That silly cars/guns analogy again.

This time from Dr. Colleen Kraft, president of the American Academy of Pediatrics.

What if guns were regulated like cars? To increase child safety, AAP president calls for public health approach
What if, she asked, “guns were regulated like cars?”

Excellent idea. I love it when victim disarmers make that comparison.

Felons and those adjudicated mental deficient could lawfully own guns. No more ex post facto losing your rights because of a decades-old misdemeanor. Fingerprints and criminal background checks would be gone. Minors could buy guns. 16 year-olds could get CCW licenses. You wouldn’t need a license or insurance so long as you didn’t fire your gun in the street. “Tank capacity” magazine limits would be a thing of the past. NFA restrictions eliminated (though, like racing stock cars, they probably would not be allowed on the road).

Other than those non-street-legal machineguns, we could have suppressors on our guns; they’d be mandated, just like car mufflers.

One shooting test, and you’re done with practical testing for life. Probably written testing, too.

My CCW would be good for 8 years, rather than 5, just like my driver license; and a whole lot cheaper. It might be “REAL ID” compliant, which would exclude anyone but citizens and lawful residents.

I’m not thrilled with the registration requirement, but I could move to a state that doesn’t require registration for non-street vehicles. I’m not sure how you’ll get people to register guns, anyway, given the very low compliance rates in states that have tried it (California thinks, after 20 years, that they might be up to 20% for “assault weapon” registration; I think Connecticut is hovering around 13%). But then, I see a lot of unregistered cars in driveways and the road.

And at long last, CCW licenses will be good in every state, just like drivers’ licenses. And they’d be valid ID for commercial flights.

No safe storage laws. Theft victims wouldn’t be blamed.

People would stop trying to sue manufacturers and dealers over things for which they aren’t responsible.

No more bound book perpetual record-keeping for dealers. No more federal licensing of dealers, or ATF harassment.

Go for it, doc. It would be far from perfect, but a vast improvement over the current over-regulation of firearms ownership.


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

[Updated] Rights vs. The Status Quo

There’s a bigger picture in The Honorable Despicable, Constitution-Shredding Police-Statist Robert S. Lasnik‘s injunction against public downloads of DefCad’s firearms files.

That right is currently abridged, but it has not been abrogated. Regulation under the AECA means that the files cannot be uploaded to the internet, but they can be emailed, mailed, securely transmitted, other otherwisee published within the United States.

Abridging rights is peachy, so long as they aren’t completely abrogated?

Seems that nutjob in a black dress neglected to read the First Amendment before ruling in favor of government censorship.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

“Abridging,” Lasnik. You can’t do it. Your direct violation of the First Amendment to the Constitution that you allegedly swore to uphold is precisely why people talk about hanging judges (as opposed to a hanging-judge, if you didn’t follow the link).

Happily, Cody Wilson and DefDist/DefCad aren’t overly intimidated by your stupidity.

However, there is that “bigger picture” I mentioned. Keep reading that order.

The Court finds that the irreparable harms the States are likely to suffer if the existing restrictions are withdrawn and that, overall, the public interest strongly supports maintaining the status quo through the pendency of this litigation.

He has found a government right to maintain the staus quo.

Oddly enough, I recall a state trying to enforce the status quo: separate but equal schools for blacks at gunpoint. It used to be “status quo” that blacks couldn’t use white water fountains, had to sit at the back of the bus, and couldn’t sit at diner counter.

At a guess, Lasnik would be good with that.

Women barred from voting used to be status quo.

Slavery used to be status quo.

The Thirteen Colonies being subjects of the British Crown used to be status quo.

Catholicism being a crime used to be status quo.

Judge Lasnik has invented a right of the government to enslave America in a state of cultural and technological stasis. Ironically: “To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts…”

The Internet enabled individuals to be heard/read/seen by a far greater audience than the printed word status quo of centuries. Right now, that despicable bastard is chipping away at free speech on the Internet about one particular topic.

If Twitter/Facebook/Google were run by rightwing ultraconservatives, rather than far left socialists, I suspect someone would be happy to apply Lasnik’s “abridging” precedent to shutting them down.

DefDist’s files were out in the wild before the State Department shut them down. State eventually admitted that was wrong. But all the files were still out in the world (I have them myself, and have for years). That was the status quo. People have been home-making guns for centuries; that was the status quo.

Lasnik has created an imaginary right to reset the clock back to some earlier state which makes him happy.

Shall he reset America back to muskets and racial bans on gun ownership? A status quo where dictatorial governors suppress dissent with troops?

Added: Lasnik Memes


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

Words

Sometimes words can’t explain. And then sometimes, no words are needed.

A Rifle pile in Kalifornia

 

 

 

 

 

The same day on Twitter.

Shoes

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

And in the one Jewish state,

Israeli CCW

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

“More trained gun license holders, more personal security”. From now, it will not only be hostile or criminal elements who have guns in Israel. Instead, loyal, law-abiding citizens will have them as well. All that is left is for us to internalize that the right to self-defense is a basic human right with which man was created, in the image of G-d. The state can negate the right to carry a gun from those people who endanger the public. But the default mode should be that every citizen has the right to carry a gun, as part of all the human rights that the state should protect. The state does not give us the right to carry guns. We have that already. All that it can do is take that right away.

Word.

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

Cracked Defends Nazi Gun Control

Cracked.com can be outrageous, funny, annoying, and even occasionally informative. This past weekend, they were disgusting genocide-apologists.

Myth: Jews Not Having Guns Led To The Holocaust
Truth: Gun Laws Became More Lenient Leading Up To The Holocaust
All German gun ownership was banned after World War I, but in 1928, Germany passed the Law on Firearms and Ammunition. It loosened gun regulations, but permits were needed, and all new gun purchases had to be registered. However, plenty of Germans, including Jewish citizens, just held onto their guns from World War I, so those went unregistered.
[…]
In 1938, Hitler further deregulated guns with the German Weapons Act, which exempted Nazi Party members from most regulations and lowered the legal age to own a gun from 20 to 18. At this point, they were essentially handing out firearms to whoever looked the least “exotic.”

The 1938 law did strip Jewish citizens of their guns, but that’s an indictment of targeting specific demographics, not gun policy. Even for Jewish citizens who held onto their guns, a couple rifles wouldn’t do much good when an entire army came to their doors. Remember, lax gun laws mean that the people who hate you have easy access to guns too.

The argument of Assarian, et al, is that gun control is fine so long as you’re only targeting despised minorities like Jews for extermination.

And, naturally, they misrepresent the gun laws of Germany of the time. Shall we look at the facts?

Pre-Nazi German conservative leaders passed a victim disarmanent law in 1928. The first fact is that the law was aimed at those upstart socialists and communists who were making trouble in the streets; those socialists specifically including the Nazis.

When the Nazi took power, they used registration lists (from the existing law) to disarm political foes.

On March 18, 1938, the Nazis passed a new law superseding the 1928 law, implementing handgun control. Essentially, only Nazi party members and allies could be lawfully armed. Jews specifically could not own firearms.

On November 10, 1938 — after Kristallnacht — the Nazis went one “better.” Jews were prohibited from possessing any weapon, “even clubs or knives.”

But the people attacking Jews and their property weren’t disarmed, so Cracked is cool with it; it’s not an “indictment” of gun policy in general.

Regardless of your stance on guns, saying that Jews could have stopped the Holocaust if only they’d had more firepower is sleazy victim-blaming…

I don’t claim they could have stopped the Holocaust in its tracks; that, despised Cracked, is a strawman argument. My position is that if more Jews (and gays, Rom, et cetera) hadn’t been forcibly disarmed, they might’ve had a better chance of resisting.

As they did in the Warsaw Ghetto. Armed with a few horded firearms and mostly homemade explosives, the Jews tied up two battalions (and hundreds of other troops) for a month. They lost, but a few escaped.

And I don’t think we should discount the possibility that others lived due to the Ghetto occupants’ sacrifice, because those engaged troops weren’t out rounding up other “undesirables.”

A few hundred Jewish combatants. A few horded and smuggled guns.

And they kept more than two battalions engaged for a month.

We should not discount the possibility that, with more and better arms denied by the Nazis and their allies, the resistance might have been even more effective.

I think I should also address this common leftist/socialist claim:

Truth: Hitler Wasn’t a Socialist; The Nazis Purged Socialists

Yes, they did. And yes, the National Socialists were most definitely socialists.

Leftwingers like to point at the Nazis’ fascism, and pretend, “Fascism is rightwing, therefore they were weren’t socialist because us socialists are leftwing.”

Fascism (/ˈfæʃɪzəm/) is a form of radical authoritarian ultranationalism,characterized by dictatorial power, forcible suppression of opposition and strong regimentation of society and of the economy

The Nazis were definitely fascists.

They were also definitely socialists. Take a look at their National Socialist Program:

“[T]he program championed the right to employment, and called for the institution of profit sharing, confiscation of war profits, prosecution of usurers and profiteers, nationalization of trusts, communalization of department stores, extension of the old-age pension system, creation of a national education program of all classes, prohibition of child labour, and an end to the dominance of investment capital”

Does that sound like something you might hear from self-acknowledged socialist Bernie Sanders, or Democrat Socialist Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez?

The Nazis were nationalist socialists (hence the name); fascist socialists. The socialists (and communists) they suppressed were merely competitors for the top slot, to be in charge. The only significant ideological differences between the Nazis and the supposed socialist was nationalism versus — Soviet-style — internationalism: “Our socialist country is better than other countries, and we’ll be in charge” versus “We want one big world socialist order, and we expect to be in charge.”

Of course the self-aggrandizing Nazis suppressed them. They expected to run their worldwide Reich anyway, eventually. They didn’t want any more competition than they already had on their plate.

I wonder if Cracked’s Steve Assarian, Mike Bedard, E. M. Caris, and Michael Battaglino would declare Antifa to be…

Fascist Nazis, not communists and socialists, because they suppress — competing –socialists. Like this:

Antifa assault liberal Bernie Sanders supporter who dared to carry ‘fascist’ US flag at protest

Yes, you disgusting SOBs at Cracked, Nazi gun control victim disarmament did contribute to the Holocaust. And gun control is still evil, even if it only targets people you don’t like.

And it’s hardly a surprise that socialists — whether National Socialists, or Democrat Socialists — like gun control. Gun control is victim disarmament, and it’s a lot easier to manage confiscation of war profits, prosecution of usurers and profiteers, nationalization of trusts, communalization of department stores when the victim is helpless. Just ask any freelance redistributionist.


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)


Ed. note: This commentary appeared first in TZP’s weekly email alert. If you would like to be among the first to see new commentary (as well as to get notice of new polls and recaps of recent posts), please sign up for our alert list. (See sidebar or, if you’re on a mobile device, scroll down). Be sure to respond when you receive your activation email!

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

Royal Holdings falling on their SWORD


David Codrea wrote a column warning of a potential new privacy-busting product called the SWORD. The ramifications were pretty obvious to me, too. Warrantless searches, outing lawful CCW, crooks locating loot, crooks spotting the armed guy to off first.

Claimed Weapon Detector Raises Privacy, Legal and Safety Concerns

“The company has created a case that goes around either an iPhone 8 Plus or Pixel 2 XL and uses the phone’s audio sound waves as a sort of sonar to detect whether someone is carrying a gun, knife or explosive device.”

Perhaps, perhaps not. But other dangers come to mind. The whole point of carrying concealed is to preserve privacy as part of an overall defensive posture. Anti-gunners could use the device to harass and even SWAT a gun owner. Criminals could use it to identify who they would need to take out by surprise first. Police could use it to bypass Fourth Amendment search and seizure proscriptions. The company claims Homeland Security is intrigued.

Except…

Based on my research, I think I smell “scam.” And that’s the bright side of a tool for tyranny meant to disarm, register, and track free people. I can think of certain governments that would have loved it.

(not the original image; see link)

My background includes — among many other things — electronics, heavy emphasis on RF and even radar (which comes into this in a minute). Right off, I wondered about that “audio sound wave” bit. Human hearing-range sound waves shouldn’t have the resolution to do what the SWORD allegedly does, without some impressive processing. So I dug a little bit more.

Elsewhere, I found a link that claimed it was ultrasonic. This gets into the resolution-range of the possible — we’ve all seen ultrasound baby pictures — but ultrasound works in contact. With a gel to improve transmission/reception. Working at 40 feet?

On to the Royal Holdings website, where I found some specifications and images. There I learned that the SWORD is neither audible acoustic nor ultrasonic, but RF-based, specifically, the US model would work at 3-10 GHz. That makes a lot more sense. It’s a little bitty radar system.

But I was still dubious. That frequency range would give a max resolution of 3 centimeters, just under one and a quarter inches; which makes it hard to resolve the shape of a gun less than an inch wide, seen edge on.

There are ways to do it though, involving scanned antenna arrays and digital signal processing. Fancy stuff, and it would require a lot of cash to develop a single chip to handle it all (and RF transmission and reception combined); it seemed a bit much to expect from a startup to develop and sell for $1,250 ($950 for pre-orders). But technically doable.

But I was still bothered by the claim that it can detect and recognize weapons at 40 feet. Reading their specs bothered me even more.

This is supposed to work up to forty feet. But it says that the device is FCC approved and transmits under -41dBM. That’s 0.00007 mW, 0.00000007 W, and I simply don’t believe that a cellphone-sized antenna array at that power level would yield a readable reflected power at 40 feet.

Royal Holding’s tech specs mentioned the processor chip that is the heart of this gadget. It’s a VYYR2401, which turns out to be a real thing, sold by Israeli company Vayyar. And it’s impressive. (Some folks don’t realize it, but Israel has a pretty decent tech sector, beyond fine arms).

The VYYR2401 really is a transmitter/receiver/array-scanning/digital signal processor all in one chip.

Reading about that, I discovered that Vayyar has a retail divsion called Walabot. This where things get quite interesting.

If you look at the Walabot Maker series of chip-based sensor kits, you’ll find interesting things in their spec sheets. Like images of circuit boards which appear to be the originals of the images in Royal Holding’s SWORD brochure. Even the RF field diagrams.

It very much appears that RH lifted their tech data and images from Walabot. My initial thought was that RH is simply buying Walbot Maker kits, writing their own smartphone app, and reselling it at a huge mark-up. The Creator version runs $149.99 from Walabot, while RH says they’ll sell at $1,250. The Walabot Developer is priced at $599.99. Such a deal. For Royal Holdings.

But then I spoke to someone about the cool stuff the Walabot products can potentially do, and started thinking about raising the money to buy one myself for experimenting (the sensing possibilities are incredible; by the specs, the Walabots are very cool).

And I found the Walabot DIY. This is a $65 dollar… cellphone case that turns your smartphone into an RF-based remote sensor that can detect and image hidden objects. Sound a bit familiar?

If Royal Holdings is actually planning to sell the SWORD, I believe it is a re-packaged Walabot DIY, at a $1,185 markup, or 19 times the real price.

But I have significant reservations about the legitimacy of the operation.

They’re using images from another company’s web site.

Nothing in Vayyar chip specs or Walabot specs indicates that it can operate at 40 feet. Indeed, the Walabot DIY is listed at being able to sense metal objects through walls at four inches. Not forty feet. So we appear to have one outright false claim.

Royal Holdings also claims that the SWORD can detect explosives. What the Vayyar VYYR2401 chip detects is dielectric materials. Vayyar says it can be set up to measure milk fat content; presumably by setting a reflectance value for the dielectric of a known milk fat level, and looking for variation. In theory, one might build a similar reflectance database for known explosives, but you’d have to know how to compensate for any intervening materials: cotton, nylon, dry clothing, damp clothing, metallized clothing (and won’t that wreak havoc on weapons detection). If it works at all, there will be a lot of false positives AND negatives.

Also note that detection/analysis based on reflectance values means knowing received signal strength very precisely: the farther away something is, the lower the return signal. It is impossible for the SWORD to know the distance to a random object, and compute the return signal level. They’d have to add in range detection to compute path loss, to then compute reflectance to guess at a material. That functionality does not appear to be in the VYYR2401, making explosives detection another seemingly false claim.

Then there are issues with the supposed business itself.

Many individuals register web domains anonymously, to protect their privacy. For-profit businesses, that rely upon people knowing who they are, rarely do.

royalholdings.org is registered through an anonymizing proxy. For one year.

What sort of business that plans to be around long enough to deliver a product — still in design — registers its domain for just one year? And .org? For a business?

royalholdings.com is parked, for sale.

What kind of business won’t spring for the .com domain?

The SWORD’s Royal Holdings claims to be located in West Hollywood, California. The only active California incorporation listing I can find for “Royal Holdings” is Royal Holdings, LLC located in Los Angeles. It’s been around for twenty years. This “Royal Holdings” is a new startup according to CNET.

The SWORD Royal Holdings’ principals — per their Team page — are Barry Oberholzer, Jeromy Pittaro, and Chuck Bloomquist.

The principal for Royal Holdings, LLC in LA is David Soufer.

Is the SWORD’s maker marketer appropriating another company’s name?

If this SWORDsmith has investors, they should be asking serious questions, and possibly demanding their money back. As should those 8,000 prospective customers who Oberholzer claims have pre-ordered at $950 a pop.

But David Codrea notes, “I doubt if there really are investors– I’m smelling an ad agency stunt by the antis.”

That’s a real possibility; that the anti-rights gun control crowd is pulling a stunt to rile gun owners. And sites like CNET giving them unquestioning adoration (kudos to 9to5Mac’s Lovejoy for expressing his own doubts)?

“What gets me is tech websites regurgitating their stuff,” Codrea said.

Me, too.


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

Agenda, Not Accuracy

It’s time to play “What does Everytown pretend is a school shooting?” again.

Back in February, I fact-checked Everytown for Gun “Safety”‘s list of school shootings. 29% of their “school shootings” did not meet even their own definition.* Some weren’t shootings.

Have they improved any?

NO.

Having limited time to look up cases (Everytown conveniently — for them — does not provide supporting links for their claims, so it takes research to find the reports), I only checked the latest ten on the list. And I provide links so you can verify my findings.

Half — 50% — of Everytown’s “school shootings” are NOT school shootings even by their expansive definition.

Three — 30% do meet their definition, but happened after hours, involving people not associated with the school; that is deliberately misleading

Two cases — 20% are dubious. One was a guy shot as he fled towards the school; the killer certainly tried to get him before he jumped the fence. The other appears to be another of those not-during-school-hours, no-school-people-involved shootings, but since they apparently got the date wrong, maybe that isn’t what they’re listing; I found no shooting on the date they gave.

Everytown’s “school shooting” list has not improved. It has gotten far worse, far less accurate.

But lies are close enough for a victim-disarming agenda.


* “Everytown tracks every time a firearm discharges a live round inside or into a school building or on or onto a school campus or grounds, as documented by the press.”


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

Amazon vs. the Constitution

And losing.

3-D-printed gun blueprint was uploaded in book form to Amazon as a ‘free speech exercise.’ Amazon removed it.
The free speech exercise didn’t last long. Amazon removed the book Wednesday for “violating our content guidelines,” a spokesman confirmed to The Washington Post. He declined to elaborate on exactly what guidelines the book violated or whether the decision to remove it was related to the temporary restraining order.

Of course, the restraining order was against Cody Wilson and DefDist, not everyone on the planet, which isn’t exactly one WA district judge’s jurisdiction (not that he cares about fine legal points). Which is exactly why CodeIsFreeSpeech.com could and did post the files.

Meanwhile — as of this writing — Amazon is still selling:

Huh. I wonder what “content guideline” applied to The Liberator Code Book that doesn’t apply to those books, mostly listed on Amazon for years.

Maybe it’s the plastic?

Nope (and some of that stuff is more dangerous than the Liberator).


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

Hand ‘em out like candy

Is there perhaps a positive change in the wind for beleaguered Israeli citizens? For several months now they have endured rockets being shot at them from the “two state solution” known as Gaza. Gaza was a fairly prosperous area prior to Israel withdrawing from the area and the citizens of Gaza electing hamass. They’ve endure rockets, bombs, firebombs, rocks, snipers, falcons being murdered by having devices attached to them so they could set more of Israel on fire than they could reach with a fire kite. All because they love the land so much they feel compelled to burn it all. There was recently a demonstration in Tel Aviv by the citizens of communities located near Gaza. They feel the government is doing enough/much/anything (circle the correct answer) to protect them.

The protesters shouted “the government must wake up – the south is burning” and “we are not cannon fodder.” They carried signs reading “the south is burning” and “we are tired of burned fields, we are tired of our children crying.”

They have darn good reason to think this way. In Orwellian double speak worthy of Yasser Arafat’s taqiyya of saying he wanted peace then explaining to the ticked off arabs he was just saying that for political reason we have this

After 250 rockets from Gaza hit Israeli locations, one a heavy Grad, Israel’s security cabinet meeting Thursday, Aug. 9, directed the IDF to continue to pursue “powerful action against terrorist forces.” This was tantamount to a decision against a major Israeli military campaign against Hamas at this time, while instead carrying on with tit-for-tat air strikes as before, and leaving the targeted communities to their despair. Some 19 people were injured in the last two days. Hamas is therefore still allowed to call the shots, exactly as it has done in the last four months, while inflicting in Israel diverse brands of terror.

The daily attacks by other arabs continue with stabbings, pro-tip, quit giving the bodies back. They don’t give Israelis back their slain. Arabs hold a big funeral, and a bunch more of them crawl out from under rocks and come into Israel to try to get money and fame by killing Israelis.

Chum Bucket, 31, approached several police officers near the Temple Mount on Friday afternoon. He tried to stab one of them with a knife before being shot dead by the officers who were at the scene.

If he’s going to attack armed police do you think he will hesitate to attack who he thinks is an unarmed vulnerable Israeli?

And he’s not the only one.

Israel Police on Wednesday said that a terror attack in Jerusalem was foiled last week.

In a statement, Israel Police said that officers operating in Jerusalem’s Old CIty noticed a suspicious individual and detained him. Upon searching the suspect, the officers found a knife and tear gas.

The suspect is a 26-year-old Arab resident of Hevron. He was immediately arrested and taken to the police station, where he was interrogated.

The criminals of course are armed, so gun control is working great there.

Police suspect the target of this morning’s shooting at a vehicle in Tel Aviv’s Kikar Hamedina Square was Ben Cohen, a criminal known to police.

Shots were fired from a scooter passing the vehicle where Cohen sat. No one was hurt and massive police forces were called to the scene.

Things are getting so serious the UN, which does not believe in the human right to self-defense, is thinking about getting involved. United Nations: Peacekeeping could protect Gazans from Israel

Are you kidding me?? Forget about Israel and the IDF you ignorant blow-hards. How about doing something about this? NIS 1 million deducted from PA transfers over torture. Need I mention they are torturing their own people. Or this little detail IDF foils Gazan infiltration attempt. Dead Jews do not concern the UN. Remember that, plan accordingly.

So, for the good news.

Public Safety Minister Gilead Erdan eased gun restrictions since armed civilians on the scene often help the police contain terrorist attacks and reduce casualties – especially in “lone wolf” incidents.”

But wait, what if your government doesn’t think your life is worth what you and your family think you life is worth. What if for example you were Elor Azariya? This case has been well covered on TZP if you have any questions just search using the little search tool on the right.

Well, we don’t have to “what if”. He applied, he was denied and the injustice continues. Apparently a James Comey (Israel version) works in the Police Department. The media knew Elor had been denied before he did. The man applied because his life was in danger, and it was in danger originally because of the liberal left being in full control of the legal process.

Terrorists do not hesitate to attack armed soldiers, police or guards. They most certainly will not hesitate to attack presumably disarmed Israeli citizens.

Palestinian youth on a stabbing rampage murders an Israeli man, injures two

A 17-year old terrorist climbed the security fence into the Adam community north of Jerusalem Thursday night, July 26, and slashed one victim after another.  Yotam Ovadia, an Israeli man of 31, whom he repeatedly stabbed, died soon after from multiple wounds, a second man, aged 58, was badly hurt and a third though injured managed to pull his gun and shoot the killer dead. The terrorist came from the nearby Palestinian village of Kobar. He must have studied the electronic fence in advance, because he was able to climb over without triggering the sensors for an alarm.

And in the end, it was a good guy with a gun that stopped the carnage. The security fence didn’t stop them, guards didn’t stop them, patrols didn’t stop them. A good guy with a gun stopped him.

Don’t be stingy Erdan, hand those gun permits out like candy.

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

Prescience?

While looking up some old writings, on a mostly unrelated subject, I happened across this old column:

Lacking new legislation to authorize this, the FAA simply, and arbitrarily, redefined toys to be aircraft requiring registration. [ding ding]
[…]
President Barrycade has stated his intent to issue executive orders to implement gun control, since he lacks legislation to do so.
[…]
Since Obama and other blood-dancers have stated publicly that they wish to crack down on private sales, it seems safe to assume this will be in one EO or another. But what if he emulates the FAA a little more closely?

Imagine “redefining” all firearms as NFA items. Just like toys became airplanes. Or how atmospheric plant food became a pollutant.

That was December 21,2015; one of my first columns for The Zelman Partisans. Fast forward to…

  • October 5, 2017

    Basically this Constitution-shredding Senator wants to redefine “machine gun” by how fast you can make something fire, rather than being designed to fire automatically as long as the trigger is depressed.

  • February 26, 2018

    “Machinegun” is defined in statutory law. Short form: a firearm that fires more than one round per trigger operation. If that can be changed by executive order, instead of congressional legislation, then everything is a machinegun waiting for the pen-stroke.

  • March 10, 2018

    Department of Justice Submits Notice of Proposed Regulation Banning Bump Stocks

  • April 2, 2018

    In short, this NPRM, and the intent of the gun controllers, is a camouflaged ban on semiautomatic firearms. Doubt it? Read the NPRM language, and ask yourself how “President Hillary Clinton” would read and apply the rule.

  • April 27, 2018

    Gun Owners of America finally notices the semiauto problem with bump-fire bans, and the crowd — finally — goes wild.*

  • Las Vegas Bump Stock FOIA Claims ATF Not Allowed to Examine Weapons
    “ATF did not disclose that they had not examined the firearms prior to promulgating the rule,” firearms designer and Historic Arms, LLC President Len Savage notes. “And now that the comment period is closed should they go forward with this rule under the Administrative Procedure Act that information can not be used in a court challenge because it was not submitted prior to closing of comments.

They are doing exactly what I warned of almost three years ago. My only error was in expecting it from Obama rather than dubiously “pro-2A” Trump.

You’re welcome.


* I’d like to think that had something to do with the multiple emails — and my columns — on the semi-auto problem, which I sent to GOA before they finally spoke up.


Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could use the money, what with truck repairs and recurring bills. Even a Tracfone card would help. Click here to donate via PayPal.
(More Tip Jar Options)

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

[UPDATED] Rotters – Their THIRD iteration

See update below. Data changed again.


I mean Reuters. Making stuff up as they go. They published a chart: Violence in Europe: Average annual number of deaths from lethal gun victimisation per 100,000 in select European countries, 2010-2016.

If you click that link, I have no idea what data you’ll get. On Tuesday, it purported to show Cyprus, just as an example since it was the top of the chart… then, with an overall firearms death rate of 63.9 per 100,000, and 82.4/100K among males 15-29. I’m not familiar with Cyprus numbers, so maybe that is was correct.

I am a little more familiar with UK numbers. Reuters showed them at overall 2.6/100K, and 6.9/100K among 15-29 year-old males.

That bastion of accuracy, Wikipedia shows Cyprus at 1.87/100K overall, and the UK at 0.23/100K. But at least Wikipedia links to their sources. Reuters simply says “Source: World Health Organization.” Maybe, but I can’t find it.

For the record, Wikipedia shows the US at 11.96/100K, which happens to be exactly what CDC says for 2016. So there’s a cross-check on Wikipedia data, something lacking in the Reuters data. According to Reuters (Tuesday), there were at least twelve European countries with firearms death rates exceeding that of the US: Switzerland, Denmark, Italy, Ireland, Netherlands, Moldavia, Estonia, Norway, Macedonia, Serbia, Sweden, and Cyprus.

That’s not exactly what you usually hear: that the US has a higher rate than any other developed nation (or whatever term they toss out du jour).

Since I could find the WHO data, I wrote to Reuters.

Regarding the chart:

Violence in Europe
Average annual number of deaths from lethal gun victimisation per 100,000 in select European countries, 2010-2016.
http://fingfx.thomsonreuters.com/gfx/editorcharts/VIOLENCE/0H0012Y7C163/index.html
Source: World Health Organisation
Gustavo Cabrera

I have been unable to locate the data on the WHO web site. Would it be possible to give me a link to the source data used by Gustavo Cabrera?

Thank you.

As expected, no response other than an automated ” being reviewed by our support staff” email.

But on Wednesday, the chart had changed.

Now, no country has an overall rate exceeding 0.5/100K; safely below that of the US. Maybe. But look closely, because on Tuesday, overall population was indicated by the black outline, and males 15-29 were pale blue. On Wednesday, the labelling is reversed. Either Wednesday labels are a mistake, or — unlike the US — males 15-29 are some of the safest people in Europe.

Take a look at the scale(s)…

On Tuesday:

0 to 100, to accommodate the sky-high Cyprus.

On Wednesday:

0.0 to that 0.5.

So suddenly everyone in Europe has a lower firearms death rate than the US… including nations that were experiencing civil wars in the indicated time frame. And the data of neither day bears any resemblance to that found elsewhere on the Internet. If Reuters is to be believed, the UK doesn’t have any firearms deaths. Which seems a little hard to believe.

UPDATE, Thursday, 8/16/2018: They’re on the third interation of that chart now.
But at least they now have a correction notice.

Correction: a previous version of this graphic contained a number of mathematical errors resulting in incorrect data and wide inaccuracies . This data has been changed to reflect the corrected numbers. For example, from 2010-2016 in Sweden there was an average of 1.2 gun-related deaths per 100,000 men aged 15-29, not 80.4 as was previously charted.

At least some of the numbers now bear a passing resemblance to data I found from other sources. Reuters provided me with a spreadsheet of their data, which was used to create this third version of the chart.

Note that numbers have changed, as have rankings, and even country labels.

The scale has changed again, too.

Reuters also gave me a link to the WHO database they used. Checking that will take a lot longer.

I think it’s pitiful — but typical — that Reuters only corrected this — and admitted to the correction — after being called out on it three times (yes, I sent them three messages regarding the inaccuracies). Once upon a time, Reuters was my go-to news service, but I ended that probably 20 years ago over just such errors and practices (not to mention an anti-RKBA slant you could ski down).


Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could use the money, what with truck repairs and recurring bills. Click here to donate via PayPal.
(More Tip Jar Options)

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail