This won't be a long post, as this event happened several months ago. I'm posting this because it's important to note that these "Weapons of War" ARE used for good, by law abiding citizens. We continue to hear from the left that guns are never used to thwart crime, which is just another outright lie that fits their narrative. In fact,according the the CDC Study on guns, sanctioned by President Obama, they found that usage of guns for self defense are "common." We will continue to post these instances where good people save lives by stopping bad people, even if the story is old.
If you have a story that you'd like for us to post, please get in touch and send me a link.
Meet Mark Robinson, citizen of Greensboro, NC who supports the 2nd Amendment and according to Fox News, doesn't even own a gun. Mark attended a city council meeting about canceling a Gun Show, and after listening to lies from the other side, he decided to speak at the event, After he spoke one of the representatives posted the video to their Facebook page and from there the video went viral.
This man represents "The Majority" the true majority, not the misrepresented majority by the radical left wing that tells us all the time that the majority of people in this country want gun control. That may be true in the left wing circles of the large coastal cities, but not in real America where "Bitter Clingers" work hard, raise their families and just want to be left alone.
Mark said the he decided to go to this meeting because he was tired of being stomped on (by both Democrats and Republicans) and being penalized even though we are law abiding. This man has it right on this issue, please take the time to watch this video. He not only makes some great points, but he spoke these words from the heart, and that's why it's gone viral.
If you forward to the 4:38 sec mark of the video, you can watch Mark with out having to watch the first person speaking.
Welcome to CivilianDogs.com
A "Safe Space" for Those That Understand the Necessity of the
Sheepdog to the Flock
Feinstein Admits She Wants to Ban All Guns
It seems like there is a new push everyday within some states to pass anti-gun legislation, or to outright ban Semi-Automatic firearms. Most of the states are to be expected, CA, IL, CT and others, but you might be surprised by a couple of the states that are included (PA, LA)
The link above is not a specific article as we normally post, rather an updated page by the NRA - ILA on these specific bills. If you want to follow these bill as they move from one house to the other for confirmation, this page will give you the latest on those bills. I hope everyone who cares about this issue and is tired of being vilified as having blood on your hands will take the time to find out what is going on in your state and get involved in some way. As Mark Robinson stated, we are the first to pay our taxes, we're never considered when these bills come up, and we're the ones that the bills affect the most. Don't stand by any more, let your voice be heard!
Just a quick thought, I see more and more our country moving to an Atlas Shrugged society. These bills are accelerating that process by quantum leaps. I would love to hear from you if you agree with this statement or have some insight into this. Thanks!
We've seen this story play out so many times with Anti-Gun activist. Whatever it is that THEY want is necessary for the safety of the children, but when irony strikes and it's their rights that are in question, well that just can't stand. David Hogg is no exception, while out on the protest trail, holding up his fist and wearing armbands, (similar to another gun grabber) advocating to take away rights from 2nd Amendment supporters, he apparently doesn't want to have his own rights infringed on.
Broward County School District made the decision to force students to wear clear backpacks at MSD High School in the name of "Safety" and David Hogg is not having it. Just like all leftist elite, he believes that infringing on the 2nd Amendment will magically make everyone safe, but wearing clear backpacks to school is infringing on his 1st and 4th Amendment rights. We don't support either one, but once again we see the left for who they are, as long as the ends justifies the means, it's Okay to take away some people's rights, just not theirs. Is anyone else frustrated yet?
While the gun debate rages on, there are several schools out there trying to make a difference without being "Politically Correct". Case in Point, New Life Baptist Academy, has implemented their own version of how to deal with threats from a mass shooter and it's a fantastic concept!
This is truly unique, and while there are schools out there that have trained teachers that are armed, this concept goes a step further and incorporates the students as a line of defense also. They are called the Pastors Warriors and they are trained how to engage and swarm a threat. I personally think it's a concept that should be the template moving forward in this debate. Mentally ill people that want to harm others, pick these schools because they are gun free zones. If they knew before hand that they would be facing armed and trained teachers and trained students on how to swarm and disarm, they will pick another place to go. Which school would you want your kids to attend? The politically correct school, or the school that has a plan in place and trains for that plan often? No brainer....
For those new to firearms, the last decade has seen an explosion of concealed carry holders in this country and as such, the gun manufactures tried desperately to keep up with demand. Up until about 2005, there weren't many guns on the market that were considered true conceal carry, only larger versions of the same gun with a shortened grip or barrel that were labeled "Compact". The problem with these guns was that they were still bulky (double stacked magazine) and very uncomfortable to carry.
Enter Walther with a revolutionary pistol design. Striker fired (no hammer) smooth rounded edges that don't get caught on clothing or skin, and a single stack magazine which allowed for a very thin body to be more comfortable inside the waistband. The PPS (Police Pistol Slim) truly changed the idea of a carry gun and slowly the rest of the manufacturers followed suit. Now just about every major manufacturer has a single stack carry gun in their line up, and some of them have been extremely successful. We'll highlight some of those soon with a new page of guns that we like or that should be considered for purchase. If you're in the market for a carry pistol, you should definitely be considering the updated version of the PPS, the M2.
I found this review while looking for some duty guns and wanted to post it. I've been an XDM fan since the gun came out (primarily for it's looks) but after I purchased one, it became my go to gun for self defense and tactical classes. This review is done by Pew Pew Tactical and is really well laid out. They approach the gun as someone who had never shot one, and come to the conclusion that it was a strong competitor to the Glock. If you don't have an XDm or are looking at purchasing one, you should take a minute and check out the good folks at Pew Pew Tactical.
For anyone that is fairly new to guns, it should be noted that Glock has historically been the favorite for Law Enforcement and shooters alike. For years Glock dominated sales of polymer frame, striker fired handguns. They are extremely reliable and have a low bore axis which makes it easy to fire with recoil. As the gun industry started changing, and manufactures turned their sights on this segment of the market, it was only natural that Glock would take a hit, and they did. Don't get me wrong, they are still very popular and are still considered the "Gold Standard" for these types of guns, but now the free market has many options available and some are arguably better than the Glock.
One thing the review failed to mention (probably because he shot the .45 ACP version of the gun), is the XDm in 9mm holds 19 rounds in the magazine and one in the chamber. That's 20 rounds of damage before you have to stop and reload. If you've ever taken a tactical class, there always seems to be a couple of guys that bring a 1911 instead of something like the XDm. They are making two mag changes for every 16 rounds you shoot, and you still have four more in the gun. Having options (meaning rounds) in a gun fight is certainly in the top 2 or 3 considerations for a gun. And since we're talking about a "Duty" gun, and not a concealed carry gun, it could be argued to be the top consideration.
This is an excellent gun and I've shot many rounds through mine, with zero malfunctions. If you aren't a die hard Glock fan (or even if you are) you should consider this gun for your home self defense, or "Duty" gun to run during classes or just shoot at the range. I think you'll be surprised at how well it shoots.
This is a MUST WATCH video for anyone that want's to understand how the law addresses the question "Why Does Anyone Need an AR-15". By far, this is the best explanation that I've seen.
As we've said many times (previous site) anyone that wants to take property from citizens, MUST understand and recognize that citizens have the right to own guns. Just like the anti-gunners have the right to speak their mind about our guns, we have the right to possess that gun. That fact gives a baseline for both sides to have a conversation and all of the arguments against guns, falls apart. Please take the time to watch this video and inform yourself on this issue, even if you aren't an AR / AK fan.
Another reason normal, middle-class people are leaving California in droves. Not only do gun owners in the state have to purchase AR-15's with ridiculous restrictions like 10 round magazines and a "Bullet Button", now they are being forced to register any weapon considered to be an "Assault Weapon."
For those that live in free states and are not familiar with Bullet Buttons, it's basically a replacement of the standard magazine release button, but it takes the tip of a bullet (or other pointy object) to engage the button and therefore release the magazine. The idea being that if you are a mass shooter, you'll have to take the time to get a bullet to press the button to release the mag, giving victims time to either run or attack you. I think it's obvious that this requirement does nothing but add frustration to the typical gun owner, and rendering the gun a useless hunk of metal if used for self defense (especially since in CA you can only have 10 rounds in your magazine)
So, on top of all of the restrictions, now you have to sign up with the state and provide them with a list of people that actually have one of these handicapped weapons. Never mind that the actual criminals will NOT register their guns, but now the state will have a list of law abiding citizens that they will target when they can get the ban passed on these guns, and more importantly, a list of gun owners to target as the political atmosphere continues to heat up. Don't believe me, look at what's happening to certain members of the Trump administration as they are targeted by the ultra liberal whackos while they are out in public with their families. This will be no different, remember the mantra for the Democratic party, "The End Always Justifies the Means."
It's fitting that our first post since bringing the site back up is about a Sheepdog! Take a look at this man who jumps into action to protect a neighbor who was being violently stabbed.
It's worth mentioning that his choice of weapon just happened to be an AR-15, and he didn't even need to pull the trigger. On our previous site, we posted example after example of anti-gunners claiming the AR had never been used to save a life, only to take life as a "Weapon of War", so the fact that it was used not only to save a victims life, but also the life of the assailant should be celebrated by both sides. Right?
When we have honest discussions about "Common Sense" gun control, it's very important to start with a baseline on both sides. For instance, our baseline that the other side has to understand, is that the US Constitution guarantee's our right to own a gun. The baseline the left should make sure we understand is that they want to take our guns. Unfortunately, most (if not all) leftist will not admit this, they just lie because the ends justifies the means.
This is an old clip of Dianne Feinstein recorded after the 1994 Assault Weapon Ban, where we get a moment of honesty from the author of the bill. Don't believe the lie about not wanting to take away anyone's guns. This is exactly what the left thinks and wants. Take a look.
Wow, this guy is amazing! Virginia delegate Nick Freitas lays out his position on the gun debate that has started since the Parkland shooting.
I don't want to say much about this, because Nick does such a good job of saying himself. However, I want to point out that every 2nd Amendment supporter should take note of how Nick lays out his argument in a calm, fact based discussion without calling the other side names or throwing them under the bus for their differing opinion. This is how we should be fighting the good fight, by providing facts in a calm manner, setting the baseline for the argument (we've talked about this before) and don't be afraid to call a spade a spade when we get attacked with their ridiculous allegations. Please watch the video all the way through, and think about how we can change the way we discuss this topic.
I'm sure many have seen this video (it's been out a while) but just in case you haven't, take a minute to watch. It's a very well done conversation between two co-workers, one Anti-Gun the other Pro-Gun. While it doesn't really offer much in the way of an argument for our side, it does show the hypocrisy and the ridiculousness of the arguments on the other side.
Remember, the left won't use logic based on the law to argue for their side, they will spout false statistics and knowingly lie in order to win. Just as an example, one of the statistics that they use often is that 40% of gun sales don't have a background check, which is obviously not true and only shows their ignorance about the subject. One of my favorite lies is that guns are easier to purchase than vegetables in a grocery store (Obama), and of course the Automatic vs Semi-Automatic lie that everyone on their side buys into.
I find it useful to take in as much of the dissenting arguments as I can, so I know what the other side is promoting. Usually an article like this, posted on the Huffington Post would be full of flat out lies and propaganda. This one however, did a fair job with the facts about the rifle, even being truthful about the difference between Automatic and Semi-Automatic guns, and admitting that civilian versions of the AR are not Automatic as many on the left like to say. I'm hopeful that we're seeing a change in the way the left operates to get their message out, because being completely misinformed about the product you want banned, only serves to make the other side not take you seriously and gets them riled up because they think you are lying to win the argument.
Don't get me wrong, the article still has most of the Anti-Gun agenda weaved into the story, (i.e. Weapons of War is in the title), and several inaccuracies ($200 AR's - which would be the .22LR version, AR-22 and not the actual AR-15). Please take the time to read through this article and think through what the other side thinks about you and your right to own this type of weapon.
Just a quick article from the "murderous, terrorist organization, with blood on their hands" NRA, reporting on the IL legislature voting to ban guns in the wake of the FL school shooting.
There are several points I want to make about this legislation, but there is one in particular that stands out in contrast. We are told over and over again by the gun hating leftist that they "Are Not Coming for Your Guns", but as you will soon find out, that is exactly what this new law will do. According to House Bill 1465, anyone under the age of 21 is denied to purchase or possess commonly owned Semi-Automatic guns and magazines over 10 rounds. So not only are they raising the age to purchase guns, but they are also forbidding young adults from owning such firearms and will give them 90 days to "Dispose" (Turn In) of the gun and the accessories. If that's not coming for our guns, then I give up.
To put this into perspective, forget the fact that the average age of these mass shooters is around 30 years old, but the new law literally takes away any protection a single mother in Chicago might have to defend her life and the life of her child. It takes away any protection that a young man might have against gangs in Chicago. Remember that we're not talking about taking the guns from criminals, they'll still get them, rather taking away from Law Abiding citizens just trying to survive in a state that has been bankrupted by liberal policies.
It appears that for the first time ever, London's murder rate has surpassed that of New York City's. Both cities have populations in the 8 mil range but one city is in a country where guns have been banned and the other has some of the toughest gun laws in the country. Yet, the city in the gun banned country (UK) has now overtaken the other in the most violent crime possible. How can this be?
The article gives us a glimpse into this question, and unknowingly proves that people who want to do evil, don't have to have guns to do it. In fact, in London, it turns out that people are still murdered even though citizens don't have the right to own protection. I wonder how many of these murders would have be stopped if the victim had a gun to protect themselves?