In October 2019, a very interesting paper was published regarding mass public shootings in the United States.
DECONSTRUCTING MASS PUBLIC SHOOTINGS
When it comes to mass shootings, the United States is tragically in a class of its own. There are more mass public shootings in the US than in any other country in the world. By some estimates the United States has experienced 318 mass public shootings between 1966 and 2017.
It appears to be a scholarly attempt to rationalize more gunpeople control. Without a whole lot of interest, I idly skimmed over it, thinking maybe I’d do a full-scale fisking.
Then this virtually leapt off the page and grabbed me by the eyeballs.
Handguns are the weapon of choice in mass public shootings. At least one handgun was used in 75 percent of mass public shootings. Handguns are followed by semiautomatic rifles (24%), shotguns (21%) and automatic or “assault” rifles (10%). In addition to firearms, 15 percent of perpetrators obtained non-firearm weapons such as Improvised Explosive Devises (IEDs), knives, and blunt objects, among others.
This isn’t the commonly seen “assault weapon” misnomer. Authors Joel A. Capellan and Allan Y. Jiao differentiate between semiautomatic and automatic weapons. They claim to have found that 10% of 318 mass public shootings were committed with automatic weapons: 31 to 32 shootings depending on how they rounded off the decimal place.
I found that number astonishing. At that time, I had documented fewer than five criminals uses of machineguns as defined in 26 U.S. Code § 5845(b) since passage of the National Firearms Act of 1934. And none of those uses were mass public shootings as defined by Capellan and Jiao (“the killing of four or more individuals in one or more closely related locations within a 24-hour period”).
Currently, I have confirmed six criminal uses, three unconfirmed possibles, and I found numerous undocumented anecdotal references to 1980s Miami shootings. And still none were mass shootings.
In hopes of updating my machinegun information, I asked the authors for their source data for the “automatic or “assault” rifle” shootings. After two and a half weeks of reaching out to the Rockefeller Institute of Government, Rowan University, and the authors, lead author Capellan finally responded and promised to have the data sent to me.
That was five weeks ago. The data was never sent, and Capellan does not answer emails. Thus, I do not know what the alleged incidents were; when, where, who, nor the actual type of weapon.
I can, however, speculate; and I shall.
My first thought was that they encountered news accounts of weapons reported as “MAC-10,” “AR-15,” or “AK-47” and mistook them for automatic weapons. If such were the case, a review of their data would have revealed it, and I could quietly inform the authors so that they could quite professionally retract and revise their paper.
But the time-frame — 1966-2017 — they use is interesting, as is the number of shootings found.
I suspect Capellan and Jiao used Lankford’s list, and updated for US shootings up to 2017. I see that as a possibility because Lankford’s 292 mass shootings over a 46 year period is an average of 6.35 shootings per year. Adding in the extra five years, at the same rate, of Capellan’s and Jiao’s study period would be 323.7 shootings; that is a bare few more than the number they have: 318.
If they did so, that’s a rather large problem. Lankford’s debunked list of 292 shootings was worldwide, not just the US. Only 91 of Lankford’s shootings were in the US.
They do cite Lankford for their numbers; but if they only used his 91 US shootings, then they also found 227 mass shootings in the next five years; an average of 45.4 per year. Time Magazine found a small fraction of that for the 2013-2017 period: 33 total; and average of 6.6 per year (note the similarity to Lankford’s 6.35 average). That includes shootings which would be excluded by the Capellan/Jiao definition, which yields a total of 21, averaging 4.2 per year.
Without being able to see the Capellan/Jiao data, it very much seems as though they mistakenly used Lankford’s complete worldwide shooting list.
If this is the case, it could also explain how they might have found actual machinegun shootings; Lankford’s data includes shootings committed by foreign military personnel, an example being the Rwandan soldier who went on a rampage, killing 14 people and wounding another 19. But you might expect the authors to notice that was in Rwanda and not the United States.
Perhaps someday Capellan will provide the promised data and I will know for sure. Perhaps it prove accurate, and my knowledge (and list) will be expanded.
While this is not a complete deconstruction of the paper, I think one more thing about the mass shooting weapons is notable.
Handguns are the weapon of choice in mass public shootings. At least one handgun was used in 75 percent of mass public shootings. Handguns are followed by semiautomatic rifles (24%), shotguns (21%) and automatic or “assault” rifles (10%)
Handguns, semiautomatic rifles, shotguns, and assault rifles. But what of other rifles, such as the bolt-action Remington 700 ADL used by the 1966 University of Texas tower shooter? Or the 1974 Olean High School shooting? The 2006 West Nickel Mines School shooting with a Ruger M77 bolt-action? And the Skagit County shooting spree; Winchester lever-action rifle?
Capellan/Jiao took the time to note the use of non-firearm weapons, but omitted bolt and lever guns?
In truth, while I was primarily hoping to see the machinegun list, I really think all of their data needs to be vetted.
[Permission to republish this article is granted so long as it is not edited, and the author and The Zelman Partisans are credited.]
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 ISP bills. And the rabbits need feed. Click here to donate via PayPal.
(More Tip Jar Options)
I hear it quite often, “I’m not antisemitic, I’m anti-Zionist, I’m anti-Israel. Well, let’s just call that what it is, shall we? Horse-schiff. It is antisemitic.
There is one tiny Jewish nation, there are around 50 muslim countries not counting Germanistan, Francistan and Englandistan. No one seems to have a problem with this. Certainly the UN doesn’t. They should. When the UN replaced the League of Nations it agreed to take on all the League of Nations mandates and agreements. See, they were liars even back then. From Barry Shaw’s The View from Israel
The Europeans take no account of the fact that, prior to 1948, the so-called West Bank was Israel in territory that included Judea & Samaria, the Jordan Valley and the Dead Sea down to Eilat.
They take no account that this was prescribed by the League of Nations (the forerunners of the United Nations) in 1922 in which they affirmed the 1920 decision of the Supreme Court of the League of Nations that “recognized the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine and the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country.”
We need to question the European drift from the requirement to “secure the cooperation of all Jews who are willing to assist in the establishment of the Jewish national home” to a policy that is blatantly anti-Semitic.
….
As for “Illegal occupation,” it is not illegal for a nation to defend itself. Nor is it illegal for such a nation to hold onto territory seized in a defensive war against a congenital aggressor as Israel was against Jordan, both in 1948 and in 1967, when it twice invaded Israel in order to annihilate the Jewish state and to banish its Jewish population.
Evidence of this is seen in Jordan’s brutal occupation of Jerusalem in which they destroyed all the ancient synagogues and physically expelled all the remaining Jews, those they hadn’t killed, from the Old City of Jerusalem. That was when Jordan occupied Judea & Samaria and the Jordan Valley, which became known as The West Bank (of Jordan) between 1948 and 1967.
Nobody cried about “illegally occupying Palestinian land” during that period. The Europeans had nothing to say about calling on the Jordanians to withdraw from occupied Israeli land. They were silent when Jordan joined with other Arab armies to “drive the Jews into the sea,” from their vantage positions on the high ground overlooking the narrow coastal plain of what was left of Israel since their initial conquest of Israeli territory.
The Europeans silently expected the annihilation of the Jewish State. They did nothing. They watched and waited. Many were disappointed by the miraculous victory of a determined people’s army against the British trained and equipped Jordanian army who were driven back across the Jordan River as Israeli soldiers liberated Jerusalem and drove the Syrians off the Golan Heights.
They did nothing, they watched and they waited. Yep, just like the Holocaust. Why does this matter? In case you’re unaware, in December the Temple Mount, Beit HaMikdash is set to be renamed by the UN. In a final betray by barak hussein obama (may his name be erased) in UN resolution 2334 barry tried to erase Jews living in Judea and Samaria, they were an obstacle to peace. The peace of the UN and barak hussein obama will only be achieved when the Jews living in Israel, all of Israel are dead and gone. There is a good interview with Barry on the Tamar Yonah Show.
The UN gave its preliminary approval to a resolution that referred to the Temple Mount solely by its Muslim name of Haram al-Sharif.
The resolution passed at the UN’s Fourth Committee in New York 154-8, with 14 abstentions and 17 absences. It was one of eight pro-Palestinian resolutions approved on Friday, out of a slate of more than 15 such texts the committee is expected to approve. The UN General Assembly will take a final vote on the texts in December.
According to Barry Shaw this is not so much muslim countries pushing this, it’s western democracies. Not antisemitic? Horse-schiff, it is. While the Jordanian Wafkos control the Temple Mount, located in Israel, they limit access Jews and Christians have to go to pray there. In fact, Jews and Christians aren’t allowed to pray there. Only muslims, at their mollusk. Once a mollusk is planted, to muslims that area is now under muslim control. Thanks so much Moshe Dayan.
That makes Israel’s decision to allow muslims to re-open the Sidna Omar mollusk in the Jewish quarter baffling and heinous. The Sidna Omar mollusk is located along the main road to the Kotel (The Western wall which is not the holiest site in Judaism). But I’m sure unlike the muslims that control the Temple Mount, these muslims will not interfere with Jews and Christians on their way there. Horse-schiff.
Some Jews just don’t seem to realize that the alligator may eat them last, but it will eat them.
I don’t know if it’s an effort to prove they are “fair” towards the arabs or they are “woke”, but either way lunacy seems to weigh heavily on some of their statements and actions. Some may just be indoctrination. It is moral equivalence. Some I think is influenced by rejection of G-d, Torah and lust for power.
Bernie Sanders who campaigns with known anti-semite Linda Sarsour by this side? He is more communist that Jew I think. Communism is his religion.
Sanders curried favor by suggesting that Israel did not respect human rights, snapping, “I would use the leverage of $3.8 billion. It is a lot of money, and we cannot give it carte blanche to the Israeli government, or for that matter to any government at all. We have a right to demand respect for human rights and democracy.” He threatened, “My solution is, to Israel, if you want military aid you’re going to have to fundamentally change your relationship to the people of Gaza. I would say that some of the $3.8 billion should go right now to humanitarian aid in Gaza.”
Horse-schiff, he knows how that money will be used.
Now the students at Oberlin may just be indoctrinated, stupid or just being “woke”. But either way this is antisemitic horse-schiff.
Oberlin ignorance
I can tell them a bit of the bio of the people killed in the attack.
Notable Jewish groups such as J street, Jewish Voices for Peace (who aren’t) and If Not Now routinely attack President Trump, arguably the most pro-Jewish, pro-Israel President ever as being an antisemite. This too is horse-schiff. I also didn’t mention what those groups are notable for.
Any attacks against Jews are blamed on the President by the press, and they yammer on and on about it, despite the fact it’s not true. It’s #FakeNews horse-schiff.
Why do I say that? Because in the attack in Jersey City the media has portrayed it as shootout that started and just “happened to wind up at the Kosher Deli”. Horse-schiff.
Authorities are still investigating and have not indicated a motive for the attack. Before the mayor’s tweets today, investigators had said the store was chosen at random and was not indicative of a hate crime.
“Why did they say that when it is clearly untrue?” a community activity asked, speaking on condition of anonymity. “And why were there rumors of a drug bust gone bad and a homicide investigation when that was clearly not the case?”
But Mayor Steve Fulop said surveillance video of the attackers made it clear they targeted the kosher market, and he pronounced the bloodshed a hate crime against Jews, as did New York’s mayor and governor.
So, it’s not so much about dead Jews because the media is glossing over the deli was the target. And it can’t be about President Trump and his white supremacists because as it turns out the killers were black and part of a group called Black Hebrew Israelites.
Also, investigators believe the two dead attackers — who were thought to be a couple — identified themselves in the past as Black Hebrew Israelites, a movement whose members have been known to rail against whites and Jews, according to a law enforcement official who was briefed on the matter but was not authorized to discuss the case publicly and spoke on condition of anonymity.
A pipe bomb seems to have been found in the rented van driven by the Buckets O’Chum.
Grewal said that within seconds of pulling up to the market, Anderson got out with a rifle and immediately began shooting, and Graham followed him into the store. He would not say whether Graham had a weapon.
A pipe bomb was found in the van, FBI agent Gregory Ehrie said.
Jersey City’s mayor said it was clear that the killers deliberately made their way toward the kosher market, passing many other possible targets along the way, and calmly and promptly opened fire.
I’m adding this video posted by Dov Hikind in because it is just so beyond belief. I heard about it from Ben Shapiro, and he said no media outlets are covering it. You need to see it. You really do.
“If they got shot dead, that was great”.
SHOCKING VIDEO: As Jewish bodies were still laying in cold blood after being murdered by terrorists in Jersey City, a rep of @AmericansAA captured spontaneous antisemitic tirades blaming Jews for their own murder & ppl cheering it on!
Liberal media’s bouffant coxcomb chattering class bemoans the fact most women elected to Congress are Democrats thereby suggesting Republicans are the party of sexist misogynists as claimed by bitter harridan Hillary Clinton. It is true most women in Congress are Democrats1 but what the princes of pompous pontification ignore is Republican women often lose to Democrat males in general elections. It’s not Republicans voting against them. Genitalia plays no part in my voting. I’d climb over a pile of limp celery stick Republican males like Kit Bond, John McCain, Jeff Flake, John Kasich, Mitt Romney, and Pot-Peddler John Boehner any day to vote for a Phyllis Schlafly.2 Female Republican candidates are likely to be conservative, a serious enough offense, but worse, some commit the unpardonable sin according to Leftist Holy Writ; they are Christians. Against this horrific threat, the Democrat Party Machine swings into action deploying its myrmidons; Hollywood’s Big Donors, spokesboob actors and actresses, radical environmentalists (Crypto-Marxists), feminists (Crypto-Marxists), radicalized college youth (Crypto-Marxists), liberal media, and union and race voters. Blacks and Hispanics in large urban areas typically vote against one of their own if she is a Republican. And who are the misogynists?
Liberals have accused conservative males debating liberal females of “picking on thegirl” if they “come on too strong”. Just ask Rick Lazio who lost to Hillary Clinton in their New York Senate race (2000).3 Conservative males now face an additional quandary. Do they “go easy” on liberal males in political debates? After all, with liberals, you never know when ‘he’ might come out a ‘she’. Lest anyone consider this an attack against Democrats on behalf of Republicans, read on.
Conservative radio talk show host Joe Pags recently interviewed Texas Republican Lieutenant Governor, Dan Patrick (23 September, 2019) about the latter’s support for universal background checks. Patrick proclaimed fidelity to the Second Amendment with a ‘but’…an affirmation followed by an equivocation is a negation…as was the case. Sure enough, Patrick argued in favor of total, 100%, universal background checks (UBC’s). His rationale was, since 90% of guns purchased already involve a background check, what’s the harm in extending it to the remaining 10%? In support of his proposal, Patrick claimed the people now avoiding background checks, presumably his 10%, do so because they cannot legally buy firearms. He said UBC’s would end this practice.4
Next Patrick asserted “gun-merchants” are getting rich selling firearms to persons who cannot legally buy them charging $4000 dollars for a $2000 dollar gun. Because of their ineligible status, “customers” have no choice but to pay huge markups. Patrick said UBC’s would shut these gun merchants down. In addition, he declared UBC’s would also stop and end public mass shootings because they would prevent the mentally ill from buying guns. Patrick believes suspects in recent mass shootings were legally able to buy guns even though health officials had adjudicated them to be mentally unfit. When Joe Pags (Pagliarulo) observed Second Amendment “hard-liners” might object to Patrick’s proposal, the Lieutenant Governor said the Second Amendment guarantees people the right to “bear” not “sell” their guns.5 Wow. Where to start? Trying to follow Patrick’s “logic” is like untangling twine after an explosion in a string factory.
If an unknown number of people are not subject to background checks, how does Patrick know what percentage are, let alone 90%? What is 90% of an unknown number? Is this the “new math?” He didn’t say. Private transfers between family members, friends, and acquaintances are not subject to background checks and hence not recorded. Again, how can Patrick quantify an unknown quantity? This is an important question because he grounds support for UBC’s on the claim since so many people are already subject to background checks, no one would notice if extended to the rest. Sort of like being covered with poison ivy and getting one more bump. Even if Patrick’s numbers are correct, when has the “everyone else is doing it” ever been a compelling argument? Would it be valid to argue, because government has suppressed 90% of American’s First Amendment rights, what is the harm in surrendering the rest? At the risk of being crass, would a rescuer tell the victim of a shark attack; “Well, he got most of your leg so, you might as well let him have the rest”? Imagine its pre-W.W. II Berlin. Jacob hears a harsh banging on his door. He opens it to find goons standing there dressed in black uniforms trimmed in ominous silver runes.
“Your guns, give them to us now!” barks one of the goons.
“But why, gun ownership is legal” responds Jacob.
“Ninety percent of the other Jews have handed theirs over. What could be the harm if you do too?” says the goon.
If the people surrender any portion of a right to the government, will government ever cede it back? Would not any rationale for the government to seize a portion of a right also be equally compelling with respect to it taking the rest? Ten percent of a bad idea is still a bad idea let alone ninety percent.
I wish Pags had asked Patrick how UBC’s would force ineligible persons to submit to background checks. If a person is ineligible, they are ineligible. Most criminals obtain firearms through the black and secondary markets. This includes theft and straw purchases wherein eligible individuals buy firearms on behalf of those who are not. Who are Patrick’s “gun-merchants”? If he knows, why doesn’t he alert the Texas Department of Public Safety? Those willing to break the law selling contraband, be it untaxed cigarettes, bootleg music CDs, drugs, guns, and so forth, have and always will regardless of prohibitions and legal sanctions. Experience, history, and the facts contradict Patrick’s arguments. How could the number two man in the Texas Republican Party make such an ill-conceived and dangerous argument?
Contrary to what Patrick believes, the law already prohibits individuals from buying or possessing firearms if the Courts and or mental health officials have determined them to be mentally “defective”. In addition, the law requires officials to report such adjudications to the FBI’s National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS). Anyone purchasing a firearm through an FFL is required to fill out form 4473. This an affidavit swearing they do not fit in any prohibited class listed on the form (felons, domestic abusers, illegal aliens, drug users, mentally unfit, etc.). Lying on this form is a felony. The FFL then calls the FBI’s NICS who determine if the customer is eligible to purchase the firearm. How does Texas’ Lieutenant Governor not know this? If individuals, barred by law from buying firearms, resort to the black market already operating outside the law, how would they be stopped by universal background checks?
I like Joe Pags but have to ask; what is a Second Amendment “hardliner?” Are they people who believe in an individual right to keep and bear arms, that the Second Amendment means what it says, and that one cannot compromise rights endowed by G-d? ? I’m a homicide hardliner. I reject exceptions to laws prohibiting anyone from illegally taking my life. Am I extreme? Liberals use “hardliner” to cast opponents as unreasonable in order to soften up the rest of gun owners to accept compromises. With all gun laws, each compromise leads to a diminution of rights.
According to Patrick, although the Second Amendment guarantees a right to keep and bear arms, those arms are not your private property. If one does not have the right to sell his or her property, then someone else does. Who is that? Government? If the latter, your arms must belong to them. The Declaration states people have a right to life and it is a gift from G-D, not one created by man or his laws. Inherent in this right is also a right to the means to protect it. The Fourth and Fifth Amendments recognizes the individual’s absolute right to own private property and dispose of it as they see fit. Firearms are private property. Crypto-Confiscationists argue, however, because firearms possess an intrinsic potential for lethality, exceptions to Second Amendment and property rights are valid. Baseball bats, knives, ice picks, meat cleavers, hammers, hatchets, axes, arrows, staves, and so forth also possess intrinsic lethal potential. This is no facetious comparison. The FBI reports that murderers kill more people with knives, hammers, clubs, and feet each year than rifles. In 2018, 297 people were killed with rifles, 1,515 were killed by murderers using a knife, 443 were murdered by killers using hammers, clubs, and blunt objects, and 672 were killed with “fists, feet and other ‘personal weapons”.6 The law can impose harsh consequences for irresponsible behavior but government cannot abridge an individual’s 4th, 5th, and 14th Amendment rights based on potential lethality of property owned. More importantly, American government, constituted as “federal”, cannot pass “national” laws.7
James Madison, the “Father of the Constitution,” writing in Federalist #39 noted a national government has authority over the “individual citizens” along with “an indefinite supremacy over all persons and things.” Under this system, “supremacy is completely vested in the national legislature” that has total control over city, county, and state governments as well as all commercial and other activities within the states. However, the United States has a “federal” not a “national” government. Its jurisdiction extends only to powers delegated to it, and enumerated, by the states.8 In Federalist #45, Madison wrote; “The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects such as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce; with which the last, the power of taxation, will, for the most part, be connected. The powers reserved to the several states will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concerns the lives, liberties, and properties of the people”9 [emphasis mine]. Oops, the “federal” government has no Constitutional authority to establish any form of “national” background check law in the first place! It is sad those calling themselves Republicans and conservatives know so little about the Constitution.10
Lieutenant Governor Patrick predicates his failure-doomed proposal on two false notions near and dear to liberals; 1) the mere existence of firearms “causes” violent crime and 2) Individuals engaging in “hate” or “hate-speech” are dangerous to others, mentally ill, and the ones who commit public mass shootings. In the first case, the solution is simple; eliminate firearms thus ending violent crime, so they say. In the second, “red-flag” and stop mentally unstable persons from possessing arms or have police seize those they possess.
First, there is no correlation between the degree of access to firearms and the degree of evil in a person’s heart. Intent to inflict pain, great bodily injury, and murder germinate from within the individual not from proximity to implements of harm. In addition, access to firearms, including by teenagers under 18, was relatively unregulated before the 1960s. People could purchase firearms through the mail. “Federal” (sic) background checks did not exist, yet public mass shootings, were rare. Each decade of the twentieth century, until the 1970s, “had fewer than 10 mass public shootings with one in the 1950s. The rise began in the 1960s with six, followed by 13 in the 1970s. This upsurge spiked in the 1980s with 32 public mass shootings jumping to an unimaginable 42 in the 1990s even though access to firearms was increasingly regulated and controlled by the government following the Gun Control Act of 1968.10 What changed?
It began in 1947 with Everson versus Board of Education (330, 1, 18, 1947) in which the Supreme Court illegally amended the Constitution inventing the doctrine of “separation of church and state”. Through the Court’s tortured interpretation, it granted Liberal Humanism the means to drive G-d, its greatest foe, from the public square.
In the 1960s, moral relativism, the notion that all values are “relative”, that there is no good and evil or right and wrong, or moral absolutes became the dominant philosophy in America. Books like, I’m Okay, You’re Okay and The Pathology of Normalcy became wildly popular along with the philosophy of “do your own thing”. Simon and Garfunkel’s prophets wrote, “G-d is Dead” on subway walls. The humanist left, the equivalent of cultural acid, declared concepts of right and wrong to be judgements and those holding to them to be judgmental. If notions of morality are relative, “who are you to impose your values on me” became the battle cry of those destroying Judeo-Christian based Western Society. In order to force cultural and moral relativism on everyone, liberal humanists worked through “modern” left teachers and the Courts to drive G-d and Judeo-Christian based values from schools. For decades, Public Dis-Education has taught notions of morality and even truth are merely social constructs. How then could the consequences surprise anyone? Religion’s decline in the role of people’s lives, disintegration of the family, loss of respect for law and order and spike in violent crime, massive drug use, wild promiscuity, murdering unborn babies, normalizing sexual perversion, school and public mass shootings, and a rise in suicides. And all this would be solved by more background checks?
Patrick’s claim that all public mass killers were/are known to have been mentally unstable and dangerous is problematic. Most recent mass killers, with exceptions, did not exhibit a “specific profile” that would have identified them as potential murderers. An FBI Study (2013) revealed only 25% of mass murderers had previously been diagnosed with a serious mental illness. However, many of the others had displayed behavior considered hostile and anti-social.11 Laws designed to prevent violent crime before it happens by nature must be anticipatory. They rely on “red-flags” triggering a response from the courts and police. Who and on what basis determines what constitutes a red flag resulting in the police seizing a person’s arms? Therein lies the rub. Short of actions requiring incarceration in the Puzzle Factory, what constitutes behavior triggering these responses? According to the “Left”, hate speech should be a “Red-Flag” because it is de facto “proof” of mental instability and potential for violence. But what is hate speech? The Left defines it as anyone holding to Biblical morality, opposition to the invasion of the US by illegal aliens, belief in limited government, and a demand government follow the original intent of the Constitution. In short, opposition to any part of the left’s agenda.
Criminals and the mentally unstable are already prohibited from buying and possessing firearms. Universal background checks will do nothing to stop the ineligible from obtaining them. Nor will they stop criminals from buying guns on the black market. UBCs serve two purposes. First, a misguided attempt to buy off Confiscationists through compromise. Second, when UBC’s fail in their intended goal, Liberals will argue it’s because gun laws didn’t go far enough and what is needed is total gun registration. This too will fail and again the Left will say it’s because “We didn’t go far enough”. Guess what they’ll call for next. Support no sell-outs regardless of political party.
22 Phyllis Schlafly was a giant in the conservative movement. She led the battle against “me-too” males in the Republican Party, fought the radical feminist and homosexual movement, and worked to expose leftwing bias in schools. The Left, in conjunction were their useful idiots in the liberal media, pop-culture, and public diss-education,have done all in their power to flush her down Orwell’s Memory Hole.
77 Teaching Government for years, I never encountered a student who knew the difference between a federal and national government or why it even mattered. Using primary sources, I addressed this ignorance for which I was summarily punished by Administration and colleagues in the SocialIST Studies Department.
88 Clinton Rossiter, Editor, The Federalist Papers (New York, N.Y., A Mentor Book from the New American Library, 1961), 244-245.
1010 I explained the difference and significance between a “national” and “federal” government to self-avowed conservatives for years. All listened, few cared. To one in particular stocking up on supplies because Constitutional abandonment will lead to collapse, I supplied primary source and scholarly articles. He refused to read them and called me, and those like me, “deranged a**holes.”
I’ve collected a list of confirmed criminal uses of NFA machineguns used in crimes since the passage of the National Firearms Act of 1934. These are confirmed:
1/11/2018, carjacking with machinegun: DOJ: “[Chumbucket], 20, was sentenced to 30 years in federal prison after he was previously convicted of carjacking, using, carrying, and brandishing a machinegun during and in relation to a crime of violence, unlawful possession of a machinegun, and possession of an unregistered machinegun.”It appears to have been an illegally modified AR-15, from news reports.
Unconfirmed Reports:
10/20/2019, AK-47: The Philadelphia Police Police Department has been telling the media that an “automatic rifle” (or “assault rifle” or “AK-47”) was used on 10/20/2019 to kill a little girl. PPD refuses to confirm how they determined it was a machinegun, and the ATF does not appear to be involved in the case. I have hit the PPD with a formal FOIA request for confirmation on 11/25/2019.
9/14/1992, .380-caliber machine gun: This pops up in searches as a machinegun use, but the report of his conviction makes no mention of federal firearm charges. Other sources dispute the machinegun claim.
1966-2017, 10% of 318 mass public shootings involved automatic or “assault” rifles: The researchers make the claim but do not share their source data. The lead author has promised to send me the “machinegun” list, but has not done so. I find the claim to be extremely dubious. I suspect he has used the wrong data from an equally dubious earlier Lankford paper.
If readers have other confirmed criminal uses of real machineguns, please share in comments, with sources please.
[Permission to republish this article is granted so long as it is not edited, and the author and The Zelman Partisans are credited.]
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 ISP bills. And the rabbits need feed. Click here to donate via PayPal.
(More Tip Jar Options)
Yours, theirs, doesn’t matter. Progressives are all in for the ideology of control. Be it whether or not you can have a 32 ounce soda pop or an AR-15. And yes, Mikey Bloomberg financier of the astro-turf Everytown for gun safety, is gearing up to run for President. It’s about control because without control they don’t have the power they are striving for.
Soda Bans
They are trying so desperately to peddle the bill of goods known as “It’s for the children”. But it really isn’t you see.
All those “Red Flag” or Preemptive prove your innocence or extreme risk orders of protection? No matter what you choose to call it by, it stinks. It is gun confiscation without due process from someone who has done nothing. In most cases they are engaging in mind reading. Or in some cases, just vindictive behavior.
In the case of the Bucket O’Chum school terrorist at Marjory Stoneman Douglas, he had given a wealth of signs, but due to a policy put in place during obama’s term there had been no consequences for his previous criminal behavior. The same with Trayvon Martin. Recently there was a juvenile in Baker County in Fl. who had made threats against his classmates and teachers. He had a plan all written out. He showed it to another student who told authorities. He was taken into custody by authorities before he could carry out any of his heinous plan. But I found this interesting.
“MAKE SURE THE TEACHERS ARE DEAD,” he ranted in a notebook. “Then rinse repeat.”….
The boy’s plan described killing teachers and fellow students in chilling detail. To maximize the carnage, he’d deploy an arsenal of knives and guns at a pep rally or some other high-traffic venue. He calculated he’d have nine minutes before squad cars and medics could reach the scene. He wouldn’t be acting alone, he hoped, having recruited at least three schoolmates who, like him, were “100% down that they might die that day.”
They try to hoodwink us, telling us there is no time to spare to ensure someone’s rights are upheld, Baker act won’t do. Must have confiscation without due process, without facing your accuser in court.
So about those nine minutes.
At the recent attack at Saugus High School, the Bucket O’Chum began firing and his pistol jammed. Although according to the Daily Mail he used a .45 caliber semi-automatic rifle, which he removed from his backpack. Heck of a backpack. But they are British, and MSM, so #FakeNews. What do they know about firearms? But it was a regular semi-automatic pistol. And it jammed. He cleared the jam and safely continued on firing secure in the knowledge he had plenty of time. He counted his shots saving the last one for himself. Help was only moments away,
Three off-duty police officers, who had just dropped off relatives at the school, were the first responders on the scene: a detective with the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department and police officers from Inglewood and Los Angeles.They were joined within a minute by uniformed deputies on duty from the sheriff’s station in Santa Clarita, as well as a sheriff’s deputy who works at the school as the school resource officer.
But the help was needed within seconds.
This being Kalifornia, I wonder if the off-duty police officers will be reprimanded for carrying their weapons into the school? The school resource officer was one of the last to arrive. I’m not criticizing him. He is one man, he can’t be everywhere. He’s not like Scott Peterson, the “Coward of Broward” who stood by outside the building, or former Sheriff Steve Israel who supported him. He was just the last to arrive. When seconds count the police are only moments away. If it saves just one child, right Mad Mommies? Right harridans of The View? Well, yeah, as long as it doesn’t involve anyone but the bad guy having the gun. How much quicker could the response have been had there been an armed teacher near by?
Laurens County, Georgia doesn’t intend to ever have to look back and wonder. They have began arming and training their teachers. They intend to do everything, politically correct or not, to protect the children from harm. I like the sign outside the school.
Outside every school building in the county is a yellow sign that reads, in part: “Warning. Staff members are armed and trained. Any attempt to harm children will be met with deadly force.”
Seem straightforward to me.
Like the shooting in a Duncan Oklahoma Walmart parking lot recently. The first two victims died, then a good guy with a gun put a stop to further carnage. But, there was a good guy, a regular citizen there, with his gun. Or as the Daily Mail would call it, his semi-automatic rifle.
But to progressives, it’s not really about protecting children, if it saves just one life is a bunch of schiff. What is the message taught at schools? Violence is always wrong, if there is a fight and you defend yourself, you get in trouble (and suspended) same as the person who started it. Don’t fight back, just tell a teacher. Since Jews are being attacked all over the world now, some just for wearing a Kippah and the charges are often ignored, or even dropped. This is not working out well. I recently heard an interview with Schmuel Hacohen “Super Jew”, on the Tamar Yonah show. He relates a story about his father decking a man when he was young. His dad was a scientist, but he still knew how to fight. Afterwards when young Schmuel was bubbling over about it, he father told him he was not proud of what he did. “Violence is not a good thing, it is not always a bad thing, sometimes it is a necessary thing.” We now have generations of children who only use violence to bully and intimidate, those that would stand up for themselves against it are vilified. And just in case someone would be inclined to fight back, or step in, they must have you disarmed and deprived of your most effective defense weapons. Only criminals are allowed to have those.
The episode of the Tamar Yonah show that followed was an interview with Eitan Fischberger, Israel Campus Coordinator for CAMERA on Campus and Aviva Rosenschein, CAMERA’s International Campus Director. They told of what it’s like on college campuses for Jewish students and those that would stand up for Israel against the lies being told, and against the bullying. Sometimes by their professors. They address the false information being put out by Jewish Voices for Peace, Peace Now, the BDS BS movement, J-Street, If Not Now and others. Far too many Jews have become disconnected an apathetic about Israel. There is one Jewish Nation, if you allow it to be destroyed, where are you planning on going as antisemitism increases? France? England? Have at it.
But some young Jews are defying the herd. And doing it brilliantly. The fact that he needs to write under a pseudonym is too bad. But I understand why he feels he must. The lad is a student of the late Rabbi Meir Kahane, HY’’D. Rabbi Meir’s father was close friends with Zev Jabotinsky. My Shimshon’s middle name is Zev. Many many of Rabbi Meir’s predictions have sadly come to pass. He believed Jews should be living in Israel, and that Jews should be able and willing to defend themselves. The writer laments that Betar is no longer around. I do as well. I’m an American Jewish teen and believe we need to teach self defense. It’s a good column.
My one and only (so far) multimedia column for The Zelman Partisans is a reading of a letter by Rabbi Meir Kahane, Dear World
Progressives see the same events we do, but they are determined to double down on their policies of leaving the innocent helpless and at the mercy of someone else showing up to help them. It doesn’t matter if it is there children, your children or parents, or you. No one must be allowed to defend them. They continually attempt to force law-abiding gun owners who have committed no crime to pay the consequences of people who have already committed several. It gets in the way of their ideology, and they love that way more than anything or anyone else. Why are they willing to sacrifice innocent souls on the alter of their ideology? Power.
Today, November 11th was Veteran’s Day. The day brave men and women who have served our country in the military are honored. I’m personally not sure enough can ever be done to honor them. I have only the highest respect for those that chose to put their personal lives on hold to protect us, and our country. They chose to go to other countries to fight evil, and to fight for those that could not fight for themselves.
November 9th and 10th is the anniversary of Kristallnacht, or the night of broken glass. We have some articles on the event if you might care to read them. There are more than just these two.
And it was brave men and women, sometimes really boys and girls that went and fought the Germans, Austrians, Poles, and any others that decided this was an opportune time to rid their fair cities of the Jewish presence.
I think the fact that the two days fall so close together, for me at least, doubles the sense of wonder and gratitude.
I was thinking about the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier the other day. Probably something I had read, maybe the weather, I don’t know. But I was thinking about the guard’s dedication to duty. The requirements to be a guard are quite stringent.
For a person to apply for guard duty at the tomb, he must be between 5′ 10″ and 6′ 2″ tall and his waist size cannot exceed 30″.
Other requirements of the Guard:
They must commit 2 years of life to guard the tomb, live in a barracks under the tomb, and cannot drink any alcohol on or off duty FOR THE REST OF THEIR LIVES. They cannot swear in public FOR THE REST OF THEIR LIVES and cannot disgrace the uniform {fighting} or the tomb in any way.
After TWO YEARS, the guard is given a wreath pin that is worn on their lapel signifying they served as guard of the tomb. There are only 400 presently worn. The guard must obey these rules for the rest of their lives or give up the wreath pin.
The shoes are specially made with very thick soles to keep the heat and cold from their feet. There are metal heel plates that extend to the top of the shoe in order to make the loud click as they come to a halt. There are no wrinkles, folds or lint on the uniform. Guards dress for duty in front of a full-length mirror.
The first SIX MONTHS of duty a guard cannot talk to anyone, nor watch TV. All off duty time is spent studying the 175 notable people laid to rest in Arlington National Cemetery. A guard must memorize who they are and where they are interred. Among the notables are: President Taft, Joe E. Lewis {the boxer} and Medal of Honor winner Audie Murphy, {the most decorated soldier of WWII} of Hollywood fame. Every guard spends FIVE HOURS A DAY getting his uniforms ready for guard duty.
Twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week, 365 days a year the guards suit up, show up and do their duty. They have studied for this, trained for this and committed to this. And that’s how they were chosen for this post. Most that apply do not make the selection. These soldiers were willing to make the commitment, and do the work, even in a hurricane.
Part of the conditions that allowed Anti-Semitism to rise to such a level as to produce a holocaust was the complaint that the Jews were “chosen”. Chosen for what? Chosen to receive the Torah, to spread the knowledge of G-d in this world. Of his love, of his instructions of how to live a life pleasing to the creator of this world. To share knowledge of the mitzvot, commandments. Holy little bread crumbs if you will, a way of helping people find their way back to G-d, or to find G-d.
But according to the Midrash, Israel was not the 1st nation that G-d offered the Torah. They were however, the one that accepted it. Now, if you would like a rather humorous story about how this went down, I can help you out. And it is worth reading, it’s funny. I’ll give you the first paragraph of The Bargain and the Jew
The story you are about to read is true. Some names have been changed to protect the guilty. Some names have been omitted to protect us from the grumpy. The story first started thousands of years ago, when the world was young…
These days it seems the Holocaust is so far behind us, and that such an event could never happen again. But that could be wrong. I listened to a talk show today, and the host Howie Silbiger pointed out that the late Rabbi Meir Kahane predicted almost 30 years ago that there would be another holocaust. In North America. Rabbi Kahane was assassinated 5 November 1990, in the first Al-Qaeda attack on American soil. The bucket of chum assassin got off killing Rabbi Kahane on a technicality. The FBI harvested buckets of information from his apartment. Which apparently they ignored and that allowed the bucket of chum to roam freely about and participate in the first bombing of the World Trade Center. The second Al-Qaeda attack on American soil. Many things I agree with Rabbi Kahane, he is the one who founded the Jewish Defense League, and wanted to change the image of the Jews from weak to strong fearless fighters.
The JDL also focused on the plight of Soviet Jewry, and coined the phrases “Never again,” and “every Jew a .22” to emphasize that Jews would no longer passively ignore the plight of their foreign brethren.
Howie pointed out in this episode that crimes against Jews in NY have risen dramatically. Violent crimes, Jews are punched, pinned against cars and physically assaulted. For which the perpetrators are charged with, “harassment”. Seriously. The culture has changed enough as well. When Netflix has a show called “The Roast of Ann Frank” in which hitler roasts the teenage Jewish girl that was one of the victims of the holocaust is disgusting and despicable. I think that Howie, and Rabbi Kahane could be right. Far too many Jews push for disarmament, too many cities are easy pickings with their progressive policies of only allowing criminals to have guns. And people keep voting for these politicians. Sigh.
But as the constant attacks on Israel continue, against Jews living in Judea and Shomron, and Jews living in New York rise, I fear that the next brave soldiers to fight in the North American holocaust may be you and I. The excuses given for such attacks vary of course, but one of the things that was a complaint and excuse in Germany was this status of being “chosen”. I would maintain that their “chosen status” is much like that of the guards at the Tomb of the Unknowns. It was a mission offered and accepted, even though aspects were unknown. Its sad that rather than admire and respect those that strive to follow the path, those that disagree with it will chose to tear it down, belittle and obliterate it. There are other choices of course, but they choose to ignore that.
I do not relish the thought of a Kristallnacht in North America, but with the #FakeNews, and the state of academia where BSD-BS with it’s anti-Jew and anti-Israel bias thrive, the mass importation of people raised to hate Jews, I could see how it could be. If it comes to pass, we will be more grateful than ever for those that have experience, and can mentor. Our Veterans.
The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.~~ Edmund Burke
Admittedly, this column is a bit behind the times, I apologize. Parshah Shoftim was a few weeks ago. And part of the Parshah really hit home. Probably because if I spend any time at all listening to the news, all I hear is impeachment, impeachment, impeachment (said is the best Jan Brady whine). The secret Soviet style hearings which include only progressive #Demoncrats, the liar Adam Shiff-less., and lots of leaks, lots and lots of leaks.
Shiff-less
But here’s the relevant portion of the Parshah that got me to thinking
Part of Parshah Shoftim
This is from Deut./Devarim דברים
19:16.
Haven’t all of the women hired to attack Kavenaugh recanted? After they and their complicit media tried to ruin his and his family’s lives. Of course.
Honest law-abiding gun owners, judged guilty for the acts of criminals.
And as Sammy “The Bull” Gravano points out, the mob will always have guns. You only have to listen to the first couple minutes if you want.
Well, the mob and #Bozo’s armed guys he would have sent in to make sure American Citizens complied with his rules, so they could “recover” the AR-15s and AK-47s. Recover? Were they missing before they were stolen by #Bozo?
But the real hypocrisy of liberals is on full display in a fairly recent bill proposed by Sen. John Cornyn -Rep of Texas. He proposed a bill to “combat mass shootings”. He proposed to do this by
It would expand resources for mental health treatment, facilitate the creation of “behavioral intervention teams” to monitor students exhibiting disturbing behavior and offer new tools for law enforcement.
The bill’s school safety proposals are a response to years of school shootings perpetrated by young people described as isolated and troubled.
What is their objection you ask?
Privacy experts and education groups, many of which have resisted similar efforts at the state level, say that level of social media and network surveillance can discourage children from speaking their minds online and could disproportionately result in punishment against children of color, who already face higher rates of punishment in school.
“This is all very frightening,” an education policy consultant, who has been tracking the legislation, told The Hill. “There’s no real research, or even anecdotal information, to back up the idea … that following everything [kids] do online is really a way to determine that they’re going to be violent.”
Now, I’m not a fan of monitoring or big brothering anyone. But this is hypocrisy at it’s finest. And if you don’t believe me, you could ask Alexandria Keyes. She was suspended from school for five days after she posted a picture of herself with her brother.
The two are shown holding guns and the photo is captioned, “Me and my legal guardian are going to the gun range to practice gun safety and responsible gun ownership while getting better so we can protect ourselves while also using the First Amendment to practice our Second Amendment.”
Oh the shock, the horror, the carnage! Oh, wait there wasn’t any. The girl and her brother just went to the range practiced marksmanship and harmed no one. But panties were being twisted into a bunch at a rapid rate, and Alexandria was suspended for disrupting school. Huh? She wasn’t at school, she didn’t use a school computer to post the picture. Sen. Cornyn’s bill only monitors online activity while the students are using school computers.
Abbe Smith, Chief Communications Officer for Cherry Creek School District, told me that the decision to suspend Keyes “involved multiple social media posts that concerned the school community and resulted in multiple parents keeping their kids home from school out of concern for safety.” Smith said that federal Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act protections prevent her from discussing the details of the case, including disclosing the other photos the district allegedly considered in Keyes’ suspension.
More about this
The school’s policy references Colorado law, which defines the grounds for suspension as “behavior on or off school property that is detrimental to the welfare or safety of other pupils or of school personnel, including behavior that creates a threat of physical harm to the child or to other children.”
… According to Cherry Creek School Board policy, the school district reserves the right to suspend students who “[repeatedly interfere] with a school’s ability to provide educational opportunities to other students.” Over the phone, Smith noted that since multiple parents kept their children home after becoming aware of the post, Keyes’ photo could be viewed as an impediment to the school’s ability to educate, even if the district didn’t ultimately make its decision based on the chances that Keyes posed a physical threat. Does this mean parental fears can be a mechanism for the school district to veto a teen’s extracurricular activities?
Is Cherry Creek not worried that this is going to prevent Alexandria from speaking her mind online? Maybe Cherry Creek never got the memo from the educational policy consultant that monitoring online activity of children is not effective in determining if they are going to be violent later?
And those sanctimonious sniveling parents that bullied the school into suspending her? They have accused her falsely. She has done nothing wrong. They have left a mark on her school record because of their hoplophobic tiny minds. They have allowed their lack of education and knowledge to deprive her of five days worth.
What should then be their sentence?
False statements given to police because someone wants someone’s guns seized in a storm trooper operation because they are A) mad at their uncle B) don’t like how someone voted C) don’t think people should be allowed to own guns D) ___________________ for whatever reason. Police show up, guns are seized and sometimes, sometimes, people die. Red Flag laws, the height of hypocrisy coming from progressives.
What then should be their sentence? And what should their sentence be if it results in the death of an innocent gun own, exactly as they intended it would?
I had to read this a couple of times to be sure I saw what I thought I saw. But…
Ohio Researchers Say Mental Health Care Alone Won’t Cure Gun Violence
“Obviously, if somebody, like in Sandy Hook, goes into an elementary school and kills 25 first graders the person is insane,” he states. “But the question still is, how are they able to get the guns, and if we could do a better job of background checks and so forth, maybe some of that could be avoided.”
We know exactly how the Sandy Hook chumbucket got the guns. He killed his mother in her bed, and took her guns. Background checks would…
Dear freaking Ghu, Wickizer is advocating for background checks for clearance to commit murder.
OK, claims that background checks would have prevented that massacre are hardly new, but this “professor” has had several years now to learn some bloody facts before spouting off “professionally.” I’m not even going to bother fisking his “research” paper because it’s already clear it’s not fact-based.
[Permission to republish this article is granted so long as it is not edited, and the author and The Zelman Partisans are credited.]
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 ISP bills. And the rabbits need feed. Click here to donate via PayPal.
(More Tip Jar Options)
Reaching a compromise on assault weapons
[…]
Many mass shootings involve military-style assault rifles capable of rapid-fire mass murder: equipped with a hundred-round magazine, the Dayton shooter killed nine people and injured at least 27 more in 30 seconds.
An assault rifle is a shoulder-fired, select-fire firearm chambered for an intermediate-power cartridge. The Dayton chumbucket used a semiautomatic pistol.
Building on the National Firearm Act of 1934, the 1986 Act banned new machine gun sales but grandfathered in existing weapons. According to a 2015 ATF report, over 500,000 of these rifles remain in private hands.
Dipstick cites a four year old report that actually lists 543,073 machineguns total (not just rifles). The actual number is, per the ATF, 175,977 in private hands. To approximate Wolfinger’s number you have to add in restricted items and sales samples, neither of which is available to private individuals. And that only yields 490,664, because he failed to notice the exports in his source.
The 1986 Act codified a robust regulatory regime governing the transfer of machine guns between private parties.
No, the NFA 0f 1934 did that. FOPA ’86 banned transfer of machineguns not already registered.
Buying one requires a background check (including a testimonial from a local law enforcement officer), a fee, a permit, and a wait of up to a year for government processing. All such purchases are entered into a federal registry.
No federally-licensed gun has ever been used in a violent crime, let alone a mass shooting.
Wrong again, bubba. September 15, 1988: Patrolman Roger Waller of Dayton, Ohio used his registered MAC-11 chambered in .380 to kill police informant and local drug dealer Lawrence Hileman.
And, while it was properly classed as an accident, there was the 2014 death of Charles Vacca at the Arizona Last Stop range by a young girl with a registered Uzi.
Why not extend this regulatory regime to all assault rifles?
All assault rifles are already covered by the NFA, and always have been (since the NFA predates the first assault rifles).
The El Paso shooter, for instance, purchased his assault rifle in the weeks before his rampage.
He didn’t have an assault rifle. He had a semi-automatic WASR-10.
Pistols, not rifles, are responsible for the vast majority of homicides and suicides in America
Pistols are nonsentient inanimate objects. They are not responsible for homicides or suicides; the people pulling the triggers are responsible.
Indeed pistols, many of which are capable of semi-automatic fire, have been used in some of our worst mass shootings, including the 2016 Orlando nightclub shooting
Interesting that he doesn’t mention the Sig Sauer MCX, since he’s riding an “assault weapon” hobby horse.
Parenthetically, in modern US usage “pistol” refers to a handgun with the chamber integral with the barrel, and most often semiautomatic handguns. Wolfinger may find this firearms primer useful should he wish to, you know, actually know whath e’s talking about.
I wonder if Wolfinger is even aware that legislation to do what he wants — make all those nasty guns into NFA items — was actually filed back in February. I noted that while it requires everything to be registered within 120 days, in reality it would require a minimum of 54 years to get the tax stamp.
This professor’s classes must be a real joy for his students, stuck trying to sort truth from made up stuff in his lectures.
[Permission to republish this article is granted so long as it is not edited, and the author and The Zelman Partisans are credited.]
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 ISP and web host bills. And the rabbits need feed. Click here to donate via PayPal.
(More Tip Jar Options)
Frustration is getting to me. That frustration is seeing the same lies over and over again, even though they’ve been thoroughly debunked. Like this one:
From 1791 until 2008, the supreme court refused to touch gun-control laws.
[…]
All that changed in 2008 with the court’s 5-4 decision in District of Columbia v Heller. In striking down a Washington DC ban on handguns in the home, the court’s conservative majority held for the first time that the second amendment “protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia.”
It’s particularly frustrating because that comes from “James J Grosfeld professor of law” Lawrence Douglas. Either Douglas is remarkably ill-informed for a law professor, or he’s a liar.
* 1857, Dred Scott
The Supreme Court ruled against Scott because — among other reasons — if Scott was a free man, he’d have the right to bear arms just like every other citizen. Not that he’d have the right to join a militia, but to bear arms at all.
*1876, Cruikshank
The Court found that the Bill of Rights applies to all people. The limitation was on which governments were forbidden to infringe on rights. In this case, they found that it did not apply to state governments.
* 1886, Presser
Admittedly, this was militia related, but the Court found that everyone capable of bearing arms is in the militia. Everyone; all individuals.
* 1939, Miller
This was an odd case, and not just for a dead defendant going to the Supreme Court. The final ruling held that the Second Amendment only protected those weapons suitable for military use. Since deceased Miller’s lawyers didn’t bother showing up, the Court bought the prosecution’s absurd claim that short-barrel shotguns are not military-grade and thus could be regulated under the National Firearms Act. Weapons suitable for military use cannot be regulated. Sadly, they limited that to the shotgun in question.
And that’s something to throw in victim disarmers’ faces when they shriek about “weapons of war.”
The Supreme Court long recognized the Second Amendment as protecting the right of individuals to keep and bear arms. Heller didn’t change that; the Court acknowledging a preexisting, individual right was not new. They said so in their decision, citing multiple cases. What was new was incorporation.
Up until Heller, court rulings as to the applicability of various parts of the Constitution and Amendments to state and local governments was inconsistent. Heller should have settled the matter: The Second Amendment applies to all governments, not just the federal government.
But Chicago politicians ride the short bus, so the Supreme Court revisited the subject in McDonald. The Court slapped down the claim that Heller only applied to Washington, DC, and explicitly stated that it applies to all levels of government.
Is Douglas ignorant or a liar? I think he’s a liar, because this recently-common talking point has been debunked repeatedly. But VDs keep pushing it anyway, just as the cite Kellerman.
It’s frustrating. We’re stuck with the truth. The rights-violators are free to lie at will.
[Permission to republish this article is granted so long as it is not edited, and the author and The Zelman Partisans are credited.]
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 ISP and web host bills. And the rabbits need feed. Click here to donate via PayPal.
(More Tip Jar Options)
Jews. Guns. No compromise. No surrender.
Password Reset
Please enter your e-mail address. You will receive a new password via e-mail.
