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.
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 heard an interesting interview on the Mark Levin show a couple weeks ago on my way home from class. The interview involved Dr. Bandy X Lee.
Bandy Xenobia Lee (born 1970) is an American psychiatrist with Yale University and a specialist in violence prevention programs in prisons and in the community who initiated reforms at New York’s Rikers Island prison. Her scholarly work includes the writing of a comprehensive textbook on violence. In 2017 she organized a conference on the mental health of Donald Trump at Yale and was the editor of The Dangerous Case of Donald Trump, a book of essays that has contributed to the debate about Trump’s mental stability and within the psychiatric profession in the United States about the interpretation of the Goldwater rule.
Judith Lewis Herman (born 1942) is an American psychiatrist, researcher, teacher, and author who has focused on the understanding and treatment of incest and traumatic stress.
Herman is Professor of clinical psychiatry at Harvard University Medical School and Director of Training at the Victims of Violence Program in the Department of Psychiatry at the Cambridge Health Alliance in Cambridge, Massachusetts, and a founding member of the Women’s Mental Health Collective.
She was the recipient of the 1996 Lifetime Achievement Award from the International Society for Traumatic Stress Studies and the 2000 Woman in Science Award from the American Medical Women’s Association. In 2003 she was named a Distinguished Fellow of the American Psychiatric Association.
How distinguished! But it seems these two distinguished doctors are afraid. There is a huge problem. They along with 2535 or 36 of their fellow psychiatrists realized the imminent danger our country is facing because we elected a seriously unstable Republican as President.
So Mark’s interview begins with asking Bandy about her political leanings. Is she a Demoncrat? She denies she is, though she did vote for Hillary. Is she a liberal? Yes, and a conservative. Has she ever voted for a Republican? Yes. Who? She’d rather not say. Then it really starts to get interesting. In what ways is she a conservative? She is a devout Christian, she believes in the founding principles of this nation, she’s a great patriot if you will, says she. By later in the interview I’m thinking she had to be a member of Jeremiah Wright’s church. Mark inquires if she believes in private property rights. Well, to an extent, she feels private property rights have gone too far. WTHeck? Does she believe in limited federal government? This made her nervous. Why was he asking her such things? She declares first and foremost she is a medical professional! She is not a very political person! She declares she has no conflicts of interest. Do you believe all the Bill of Rights? Ummmmm. Do you believe in the Second Amendment?
“Ummmmm…..I actually don’t really know the exact ummmm, meanings of the Bill of Rights. What I studied was enlightenment literature.”
So she and 36 other “mental health experts” have written this book. As many as thirty-six out of the, as she admits, hundreds of thousands of other mental health experts in this country, have written a book on the dangerous mind of President Trump.
Where did she get her information? Had she ever met the President? No. Had she ever spoken to the President? No. Did she watch TV, read newspapers, listen to the radio? No, she did a “fairly intimate analysis of him due to the information that was on him in the Mueller Report.” She said, well, its observations from outside the President’s head. As Mark points out, her book was written before the Mueller report came out. She says the alarm for herself started in early 2016. She was triggered by the interaction between the Presidential candidate DJT and his rally attendees. She said this is real time interaction, and response in real time, as recorded of course. She was disturbed by the things the Candidate said and that people were applauding and cheering. Mark points out she did no scientific diagnosis, as that’s not possible from a distance. She counters that is not true, she brought her scientific knowledge and psychiatric training as well as her experience in public health. So she was quite aware of what these signs represented, and they have born out to be true with time. A danger she says. That’s why it’s ok she wrote this book without a diagnosis. Mark points out you can’t have a diagnosis from afar. She says “that’s not true either”. With certain conditions, a diagnosis is more accurate from a distance, without a personal interview. And this is mainstream thought. Today diagnosis is based on no interaction, just on observing the person. But she insists she never diagnosed, she is only interested in the public health effects of DJT. Then she insists she can’t diagnose from afar. And she doesn’t want to, where upon Mark tells her the book is filled with speculation on such things. Mark asks if she analyzed Hillary Clinton? She insists dangerousness is about the situation, not the person. Huh? Ok, is she dangerous?
“Hillary Clinton never raised alarms for me”.
I guess she could do a internet search on the Clinton body count. She insists it’s not about political party, it’s about standards. Mark reiterates he’s read her book. On what page are the standards listed? They aren’t. He further points out, she only watched TV. She never actually went to any of his rallies, never talked to any of his people, never talked to any of his supporters.
Why does this outrage me so? Red Flag laws. Not only can a person accuse you without evidence it appears the medical profession, or at least the mental health profession (some of whom wanted nothing to do with Bandy or this book) are willing to make judgments affecting your property, your rights and your life based on some undocumented, unspecified standards. Will these be the same “professionals” helping to write legislation in an advisory capacity? Now I understand why Professor Quack thinks personal property rights have gone too far. Not that she can tell you about the Bill of Rights.
If you want to hear the whole interview, it’s available here
If you want the whole show, and the part about “medicare for all” is pretty darn interesting, as is the “wealth tax”, you can get that here.
For those that haven’t heard yet, retail giant Walmart has decided that to keep the forces of evil at bay (the anti-gun harpies and their ilk) the best thing they could do would be cave into the pressure. Because their customers who shop at Walmart looking for value on things they use in their daily lives are not nearly as important as getting the harpies to quit and being labeled as “socially responsible”. Mind you, the harpies are not nearly as large a segment of the population as the people that quietly go about their business shopping at Walmart, I don’t believe.
This has lead a buddy of mine of Facebook to point out a few things. Said buddy is staunch Second Amendment supporter, so his views may be subtle. Thanks Bill for the lines.
My breakup with Walmart will not be easy. I have two outstanding items at the pharmacy that have to be handled there, but then I’ll transfer the prescriptions elsewhere. I’m serious about this.
I do owe him and his buddies one, they helped me figure out how to get a screw out of the laser sights on my .380 and only chided me a tiny bit for carrying that small a gun at times. Good lads all! But being a helpful friend, I told him about Israel Pharmacy. I’ve set 3 people up with accounts there and they’ve all been pleased and saved money, and no they aren’t paying me.
So regarding my buddy’s salient points, let’s examine the death and destruction Walmart unleashes on a daily basis on the unsuspecting communities they invade. And if you are a small Mom and Pop shop, I suspect you would agree with the characterization of Walmart as being an invasive species that puts small businesses out of business and then quits carrying the necessary items.
This one is startling. A study by Johns Hopkins found that 250,000 Americans are killed by medical errors each year. That’s 17 times the number killed by guns. Yet Walmart has a pharmacy in each store.
But my friend wasn’t done with his observations.
In 2018, 40,000 people died in automobile crashes in the U.S., yet Walmart still sells the vital parts and ammunition to keep these machines of carnage operating.
And
In 2014, nearly 5000 people died in bathtub drownings in the U.S., yet with few exceptions, every home still contains at least one of these known instruments of death. In fact, the government requires them!
My gracious! The inhumanity! Think of the bathtub bumpstocks Walmart sells! High capacity bottles of bubble bath, huge bags of scented Epson salts, bath scrubbies in multiple colors and that doesn’t count the dangerous chemicals Walmart sells to clean aforementioned bathtub of death! And they sell Tide Pods!
In 2017 there were nearly a thousand fatal bicycle accidents, yet Walmart still sells these machines of death. Walmart has blood on their hands.
I can hear it now, “Walmart peddler of death”. Yes, it’s a pun. Yes, it’s a bad one.
But let’s go back to the “groundbreaking” stance bit. It’s not really you know. And if Walmart quits selling ammunition you can just go to K-Mart and buy it. Oh, wait. Kmart Kills Ammunition Sales
Maybe not.
Company officials made the announcement Thursday following meetings that included company executives, a prominent gun-control advocate and victims of the 1999 Columbine High School shooting.
Kmart stores have not carried handguns since the 1970s, but still sell hunting rifles and other long guns. For some time, the Troy, Mich.-based company has been under pressure from gun-control advocates to stop selling firearms.
In November 1999, talk show host Rosie O’Donnell resigned as the company’s celebrity spokeswoman because of her strong support of gun control.
And in December 1999 the company withdrew an application for a license to sell rifles and shotguns at a new store in New York after protests by an anti-gun group.
Company spokeswoman Julie Fracker said the sale of firearms and ammunition had been under review as part of a merchandising strategy by the company’s new executive team for some time.
“Obviously we consider ourselves a socially conscious business, but this was a business decision made in the best interests of the company,” she said.
And about Rosie resigning as spokeswoman? Well, she’s important you see, you aren’t. If you aren’t rich enough to afford professional body guards, well then your life isn’t worth preserving. She of course can afford armed bodyguards, and has them. #Elitist #Hypocrisy
The latest balance sheet data shows that DICK’S Sporting Goods had liabilities of US$1.93b due within a year, and liabilities of US$3.22b falling due after that. On the other hand, it had cash of US$116.7m and US$68.5m worth of receivables due within a year. So its liabilities total US$4.96b more than the combination of its cash and short-term receivables.
This deficit casts a shadow over the US$3.08b company, like a colossus towering over mere mortals. So we definitely think shareholders need to watch this one closely. At the end of the day, DICK’S Sporting Goods would probably need a major re-capitalization if its creditors were to demand repayment.
…
DICK’S Sporting Goods’s net debt is only 0.48 times its EBITDA. And its EBIT easily covers its interest expense, being 32.4 times the size. So you could argue it is no more threatened by its debt than an elephant is by a mouse. But the bad news is that DICK’S Sporting Goods has seen its EBIT plunge 13% in the last twelve months. We think hat kind of performance, if repeated frequently, could well lead to difficulties for the stock. There’s no doubt that we learn most about debt from the balance sheet. But it is future earnings, more than anything, that will determine DICK’S Sporting Goods’s ability to maintain a healthy balance sheet going forward.
Who cares about those mouth breathing gun owners? Oh, I dunno, the shareholders? If I were a shareholder and the CEO started making monetary decisions based on “social justice” knee jerks rather than responding to customers I think I would lead the charge to oust them. That’s my money you’re playing with. I invested in a company, not a high school experiment with a popularity contest.
This has lead to the popular Babylon Bee news site (satire) breaking the news on two more new Walmart policies
BENTONVILLE, AR—In a bold move intended to curb the thousands of deaths from vehicles each and every day, Walmart has decided to stop selling auto parts, sources confirmed Tuesday.
According to shocking reports, people have purchased car parts at Walmart and then those cars have been involved in accidents, proving a direct correlation between selling auto parts and causing deaths.
“We can no longer be complicit in an industry that kills over 3,000 people a day,” said a spokesperson for Walmart. “Every time we sell a muffler, steering wheel cover, or flame decal, we are potentially causing the death of a person, and we cannot support that any longer.”
But hey, while perusing the Bee’s homepage, I did get a bit of good news!
U.S.—Beto O’Rourke promised to take away everybody’s guns when he is president, though sources have confirmed that O’Rourke will never even get close to being the president.
…
“Man, I can’t wait to see how that presidential pen feels signing an unconstitutional executive order,” he added wistfully, though he will never know how that feels.
At publishing times, O’Rourke’s pro-gun control comments had caused his number of supporters to get cut in half, leaving him with just one.
That’s the thing about all this modern incarnation of “social justice”. In placating the harpies, and playing to the #FakeNews cameras you cause harm to the people you are suppose to be working for, shareholders or constituents. Not to mention the people that work for you. They used to be called “employees with families” till their jobs went away because that store had to be closed. If you’ve enhanced your ego or reputation at the expense of someone you’ve betrayed, it seems there could be fallout. I hope it falls hard on you.
I bet there might be a local gun shop with knowledgeable people around. They may not mix paint for you, but I bet the can make some sensible gun related recommendations should you ask.
Recently the House of Representatives voted on a non-binding resolution to condemn Boycott Divest and Sanction (BDS, or BS for short) against Israel. The motion passed 398-17. So who were the 17?
Earl Blumenauer (D-Oregon)
Andre Carson (D-Indiana)
Debbie Dingell (D-Michigan)
Jesus “Chuy” Garcia (D-Illinois)
Raul Grijalva (D-Arizona)
Pramila Jayapal (D-Washington)
Barbara Lee (D-California)
Thomas Massie (R-Kentucky)
Betty McCollum (D-Minnesota)
Gwen Moore (D-Wisconsin)
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-New York)
Ilhan Omar (D-Minnesota)
Chellie Pingree (D-Maine)
Mark Pocan (D-Wisconsin)
Bobby Rush (D-Illinois)
Rashida Tlaib (D-Michigan)
Bonnie Watson Coleman (D-New Jersey)
Sixteen of the 17 representatives who voted no were Demoncrats, one was Republican, Thomas Massie from Kentucky. WTH?? Four out of the five who voted present also were Democrats. The only non-Democrat who voted present was Rep. Justin Amash, an Independent.
“I stand before you the daughter of Palestinian immigrants,” said Tlaib on the House floor the morning of the tally. “Parents who experienced being stripped of their human rights, the right to freedom of travel, equal treatment. So I can’t stand by and watch this attack on our freedom of speech and the right to boycott the racist policies of the government and the state of Israel. I love our country’s freedom of speech, Madam Speaker. Dissent is how we nurture democracy.”
And
Earlier in the day, Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.) criticized the resolution, saying, “It sets a dangerous precedent because it attempts to delegitimize certain people’s political speech and to send a message that our government can and will take action against speech it doesn’t like”
During the 40-minute floor debate on the resolution, House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Eliot Engel (D-N.Y.) said the BDS movement “promotes a one-sided view of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict that seeks to marginalize Israel, that would deny the Jewish people the right of national self-determination.” He added, “Participating in an international commercial effort that undermines Israel’s legitimacy and scuttles the chances of a two-state solution isn’t the same as an individual exercising First Amendment rights.”
After the vote, Rep. Alex Mooney (R-WV) tweeted, “Displays of anti-Semitism have become too frequent in the past few months, even from members of this House of Representatives—and it is time that we stand united in support of Israel.”
Of course we know my opinion of the “two state solution”. That is already in place. It’s called Gaza, where rockets and fire balloons are launched into Israel.
She compared the BDS movement to the American boycott of Nazi Germany.
“The right to boycott is deeply rooted in the fabric of our country,” she said. “What was the Boston Tea Party but a boycott? Where would we be now without the boycott led by the civil rights activists in the 1950s and 60s like the Montgomery bus boycott and the United Farm Workers Grape boycott?”
She then pivoted to the history of Americans boycotting foreign government, saying, “Americans boycotted Nazi Germany in response to dehumanization, imprisonment, and genocide of Jewish people.”
She claimed in May that “Palestinian Arabs living in the British Mandate prior to the establishment of the State of Israel “provided” a safe haven to Jews after the Holocaust.” Look up Hevron massacre 1929 if you are unsure why I’m angry about that particular statement.
“There’s always kind of a calming feeling when I think of the tragedy of the Holocaust,” Tlaib said, “that it was my ancestors, Palestinians, who lost their land and some lost their lives, their livelihood, their human dignity, their existence, in many ways, has been wiped out … in the name of trying to create a safe haven for Jews, post-Holocaust, post-tragedy and the horrific persecution of Jews across the world at that time. And I love the fact that it was my ancestors that provided that in many ways.”
It seems that the two anti-Semites, Omar (whom I don’t think is married to her brother this week, though she isn’t saying) and Tlaib are planning on visiting Israel.
I really like Sha’i ben-Tekoa’s solution. Let them enter Israel through the Hamass terror tunnels, they’ll feel right at home. He also has a great itinerary for them. Ripping good show with some American History on Thomas Jefferson.
But there are people that disagree. While they are not calling out the pile of Tlaib by name, their actions say she’s liar liar pants on fire.
Who are these people? Arabs. Specifically Arabs in other countries. It seems the Falestinians are beginning to get on everyone’s last nerve.
This may not have made headline news last week.
This is Saudi blogger Mohammed Said,
This man is an ARAB, and he is being treated this way by the Falestinians. I find this curious as well as appalling. But in the Arab world, it’s an eye for an eye. Literally. In Torah it means the value of an eye for an eye.
So in Riyadh
Who else besides the Saudi Arabs have had a bellyful of the Tlai Falestinians? Syrians.
In an exclusive interview, Syrian analyst Wael Ashaq explained that many people in Saudi Arabia despise how the Palestinian Authority is assisting the Assad regime: “They only care about what is good for them. They don’t care about the millions killed every day by the Assad regime. If we look at the issue historically, the Palestinians went everywhere in Syria, Lebanon and Jordan and created many problems and troubles. We as Syrians helped the Palestinians but when we have a problem with our dictator, they stand with this terrorist regime and help them politically as well as militarily. This is true for both Fatah and Hamas. They are both the same on this.”
On top of that, he added that many people in the Arab world are looking in order to build a strong relationship with Israel: “We want a good relationship with Israel because we know that Israel respects our right to be a free people and a liberated country. Israel is the only democratic state in our area. We don’t see any other free and democratic governments in the area. We are looking for a free Syria that will be just like Israel. The region has changed in favor of a new alliance. Any government has to make good relations with Israel if they want their country to be free and democratic and for their people to live with dignity and to have a good life. Therefore, we condemn Palestinian terrorist practices against Israeli civilians and those who support Israel.”
But wait! There’s more!
Mendi Safadi, who heads the Safadi Center for International Diplomacy, Research, Public Relations and Human Rights, added that many people in the Arab world are waking up and discovering not only how the Palestinian Authority and Hamas have abandoned the Syrian people but also have been taking hostile actions against Saudi Arabia. He noted that the Saudis are greatly disturbed with Hamas and the Islamic Jihad for building a relationship with Iran.
Safadi stressed that the Saudis view Iran to be their number one enemy for the Houthis, Iran’s proxy in Yemen, have fired rockets at Saudi Arabia. In addition, they view Iran’s nuclear program to be a major threat to the Saudi Kingdom and its regional sphere of influence. In light of this, many Saudis are greatly disturbed over the fact that many Palestinians don’t share their hostile perception of the Iranian regime and are actually working in order to have a good relationship with Iran.
According to Safadi, another factor that disturbs the Saudis is the popularity of the Muslim Brotherhood among Palestinians. The Saudis consider the Muslim Brotherhood to be a terrorist organization. In light of this, they are not huge fans of Hamas, which is essentially the Palestinian Arab branch of the Muslim Brotherhood.
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez said that people such as Palestinians have no other option than to “riot” because they are “marginalized” by Israel — drawing swift outrage from Jewish advocacy groups.
…
Radio host Ebro Darden prompted the discussion with Ocasio-Cortez by saying there are a number of “corrupt” governments — lumping together Israel, the United States, Russia and Saudi Arabia — which he claimed are “working in concert.”
He went on to assert that young Jewish people are against the “Palestine occupation” and would like to see the ouster of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
Darden also ranted about “white supremacist Jews” and said it’s “something most people can’t wrap their brains around.”
“And what’s going on with Israel and Palestine, while it’s very, very deep, it is very, very criminal, and it is very, very unjust,” he said.
Ocasio-Cortez agreed, saying, “Absolutely.”
“I think, too, where we’re at as a country when it comes to Israel-Palestine is very much a generational issue,” Ocasio-Cortez said.
One person is responsible, the one who pulled the trigger. Not the gun. But the very anti-Semitic goon “squad” is certainly doing their best to incite hatred with their lies. It seems many in the Arab world are realizing that the Falestinians are a lie and are tired of them, and their lies. How many Americans will still buy the lies and that pile of Tlaib that she and the rest of the goon squad are dishing out?
Beth Alcazar, writing at USCCA, has bought one of the victim disarmers’ biggest lies.
The Constitution Didn’t Intend for Us to Have So-Called ‘Assault Rifles’
Interesting how people have infiltrated our reference tools and inserted interpretations. Well, so be it, then. Here’s my interpretation: An assault rifle is any kind of rifle being used by an evildoer to attack someone. In other words, it’s a weapon that a violent person is using to harm or kill others. (Or, to use the active voice and clarify the subject and who is actually taking the action of the verb: The term “assault weapon” refers to a violent person using a gun to assault people.)
No, no, no.
An assault rifle is a real thing: a select-fire rifle chambered for an intermediate-power cartridge. The term — and the class of weapon — dates back more than seven decades. You no more get to change the definition than a snowflake gets to call “speech I disagree with” violence.
Then there’s “assault weapon,” which generally means absolutely nothing. In certain jurisdictions, the term is defined in law, but one state’s ordinary rifle may be another state’s “assault weapon.” and vice versa. It’s arbitrary and confusing.
By deliberate intent.
As best I can tell, the term “assault weapon” originated with victim disarmer Josh Sugarmann in 1988.
“The weapons’ menacing looks, coupled with the public’s confusion over fully automatic machine guns versus semi-automatic assault weapons—anything that looks like a machine gun is assumed to be a machine gun—can only increase the chance of public support for restrictions on these weapons. In addition, few people can envision a practical use for these guns.”
Congratulations, Alcazar; you just bought Sugarmann’s große Lüge. What’s next; are you going to adopt George Skelton’s “Mass-Shooting Gun” terminology?
* The Supreme Court somewhat disagreed in MILLER; holding that the Second Amendment only protected our right to military weapons. As no one showed up to counter the prosecution’s ignorant claim that short-barrel shotguns aren’t used by the military, the Court rolled with that.
[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)
For those discomfited by my point of view, and for liberals that entails maniacal hatred, don’t get your Garanimals’ training undies in a twist. I’m in the extreme minority. I’m so “old-school” and normal, nothing more than shirt and trousers will ever emerge from my closet and I managed to reach middle-age sans tattoos, never involved in drugs, and without carnal knowledge of Madonna. Is that rare or what? I’ve never won a popularity contest either and am not about to start now. So why sweat me? Like-minded Americans could fit in one room without a shoe horn.
Unbeknownst to me how, I was added to the email blast alert list of Democrat Party Panjandrum Nancy Pelosi known affectionately in some circles as Bela Pelousy. My first impulse was to hit delete and unsubscribe followed by multiple showers and a round of antibiotics. Wait a sec. Imagine the immense loss in entertainment value not reading lunatic emails penned behind the Tofu Curtain by Bela’s neo-Bolshevik scribes out in California. I reconsidered. Pouring a beverage and popping popcorn, I began reading. Hysterical. What a hoot. I stopped laughing. Radical Trotskycrats couldn’t fund-raise through preposterous wild-eyed frothing at the mouth emails, spewing claims unmoored from reality, unless significant numbers of the Great Unwashed are gullible and ignorant enough to believe such rubbish. Or went to public schools. Or both. G-d help us all.
Based on radio and television discussions, online articles, and conversations with Millennials, in general they seem to oppose abolishing the 2nd Amendment right to keep and bear arms. But they also tend to support so-called “assault-rifle” bans and believe safer guns and more training are the remedies for “gun-violence.” If true, their knowledge of firearms and understanding of crime issues needs to be addressed. What is the best approach?
All too-often Millennials propose gun control laws whose underlying premise is grossly naïve; people are incompetent with respect to self-defense so shouldn’t fight back against criminal attack. And “because,” they claim, an armed woman is more likely to shoot herself than the bad guy, she should submit to rape. Could these gutless arguments stem from an unwillingness by TSNAGs (Typical Sensitive New Age Guys) to shoulder a responsibility once embraced by men; protecting society’s most vulnerable? Is cowardice behind their claim disarming all but cops will create safer communities? Making matters worse, people proposing more gun laws sometimes know little or nothing about guns. They employ incorrect terms, trade in urban legends, and rely on internet disinformation. Maybe they ask where’s the safety on Ruger’s GP100, call AR15s “assault weapons,” refer to magazines as “clips,” claim anyone can walk in and out of a gun store in five minutes with a machine gun, say the Constitution “gives” us the right to keep and bear arms, or claim gun-registration will never lead to confiscation. Can gun-owners be faulted in believing when a liberal man marries a liberal woman, it’s a same-sex marriage? How does one address their ignorance and misinformation? Understandably those in the self-defense community often respond to the ill-informed with insults but, is this the best approach with Millennials? Is treating them as lunkheads for not knowing what the rest of us were taught the best way to win converts? No. Instead, with gentleness and patience, take them under your wing. Guide them to a saving knowledge of the truth about self-defense. Teach them the 2nd Amendment protects the right to save their lives and those of loved ones from bad guys who’d take them in a second without remorse. They’re smart. As they learn, questions will arise and your answers will lead to more questions and soon you’ve taught them what used to be common knowledge. Let’s start here.
Deceitfully calling them “assault-weapons,” and “assault-rifles,” liberals would ban America’s rifle, the AR15/AR10 and their derivatives. But these are semiautomatic not assault-rifles, (no firearm is classified an assault weapon). They comport with the type of firearm Alexander Hamilton had in mind observing in Federalist #46 that an armed citizenry is the chief bulwark against infringement and oppression by a federal government, and an army it might raise for that purpose.1 Those calling for “safer” guns and more training are apparently unfamiliar with firearms. Considering approximately 124 million people own about 270 million guns,2 (or more), and there were 505 deaths due to “accidental or negligent discharge of a firearm” in 2013,3 (not even half of a half of a half of a percent, you get the drift) safe gun handling is not a problem in America. Would guns complicated by additional safety devices and more training impair the thugs shooting up Baltimore, Chicago, Detroit, Philadelphia,4 and Washington, D.C. among others?
In the past several decades, various firearm manufacturers began attaching unnecessary function-retarding devices (magazine disconnect safety) aimed at fending off slip-and-fall lawyers, buying goodwill among anti-gunners, and saving from themselves, people too stupid to unload their gun before cleaning it. Remarkably, even self-defense gurus piled on teaching CCW holders not to carry guns with personal hand-loaded ammunition because it made them appear more blood-thirsty. Editorialists for firearm magazines, gun forums, pro-gun attorneys, and those training citizens at various shooting schools and academies echoed these proscriptions as well. These admonitions took on the life of hoary old clichés everyone accepts but never questions. With all due respect to ThePersuaders, as a policeman, when I heard someone utter the cliché; there’s a fine line between love and hate, it was always after husbands or boyfriends beat, stabbed, or murdered their wives or girlfriends. There is a huge chasm between love and hate. I am no fan of hoary clichés. If you get worked up over what comes next, keep in mind, drugs, tattoos, Madonna, extreme minority…
I’m acquainted with the PARDs (Pistol Rescue Doctors) who perform operations transforming liberal guns into conservative guns. They surgically remove from pistols magazine disconnect “safeties,” an unnecessary handicapping mechanism. I realize liberals enjoy taking sharp objects to everything from fences to babies, but, in this case, patients emerge from operating rooms feeling much better. These surgeons have rescued pistols from both domestic and foreign marques. A minimally invasive procedure, each gun is able to return to a normal life the same day, without prescription Opioids. What is this safety? A magazine disconnect safety prevents a pistol from firing unless a magazine is firmly inserted and locked in place. It doesn’t matter if the magazine is loaded with rounds or not. Unless the magazine is in place, the pistol is inoperable.
In an ongoing campaign to limit the type of firearms which may be sold and possessed, down to, well, none, California created an ever evolving list of “safety” features and attributes firearms must have in order to be legal in the Rainbow state. To the ever shrinking list of legal guns was added in 2007, the requirement of a visual and tactile loaded chamber indicator and a magazine disconnect “safety.”5 It remains unclear how such mechanisms reduce crime by identifying, apprehending, and bringing violent criminals to trial. In order to continue marketing guns in California, and placate lefty anti-2nd Amendment politicians (the beard and ponytail crowd), Sturm Ruger and Smith & Wesson (metal pistols) added magazine disconnect “safeties” not typically found on pistols manufactured by Beretta, CZ, Glock, H&K, FN, SIG Sauer, Springfield, and 1911A1s, or Smith’s modern plastic pistols.
Self-anointed “gun-experts,” among the most insufferably arrogant people I’ve ever encountered, and Neosporin scraped knee spraying worry warts argue that, before cleaning a pistol, someone might forget to check to see if it’s loaded and suffer a negligent discharge [ND] with tragic consequences. Do they assume everyone, other than them, is too ignorant, stupid, and irresponsible to safely handle guns so as many function retarding devices as possible must be added to them? The rarity of gun-accidents puts a lie to this notion. For everyone I’ve trained with, at police and public ranges, the approach is much the same. Training is 100% focused on safety. A standardized step by step protocol is taught and pounded into the heads of new shooters. Range Masters are unforgiving. 1) all guns are considered loaded, 2) guns at all times must be pointed in a safe direction, 3) shooters must know their backstop meaning, what you’re shooting at and the dangers of shooting in that direction, 4) don’t touch or load guns until conditions are safe to do so, 5) When done firing, place the pistol on the bench, table, etc. with the slide locked back and the ejection port up so anyone can see if it’s loaded. Rounds, fired or not, are ejected from the cylinder of revolvers and the gun is placed on the shooting table with the cylinder propped open for inspection, 6) before disassembly for cleaning, the pistol’s magazine must be out, the slide locked back, and the chamber inspected to ensure no rounds remain in the gun, 7) never point even a disassembled gun at anyone, 8) when unloading an unfired gun, whether back from the range or a day of concealed carry, you must account for each round. By always following these or similar steps in the same order, they become part of what’s known as “muscle memory.” Simple. For those finding these steps too complex or mentally challenging, no amount of safeties will make their firearms safe. For them a safe gun is none at all. But don’t punish the 99.99% who handle firearms responsibly with useless feel-good beanbag lava lamp “safety” devices. An on-line Ruger Forum reveals there are Henny Pennys among gun-owners.
Magazine disconnect safety deactivation opponents argue, although removing them makes pistols no less safe, the why of it would not be understood by juries. Others contend that, even in cases where use of deadly force is justified, prosecutors will use removal to paint defendants in the worst possible light. Forum member ‘Sandlapper’ wrote; “It is a safety device you are removing and I’ve always thought safety and gun are too (sic) words that worked well together.” When another forum member asked if this had ever been an issue in a court case, removal opponent ‘Storm40’ delivered what he thought was the coup de grace citing People v. Superior Court (DU) Los Angeles County, (1992). In this case, an LAPD ballistics expert testified the snub-nosed Smith & Wesson revolver used in the shooting case had been crudely altered and it’s “trigger pull dramatically reduced.” Storm40 added that the revolver’s “safety mechanism” didn’t function.6 Having fired snub-nosed revolvers from Colt, Sturm-Ruger, Smith & Wesson, and Taurus over the years, I never encountered a “safety-mechanism,” left-wing novelist Stephen Kind notwithstanding.
Great Scott, has America descended so deeply into Henny Penny emasculation that the blood of America’s rugged, individualistic, and self-reliant forefathers has evaporated from everyone’s veins? Have Neosporin wielding moms patrolling playgrounds ever vigilant for scraped elbows turned Americans into the sky is falling ninnies?
Back in the day, a young man’s first car was typically a tired old jalopy. He soon went to work tossing out performance inhibiting parts replacing cams, intakes, carburetors, exhaust manifolds, and gears with those designed to wring from the car its true performance potential. At least outside of Palo Alto. When liberal environmentalists, who pee their pants at the mere mention of horsepower, employed the tyrannical power of government to foist all manner of unconstitutional performance crippling “pollution” devices on cars, sons and daughters of pioneers and settlers did what free people always do. They chucked them. None of their modifications rendered cars any less safe. Whether driving a 1974 Ford Pinto pumping out 80 horsepower or a 2018 Dodge Demon with 840 screaming horses on tap, what makes cars safe or unsafe is how they’re operated. For those driving sewing machines (electric cars), time among aficionados of real cars is highly recommended…and fun.
Removing magazine disconnect safeties does little to alter trigger pull weight on hammer or striker fired pistols and renders them no less safe. With Ruger’s SR9, removal actually smooths trigger press resulting in a more accurate gun. No one wants to shoot innocent bystanders. Won’t prosecutors use this modification to vilify defendants? Let’s be frank. If a prosecutor has charged you in a self-defense case, they want your scalp. Ethical or not, fair or not, they’ll throw anything they can at you to win conviction. District Attorneys are politicians. Even If you do everything right; approved factory ammo and a totally bone-stock gun, and you’re a pillar of the community completely justified in the use of deadly force, a D.A. who chooses to bring charges will so blacken your character and reputation, your own family won’t recognize you. Trial lawyer Gordon Cooper, an experienced attorney who represents gun-owners, observes the legal system is biased and stacked against gun-owners. And that’s whether you tuned your gun to be more efficient or not. In his experience, “many law-enforcement officers, district attorneys, and even jurors seem to think that if you own or carry a firearm, you are inherently guilty in some way.”7 It won’t matter whether or not you added clearer sights, replaced the grip panels for a better fit, had a trigger-job to improve a horrendous pull weight, Cerakoted the frame for rust prevention, or removed a magazine disconnect “safety.” Ultimately the issue to be decided is, was the use of deadly force justified? Prosecutors attempt to load juries with as many gun-ignorant Oprah watching malleable Neosporin nitwits as possible. It’s the defense attorney’s responsibility, through the voir dire and trial process to block this and provide expert counter-witnesses. As to Ruger Forum member Sandlapper’s cliché about guns and safety going together, Confiscationists use the words “gun” and “safety,” together all the time. Are you going to allow those who know nothing about and or hate guns, dictate what does or doesn’t belong on your gun because the word “safety” is attached to it? For liberals “safety” means national gun-owner registration, restrictions, bans, forced-buy backs, and confiscation. Is that what you want, Sandlapper? If you allow Confiscationist Henny Pennys to build a “safe” gun, chances are it won’t fire. Messages on T-shirts, bumpers stickers, and social media pose a much greater threat to a defendant in a self-defense case than a finely-tuned gun.
Ruger Forum member “Spring” noted disconnect “safety” removal does not lighten trigger pull and the same dire warnings were applied to gun-owners using hollow point rounds; they’re “designed to kill” and make gun owners appear “blood-thirsty.” You’ll get hammered by prosecutors if they discover you used hollow-points in your self-defense gun, people warned. Another Forum member observed that, with respect to the California snub-nosed revolver case, modification of the revolver’s trigger was not an issue and played no role in determination of guilt or innocence. Two women were engaged in a physical altercation (sounds like a high school cafeteria at lunchtime), one turned to leave, and the defendant shot her in the back of the head.8 Anyone with a modicum of common sense knows immediately what the defendant did wrong. If not, don’t touch a gun until you get some serious legal training.
As much as I respect Massad Ayoob, I take issue with his admonition against disconnect safety removal.9 As a policeman, I and other officers were issued Smith & Wesson Model 19 revolvers. By the 1980s, new specimens typically came with heavy gritty triggers and large wooden grips. It was routine for officers to replace wooden stocks with rubber grips, change the sights, and pop for a department legal trigger job. Like performance mods on a car, this didn’t make the gun any less safe, it simply ran better.
Prosecutor: “Isn’t it true officer Goldstein, getting an action job indicates you intended to shoot the deceased?”
Goldstein: “No, pulling the trigger does.”
Gaston Glock’s masterpiece has no magazine disconnect safety and is perhaps the most customizable pistol on the market. From slide hold-open levers, magazine release buttons, springs, barrels, slides, name it, the performance of off the shelf guns can be greatly enhanced. This can make for more confident and accurate users. Ultra-light triggers aside, in self-defense situations, employing a finely tuned and accurate gun means less chance of bullets striking unintended targets. Gun owners who experiment with various loads are more likely to know which bullets might over or under penetrate in given situations allowing them to choose wisely. This makes them and the gun safer.
It’s possible, sitting in a car, at a desk, or reaching for items on grocery store shelves, to bump the magazine release button just enough to unlock the magazine of some pistols. With the magazine still in the well, nothing appears amiss. Attacks by criminals are often sudden and violent, allowing victims but a second to pull their gun and fire in self-defense. Only, the gun won’t fire. The magazine is unlocked. What about the fact a round is already chambered. It won’t matter. The gun is inoperable due to the magazine disconnect safety. For naysayers who might argue this would probably be a rare occurrence, how rare will it be if it’s you? Gun Writers note most attacks and self-defense uses of pistols occur at handshaking distances. Suppose a scumbag makes a grab for and gets his hand on your gun and, in the ensuing struggle, the magazine release button is bumped sending the magazine flying. No sweat, you still have one in the pipe. Weren’t you paying attention? Without the magazine locked in place, the pistol is inoperable. While the Scrote is stabbing you with a knife or bludgeoning your skull with a crowbar, you’re on hands and knees, scrambling around on the sidewalk, trying to find the ejected magazine so it can be re-inserted into the pistol to make it work. Only, you won’t be able to do that. Because you’re dead.
Finding time and money to practice frequently at the range is a challenge for anyone. “Dry-firing” is a method for practicing trigger skills, hand and eye coordination, and building muscle memory. Third generation Smith & Wesson pistols, alloy and steel models, had hammers and a double action trigger pull weight designed to build great forearms. Like a revolver, one can practice “staging” the overly heavy trigger learning to control and fire it at the proper “break” enhancing accuracy and effectiveness. But this requires lots of practice, including long dry-fire sessions. To dry-fire these hammer fired Smiths, one has two options; thumb back the hammer and pull the trigger but, it won’t drop without the magazine in place (Smith 908, for example), or rack the slide. But the slide can’t be racked to the rear and returned to battery if an empty magazine is in place. The slide has to be retracted, allowed to return to battery, and then the magazine re-inserted. Unless you thumb the hammer with a magazine in place, if you dry fire 50 times, you’ll have to repeat this process 50 times. But that’s impossible with magazine disconnect safeties. It’s the same for striker-fired pistols. Dropping the magazine, working the slide, reinserting the magazine, pulling the trigger, and repeating is not conducive to training and, we have a magazine always in the gun. Wouldn’t it be safer during dry fire practice for a magazine not to be part of the equation?
For those clinging to the, what’s the harm with more safeties argument, how many will be enough? At what point does the firearm’s intended purpose become compromised? The way to improve driving skills is through practice, not making it harder for people to drive their cars. In both cases, firearms and automobiles, one learns a set of safety protocols from which not to deviate. I am aware of a man who was killed when the jack holding up the car he was under failed. Anyone who works on cars learns early on this is a hideously dangerous no-no. The same “everyone knows you don’t do this” type of maxim also applies to guns. Those who violate safety protocols, face tragic consequences. The good news is, most of us do follow them.
What would guns designed by Henny Pennys look like? Big and heavy, festooned with a padlock, proof all 29 warning labels were read, owner fingerprint keypad, microphone and voice recognition software, chip reader, DNA blood-sample collection needle, video-screen on which to take a required test, google search for any racist, sexist, bigoted, etc. comment ever made on social media, and an automatic call to the FBI for authorization to use the gun.
In America, when a respected greybeard in the 2nd Amendment and shooting community theorizes from his pedestal this or that handgun modification could be used by prosecutors to hang an innocent person, other sages nod in cross-pollinating agreement. Soon the theory circulates becoming accepted wisdom one dares not question. In the real world, rounds fired at violent attackers in self-defense, from .380s to .44 Magnums, don’t automatically drop knife or gun-wielding Scumbags like a sack of potatoes. You’re in a fight for your life. You must do whatever it takes to prevail. Failure means you die. But, snivels the Henny Penny, they’ll say when you fired your gun, you meant to kill the bad guy with the knife.10 When it comes to saving lives, we can’t let fear mongering and the massive egos of firearms “experts” cripple our ability to defend ourselves. We can’t allow Confiscationists to normalize hamstringing guns with function inhibiting devices in the name of “gun safety” and “sensible laws.” None of this will hamstring violent criminals but may cost you your life.
11 Clinton Rossiter, Editor, The Federalist Papers, #46 (New York, N.Y., A Mentor Book from New American Library, 1961), 294-300.
22John R. Lott, Jr., More Guns Less Crime, Third Edition, (Chicago, Illinois, University of Chicago Press, 2010), 1.
1010 People who rob, rape, and murder, are intentional predators. Unlike animals whose predation is based on feeding, these predators are motivated by evil hence monsters and no longer part of the family of man and should be treated as such.
You know, it seems more and more often I hear the left justify their criminal behavior as “fighting hate”, “fighting evil” “fighting fascism” or another one I hear from time to time, “Trump is so evil”. No, I don’t believe President Trump is evil, misguided and screws up? Yep. But I notice those that claim he is “evil” usually do so because he is denying them something they want such as illegal immigrants voting, or on welfare, or how about just coming here illegally, un-vetted and we have no idea who they are, what diseases they have or what their character is.
Recently a conservative journalist was attacked in the city of Portland Oregon. A shame and disgrace, Portland used to be a very beautiful city. I very much enjoyed my trips there when I was younger. But Portland has become a liberal haven, like Berkeley. And like Berkeley, antifa flourishes. What is antifa like?
I’m reading a book right now called Women Heroes of WWII.
He instituted the Hitler Jugend (Hitler Youth), a state-run program for all children ages 10–18. The Hitler Youth program was geared to make Germany’s children proud, militant Nazis. They engaged in warlike games, killed small animals (to become insensitive to suffering and death), sang songs about German streets running with Jewish blood, and were encouraged toward fanatical, personal devotion to Hitler, a devotion that was to take precedence over their relationships with their parents. (Children were encouraged to turn in their own parents to the Gestapo if they heard them say anything against the Führer.)
The members of antifa certainly fit that description! My Mom and I were talking the other night and she was telling me a statistic she thought she had heard about the percentage of people that want socialism vs the people that don’t, and want capitalism. And in their public educatioindoctrination centers skools they learn what is “social justice” and “victimhood” 300 level classes in this are available at most universities, along with BDS and anti-Zionism against the one Jewish state in the world, which is in no way of course, antisemitic. In addition to physically attacking their victims, they strive for fear, intimidation and humiliation. Again, familiar.
But adults can have differences of opinions, they can discuss ideas. Very spirited discussions can result between two adults that argues their points, theories and ideas.
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people.
Brainstorming is a beautiful thing. Antifa doesn’t brainstorm. I’m not sure they really think, they seem more like violently programed robots. They are absolutely indoctrinated to hate. How else can you scream “Love trumps hate” as you try to beat another living being?
Some of this just seems so familiar, it’s like a memory ringing in the back of my mind.
I’m seeing a pattern. Conservatives, especially in this time of Trump have been de-humanized to the point that the liberal tolerant left feels perfectly justified in physically attacking them. Women alone, old men, doesn’t matter. They function as a feral pack, they seem to single out one person and go after them. Because of they have different ideas than that of the left and that is no longer permitted. Stores are boycotted, careers are ruined, jobs are lost. All because someone expressed an opinion that the left doesn’t allow them to express or believe. Which goes with the pattern, it’s why Russia and Germany had to lock up and isolate leaders of the opposition, be they teacher, doctors, sailors, soldiers or the neighborhood grocer.
Antifa sympathisers are ‘whitewashing’ violence: Andy Ngo
You notice this report came from outside the U.S.
Also like the days of old, those in authority are telling the police to “stand down” and not protect the Trump supporters. Whether it was Berkeley, the lady in San Jose when the police blocked the door and wouldn’t let her in as antifa surrounded her or the attack on Andy Ngo which occurred right in front of a police station. The authorities are not doing the “serve and protect” thing. Well, not if you’re a conservative anyway.
Have you noticed another similarity between the cities where antifa seems to be flourishing? Yeah, I thought you probably had. They all have strict gun control. While that will affect conservatives who tend to be law abiding, it does not affect antifa who show up armed with crowbars and bats. And while the liberal talking heads aka #FakeNews tend to belittle the milkshake thing, the “milkshakes” often have quick drying concrete which makes them capable of blunt force trauma as well as chemical acid burns.
The point of the all this intimidation is something gun owners have seen for a long time. The media tells us some massive percentage of the people support further restricting our Second Amendment rights. And while we know it’s crap, many others, the Fudds out there will believe it. Especially if there is a collaborating story from the VNRA. With the stifling of free speech, and the ability to safely assemble at a political rally the tolerant, progressive anti-fascist fascists are ensuring only one opinion, theirs, is safe to express or will be heard.
And while some say “Love Trumps Hate”, I say love may well trump hate, but these days love and a AR-15 are a way better way to go.
Last weekend was Shavuot. In the diaspora it is a two day holiday. I admit it is an emotional holiday for me. I love Shavuot.
The holiday of Shavuot is the day on which we celebrate the great revelation of the giving of the Torah at Mount Sinai, more than 3,300 years ago. You stood at the foot of the mountain, as did your grandparents and great-grandparents before them. The souls of all Jews, from all times, came together to hear the Ten Commandments from G‑d Himself.
What was involved?
Moses ascended Mount Sinai, and G‑d spoke to him the following words (Exodus 19:3-6): “So shall you say to the house of Jacob and tell the sons of Israel. You have seen what I did to the Egyptians, and [how] I bore you on eagles’ wings, and I brought you to Me. And now, if you obey Me and keep My covenant, you shall be to Me a treasure out of all peoples, for Mine is the entire earth. And you shall be to Me a kingdom of princes and a holy nation.”
Moses returned from Sinai and called for the elders of the people and put all these words of G‑d before them. Unanimously, with one voice and one mind, the people answered: Naaseh Venishma – “Everything G‑d has said, we will do.” Thus they accepted the Torah outright, with all its precepts, not even asking for a detailed enumeration of the obligations and duties it involved
So last Sunday, June 9, I went to my synagogue to hear the Ten Commandments and reaffirm the covenant with G‑d and His Torah. There are actually 613 commandments, like little holy bread crumbs helping you find your way to G-d. But within the 10, they contain kernels from which the others come.
Number 6 is the one that seems to confuse people. It does not say “Thou shalt not kill”. It says “You shall not murder”. Which is a very different kettle of fish.
I also note it does not say that “You shall not murder by a so-called assault weapon” “You shall not murder using a adequate capacity magazine” “You shall not murder using a shoulder thingy that goes up” “You shall not murder using a ghost gun” “You shall not murder if you are in a citizen registry” “You shall not murder if your ammunition is registered” “You shall not murder if you are taxed so high you can’t afford to defend your family” “You shall not murder with a knife” “You shall not murder with an ax” “You shall not murder with a screwdriver” “You shall not murder with a rope” “You shall not murder with a car” “You shall not murder by drowning” “You shall not murder by poison” “You shall not murder with a chain” “You shall not murder with your hands”.
Just a very simple “You shall not murder”.
And yet, our politicians have put who knows how many gun control laws on the books that only law-abiding citizens will obey in the first place. Criminals are not the least affected by laws, the more the merrier for them.
We can live by G-d’s law or die by man’s I heard a Rabbi say.
So, for your information, here’s a handy clip out guide to the current crop of aspiring tyrants running as the Demoncratic candidates for President of the United States. Where I didn’t come up with a snazzy nickname for one of the aspiring tyrants, feel free to suggest one. Anything in italics is just my comments.
You have to apply to Washington for permission,reapply every five years Inform the executive branch of each weapon you own in your home
Use of the error ridden terrorist watch list to prohibit gun ownership.
Allow lawsuits against gun manufacturers.
“Red flag” gun confiscation
Bernie Sanders the millionaire communist
A nationwide ban on assault weapons
Expanded background checks
Ban on “high capacity magazine over ten rounds.”
A “common sense proposal on guns that will have the support, not of everybody, but a significant majority of American people.”
“We need strong sensible gun control, and I will support it,”
“I support what President Obama is doing in terms of trying to close the gun show loopholes.”
Mostly vague
Elizabeth “Fauxcahontas” Warren
Obligatory “Assault Weapons” ban
Obligatory “Universal background check”
Mostly vague
Kamala Harris
Vows to use executive action on “Day 1”
Reminiscent of Valerie Jarrett’s statement obama would be “ready to rule from Day 1”
Direct the ATF “to promulgate a regulation” that makes it so that “if you sell five or more guns for profit a year, you will be considered a ‘dealer’ and required to perform background checks.”
Ban Semi-automatic firearms
Direct the ATF “to promulgate a regulation” that makes it so that “if you sell five or more guns for profit a year, you will be considered a ‘dealer’ and required to perform background checks.”
Require universal background checks
Ban high-capacity ammunition clips
Make gun trafficking a federal crime (no mention if this applies to the ATF as well)
Prohibit those convicted of a federal hate crime from buying firearms.
Repeal the Protection of Commerce in Arms Act
Robert Francis “Beto” O’Rourke
Obligatory Universal background checks for gun sales
Obligatory weapons ban
“Red-flag” gun confiscation laws
Close the boyfriend loophole, the Charleston loophole, the gun show loophole, the online loophole<<gibberish
Fully invest in the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and research into gun violence<<taxpayer fraud
Pete Buttigieg
Obligatory Universal background checks for gun sales
Obligatory weapons ban
National gun-licensing system
Eric “Duke Nukem” Swalwell
Gun Confiscation
Drop nuclear weapons on American Citizens
You know, on Shavuot, we reaffirm our dedication to G-d and living according to his Torah commandments. I would suggest that to be a candidate for the office of President, the candidates of all parties need to reaffirm their dedication to our Constitution and the Bill of Rights. All of them, every single one. Including the Second Amendment.
But then, see my comment above about criminals and laws. The laws don’t apply to them, right?
“Can we discuss the loss of rights of people going to a concert because of the lack of assault rifle regulations?”1
Singer Sheryl Crow
“It sickens me the ease in which a TERRORIST can be sold a GUN. Is the ease really worth all these lives?! This needs to stop”2 [capitalization and punctuation in the original] tweeting about Las Vegas.
Gigi Hadid, top fashion model
“It would be wise to ban assault weapons, high-capacity magazines and silencers. None of which is excessive.”3
Elizabeth Banks, Hollywood actress
“Gun control now. Enough already. Grow the f__k up. The average person doesn’t need a f__cking maching (sic) gun. Enough already.”4 [Misspelling in the original]
Billy Eichner, Comedian, actor, writer, television personality.
“We love the traditions, the history, the technology of firearms, and we grew up with the sense of deep responsibility owning guns brings. We gun owners have a deeply held belief in gun safety, instilled by our parents and our grandparents. Owning a gun means living by a set of sternly ingrained rules. Those rules belong to us. We live by them. And when someone breaks those rules, we feel betrayed, appalled, and angry.”5
Todd Woodward
Leftist singer Cheryl Crow, from Kennett, Missouri is worth approximately $41 million dollars. No doubt she and the celebrities cited above earn enough to preclude rubbing shoulders with the hoi polloi. They probably have bodyguards as well. Armed bodyguards. If Crow knows anything about firearms and gun-laws, she keeps this secret well hidden. If model Hadid knew the Las Vegas mass murderer was a terrorist (no one else did) then why didn’t she speak up or call the FBI before the massacre? Comedian Eichner demonstrates a psychosis peculiar to those on the left to wit; they believe anger, shouting, and profanity lend credence and strength to their argument. The more self-righteous sanctimony they can work up, like a sweaty lather, the more correct they are. Grow up? For real Billy? I heard that. Someone in the room said, “Who cares. I don’t go to the movies and never heard of these people anyway.” Do you know how many followers they have on social media? Remember this is the USSA (United States of Shallow Americans) wherein if people like an actor, singer, model, or entertainer, then whatever they say must be true. Affection determines truth. Mental exertion need not apply. Let’s play a game. Let’s pretend we’re in a large room and seated at our feet are pop-culture icons all eager to learn. They begin with questions like; aren’t people running amuck in streets blasting each other left and right like in the movies and video games we make? Shouldn’t the government ban guns before they hurt more people? Why is anyone allowed to buy military assault weapons? And they’re all ears and no mouth. I know, I know, but play along anyway.
With respect to actress Elizabeth Banks, there are no firearms classified “assault weapons.” Anything that can be used to hurt another; a rolled up magazine, pencil, ashtray, rock, fishing hook, hayfork, Hillary’s laugh (like a cross between a strangled goose and Bob Dylan singing), or a refrigerator hardened biscuit can be an “assault weapon.” Okay, I get it, you meant “assault rifle” like AR15s, AK47s, Ruger Minis, and any rifle with a collapsible stock and fore-end grip. Right? Wrong. For a rifle to be classified as an “assault rifle,” it must possess specific characteristics including: (1) shoulder fired, (2) capable of full automatic fire, and (3) chambered in a cartridge “intermediate between pistol and revolver, and rifle ammunition; i.e., carbine ammunition.”6 Some are capable of selective fire meaning they have a switch to set them on safe, semiautomatic, fully automatic, and back again. By definition this excludes semiautomatic rifles because there is no switch or capability for full automatic fire. Instead their triggers must be pressed, one at a time, for each round fired, a system more than a century old. Other than caliber, similarities between military and civilian rifles are cosmetic. The latter are incapable of selective or full-automatic fire. Liberals invented the term “assault-weapon” to confuse and scare non- gun owners into believing commercial AR15s are the same as military fully automatic assault rifles.7
Okay, maybe you’re right, a songstress replies, but can’t semiautomatics be modified to fire full-auto? In some cases, yes but it takes skill and proper tools to make alterations which typically are irreversible. This false claim, semiautomatics can easily, and apparently legally, be converted to fully automatic, came up at my school in the form of an ambush.
When I was a high school teacher, a colleague in the foreign language department told her students anyone could purchase the part(s) at gun shows to convert semiautomatic rifles to full-auto. Why this came up in a Spanish class, I have no idea. English, Science, Math, SocialIST Studies, and other departments were compartmentalized into their own hallways and, only in my 3rd year, I’d met few teachers outside my own. Therefore, I was caught off guard when a teacher I’d never met (I had to ask a colleague her name) unleashed an attack on me in the teacher’s break room at lunch. Angry and emotional, she yelled at me in accusatory tones claiming anyone could buy the parts to convert semi into fully automatic firearms at gun shows. Collecting myself, I asked what the part was and how many gun shows had she attended? Her response was tempestuous insistence she spoke the truth and if I said otherwise, I was a liar. Why had she targeted me? An introvert in a department of belligerent very vocal leftists, I’d kept my views to myself from day one so her outburst was mystifying. I failed to grasp, until apprised later by the principal, what an intolerable scandal it was for an overwhelmingly liberal faculty to discover a conservative in their midst. And I was unaware to the degree which liberal teachers, who didn’t even know me, talked about me behind my back. MOTOWN’s The O’JAYS sang of my plight. The pattern was typical. Upon discovering a conservative colleague, liberals begin with mild teasing, then goading, next mockery and stepped up insults, and finally angry verbal attacks. When assigned to work with new teachers during faculty in-services, ultra-liberal union goon Mao ZeTodd was invariably lurking nearby. He’d rush over announcing in hysterical tones resembling an Atlanta CDC warning, I was the “school conservative” thus poisoning any chance to build a relationship before rumor, gossip, and lies reached their ears.
I’d attended many gun shows and never seen parts for sale to convert semi to a fully automatic rifles. Being no authority and wanting to get the facts straight, I contacted the local BATF. They said the Spanish teacher was wrong. Possession of any part permitting conversion of a firearm from semi to full-automatic is illegal and a felony. This is true even if one doesn’t possess a firearm. Members of local police departments and the BATF often visit gun shows ensuring everything is on the up and up. It is illegal to make, alter, or offer for sale, any part modifying the semiautomatic function of any firearm, pistol, shotgun, or rifle, to fully automatic. Kiss loved ones goodbye because you’re looking at up to 10 years in federal prison, a $250,000 dollar fine, and permanent revocation of the right to possess firearms and vote as well. Suppose you make the modification and take it to someone’s farm to try it out. A neighbor reports to authorities hearing automatic fire coming from this property. Based on probable cause the BATF secures and executes a search warrant finding the weapon(s). It gets very bad at that point. Altering firearms this way is something you should never have anything to do with. Don’t do it. Run from anyone doing this.8 Did I confront the Spanish teacher with the truth, the fact that she lied? No, it’s the whole introvert thing. Okay ask our glitterati, AR15s are not the same as M16s, but why does anyone need them anyway?
The right to keep and bear arms is recognized through the Declaration of Independence and Constitution as a G-d-given not man-created right from which individuals can’t be alienated [separated] by government. It has nothing to do with hunting or membership in the Military or “National” (sic) Guard and more importantly, is not dependent on notions of a “need.” Were this not so, those who rule, regardless of style of government from authoritarian to democratic, could define and redefine the “need” standard until it becomes an un-scalable wall. In response to mass shootings in the latter half of the 20th century, Britain eliminated self-defense as a reason to “need” firearms essentially banning pistols, revolvers, rifles, and shotguns. Because registration had been implemented years before, the government knew who had what when confiscation began.9 An inalienable right cannot be altered, infringed upon, or abolished by a majority vote of one’s neighbors or by government. Okay, says a pop-star, instead of banning guns, couldn’t we save lives by limiting magazine capacity? Who really needs “high capacity” magazines holding 15 to 30 rounds?
High compared to what? The correct term is “full capacity.” I have a question for you; how many rounds does it take to stop an attacker? A 2008 Rand Corporation study found the NYPD averaged an 18% hit rate in shootouts with armed criminals and a 30% rate when the bad guys didn’t return fire10 translating into an approximate hit ratio of 1 to 3 rounds per 10 round magazine. Roughly the same percentage, sometimes worse, holds true for departments across America. Would you limit magazine capacity for the police? Okay maybe not cops but it’s different with civilians. It’s the cops that face armed bad guys a movie star shouts. Based on my experience, more than a few civilians are better trained and know their way around firearms than the average cop. Considering victims, by virtue of their status as the intended target, are first on the scene, why should they be hamstrung by limited capacity magazines when police, on the way if 911 is called, are not? Now toss into the mix an attacker full of murderous rage, under the influence of alcohol and or drugs, and running full speed at you with knife or gun in hand. Forget all this talk about bringing a knife to a gun fight, one-shot stops, and knock-down power, we’re dealing with the real world, not Hollywood. Lethal hits or not, how many rounds will it take to stop the attacker from taking your life before he expires? No one knows. Further, criminals may attack in pairs or groups, one asking for the time or bus fare, distracting the intended victim. Will felons, already barred from possessing the firearms they acquire, obey magazine capacity limits? They tend to keep shooting until their victims are dead.
I see your hand up in the front. Didn’t you sing at a Super Bowl halftime a few years back? Never saw a skirt so short before. What about gun registration to prevent violent crimes, she says, ignoring my observation. Wouldn’t it keep them out of the hands of criminals? Does it now, I reply. Registration is record keeping on who legally purchased and owns what. Since criminals, who typically obtain firearms through theft and burglary are disinclined to register them, what difference would registration make? Consider automobile registration and driver’s licensing requirements. License plates on stolen cars reveal who owns not who stole it. Same with guns. Like firearms, many laws regulate the purchase and operation of automobiles but here the analogy breaks down. Fines, restrictions on and revocation of driving privileges, and even prison to compel compliance with traffic laws has failed. People still text, speed, run stop signs and red lights, steer wheels with knees because a cigarette is in one hand and a triple-decker two-pound bacon burger is in the other, and drive under the influence. Each year they murder thousands of people and hurt, maim, and cripple millions more yet no one calls for the elimination of automobiles even “if it will save one life.” There is no analogue with firearm ownership. Considering approximately 124 million people own about 270 million guns,11 and there were 505 deaths due to “accidental or negligent discharge of a firearm” in 2013,12 and of “2,596,993 deaths in the U.S. for the same year, 1% were related to firearms (most suicides),”13 gun owners have a remarkable record for non-criminal safe handling of firearms. This is not the result of registration or gun control laws but rather, the nature of firearm owners going back to America’s founding. Gun registration schemes typically lead to confiscation as in the U.K., Australia, and California. Speaking of California, one of its denizens, not sure if male or female, raises, his, er, her hand, and asks; why not “reasonable” gun laws, can’t you compromise?
Lewis Dovland notes regardless of rhetoric, gun-controller’s “ultimate goal” remains “confiscation of all guns in America.” Each law passed moves closer to this goal. Take same-sex marriage for example and imagine a line forming a continuum running from ‘A’ to ‘Z.’
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z
Normal marriage is ‘A’ with ‘Z’ being same-sex marriage. Proponents of same-sex marriage knew demanding ‘Z’ was too much to ask for, so they demanded ‘N’ instead. This sparked debate and resistance. Attorneys challenged state laws against same-sex marriage in court while supporters fanned out across the land branding opponents bigots, haters, extremists, and “homophobes.” Schools were pressured to adopt same-sex friendly curriculum under the rubrics; “tolerance” and “diversity.” Hollywood films and television shows seeded positive depictions of same-sex marriage. Stories planted in the liberal media echoed these portrayals. Opponents were depicted as rabid backwoods Christian fundamentalists chomping at the bit to launch new waves of Salem witch trials. Although the demand for ‘N’ appeared a failure, (citizens in states that remember the 10th Amendment still voted on the issue) in actuality proponents of same-sex “marriage” (sic) achieved ‘C,’ greater acceptance of and crumbling resistance to their agenda. The effort began anew only now, ‘C,’ is the new ‘A’ and there is no way to go back to the original ‘A.’ ‘N’ is again demanded and ‘C’ is again settled for but ‘C’ is now really ‘F.’ By constantly refining ‘A’ toward ‘Z,’ they ultimately got to ‘Z.’ In like manner, Confiscationists through so-called reasonable gun laws, hope to eliminate private possession of firearms in America.14
Gun control laws are predicated on the notion mere existence of firearms increases if not causes violent crime. The solution? Remove firearms from the equation and the problem is solved. This is why Confiscationists focus entirely on the means, i.e. guns, magazines, ammunition, and never on the criminal. But this notion has proven to be terribly flawed to the point of being false by criminologists and researchers from Gary Keck, David Kopel, Joyce Lee Malcom, to John R. Lott, Jr. If it was valid, in states and cities where obtaining firearms is almost impossible for the law-abiding, it would be even more so for criminals causing them to abandon their lives of crime becoming carpenters, waitresses, farmers, teachers, plumbers, nurses, and doctors. But this is not the case. Evil in the heart of malefactors causes evil deeds. Tools to implement evil will be found one way or another. As a policeman I transported criminals to court, jail, and prison. Recognizing some as return customers, I asked, why not turn away from their life of crime? Answer; it’s what they knew and what they liked. None sweated getting their hands on guns either. Fences (who trade in stolen property) and other criminals sell them or they could be acquired on the job during thefts and burglaries. Gun laws play no role in their calculations. “Reasonable” gun laws do nothing to transform wolves but instead, disarm the lambs. One cannot escape the fact that no greater deterrent to criminal assault and mass shootings exists than a public at large possessed of and trained in arms.
88 Students told me what the Spanish teacher said. Some kids bragged in my class knowing someone’s dad or dad’s friend who was altering semiautomatic rifles to fire full-automatic. I told the class in no uncertain terms this was illegal, a felony, and the consequences when they were caught.
99 David B. Kopel, The Samurai, The Mountie, And The Cowboy (Buffalo, New York, Prometheus Books, 1992), 70-95
1010 Nate Rawlings, “Ready, Fire, Aim: The Science Behind Police Shooting Bystanders, Time, at http://nation.time.com/2013/09/16/ready-fire-aim-the-science-behind-police-shooting-bystanders/ A New York Times study put the NYPD officer’s hit rate as high as 34%. See Al Baker, “11 Years of Police Gunfire, in Painstaking Detail,” New York Times, at http://www.newyorktimes.com. While I was at the Santa Clara PD range for annual qualification, our [not Santa Clara] new Chief walked in. The Range master said although I’d been waiting an hour, to let him go first. Later he told me the Chief showed up with revolver rounds in his shirt pocket, two different calibers, none matching his gun. I asked if the Chief had passed qualification. He made a funny face, rolled his eyes, and refused to answer on the basis that it might…
1111 John R. Lott, Jr., More Guns Less Crime, Third Edition, (Chicago, Illinois, University of Chicago Press, 2010), 1.
nbeknownst to me how, I was added to the email blast alert list of Democrat Party Panjandrum Nancy Pelosi known affectionately in some circles as 
