Iraq Joins the Fun of an Arms Race

Kalashnikov's booth at IDEX 2015

According to ViceNews, companies from all around the world have increased sales to the warring country of Iraq. At IDEX, in Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates, corporations such as Kalashnikov, Colt, Sig Sauer, and Boeing all attempt to increase their exports, mostly to Iraq. While not all of the companies present, such as Kalashnikov of Russia and Sig Sauer of Germany/Switzerland, are American, the United States does send more exhibitors than any other country across the globe. Boeing admits to selling product to the Middle East for a total of 10 billion dollars annually. The ViceNews reporter present for this story stated, "I kind of couldn't help but think the instability is good for business," to the Vice President of Oshkosh Defense, a company that provides armored vehicles to those in warring countries. The reporter clearly understands the concept of the "war economy," but does not understand that no one wants war, even if it is "good for business." The sale of arms to the Middle East and Iraq is nothing new. The United States alone has been providing arms to the Middle East since the 1970s. However, as of recent days, the sale of armament in the region has increase exponentially. In 2013 alone, just the United States exported approximately six billion dollars worth of arms to the Middle East. In 2014, that amount increased to around eight billion dollars, due to Saudi Arabia's new found strength in the importation of arms. The United States is not the only world power taking a slice of the arms export pie, however. Russia has also increased its own arms exports by great amounts. One company that can have its products found in almost every conflict zone across the world is Russia's Kalashnikov Groups. America still remains at the top of the exportation world, though. Many fear that, due to the increase of arms to Iraq, militiamen will continue to commit human rights violations. However, many of the arms sold have been used against ISIS. The militiamen really are a problem and must be dealt with in a reasonable manner, while still being allowed to fight the terrorists in the region. While there are laws and regulations in place to prohibit the sale of arms to those who commit human rights violation, the violations continue with the arms provided by American companies. However, arms are not the only things being bought and sent to Iraq. In 2014, the United States hired numerous security contractors to fight members of ISIS. Due to political issues of taking U.S. soldiers out of Iraq, Obama will not send them right back in, so he sends contractors that have no real value to our government. If a contractor is killed, there is no 21 gun salute; there is not even a proper military burial for them. Most just lay dead in the streets of Iraq or whatever country they happen to be in. Also, if a contractor does something wrong while overseas, the American government can deny any involvement. These things simply cannot happen with the regular U.S. military. I personally hope that our government not only sees the necessity for contractors to fill the void of soldiers, but also takes responsibility for sending them and treats them as true soldiers. The Middle East is proving to be quite the hot spot for the "war economy." Maybe we will see almost all the world's focus turn to the Middle East soon. Only time will tell.

Minor language used and explicit violence.

Viewer discretion advised.

What Is Wrong With Jesus In School?

According to FoxNews, a student at Nevada's Somerset Academy was banned from using Biblical quotes in her assignment. Mackenzie Frazier used Biblical passages in her school projects, which the school stated was against the rules. Her project was titled "All About Me" and, as Miss Frazier is a Christian, she decided she would included John 3:16. Later, after her first project had been rejected, the class was given another project on the concept of self esteem. Frazier wrote that her self esteem originated from being "created in the likeness of God." Once again, her project was rejected. The school then sent an email to Miss Frazier's father. The email read that the "...[Teacher] appropriately followed school law expectations by asking Mackenzie to choose an alternate quote for the presentation." Then, Frazier's parents took action. They went to a law firm that specialized in Christian-based lawsuits. The lawyer in the case stated that students must be allowed to express their religious beliefs in schools and their classes. Not only does Somerset Academy's actions violate the first amendment, but they also acted in a morally incorrect manner. I do not understand how a school can teach the theory of evolution as absolute fact, but treat Christianity as taboo. I blame the drop in younger individuals believing in Christianity on school's actions against Christianity. If a child or teenager does not receive Christian teachings at home, then a school is the next best option, but that cannot happen, as schools seem to ban any mention of Christianity. I personally believe that both the theory of evolution can be taught alongside Christianity's belief of creationism. I am not alone either. More than half of Americans share this belief. Also, three-quarters of Americans state that they would approve of voluntary prayer in public school classes. Greater than four-fifths of United States citizens claim that they turn to God to aid in making their decisions, as well. Christianity is clearly still a powerful force in America, as it should be. Unfortunately, Christianity is still restricted, if not entirely banned in public schools. Hopefully Christianity will be acceptable in schools and various other public forums soon.

At Least Some People Understand the World

Hopefully this will become a common sight in every state.

According to Al Jazeera, due to the recent shooting between biker gangs in Waco, Texas, the state has moved closer to actually allowing civilians to open carry handguns. There are numerous opponents to the bill, but Texas was already headed toward allowing open carry anyway (Just look up "Open Carry Texas" if you want to know more), so this shooting was just the push the state needed to finalize steps toward open carry. Many of the opponents claim that this shooting just proves that firearms are too easy for criminals to acquire and that stricter gun laws must be enacted. Despite the gun-friendly reputation of Texas, the state actually does not have the loosest of firearm laws. It is one of six states that bans the open carry of handguns (So much for the "Wild-west" state). However, that number will most likely go from six states to five. Of course, as with all controversial firearm issues, Moms Demand Gun Sense In America was there to comment. They claim that by allowing more law-abiding citizens to open carry, the new situation in Waco would have been no different, if not created more confusion for officers. However, this is not true, as bikers are quite easy to tell apart from other civilians. But, for sake of argument, let us pretend that there was confusion. An officer knows not to fire at someone who is not firing at them, so therefore they would not be shooting at the law-abiding citizens shooting in the opposite direction on the officers. Also, the civilians may possibly have been in a line with the officers, mitigating the confusion a great amount. Another way to mitigate confusion is the fact that, as Jonathan Pranzer stated, "I don’t think lax gun laws created this vigilante system." This statement is very true. Just because one is carrying does not mean they will risk their lives in a situation that does not involve them, unless there is an innocent involved. While open carrying may not deter all crime, such as the Waco shootout, most criminal activity would be deterred and/or halted altogether. The gang members may have been shooting each other right in front of officers and then shot at officers, but the officers were able to respond are take control of the situation, resulting in over 170 arrests. While the introduction of more firearms (The officers) did not deter the gangs, most criminals are deterred from committing a crime when there is a legal firearm present. Just think about it, which would you rather rob, a citizen open carrying a firearm, who has the ability to defend him or herself, or someone without a firearm, who has very little chance to protect themselves. Also, how can a 130 pound woman defend herself from a 200 pound criminal; a firearm evens the playing field. Firearms can be used for evil, just as in both Waco shootings (The biker one and the massacre in 1993), but they can also be used for good by defending people; it all depends on what the person intends for the use of the firearm.



All this is causing such a big controversy in the firearms community.

Military Equipment; Really? Everyone Can Buy That Stuff.

Anyone can purchase all of this equipment. Even I have to own
more than half of the things they are wearing.

According to Al Jazeera, due to the increase in "military equipment" used by police officers, President Obama has announced his plans to decrease the funding of such equipment. An interagency group claims that there is a "substantial risk of misusing or overusing" armored vehicles, "high-powered" firearms, and camouflage in policing situations. Obama originally supported the use of "military equipment" for police officers, but due to increasing anger and scrutiny of officers, Obama has reversed his position and decided to limit the amount of the "military equipment" that has become hated for some reason. The list of proposed bans includes vehicles that operate on tracks, aircraft and other vehicles that have weapons on them, firearms that operate with .50 caliber ammunition or greater, grenade launchers, bayonets, and uniforms of camouflage. However, most of these have no reason to be banned or limited, as almost all can be purchased by a regular civilian. Don't believe me? Police officers generally use AR-15 rifles, Glock handguns, Sig Sauer handguns, .308 rifles, etc. All of these firearms can be purchased from atlanticfirearms.com and bigskyguns.com, among other sites online or local firearms stores. Also, the body armor used can be purchased by civilians, as well. Actually, civilians can buy body armor that is much greater in protection than that used by police. The company AR500 and USPALM both sell plate carriers that can accept Level IIIA armor plates, while most officers use Level IIA plates. AR500 even creates and sells the plates for the carriers. Bayonets are legal as well. Any firearm with a bayonet lug is allowed to have a bayonet in the civilian market, in most states. The thought of even banning or limiting camouflage uniforms is absolutely ridiculous. Anyone can own camouflage. Even I own camouflage uniforms. Camouflage can be purchased from any number of places, including Airsoft GI and eHobbyAsia (these are where cheaper versions of camouflage can be purchased), among other websites and stores, such as Kryptek for more expensive, yet durable camouflage. If you do not believe that civilians can purchase such "military equipment," just watch Cory from RangeTimeTS operate an AR-15 with a battle belt and a chest rig (tactical vest without plates) at his tactical shooting range. Others at the Haley Strategic course were wearing plate carriers. All those present at the course demonstrate that civilians have the ability to purchase the same equipment law enforcement uses. Not only should officers use the equipment, but they should have more, as crimes just seem to be getting worse and worse and hatred of police seems to be getting greater and greater.

A civilian wearing a US PALM plate carrier. Proof that military
and police are not the only ones who can purchase "military equipment."

Arrested for a Shirt

The shirt the 14 year-old was arrested for.

According to FoxNews, a teenager was arrested after refusing to turn his National Rifle Association, or NRA, t-shirt inside-out. Teachers claimed that the 14 year-old "disrupted an educational process" and "obstructed an officer." Originally, a teacher (presumably anti-gun) asked the teenager to turn his shirt, which featured a camouflaged AR-15 with a scope, inside-out. After refusing to turn the shirt inside-out, he was falsely charged with the previously mentioned accusations. However, the teen did nothing wrong. As long as the school does not have a policy that specifically states that there is to be no firearms on clothing (which is not necessarily Constitutional), then they had no right to infringe upon his 1st Amendment right. By using his 1st Amendment right, he was defending his 2nd Amendment right, and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that. However, the teachers acted in a totally unprofessional manner. They clearly did not know the Constitution's Amendments, so they infringed upon the first of the original ten. The judge in the case did know the Amendments and chose to drop the charges on the teenager. The mother still plans on suing the school for wrongly charging her son, though. It is just too bad that the teenager was not in South Carolina. Earlier this year (2015), South Carolina proposed a bill that would allow for a 2nd Amendment class to be taught in classroom. The bill would mandate that a three-week NRA regulated curriculum be taught in each and every public elementary, middle, and high school. The bill was known as the Second Amendment Education Act. Clearly, had the teenager with the NRA shirt been in South Carolina at the time, he would have been praised, not ridiculed. Personally, I hope that the Second Amendment Education Act passes, as it would actually allow children to understand firearms as what they truly are. Firearms are tools used to do bad things, but they are used for good more then evil most of the time (the media just refuses to talk about that). If children and teens were taught that firearms were not evil killing machines, maybe people would not be afraid when they see one. I know I am not afraid of firearms when I see them; I just want to shoot them at a range. How easily we forget that more people are killed with cars than by firearms every single day.

Now the American Flag is Not Allowed?!

According to FoxNews, protest broke out in a South Carolina town after a high school student was told he could not fly the American flag on his truck. After not removing the flag, school officials removed it themselves. This action sparked a great amount of controversy and protest. Dozens of individuals were involved in the peaceful protest, in which flags could be seen flying on cars and in hand outside the school. The school was forced to react to such a protest by allowing the American flag on vehicles. Originally, the school's policy was the banning of all flags on vehicles, but that changed with this protest. However, just the American flag is allowed on vehicles at the school (not that that is a problem). Many of the protesters were veterans who fought to allow that flag to fly high. It is truly disheartening to see a school act in such an anti-patriotic way, but the true patriotism shown by the protesters restored my faith in humanity. Unfortunately, this is not the only situation when the American flag has been the center of controversy. In a Georgia homeowner's association, a 70 year-old veteran named Tony Cumberworth had flown the American flag outside of his home for over 20 years. However, one day he received a violation notice that stated his flag was to be removed. The homeowner's association told Cumberworth that the flag was to be removed within four days, otherwise he would be required to pay 50 dollars for each day after the initial four days. As Cumberworth read all the policy letters of the homeowner's association, he could find nothing on flags. USAtoday reporters went out to find the members of the homeowner's association to ask about the flag. Some members did not even know that Cumberworth was asked to take his flag down. After the reporters from USAtoday interviewed Cumberworth about his situation, the homeowner's association rescinded the original violation notice. Cumberworth is still proudly flying his flag in the front yard of his house. I personally do not understand what is the problem with flying this great country's flag. We live in America. If you do not stand behind that flag and the men who fight to protect it, then something is wrong.

God, Guns, and Guts Made This Country. Can We Keep All Three?

According to FoxNews, a two-star general in the United States Air Force, by the name of Craig Olson, runs the risk of being court-martialed for talking about God. General Olson gave a speech on "GOD TV" where he stated that God had given him the ability to perform all the actions he had ever done, including those of extreme difficulty in the military. After all the resounding claps ended, Olson asked the crowd to pray for the leaders of the Defense Department, as well as the soldiers that are getting ready to be sent to combat overseas. However, the Military Religious Freedom Foundation claims that Olson must be court-martialed and "aggressively and very visibly brought to justice for his unforgivable crimes and transgressions." The foundation states that the general's statements have left "...countless members of the United States Air Force...utterly disgusted and shocked." Of course, I cannot believe this to be true, as there are many people in the entire United States military that are Christian, so therefore they would not be "...utterly disgusted and shocked" by Olson's statements. I could see a few being "...disgusted and shocked," but "...countless members" seems absolutely ridiculous. My only question is, what about all the Chaplains in the military that preach Christian values, are they performing "...unforgivable crimes and transgressions."? Unfortunately, this is not the only time Christianity has been attacked. When Congress meets weekly, they can be found in Room 219 in the United States Capitol, praying, and  saying, "seek God’s wisdom and guidance in leading our great nation." However, advocates of a secular state and leaders of other religious groups claim that the great nation of the United States of America was not founded as a Christian nation and that Christian values are not under threat, as many Christians state. Of course, the secular advocates and religious leaders are wrong. Let me explain with a rhetorical question. What was the religion of George Washington and the other Founding Fathers? And the fact that they say that Christian values are not under threat is a compete lie. Personally, I know that I can rarely speak of my Christian beliefs in my school, but atheists can state that Christianity is wrong all they want (Yes, this is an actual situation that has happened a few times in previous years). How easily we forget that our Pledge of Allegiance states, "...one nation under God."

Proof the America is still a country based on Christianity.

ISIS Is At It Again



Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi

According to BBC, a recent audio message has been allegedly created by the ISIS leader, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi. The message states the all Muslims should go to areas of "caliphate" that have recently been obtained in Iraq and Syria. While analysts are not 100 percent sure if the voice in the recording is truly Baghdadi's, they highly suspect that it is. This new message has contradicted a previous statement that recorded Baghdadi as being killed in an American air strike. The voice in the new recording is very clear and has even been called melodic. While many have suggested, if Baghdadi is alive, that possibly he could just be in poor health and just incapacitated, but the voice on the message would suggest otherwise. Due to the lack of visual in the message, many people have began creating every speculation they could possibly think of. Of course, should Baghdadi be alive, a wave of fear would spread across America again, as suspected members of ISIS had just recently attacked an art exhibit in Texas that was displaying the Prophet Muhammad in a cartoon-y manner. Two men began firing into the exhibit and supposedly had a car bomb. The two shooters were killed by security forces before being able to drive the car inside the building, causing massive amounts of death and damage. Investigators are still attempting to figure out if the two were simply inspired by ISIS's actions or if they were truly active members. In my opinion, ISIS must be brought down by whatever means necessary. ISIS is similar to a rabid dog. What is the only way to stop a rabid dog? A bullet to the head.

The security at the Texas art exhibit.

The Truth About "Assualt Weapons"

An AR-15 with a suppressor.

According to FoxNews, a man by the name of Larry Correia explained the falsehoods in President Obama's speech on what should be banned on "assault weapons." He stated that the president clearly had no idea what he was talking about when he was speaking about firearms. By breaking down each individual part that would likely be regulated and/or banned by a federal gun control act, Correia described why the act would be an idiotic action. One of the proposed banned pieces of a firearm would be the flash suppressor. However, this does nothing to make a firearm more deadly, so therefore banning flash suppressors would simply annoy firearm owners. Correia explained that most people wish to ban flash suppressors simply out of ignorance, as they most likely believe that a flash suppressor is the same as a suppressor (or silencer as it is commonly, and incorrectly, called). I will continue more on suppressors later. Also, "barrel shrouds" would be banned, but the funny thing is, most politicians do not even know what a "barrel shroud" is. Not to mention the fact that it is not called a barrel shroud, but instead a hand guard; we are not going to talk about that though because it would make most of our politicians look like complete and total buffoons. One politician, named Carolyn McCarthy, was actually quoted saying that she thought a "barrel shroud" was a "...shoulder thing that goes up." "High-capacity" magazines are also on the list to be banned. I feel like a broken record saying this, but if the firearm ships with a 30-round magazine, then it is not "high-capacity" magazine, but instead a standard-capacity magazine. Also, who wants less rounds in a fight when the criminal ignores the law and continues to use 30-round magazines, while the law-abiding citizens only have ten-round magazines. The fourth proposed piece to the firearm to be banned was the pistol grip. The pistol grip is literally a piece of plastic or wood on most firearms that does nothing more than allow you to hold the firearm with your dominant hand. The fact that it is even thought of being banned just proves their idiocy and ignorance with firearms. The final proposed accessory to be banned would be collapsible and folding stocks. This would be an absolutely ridiculous to ban, as collapsible stocks simply adjust the length of pull, so numerous individuals can use the same firearm with comfort. Folding stocks are created to allow for a smaller package, so that the firearm can be placed inside a case easier. Now, I will get back to the concept of suppressors. Most people view suppressors in a terrible light because of movies and situations such as when a man was caught in Ireland with numerous illegal firearms, drugs, and sound suppressors. Of course, only situations such as this hit the media, but suppressors are actually used in a legal manner more often than not. Yes, suppressors are actually legal in 39 of the states in America. Due to the National Firearms Act of 1934, more commonly known as the NFA, a 200 dollar tax stamp can be paid to acquire one, along with a Form 4 to attach a suppressor to a firearm. Companies such as SilencerCo, AAC, Surefire, and Gemtech have all made great amounts of money off of the sale of suppressors. Personally, I wish that the NFA would be repealed over a period of time, as, if the NFA was repealed instantaneously as most people want it to, then the resale value of NFA items would diminish instantaneously, causing citizens who own numerous NFA items to automatically own cheaper items that used to cost thousands of dollars. Also, suppressors should not be restricted, as they are great items for hunting and self-defense, as in hunting, other animals in the area would not be startled by a loud shot, while in self-defense, a suppressor would conceal an individuals location from attackers, as well as not cause damage to someone's eardrums. I personally wish to see more law-abiding citizens using suppressors, as they are extremely useful and fun to use. Suppressors and "assault rifles" (yes, I am talking about the incorrectly termed semi-automatic rifles) are both great items in the firearm industry and both must receive more positive recognition.

Military Arms Channel explains all the necessary

knowledge of those interested in suppressors.

Iraqveteran8888 proves suppressors truly are

fun to shoot.

I See WAY Too Many Problems

The eight different non-lethal 40mm rounds available.

According to FoxNews, a new form of non-lethal ammunition has hit the market. This non-lethal ammunition is marketed toward law enforcement officers in an attempt to limit the amount of negative headlines involving police officers using deadly force. The non-lethal ammunition is a 40mm "grenade" that is launched from a standard launcher and has the range of approximately 300 feet. The "grenade" is not a grenade at all, but instead a blunt projectile that launches with the force equal to that of a baton or ASP strike. There are also different types of 40mm ammunition that can be used in any standard launcher. Some of which include pepper rounds, DNA rounds, and a standard energy absorption round. The energy absorption rounds hit the target and spread the force across multiple nerve endings and this is similar throughout all the rounds, but the pepper rounds produce a similar effect to pepper spray and the DNA rounds mark a target for an extended period of time so that officers have the ability to determine those involved in riots and arrest them for their activities at a later date. My only concern is the effects at a close range. If the effective range of the launchers with such rounds is 300 feet, then the force at closer ranges would be far greater, so my question is, how extensive would the blunt force trauma be at close range? Someone with just everyday clothing being shot with such an object would be quite highly damaged at close range. In a riot situation, where rioters are in very close proximity to officers, these 40mm rounds possibly possess the potential to break ribs, rupture lungs, and even cause massive damage to the heart. I personally think that other non-lethal options, such as the Ironfist 38mm non-lethal weapon system, ISPRA multi-effect grenades, Condor GL 310 - Bailarina, and the Samson NL RWS, would be much better for officers. All previously mentioned non-lethal options have their own purposes, but some can provide a multi-purpose role, as well. All of them provide better options to officers that the 40mm non-lethal round, as they would not deduce the same amount of blunt force trauma to an individual's body. However, any non-lethal option that is given to police officers is better than none at all.

This video may be using firearms to demonstrate

blunt force trauma, but it gets the point across.

To explain blunt force trauma from the 40mm

non-lethal round, imagine the same crater being

created at a very close range, but without a plate

of Level IIIA body armor to protect you.

Good Job Media. Slow Clap to You.

According to FoxNews, Mississippi faces a brand new murder case. Sadly, this one involves police officers being killed. After the two officers were shot at what appeared to be a "routine" traffic stop, a state-wide search went into effect. During the search for the fugitives, three criminals were arrested for the murder itself and one was arrested as an accessory to the murder. Not only did the individuals who shot the officers murder them, slapping on a second degree capitol murder charge, but one of the criminals actually fled the scene in one of the officer's patrol cars, adding on grand theft auto, as well. Not to mention the counts of illegal possession of a firearm. The officers passed away at a hospital later due to the injuries sustained from the gunshots. These were the first deaths for the Hattiesburg police department in approximately 30 years. Many officers and other individuals were hit especially hard by this shooting, as some had even gone to high school with one of the officers by the name of Benjamin Deen. As of now (5/11/2015), the weapon(s) used have not been found and/or retrieved. However, two of the individuals, Marvin Banks and Joanie Calloway, were found and arrested at a hotel and a convenience store, respectively. I would just like to give a sarcastic "Good job media." I cannot help but think that this attack was in response to the large amount of negative light that has been shined on the police force in the media as of late. All the media seems to do anymore is talk about celebrities no one really cares about, make firearms look like terrible killing machines when they are really just tools to protect one's self, and make police officers look like racist and brutal murderers when most officers in the force are good people. The media only makes the world a more paranoid place and the media needs to realize that their stories affect more than just the money going into their wallets.

A word to the media directly: There is more to this world than money.

Marilyn Mosby Needs Out of this Case

Marilyn Mosby: The prosecutor that does not even know
her own state's laws.

According to CBSnews, the six police officers that had been charged with Freddie Gray's death in Baltimore wish for the top prosecutor to be off the case, if not have the entire case dropped entirely. The police officers' charges ranged from assault to second-degree "depraved heart" murder, which, by definition of "depraved heart" murder, the officers will easily be let off. Clearly, by the charges and wording used by the prosecution, Marilyn Mosby, the top prosecutor in Baltimore, has become "overzealous" and "politically motivated." This political motivation has caused the officers' attorneys to ask for Mosby to be let off the case or for the case to be dismissed. Mosby continues to state that the officers involved in Freddie Gray's arrest was unlawful, as the reason for his arrest, a switchblade, was legal, according to Mosby. However, the officers' attorneys correctly state that the switchblade, by Maryland's Penal Law, is illegal and therefore the officers had arrested Gray 100 percent lawfully. In the midst of this case, Baltimore has begun investigated alleged accounts of "excessive force" among officers. The investigations would be extremely similar to those conducted in Ferguson, Missouri and Cleveland, Ohio. I personally hope that Mosby is dropped from the case, if not the charges themselves. I believe that if a prosecutor does not know his or her own state's Penal Laws, they should not be attempting to charge someone with a crime, as they do not even understand the crimes they are charging them with. Mosby does not know what she is talking about and therefore should drop the charges, but I know she will not, as she has become too politically motivated by all the rioting and anger which is stirring around her. The officers involved in the arrest of Freddie Gray are innocent of all crimes and must be released as soon as possible.

The officers that arrested Freddie Gray. They must be
set free, as they are innocent.

Soviet Collector Cars





The Soviet 41045

According to BBC, more and more people are collecting cars from the Soviet era of time. While Ronald Reagan may have called the USSR "the evil empire," many United States collectors can now be seen driving one of those "evil empire's" beauties. While the cars may not exactly be the most graceful of beasts (one man just flat out admits that "It drives like a 60-year old Russian car."), they continue to grow in popularity due to their decently pretty exterior. They may not be the safest of cars, such as the Audi A6, Chevrolet Trax, Buick Encore, Kia Sorento, and Nissan Sentra, but what they lack in safety and features, they make up for in beauty and taste. Many Soviet cars such as the 41045 and ZiL continue to be seen in various locations in America. While I personally am not extremely interested in Soviet and Russian products, I do find the cars to be decently, if not extremely, attractive cars. If the price was right, I would not mind owning a vintage Soviet car, as I personally love almost all vintage cars. I hope to see more vintage cars on the street, no matter what country they originate from.

Nothing Wrong Was Done; Other Than the Government's Reaction

According to FoxNews, the man who created "The Liberator" 3-D printed handgun is facing criminal charges for his creation. If you wish to know more about "The Liberator" itself, you may read about it in my previous blog here. The creator, Cody Wilson, explained that he created the 3-D printed handgun to "...invalidate the government's 'unconstitutional' hold on gun technology." However, Wilson now may be facing prison time and a fine of one million dollars for every violation, so he is suing the federal government in an attempt to void his charges and to keep his dream of keeping the second Amendment alive valid. Wilson knew that he was going to be breaking gun control laws, but he stated that "[he] stand[s] for freedom." This freedom statement clearly depicts that Wilson does not agree with many gun control laws, as they are unconstitutional and limit American citizens' freedom. The main reason people freaked out about this firearm technology was that they feared that any felon or terrorist would be able to freely access a firearm. However, they do not realize that a felon or terrorist would first have to purchase a 3-D printer and all the equipment required, which would cost more than a firearm on the street. Plus, it would be more work than it was worth to print out a firearm and then use it. It is just easier to purchase one on the street. 3-D printing is nothing new. It has been available to companies such as NASA for around 30 years, but just recently it was released for commercial use to allow civilians to create great things. However, once a firearm is made, everyone freaks out. I just do not understand what happened to America's great creative spirit. John Moses Browning was a civilian and he created fully automatic firearms, yet he was praised for it, but now, someone makes a single-shot .22 and everyone calls him a terrible human being. I just want to see the creativeness come back. Hopefully America will see more Brownings in the future.

John Moses Browning

Here is Another College with Some Common Sense

According to Al Jazeera, Florida State University has been making attempts to pass a bill to allow the concealed carry of handguns on the campus. The concept had created great support after a shooter, by the name of Myron May, stormed into the college and opened fire. May was killed by police, but not before murdering two of his classmates and paralyzed another. After the shooting, the idea for students to be able to protect themselves collected great momentum and Greg Steube, one of Florida's Republican state representatives, is playing a major role in the passing of the law. Steube was an Iraq war veteran and believes that "People inherently have the right to defend themselves." When people may say that 21 year old individuals do not have the experience or knowledge to properly operate a firearm, Steube simply replies with, "...we don't have a problem with 17 and 18 year olds swearing an oath to our Constitution and entering into the US military." I personally could not agree more with Mr. Steube. However, Harrison Dubosar, the director of the Florida State University student government, claims that firearms would not mesh well with schools. He seems to believe that everyone would be suspicious of each other and that the college would fall into chaos. Dubosar could not be more incorrect. His statements clearly indicate that he does not understand the philosophy of concealed carry. No one would even need to know someone was carrying unless a friend told another friend or a situation arose where someone needed to defend themselves or others with their firearm. Surprisingly, there is a Democrat who supports a pro-gun bill. She states that she understands not everyone should have a firearms, nor will everyone want to carry, but those who do wish to put their own protection in their own hands should have the ability to. She also believes that the bill will protect countless women for individuals who wish to sexually assault them. Another woman, who participates in classes at Florida State University, is actually against the passage of the bill. She claims that the bill is extremely dangerous, calling back to the age old argument, when people get drunk they will pull out their firearms and act stupid. She even pulled evidence of a Snapchat user who poses with illegal firearms while drunk. My only question is, how does she know they are illegal and if they are, why has he not been arrested yet? Steube has a counter argument for the "drunk and wild" argument, however. Steube stated that the drinking does not occur on campus, but instead in apartments and at frat houses, where firearms have been always been allowed to be carried, yet there have been no problems. Of course, as I am one of the biggest advocates for carry everywhere, I personally hope the law passes, as it would save countless lives, if not simply cause a mass shooter to think twice about becoming a mass shooter in the first place. Hopefully people will see the light and realize that we must take our own self preservation into our own hands.

Which seems better to you? Florida seems to know.

Why Are There No Protests for This?

According to BBC, a New York police officer by the name Brian Moore had been shot in the face on May 2, 2015. Sadly, Moore passed away on May 4, 2015. The suspect in his shooting goes by the name of Demitrius Blackwell. Blackwell was charged with attempted murder on Sunday. However, due to the new information about Moore's passing, Blackwell will most likely be facing other, more severe charges. Blackwell had opened fire after Moore and a few other officers, all in plain clothes, approached him on suspicions that he possessed an illegal firearm. Moore was only 25 when he was shot and killed. He was no slouch either. Officer Moore managed to arrest approximately 150 criminals in the time frame of about five years. His actions on the force granted him with meritorious service medals. However, on May 2, that one last arrest stop was never completed by Moore after seeing Blackwell adjust his waistband, a motion that caused the plain clothes police officers to believe he had an illegal handgun tucked into his waistband. Blackwell is being held without bail and has yet to state a plea. My only question for this action is, why are people not rioting against this? All the time Americans see news stories of protests for "police brutality," yet when a police officer is murdered, there is absolute silence. This silence infuriates me and I cannot believe the double standard the Americans hold. People claim that all of the police shootings are racist in nature, as most are a white officer shooting a black criminal, but when a black criminal shoots a white officer, no one seems to care. Clearly these protests are not racial, but instead all colors of skin against the color blue (police officers). Everyone seems to be against police and will do anything to give them a bad name, but when something terrible happens to police, the news that out with more "police brutality" and, as of recently, the Baltimore riots. I am just astounded by the utter ignorance and double standards that people hold when it comes to the police. My prayers go out to all of the police officers in this great country and I hope they make it home safely.

Demitrius Blackwell: The man who shot
Brian Moore.

Now Everyone Can Be An "American Sniper"

According to Vice, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, or DARPA for short, is extremely close to creating the next wave of firearms technology. No, it is not some new firearm or lasers, but instead, self-guiding bullets. Yes, you read that right, self-guiding bullets. The technology works in a very similar manner to the way the laser-guided missiles operate. These bullets are not going to cost an extreme amount of money either, due to the fact that the bullets themselves would be used in standard shell casings. Really, the only costly aspect would be to replace barrels on all firearms or all the actual firearms themselves. The only question to ask is, which is more expensive, a soldier's life from missing a shot or a few barrels on some .50 caliber rifles? However, DARPA may not have created the technology that would eventually lead to Extreme Accuracy Tasked Ordnance, or "EXACTO," bullets on the battlefield. A man named Rolin F. Barnett, Jr. stated that he filed for the first patent for theoretical self-guiding bullets in 1997 when he was a graduate student, simply to challenge himself. When Barnett had heard of DARPA's design for self-guiding bullets, he had asked for patent-holder compensation. However, DARPA claims to have used different technology than Barnett's design. This bullet design is not just a theory either, as DARPA has actually tested the "EXACTO" rounds. In the tests, six shots were taken by an expert shooter and one shot was taken by a novice shooter that had never fired the rifle before. In all seven shots, the target was hit, even on the move because the .50 caliber round made sharp turns to follow the target. One of my fears is that the technology may fail and the smooth-bore barrels will not allow for proper accuracy, causing soldiers to be injured or killed. Also, I fear that the technology should fall into the enemies hands, resulting in the deaths of innumerable American lives. I can only pray that the "EXACTO" bullets will save countless American soldiers' lives.

EXACTO Ammunition Test