Site logo

© 2007-2013 Email the Publisher
There are five boxes to use in the defense of Liberty: The Soap Box, the Mail Box, the Ballot Box, the Jury Box, and the Ammunition Box. Please use them in that order.
by Mark Ollendale | 2015-04-08 8:25 

If you’re a shooter and probably even if you’re not, you’ve likely seen the lines of folks lined up outside sporting goods stores across the country. In many cases it’s crowds filled with folks frustrated about the lack of ammo supply after an intense national debate. There’s a chance that scarcity could hurt the shooting community over the long haul.

With good reason, Americans are buying ammo like never before – so what’s in their ammo cans at home?

Here’s a look at the top selling calibers at a top online ammunition retailer since the first of the year: (more…)

Be Sociable, Share!
More articles in News, Op-Ed  | 

Similar Posts:

    None Found

Sorry, comments are closed for this item.
by J. Gill | 2013-04-28 15:27 

In the aftermath of the tragic and horrific act of terror in Boston, I was alarmed to see how everything unfolded after the bombing. There was of course the mainstream media who were hoping and praying that the terrorists were white. (Well, I doubt they were praying. The liberal media aren’t exactly known as God-fearing people of faith, but I digress.) Then there was Obama who took a looooong time to finally come out and call it an act of terror. After all, according to him and his propaganda team, the war on terror is over, and this whole “Muslim extremism” thing is just something Bush cooked up to go to war in the Middle East and make his oil buddies rich. Or something along those lines. So of course imagine their shock and sadness when it wasn’t a bitter white Bible-thumping gun-clinging Tea Partier, but instead two Muslim extremists who were white. I bet there was a lot of Starbucks consumed as the propagandists burned the midnight oil trying to cook up a new narrative for that one.

And of course there was The Manhunt. The Manhunt that everyone should pay close attention to, because it is a harbinger of things to come.


It is worrisome that two schmucks can shut down an entire city and have it cowering in fear. First, I have to ask: Bostonians, how did it feel to be trembling in your homes, unarmed and defenseless while two terrorists were on the loose? Unarmed and defenseless because the people you elected took away your God-given right to be able to defend yourselves, while you sat there and LET them, and at times ENCOURAGED THEM TO DO SO? Did you learn anything from this, Bostonians?

The biggest mistake was announcing the perpetrators’ names and posting their photos. Why? Because when you do that, and the Bad Guys know they’re now being hunted like feral hogs, they have a tendency to do more Bad Things. Like set off more pipe bombs, carjack a guy, and assassinate cops to steal their guns . We’re just very lucky they didn’t take roomful of hostages or blow up more innocents. Until their names and faces were plastered all over TV and the internet, they had settled back into their everyday lives. Heck, 19-year-old Dzhokhar even went back to his dorm, hit the gym, sent some tweets, and went to a party. But as soon as they knew their identities were known, the “Good Guys” lost their tactical advantage of surprise.

What they should have done was use the media to sow disinformation: tell the public they’re looking for a lone Asian female, late 40’s or something way off the mark. Maybe release a blurry photo. And when the brothers Tsarnaev see that, they get even more relaxed. They settle back into their lives and prepare to carry out their next attack. Oh sure, still set up a perimeter and cordon off Boston, check every car going in and out, shut down the rail lines and all that, but at that point you already know who they are. And two 12-man teams, one for each brother, could have surgically staked them out and taken them down at the moment of the “Good Guys'” choosing… a moment when the likelihood of collateral damage would be lowest. Like in Dzhokar’s dorm room while he was sleeping. Instead, they gave up their tactical advantage. They put the brothers on the run, which means the brothers had the tactical advantage and the “Good Guys” were forced to react as opposed to initiate.


So to hunt a 26-year-old and his kid brother, the city of Boston effectively declares martial law. Citizens had their 4th Amendment rights trampled upon as jack-booted stormtroopers roamed the streets and went door-to-door searching houses with no warrant, no probable cause and no “hot pursuit”.



Then there’s the curfew, the order to stay indoors, the treating everyone as suspects, regardless of race, gender, or age, despite the fact that they knew who the terrorists were. This is no different than the TSA making 6-year-olds cry on their way to Disney: “We’re from the government, and we’re going to do whatever we think is in the best interests of public safety. Do what we say, subjects, or you’ll be zip-tied, arrested, and interrogated. And I don’t care what ‘the law’ says, don’t record me. The law doesn’t apply to me.

This wasn’t rocket science. This was a simple manhunt, and as anyone who has watched a few episodes of Manhunters on A&E knows, you don’t need thousands of military, SWAT, armored cars, Blackhawks, FLIR, and suspension of civil liberties for an entire town in order to catch two guys, and you certainly don’t need it to catch just one. So if all that was needed was some smarts and a few dozen sharp officers, then why the superfluous use of force?

The Advancing Police State

Boys will be boys. And part of being a boy is proving your manhood, showing that you still pack the credentials to possess a Man Card. This comes in many forms, from running Tough Mudder to mixed martial arts to skydiving, but many boys turn to the military and military-esque pursuits. Some join the military, others become police officers. And all these boys want the same thing: cool toys, macho uniforms, and the opportunity to be a hero. So virtually every police department across the country has been on a spending spree over the past two decades, arming up with the latest and greatest toys: AR-15s, ballistic armor, tear gas grenade launchers, armored vehicles, and anything with the word “tactical” in its description. And it would be such a pity to have all these toys and not have the opportunity to use them!






So when the balloon goes up and some terrorists are on the loose, every agency in the land — which is filled to overflowing with all sorts of cool gear and an abundance of over-eager staff who have the whole “tactical operator” mindset — immediately want in on the action. And why should the government stop them? After all, they need to be able to justify to the taxpayers why they spent the past 20 years spending millions (conservatively) on all this tactical gear. And besides, the show of force would be sweet. “Go on, boys, saddle up and let’s get some!” they shout. And then every operator wanna-be straps on his body armor, puts on his Oakleys, and looks in the mirror going “I look AWESOME. I TOTALLY rate my Man Card. LOCK AND LOAD! YEAH!” (I’m not saying that everyone in the police, national guard, military, etc has this mindset, but an increasing number do. Sadly, they are gaining more traction in the politics of their respective organizations than their more subtle brethren who still believe in and abide by their oaths.)

Of course, government tyrants use the tragedy in Boston as a call for more drones, more police cameras, and a “reinterpretation” of our Constitution. In short, they are calling for more tyranny and less freedom. For our own protection, of course. Ironic, isn’t it, that the Boston bombing occurred on Patriots’ Day, when we are supposed to remember that the battles of Lexington & Concord were fought because King George was fearful that the Colonists would use their guns to resist his tyrannical rule, and so he sent troops to seize those guns; yet today we have a government that is calling for the same thing?

And the government is completely fine with this mentality, and actually encourages its perpetuation through increasingly large federal law enforcement grants so these agencies can buy more tactical toys. Why? Because it makes it so much easier to impose tyranny on the masses when you have a “civilian national security force that is just a strong, just as powerful, just as well funded” as the U.S. military. And sadly, when they come busting down doors to round up innocent citizens’ guns and enforce The Police State, they’ll be the same cops who swear on their mamma’s eyes that they loooove the Second Amendment.

Be Sociable, Share!
More articles in Featured Column  | 

Similar Posts:

    None Found

Comments (1)
by FiveBoxes Staff | 2013-01-15 9:07 

The liberals and the media (but I repeat myself) are hellbent on regulating gun rights. Now, far be it from them to use any sort of logic in their arguments, and we don’t expect them to understand how if a right is regulated, it’s no longer a right but a privilege. So we propose the following:

Since the media is so in favor of regulating the Second Amendment, let’s take a look at doing some regulating of the First Amendment.

  1. Since they’re in favor of mandatory training for people to own a firearm so that firearm owners will be responsible, we recommend mandatory testing of all journalists to ensure that they’re reporting responsibly. So if they want to write an article on firearms and the Second Amendment, they would need to pass a test to ensure they know all the facts about firearms and firearm nomenclature, the Second Amendment, and the history of the Second Amendment. If you don’t possess a license to report on a certain topic, you cannot report on that topic or else you’re guilty of a felony. And since things change, to make sure they’re responsible journalists, they need to re-test to maintain their license.
  2. Since they’re in favor of a national register of firearm owners, there should be a national register of journalists and their licenses. Prior to publishing any article, they must fill out a form and have their licenses checked for validity.
  3. Since they’re in favor of waiting periods before buying firearms, all news articles should be sequestered for 14 days before publication.
  4. Since they’re in favor of limitations on the number of rounds a magazine can hold, there should be a limited distribution of every news article. After all, one erroneous report or “loose cannon” journalist could negatively affect the lives of millions of people. A distribution cap of 100 people should be more than enough. 
  5. Since they’re in favor of restricting the amount of ammunition people can buy, journalists should be limited in the number of words they use and what words they use. After all, words can be powerful weapons, the pen mightier than the sword and all that. So let’s limit them to 100 words and no inflammatory language. Don’t want to upset anyone.
  6. Since they want to force gun owners to keep their guns locked up at all times and be required to have biometric devices to prevent unauthorized use, they cannot possess laptops, their desktop computers must be secured inside a safe, and they must keep their thumb on a thumbprint scanner while typing to ensure no one wrestled them away from the computer to write an inflammatory article.
  7. Since they want to check mental health statuses of all gun owners, every journalist must undergo a mental fitness check every 6 months by three psychiatrists. Anyone taking any medications for depression, anxiety, ADHD, or other mental problems will have their journalism license revoked. Wouldn’t want them posting something while in an altered state of mind. Also, their computer would have a built-in breathalyzer to ensure they have a blood alcohol content of 0.0 when writing.

There. Now the American people can rest easy knowing that their news is — at last — safe to read.

Be Sociable, Share!
More articles in Featured Column  | 

Similar Posts:

    None Found

Comments (2)