What Does a Tidal Wave Look Like?

Something like this maybe? This is traffic to my blog.

It has more than doubled since last Friday. I’ve seen people in the comments I haven’t seen in years coming back and commenting. Welcome back. After a good night’s sleep, I no longer feel so gloomy. Let share with you something I keep being reminded of:

As the Army moved into the field on its expedition, it was operating with incorrect assumptions as to the number of Indians it would encounter. The Army’s assumptions were based on inaccurate information provided by the Indian Agents that no more than 800 hostiles were in the area. The Indian Agents based the 800 number on the number of Lakota led by Sitting Bull and other leaders off the reservation in protest of US Government policies. This was a correct estimate until several weeks before the battle, when the “reservation Indians” joined Sitting Bull’s ranks for the summer buffalo hunt. As one historian wrote: “The (US) Army’s strength estimate didn’t change, because the civilian Indian agents on the reservations didn’t tell the Army that large numbers of Indians had left.” Nor did the agents take into account the many thousands of “reservation Indians” who had “unofficially” left the reservation to join their “uncooperative non-reservation cousins led by Sitting Bull”. The latter were those groups who had indicated that they were not going to cooperate with the US Government and live on reservation lands. Thus, Custer unknowingly faced thousands of Indians, in addition to the 800 non-reservation “hostiles”. All Army plans were based on the incorrect numbers. While after the battle, Custer was severely criticized for not having accepted reinforcements and for dividing his forces, it must be understood that he had accepted the same official Government estimates of hostiles in the area which Terry and Gibbon also accepted. Historian James Donovan, states that when Custer asked Gerard his estimate on the opposition, he estimated the force at between 1,500 to 2,500 warriors.

This is not our last stand, it is theirs. If we beat them back now, if we deny them their agenda and keep the lawmakers in line, we will sweep these people from the field. They will, like Custer, have underestimated our numbers and our ferocity. We will dog our lawmakers. They will be sick of hearing from us by the time this is over. Obama’s historical legacy will be a lousy economy, and an ineffective and bumbling second term. It is our time to show the weak and pitiful Republicans how this is done, and how you beat Obama.

37 thoughts on “What Does a Tidal Wave Look Like?”

  1. The missus went to our local gun shop on Monday to buy me a holster for Christmas. She said it was packed to the gills. Obama’s inane comments are having an impact. Not the impact he was looking for, but . . . Heh.

  2. My long dead blog suddenly went to over 1,000 visits a day, mostly based on google, but also a few people who linked to some old posts. Vs. about 50 visits a day average before.

    I wonder if the storm of demand for massive gun control is more from the media and the usual voices, just with their volume turned up to 11. And of course some weak conservatives caving. And I have to say I’ll give them a little grace based on the images they have to experience right now from CT. Maybe they’ll think it through and their opinions will evolve again.

    The problem is is even if there’s not a huge groundswell of demand for gun control from the people, can we punish them if they do it anyway? I’m sure that’s what they’re thinking about now. The last thing Obama wants is to lose more of the Congress in 2 years.

    The next few weeks will tell how much support the Dems and Obama think they have to this stuff based on their actions. If this becomes an “assign a panel to Joe and make some noise” campaign, then they’ve figured out it works against them. If they press it hard we’re in trouble — unless we can actually punish them after the fact.

    Time will tell. I didn’t hear of any mentions of CCW banishment or handgun banishment. Perhaps we’ve reached the point where those are considered settled issues? At least until they’ve made some headway in rolling back other rights?

    1. I wonder if the storm of demand for massive gun control is more from the media and the usual voices, just with their volume turned up to 11.

      Ya think? Manchin’s already walking back his remarks.

      1. Trader Joe is doing one hell of a moon walk today. Once the weekend emotion is removed, the gun grabbers know they have an uphill battle.

  3. my blog averages 1,200 visits a day. Since Friday I had 17,000 visits. Thank God I switched to a host with unlimited bandwith.

    The issue here is that the rules have changed and the gun community has not figured it out yet. As much as I understand the NRA’s stand on not politicizing killings, that is creating a vacuum that is being filled by the wrong people giving the wrong message for their purposes.
    At a minimum, the NRA should have made a very strong appearance on Monday morning, as of now, they appear as afraid and weak; not the best of images.
    It is pissing me off that I am getting banned on Twitter and collecting hate by the bushel while waiting for back up from Fairfax to arrive.

    1. It’s frustrating, I know. I have some thoughts about what NRA is trying to do, and it’s either really smart, or really stupid. And I’m not sure which yet.

      My first thought is that by sitting out until Tuesday, they are not getting their message out too soon when people aren’t prepared to listen. Second, by suggesting they have solutions, the media is going to be thinking that NRA is prepared to capitulate on guns. I think they will end up disappointed in that, but that would be such a huge story, they are all guaranteed to be there. Thirdly, people will be headed out for the holidays to family. NRA will be controlling the narrative just before people go home for the holidays, and will get the last word as people tune out of the news cycle to be with family. NRA’s arguments will be fresh in people’s mind.

      My second thought is they should have been out with their statement on Monday, and had the presser scheduled for Tuesday or Wednesday. But then you run the risk Obama is either going to try to stomp your press conference with his own, or he’ll end up taking the narrative back before the holidays. The timing of this could have been bait. Let Obama make his statement, and now NRA has a few days to figure out how to deal with it.

      But I’m not sure they are that smart. I’m also not sure they are that stupid. This is kind of like being a general. You may have some instincts about your enemy, and you may have a plan, but at the end of the day it’s going to come down to who makes the fewest mistakes. It’ll be judged by the result. If NRA gets steamrollered it’ll be the worst idea in the world. If they end up beating the gun control orgs and the left back, they’ll be heroes and geniuses.

      What’s it going to be? I wish I knew. But I don’t pretend to have a better plan.

      1. The risk of Obama stomping on your press conference is very real, it’s a common tactic of his (although not normally with a press conference, as this one showed where they asked him about the fiscal cliff for 18 or so questions … and continuing to show he has less class than Nixon, he tied Newtown to it and what he wants the Republicans to do).

        But the NRA could always reschedule, it’s not like events in a campaign. Me, I just can’t think of anything good that comports with their Tuesday statement except putting guns in schools one way or another. But maybe you’re right and the Winning Team is just trying to make sure the media will really cover it … but, how could they not anyway?

        And, my oh my are they exercising message discipline. No rumors from someone who “insisted on anonymity because he is not allowed to speak to the media.” That says something….

    2. I think the NRA is being very smart in not jumping into a dogpile.

      Did you notice that the first three (I think) questions after his gun control press conference were about the fiscal cliff? For all the bluster about ignoring the second amendment, about the NRA being a terrorist organization that eats dead burnt babies for breakfast, what they really care about is taxing millionaires. This fiscal cliff is taking the news lead, and it will until the end of the year, if not after. If they don’t extend the 2% payroll tax cut, the rest of the country is going to be screaming bloody murder about the 2% pay cut. All the leaks about the fiscal cliff talks say they are postponing actual spending cuts til next year; there won’t be time for gun control bills for at least several weeks, and by then it will be on the back burner. Besides, they now have to wait for a commission to make recommendations, and not only will that take six months, but Joe Biden is in charge, which is guaranteed to make an incoherent mess of it.

      The NRA is is absolutely positively doing the right thing by staying above this fray, and when they do have their presser on Friday, the anticipation will hype it all the more.

  4. I went out yesterday to my local impact guns store for a pickup from an order last week. Between one week before and yesterday the store was all but out of anything in .225/5.56 AR-esk and was severely depleted in the AR-10 area and low-mid cost semiauto pistols. The folks at the counter said they had plenty of rifles at the start of this week but in two days were basically out, with a guesstamate of 3-6 months of supply being consumed in 2 days

  5. Scottsdale Gun Club was packed Saturday afternoon. I mean wall-to-wall, call the Fire Marshall there’s too many people here packed. We’re talking sardines. The line to sign up for a rental lane was almost out the door.

    If this isn’t winning, what is?

    1. It’s not winning because there are plenty of those people who don’t want to engage in the direct politics of the issue. Yes, they see that they are under a threat, but they don’t want to do anything about it.

      I just saw someone who “cares” about guns enough to follow PAGunRights on Facebook and share posts on political threats to our rights, but his share included the statement that he’s just “not the voting type.” He was just passing it on so that those other gun owners who “care” about the right as much as he does, but who are “the voting type,” could know who to vote against. It took everything I had not to ban him from the page. I’d rather he keep sharing the information, but still…

      Now, if I were in charge of Scottsdale Gun Club – or any other gun shop/gun range – here’s what I would have done with that line:
      1) Had business card printed with the name and contact information for every federal lawmaker in the region – one for every Congressional district they draw customers from. Every person who checked in to buy a gun or rent a gun would get one for their lawmaker.

      2) While people are waiting to shoot, they would be very strongly encouraged to sit down at a table and write a letter to their Congressman and Senators on the spot. For everyone who does it there, the gun shop will pick up the postage for their letter and see that it gets in the mail that day. Everyone who turns in their 3 letters to be mailed gets a coupon for their next visit as a thank you.

      This, and some other comments, have inspired me to write a few posts on specific ideas for different types of gun communities – online and in real life.

      1. Well, I’m not the voting type because of that pesky requirement that only citizens vote, although I’m certain that several ballots with my name on them were cast in Chicago during the election this year. :D

        The ballot box is one way to make sure we win, the soapbox is another, and we can use both to preserve our access to the cartridge box. I like you idea of getting gun stores and ranges involved. This affects them directly and they need to step up to the plate.

      2. I agree – everyone who frequents Targetmaster in Chadds Ford, please encourage them to do these things.

        I just wrote them targetmaster1@verizon.net or call them at (302) 529-5600.

        They have to have a 1000 walk ins a week. If we could get 250 of them involved each week, that would be a great return on the calls/emails/visits we can do to encourage them to get political.

  6. One thought about the NRA …

    They actually represent millions of members, some of which are far from 100% on our side. I think they move slowly for 3 reasons:

    1. An honest concern about politicizing carnage.
    2. To evaluate what message their membership will accept.
    3. To let the front lines (i.e. bloggers and smaller gun rights group) take the initial hits and plan a response.

    As Sebastian noted, all these groups seem to have a coordinated message ready to go. i.e. Obama saying “we’re better than that” and all the mentions of weapons of war. NRA needs to observer what this is, see where it’s scoring points, and plan a counter punch.

    When all you have on your side are some weak but loud guerilla forces (the anti-gunners) you can attack much quicker than a massive conventional army like the NRA. And you can afford to make more missteps than the NRA have, since you have no members to piss off in the first place.

    I’m being an apologist here for the NRA I know, but I do like their recent record of success …

    1. “I’m being an apologist here for the NRA I know, but I do like their recent record of success …”

      You mean the success of the Second Amendment Foundation which the NRA has declared, after the fact, to have been their own?

      1. This honestly isn’t the time for this kind of shit. The enemy is that way!

        Both NRA and SAF have been key players in preserving the Second Amendment.

      2. Agreeing with Sebastians reply …

        but in any case the SAF without the NRA would be like a deadly SEAL team without army to back them up and occupy the territory. The SEAL team may be the tip of the spear and have some huge, shiny successes, but you need the massive forces of the army maneuver units to win a war.

  7. The question is simple: Will enough Republicans split off from the Congressional majority to vote against gun rights? If the answer is “No”, the Democrats in the Senate and the President can whine and wail until the cows come home. Identify the number of spineless versus cartilage equipped politicians that are vulnerable and if that number removed from the majority still retains a majority, nothing from Congress happens.

    Not to say that Obama may go all-out on executive overreach. Does it matter that Obama will blame the Republicans? He does already. Will the shrill voices still be screaming and wailing 3-5 months from now when potential legislation is being debated, etc? Do all of those calling for every marginalization (or worse) of gun owners have that level of staying power?

    The issue is mental health, pure and simple. Blaming the mother, while she may have made mistakes, is blaming the first victim of this heinous act. The reform we need to be focusing on is:

    1) How do we reform mental health treatment so we don’t stigmatize those seeking it?
    2) With 1 in mind, encourage a voluntary suspension of rights in concert with the patient and therapist that is reported to NICS but automatically expires to restore someone’s rights unless that patient/therapist volunteers to extend it or a judge agrees on committal proceeding per current due process. The expiration would be coded into law as automatic so as to retain privacy and due process and not leave someone’s future rights at the whim of someone who doesn’t like them.
    3) Change the culture of mental health so that people won’t feel a Hobson’s choice between seeking treatment or lifetime, irrevocable loss of rights. We should be able to balance both along with privacy.

    I think this would go a long, long way towards reporting people that aren’t quite right to being examined, treated and keeping them away from arms and the like until they are fit to do so. For involuntary committals, an appeal or preferably an automatic restoration after N years of non-violent behavior or positive treatment (i.e. 3-5 years).

    Otherwise, it is pure emotional reaction, we get screwed and when new ARs and AKs are banned, the next monster uses a Remington 750. Where does it stop? There is no stop or bar to this.

    1. Errr, no. The House isn’t run like the Senate, the House leadership exercises iron control over what comes up for a vote and not. If a gun control bill passes the House it’s because Boehner wanted it to, or whoever replaces him if he goes down in flames this January after purging all those conservatives from leadership and committee positions.

      And you’ll have cause to ding your Republican House Representative (if you are so lucky as to have one) if he lets Boehner stay Speaker after all he’s done to damage the party and brand and what he’s saying about gun control right now.

  8. To repeat what I posted at Stephen’s, killers don’t need guns which spit out a single bullet or even many – they’re not that effective. In Afghanistan and Iraq where full-auto AKs are easily the norm, IED’s are the weapons of choice.
    The worst U.S. school-killing of children was in 1927 and it was a bombing. At the Bath School Disaster, 38 elementary school children were killed along with two teachers and four other adults – and the bomber himself. In total at least 58 people were injured. The bomber was school board treasurer Andrew Kehoe, 55, who died in a car bomb he set off after he drove up to the school as the crowd gathered to rescue survivors from the burning school.
    This effort to ban guns and magazines is small-minded and self-centered and futile.

  9. My worry is that all these panic buyers will think, “whew, I’ve got mine, I don’t care if they ban them now” and not contact their representatives. People are selfish and not that bright. Many “don’t want to get involved,” and all the other excuses that have led to this mentality. Arrggghhh! I’m frustrated.

    1. You and I share this same fear. But I am heartened my almost purely political gun blog has seen a more than double the traffic since this all began. And not because I like traffic, but because it shows people are starting to pay attention again, and we need that.

      1. I mentioned to my friend last night at the gun store (which looked as thought it had just been robbed) for every five people buying a gun and walking out with what they wanted, there are probably two or three that left empty handed and angry. One guy at the store failed a background check and was pretty upset. I’m sure he will be filing a challenge and if/when it gets reversed he’ll be back just as determined as ever.

        When will the new stock come after this? Maybe in a few months… maybe. Those two or three folks who left empty handed will be enough to keep the pressure on from our side and come back and want to see fresh inventory of their favorite gun in two months or two years without their rights being infringed. It’s an argument that plays out well for our side over time.

  10. If it’s becoming hard to buy a whole pre-assembled gun, when will it become hard to buy a stripped lower and build one? I’m still thinking’s .308AR build, but I havn’t been getting much feedback. :-( And what scope goes well on a .308 AR – I’m clueless about glass.

    1. What is its purpose? Plinking? Serious distance work? Deer hunting? My next serious rifle will be a Remington 700 (M40A3 configuration) with Schmidt & Bender fixed power glass. The glass will cost as much as the rifle. Leupold works well too.

    2. If you’re not spending AT LEAST as much as the gun itself cost, you aren’t serious about it. 2X, or even 3X is not unreasonable. Don’t forget a rangefinder. A few scopes now come with a built-in system. (Adds to the cost, of course!)

  11. Is it true that the Pennsylvania State Police are still ordering the FFL’s to sell stripped AR lowers as if they were handguns?

    1. I haven’t tried to buy a lower for a few years, but yes, last time I bought one I had to fill out the state forms like it was a pistol.

      1. That amounts to a backdoor registry list for everybody in Pennsylvania who builds rifles from stripped AR lowers. Count me out then. Sure, somebody with a stripped AR lower could build an AR pistol, but it would not be concealable compared to almost all other pistols, plus, somebody with an AR rifle could convert it to an AR pistol without having to fill out the same forms.

        1. The best time to buy a stripped lower was Friday.

          Seriously, they are flying off the shelves. BCGs, uppers, everything is gone.

          I have three coworkers that decided to pull the trigger on an AR. I gave them a shopping list and a list of distributers and they came up empty on everything.

          Not a good time to build an AR. I’m glad I got some Black Rifle Friday shopping in. Now I can focus on contacting my reps/sens every day.

        2. By my reading of the law (which is not expert, by any means, talk to a lawyer), you can buy an AR-15 lower out of state from an FFL, because it is not considered a handgun by the feds. Pennsylvania repealed it’s law on buying firearms out of state, and replaced it with this:


          But given they repealed the law, there’s also nothing, though it goes unsaid, keeping people from buying handguns out of state other than federal law. So my interpretation of the law is that it’s legal federally to buy a lower out of state (from an FFL), and legal under state law to import it into Pennsylvania. That means no state form, and no state registry. Though there would be the 4473 from the out of state dealer, and federal NICS check (assuming it’s not a POC state).

  12. Gun shows in the Atlanta area were packed on 12/1 and 12/8. I expect the one this weekend will be even more so. For good reason. We have let the fed govt get so out of control, a lot of Americans don’t even know how to see the reality around them.

  13. Your optimism is infectious Sebastian. It’s making me feel like we’ve got the momentum here.

    This is not 1994, thank god.

Comments are closed.