Category Archives: “News Media”

Law and Order: Western Society under Siege Part IV

Experiences living in California’s Bay Area, as a public high school teacher later for more than two decades in the Midwest, and now witnessing what is transpiring in the body politc convinces me the Left will stoop to any fabrication, dirty trick, smear, and hypocritical double standard to advance their agenda regardless of who is destroyed. Their strategy requires identifying certain groups to be targeted and demonized. Nothing unifies people like a bogeyman. Trashed and bashed by pop-culture for years, Christians have long served as a Leftist fave. They afford ready-made props useful in riling up the ignorant, the superstitious and conspiracy addled, bitter middle-aged feminists, malcontents perpetually angry and bitter about their lives, radical nihilists, anyone with an axe to grind, and those who despise G-d’s natural order galvanizing them in support of various faux crusades. All too often these intellectual lumpen have no idea they are pawns advancing a greater political cause and destined not to sup at victory’s banquet table. Now Police officers have become the current sacrificial lamb offered up to the eye of the hoi polloi storm.

Unlike war, wherein soldiers typically face death only on the battlefield, men and women donning the uniform of a police officer step onto the battlefield every day they go to work. The enemy doesn’t wear uniforms and they have access to weapons, vehicles, supplies, and technology. They live in plain sight, undetected, on the battlefield be it urban, suburban or rural and always outnumber the good guys. Police officers don’t fight enemies in a foreign land but here, at home. Enemy soldiers can locate their residences attacking them and their families where they live, a la Mexico. Unlike portrayals on the silver screen, most work in single officer squad cars. Backup may be minutes or hours away or nonexistent. Instead of facing the enemy as part of a unit, they typically face the enemy alone. Instead of decompressing back at base camp with fellow soldiers before rotating back to the U.S., police officers go home to families who can’t possibly understand the distant gaze in the eyes of men and women who see and face too much death and suffering. Police officers can only engage the enemy after he has fired on them first. When executing search and arrest warrants on known violent murderers, officers can only use deadly force if they are first attacked by the enemy. The level of stress they face is manifested through unusually high rates of depression, alcohol abuse, divorce, and suicide. Citizenry seemed unconcerned with the fact that there are hundreds of thousands of hardened violent criminals lose on the streets and millions more in prison. If united, they would form an unstoppable army of rage, murder, rape, and destruction. This is why police officers are called the “Thin Blue Line,” a tiny army standing between humanity and the most blood-thirsty murderous army ever assembled. Who has their back? Lieutenants and captains whose only interest is climbing the promotional ladder? Police Chiefs who view their job as a public relations experience ready and willing to throw anyone under the bus who threatens their reputation or political aspirations? Or citizens who don’t want to see cops in their rear view mirrors when speeding but are furious they aren’t guarding their homes 24/7 from burglars? Although putting their lives on the line to protect them, the liberal Jihad has singled out police officers as props to promote their political agenda. This they do by promoting a false narrative that cops are the point of the white man’s spear in a war of genocide against the black race.

An agenda takes shape when one recognizes for Black Lives Matter (BLM) and their Leftist allies, the only blacks who “qualify” as victims of shootings are those killed by cops or whites. The enormously larger number of black homicide victims in “Chiraq” (gang slang for Chicago), 677 from January to March (2016) alone, consisted of black on black murder but BLM, the New Black Panthers, and the white liberal media refuse to recognize or address who is doing the killing.1 Over its Fourth of July, Chicago experienced 11 people gunned down and another 50 wounded in one weekend. Many of the black children were what Millennials refer to as “collateral damage.” BLM’s website declares it’s working to create a world where blacks are no longer targeted for “demise” by whites and the police but, they make no mention of the epidemic of black on black violent crime and the blacks who have targeted each other for demise. Memphis, Tennessee, for example, is so bad that “98 percent of Tennessee’s other communities have a lower crime rate. In 2015, 74.5 percent of Memphis’ homicide victims were black and 68.3 percent were under the age of thirty-five” along with 435 children who were “shot at.” What have liberals, including the New York Times and BLM, said about the crisis in Memphis? Nothing. Not even a word that, in 2015, all 145 black murder victims were killed by other blacks.2

The New York Times, president Obama, and other liberals blamed the shooting of Michael Brown, (Ferguson, Missouri), on the racism of the city’s mostly white police force signaling to protestors they should express themselves which they did through looting, rioting, and assaults.3 As the size and threat of the roiling violent mob mushroomed out of control in Ferguson, the mayor pleaded with Missouri Governor, liberal Democrat Jay Nixon, to send the State Police and National (sic) Guard. But Nixon fiddled while this proverbial Rome burned.4 BLM, Obama, and the Liberal Media used Michael Brown to “prove” racism was endemic to white police officers but where were they and the New York Times when 9-year old Jamyla Brown was shot doing homework in her Ferguson, Missouri home? There were protests but they were in nearby St. Louis following the police shooting of eighteen year-old Mansur Ball-Bey during a drug raid (19 August 2015). The gun Bey pulled on police was stolen and officers retrieved 3 more guns and a quantity of crack cocaine in his possession. Demonstrators, the blind, the gullible, shrieking moms, and those seething with rage and racial hatred pushed the notion of police as the tip of the white race’s war of extinction against the black race. Soon rocks, bricks, and bottles filled the air, cars were set fire, buildings trashed, looted, and burned, and police, trying to save lives and restore order, were assaulted as well.5 In each riot, Ferguson and St. Louis, (and later, Baltimore) the police were prevented by government officials (liberal Democrats) from doing their job. White residents caught at the epicenter of these riots and found themselves targeted for assault by virtue of their skin color, and dialed 911, were told they were on their own. And yet the liberal media refused to call this violent savagery a riot instead employing the gonadophobic politically correct term “unrest.”6 I was a public high school teacher at the time and a liberal teacher (but, I repeat myself) chastised me for using the terms “riot” and “looters,” because they are “racist.” I asked, if he and other liberals automatically assumed “riot” and “looter” applied to blacks, who was being racist? And, if many if not most rioters and looters turn out to be one race or another, what benefit is there in lying about this? He said it didn’t matter. Those terms were forbidden. Does not this craven supine approach to addressing violent crime by the Left signal to criminals that, whatever they do, theft, burglary, rape, and violent rampages, it will be rationalized away and excused as long as committed by minorities? What justice then is promised to victims? Why does it seem as if the political leaders and media personalities most hair-pulling furious about racism in America are also the most lily white? Caucasians so white they’d disappear if they fell into a snowbank? These are the liberal whites whose income precludes contact with people of a darker hue unless staying in a hotel or ordering a meal. Isn’t that called “projection?”

Under no circumstances can Liberals admit the truth about race and crime. To do so would undermine what they are teaching America’s young in public schools, reinforced through their party propaganda organs, the liberal media, that blacks are numinous victims and whites, perennial oppressors. If white children grow up guilt ridden enough to accept this view, they will vote to purge their shame by supporting the Left’s political and social remedies…socialism and the end of individual liberty in America. Whipping up racial conflict advances the Left’s agenda. For example, the liberal New York Times trumpeted the ‘police war on blacks’ narrative declaring “the killing of young black men by police is a common feature of African-American life and a source of dread for black parents from coast to coast.” The Times also published a statistic from a 2014 study claiming “Black males are 21 times more likely to be shot dead by police than are young white males.” This is a lie. Killing of blacks by police is “rare” but black on black murder is commonplace. Even the Washington Post, marching orders for liberals, conceded of the 258 blacks shot and killed by police in 2015, most were committing serious assaults against the officer! In 2014, 6,095 blacks were victims of homicide, almost all killed by other blacks. Even if police shootings were eliminated, the impact on this statistic would be negligible. In reality, blacks “are responsible for a death rate ten times that of whites in urban areas.” Young black men commit homicides at a rate nearly ten times that of whites and Hispanics, combined. This “astronomically high homicide commission rate means that police officers are going to be sent to fight crime disproportionately in black neighborhoods, where they will more likely encounter armed shooting suspects.” And they will be shooting at the cops.7

Does it not make sense? Most crime, especially violent crime, occurs in black not Asian neighborhoods so, where should meager police resources be directed? To keep an eye on Japanese people? Armed “exchanges” between bad guys and cops will most often occur in high-crime neighborhoods, which means black neighborhoods because that’s where the armed bad guys live and “work.” In the study cited for its hit-piece, The New York Times’ “study” ignored this reality and that the study actually revealed 62 percent of those shot by police “were resisting arrest or assaulting a police officer” as was Michael Brown. Yet the New York Times insisted in claiming “many police officers see black males as expendable figures on the urban landscape, not quite human beings.”8 Perhaps blinded by a political bias that oozes from its pages, the Times has it backward. The cops are trying to halt the epidemic of violence in black neighborhoods. It’s the thugs and hoodlums, gunning down each other, moms, dads, and their kids who view each other as expendable.

Chicago’s nightmare of young black males gunning down each other has been visited upon other cities. Cleveland, Ohio, is a majority black city in which “more than ninety-one percent of the other communities have a lower crime rate than Cleveland.” Oakland, California, ranked by Forbes as the 3rd most dangerous city in America, is majority-black and 99 percent of other cities in the state have lower violent crime rates. Baltimore, my old stomping ground, is also majority-black and has set records for homicides the past several years. Like other black majority cities, its Mayor, Chief of Police, City Council, and Board of Education are black yet the “Black Press,” and the National Association of Black Journalists racializes each shooting between black males and white cops. Even violent black criminals, who prey on their communities, are portrayed as victims. These hyper-racial stories generate “high web traffic which translates into job security” for black journalists. But black on black violence generates little interest in the black community including social media. Perhaps because it was struggling financially, Ebony, a black magazine, commenced a “Save Our Boys’ campaign as if blacks are being slaughtered.” Apparently blacks comprise Twitter’s largest demographic and they employ hash-tags “to make black topics go viral” creating in the process “martyrs of the movement and construct racial grievances.” Through Black Twitter, activists can quickly mobilize protests, backlashes, boycotts, and flash mobs. Movie producer Spike Lee used it to publish what he thought was George Zimmerman’s (Trayvon Martin case) address. It wasn’t and the people living there were under grave threat. Yet none of the outrage in the black community, legitimate or manufactured, address the problem that less than six-percent of America’s population, who are black, commit most of its murders and its victims are black.9

In order to indoctrinate, mold, and shape future voters to accept their vision of a world in which the will of the individual must be bent to the volition of the state, the Left must instill guilt for all racial crimes, past and present, into white children. These children, as young adults, must make restitution for the sins of the white race against all peoples of color by supporting the Left’s massive socialist agenda. They must look the other way with respect to black crime, blame victims not the bad guys, and not criticize the hate fest leading to the ambush and murder of the very police officers protecting their young liberal upper middleclass white lives.

11 Taleeb Starkes, Black Lies Matter: Why Lies Matter to the Race Grievance Industry (North Charleston, South Carolina, Createspace Independent Publishing Platform, 2016), 52-57.

22 IBID. 62-64.

33 Heather McDonald, The War On Cops (New York, N.Y., Encounter Books, 2016), 8-9.

44 David Carson, “Ferguson Mayor Asks Where National (sic) Guard Was,” Gov. Nixon Pledges More,” November 20, 2014, St. Louis Post Dispatch, at http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/ferguson-mayor-asks-where-national-guard-was-gov-nixon-pledges/article343a2224-Ad61-54fb-b5ac99957F7.amp.html.

55 Starkes, 66-67.

66 McDonald 11.

77 IBID. 17.

88 IBID. 17-18.

99 Starkes, 68-73.

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

Forgotten Memo: KSTP’s mysterious bump stock doc

A week ago, Minnesota television station KSTP ran with a story about a mysterious “federal memo” allegedly being sent to law enforcement agencies and Federal Firearms Licensees (FFL) regarding bump-fire stocks.

Aside from pages waved about on camera by reporter Beth McDonough, no one else has seen the memo. KSTP still declines to publish it, paraphrase the contents (if they’re protecting a source), or even say who signed it and when. Apparently the DOJ denies sending such a memo.

David Codrea and I have been trying to get KSTP to publish it, to no avail. McDonough, the reporter for KSTP who “broke” the news of the memo, was asked for a statement for-the-record on why KSTP will not publish the alleged memo.

She, and the station declined to respond. -crickets-

So what can we tell about this memo? All I’ve seen of what seems to be the document is the handful of pages in McDonough’s hand on screen. A screenshot of the documents doesn’t tell me much; too low resolution. It looks vaguely like ATF letterhead.

Compare this…

…to these real examples.

The logo on the KSTP letter could be the ATF seal, but it’s set far lower on the page than the examples. Other things like the divider line, addresses, and control numbers which I might expect, don’t seem to be there. But, again, the image quality is poor.

It strikes me as something a person might have scanned from real letters on the Internet, then pasted into their own word processor. Maybe someone with the ATF, maybe a prankster.

All the “information” which McDonough mentions sounds straight out of the November 28, 2018 CNN report citing “a senior Justice Department official.”

Over at ar15.com user “AT7” has apparently found a better resolution image, and reports

The memo is addressed to “Special Agents in Charge”

It is from a person in “Fiscal Operations”

Subject is “bump stock type device” with two more words, possibly “abandonment process”. It is dated November 24 2018.

FFLs generally not being SACs, it’s hardly surprising that no FFL (including several at ar15.com, as well as Georgia and Ohio FFLs contacted) have seen this memo.

So what does KSTP have, and where did it come from? What does it say?

They aren’t telling.

KSTP’s silence on a story of major national interest is peculiar, to say the least.

 

Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could really use the money, what with truck repairs and recurring bills. And the rabbits need feed. Truck insurance, lest I be forced to sell it. Click here to donate via PayPal.
(More Tip Jar Options)

 

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

Savage Ignorance Part II

Unreasonably warm temperatures (55° on 13, December) spawn tourist outbreaks along woodland trails. How does one differentiate tourists from regular hikers and mountain bikers? Voices as loud as their clothing, hands crammed with devices and radios, unleashed trail-poopers (dogs), and packs of even louder chubby fast-food wrapper spewing hotdog fingered kids for whom being chained to a hamster wheel for six months…without food, would be beneficial. People attend movies to laugh, cry, and escape reality if but for a short time. Conversations, seat-kickers, and cell phone glow can spoil the experience. In like fashion, nature is spoiled when rude civilization intrudes. Didn’t the Bush Administration argue the fight against Tourists was international? Didn’t they coin the term “GWOT” for “Global War On Tourism?” Recently I considered reporting a herd of Tourists to Homeland Security. None appeared menacing, not even their dogs, and some seemed friendly enough. But isn’t that what people say when told their neighbor ran over pedestrians with a truck or blew themselves up at the train station killing many people? I’m keeping an eye on them.

In Part I, I began exposing Michael Savage’s campaign to ban private ownership of certain firearms and magazines, in which he employed arguments perfectly useful…to Confiscationists. If I don’t like Savage, why listen to him? I don’t. I used to enjoy his wit and irreverent humor but his undisguised jealousy of conservative radio-talk show hosts and promotion of a Buddha-ized version of Judaism wore thin. His claim to be the only true radio conservative on the one hand, and assertion FDR’s socialist New Deal solved the Great Depression on the other, was the final straw. Anyone with a modicum of understanding with respect to economics, history, and the Constitution knows this is false. I listen when necessary because 2nd Amendment supporters must be prepared to answer its enemies. Las Vegas was the impetus for Savage’s first salvo against the right to keep and bear arms as the second was the Sutherland, Texas church shooting.

On 6 November, 2017 Savage resurrected with a vengeance his anti-2nd Amendment rant from the previous month yelling into the microphone; “Don’t tell me if everyone had a gun in that church they could have stopped the killer! You John Wayne types.” With a sneer he added, “And please don’t play John Wayne with me on this show. I’m going to hang up on you if you call and say if all those church-goers had had a gun, this wouldn’t have happened. Yeah, you John Wayne types. You’d freeze up, drop the gun, and shoot yourself in the foot if evil came into your church with an ‘assault rifle” (sic). He asked how the “shooter,”1 a nut, got a gun. “Why? Because gun laws are too weak” Savage continued. “Gun shows are wide open ranges and anyone can buy a gun there.” He mocked conservatives arguing more guns are the answer and pastors saying G_d is with us even in the midst of such tragedies. Savage insisted every “nut”2 in the nation can buy an AR15 because of “lax gun laws” and the killer was allowed to buy an “automatic rifle.” Although Savage conceded he was ultimately stopped by a man with a gun, “That was only after he had killed everyone” he said and then trotted out an argument near and dear to the hearts of liberals with respect to the 2nd Amendment; “People have a constitutional right to drive,” Savage argued, which comes with all sorts of regulations, licensing requirements, training, and tests to enjoy this “right” (sic). People have to “demonstrate” knowledge of how to operate the car and that they can drive before getting behind the wheel. Why isn’t this true with guns? Then he shouted; “Why is the right to own firearms one hundred percent free from licensing, but not the right to drive? All you tough guys who want ‘assault weapons’ (sic) say, ‘well that government will come down and get us. Let’s roll armed and go out like the militia.’ Yeah, all the tough guys on conservative radio are going to lead you. Onward Christian soldiers with their ‘assault weapons’ (sic). They’ll run so fast you wouldn’t be able to say Mickey Mouse.” Wow. During this diatribe Savage let out he has a concealed carry permit. How does one obtain a permit in radical Left-wing People’s Republic of Marin County of California’s Bay Area? You can’t unless you’re a rich celebrity or well-connected. But, Savage confessed, he’d be too scared to use his firearm so he has two body-guards. Are they armed? When it comes to self-defense, how long must Americans endure being preached down to by upper-crust gated community, goon-protected self-styled aristocrats? It reminds me of the unquenchable hypocrisy flowing from ultra-rich super-liberal Senator Ed Kennedy raging about the plight of the poor in America. Savage continued railing against conservatives claiming the “knee-jerk” reaction from “right-wingers” is; “You can’t touch guns. But we must touch guns!” He yelled becoming unhinged. “Tell me I’m wrong that every nut-job in the world shouldn’t be able to get ‘assault-weapons’ (sic). You’re wrong! Too many nuts have their hands on too many guns!” He accused conservatives of arguing “nuts” should be allowed to have guns adding that those who claim they “need assault-weapons” (sic) for home defense “would poop in their pants instead. People armed is not the answer!” He shouted.3

On the following day, Savage claimed “right-wingers” oppose any and all restrictions on who can have a gun and the number of rounds held by a “clip” adding; “I have no idea why anyone in this country ‘needs’ a thirty-round clip (sic). Who really needs an assault-rifle? What, to hunt elephants? Don’t they use single-shot rifles, in .30-06 to hunt elephants? A single round from that caliber would drop an elephant. So what in the hell do we need a thirty-round ‘clip’ (sic) for? I know, you’re going to stand up like Paul Revere and you’re going to say Charge! You won’t say charge. You’ll drop your gun, you’ll drop your shorts, and you’ll run like everyone else. Stop pretending that you’re a big hero!” He then called for banning “assault weapons” (Meaning ARs, AKs, and similar function rifles) and “multiple round ‘clips” claiming this would limit the number of guns in circulation hence limiting criminal access. The Texas killer was able to kill so many people because “He had a machine gun in his hands!” Savage shouted. But, with an “assault-weapons” (sic) ban, he continued, the killer would have been forced to use a single-shot rifle which would have allowed the men in the church to have subdued him by beating him over the head with a chair. To this insanity Savage added; “One in five police officers is killed by an assault-rifle” and then he screamed; “I no longer believe Americans need to run around with thirty-round ‘clips’ (sic) and assault rifles! When the hell did the 2nd Amendment ever say you had the right to own an ‘assault-weapon?’ (sic) What am I going to do with one, wait for the day the government comes to get me? I’m going to hold off a platoon of government agents? You people are living in a dream world!” He then asserted, as before, AR15s were useless for home defense. The best weapon, he said, is a shotgun but they “are complicated to use” and “their mechanisms are complex, not for amateurs.” Savage again claimed an AR15 round will go through house walls but shotgun pellets would not. A pistol round might go through a wall but this was unlikely, he claimed, because they had 15 to 20 round “clips” (sic) as opposed to the thirty-round capacity of “assault-weapons” (sic). Finally Savage claimed because there are restrictions on the 1st Amendment, you can’t yell “fire” in a crowded movie theater or threaten the president, banning “assault-weapons” and thirty-round “clips” didn’t violate the 2nd Amendment. “There’s a difference between the right to bear arms and the right to bear machine-guns” he said.4

It would be beyond charitable to describe what Savage said as either abysmally ignorant or intentionally deceptive. His persistence in calling magazines “clips” and conflation of the terms “assault-weapon” (no such animal), assault-rifle, and machine gun with semiautomatic rifles demonstrates his knowledge of firearms is limited, at best, and promotion of an agenda supersedes honesty.

Conceding the Texas killer was stopped by an armed man but this would have failed inside the church because, Barney Fife-like, fear-stricken and trembling men would have dropped their guns shooting themselves is illogical. It is stupid. It also ignores the many, more than capable, men and women who carry and could have stopped the killer. It makes no sense unless Savage, shamed there are real people with spines out there, beyond the Bay Area, in places like Texas, is projecting his own timorous nature onto others. During any mass shooting event, in the time it takes to call the police, for them to respond, set up a command post, assess the situation, identify the good from the bad guy(s), and formulate a counter-response, the massacre is usually over. Contrary to the lies told by Savage, when a “good-guy” with a gun is on the scene, casualties are “dramatically lower” and is often the deciding factor in limiting the “body count.” In nine mass shootings in which victims had to wait for police arrive, from Luby’s Cafeteria, Killeen, Texas (16 October, 1991) to Pulse Night Club, Orlando, Florida (12 June, 2016) 220 people died. In eight similar shootings in which an armed good-guy was on the scene, from Pearl High School, Pearl, Mississippi (1 October, 1997) to the Curtis Culwell Center, Garland, Texas (3 May 2015), 37 people died.5 Savage’s attack on men and women willing to shoulder the responsibility for the safety of others, putting their own lives on the line, is disgraceful.

Why do liberals seem to go after the rights of law-abiding Americans as opposed to violent criminals (Chicago)? Why do they mock and ridicule notions of personal responsibility with respect to self-defense? Are the spines of liberal men removed in-vitro or do they dissolve naturally as they progress toward puberty? Savage’s allegation; conservatives want every “nut” to have guns, is a malicious lie and ignores the fact that, under “federal” law, they are already prohibited from so doing. Information on anyone institutionalized and or adjudicated “mentally defective” by mental health officials and judges must be forwarded to the FBI where it is entered into their massive data base known as NICS (National Instant Criminal Background System). If anyone so classified attempts to purchase a firearm, once the FFL (Federal Firearm License) holder calls and submits the individual’s name as required by law, they will be rejected. Further, as to Savage’s assertion armed law-abiding citizens are not the “answer,” approximately 2.5 million people per year employ a firearm to prevent violent criminal attack. In 98% of those cases, displaying the firearm is enough to stop the attack.6 Instead of reducing violent crime, Savage’s solution, disarming intended victims, always the first on the scene by virtue of their status as targets of criminals, would lead to even more murders and mass shootings.

Savage’s analogy between the “right” to drive and to keep and bear arms is slick sleight of hand. There is no constitutional right to drive and it is untrue that the manufacture, sale, and possession of firearms is completely unregulated, unrestricted, and unlicensed. All manner of legal restrictions, including age, legal status as a citizen, mental health, criminal record, and so forth apply to obtaining a firearm. Savage ignores the fact that each year more than 37,000 Americans are killed by other drivers in automobile accidents, essentially negligent homicide, with an additional 2.35 million injured, maimed, and crippled. Automobile accidents are the single greatest cause of death in the United States.7 Speaking as a passionate car lover and former police traffic investigator, Americans in general are careless, cavalier in attitude, irresponsible, and exert little effort to perfect driving skills. And yet once started, they and their automobiles pose a grave hazard to everyone in their path. By contrast, more than 124 million Americans own close to 300 million guns but there were only 505 deaths by gun accident in 2013 and of 2,596,993 deaths from all causes the same year, only 1% were firearm related and most were suicides.8 Comparing drivers to people who own guns makes for a very poor argument. One wonders to which constitution he refers.

The right to keep and bear arms is not subject to a utilitarian “needs” test. It’s no one’s business how many neckties, cars, horses, guns, or pairs of shoes anyone owns. People have a G_d-given right to their property and to accumulate however much of it they desire. But, for the non-gun owning public swayed by such arguments, let me ask you this; how many guns, rounds (not bullets) of ammunition, and magazines will you need when the power goes out, it’s not coming back on for a long time, and when called, the cops aren’t coming either. Remember the riots in Los Angeles (1992), Ferguson, Missouri (August 2014), and Baltimore (April 2015) and attendant looting, robbery, destruction of private property, and even assaults including murder? Where were the cops? Where was the National (sic) Guard? Natural disasters like Hurricanes Andrew (August 1992), Katrina (August 2005), and Harvey (sic) (August 2017) all resulted in attempted looting, rape, robbery, and destruction of property. Again, where were the police? In each case it was armed citizens, or lack thereof, who prevented crime or fell to predatory animals called looters.

Savage’s attempt to delegitimize semiautomatic rifles by tying them to elephant hunting is pathetic. No one hunts elephants with so-called “assault rifles,” nor a .30-06 single shot rifle. It is illegal to hunt elephants (as is the case with buffalo, Rhinos, and lions) with a caliber smaller than the .375 H&H. Most professional and experienced hunters use either the .404 Jeffrey, .416 Rigby, .416 Remington, .458 Winchester, or the .470 Nitro Express in bolt action repeating rifles.9 The point is not to argue the efficacy of one caliber compared to another but to demonstrate Savage hasn’t a clue what he’s talking about. These are all strawman arguments. Savage also seems ignorant of the fact that it was the American citizen soldier; the farmer, mechanic, tradesman, shopkeeper, and laborer, trained to arms, who were the backbone of the resistance to Britain’s armies in the War of Independence possessing modern equivalents of the “assault rifles” of their time.

In Federalist Paper #28, Alexander Hamilton declared the people held an “original right of self-defense” to take up arms, resist, and defeat even their own government should it betray and usurp their liberties.10 In Federalist #29, Hamilton added the “best possible security” against a standing army was the whole body of the people, who are armed and “stand ready to defend their own rights.”11 In the Federalist Papers and writings of many other Founding Fathers it becomes clear the main purpose of an armed populace, not a military or National (sic) Guard was to serve as a bulwark against infringement of their liberties by their own government.

Savage’s claim one in five police officers is killed in the line of duty by “assault-rifles” is false. It comes, from Senator Dianne Feinstein (Democrat, California), who appeared on Face the Nation making this claim. She took this “statistic” from the Violence Policy Center, a virulently anti-2nd Amendment Leftist organization. Here’s the trick. California classifies all semiautomatic firearms, including pistols, rifles, and shotguns, as “assault-weapons” (sic) a classification rejected by the FBI. Feinstein and Savage conflate California’s broad and ambiguous “assault-weapons” category with semiautomatic rifles meaning ARs, but this is a lie. Roughly 1% of officers shot and killed in the line of duty are killed by semiautomatic rifles.12 Using lies spun by ultra-liberal Senator Feinstein and an extremist anti-2nd Amendment group? Does Savage attack conservatives so viciously, while claiming to be one himself because, well, he’s not really one after all?

More demonstrations of ignorance can be found in Savage’s claim that shotguns are complicated and complex to use. This is absurd. A shotgun is typically one of the first guns kids learn to shoot because its operation is so simple. His claim AR15 rounds will, but shotgun pellets won’t penetrate sheetrock walls is wrong to the point of being dangerous. They all will. Finally, his use of the hackneyed “you can’t yell fire in a crowded theater” cliché is another liberal shibboleth. Pay attention Michael; the 1st Amendment is a prohibition against government interfering with free political speech. For it to be free, one must rightly possess or control the platform from which one speaks. Yelling “fire” in a crowded theater is not political speech nor does its shouter own the platform from which they yell. At the least, it’s a property rights violation of the theater owner, the sole determiner of what will or will not be said on his platform. The same holds true for threats against the president. These are fallacious if not atrocious analogues.

Savage’s straw man arguments and discreditable analogies demonstrate ignorance of the fact America’s Declaration of Independence proclaimed all rights G_d-given, inalienable, and among them is life. They are off limits to a majority vote of one’s neighbors or act of government. Inherent in the right to life is the right to protect it which also presupposes the means to do so. It is an illegal and unconstitutional act by man or his governments to alter, modify, regulate, infringe upon, or in any way denature a G_d-given right. It is not possible to square calls for “reasonable gun laws,” which by their nature must violate the 2nd Amendment, with equal claims to support the 2nd Amendment.

11 Typically I employ terms like: Killer, murderer, dirt bag, scum bag, and so forth. A shooter is someone engaged in target practice and competition at the range. Never let your foes and the ignorant shape the narrative through misuse, intentional or not, of vocabulary.

22 Unless someone clearly defines what they mean by “nut,” you should not presume you share the same understanding. For example, to me the term applies to an individual clinically diagnosed as schizophrenic. A person suffering an emotional meltdown, depression, or PTSD, for example, is not necessarily insane, often far from it. Savage lumps them, including soldiers returning from war who have difficulty adjusting to civilian life with the same broad brush as the insane. Cops who have seen too great a loss of life, in tragic ways, too many times and are having trouble dealing with it, could, under Savage’s broad brush, be characterized as nuts as well. They are not.

33 Michael Savage, The Savage Nation, broadcast 6 November 2017.

44 Michael Savage, The Savage Nation, broadcast 7 November, 2017.

55 Caleb, “Fact: Armed Citizens Do Stop Mass Active Killers,” 16 June, 2016, at http://www.preparedgunowners.com.

66 Gary Kleck and Marc Gertz, “Armed Resistance to Crime,” at http://scholarlcommons.law.northwestern.edu/jclc/vol186/iss1/8/1995. See also John R. Lott, Jr., More Gun’s Less Crime (Chicago, Illinois, The University of Chicago Press, 1998)

88 Atlanta Center For Disease Control at http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/invsr64/nvsr64_02pdf.

99 Cameron Hopkins, “African Big Game Hunting Rifles,” American Hunter (July 9 2010).

1010 Alexander Hamilton, John Jay, James Madison, Clinton Rossiter, Editor, The Federalist Papers (New York, N.Y., A Mentor Book, New American Library, 1961), 178-181.

1111 IBID. 182-187.

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

Self Defense notions from a Patriarch

So this last week the Parasha was Vayishlach. This is an exciting portion. It’s when Jacob/Yakov/Israel returns home from his exile working for his crooked uncle Laban. Yakov had fled his brother Esav’s murderous rage after Esav regretted having sold his birthright for a bowl of beans, lentils. Esav didn’t value his birthright in the least. Probably a message in there for those that would pressure Israel to give up land for peace. It never works, because like Esav, they just always want more and don’t keep their end of the bargain. So, Yakov is returning home with his wives, their handmaidens and 12 children, a passel of camels, donkeys, sheep, goats and some servants. Yakov has done well, he is a very successful shepherd. But, he is in a quandary, what will his meeting with his brother be like? Will Esav still want to kill him, or will time have mellowed him. Yakov sends angels to ascertain his intentions. Turns out Esav hasn’t changed a bit. He’s heading towards Yakov with 400 men. Yakov is way outnumbered.

Then Jacob was greatly afraid and distressed (Gen. 32:8)

From Rabbi Lord Jonathan Sacks:

The fear is understandable, but his response contains an enigma. Why the duplication of verbs? What is the difference between fear and distress? To this a Midrash gives a profound answer:

Rabbi Judah bar Ilai said: Are not fear and distress identical? The meaning, however, is that “he was afraid” that he might be killed; “he was distressed” that he might kill. For Jacob thought: If he prevails against me, will he not kill me; while if I prevail against him, will I not kill him? That is the meaning of “he was afraid” – lest he should be killed; “and distressed” – lest he should kill.

And this brings us to self-defense.

One might argue that Jacob should surely not be distressed about the possibility of killing Esau, for there is an explicit rule: “If someone comes to kill you, forestall it by killing him.” Nonetheless, Jacob did have qualms, fearing that in the course of the fight he might kill some of Esau’s men, who were not themselves intent on killing him but merely on fighting his men. And even though Esau’s men were pursuing Jacob’s men, and every person has the right to save the life of the pursued at the cost of the life of the pursuer, nonetheless there is a condition: “If the pursued could have been saved by maiming a limb of the pursuer, but instead the rescuer killed the pursuer, the rescuer is liable to capital punishment on that account.” Hence Jacob feared that, in the confusion of battle, he might kill some of Esau’s men when he might have restrained them by merely inflicting injury on them.

Self defense is very definitely a Jewish concept, but unlike his brother Esav who delights in it, Yakov will do so if required, but he wants to avoid it. The taking of a life is not something to be done lightly. So what did he do to try to prevent needless loss of life?

He had a three pronged approach. Prayer, he threw himself on G-d’s mercy, he sent lavish tribute female and male goats, sheep, donkeys, camels all with the proper proportion for the most effective breeding program. Sort of a gift that keeps on giving. But then he prepared for battle. He divided his people into camps, his thinking was that if one camp was attacked the other might escape. Then he had the children with each of their mothers. Yakov knew the four women would fight for their children, so he left the children with their mothers, then he placed himself in front of them. Esav would have to go through Yakov to get to his family.

I’ve heard the opinion that if Yakov had really trusted G-d there would have been none of this battle preparation business. He would have just gone and met his brother. I don’t agree with this opinion. I think people are people and they have plans of their own. Plans I may not appreciate or agree with. I think if their plans concern me, I want a say in how they turn out. As Esav’s plans would have included Yakov’s family, I figure he felt the same way. There are cemeteries with those that refused to believe anything bad would happen to them. I’ve heard that there were Jews in the Warsaw ghetto that refused the chance to escape because they didn’t really think the nazis wanted to annihilate them, and perhaps, because they expected a miracle. I heard Rabbi Tovia Singer say in a lecture that while the Jewish nation will always be preserved, that promise does not extend to individuals. I’ve also heard it said that when you pray for help, you usually have to do something, expend some kind of effort for him to have something to help you with. And so, Yakov had his three pronged approach, which ultimately was successful. There was no battle between brothers, only a brotherly meeting, with quite possibly temporary brotherly feelings judging from Yakov’s refusal of Esav’s offer to escort them. It’s like having a black snake to guard your chicken house from mice. Yeah….the snake may eat the mice, but more than likely it is eating the chicken eggs, and/or baby chicks. I’ll pass, and Yakov did as well.

Yakov and concealed carry holders face a moral dilemma. More from Rabbi Lord Jonathan Sacks.

Moral dilemmas are situations in which doing the right thing is not the end of the matter. The conflict may be inherently tragic. Jacob, in this parsha, finds himself trapped in such a conflict: on the one hand, he ought not allow himself to be killed; on the other, he ought not kill someone else; but he must do one or the other. The fact that one principle (self-defence) overrides another (the prohibition against killing) does not mean that, faced with such a choice, he is without qualms, especially given the fact that Esau is his twin brother. Despite their differences, they grew up together. They were kin. This intensifies the dilemma yet more. Sometimes being moral means that one experiences distress at having to make such a choice. Doing the right thing may mean that one does not feel remorse or guilt, but one still feels regret or grief about the action that needs to be taken.

Even people of great faith, realize that there is a time to “Praise the L-rd and pass the ammunition”.

There is nothing about being prepared with a gun, a concealed carry endorsement if your state requires it, that says you don’t believe that G-d can and will keep you safe. We have fire extinguishers and spare tires, right? We have generators for bad weather, and carry an umbrella. The right tool for the right time.

That I think, is one of the things about concealed carry holders that leftists, politicians and the #FakeNews (sometimes one in the same) don’t understand about “gun nuts”. We are not anxious to kill, we don’t want to do that. What we do want is for us and our families to be safe.

Heat seeking bullets, who knew? Did BassPro have these listed in the Black Friday flier?

Self defense is not a spur of the minute deal. We put thought into what gun, training tactics, classes and tests to be able to live as free citizens. Just like Yakov had his three pronged approach for meeting Esav, we too plan our defenses.

These mixed feelings were born thousands of years earlier, when Jacob, father of the Jewish people, experienced not only the physical fear of defeat but the moral distress of victory. Only those who are capable of feeling both, can defend their bodies without endangering their souls.

Because like Yakov facing Esav, there can be bigger, stronger, mightier evil that hates us.

Elected Moonbat Swalwell
Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

Savage Ignorance Part 1

Beretta92FS
1911A1
Glock 19 Gen 4

Recently I had occasion to patronize several commercial establishments including an apartment complex. Displayed on the glass entry door of each was the international symbol for “No,” a red circle bisected by a diagonal line. Centered in each was a handgun; Beretta 92FS in the first, 1911A1, possibly a Colt, in the second, and a Glock 19, Gen 4 in the third. I thought; thank G-d for Smith & Wesson. Why do those responsible for malls, schools, stores, apartments, and venues open to the public believe posting these stickers deters those bent on violent behavior? Criminals, by behavior and definition, exist outside the law and if legal prohibitions against them possessing firearms provide no dissuasion, a decal surely won’t. Instead they disarm the law-abiding, the only ones already on the scene capable of halting violent crime and mass shootings.

Webster’s Dictionary (a virginal source of information for today’s public school students) define Straw Man as: “a weak or imaginary opposition (as an argument or adversary) set up to be easily confuted (overwhelm in argument, refute conclusively).”1 Talk show host and baron of bombast Michael Savage knows something about Strawmen. Recently he launched a series of attacks on the 2nd Amendment, specifically semiautomatic rifles as well as their owners. His wild assertions were an army of scarecrows so stuffed with combustible straw, one dared draw nigh with matches at his own risk. When anyone says; “I own guns” or “I’m a big supporter of the 2nd Amendment” followed by a “but,” they don’t. They’re lying. It’s a trick to seize the intellectual and moral high ground thereby casting those in disagreement as extremists. Savage case in point. He began each show declaring support for the 2nd Amendment followed by an angry frothing at the mouth denunciation of firearms owners and notions of self-defense. In so doing, he promoted arguments undercutting the very amendment he purports to defend. Hay crammed in his Strawmen must have been plucked from the field of contradiction.

Savage’s first broadside came the day after the Las Vegas, Nevada Mandalay Bay Hotel mass shooting. He said he was a gun owner, big supporter of the 2nd Amendment, and to have given a “fortune” to the NRA apparently believing by brandishing such credentials he was immunized against critique. Savage asked if Americans should be able (allowed) to own “military grade weapons” and “assault rifles,” terms left undefined. He asked; should a man in therapy and on medication for mental problems be allowed to own a gun? If concealed carry was legal, how could armed citizens have stopped the killer’s rampage Savage demanded to know. In mocking tones he added; “Gun-slingers will say that. No matter what you hold in your pocket, you couldn’t have defended yourself. Fallacious argument. All you John Wayne’s with concealed carry on your mind, put it aside. You’d have gone down like ten pins.” He asked why anyone “needed” an “automatic weapon” declaring there needs to be “limits.” Should people be “allowed” to own a Howitzer, Russian tank, or bazooka? No one “needs” a semiautomatic rifle to defend their house, Savage continued, saying a shotgun was much better in that role. “The whole idea you’re going to get a semiautomatic rifle to hold off an army, come on. Stop the BS. If someone breaks into your house all you’ll have time to grab in the dark is a shotgun and an automatic pistol, not a semiautomatic rifle. Unless you keep a semiautomatic weapon fully loaded, and in your bedroom, it’s not going to do you any good. And if you do keep one, you’re crazy. If you keep a semiautomatic rifle next to your bed cocked and locked and ready to fire, you’re a sicko.” He then mocked Mandalay survivors who said they were no longer atheists. Next he attacked unnamed conservative talk-show radio hosts who, after Mandalay Bay, still opposed new gun control laws and regulations, yelling into the microphone; “You bunch of John Wayne’s!” He accused them of calling people like him, now supporting stricter new gun control laws; “lousy communist Progressives” adding in sneering tones; “No one wants to seize your guns otherwise it would have happened during the Obama years.” He asked how the killer had obtained “machine guns” because “they’re illegal” reminding listeners he wasn’t new to the gun control debate and had been on his high school rifle team. He asked if every psycho in the nation should own machine guns. “Did you know machine guns are legal in Nevada?” Savage continued. “But of course, fully automatic rifles are illegal.” What? Come again. Continuing in mocking tones, he asked who “needed” a fifty round drum magazine. “They should be illegal!” He shouted. “I argued this before. When I asked callers why they ‘needed’ one, they said to hold off the U.S. government which is against the private ownership of firearms.”2

Savage continued his assault on the 2nd Amendment the following day floating hysterical conspiracy theories attacking the Las Vegas Police for taking too long to assault the killer’s hotel room. Once again he reminded listeners he was a gun owner, “passed all the tests,” and gave money to the NRA therefore his calls for new gun bans had to be reasonable. Again he asked if the right to keep and bear arms included hand grenades, bazookas, used Russian tanks, and half-tracks asking; “Should there be limits on the right to keep and bear arms? What do you mean saying the 2nd Amendment ‘permits’ you to have any number of machine guns? Does this mean you can own two hundred machine guns, that every man should be able to have an arsenal in his basement? I can see having weapons to defend yourself but does that mean an entire arsenal? Why not RPGs and flame throwers? I don’t think the 2nd Amendment goes far enough” he continued in sarcastic tones. “I think we should be allowed to have flame throwers for that evil government that may arise any moment now. We should be able to have flame throwers.” During Savage’s shows, he insisted on calling magazines “clips” and using the terms semi and fully automatic rifles interchangeably.3 He entertained, as experts, numerous callers claiming because they had been in Vietnam, they knew precisely what weapons the suspect used (opinions subsequently contradicted by the FBI). Many voices sounded too tender to have been alive let alone old enough to have served in Vietnam. Once again he labeled anyone holding contrary views as “John Wayne’s” and “right- wingers” promising to hang up on them if they called his show. Savage concluded by attacking the Las Vegas Police, again, and blaming mass shootings on prescription drugs and the “proliferation of guns.”4

Savage’s claims and Straw Man arguments are wrong on so many levels, space and sufficient matches probably don’t exist to address them all. His oft repeated claim to be a firearms authority, supporter of the 2nd Amendment, and NRA backer is artifice, a trick as noted, to prevent debate to the contrary.

As to the efficacy of concealed firearms with respect to the Mandalay massacre, handguns are designed for self-defense at personal distances not against someone shooting rifles from the 32nd floor of a hotel window hundreds of yards away. Savage’s attempt to undermine concealed carry by judging its validity against situations for which it was never intended is a fallacious straw man argument a practice he accuses critics of employing. Does he really know what he’s talking about?

Doctors don’t use the terms bacterial and viral infection interchangeably. Weight lifters know the difference between dumb and barbells. Authorities on any subject use proper terminology. Improper use exposes pretenders, poseurs, and frauds. For example, in Stephen King’s novel Salem’s Lot, his policeman character checks his .38 special revolver to ensure the “safety is on.”5 A kid in his novel IT, warns another kid to be careful with his dad’s pistol, a Walther PPK, because it has “no safety.”6 In the movie The Fast And The Furious, Vin Diesel’s character Dominic Torretto tells Paul Walker that his dad’s 1970 Dodge Charger’s engine had so much torque, it twisted the “chassis” coming off the line.7 As a Deputy Sheriff and later policeman in the 1970s and 80’s, I carried and or shot Ruger, Smith & Wesson, and Colt revolvers in .38 special and .357 magnum. None, nor those on revolvers of colleagues, had a “safety.” I’ve also shot a variety of PPKs from Walther and Manurhin and their clones from FEG to Bersa and each had de-cocker safeties. Except for the Imperial (1965), Chrysler abandoned the chassis in favor of a uni-body frame, (1960-1961), which my 68’ Charger has, exposing The Fast And The Furious’s writers to be automotive ignoramuses. In like fashion, Savage insisted on referring to drums and other magazines feeding semiautomatic pistols and rifles as “clips” and conflated “assault weapons, assault rifle, semiautomatic rifle,” and “machine gun” as interchangeable terms, one and the same over and over.

A “clip” holds individual cartridges, “has no spring and does not feed shells directly into the chamber. Clips hold cartridges in the correct sequence for ‘charging’ a specific firearm’s [fixed] magazine.”8 A magazine holds rounds in a box, separate from the firearm for the weapons under discussion. Examples of clip “fed” firearms would include the Russian Mosin-Nagant 91/30 and American M1 Garand of W.W. II fame as well as the postwar Soviet SKS. Cold War weapons like the Soviet AK-47, U.S. M14, and later M16, are magazine fed. No such category of “assault weapon” exists for firearms. Any object that can be used to hurt another; flyswatter, umbrella, coat-hanger, or kitchen counter hardened wedge of cornbread is an assault weapon. The term “assault-weapon” was invented by liberals to frighten non-gun owners into believing your AR15 is identical to an M16 and that AKs and Mini-14s are full-automatic machine guns. Repeat after me; “The other side lies.” Editor of Jane’s Military Publications and firearms expert Charlie Cutshaw writes there are firearms categorized as “assault-rifles” but to be so classified they must be “shoulder-fired,” capable of fully automatic fire,” and chambered in a caliber intermediate “between pistol (or revolver) and rifle ammunition.”9 Some have a device allowing operators to switch from semiautomatic to full-automatic fire and back again. Commercial AK47s, AR15s, Mini-14s, and similar families of rifles don’t have this capability. Their triggers must be pulled, one at a time, for each round fired hence they are not “assault rifles” but “semiautomatic rifles” and “carbines.” “Machine guns” are typically heavy and tripod mounted, with hand held versions called “submachine guns,” and are capable of full automatic fire, emptying a magazine with a single pull of the trigger.10 Consistent misuse of terminology indicates Savage is grossly ignorant and misinformed, flagrantly dishonest, or both. He has no credibility.

No one wants to take your guns is the mantra of people, who, in the same breath, call for “assault weapons” (sic) and “high-capacity” (sic) bans. Time and again Liberals from anti-2nd Amendment organizations to Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton have said no one wants to take your guns and then promote Australian gun control which did just that. They are either stupid or brilliantly cunning. Perhaps dangerously naïve, I have never called liberals stupid because they’re not. Recall that U.S. District Judge Catherine C. Blake essentially resurrected the “sporting purpose” standard in upholding Maryland’s ban on AK and AR rifles mislabeling them “assault rifles” asserting they are not commonly used for lawful purposes including home defense.11 Liberals claiming; no one wants to confiscate guns, followed by proposals to ban AR, AK, and similar rifles, sounds contradictory until one understands their two pronged “trick”; the first is how they define “gun.”12 Confiscationists define “gun” in general as a firearm possessing a long established sporting purpose commonly used for hunting, trap and skeet shooting, and target competition at ranges and with no military analogue.13 This would exclude ARs, AKs, FN-FALs, and so forth. The second part of their trick is to convince the non-gun owning pubic there is no difference between full and semiautomatic firearms. Obama and others said time and again, AR15s, AKs, their derivatives, and similar rifles are military weapons that belong on battlefields, not our streets. It would not be confiscation, they argue, to return military weapons in civilian hands back to the U.S. Military where they belong.14 The only way to do this is through a ban on “civilian” possession of semiautomatic rifles and confiscate them as did Australia and England, and incrementally in California. How can Savage, living in Marin County, California, one of the most liberally infected in the galaxy, deny confiscation is not the liberal’s end game? He lies.

Like Judge Blake, Savage’s claim no one uses and no “cop” would recommend using an AR15 for home defense because they are such a poor choice, is pure buffoonery from one who has lived for too many years behind the Bay Area’s Tofu Curtain.15 Breathlessly, about to reveal a secret, Savage said his listeners, had never heard or been “told this” but one of the reasons AR15s are such poor choices is because the .223 round goes through walls. Shotguns and pistols are better because their rounds don’t. On the contrary, “More Americans than ever are relying on AR15s for home defense. Not only is an AR easier to shoot more accurately than a handgun—thanks to its additional points of contact with the body (cheek weld, shoulder mount, and two hands)—[and longer sight radius]—on AR rifles chambered in .223/Rem/5.56 NATO, produces superior terminal performance, and penetrates less when compared to the typical handgun.”16 An AR is harder to grab in the dark than a pistol or shotgun, Michael? Why is that? People have been attaching optics and lights to ARs for decades. A cocked and locked rifle makes one a “psycho” Michael?17 Employing his unloaded pistols and shotguns without lights against intruders beggars the question as to whose sanity should be in question. His rhetorical cant; “who needs” this or that firearm or “high capacity clips” and that the 2nd Amendment doesn’t allow possession of bazookas, hand grenades, and Russian tanks is a fallacious Straw Man argument to set the stage for infringements against the 2nd Amendment.

Savage is ignorant of or intentionally misrepresents the 2nd Amendment’s meaning. It grants no rights including to own anything. Rather, it recognizes an individual right to self-defense, to keep and bear arms, and establishes prohibitions against any government infringement on this right. The Declaration of Independence establishes it as a G-d-given right belonging to every individual inherent in their humanity whether government exists or not. It is inalienable and off-limits to a majority vote by one’s neighbors, act of government, or fashionable whim of the times. Rights cannot be modified, regulated, licensed, or infringed upon by government otherwise they would be called privileges.18 Inherent in the right of self-defense is the means by which one exercises it. To answer Savage’s “need” question, rights are not dependent upon a utilitarian need standard which, at best, is arbitrary, subject to popular opinion, or manipulated and controlled by those in power. Were this not so, government could raise the bar to demonstrate “need” so high, it becomes insurmountable thus rendering the right de facto abolished. Employing Savage’s Straw Manneed” standard to firearms ownership would subordinate it to ephemeral notions of “the common good, the good of the whole,” or “the greater good.”19 How long before it became extinguished? Ask Britons. By suggesting the 2nd Amendment regulates bazookas, half-tracks, Russian tanks, and grenades, therefore rifles can be regulated as well, is hay falling from massive gaps in Savage’s last Straw Man. Matches please.

Half-tracks and used Russian tanks are not firearms hence are regulated by other laws not the 2nd Amendment which applies to weapons citizen soldiers would keep and bear. Bazookas were the technological equivalent of shoulder fired canons, used against tanks, and grenades are sort of like exploding cannon balls. None of these are proper analogues to firearms. These are fallacious and false arguments employed by the deceitful to trick the unwary into surrendering bits and pieces of their 2nd Amendment rights until all of them are gone. This explains why Savage banned calls from those who knew what they were talking about in favor of kooks, conspiratorialists, the deluded, and poseurs.

11 Frederick C. Mish, Editor-in-Chief, Webster’s Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary (Springfield, Massachusetts, Merriam-Webster, Inc., Publishers, 1985), 1165, 276.

22 Michael Savage, The Savage Nation, broadcast 2 October, 2017.

33 IBID. 2 October, 2017.

44 Michael Savage, The Savage Nation, broadcast 4, 5, and 6 October, 2017.

55 Stephen King, Salem’s Lot (New York, N.Y., A Signet Book, New American Library, 1975), 317.

66 Stephen King, It (New York, N.Y., A Signet Book, New American Library, 1986), 353. With eleven years between publication, King still couldn’t get it right.

77 Universal Studios, The Fast And The Furious, 2001.

88 Kyle Wintersteen, “9 Most Misused Gun Terms,” Guns & Ammo, online, 21 November 2016 at http://www.gunsandammo.com.

99 Todd Woodward, “Down Range: Assault Weapons ‘Hoo-Hah,” Gun Tests 11 (November 2004) 2.

1010 U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms, at http://www.aft.gov/firearms.

1111 Jeff Knox, “Judge Says Maryland Ugly Gun Ban is Ok,” 13 August 2014, at http://www.FirearmsCoalition.org. See also; Michael Dorstewitz, “Judge Rules AR-15s are not covered under Constitution and are dangerous and unusual,” Liberty Unyielding at http://libertyunyielding.com/2014/08/13/judge-rules-ar-15s-not-covered-constitution-dangerous-unusual/#XErDCz10jgxiDG81.99.

1313 Richard Stevens, “Nazi Strategy Summed Up In 2 Words, Sporting Purpose,” 7 April, 1988, Jews For the Preservation of Firearms Ownership, at http://jpfo.org/filegen/-n-z-/nazirot.htm.

1515 I should know, I lived there for ten years.

1616 Richard Nance, “Your AR15 ASAP: Hornady’s Rapid Safe Wall Lock and Gunlock Provide a Safe Storage Solution for Quick Access in the Home,” Guns & Ammo 10 (October 2017), 76.

1717 Expanding what constitutes “mental illness” and “mental instability” is very popular on the Left who will use such determinations to expand individuals prohibited from owning firearms. Can thought-crimes be far behind?

1818 Ronald J. Pestritto, Woodrow Wilson and the Roots of Modern Liberalism (Lanham, Maryland, Rowman & Littlefield, Publishers, Inc., 2005), 3-6. See also; Gary T. Amos, Defending the Declaration (Brentwood, Tennessee, Wolgemuth & Hyatt, Publishers, Inc., 1989), 127-129.

1919 Jeff Snyder, A Nation of Cowards (St. Louis, Missouri, Accurate Press, 2001), 119-121.

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

ZAKA is on the scene

זקא‎ is the abbreviation for Zihuy Korbanot Ason. זיהוי קרבנות אסון, literally: “Disaster Victim Identification”

And I’m very tired and sad to hear it, yet again. For those that don’t know, ZAKA is a volunteer group that comes to the scene of a terrorist attack or a car crash or any such tragedy and gathers the body parts, pieces and blood of the Jewish victims so that they may be buried in accordance with Halakha, Jewish law. They also help with search and rescue, but I think they are best known for working with law enforcement and EMS (Emergency Medical Services) units to ensure that the necessary things are done. ZAKA volunteers prefer the work be called חסד של אמת – “Grace of truth” because the kindness they are showing the dead can not be returned by them. I would translate it as “kindness of truth” myself.

And ZAKA was on the scene in Pittsburgh.

ZAKA was on the scene because a Bucket of Chum entered the Tree of Life synagogue in Squirrel Hill on Saturday and opened fire during a Shabbat service. Eleven people lay dead. An elderly Holocaust survivor survived a maniac yelling all Jews must die by being late to the service.

‘It just never ends. It’s never completely safe for Jews. It’s in the DNA. Not just America’s DNA but the world’s.’

He’s right it doesn’t. And with that in mind, doing what we’ve been doing isn’t getting us anywhere.

I’m not really sure why anyone is surprised at the attack. The signs have been there for ages, I know TZP has certainly covered them. But there is a problem, it’s like taking your modern college snowflake leftist out to the woods and dropping them off in the middle of the woods with their $tarbuck$ double non-fat soy whatever and telling them there is a 300 pound grizzly bear in the woods, track it, or avoid it. Read the signs and you’ll be fine.

The snowflake doesn’t think it needs to read signs, it will be non-threatening to the grizzly and just drink it’s latte and it will all be fine. Yeah? Ignore some signs at your own peril. That’s not how life works, it can be how death works though.

Following the attacks what did we hear from the left, both Jewish and Goyim (the standard Hebrew biblical term for a nation)? Mostly what we heard was condemnation of President Trump, the anti-Semite, for the people on the right as “haters”, climate of hate, etc, etc.

I’m far from the only one who is appalled. Caroline Glick Left-Wing Jews Blaming Trump Are Dishonoring the Dead

Glick noted the prevalence of anti-Zionism on the left and within the Democrat Party. Marlow said, “[There is] a mainstreaming of anti-Zionism in the Democratic Party.”

“There is a huge problem with the empowerment of anti-Semites,” said Glick. “You have several Democratic nominees for Congress who are running on openly anti-Zionists platforms. Anti-Zionism is out-and-out anti-Semitism. It calls for the annihilation of the largest Jewish community on Earth, in Israel. … [Trump] is the most supportive president Israel has ever had, [and] they’re calling him an anti-Semite?”

Glick added, “There’s an insanity that’s infected the discourse inside of the Jewish community that doesn’t allow people to understand what the real threats are. Rather than deal with that, these radicals are making up stories. It does no service to the Jewish community in the United States to not pay attention [and] focus on actual anti-Semites who are actually involved in harming the position of Jews in American society, either politically or physically.”

….

Glick added, “A lot of people on the left in the Jewish community who are not seeing their interests because they’re blinded by ideology. Obviously, when you have congregants in a synagogue that are armed and capable of defending themselves and their fellow worshipers, you’re much safer than you would be with an alarm system or anything else in the face of somebody coming in and trying to massacre you.”

Glick observed, “People in general, in Israel, are better armed [than in America]. We have armed guards outside of every school. … It’s not considered to be a big deal. … This is just common sense.”

Glick concluded, “If you’re under threat, then you have to protect yourself. … It’s about life and death, and when you just concentrate on the fundamentals of the value of life and preserving the most precious thing in the world which is human life, then you come up with pragmatic ways of protecting it.”

Don’t Insult Me As a Rabbi by Blaming Your Political Enemies for Some Dirtbag Jew-Hater Rabbi Dov Fischer, you should really read the whole column.

So I respond: Don’t you dare insult me as a rabbi by blaming your perceived political enemies for some dirtbag Jew-hater. This President could not be a better friend of Jewish concerns and causes. He supports Israel and moved America’s Israel embassy to Jerusalem. His daughter and son-in-law are Orthodox Jews, and he treats them lovingly and respectfully, as he does their Orthodox Jewish children, his grandchildren. He ended Obama’s vicious anti-Israel animus, and he has supported Israel strongly in the United Nations. No wonder that Jews throughout the world love him, support him. In Israel, among Israeli Jews, he is wildly popular with a 67% approval rating. They hated Obama — and for great reason.

Some have become so caught up in the media lies and propaganda they can no longer see the truth of who is their enemy and who is their friend. They call what is good bad, and what is bad, good. The left wing of Judaism appears to me, to be more concerned with the worship of liberalism than Torah. Well, what do you call it when Jews daven Kaddish for the arabs that tried to infiltrate Israel from Gaza with the openly expressed purpose of ripping Jewish hearts from their chests? When they burn the land and shoot rockets into schools and homes? When they openly state they want to kill the Jews, and Jews in the diaspora daven Kaddish.

Synagogue shooter hated Donald Trump and shows what real hatred, anti-Semitism looks like

Donald Trump is often blamed by the media as inspiring attacks and violence, but he is not anti-Semitic. The synagogue shooter shows what hate is.

Dr. Tsvi Sadan points out Pittsburgh Massacre is Splitting the Jewish World this is not a long column, and well worth reading.

Jewish lives need to matter to Jews everywhere. Moshe Feiglin did a column on the massacre in Squirrel Hill.

But there is something more, deeper than the economic factor, which makes us partially responsible for what happened in Pittsburgh. Jewish history is being written today in the Land of Israel. It is clear to all of us that anti-Israel sentiments are the new expression of Anti-Semitism. When Israel is sure of itself, strikes its enemies as it did in the Six Day War, eliminates the hijackers as in Entebbe – the level of anti-Semitism decreases!!! And when Israel displays lack of self-assurance, temporariness, moral flaccidity – a feeling that we are not really on the map, that we are nothing more than colonialists acting only for the sake of self-defense, begging the Hamas for  a cease-fire – then our enemies feel that they are just and anti-Semitism flourishes.

At a political event in Tennessee Rep. Marsha Blackburn asked for a moment of silence for the victims. That lasted a few seconds when leftists interrupted heckling the Representative. Wow.

The world is not worried about Jews being attacked, and the left is not our friend, and has not been for a long time. These are a couple of the observations that showed up on a Zehut list I’m fortunate enough to belong to.

Whatever happens to Israel happens to the rest of the world! A world that insists Israel not fight back, that insists Israel make peace with murderous infiltrators who came across our borders as economic immigrants who slaughter us at will at our Shabbat tables and our infants in our cribs. Who curse us with the worst kind of racist invective if we don’t allow violent, Jew hating infiltrators into our communities. What happens to us will happen to you– mida kneged mida. I’m not hating I’m explaining how justice works. This is not just aimed at Pennsylvania. This is aimed at the world. What happens here will happen there. Just ask Germany, France and the UK. Remember Genesis 12:3..Those who bless Israel are blessed, and those who curse Israel are cursed. If only you feared G*d you’d know it’s true.

And

My wife was pointing out how silent social media has been since yesterday’s attack. No viral hashtags of solidarity. No “je suis juif”. No black armbands worn by team athletes in national leagues (which they wear for the smallest of thing, find an excuse almost weekly). But spilled Jewish blood is not worthy of sympathy. It’s not notesworthy, and it’s to be expected. I’m sure there’s millions of people that, underneath their mask of politically correct niceties are pretty happy about this. What I keep wondering is: if I had lived in Austria in the early 30s, and had known what was coming, what kind of a life would I live? What choices would I make for myself and my family? This is a sobering moment. Jews have always been and will always be alone. We may buy our way to the top of the pyramid in gentile society (like Yosef also did) but sooner or later the weight of the entire pyramid is unleashed against us. Jews are the one single “other” capable to unite in hatred Islamic Jihadists, crazy SJWs and white supremacists.

The signs of danger are not what the media and those on the left say they are. The signs of growing anti-Semitism are the plethora of BDS and Free Falestine groups that abound on college campuses. They are professors refusing to write letters of recommendation for students that want to study in Israel, and they get by with it more than once. They are the embracing of Farafreak who compares Jews to termites with no denouncement. What? The View went full out nuts over that statement? No. They are the constant attacks on Israel in the U.N. The signs may be called “Anti-Zionism” or “Anti-Israel” as they call the only democratic state in the middle east an “apartheid” state, but it is anti-Semitism and that’s all it is. The same dirty thing recycled with a new brand label. It’s Jew hatred, period.

Below is a list of columns I’ve done for TZP and a general idea of what they dealt with.

Enough Only Mourning—The death of the most wonderful Ari Fuld

LETS GO FLY A KITE—blame Israel

BUT HOW COULD THIS HAPPEN—The history of gun control and Judaism

The Double Edged Standard Sword—hypocrisy, the BS- BDS

#Neve Tzuf Halamish— The slaughter of the Solomon family in their home as they celebrated Shabbat and a new baby.

Hate in America—the SPLC which spreads disinformation and lies.

The Disconnect—Disgraced Harvey Weinstein called on Jews to be disarmed for things like a Synagogue attack.

Tisha B’Av. From Within—Liberal vs Judaism

We’ve been showing the warning signs for what they are. As I said, I’m not really all that surprised. People may not think President Trump condemned it in a way to suit them, but radio host Mark Levin called it the strongest condemnation of anti-Semitism by any president, ever.

So, what’s the answer? Bear dealt with this beautifully. I want to go a little further down the trail though.

I have never made any secret of the fact I greatly admire Judah Maccabee, and from the book of The Maccabees

Ch. 2 ; Ver. 39-49 ^ First Book

Victory of Now when Mattathias and his friends understood hereof, they mourned for them right sore. And one Mattathias of them said to another, If we all do as our brethren have done, and fight not for our lives and laws against the heathen, they will now quickly root us out of the earth. At that time therefore they decreed, saying. Whosoever shall come to make battle with us on the sabbath day, we will fight against him ; neither will we die all, as our brethren lo that were murdered in the secret places.

Fight, on Shabbat. Neither will we die all.

Nechemiah Chapter 4

10And it was from that day on, half of my youths did work and half of them held spears, shields, bows, and coats of mail, and the rulers were behind the entire House of Judah.

11The builders of the wall and the carriers of the loads were loading, with one hand doing the work and one holding the sword.

12And the builders, each one with his sword bound to his waist, and [they were] building, and the one who sounded the shofar was beside me.

There have absolutely been times in our history when our wise leaders knew we needed to be armed, ready and willing to defend our lives, even on Shabbat.

Robert Harris makes the point in his column Only fellow Jews can protect their brothers in shul

If G-d forbid there is more to come – that hired guard standing in front of shul will be the first victim of an anti-Semitic gunman, guaranteeing another synagogue massacre

If a taboo was broken on Saturday and American synagogues are going to become magnets for violent anti-Semites, then American Jews will have to protect themselves.

We saw in Pittsburgh that it is not possible to save Jewish lives by waiting for the police to come and do so. For within minutes on Saturday, 11 Jews had been shot down and killed by a single gunman.

As we have heard since the massacre, the response among many Jews will be to hire armed guards to stand in front of synagogue buildings.

However, if an anti-Semite plans an attack on a synagogue, the first bullet must be for that bored and surprised guard standing by the front door.

We can choose how we stand

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

And that is exactly how it played out in the Kirkwood city hall massacre in 2008. The police were easily identified. The predator know they need to remove the sheepdog before they can kill the sheep. It is why concealed carry is effective. If you don’t know if people are armed, and you don’t know who is armed it sure changes the game.

A gunman went on a shooting rampage at a public meeting in the city hall, leaving six people dead and two others injured. Bucket O’Chum, 52, shot one police officer with a revolver across the side street from city hall and took the officer’s handgun before entering city hall. Bucket O’Chum reached council chambers with these two pistols shortly after the meeting began. There, he shot a police officer, the public works director, two council members, the mayor, and a reporter. In total, the gunman killed five and wounded two others; one of the two wounded victims, the mayor, later died. The gunman was then shot and killed by police

The answer is for us to be armed. If someone wants to walk into our Shul, and try to open up the response needs to be more like the bar scene from Code of Silence. Minus the language.

But I will leave you with thoughts from Rabbi Zev Weinberg. I’ve been fortunate enough to take a class from the Rabbi that I owe much to, and very much admire. There is much wisdom in what he has to share.

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

Law and Order: War on Western Society Part III

On my 91st day of employment with Lockheed Missiles and Space, Sunnyvale, California, I became a member of Local 508, Machinist and Aerospace Workers’ Union, an AFL-CIO affiliate. How odd considering I hadn’t joined and, I’m not even a Democrat. When asked about this, my manager said union membership was a condition of employment. What? Who hired me, Lockheed or the Union? He answered; “Lockheed,” but “the contract negotiated between the company and union stipulates all non-managerial employees automatically become union members after 90 days. Dues are also deducted automatically from your paycheck.” But, I’m the one who found, pursued, and won this job with no help from anyone else, thank you, I protested. “If you quit the union, you’ll be fired” was his response. Well, if there’s no choice in the matter, why not attend the meetings? What an eye opener.

It could have been a B-grade movie; Clash of the Hillbillie Pig Roast Meets Angry Biker Bar. Venomous “Us versus them” class-warfare invective laced with hatred of management, the college educated, and rich people, were hurled back and forth like darts, each adding his own poison to the tips. So asinine and uneducated were the inflamed assertions and chanted slogans, they placed validity for each member’s high school diploma in jeopardy. It was eerily reminiscent of the simpleminded claptrap spouted by ignorant, backward, and gullible unionized Appalachian hillbillies, an area where once I had the misfortune to live. Superstitious and highly combustible with conspiratorial rumors,1 they fought to keep wages up with threats of strikes even during President Carter’s wretched economy. They drove one business after another from the region ensuring it remained trapped in a quicksand-like poverty of their own making. At least Local 508 members could read, they had a newsletter.

It was a masterpiece organ of radical rage-filled propaganda; 100% pure liberal Democrat Party politics demonizing free markets and every Republican ever born. It wouldn’t have shocked me to find Vladimir Lenin, raised from the grave, passing out Hammer and Sickle armbands at meetings. My union brothers would’ve made Fascist dictator Benito Mussolini proud. Italy’s flamboyant dictator, fave among American intellectuals, adopted Georges Sorel’s Syndicalism which held revolutionaries could only achieve power through organizing and radicalizing trade-unions. Thereafter, “society could be divided by professional sectors of the economy” organized into guilds or unions.2 On 7 August, 2018, Missourians, walking in the steps of Mussolini’s Fascists, took a giant step back from freedom toward that goal voting no on Prop A.

The very idea one’s neighbors could vote in the first place on conditions of employment, including union membership, using instrumentalities of government to force their will on others, is obnoxious to the very notion of liberty. Forced unionism is unconstitutional and as anti-freedom as it is anti-American. Above market union wages are sustained only by restricting other’s access to employment. It means limiting, not expanding jobs thus crushing the state economy. Clinging to a bankrupt and an anachronistic 1930s socialist economic model ensures Missouri will remain mired in longsuffering stagnant economic growth. It translates into thousands of lost jobs, a flat-line tax base, and few opportunities beyond the agricultural sector as companies, deciding it makes economic sense to avoid forced union states, go elsewhere. Seeking job opportunities, Missouri’s young will have to leave as well. To survive, businesses that remain will replace union workers with robots and illegal aliens. Way to go guys. Is it possible those voting “no” on Prop-A are so self-centered or such dolts they don’t realize union dues provide the major source of funding for the Democrat Party? The same party that elects politicians determined to abolish the 2nd Amendment and outlaw the firearms you possess? I understand autoworker and bulldozer Bolsheviks may be too selfish to consider the rights of fellow Missourians and pesky ideas like freedom, but what happened to the rest of you? If you voted “no” on Prop A, don’t dare tell me you also support the 2nd Amendment because the latter is a Constitutional right. No sir. You’re either ignorant or a hypocrite no different than Gun-Confiscationist liberals supporting only those parts of the Constitution furthering their agenda. How dare you claim support for liberty when you’re so willing to deny it to others. If you voted for forced unionism, don’t ask me to work with you on any cause from this day forward. You’ve disgraced yourselves and you’ve disgraced your state. Well, well, I see minimum wage (socialism) and medical marijuana (first step toward total legalization, like Potorado) are on the November ballot. Gee, I wonder how people will vote. At my age I’ve learned looking the other way with respect to even the smallest injury to liberty and compromising with fools only begets less liberty and more fools. Thank God we can still vote with our feet.

If not already busy with a coalition to Save Our Dime, by removing Constitution-hating FDR’s visage off its face, as well as the Committee to Re-Name Washington, D.C., because, after all, George shouldn’t be saddled with connection to that stinking crime scene on a hill, yet a new cause beckons.

With labor union and Democrat stronghold Baltimore at is epicenter, Maryland is unlikely to ever glow red instead of blue. Ironically, Ronald Reagan won my home state (Go TERPS!) in 1980 and again in 1984 with 52.51 to Mondale’s 47.02 percent of the vote. Although Reagan carried 22 of 23 counties (Prince Georges the lone reprobate), the election was still close.3 This demonstrates a perversion of representative democracy in which populous urban centers inhabiting tiny areas, dictate law and policy to geographically vastly larger surrounding suburban and rural areas possessing significantly different cultural, religious, social, and political values. America’s founding fathers would be appalled. They didn’t fight a long bloody war in order to reestablish a form of tyranny just overthrown. Regrettably the Reagan Revolution was followed by the equivalent of worn brakes; unable to stop and disinclined to slow government’s inexorable massive growth and leftward trajectory, known as the Bushes. Once residual Reaganites were rounded up and banished to the hinterlands, conservative ramparts were scaled and breached crumbling under enormous pressure from hordes of Liberal Northeastern Carpetbaggers swarming to the Old Line State swelling government in Washington, D.C. to corpulent Jabba the Hut size. The effect was that of parasites feeding on a helpless host imparting a fatal infection. We never had a chance. With stocks of conservative anti-biotic exhausted, parasites flung aside their drained and emaciated host oozing across the border into Virginia. Soon it too was stricken with the dread liberal infection brought by Carpetbaggers who understand they have but to outnumber natives by one vote in any district to win elections. Once in power, their policies soon led to a huge influx of illegal aliens who know for which party to vote, wink wink. And so the fever raged destroying a former bastion of liberty home to greats like George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, and Robert E. Lee. Now the Carpetbaggers are on the move again heading further south into North Carolina. Callers to a recent radio program from Maryland, Virginia, and North Carolina shared tales of woe wrought by what Liberal Carpetbaggers had done to their once fair and free states. Callers from Illinois and New York chimed in explaining most of their state’s counties were fairly conservative but, due to swollen population centers, Chicago, New York, and the liberal pustules inhabiting them, they live under a boot of tyranny holding in contempt their cultural, social, and religious values. Hence I’ve been asked to support LCBICA, the Liberal Carpet Bagger Immigration Control Act. For what’s left of free America to survive, people must unite, drive liberal Carpetbaggers from their states, and take power back from workshop socialist unions. It’s a matter of life and death. Watch your borders. Be vigilant. Watch your borders.

For the Left, everything is political. Nothing exists outside their ideology. Any cause they support, from abortion to minimum wage, is done to further the Great Project; bringing all aspects of human activity, social, economic, religious, and political under state control. And they are the state. For this to work, American government must be transformed from a federal into a national system. Check that one off the list. They must overturn the Constitution subordinating all local and state political activities to “federal4 control. In order to trick Americans into accepting their vision for a Brave New World, Leftists teach false narratives to America’s youth filling their heads with lies about the nation’s founding principles, and censoring out anything undermining this indoctrination. Good guys become boogeymen and boogeymen become the good guys. The same holds true with the Left’s war on the police. It’s nothing personal, it’s an agenda.

Black Lives Matter (BLM) is one of the radical Left’s hammers against Western values. Created by Marxist Lesbians, BLM propagates the false narrative white America, acting through armed surrogates, the police, is waging a war of genocide against black America. They preach, and their stooges in the white liberal media repeat, the preposterous assertion the moment a black man steps from his residence, he must run for his life because he’s hunted by gun-slinging mad-dog white men driving pickup trucks adorned with Trump stickers and Confederate Battle Flags. Spitting tobacco juice and swilling Bud-Lite, these unshaven rednecks in BBQ stained ‘Wife-Beaters’ scour the highways and byways looking for black men to drag through the streets, chained to the back of their trucks or to shoot down as target practice. And dadgummit, if one should slip through their fingers, thank God for America’s racist white cops,5 they’ll get them, by Jiminy. This delusional fantasy is separated from reality as far as possible. For those accusing me of being hyperbolic, have you spent time on websites for groups like BLM, Pantifa, the New Black Panthers, and others? Were you ever a cop? Did you ever live in Baltimore or Philadelphia’s inner cities as I did? If so, you’d know who has to be scared stepping through their front door. Hint; it’s not who BLM says it is. Why is it so important for liberal teachers to fill the minds of young kids with guilt over being white? If they can be made to feel responsible for all that has gone wrong in minority communities, how much more amenable will they be to the radical socialist agenda when of age to vote? The ludicrous claim Trump’s, “Make America Great,” slogan is secret code promising followers a return to slavery6 has already had its intended effect among Millennials.

Liberals promised Barrack Obama’s election would bridge and transcend racial divides thus bringing about racial healing. Would that it were true. Born in Hawaii and growing up there and in Indonesia, Obama as president attempted to appropriate the American “Black experience,” which he was never part of, allowing him to cast critics of his socialist agenda as racists. His administration became “the most anti-law enforcement administration in memory.” From Milwaukee to Baltimore, crime sky-rocketed and “Homicides in the country’s 50 largest cities rose nearly 17 percent in 2015, the greatest surge in fatal violence in a quarter of a century” reversing a “two-decade long decline.”7 In addition, murders of police officers, by ambush and direct assault, spiked dramatically under Obama. “Root-cause liberals” who never shy from blaming everyone but themselves for failed government policies, naturally singled out poverty, unemployment, and racism, especially police oppression, to explain horrifying crime rates in America’s inner cities.8 And how did they explain the fearful spike in murder of police officers? Many on the left claim cops have it coming. When minorities kill cops, its self-defense, justifiable homicide.9 This attitude; cops deserve to be killed because they’re the bad guys who gun-down blacks in cold blood, continued unabated even after the facts about the execution style murder of two New York police officers became widely disseminated in the news and on social media.10 Liberal’s method to address root-cause solutions to crime, throwing billions of other people’s dollars at poverty and unemployment, failed. Inner-city crime remains epidemic.11 They failed because they’re based on false premises refusing to address the fact 94 percent of blacks are killed by other blacks not whites or cops.12

Substantial political dividends accrue to liberals capable of enforcing Party (Democrat) discipline engendered through fear-mongering and lies. For leftists, including college professors and young Marxist revolutionaries, racial division stoked to red-hot hatred and violence is the vanguard of the long hoped for ignition of revolution in America. BLM and their white supporters claim incarceration of blacks represents a plot to put them in concentration camps. Through drug laws, whites are “re-enslaving black Americans.” Liberals especially target “discretionary policing” meaning stopping and checking out “suspicious looking people” (if you’re a cop, you know one when you see one), before they can commit crimes. New York City’s “stop and frisk” program drastically reduced crime under Mayor Rudolph Giuliani. But liberal court challenges and protests against “profiling,” forced cops to back off. Now crime is out of control again and “a blood bath ensued and its victims were virtually all black.” When police back off, its “black people themselves who pay the greatest price.”13 In addition if anyone tells the truth, the liberal media, Hollywood, and Leftist Pop-Culture, spring into action destroying critics with accusations of racism, the kiss of death these days. The media hounding Trump’s every step, never took Obama to task for his words and connection to subsequent racial violence in America.

Today white leftists push blacks to react with aggressive hostility and combativeness, including resisting arrest, when stopped by police. This makes the job much more dangerous for cops and increases the likelihood low-risk encounters explode into major scuffles. The type that lead to use of deadly force. But the left doesn’t care about the blacks it pushes to physically resist cops. They serve as props in the narrative white cops are waging war against blacks with revolution the only solution. Kind of reminds me of the 1960s. Fear and distrust have been promoted so heavily by the Left, it has spawned feelings of anger and resistance in black communities who now see all encounters with police as resulting from racism by whites attempting to control and suppress them. Anger against whites has birthed the “knock-out” game in which a black youth walks up to an unsuspecting white person punching him or her as hard as possible in the head trying to knock them out with one blow. Witnessed by many and broadcast throughout social media, nevertheless the white liberal media refuses to report on it because to do so would undermine the false narrative of a white war on blacks.14

For those arguing; but look at all the whites marching with BLM, keep in mind BLM views white liberals as individuals who have internalized and are blind to their racism. Conservatives, on the other hand, are openly and shamelessly racist. For blacks who believe all problems within their community are the result and fault of the legacy of slavery and Jim Crow, “good and bad” whites are simply opposite sides of the same racist coin. The good ones are to be used and discarded.15 As for crimes committed by blacks, including O.J. Simpson, knock-out games, and violence in Kansas City’s Plaza,16 these are seen as collective acts of self-defense against an oppressive white society holding all the reins of power.17

In response to the Grand Jury’s decision not to indict officer Darren Wilson in the Ferguson, Missouri shooting of Michael Brown, President Obama said he understood the disappointment and anger in the black community. He made no mention of the rule of law or that a grand jury investigation ruled Wilson’s shooting was justifiable self-defense. Riots, looting, and assaults followed.18 Obama essentially declared the facts and forensic evidence didn’t matter. The white man was always guilty, no matter what, a view Obama had come to internalize as a youth.19 For example, Obama blamed Michael Brown’s shooting and riots on “lack of diversity” within the Ferguson Police Department, not the actions of Brown and those burning and looting.20 At the time, Obama’s remarks seemed foolish and naïve. They weren’t. They express the same view as BLM; white people are born inherently racist and are the cause of all problems in all minority communities, thereby exculpating any crime committed by any black person no matter the circumstances. Without accepting that this is the point of view held by many in the debate on race and crime, it’s impossible to understand what is really driving the Left’s agenda.

11 It was a small town which I un-affectionately called “Dogpatch,” when, in 1972, while still in high school, I wrote an editorial in support of President Nixon’s reelection which was carried in a local newspaper. This sparked a meeting of outrage among town leaders as, they were almost all union Democrats. They concluded, no one my age could write such an editorial without help from dad. My parents had no idea I had written and submitted the letter. I concluded their level of astonishment was proportionate to their level of literacy. In 1974, my dad bought an Opel station wagon which was considered scandalous and led to meetings by the town’s movers and shakers. After all, the car was made in Germany. Had he bought a car made in Japan, the Witness Protection Program would have been the only option. Hatred of Asians was and is alive and well in parts of America.

22 Jonah Goldberg, Liberal Fascism: The Secret History of the American Left, from Mussolini to the Politics of Change (New York, N.Y., Broadway Books, 2009), 36-37 (Paperback version).

44 At this point, Feral” government seems more apropos.

55 In the BLM’s disturbed psyche, it you’re black and a cop, you’re still a white racist cop.

66 Ralph Nader, “What Does Trump Mean By ‘Make America Great Again?” Huffington Post, December 15, 1017, at https://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us5a341e29e4b02bd1c8c6066/amp.

77 Heather McDonald, The War On Cops (New York, N.Y., Encounter Books, 2016), 1.

88 IBID. 1.

99 Jessica Chasmar, “Brooklyn Onlookers Cheered N.Y. Cop Killings at Murder Scene: They deserved it.” The Washington Times, Monday, 22 December, 2014, at http://www.washington.times.com/new/2014/dec/22/brooklyn-on-lookers-cheered-ny-cop-killings-at-murd/.

1010 Dave Urbanski, December 20, 2014, “NYPD Gets What They Deserve: Here’s How Some Celebrated the Shooting Deaths of Two Ambushed New York City Police Officers,” The Blaze, at http://www.theblaze.com/news/2014/12/20,nypd-gets-what-they-deserve-heres-how-some-celebrated-the-shooting-deaths-of-two-ambushed-new-york-city-police-officers/.

1111 McDonald, 1-2.

1212 Taleeb Starkes, Black Lies Matter: Why Lies Matter to the Race Grievance Industry (North Charleston, South Carolina, Createspace Independent Publishing Platform, 2016), 40-41.

1313 McDonald, 3.

1414 Starkes, 41-42.

1515 IBID. 42.

1616 Colin Flaherty, White Girl Bleed A Lot (Washington, D.C., WND Books, 2013), 164-166.

1717 Starkes, 45-46.

1818 McDonald, 3.

1919 Dinesh D’Souza, The Roots of Obama’s Rage (Washington, D.C., Regnery Publishing, Inc., 2010), 57-126.

2020 McDonald, 7-9.

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

Claire McCaskill vs Veritas, Truth

With Demoncrats doing everything to gain control of the nation so they can institute their program of higher taxes, impeaching a lawfully elected President and enacting gun control they have a variety of strategies they are flinging at the goal.

Since San Fran Nan has decided it’s more important to enact gun and citizen control than to win elections, I thought we might take a look at some of these brand new demoncratic socialist candidates. Although really, I guess if you’re a Demoncratic Socialist, after you’ve enacted gun and citizen control, you don’t really need to worry about winning elections, yeh? They’re just being more open about it now.

One is the socialist who thinks Bernie Sanders is the Great Pumpkin, Ocasio-Cortez.

Ocasio-Cortez’s Great Bernie Pumpkin

 

 

 

 

Another is a candidate in Texas who wants to lead the nation in gun control, has a perfectly WASP sounding name so apparently wants to be called Beta, oh, sorry! Not Beta? Oh, right Beto. So Beto is desirous of stripping Americans on one of their Constitutionally enumerated rights. Not granted. I’ve also heard he eats his tacos with a fork, so does Beto use the same fork to eat his tacos he uses to shred our Constitution?

Sometimes I wondered if the National Demoncratic Socialist Party realizes these elections are to be held in America, but in this day an age? Ocasio-Cortez beat a sitting legislator, so yeah, I guess they do.

Then there is Missouri. Missouri has Air-Claire McCaskill.

I’ll be right up front here, this really isn’t a “Gee Josh Hawley is a great guy, how could you pass him up” column. For one, I don’t like Josh Hawley, I think he is a smarmy, greasy, snake oil selling jerk. Missouri elected a Governor, we’ll call him Eric Greitens, shall we? Gov Eric did something quite foolish in his personal life before he ever ran for Governor. And like politicians all over, of every party, he got caught. Now, he didn’t drown her so he didn’t actually follow a recognized approved DSNC playbook and perhaps that is why the Demoncratic Socialists became convinced the world would end, end I say, if our Gov Greitens wasn’t removed from office. Well, it could have been the lack of playbook or it could have been that he signed a bill to allow Missouri to become a right to work state. The Demoncratic Socialists didn’t like that either. But the AG at the time was Josh Hawley. I don’t know if Hawley was just trying to prove how cool and unbiased he is but he felt compelled to wade into the poop patch created by Demoncrats and their propaganda arm, the mainstream media. Now the thing is, there are some actually very curious things about the persecution of Gov Greitens by good little Demoncratic Socialist Kim Gardner that SCREAM for someone such as a real attorney general to poke a nose in. Lt Col Dave Grossman did a couple of articles for The Federalist asking questions the media or the AG didn’t seem to be asking. The first one asked questions like,

1. Where is the police report?

2. Where is the evidence?

3. Why did the FBI, the U.S. Attorney, and the police refuse to look into this case?

4. What’s the deal with the private investigators?

5. Why did the prosecution want so badly to delay the trial until the fall?

That number 4? Now that is some interesting reading.

The Second article, had such data that one would really think someone would be asking about her expenditure of taxpayer funds,

1. It appears that Gardner began preparing the paperwork for the indictment prior to conducting any investigation.

2. Gardner allegedly broke the law in the course of her prosecution.

3. Gardner’s assistant prosecutor allegedly misled the grand jury about the indictment.

4. Gardner’s investigators were under FBI investigation.

5. Even the chief of police of St. Louis is demanding answers.

But, guess not. So no, I’m really not so much a Hawley fan. When you consider that this grave threat to freedom, Mom, the flag and apple pie just pretty much faded away after Gov Eric resigned…seems odd. Still don’t have Right to Work.

So, when I say this is about the Demoncratic Socialist known as Air Claire McCaskill, please don’t think this is about saying Hawley is great, it’s not. It’s that Air Claire is so much worse, and dirtier than Josh Hawley. Let’s take a few trips down memory lane, shall we? Because Air Claire has a lot of history that can be examined, along with her baggage, carry-on and otherwise.

But I’m saving the cherry of memory lane for last.

Air-Claire likes to create problems so she can use the force of government to solve them, like all big government Demoncratic Socialists do. For example in February of this year, Air Claire got all hot and bothered to battle “Identity theft” and the use of stolen social security numbers! Especially the use of stolen children’s social security numbers! Good job Air-Claire, right?? I mean who wouldn’t want Air-Claire in her crusader cape flying the friendly skies on behalf of law abiding citizens?

How about law-abiding citizens who are pissed because Air-Claire helped create the problem she is now crusading against? Oh, YES, she did.

Air-Claire helped create the problem, now she expects private businesses to spend their money to fix it, after she blithely spent OUR money to create it. How so?

It would be appropriate to have [Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals – DACA] applicants disclose any misuse of Social Security numbers or other personal identifiers so that the system can be purged and corrected, and so that the true number holders can be informed. It would also be appropriate to impose an additional fine on the many DACA recipients who worked illegally before obtaining DACA status and improperly used false identity information. The fines could be used to establish a restitution fund for the victims.

… 43.9 percent of all surveyed DACA recipients had worked prior to gaining DACA status, and that percentage increases to 60.7 percent for DACA recipients over 25 years of age. However, these individuals were unable to legally obtain Social Security numbers for their pre-DACA employment, which means that they used fraudulently obtained Social Security numbers that all-too-often belong to American citizens, including American children.

The use of unlawfully obtained Social Security numbers by individuals eligible for DACA status is so pervasive that the Obama administration instructed applicants not to disclose their illegally obtained numbers. That ensured that Americans who are the victims of DACA identity theft were left with destroyed credit, arrest records attached to their names, unpaid tax liabilities, and corrupted medical records while the DACA recipients walked away scot-free from multiple felonies.

Does Air-Claire have anything to do with that mess? Does a Demoncratic Socialist love vote fraud?

She supports chain migration, sanctuary cities, funding for executive amnesty, and funding for processing centers for Central American unaccompanied minors. She voted for the DREAM Act, against a bill to prevent suing Arizona for immigration law, and against defunding sanctuary cities.

Something to remember with another 5,000 Hondurans headed this way with at least 100 members of ISIS chumming along for the ride and free drinks.

So is using taxpayer dollars to create a problem, then expecting private businesses or taxpayers to spend their money to fix her cockwomble (I love Katie Hopkins don’t you?) normal? Yeah, pretty much.

Aiming to Crack Down on Exorbitant Air Ambulance Costs for Missourians, McCaskill Introduces Legislation

AAMS Responds to Sen. McCaskill’s Air Ambulance Consumer Protection Act

The Association of Air Medical Services (AAMS) is greatly concerned about the unintended negative consequences that can result from the recent Air Ambulance Consumer Protection Act, reported to be introduced today by Senator Claire McCaskill (D-MO). While it is the position of AAMS that all our members advocate on behalf of their patients and work toward solutions that keep patients out of the middle in negotiations with insurers, this legislation doesn’t do that – it only provides insurers with smaller portions of patient’s bills to cover while erecting “borders in the sky” making it difficult or impossible to transport patients across state lines. We can do better – we can require transparency, fix Medicare, and solve for greater healthcare access.

Transporting patients across state lines was something aero-medical helicopters routinely did when I flew. It’s like Air-Claire just hasn’t yet ruined enough healthcare systems to suit herself.

And it’s kind of ironic that Air-Claire thinks she should chime in on air anything really.

The appellation “Air-Claire”, where does that come from? Claire McCaskill and her husband Joseph Shepherd are very wealthy, in fact, she’s one of the wealthiest members of congress. Businesses linked to McCaskill’s husband get $131 million in federal dollars

McCaskill is one of the wealthiest members of Congress, a fact that Republicans are quick to remind voters as McCaskill battles for a third Senate term representing a state President Donald Trump won by nearly 19 percentage points in 2016. GOP-funded ads trying to paint her as out of touch with ordinary Missourians have attacked McCaskill for buying a $2.7 million D.C. condo and for using her husband’s private plane on the campaign trail.

So a few years ago, air-Claire got busted using the family’s private jet to travel around and campaign. And billing the taxpayers for it.

It gets worse for Air Claire. The public realized (even the press) that using taxpayer dollars to pay yourself is wrong. The pressure was unbearable and McCaskill whipped out her personal checkbook and re-paid the federal treasury with an $88,000 check. It’s shameful when you game the system to the point of being politically forced to pay back a taxpayer subsidy.

Oh but wait, there’s more as they say on TV. Air Claire, the high tax and spend obama Demoncratic Socialist wouldn’t do anything shady with taxes would she?

McCaskill had been keeping the plane in Delaware and Illinois, two states that do not impose personal property taxes. Well, Missouri does. So, was McCaskill, a committed liberal millionaire who advocates soaking the rich, actually dodging taxes?

Yes, Air Claire was trying to pay fewer taxes. Caught again and pressured by the public, McCaskill pulled out her checkbook and wrote a check for over $300,000 for back taxes on the plane.

Not only was McCaskill paying her own company taxpayer dollars to fund her travels, she avoided paying taxes to the state she supposedly serves.

There’s a few more things in the article linked above. Here’s another one from 2011, Breaking: Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., Failed to Pay $287,000 in Property Taxes on Aircraft

But like any elitist, she think the basket of deplorables is just behaving badly, lots of normal people have 3 million dollar private planes!

Wait, what? Air Claire had her husband sell “the damn plane”. They waited a little while and bought another one.

Now what is funny, is Air Claire has been doing the Hillary Clintoon Scooby van deal. Hers is called BigBlue. Wow, really Air Claire? Big Blue, well ok.

So Air Claire is being all folksy with her RV tour

The RV, named BigBlue by the campaign, was unveiled late last month by McCaskill, who said she was “very excited to hit the road” in it for an upcoming “Veterans for Claire” tour. The campaign kept a live blog of its three-day RV trip from May 29 to May 31, posting updates of its whereabouts.

All indications from the McCaskill campaign were that she was traveling on the RV. The campaign bragged after the three-day tour concluded that it had traveled 700 miles on the RV. The campaign asked in fundraising emails for money to fuel the RV, complaining, “gas is expensive.”

“It costs us $200 just to fill up the RV and with the number of places we plan on going—that adds up fast,” the campaign wrote, without mentioning aircraft fuel costs. “Will you pitch in just $5 today to help fund our RV tour and power us to a victory in November?”

Now for the fun part?? Air Claire has been FLYING a bunch of that in her private plane, and just not telling anyone or at least so far as we know, charging the taxpayers for the use of the plane. The same article listed above tells how the plane has been tracked and it’s path lining up with her RV. Yeah. Worth reading that. But Air Claire knew they would probably track the plane, so she had

Claire McCaskill Took Action to Hide Travel on Private Plane From Public

Email records show FAA was asked to hide tracking data of Democratic senator’s plane in April

Sen. Claire McCaskill (D., Mo.) took action earlier this year to make her family’s private plane untrackable by the public, according to documents obtained from the Federal Aviation Administration.

Didn’t work.

Which has led to some kind of fun things like the NRSC trolling Air Claire at campaign stops by having airport ground crew there for BigBlue like photo bombing gnomes, it’s kind of cute really.

But the Washington Free Beacon did the best coverage of it.

There is even a Air Claire computer game you can play for free, http://www.flyairclaire.com/

But now, now James O’Keefe with Project Veritas comes bringing us the real Air Claire, and she is every bit as dirty as you should be understanding from everything you’ve just read. Claire is a liar, flat out. Here is the Project Veritas video, and it is well, well worth watching. People just can’t know that.

Then KOLR10 allowed Air Claire to express her outrage at Josh Hawley. Huh? He had nothing to do with it. Air Claire had a synapse or two go missing. So rather than watch Claire’s idiotic response, let’s watch the brilliant and talented Mr. O’Keefe dismantle it.

Now at 1:17 in, James seems shocked that Air Claire would just say something on TV, that is just a flat out lie. Just say it, just throw it out there with no truth behind it. Darling James, WHY?? It’s not like it’s the first time Air Claire has done this. From 20th June 2012,

And, we’ll let Glen Beck take it away

But now, now, the cherry. Just step into my wayback machine. And I do mean way back. Back to when Air Claire was the Prosecutor for Jackson County Missouri, on 9th December 1992.

From page 81 of the most excellent book, Missouri Weapons and Self-Defense Law: Commom Law Experience and Missouri Practice

McCaskill has been lying about gun laws even in 1992 as a prosecutor

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yes, Air Claire is the prosecutor. I’m almost sure back in 1992 James O’Keefe and Josh Hawley had nothing to do with her lying to the press about the law that she certainly should have known better as a prosecutor. But if you really fear that they might have secretly been taping what she openly lied about I can ask the author.

You see, that is the thing, Air Claire openly lies, in any way shape or form she feels the need to get what she wants. She will deceive and hurt whoever necessary, because Air Claire is evil. You may or not give two hoots about the Second Amendment, but I promise you, there is most likely an issue that you care very deeply about. And you think you know Air Claire’s position on it. But she has lied to and betrayed Second Amendment people for years, you think she won’t betray you? You are being foolish.

Air Claire is only one of the Demoncratic Socialists up for election this time. Nancy Pelosi has said if they win, gun control takes priority over winning elections. And, as I suspect will be the case it will be because the fight will have changed from the soft fight to the hard fight. Because there are something that they just can not do to us while we can fight back. Whether or not you believe in the electoral system or think it’s all bunkem, I think it it worth it to suit up and show up and participate in the legal option, at least as long as we have it. Besides, you can always join Bear in his new game.

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

Interesting. WSJ contact about bump-fire stocks.

I just received an email purportedly from the Wall Street Journal’s James V. Grimaldi. It appears to be mailing list, not really to me specifically; it isn’t as if the WSJ knows me from Adam.

But the topic is the ATF’s Notice of Proposed Rule-Making on “Bump-Stock Type Devices.” It wants me to take a survey and verify contact information for possible interview.

Being the suspicious type, I did check email headers for routing, and a few other things. It appears to be legit.

The survey specifically quotes a comment I submitted; it seems they’re going through all 193,000 comments and trying to contact folks.

And…

Yep. I just got another email on a different account. Because I also submitted a comment on behalf of The Zelman Partisans.

Anyone else getting these emailed survey requests?

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

Kirby, TX PD: Machinegun deception a matter of intent?

On Sunday, a person doing yard work discovered a pistol in the grass. In itself, that’s hardly news, as criminals do toss weapons after a crime, and this was stolen. But in this case, the “news” is in the police claims about the firearm.

After people find weapon in tall grass, Kirby police advise on what do if you find gun
Lt. James Laymon, of the Kirby Police Department, said the gun could have easily been fired. It was completely unsafe.

“This weapon was found with a round in the chamber and three rounds in the magazine, so it would have discharged if the trigger would have been pulled,” he said. “It was self-cycling, so it would have continued to do so three more times.

So Lt. Laymon is claiming this weapon is an illegal machinegun? Only a machinegun continues to cycle and discharge multiple times from a single operation of the trigger.

Not, “It would have discharged, and could be fired three more times.” It would have fired and continue to fire. Outside of military duty, relatively few people have fired an automatic weapon. Like myself, I think most people, upon hearing that a pistol had a round chambered and more in the magazine, would assume just another semiautomatic pistol. Specifying “continued to do so three more times” definitely sounds like an automatic weapon- a machinegun under the law. Prior to this, I have only seen “fire and continue to fire” descriptions used when the intent was to describe an automatic weapon. If Laymon inadvertently missppeaks so badly, I wonder if he should be speaking to the media in the first place.

Or testifying under oath in trials.

That appears to be a Springfield XD-S. That is not manufactured as an automatic weapon. One trigger operation, one shot. If it continues to discharge multiple times — “three more times” — after a single trigger pull, it is an unlawful machinegun.

I wonder…

  • Did Lt. Laymon simply make a remarkably odd error?
  • Is the lieutenant that ignorant of firearm operation?
  • Or was he deliberately fearmongering?

For that matter, is Lt. Laymon in the habit of involuntarily/negligently firing until magazine is empty, and assumes everyone else’s gun handling/safety is just as bad? Well… the FBI, I suppose. And I once worked with an officer who would pick up her shotgun with her finger on the trigger (prompting me to dive behind a truck, as she had it pointed at me); and to be honest, she did empty a revolver cylinder into a classroom building 180 degrees from the target she was supposed to be shooting. But they took her off duties with access to guns.

I asked. Kirby PD Chief Bois… answered replied.

The weapon in question was a semi-automatic handgun, not a machine gun. It was found with a round in the chamber and three more rounds in the magazine. This particular model of handgun does not have a thumb safety and if a child (or anyone for that matter) had found it and pull the trigger it would have gone off. Because it is semi-automatic it would have cycled another round into the chamber and required the trigger to be pulled again. We apologize for the confusion and hope this clears it up.

Note that he evades the question of why Laymon claimed — at a minimum — strongly implied to an unquestioning Patty Santos — that the pistol would have continued to cycle “three more times” after the trigger was pulled; i.e.- a machinegun under 26 U.S. Code § 5845(b). I clarified that.

Chief Bois,

_I_ am quite well aware that the Springfield XD-S is a semiautomatic firearm. It was _your_ lieutenant who asserted, to an unquestioning reporter, that the pistol would have cycled 4 times if the trigger had been pulled (which would make it a machinegun under 26 U.S. Code § 5845(b)). I am attempting to ascertain _why_ the lieutenant made that claim to the media.

The Chief said, “I believe that is clear the Lieutenant made a mistake in his choice of words during the interview.”

That’s some “mistake.”

And then, there is the matter of unquestioning reporter Patty Santos. Upon hearing a police lieutenant claim that a stolen and abandoned firearm would, when the trigger was pulled, fire and continue to fire until the magazine is empty, she should have demanded answers to more questions.

  • That is a machinegun?
  • How do you know, since it was just found?
  • Is it a registered NFA firearm? (I’ll cut her enough slack to allow that she might not realize the XD series went into production long after passage of FOPA.)
  • Where is the ATF, since they have jurisdiction over NFA items?

That first question would have exposed the simple fact that it was just another semi-auto, assuming honesty and knowledge on Laymon’s part.

Santos failed to do her job as badly as did Laymon.


Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could really use the money, what with truck repairs and recurring bills. And the rabbits need feed. Truck insurance, lest I be forced to sell it. Click here to donate via PayPal.
(More Tip Jar Options)

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail