Why arrange links the way I do, don't link to Infowars/PrisonPlanet or Veteran's Today, & debunking the belief that places with high gun ownership are socially unfriendly.

Though no one has asked this question yet, in my freetime, I decided to have a quick talk about why the links that you see on this blog, particulary the ones to your right hand side, just in case anyone is curious.

When it comes to the top links to important funds and petitions, "Generally important information", "A few truth & alternate media sites to look at & support", and "Social-issue (plus philosophy) must reads", it's quite simple; they are ordered from what I want people to see first and what's the most important to the least important and what I feel is least necessary to see (though somewhat roughly).

For example, becuase of the information provided by websites such as ANC report, The archived Bilzerian Report, and StormCloudsGathering gets higher priority than Alternative Media Network, Mark Dice, or David Icke becuase I feel that the information provided by the former is often more important, more accurate, and/or even less often read than the information from the latter.

However, as for the "International civilian arms rights organizations", along with "U.S. based civilian arms rights + other groups", it gets slightly more complicated. As hinted by the way websites are ordered, the International Association for the Protection of Civilian Arms Rights, and Firearms United - Worldwide confederation of gun owners get top priority becuase they are trying to help firearm owners on the international scale, just like my currently unsuccessful World's people against Democide group on Google+. 

I am not too concerned about weapon owners in the mainland United States of America (except for overseas territories, such as the U.S. Virgin Islands, Northern Mariana Islands, and American Samoa), as that I feel that we are pretty secure compared to our counterparts is many other countries (with the exception of outright lawless countries or countries such as Pakistan, Yemen, Afghanistan, or 3rd world countries with few, if any laws regarding civilian arms and armor ownership). And the 2nd amendment acts like a legal buffer that slows down anti civilian gun ownership legislation. I'll get to the situation of the United States of America later.

 As for National Association for Gun Rights India, Indians for guns, PROGUN Philippines, National Arms Association of Spain, Gun Owners of South Africa, Forum Waffenrecht, German rifle association, and so on and so forth, they get high priority becuase of the lack of a strong civilian arms rights movement and/or gun culture in those areas.

As for the National Rifle Association United Kingdom, Firearms UK, The Coalition of Law Abiding Sporting Shooters, British Association for shooting and conservation, and Sportsman's association United Kingdom, they get a higher priority than the Firearms Owners Association of Australia, Sporting Shooters Association of Australia, Outdoor Recreation Party Australia, and Shooters and Fishers party becuase, in the United Kingdom, from what I've read, their licensing system is stricter than Australia's, especially with Firearm Certificates, which are "May issue", as opposed to Shotgun certificates, which are "Shall issue", and I think all common Australian firearm licenses, which is category A, B, and H are "shall issue" (category C and D have occupational requirements if they're functioning, while collector's category D and R weapons can not be functional, and category M weapons have so many rules on them that I recommend checking out Australian state police websites to figure out how they're regulated), and that Australia has a much higher firearm ownership rate than the United Kingdom.

However, for both the United Kingdom and Australia, things are currently not getting much better for weapon owners, and the same is true for Switzerland, which is why PROTELL also gets some priority.

As for Viva Brazil, National Rifle Association New Zealand, New Zealand Shooting Federation, and Outdoor Recreation New Zealand, they get medium priority becuase the issue of civilian arms ownership is kind've a stalemate in Brazil and New Zealand, and the latter has some of the loosest gun laws in the world (albeit with a strict licensing system), only behind the Czech Republic (though Austria has a more permissive licensing system), and the United States of America.

As for the Canadian Coalition for Firearms Rights and National Firearms Association, they get the lowest priority outside the United States of America becuase, from what I can tell, even though the anti-gun movement seems to have more sway and power in Canada, for firearm owners, slowly but surely, it's actually getting a little better. 

Personally, I am less enthusiastic about supporting sporting or outdoor recreation based groups, simply becuase they operate on sport or recreation, rather than principle. To give you a clue about how important principle is to me, especially when it comes to civilian arms and armor rights, go read my Ultimate argument for the right to self-defense & to keep & bear arms & armor.

I'm also reluctant to support political parties, even Libertarian parties. Lookup Jesse Ventura's stance on the elimination of political parties, which I agree with.

Now, let's move on to the United States of America.

As for the U.S.A., we are, for the most part, pretty well off.

The American Civil Liberties Union gets top priority becuase, while it's not exclusively an civilian arms rights group, I also support it for its stance on many other issues, and Oath Keepers gets high priority becuase it addresses the enforcement arm of the powers that be, military and law enforcement (the other main real enforcement arm we'll have to worry about are foreign troops). The Liberal Gun Club, Pink Pistols, and Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership also get very high support priority becuase, as explained on Massad Ayoob on the "against guns" issue, CCW but not carrying, and why women should carry, many people get their views from what Massad Ayoob calls "pigeonhole politics", which is probably similar to "identity politics", in which is a party's or common political alignments views on issue X will be stance Y, and whoever is following them often would viewing issue X ends up as stance Y.

If this paradigm dies out, this would be an enormous victory for us. 

You can read about how this is already happening, especially with the rise of famous, high-profile stereotype breakers such as Chris Cheng and TheYankeeMarshal (I agree with the latter on almost everything except for his stance on libertarianism, immigration is a gray area, and last, and definitely least,  abortion. I also consider him a "Porcupine", rather than a true "Sheepdog", as that he'll mainly defend himself and his loved ones, and will only protect others under limited circumstances).

Continued, groups such as Gun owners of California, The Calguns Foundation, and New York state rifle and pistol association get higher priority than even national arms rights organizations becuase states such as California and New York are hold-out spots for civilian arms control. 

The NRA gets unenthusiastic support for me mainly for reasons explained on https://www.youtube.com/user/TheYankeeMarshal/search?query=NRA, but it gets my support nonetheless.

As of right now, pretty much the absolute best that states can do is to adopt the firearm laws of Texas and implement Alaska carry. There are what I call "Bird poop spots", which are states that have small amounts of weapon laws that aren't particulary problematic (such as tighter regulation of NFA weapons, registration of certain non-NFA firearms or tight or lengthy requirements to get a carry permit) but still shouldn't really be there, which is why the Gun owner's action league, Grass Roots North Carolina, Firearm Owners Against Crime, Virginia Citizens Defense League, and Florida Carry, inc are listed directly on my blog. The rest are listed in my ultimate argument.

Also watch: Winning The Gun Rights War (There is good news out there), and Winning The Gun Rights War.

Wrapping the 1st part of the article up, the main reason why I don't link to Infowars/Prisonplanet on the blog too much is becuase pretty much everyone looks at them now, and I just decided to not use up space or clutter up link lists to link to them. However, you still can see videos from the Infowars channels on a lot of my channel's playlists, especially older playlists.

Also read: Did Alex Jones & Infowars finally blow it?.
As for Veteran's Today, watch https://www.youtube.com/user/Rys2sense/search?query=Veteran%27s+Today, , and Maidhc Ó Cathail the disinformation of guilt by association tactics.

Debunking the belief that places with high gun ownership are socially unfriendly.

As you can see on my sarcastically named playlist, "All gun owners are racist Christian Conservatives", there is a collectivistic stereotype that civilian arms owners tend to be unfriendly people. Now, I'm going to show some places with relatively a high number of firearms per capita but are overall relatively friendly.

And note that all large societies are going to have its bad apples, so I'm speaking relatively and nothing is really set in stone.

Information credit: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Number_of_guns_per_capita_by_country.

Note: this list also includes countries that previously ranked higher.

Czech Republic, 37th in gun ownership rate: while its firearm ownership rate is strikingly low considering how it is rivaled with Austria is terms of firearm owner friendliness and, besides Estonia is the only European Union member that I'm aware of that has "shall-issue" concealed carry permits (though in Estonia you're not supposed to have a round in the chamber unless you're carrying a revolver, according to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overview_of_gun_laws_by_nation#Comparison), however, shooting is the 3rd most popular sport, and non-firearm weapons (such as batons, irritant/inflammatory sprays, stun guns, knifes, etc) are seemingly unregulated. But, the people also seem to be friendly, and, believe it or not, also tend to be rather open to LGBT people. No wonder why the mainstream media doesn't talk about the Czech Republic; they don't fit the stereotype of typical gun owners (by the way, a fair chunk of the population is atheist from what I've read, so there goes another part of the stereotype).

Some of the reasons are why the Czech Republic got a very honorable mention on Why is the Czech Republic, New Zealand or Chandler, AZ rarely mentioned in the gun debate?.

Uruguay, 8th highest in gun ownership rate: perhaps my favorite developing country, has the highest firearm ownership rate in Central and South america, and while many of the firearms are illegally owned or possessed, from what I've read, many people are on the friendly side. Plus, it has an very open immigration policy.

Sweden, 9th highest in gun ownership rate: people are known to be quite friendly with both each other and outsiders, and has a seemingly open immigration policy (too much, perhaps, as that I wish that they would kick out troublemakers and keep troublemakers out for the betterment of everyone, and to cut back on welfare).

Finland, 16th in gun ownership rate: my favorite Nordic country, and one of my favorite countries in Europe, particulary eastern Europe, has people who are often socially on the open side, and considered one of the most "libertarian" countries in Europe (https://www.quora.com/What-countries-come-closest-to-being-ideal-libertarian-societies?share=1).

Canada, 12th in gun ownership rate: just north of gun nut central of the 1st world, has mostly friendly people, there is some patriotism but, from what I can tell, not much uncontrolled nationalism.

New Zealand, 22nd in gun ownership rate: my favorite country in Oceania, and has some of the loosest firearm laws in the world (albeit with a rather strict licensing system) behind the Czech Republic. There are literally hundreds of thousands of unregistered long guns in circulation, along with tens of thousands, if not, hundreds of thousands of legally owned handguns, assault weapons and even machine guns (in New Zealand, civilians can own fully operational machine guns, but they can't fire live ammunition, and can't be fired at all except for film production or reenacting).

Belgium, 35th in gun ownership rate; while it has an overall low gun ownership rate and rather restrictive firearm laws (except maybe for airguns), however, it is home to Fabrique Nationale, aka, FN, plus FN's subsidies (such as Browning), which is one of the largest firearms manufacturers in world history. From what I've read, Belgian people seem to be socially on the open side, and are rather open to immigrants (particulary at the time that the book, "Letters from Rifka", which I once read when I was younger, takes place).

Don't you think it's interesting to see people trying to paint a stereotype of gun owners being unfriendly or even hostile and violent people while, in actuality, there is a country that both has socially open people and one of the most important firearm manufacturers in world history?

Italy, 53rd in gun ownership rate; while the overall firearm ownership rate is, again, low, Italy also has "Shall-issue" firearm ownership licenses with self-defense being a legitimate reason, and is home to the oldest still existent gun manufacturer on mother Earth: Beretta. Again, Italy has a reputation for having friendly people, and while the Catholic church holds some sway, LGBT people aren't badly discriminated against.

So explain to me how most gun owners are far-right wing ultra conservative "Christians" who are hostile to those who are too different from them, and the country that holds the world's oldest firearm manufacturer and has "shall-issue" firearm ownership licenses actually has many friendly people?

United States of America, 1st in gun ownership rate: the friendliness of the people in the U.S.A. varies a whole lot, and there are quite a few extremes. However, from what I've read, many Americans are outwardly friendly, and besides, overall, the U.S.A. is the #1 destination for immigrants around the world. Why would people immigrate to some overzealous xenophobic battlefield?
Now, here's a few places with a significant number of weapons in civilian hands per capita, and are still pretty friendly.

Alabama: though known to be quite religious, from what I've heard and read, people in Alabama have been at least perceived to be some of the friendliest people in the U.S.A..


Texas: even though there are, like everywhere else, bad apples, still is considered to have many friendly people. And Plano, Texas, has been reported to be rather gun crazy, but at the time the linked video has been created, had a murder AND nonnegligent manslaughter rate of only 0.4 (now it's 1.4), and now with the same statistic for Chandler, Arizona (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_cities_by_crime_rate_(2014)),

By the way, California has some of the strictest weapon laws in the United States (other than overseas territories such as American Samoa or the Northern Marina Islands, which you probably have not heard of before), yet the people get a reputation for not being the most friendly, or at least rather arrogant or condescending (not that I have an issue with most Californians).