..or can you?
Friday, May 3, 2019
No Secret: You Can Make Your Own Glock Gun or AR-15 Assault Rifle
The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms & Explosives, the agency that regulates gun ownership in the United States, recognizes that individuals have a historical right to make their own firearms. While this may have been common in the eighteenth century, it is only recently becoming popular again due to the high tolerances of modern machinery and the widespread availability of powered tools. As a result Americans have the ability to make a wide variety of firearms, from pistols to semiautomatic rifles, in their own homes.
Modern home firearms production is the result of so-called “80 Percent” firearms receivers. Every firearm has a receiver, a common part that brings together the grip, stock, trigger group, barrel and action. It’s similar in function to a car chassis. In the world of small-arms parts, the necessity of a receiver makes it the only single part regulated by the BATFE, and legally designated as a firearm.
related: The 80 Percent AR-15 Lower Receiver RawOne exception to the receiver-as-firearm rule is that a receiver that is 80 percent complete or less is not subject to regulation; in other words, it is not legally a firearm. Unlike firearms, “eighty percent” receivers can be purchased in a brick and mortar store and brought home without filling out paperwork or conducting a background check, or may be purchased online and shipped straight to an individual’s home.
Once at home, an 80 percent receiver is typically secured to a workbench and set in a jig. Using common home tools, including a router, power drill and file, a handy person can complete the remaining 20 percent of the receiver in a matter of hours. A bustling trade in spare parts for firearms makes it easy to procure the rest of the parts necessary to build a fully functional firearm. Here are five such firearms you can build in your own home:
Expert: Even doubling all income taxes won’t cover the LOWEST cost estimate of socialist ‘BernieCare’
On the one hand, they fight tooth and nail to preserve Obamacare, which has seen enrollment fall to new lows (just 8.5 million enrollees) this year. Yet, they back a new socialist system that would toss 180 million Americans off of private health insurance most enjoy and don’t even bat an eye.
What’s more, while they lament the cost of private health insurance, they have no problems foisting a socialist system on us (call it “BernieCare”) that would cost taxpayers tens of trillions of dollars and still not be any good.
First things first: The reason why private coverage remains high is because of government and its volumes of regulations on both the healthcare and health insurance industries. Obamacare’s requirements alone have dramatically driven up the cost of monthly premiums and deductibles.
And remember when the law’s namesake claimed (lied) that his signature legislation would lower our premiums, deductibles, and overall healthcare costs?
Without question, having government take over most of healthcare has been an expensive disaster; having the government take it over completely would collapse the system, not to mention give government entirely too much power and influence over our lives.
But the expense is the big country killer, as Charles Blahous, a senior research strategist at George Mason University’s Mercatus Center, said this week, per the Washington Free Beacon.
“Doubling all currently projected federal individual and corporate income tax would be insufficient to finance” Medicare for All, which is the essence of BernieCare:
Blahous spoke before the House Rules Committee about “Medicare for All,” the health care plan proposed by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I., Vt.) and supported by several 2020 Democratic candidates. Blahous estimated the cost is between $32.6 trillion and $38.8 trillion.
“Medicare for All would add somewhere between $32.6 trillion and...
The 90 Miles Mystery Box: Episode #610
You have come across a mystery box. But what is inside?
It could be literally anything from the serene to the horrific,
from the beautiful to the repugnant,
from the mysterious to the familiar.
If you decide to open it, you could be disappointed,
you could be inspired, you could be appalled.
This is not for the faint of heart or the easily offended.
You have been warned.
Thursday, May 2, 2019
Do You Feel It?
When Your Record Pales In Comparison...
Biden Releases New Book!: The Audacity of Grope...
It Wasn't Kavanaugh, It Was Joe Biden!
Go Low With Groper Joe...
Joe Biden Needs To Change His Campaign Slogan...
Joe Biden ‘Steered $1.8 Billion’ to Ukraine While His Son Bagged ‘Sweetheart Deal’ from Their Government
Johnny Teaches His Teacher A Valuable Lesson...
More Interesting, Thoughtful And Funny Stories:
New evidence suggests Stone Age hunters from Europe discovered and colonized America
More Interesting Stories, Amazing or Funny Things CLICK HERE
Interesting, Thoughtful And Funny Stories Collection #2 HERE
Freedom vs. Liberty: How Subtle Differences Between These Two Big Ideas Changed Our World
“I see the liberty of the individual not only as a great moral good in itself (or, with Lord Acton, as the highest political good), but also as the necessary condition for the flowering of all the other goods that mankind cherishes: moral virtue, civilization, the arts and sciences, economic prosperity. Out of liberty, then, stem the glories of civilized life.” Murray Rothbard
The terms "freedom" and "liberty" have become clichés in modern political parlance. Because these words are invoked so much by politicians and their ilk, their meanings are almost synonymous and used interchangeably. That's confusing – and can be dangerous – because their definitions are actually quite different.
"Freedom" is predominantly an internal construct. Viktor Frankl, the legendary Holocaust survivor who wrote Man's Search For Meaning, said it well: “Everything can be taken from a man but one thing: the last of the human freedoms – to choose one’s attitude in any given set of circumstances, to choose one’s own way (in how he approaches his circumstances).”
In other words, to be free is to take ownership of what goes on between your ears, to be autonomous in thoughts first and actions second. Your freedom to act a certain way can be taken away from you – but your attitude about your circumstances cannot – making one's freedom predominantly an...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)