very reliable, it’s the technical ability of something like the Ghost Gunner 2 that brings very advanced milling machine ability to private homes. That realization destroyed what many left leaning anti-gun advocates had long been fantasizing about. They thought that if they lobbied congress to change some gun laws, or put pressure on Dick’s Sporting Goods and Field & Stream to take guns out of their stores, or that liberal politicians might even shut down gun manufacturers by taxing them and regulating them out of existence, that they might rid the world of guns. What they learned is that as regulations and the threat of them have increased, the ability to manufacture guns at home which have also increased as a direct response and the threat of having millions and millions of guns in society that don’t even have traceable serial numbers on them is even scarier.

I personally have no problem with my guns being registered. But given what we’ve seen out of our own FBI during the Trump presidency and the massive laws that were broken in an attempt to overthrow him through impeachment, it doesn’t take much of an imagination to see why registering guns with the federal government would be problematic. If they were to ever gain the ability to confiscate guns through the legislature they would simply read off their directory and go home to home in a confiscation raid which gives an emerging enemy an unfair advantage. I say an emerging enemy because obviously if a government is seeking to protect its power and wishes to take more from the people who fuel it through taxation, then their ability to disarm the population to protect their advances gives them a terrible advantage. But for the gun owner, the power of their firearm ownership keeps such governments from gaining too much power. It’s not that we should go around shooting everyone, but the threat of having it keeps potential dictators from getting any crazy thoughts. Naturally, being part of a thoughtful civilization as the Obama years made the threat of gun confiscation a very real possibility, companies like those who manufacture Ghost Gunner 2 have found a way to overcome that threat. Personally, I think produced firearms that nobody needs to know that you have so that they aren’t on a target list from some future government is the key to a continued free society.

Of course, political lefty radicals want more laws to legislate these types of personal gun making machines but I’d say to them, who thinks anybody is going to follow the law? Laws will not put the Genie back in the bottle and I would say they will be vastly ignored if they do create such legislation. After all, marijuana is illegal and political leftists have been ignoring those laws for decades. Why should gun owners obey laws just because some politician makes them up to protect their own power? By following the Constitution of our nation, the Second Amendment, and the First Amendment which protects the ability to exchange the knowledge of gun building from one person to another are critical to the continued success of the United States of America. Having a gun that has a serial number on it that the federal government can trace is not important to the right to own a gun to protect civilization from an out of control government. In a gun free world, history shows that governments often spin out of control and we’ve seen it in American culture as well as anywhere, so taking guns out of society and legislating them out of existence just isn’t a possibility. The more laws there are, the more innovation will arise to step around those laws. If there are more gun control laws centered around serial number registration than naturally the human thing to do would be to invent some way to step around the law. It’s that simple.

All my guns are registered, and I don’t worry about any federal government trouble at this time. My kind of president is in the White House and I feel good about where the nation is going. But I personally do have the ability to build every part of a gun from the ammunition to the most complex part of a gun and if society fails for sustained periods of time, I can see a real need to be able to manufacture my own guns from my home. Liberals want the American population to trust their government completely, but Austin Peterson has the right idea, gun ownership is the heart of our Constitution, it is at the heart of all civilized society. Guns aren’t defined by whether or not they have a serial number that shows they are officially recognized by the federal government, they just need to shoot straight, and not blow up in our hands. They need to be reliable, and we need to have them, that is all that is required. That is why the Ghost Gunner 2 is a wonderful invention and I am very inclined to get one just in case someday I may need it.

One of the most satisfying things I’ve done in a while was purchase my new Desert Eagle from Magnum Research. The gun wasn’t in stock, I had to wait for them to make a run through their shop to get the style that I selected. And they were very good to let me know the status along the way which I appreciated. I personally know well over 100 people who could machine a gun from a block of aluminum without even breaking a sweat. That’s why I was able to appreciate all the fine craftsmanship that went into my Desert Eagle. But if Magnum Research were to be regulated out of existence by politicians hell-bent on power, I would still get my gun. No law from some modern politicians trying to manipulate the Constitution is going to stop me from that. They can’t have it both ways, they can’t advocate law breaking (marijuana, and illegal immigration) then expect gun owners to follow the laws liberals like. Respect for the law is just what it is, and liberals have shown that they don’t respect the law, and that is a situation they made for themselves. And that is why we will make guns in our homes whether or not it is legal. So long as the Constitution says we have the right to bear arms, we will have them whether or not there are serial numbers to go with them, because it is that very government that we have an obligation to keep in check. And that is the ultimate law of the land. Without that we have nothing anyway.

Rich Hoffman

Sign up for Second Call Defense here: Use my name to get added benefits.