Shooting Sports News
RSS feed
Roger holds a Master of Public Administration Degree from Cleveland State University and holds several degrees from The Ohio State University. He earned a Master of Arts degree in Philosophy, a Bachelor of Arts degree in English and a Bachelor of Science in Education degree in Secondary English Education.
Roger has practiced law for the federal Government in Washington D.C., for the State Government in Arizona, and has been in private practice in Ohio, New York, and Arizona. Roger is a co-founder of Arbalest Group LLC, creator of the Arbalest Quarrel weblog, dedicated to strengthening the Second Amendment, preserving our Bill of Rights, and maintaining a free Republic.
They also co- author commentary, with a unique perspective on, and perceptive insight into, news and politics.
Roger and Stephen are regular radio talk show guests on Lock N Load with Bill Frady.
John Paul Stevens once remarked that the Second Amendment should be redrafted to make clear and unequivocal that the right of the people to keep and bear arms is not an individual, unalienable, right.
Democrats’ agenda to reshape our nation in accord with the socialist tenets of collectivism is reflected in a pathological desire to destroy the Second Amendment of the Bill of Rights.
Releasing dangerous people, charged with serious crimes, on the street, and, at once, hamstringing the police will hardly make the City safer. Add to that more gun control…
Leftist activists demonstrate their obliviousness to the heavy burden our legal system imposes on the State to prove the accused committed the crime he or she is charged with.
Radical Leftist activists of all stripes and anarchist groups—misapprehend, misconstrue the legal significance of the concept of ‘presumption of innocence’…
If the police don’t have the legal duty to protect innocent, law-abiding Americans, it is irrational to argue Americans ought not have firearms for their own defense.
What Is The Duty Of A Community’s Police Force Toward A Citizen Whose Life Is In Imminent Threat Of Attack?
It is a blatant gun confiscation scheme scarcely cloaked as a “gun buyback,” for there is nothing voluntary about it. If a gun owner doesn’t wish to turn his firearms over to the Governmental…
If Democrats take control of both houses of Congress and the U.S. Presidency third prong will be: “expand” gun background checks.
All of these “Red Flag” laws are Constitutionally suspect and they all should be scrutinized before enactment to see if they pass Constitutional muster. But, that never happens.
It isn’t bans on some semiautomatic weapons that the New Progressive Left is gunning for: It’s a ban on all semiautomatic weapons and on all component parts of those weapons.
How does Governor Cuomo seek to protect “women’s rights?” He does so by offering up as a sacrifice, what ought to be received as the Divine Creator’s Greatest gift to human beings: a new life.
Harris’ stance on abortion is, on logical grounds, at loggerheads with her pretentious claim that additional gun control will save lives of babies.
One must ask: does that policy choice promote life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; or does that policy choice operate to impede if not altogether preclude life, liberty, and the pursuit of…
If Government seriously wishes to deal with violence in society, we have an answer for the President and for Congressional Republicans. To begin with…
The President needs to be very, very careful suggesting to Schumer and Pelosi that he is conducive to entertaining any gun measure. When most would only operate as a backdoor to restricting 2a rights.
Extremist elements are hammering Congress, first and foremost to enact more gun background checks, even as the New York Times acknowledges it will do nothing to stop criminal murders.
“The most brilliant propagandist technique will yield no success unless one fundamental principle is borne in mind constantly— it must confine itself to a few points and repeat them over and over.” ~
Engaging in compromise with those who abhor firearms and who detest those who choose to exercise their sacred right to keep and bear arms will serve only to compromise that right, destroying 2A.
Armed citizenry will only continue to exist if the American public manifests and maintains its strength of will and an indefatigable faith in our founders’ vision for our Nation.
It should come as no surprise to anyone, then, that the Radical New Progressive Leftist would seek to destroy the means by which and through which the individual may emphasize his or her individuality
Nothing distinguishes the two political and social philosophies, that of the radical new Progressive Left* and the Conservative on the other, more than on the issue of firearms.
The ethical systems and political philosophies of individualists and collectivists are mutually exclusive and therefore cannot be reconciled with each other.
Which side really holds the moral high ground? A political Conservative or the political and socialist Liberal, a.K.A., Radical leftist and progressive?
The radical left spreads hatred and violence, not peace and community as they thrust their value system on everyone else.
