IMPORTANT UPDATES

1. Chipman is a zealot, a liar and a real weirdo. He fits in perfectly with the rest of Biden’s nominees.

   • If Chipman were just a zealot, a liar, and a real weirdo, I wouldn’t worry too much about him. Obama’s ATF head, FBI head, and Attorney General all supported a ban on AR-15s. It didn’t happen.

     However, this zealot/liar/weirdo has a verifiable track record of murdering American citizens in horrible ways — including women and children — over what effectively amounts to a difference of opinion. And if his expression in the infamous “post-Waco rubble” photo is any indication, he’s pretty happy to do it.

     This zealot/liar/weirdo is several orders of magnitude more dangerous to you and me than previous zealots/liars/weirdos.

     • My family knew people at Waco. Chipman should hang.

2. Friend Mark, are you saying that Chipman will order minions to kill everybody who refuses to give up their ARs? Sounds like the typical political weirdo that has perpetrated murders over the ages. Take some time and look at the internecine violence alone that has taken place among the deranged “socialist” wannabe dictators themselves as they even vented their crazy spleens on their “fellow travelers” in the name of “social justice.” Lenin, Stalin, Trotsky, Beria, Kruschev, Hitler, Mao, etc., etc. All highly reminiscent of the violence against the police in the Portlands of last summer, where habitual criminal thugs were supported by “compassionate” politicians, in the name of justice, ruthlessly roasting the goose that has laid the golden eggs. Border to border, coast to coast, we are encouraging our own destruction through apathy, negligence, and political cluelessness. Reason not the ARs!

   • Strategic Steve,

     I agree, and just want to point out the damage Democrat voters do. They keep sending evil, destructive politicians back into office to continue their work of disabling this country.

     When the Founding Fathers were alive, most forms of government were monarchies. They rebelled against a monarch because kings had too much power, and were usually corrupt men. Citizens voting for their leaders was supposed to prevent evil men from attaining and staying in power. Our system worked for a long time. Our Presidents and politicians have either been good men and women or evil men who were prevented from doing too much evil. But when deluded Democrat voters keep sending the same problem creators back into office, like you wrote, we are slowly destroying ourselves. Uneducated, misinformed, low-information voters are to blame for not keeping bad people out of our system.

     And, of course, the Republicans mostly do nothing to help the people. That’s why Trump was different, and we love him for at least trying to help make the country better. He kept his word, and most of his ideas were good. He did a lot without much help from the Republican party.

3. SAF Membership… good reminder… and Done!

4. Write your senators. Both of mine are dyed in the wool grabbers, but I wrote them anyway. I expect Joe Mancin will be the decider, although if there are a couple of red state dem senators up for re-election they might decide to oppose Chipman.

   • IF , Manchin is true Patriot? IF , he truly supports and will defend the Constitution from all enemy’s foreign and domestic he would renounce the demoncrate party and turn REPUBLICAN 1

     • If he was a Republican, he’d be just another member of the party of NO. As a Dem, he’s not only got power, he’s got other pols (and the Pres) lining up to kiss his posterior.

       There used to be conservative Dems (Blue Dogs) who voted along with conservatives of the other party. Let’s not alienate what seems to be the lone survivor of an endangered species.

     • I think Joe Manchin is just mouthing off about what a devoted supporter of the U.S. Constitution he is to get his party to give him something of value to keep the sneaky senator on their side, which he has no intention of leaving.

5. Chipman was asked to define “assault weapon”. He was right to offer no definition, because (at the time and place he was speaking) the term is undefined. The term is not a technical description like “revolver” or “prismatic scope” or “assault rifle”; it’s a propagandized legal term like “high capacity” that means whatever arbitrary thing the anti-gun lobbyists and their pet legislators decide it means.

   During 1994-2004 the term had a definition across the USA. In some jurisdictions (e.g. California) the term is currently defined by law. The meaning differs between jurisdictions, and changes over time within the same jurisdiction.

   But in DC in May 2021, the term was undefined. As Chipman sat in that chair, on that day and in that room, that was an unanswerable question.

   • The most accurate definition of an “Assault Weapon” would be a criminally minded human being who is intent on inflicting harm to another using his/her body or objects.

     Man is a weapon. A gun/knife/club/rock, etc. is a tool used by man to accomplish something.

     • Pull over, Tom606. This is the Thought Police. I stopped you because I observed you speaking the truth, not government approved newspeak. We can’t have you writing such things. Your ideas are harmful to society. Now, repeat after me. “An assault weapon is whatever the Ministry of Truth defines as an assault weapon.” Let’s have no more of this deviating from the ideas of the Ruling Party. Go on your way, Citizen, and remember there is no place for your ideas of truth in the utopia your overlords have created for you. Follow the Party Line.

     • Roger, and fellow obedient loyal subjects:

       I apologize profusely for my mindless, mean spirited rants about our benevolent Crooked Joe and beloved Aunt Kamala who only has America’s best interests at heart. Of course the wise, high ranking swamp dwellers in D.C. knows what’s good for us lowly ignorant peasants who cling hopelessly to our Bibles and guns. I promise to be a humble subject of the state from now on.

       But if I decide to become a Demoncrat, then I’m not expected to keep my promises and can lie all I want.

   • He was right to offer no definition, because (at the time and place he was speaking) the term is undefined.

     Watch the video. He wasn’t asked for a legal definition, he was asked what in his opinion was an “assault weapon.

6. At least he is honest about his beliefs. Hopefully, the Senate will withhold its approval.

7. Chipman did not define “Assault Weapon” because it is a B.S. made-up term crafted by the word-smiths of the Left. It is similar to “Cop-Killer Bullet”, “Saturday Night Special” and other such B.S. made-up terms.

   In a broad sense, “Assault Weapon” can be anything that is turned into a “Weapon” and then used to “Assault” someone. Under this broad sense, even a rock can be an “Assault Weapon”.

   To the American Left, “Assault Weapon” is a flexible, catch-all term. It effectively means “Any weapon that they want to ban or limit with firearms-prohibition legislation or regulations”.

   Consider this story:

   https://currently.att.yahoo.com/att/cm/four-way-machete-brawl-broad-135626850.html?.tsrc=fp_deeplink

   Under the flexible definition of the Left, machetes, knives and hammers constitute “Assault Weapons”. Having effectively banned most firearms (except on their black market for more affluent criminals), you can expect the zealots in the UK to continue to expand their prohibitions and bans on anything that even looks like a weapon. They will use the media and the publicity of “mass knifing” incidents, like the one above, to do so.

   Is a machete an assault weapon? Pretty soon, it will be declared so in the UK and the legislative bans will be passed. Just you wait and see.

   Given that there is no end to the items that can be used as weapons, where does left-wing ideology reach its limit? Will they eventually attempt to ban rocks and bricks?

   It shows the stupidity of the left-wing mind. They continually focus on the material items or social forces in mankind’s environment while their ideology makes them willfully blind to the evil that lives within the heart of man himself.

8. Murderous, evil scumbags like David Chipman and the current crop of power hungry liberal politicians are the reason why the wise Founding Fathers crafted the Second Amendment in the first place, to allow citizens to defend themselves from tyrants.

9. From my personal observations, I think Chipman should undergo a drug screening and a VALID psych evaluation.

   • Chipman has a bright future in Follywood if he doesn’t make it as BATFE director. The dude looks like a psychotic serial killer on an acid trip and would make an excellent movie villain. He looks like actor Gary Busey on drugs and acting crazy. I know it’s not fair to judge a book by it’s cover, but Chipman simply looks evil.

10. You can all relax. Trump will be back in office by August to smack Chipman around and say “That’s right. Now go make me a sammich!”

11. In the end, there is only one reason that our elected officials are so determined to disarm us. Consider the following from another era.
    “The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subjected people to carry arms; history shows all conquerors who have allowed the subjected people to carry arms have prepared their own fall.” Adolf Hitler

12. Looks like OregonBuzz found a relevant example of Godwin’s law vs. Ayoob’s law.

    • @ Cold Pizza – Perhaps Godwin’s law seems so valid in these modern times because we are, again, seeing the rise of totalitarianism around the World? In which case, the invocation of Godwin’s law may well be a “feature” rather than a “bug”.

      Certainly, the modern UniParty elite in America, lead by the Democrat Party and their globalist corporate backers, are strongly trending in that direction.

      Maybe, in these uncertain times, the invocation of Godwin’s law should be viewed as an appropriate response rather than an automatic negative one?

      Just an alternate point of view for you to consider.

      • “Godwin’s Law”: any mention of Hitler in an argument being automatically hyperbolic? Just another cancel-culture fallacy. One fearful Hitlerian success was his conversion of communists to German National Socialism. Evil plus evil actually multiplying evil. Any student of politics needs to read “The Mind of Adolf Hitler” by Walter C. Langer to really get inside Adolf’s insane mentality. The money-driven propaganda of our day is a stalking horse to conceal such psychopathic tendencies in predatory public figures.

13. You may be overlooking my reference to Ayoob’s law explained 16:00 in at the NRA 2017 conference Viridian FACT booth interview

    https://youtu.be/6wfti70ZTyw

    Ayoob’s corollary to Godwin’s law: ‘If you don’t want anyone to call you a GD Nazi, don’t act like a GD Nazi and don’t talk like a GD Nazi.’

    • Godwin’s Law is generally used to make the claim that an internet discussion is trending toward Argumentum ad absurdum (an illogical conclusion). However, there is an assumption behind this line of thinking. It assumes that modern societies are democratic rather than totalitarian. Unfortunately, this assumption is becoming more fallacious with each passing day as totalitarian regimes, around the World, grow more powerful.

      In modern usage, the invocation of Godwin’s Law has become, as Strategic Steve notes above, a cancel culture tactic by which modern day totalitarians seek to shut down any comparison between their totalitarianism and that of the historical Nazi regime.

      Ayoob’s Law can be taken as a general condemnation of fascist speech.

      OregonBuzz quoted Hitler to show that the true reason for the modern push, for civilian disarmament, is so that our current totalitarians can sit in the seat of power without fear of an armed rebellion by the People. He was also pointing out. indirectly, that their claims of doing it for crime control and to reduce “Gun Violence” is just a false cloak. The true reason is POWER. The same reason that Hitler and the Nazis did it. Thus, the relevancy of the quote.

      Your double invocation of both Godwin’s Law and Ayoob’s Law, in relation to OregonBuzz’s comment, can only be taken as a condemnation of his point.

      In other words, it seemed to me that (a) you were declaring your support for the totalitarian UniParty Power Structure that currently dominates Washington D.C. and the globalist corporate culture, (b) you were declaring your support to discard the Rights listed under the 2nd Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, (c) you were declaring your support for firearms prohibition and the disarmament of the American People, and (d) you were, therefore, engaging in the Cancel Culture tactic of trying to invalidate and shutdown OregonBuzz’s speech since his point is not at all favorable to your side.

      I simply pointed out that (a) Godwin’s Law is not a negative if you are dealing with actual totalitarians and, further, (b) Ayoob’s Law does not apply since OregonBuzz did not quote Hitler with approval. Quite the opposite.

      Perhaps I am wrong in my interpretation of your comment. Certainly, your comment was vague and ill-defined. Perhaps you could clarify? Be a little less erudite and a bit more plain-speaking?

      What, exactly, was the point you were making? Assuming that it was not merely just a Cancel Culture tactic of shutting down the speech of your opponent?

      • For what it’s worth, I didn’t take Cold Pizza’s comment negatively.

Comments are closed.