Cottonwood Heights, Utah police chief E. Robby Russo has issued a Special Order for his officers: They “will support” (emphasis added) Moms Demand Dead Victims. Visually.
Specifically, they “will support” Bloomberg’s MDA by wearing department-provided “orange” shirts under their uniforms in June.
Special Order 19-001
Gun violence is an epidemic in the United States, with 88 people killed by gun violence every days. Police Officers deal with the constant threats an are called upon to deliver tragic news to families touched by gun violence. The City Council has proclaimed June as “Gun Violence Awareness Month”.
As a symbol that we value human life the Cottonwood Heights Police Department will support our friends at Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America by wearing “orange” shirts under their uniforms as visual affirmation of the right of every American to live a life free from gun violence.
The department has obtained these shirt which are available in support services and authorized during the month of June.
/signed/
E. Robby Russo, Chief
This is published as an order. The language “will” is directive, as opposed to “may” which would have been suggestive. And, as it’s an order from their boss, I imagine the officers see this as mandatory anyway, regardless of what views they might personally hold on the subject of victim disarmament,
I don’t know what laws Utah might have regarding public servants forcing their underlings to express political opinions, but it’s possible the Hatch Act may come into play (and yes, it can apply to state and local officials, not just federal employees). Add the strong probability that the CHPD gets federal support through grants or the 1033 program, and I’d guess, as a non-lawyer, that Russo is subject to the Act.
Does the Act apply in this case? Utah’s latest legislative session has ended, so he isn’t forcing an expression of support of a specific bill. But he is forcing political support for a group that most definitely played an active role in pushing specific legislation.
Certainly victim disarmament/gun control is partisan, as evidenced by every Dem presidential wannabe saying so and trying to prove they’re each more anti-rights than their competitors. Not to mention House and Senate Dems blasting Republicans for footdragging on the push to feed the Constitution to the shredder.
So, in my opinion, Chief Russo is using his office to engage in partisan political activity, and is forcing his officers to do so as well. That looks very much like a Hatch Act violation. But I could be wrong.
At any rate, I wonder what the officers think about this, when the chief isn’t listening. For that matter, what do the apparently strongly Republican-leaning people of Cottonwood Heights think of the chief’s political shenanigans in support of Bloombergian harpies? Then again, they elected a city council that supports this.
Maybe that Hatch Act net can spread a little farther.
[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)
If this lawyer lost any gun cases, his clients may have grounds for appeal due to ineffective counsel. I just hope he didn’t convince a client to cop a plea to unlawful possession of paper weights.
It started with this news report.
Indiana teen built ‘ghost gun’ from online parts
In February a 17-year-old boy in Evansville, Indiana, went onto the website of Columbia-based firearms manufacturer MidwayUSA and spent $235.37 on parts making up 80 percent of a Glock 17 pistol.
It’s the usual Ooooh! Scary ghost guns BS. Pretty clearly the reporter doesn’t know the difference between an unfinished 80% receiver and a finished-but-unequipped one.It didn’t help that he went to Columbia, MO attorney Stephen Wyse for info.
Under federal law, long-gun unfinished receivers are classified as firearms, said Columbia attorney Steve Wyse. Handgun unfinished receivers are not classified as firearms under federal law, Wyse said.
That’s bad enough, but when I took to Twitter to point out the error things only got worse. Wyse replied.
I actually said that unfinished receivers to machine guns are considered firearms under federal law. The feds consider an AR-15 to be a machine gun
AR-15s are semiautomatic, not machineguns, unless unlawfully modified. And whether intended for a machinegun or not, an unfinished (80% or less) receiver is not considered a firearm; it’s a receiver-shaped paperweight. Compare the two:
An 80% lower.
A paper weight until it’s further milled. It could be milled to be an AR lower, or — assuming you’re properly licensed and doing it for mil/police, and not for civilian use (thanks, VNRA — it could be milled to take an M-16 trigger group. For now, it’s an inert chunk of metal.
A finished AR lower.
This, being by ruling of the ATF is a firearm. Note the lawfully required markings, including serial number.
But Wyse had to double down on the AR-15 = machinegun line.
The federal govt. defines a AR-15 receiver as a “machine gun”. Not my definition and not within my power to change
He’s l… being less than truthful, or he doesn’t understand the difference between an AR-15 (semiautomatic firearm) and the the M-16/M-4 family of assault rifles (select-fire). According to his bio, he’s a Democrat, so it could go either way. Ditto for his possible… confusion over 80% and finished lowers.
It’s a shame reporter Philip Joens didn’t go to an “expert” who actually knows what he’s talking about and/or is honest.
I hope Wyse hasn’t convinced a client to cop a plea for possession of an AR-15 semiauto “machinegun” or 80% lower. As I started, such a client would certainly seem to have grounds for appeal, and should get an opinion from a knowledgeable attorney.
Update, 5/29/2019, 5PM: Mr. Wyse has anticipated the “semi-auto problem” about which The Zelman Partisans have been warning since October 5, 2017. Wyse argues that bump-fire stocks make semiautomatic rifles “easily convertible” to machineguns under the recent BSTD rule.
While the bump-stock-type device rule was finalized (and is being challenged in federal courts), there has been no ruling actually establishing the “semi-auto = machinegun” equivalency. I don’t see any Advance Notice of Proposed Rule-making or NPRM for such a rule.
Yet.
[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)
There are days when I wonder if Harold Hutchison gets a check from the Vichy NRA.
Or maybe Bloomberg.
When All You Can Do Is Limit the Damage
The other benefit damage control can have is that it could prompt anti-Second Amendment extremists to kill a bill. This happened 20 years ago in the wake of the Columbine shooting. After the NRA’s damage-control bill became the preferred version in the House, anti-Second Amendment extremists voted it down, teaming up with “no compromise” Second Amendment supporters.
He’s a big fan of compromises, and wastes a lot of ink justifyingrationalizing the Vichy NRA’s preemptive surrenders.
compromise [ kom-pruh-mahyz ]
noun
a settlement of differences by mutual concessions; an agreement reached by adjustment of conflicting or opposing claims, principles, etc., by reciprocal modification of demands.
Mutual. As in, I’ll give you this, you give me that. The way the VNRA plays it goes thusly:
Victim Disarmers: “We want a [insert VD wishlist].”
VNRA: “OK, we’ll give you [insert VD wishlist]. What will you give us?”
VD: “The shaft.”
VNRA: “What? No.”
VD: “Fine. We’ll give you half the shaft now, and the rest later.”
VNRA: “Sold!”
More specifically, the Firearms Owner Protection Act, for example, was a VNRA compromise. They gave the VD carriers machineguns. The VDs gave us…. must… not… say.. it… gave us interstate transport protections and a registry ban. Those concessions to our side have been so effective that no one has been arrested for lawfully transporting a firearm in New York since, and the ATF stopped copying dealer records en masse. And it isn’t like it also led to the banning of bump-fire stocks (in which the VNRA bypassed compromise and went straight to preemptive surrender).
Oh. Wait.
Here’s a three-part challenge for Mr. Hutchison:
1. Name one VNRA compromise in the past 50 years that resulted in a net gain for Second Amendment rights.
Gain; not deferred or delayed loss. Not It coulda been worse. HELLER doesn’t count; they tried to stop it, and only jumped in later when they realized it was going forward to SCOTUS. MCDONALD doesn’t count; SAF and ISRA, not VNRA.
2. Explain how refusing to compromise hurts Second Amendment rights. Specifically:
The other benefit damage control can have is that it could prompt anti-Second Amendment extremists to kill a bill. This happened 20 years ago in the wake of the Columbine shooting. After the NRA’s damage-control bill became the preferred version in the House, anti-Second Amendment extremists voted it down, teaming up with “no compromise” Second Amendment supporters.
The VNRA-backed House version expanded background checks. The Senate version expanded background checks even more. The no-compromise faction caused the bill to die in the House. It appears that not compromising prevented the expansion — lesser or greater — in that fight. Explain why I’m wrong.
3. Explain why we should ever compromise on an enumerated, constitutionally “protected” right at all.
The Bill of Rights, including the Second Amendment, is a list of things specifically protected from government abuse. We aren’t supposed to have to compromise on any of it, because these rights were hard-coded into the document. But compromisers let slip in the idea of differing levels of scrutiny. At least “strict scrutiny” used to be the default setting for all of the Bill of Rights, but the VNRA bargained it away — we’re now lucky if 2A human/civil rights even get intermediate scrutiny.
Suddenly, infringements become hunky-dory so long as the government invokes a magic need to override what was never supposed to be overriden, for some alleged public good.
Even the infamous 1857 decision in Dred Scott saw the majority maintaining that if Scott were recognized as a citizen then he — as an individual — would have the right to bear arms and all other enumerated rights; because that’s what rights are without question. But in 1934, the VNRA capitulated on 2A rights, and the Second Amendment was effectively edited to add “unless we want to.”
Please Mr. Hutchison, tell what good “compromise” has done us, and why we should be compromising in the first place.
[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)
Ed. note: This commentary appeared first in TZP’s weekly email alert. If you would like to be among the first to see new commentary (as well as to get notice of new polls and recaps of recent posts), please sign up for our alert list. (See sidebar or, if you’re on a mobile device, scroll down). Be sure to respond when you receive your activation email!
So adding to the list of who hates Israelis, I guess we can add…..Israel? For those that don’t know, the Falestinian Authority headed by Abu Mazen, one of the planners and financiers of the Munich Massacre is getting armored vehicles. And how is this happening? Well, they were donated by the European Union. And the Falestinian Authority (FA) has been demanding them. In the past Israel had refused to allow them into Judea and Samaria. But now in an effort to offset the arab hissy fit at Israel’s cutting the amount of money they give the FA every month Israel is giving in and allowing the FA their armored vehicles. This is a phenomenally bad idea.
The last time PA armored vehicles aroused controversy was in 2000 when a paper published by the Ariel Center for Policy Research identified the PA armored threat to Jewish communities in Judea and Samaria, saying “Because the IDF limits yishuv self defense to small arms, the growing armor vehicle capability of the PA would render the assault troops it carries invulnerable to yishuv defenders. The IDF gate guards do not have anything to stop these vehicles. The standard sliding gates for all yishuvim would buckle under the impact of such armored vehicles, and many yishuvim lack even this ‘obstacle’ – such that the only thing separating between the attacker and the yishuv is a moving aluminum arm painted red and white.”
The report went on to say that “The PA armored vehicle force is not capable of challenging the IDF, but would be unstoppable in a first strike on yishuvim. Therefore, it is reasonable to assume that that is their purpose.
“Although it is possible to gain sudden entry into yishuvim by using commandos or even less prepared troops – as the examples of Ariel and Ofra show – armored vehicles provide a rapid capability to do so that ground troops cannot match.” The report can be seen in the original Hebrew here.
At that time, the IDF justified PA armored vehicles according to Oslo saying Arafat needed them to protect his government from Arab extremist elements, while at the same time trying to deny their existence.
The tax money was cut to the FA because the FA uses it to pay terrorists to kill Jews. So Israel was paying the murderers, the FA is just the middle man. So the FA is throwing a hissy fit by refusing to take any of the tax money. Ok. I can’t believe Israel gives them money anyway. It’s like installing metal detectors for the arabs on The Temple Mount. Everyone else already had to go through metal detectors. But after arabs killed Israeli policemen on the Temple Mount and Israel installed metal detectors the arabs pitched a hissy fit, refused to return to the Temple Mount and PM Netanyahu took them down. What a shame, I hear it was great for a few days on The Temple Mount, no screaming harridans.
But this latest decision will leave Israeli citizens at a decided disadvantage in terms of defending themselves. Small arms against armored vehicles while they wait for the IDF to arrive? Nonsense! Stupidity!
I have a solution. Going back in Israel’s history there was another time when Jews were denied the most effective self defense tools. This isn’t the first time a government has deprived Jews of effective tools to defend themselves while arming the enemy. It’s just the last time it wasn’t their own government. It was Britain with the “White Paper” of 1939. It remained if effect until 1948. The white paper limited Jewish immigration into Israel at a time when Jews most needed to flee Europe, before it became Europistan. Why? Because it would upset the delicate arab sensibilities. Perhaps tlaib’s kindly grandmother hadn’t explained things to the other arabs yet, this was before 1964 when the arabs suddenly and auto-magically became Falestians. And the British most definitely limited weapons access to only the arabs. Jews were suppose to rely on the British government to keep them self. Which worked out horribly.
And thus began the Jewish effort to protect the new Jewish residents in Israel. There were three different groups, Haganah, Irgun and Lechi.
Here is some basic info on the genesis of the three groups. I’m not crazy about how some of them are described, but it does tell how the came into being.
So when I found out that Israel is arming their enemy arabs against their own Israeli citizens I thought back to pre-state Israel and immediately after statehood was declared. I’m wondering what the towns and villages have to fight back with until the IDF gets there. If all you have is small arms against armored vehicles, well, there must be something better. They need guerrilla tactics.
So I wondered if there were any of the old Davidka mortars hanging around.
Yes, a real Davidka
Availability of weapons and ammunition is critical.
And then I thought about the ship, the Altalena, if you didn’t know it, Altalena was a pseudonym for Zev Jabotinsky. Understand that this ship was bringing weapons and fighters for the impeding fight for Independence, weapons and fighters desperately needed. It also was carrying new immigrants to Israel. Ben-Gurion should be ashamed.
According to the book Altalena by journalist and political analyst Shlomo Nakdimon, Ben-Gurion instructed the Israeli Air Force to sink the ship on the high seas, long before it approached the shore. This would have resulted in much greater loss of life aboard. Gordon Levett, a Mahal volunteer pilot, wrote in his book Flying Under Two Flags that Heiman Shamir Deputy Commander of the Air Force, tried to convince non-Jewish pilot volunteers to attack the ship. However, three pilots refused to participate in the mission, one of them saying, “You can kiss my foot. I did not lose four friends and fly 10,000 miles in order to bomb Jews.”
Why am I telling this old story now? Because I am concerned about the way some Americans, and painfully some Jews, misunderstand the situation in Israel and what occurred there for the last hundred years, and now. Some still blame Israel for the agony there. Some withhold their support because they find lack of perfection in this Jewish State, which is fighting continuously for its survival. Some sit here in judgement on a state and people of which they have little understanding.
When Israel was celebrating its fiftieth anniversary, my picture was on the front page of the Sacramento Bee and my family’s participation in the liberation of Israel was told inside, written by a “liberal” Jew. The writer emphasized the suffering of the Palestinians, with little understanding of the suffering of the Israelis. After all, the Israelis are the “strong” ones, therefore the “bad” ones. (Most of the media approach the Arab-Israel problem that way.) The article in the Bee was nicely done, sanitized, the way most Americans want to see this story. Most of us like to have things nicely packaged, refraining from seeing the pictures of true agony in order to continue our lives without too much involvement. Much of this shield was broken on September 11. We started to see the world in truer colors. I hope we can now see the Israeli story also as it really is, and not through the utopian eyes of unrealistic people.
So thinking back to those days of fighting for Independence, and every weapon counting as you faced overwhelming odds and lack of tools I got to wondering, could perhaps the inhabitants of the towns in jeopardy because of the decision, go together and raise the Altalena? Are there enough weapons in functional order?
And this is yet another case of how things can go sideways when only the government has the weapons, or the big guns. They will decide who gets to have them.
In America we have “Duke Nukem” Swalwell, Bear has well documented his stance on using nuclear weapons of American citizens that he later walked back as a “joke”.
So we know that any Demoncratic presidential candidate at this point probably hates Israel, hates or close to hates Jews, at least in comparison to the embrace of the religion of pieces, hates Christians. Is Ilan Omar still on the foreign relations committee today? Hates babies, hates guns, and hates strong confident self-reliant women. And men, they seem to hate ya’ll a lot. Unless of course, you think how they tell you to think. I think they hate G-d, apple pie, America and I bet they even hate George Strait. Sick bunch, not a one of the 4,325 of them running for President don’t have some scheme to confiscate, ban, restrict or in some form or fashion control guns and/or citizens, up to and including the aforementioned nukes.
So Israel is arming the enemy, Duke Nukem and his crew consider us, U.S. the enemy and while I don’t foresee a President Trump allowing a foreign country to come in here and attack citizens in an effort to render us defenseless the same can most certainly not be said of a Clintoon, Fauxcahontas, Bozo, Swalwell, Bernie, Occasional-Cortex or any of the others of that lack of caliber. I could see them happily calling in the UN.
Which makes me very happy that President Trump withdrew the United States from the Arms Trade Treaty.
Then there’s the matter of the Second Amendment. Oh, the treaty’s supporters assure us that the ATT won’t affect our right to own guns. But as Mr. Bromund points out, they also refuse to make that clear in the treaty text. So sure, the treaty (at least as now written) is no gun grab. But gun-control activists could still use it to advance their goals.
And let’s not forget a major flaw in the Arms Trade Treaty, at least if we’re to take it seriously. China and Russia, both of which are major arms exporters, aren’t party of the treaty.
So looking at all this, I’m thinking the Lehi was correct in no compromise, I’m thinking “Oh Herman Wouk, what would you have written about this sorry state of affairs?” A few more days, and he’d have been 104. May his memory be for a blessing. And I’m wondering if we need to finance some orchards and vineyards in Israel, specifically Judea and Samaria.
I have trouble just keeping up with bills in DC and my own state, so I missed this Pennsylvania victim disarmament bill until this morning. But once I heard about, I knew I had to check for the devil in the details; they’re always there. And I’ve learned that looking for the worst case scenarios hidden in legislation is worthwhile.
I’m not up on the political scene in Pennsylvania, so I can’t say how likely this is to pass and get signed into law. I hope in-state human/civil rights supporters have this on their radar.
First, the bill requires mere private citizens to register every firearm other than some antiques. That’s bad enough.
The registration process would a pain in the nether regions. Two passport-style photos taken within the past 30 days, fingerprinting, background checks. Any crime of “violence” — not just felony, or misdemeanor domestic violence — ever is a disqualifier. There is no “shall issue” in this; the State Police can still deny your registration.
And should they deny your application, you’ll have a mere ten days to get a lawyer and file an appeal. If you lose, you’ll have to dispose of the firearm(s) you naively told them you have. That’s another devilish detail; there is only one legal way to do so: Turn it over to the State Police. No compensation. You can’t sell it, or move it out of state.
Registration would be annual. And being the cynical sort — think of the nastiest implementation of a law, and plan for it — I see another potential problem.
Applications for renewal shall be made by a registrant 60 days prior to the expiration of the current registration certificate.
That’s rather specific. Not within 60 days of expiration, not no later than 60 days prior to. 60 days exactly.
State Police: “Sorry, Mr. Smith. Your renewal application is 61 days before your registration expires. Disapproved! Turn in that gun.”
Sucker: “But your office is closed tomorrow. Can I renew on Monday?”
SP: “Nope. That would be 58 days, past the deadline.”
And then we get to Section 5. Additional duties of registrant. I’ll just skip past the parts about notifying the police of thefts and any change in any detail on your registration certificate (did I mention you have to carry that around with the firearm, not safely stored in your file cabinet?) within 48 hours.
(3) Keep a firearm in the registrant’s possession unloaded and disassembled or bound by a trigger lock, gun safe or similar device unless the firearm is in the registrant’s immediate possession and control while at the registrant’s place of residence or business or while being used for lawful recreational purposes within this Commonwealth.
You might think that’s the usual (un)safe storage requirement that victim disarming politicians have been trying to foist on honest gun owners, in an effort to provide safe workplaces for criminals (hard to shoot a violent intruder with a locked up defensive tool). Read it again. Slowly.
Unloaded, and disassembled or locked away. With only three exceptions.
1. In the registrant’s immediate possession and control while at the registrant’s place of residence.
2. In the registrant’s immediate possession and control while at the registrant’s place of business (and that has to be listed on your registration application).
3. While being used for lawful recreational purposes.
There are no exceptions for defensive carry. I suppose you could argue that shooting bad guys is fun, but that might trash your self-defense claim.
There are no exceptions for transporting the firearm from residence to work (or recreational shooting area). There are no exceptions for taking it to a self defense class.
I think that was intentional. It looks like it was modeled on the New York City restriction currently being appealed to the Supreme Court, but written to evade any favorable — to gun owners — SCOTUS ruling: We don’t restrict where you can take it, like NYC did. It just has to be nonfunctional while you transport it.
Please tell me Pennsylvania RKBA groups are on this and will stop it.
[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)
Apparently she never heard of the Undetectable Firearms Act of 1988. Yes, 1988; undetectable guns have been unlawful for 31 years. That’s puts her down in the same low IQ bracket as Pennsylvania’s Madeleine Dean who entered a bill to specifically make it illegal to violate the UFA.
26. “UNDETECTABLE” MEANS NOT DETECTABLE BY AN X-RAY MACHINE, PORTABLE PULSED X-RAY GENERATOR, METAL DETECTOR OR MAGNETOMETER WHEN SET AT A STANDARD CALIBRATION, OR ANY OTHER MACHINE USED TO SCREEN OR INSPECT A PERSON AND AN OBJECT FOR A FIREARM, RIFLE, OR SHOTGUN.
The required (by the UFA, and generally if you don’t want your gun to explode) metal will show up on an X-ray.
And should someone 3-D print a plastic item sans metal…
Yes, plastic does show up in X-rays.
At least the NY Dims are wasting their time on this instead of more real infringements.
[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)
Well, the 14th is recognized as Israeli Independence day יום העצמאות, Yom HaAtzmaut and in 1948 the 5th of Iyar was. This year it was not, this year it was the 10th of May. I was fortunate enough to be at a table in my local JCC, nope I wasn’t eating. The Shaliach (emissary from the Jewish Federation) asked if I would like to teach about Israel at Yom HaAtzmaut. Oh yes! YES!! What did he want me to teach, since I am pretty sure there are far better qualified, though perhaps not more enthusiastic. I ended up having a table with a map and some post cards from Israel dating back to the 60s and 70s, as well as some of my own photos. I have an idea for a presentation I would like to work up and have on hand for the future. I called my presentation “Israel Past and Present”. I met some very interesting people, and had a great time. I loved it, just loved it.
In my Hebrew class we learn all kinds of things, and in one lesson my teacher who grew up on a Kibbutz was teaching us a song that was in our school book. It’s called Boker Boker Ba. It means “Morning morning comes”.
It you want a real treat you can listen to this one, I think she said it was recorded on a Kibbutz. The words of the song are basically about celebrating morning coming because they were going off to work on the kibbutz, lunch was for a meal, evening was to rest and at night they assembled. She explained that they were just so glad to have land of their own, that they couldn’t wait to get up of a morning to go work it. I might mention in a kibbutz no one actually owns land, it’s owned by the kibbutz. Many of the Jews that came to Israel came from communist and socialist counties where they hadn’t been allowed to own land, and they were used to the big government where no one owns anything. It’s all property of the state. I understand the feeling. Having land that you love, that you want to work and don’t want to lose. I get it. They are the Israeli version of Scarlett O’Hara,
It’s the land Katie Scarlett, it’s the land~~Gerald O’Hara
So, according to the Falestinian lip flapper, no, not sarsour, the other one, tlaib, those Jews coming after the Holocaust are among the first Jews in Israel. Tlaib #AntisemiticLiar and omar #AntisemiticLiar seem to be having a contest as to who can spout the most outrageous lies, then claim persecuted victim status the quickest. This last week I guess it was tlaib. One of my favorite writers, Jack Engelhard has picked up on their pattern.
‘There’s always kind of a calming feeling I tell folks when I think of the Holocaust, and the tragedy of the Holocaust, and the fact 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, have been wiped out, and some people’s passports. I mean, just all of it was in the name of trying to create a safe haven for Jews, post-the Holocaust, post-the 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, right, in many ways. But they did it in a way that took their human dignity away, right, and it was forced on them.’”
The first wave, known as the “First Aliyah,” took place prior to political Zionism, in the late 1800s….
The Second Aliyah , prior to World War I, ….
After World War I and until 1923, the Third Aliyah came to Israel. …
The Fourth Aliyah, which took place over a short period of time from 1924 to 1929,….
The Fifth Aliyah coincided with the rise of Nazism in Germany and extreme nationalism across Eastern Europe
And just who were the Jews that came prior to WWII buying the land from? The Ottoman Turks. Who didn’t want to sell it to them, and made it very difficult legally for them to buy land, that did ease up later. So what were the arabs doing in Israel prior to the Jews buying the land? They didn’t own the land, they worked it for the Turks. The Ottoman census of 1875 has Jews listed as the population majority of Jerusalem, by 1905 Jews made up two thirds of the population majority of Jerusalem. This has a lot of interesting goodies.
So tlaib shoots off her ignorance, and shares her comforting feelings about the Holocaust and Republicans including President Trump are outraged. Steny Hoyer and San Fran Nancy Pelosi were outraged as well, outraged I say! At Republicans and President Trump, not tlaib, her they stood up for.
Predictably, tlaib rushed to get her “victimhood prize” happy meal.
Shall I say it again? Demoncrats are not our friends. Need I point out that the arabs collaborated with hitler? History doesn’t appear to be tlaib’s strong suit.
”President Truman, by granting immediate recognition to Israel, led the world in extending friendship and welcome to a people who have long sought and justly deserve freedom and independence.
We pledge full recognition to the State of Israel.
Yes, some arabs may have rescued Jews at different time. But I have a feeling these Jews experienced the “rescue” of tlaib’s family.
Hevron & Safed riots
There were riots in Israel in 1929, for example in Hevron (and here) and Safed. Long before 1948 when she was attacked by the five arab nations at once after Ben-Gurion declared statehood. These things were easy to pull off because the British didn’t allow the Jews to have guns. The arabs? Whatever.
Map of attack on Israel 1948
It’s not that way today. The British don’t control Israel, and the people are less helpless. Though gun control for citizens is not good and until Moshe Feiglin is Prime Minister that is not likely to change. Maybe in a couple of years.
British plaque
You may remember one of my heroes Ari Fuld was killed not long ago. His brother Hillel put out a statement that fellow writer Y.B. ben Avraham shared with me.
Locking Up Guns Could Reduce Teen And Childhood Firearm Deaths By A Third
Most US households with children do not safely store firearms in the way the American Academy of Pediatrics recommends: locked up and unloaded. If parents simply locked up all their guns, then up to a third of gun suicides and accidental deaths among children and teens could be avoided, researchers estimate in a new study.
This modeling study using Monte Carlo simulation estimated that 6% to 32% of youth firearm deaths (by suicide and unintentional firearm injury) could be prevented, depending on the probability that an intervention motivates adults who currently do not lock all household firearms to instead lock all guns in their home.
So the researchers actually came up with an oddly wide range of 6% to 32% (which is less than a third). So far, so good. That would be nice to know. How did they do that?
DESIGN, SETTING, and PARTICIPANTS: A modeling study using Monte Carlo simulation of youth firearm suicide and unintentional firearm mortality in 2015. A simulated US national sample of firearm-owning households where youth reside was derived using nationally representative rates of firearm ownership and storage and population data from the US Census to test a hypothetical intervention, safe storage of firearms in the home, on youth accidental death and suicide.
This wasn’t even a dubious “synthetic control” (make up imaginary states by selectively combining real states) study. Simulation. They didn’t use real data. They made it up. Then they applied “hypothetical intervention” to their imaginary data.
For the record, you can stop right there. The “study” is meaningless. But the fact that their “youth” includes 18 and 19 year old adults would have told you that anyway.
I also found it amusing that they created their imaginary country using firearms numbers and storage methods gathered in the National Firearms survey, in which 45% of selectees declined to participate, leaving only those stupid enough to tell strangers how many guns they have and how they’re stored, if even if they are locked up.
Then there is this:
we assumed that all deaths resulted from firearms kept in homes where youth resided.
Invalid assumption, which even the most cursory web search could have told them. Even The Trace admits that 1 in 5 youth suicides are committed with guns not kept in the person’s home.
I could go about things like them doing a study about 0-19 year olds but using data from studies on 0-17, or that gun-owning adults (18, 19) need only unlock their safely stored gun and do the deed. Instead, let me explain how they could have come to meaningful conclusions.
At least a dozen states have so-called “safe storage” laws. For each state, graph the unintentional firearms death rate per 100,000 for people 0-17, for the period of 1999 to 2017 (years chosen because their readily available in WISQARS).
Then graph the firearms suicide rates for the same group and period.
Now identify the point in time when the safe storage law went into effect in each state.
Note the trend. Did the rate increase or decrease abruptly? Did the pre-law trend simply continue? Are there other discontinuities in the trend at other points in time which you can correlate to some known event (such as a sudden increase during a period of high unemployment)?
Compare the trends of the states. Did each state experience the same trend (more likely to be a correlation with the storage law), or do the differ significantly?
We have 30-something states without “safe storage” laws. Pick a dozen of those, preferably states with otherwise similar demographics as one of the “safe” states; the idea being to minimize the effect of non-safe storage factors.
Graph the same data for the same period, and analyze for the same trends.
How do the “unsafe” trends compare to the “safe” trends?
Now you have data to support a real conclusion.
But wait! There’s more.
Run another set of state by state graphs; this time for number and rate of firearms-related murders. We want to see if locking up one’s security had any negative effects. Saving one kid at the expense of 2-3 murder victims is expensive.
If you really want to be comprehensive, graph home burglaries and violent crime rates for the same period. Did locking up security embolden burglars and rapists?
But real data might not give you the results you want.
[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)
The STEM School shooting in Colorado gave the media the usual chance to muddle information. The original reporting I found said that the casualties were comparatively low because law enforcement arrived on-scene in two minutes and subdued the assholes. By yesterday, we began hearing a story that differed somewhat: student Kendrick Castillo “rushed” one of the chumbuckets.
This morning…
No thought for their own safety: Hero students disarm gunman
The three students who disarmed a gunman in a Colorado school shooting leapt up from their desks without a word and with no thought for their own safety when they spotted the gun, recounted one of the young men.
[…]
Authorities said the actions of Castillo, Bialy and Joshua Jones minimized the bloodshed from Tuesday’s attack at the school south of Denver that wounded eight students along with killing the 18-year-old Castillo.
Kendrick Castillo
Brendan Bialy
Joshua Jones
These young men rushed an active shooter, and disarmed him, at the cost of one of their own dead and one wounded. Not police.
Thank you, gentlemen.
As for the media… So far, the younger attacker has been reported as male, female, male identifying as (sometimes “transitioning to”) female, and female identifying as (or transitioning to) male. I’m not sure which is more confused: chum or reporters.
[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)
[Some readers may think that this column is just about immigration, and is inappropriate for a site dedicated to Second Amendment issues. Please consider the potential effects of importing large numbers of people with little to no knowledge — much less respect for — constitutionally protected rights. – Editor]
Guest column by Historian
Quisling. A curious and somewhat whimsical sounding word. What does it mean? I’ve asked, and surprisingly few of my acquaintances knew the origin or meaning of the word; most of the responses were more or less humorous.. One acquaintance of mine said that it was a short quiz. Another made a humorous reference to the result of an amorous encounter between Mama Quis and Papa Quis. The word seems to have largely dropped out of our discourse, and is not often heard to-day. Some might argue that this is right, that old words, regardless of how cute they are that are no longer applicable to the world we live in today, should be retired. But the origin and meaning of the word “quisling” is neither cute nor innocent, nor is it at all funny. And it is as relevant today as it was when it was coined.
On April 9th, 1940, just over 79 years ago, military units of Nazi Germany invaded neutral Norway, supported by the fascist politician and head of the Norwegian Nazi Party, (Nasjonal Samling,) Vidkun Quisling, who then promptly staged a coup against the fleeing legitimate Norwegian government. Beginning at least as early as 1939, Quisling had urged Nazi Germany to invade neutral Norway, making trips to Germany to urge Hitler to invade Norway, and conspiring with German Intelligence agencies, providing information about Norwegian military plans and defences to the German military.
In 1942, Quisling became the Nazi-appointed Minister-President, under Reichskomissar Josef Terboven, and later that year, the Norwegian Endlosung commenced. While the numbers are a miniscule fraction of those murdered in Germany and Eastern Europe, about 1/3 of Norway’s Jews were sent to German extermination camps, mainly Auschwitz, under Quisling. Quisling supported the invasion of his country, overthrew his lawful government, and administered the displacement and murder of his countrymen, for political advantage.
It is worth noting that anti-semitism had, and still has, deep roots in Norway; Jews were forbidden to settle there until 1851, and only about 2100 Jews lived there before the Nazi invasion. Over 700 were murdered during the war; the rest fled the country, mostly to Sweden or England. Today there are two synagogues in Norway and about 700 Jews, both of which are subjected to attacks. In contrast, today there are about 160,000 Muslims there, over 3% of the population, let in by modern-day quislings.
So what is a ‘quisling’? A quisling is a traitor who collaborates with and supports a foreign invasion of his country; the term was coined shortly after the Nazi invasion by the Times of London, which referred to Norwegian collaborators as quislings. This term was commonly used during the Second World War, and is still occasionally used today- Paul Krugman recently referred to Donald Trump as a quisling for his supposed (and now shown to be non-existent) support of Russia.
Which begs the question- who are the REAL present day quislings among us here in these presently united States?
Who are those who have conspired to block the administration of US law, allowing millions of illegal aliens to criminally invade the US, and to remain here, committing further crimes?
Who are those who have funded and encouraged the above mentioned invasion of these presently united States?
Who are those who have treasonously refused to fund the defence of the borders of these presently united States?
Who are those who have, just as Vidkun Quisling did, uttered slanderous anti-Semitic diatribes against their supposed countrymen?
Who are those who have, just as Vidkun Quisling did, attempted a coup against their lawful government?
Who are those who have, for political advantage, subverted law and justice, aided and abetted murder, suborned non-enforcement of the laws, and supported invasion by large numbers of criminals and fanatics whose views and moral code is entirely opposed to the entire basis of Western Civilization?
What do you call such people?
Quislings, one and all. Traitorous anti-American collaborators with murderous fanatics, AND THEY MUST BE CALLED SUCH.
Nancy Pelosi? Quisling.
George Soros? Quisling.
Ocasio-Cortez? Quisling.
Omar-Ilhan? Quisling.
Comey/Rosenstein/Strozk? Quislings, one and all.
Anyone, of any political party, who is complicit in the ongoing attempt to subvert and overthrow the Republic by means of an invasion by illegal immigrants, is a Quisling.
Vidkun Quisling allied himself with those he thought would win the Second World War in the 1930s. He was rewarded by his Nazi masters, and ruled Norway during the German occupation. In 1945, Quisling was arrested, tried and convicted of murder and treason after the collapse of Nazi Germany, and shot in Oslo Norway in October 1945. Sic Semper Tyrannis.
Our modern day quislings would do well to remember his fate, although they certainly will not. So much the worse for them. “ Those who do not study history are doomed to repeat it.”
Will you remember the word?
Will you apply it where appropriate?
Quisling.
Jews. Guns. No compromise. No surrender.
Password Reset
Please enter your e-mail address. You will receive a new password via e-mail.
