What a Coincidence: Another ‘Mentally Ill’ Muslim Goes on a Stabbing Spree in France

This time it was in Clermont-Ferrand, a pleasant, or formerly pleasant, city of around 150,000 people in central France. But it is a story that has played out many, many times before, and likely will many more times before people, after who knows what calamities, finally cast off the ridiculous fantasies of this Age of Absurdity.

Breitbart reported Sunday that “a Sudanese migrant was shot and then arrested by police after allegedly going on a stabbing spree in the French city of Clermont-Ferrand on Sunday, leaving at least three people wounded.”

It seems that this grateful refugee, who is 34 years old, “is alleged to have stabbed a neighbour at around 2:30 pm local time, before going on to attack other pedestrians. When police arrived on the scene, the man reportedly ‘charged at a police officer with his knife.’”

The charge, however, was not successful: “After seeing his colleague come under attack, a fellow officer on the scene shot the alleged knifeman, first in the arm, and then in the abdomen and side as the attacker continued to come towards him.”

This Sudanese migrant’s behavior is entirely in accord with the repeated calls from the Islamic State and al-Qaeda for individual Muslims to mount “lone wolf” attacks against innocent civilians in the West. The Islamic State issued this call back in Sept. 2014:

So O muwahhid, do not let this battle pass you by wherever you may be. You must strike the soldiers, patrons, and troops of the tawaghit. Strike their police, security, and intelligence members, as well as their treacherous agents. Destroy their beds. Embitter their lives for them and busy them with themselves. If you can kill a disbelieving American or European — especially the spiteful and filthy French — or an Australian, or a Canadian, or any other disbeliever from the disbelievers waging war, including the citizens of the countries that entered into a coalition against the Islamic State, then rely upon Allah, and kill him in any manner or way however it may be….If you are not able to find an IED or a bullet, then single out the disbelieving American, Frenchman, or any of their allies. Smash his head with a rock, or slaughter him with a knife, or run him over with your car, or throw him down from a high place, or choke him, or poison him….

So this fellow attacked several of the “spiteful and filthy French” with a knife. He didn’t manage to “slaughter” any of them, but that was not for want of trying.

Continue reading “”

They’re still bureaucrap

NYT Sounds The Alarm on the ‘Drastic Retrenchment’ Going On at ATF.

Proponents of the changes [to ATF rules] point out that some of the reversals would return regulations to what they were only a few years ago, before President Joseph R. Biden took office. After a series of deadly mass shootings, Mr. Biden signed into law gun control measures, ending nearly three decades of gridlock over whether and how to regulate firearms.

The divisiveness illustrates the complicated landscape for gun policy.

“With the Biden regulations that we got and put in place, we advanced the ball,” said Kris Brown, the president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, one of the country’s biggest gun control organizations.

But the Trump administration’s approach “takes us back 100 years,” she said. “It’s really decimating A.T.F.’s ability to regulate this industry.”

A White House official said the administration’s policies reflected Mr. Trump’s commitment to ensuring that Americans could exercise their Second Amendment rights, accusing the Biden administration of bypassing Congress and using the regulatory process to restrict gun rights. …

Since his first run for office, Mr. Trump has positioned himself as an ardent supporter of gun rights. In the run-up to the 2024 election, he vowed to be “the best friend gun owners have ever had in the White House.” Days after being inaugurated, he signed an executive order instructing the attorney general to scrutinize what he described as “ongoing infringements of the Second Amendment rights of our citizens.”

— Aishvarya Kavi in Trump Administration Rolls Back Dozens of Gun Regulations

 

Why We Need National Reciprocity, At a Minimum

National reciprocity legislation is now something we know the Trump administration is working on. While it’s not the ideal situation–national constitutional carry would be so much better–it’s far better than the status quo. As it stands, a permit in one state might be recognized in another, or it might not. You have to navigate the insane patchwork of laws, all to exercise a constitutionally protected right.

But if you have a driver’s license in Minnesota, you can drive anywhere in the United States. Your license is accepted everywhere, even though driving is considered a privilege and the right to keep and bear arms is a right.

Yeah, someone try to make that make sense.

Writing at Real Clear Politics, John Lott makes the case for national reciprocity.

Much of the gun-control debate centers on hypothetical risks. With reciprocity, however, we don’t have to speculate. With 21.5 million concealed handgun permit holders in the United States, we already know how they behave. In addition, most Americans already benefit from reciprocity. The average state recognizes permits from 30 other states, allowing permit holders to travel legally with their firearms.

Last year, when House Judiciary Committee passed national reciprocity along party lines, Democrats also opposed legislation that would allow current and retired law enforcement officers with at least ten years of service to carry firearms in facilities open to the public – including schools – while traveling across the country. Given their fear that allowing experienced current or retired law enforcement officers to carry would endanger public safety, it comes as no surprise that they also oppose allowing civilians to carry across state lines.

Congressional opponents of reciprocity warned that permit holders would commit crimes but cited no evidence to support that claim. The facts point in the opposite direction. Concealed handgun permit holders are extraordinarily law-abiding. States revoke their permits for firearm-related violations at rates measured in thousandths – or even ten-thousandths – of one percent. Police officers rarely commit firearm crimes, yet permit holders lose their permits for firearm offenses at only about one-twelfth the rate that police are convicted of firearm related crimes.

This is the typical anti-gun playbook. They treat unlawful gun carriers and permit holders as the exact same, even while pretending they understand the difference.

In their mind, the paranoia they accuse us of takes hold and rather than differentiate between good guys and bad guys, they see us all as bad guys in waiting.. They claim to be able to tell the difference, but this is a case of “deeds not words” applying. Their deeds tell a different story.

Permit holders are the most law-abiding people in the country. That’s been shown by years of data, also. It’s not some flash in the pan, but a trend that dates back a ways, likely to the day the first carry permit was issued.

Continue reading “”

Man shot after arguing with, shooting at another man, police say

ATLANTA — A man is recovering in a hospital before being taken to jail for a shooting incident in northwest Atlanta on Friday.

Officers responded to 859 Oak St. NW around 11:20 a.m. after receiving calls about a person shot. When they arrived, they found a 38-year-old Brandon Harper suffering from a gunshot wound and another man at the scene.

The person who shot Harper was quickly detained, according to police, and Harper was taken to a local hospital.

Investigations later determined that there was a verbal dispute between Harper and the man. Police said Harper was the aggressor and fired multiple shots at the detained man.

The uninjured man returned fire in self-defense, striking Harper twice.

Police also determined that Harper is a convicted felon and was wanted on multiple outstanding charges. He was charged in connection with this incident and will be transported to the Fulton County Jail after being discharged from the hospital.

The other man involved, whose identity was not released, will not face any charges.

NICS: Over 1.1 Million Guns Sold in June, NFA Saw 177 Percent Jump

In the lead-up to America’s 250th, the Second Amendment was well exercised, according to the latest data for last month’s gun sales.

According to data from the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s National Instant Criminal Background Check System, 1,886,539 background checks were processed in June 2026. That was a 1.2 percent decrease from the FBI NICS figure of 1,909,294 in June 2025.

However, that figure covers several types of checks, not just those done for gun sales.

The firearms industry trade group, the National Shooting Sports Foundation, distills the raw NICS numbers to remove gun permit checks and rechecks to yield the true number of checks done for over-the-counter sales. The adjusted figure for June 2026 stands at 1,123,006, a downright decent 11.7 percent increase compared to the June 2025 NSSF-adjusted NICS figure of 1,004,986.

Two big causes for the increase in those numbers were pending “assault weapon” bans in Rhode Island and Virginia that were set to take effect in July.

“Virginia saw a 241 percent increase over the same month last year, with 123,699 background checks for the purchase of a firearm,” Mark Oliva, public affairs officer with the NSSF, told Guns.com. “Likewise, Rhode Island had a 201 percent increase over June 2025 with 7,815 background checks completed.”

NFA transfers way, way up

In an update of what is shaping up to be the story of the year when it comes to firearms industry growth, the number of NFA items transferred nearly tripled when compared to last year, with June 2026’s figure of 166,677 transfers being a remarkable 177.1 percent jump compared to June 2025’s much more pedestrian 60,147.

This is no doubt due to the recent zeroing out of the circa 1934 taxes on the making and transfer of suppressors and short-barreled firearms.

United States v. Rose: A Second Amendment Skeptic Embraces the Present-Danger Rule

“Judge Frank Easterbrook, a Reagan-appointed federal appeals judge, with a long record of ruling against the Second Amendment has just ruled favorably for 2A. By applying the Supreme Court’s present-physical danger rule to an individual facing a lifetime gun ban due to a long-ago mental illness, Judge Easterbrook has broadened the scope of 2A protections. This decision is proof that Second Amendment jurisprudence is taking hold even among its skeptics. United States v. Rose is the latest stop on the incremental march restoring the right to keep and bear arms to anyone who is not, right now, a genuine threat of physical violence to themselves or to others.” – Professor Mark W. Smith, Four Boxes Diner host

A prominent federal appeals judge with a long record of ruling against Second Amendment claims has reached a legal conclusion that the gun-rights community has waited years to hear.

In United States v. Rose, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, in an opinion by Judge Frank Easterbrook, held that the lifetime firearms disability in 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(4) — which bars anyone ever committed to a mental institution — may be constitutionally invalid as applied to someone no longer mentally ill or physically dangerous. The court vacated the dismissal of the charges against Jonathan Rose and remanded for further fact-finding.

The Facts Behind United States v. Rose

In September 2009, Jonathan Rose was involuntarily committed to a mental hospital in Indiana; the record does not identify his diagnosis. He was released in January 2010 and was never recommitted. In 2022, Rose purchased several firearms from licensed dealers; other attempted purchases were denied after a database match flagged his 2009 commitment.

In 2023, a federal grand jury indicted Rose under § 922(g)(4) for possessing firearms after a mental-health commitment, and under § 922(a)(6) for lying on ATF Form 4473 by denying in writing the commitment ever occurred. The district court, applying Bruen’s “text first, historical-tradition second,” test dismissed the § 922(g)(4) count for lack of any evidence Rose is a present danger. The § 922(a)(6) counts survived; circuit precedent already treated a false statement to a dealer as compatible with the Second Amendment. The Biden DOJ then appealed on behalf of the federal government.

Continue reading “”

FLOCK™ surveillance camera company has been getting called out about the use of their cameras for goobermint surveillance. They went and stucj their feet into their mouths

Well, “Safety” has never been a right and such is a fallacious appeal to emotion, not to also point out:
“Für eure Sicherheit” (“For your safety”) was a common authoritarian justification used by the NAZIs to mask coercion, surveillance, and repression behind the language of protection.

Flock’s appeal obscures several important realities:

  • Mass data collection — license plates, vehicle movement, timestamps.
  • Networked surveillance — neighborhoods link into police databases.
  • False positives — misidentification can lead to wrongful stops.
  • Normalization of constant monitoring — cameras become default infrastructure.
  • Power asymmetry — those who control the system gain disproportionate visibility.

None of these are framed as risks; they’re framed as features.

 Study finds nearly 90 percent of students fake progressive views to appease liberal professors.

College students at Northwestern and the University of Michigan increasingly hide their conservative beliefs, with 88 percent admitting to faking progressive views to succeed academically or socially.

Researchers warn that this climate of ideological conformity suppresses authentic expression and encourages performative morality among both students and professors.

Patrick McDonald ’29 | Michigan Correspondent

A new study has concluded that college students are increasingly faking conformity to liberal opinions in order to academically succeed.

The study, published on Aug. 12, was spearheaded by Northwestern University researchers Forest Romm and Kevin Waldman.

Between 2023 and 2025, the researchers conducted 1,452 confidential interviews with undergraduate students at both Northwestern University and the University of Michigan to examine how ideological pressure influences students’ beliefs.

They found that 88 percent of students admitted to pretending to harbor more progressive views than they genuinely endorse with the aim of succeeding academically or socially.

“We do not fault students for perpetuating a climate that is hostile to intellectual integrity,” Romm and Waldman wrote about the results. “We fault the faculty, administrators, and institutional leaders who built a system that rewards moral theater while punishing inquiry.”

More than 80 percent of surveyed students reported submitting classwork misrepresenting their true beliefs.

Regarding controversial topics such as gender, politics, and family, students consistently censored themselves. While 77 percent said they disagreed with the idea that gender identity should override biological sex in contexts like sports and healthcare, virtually none felt safe voicing that view.

Romm and Waldman argue that the climate of compliance in higher education undermines identity formation—replacing conviction with performance.

“These students were not cynical, but adaptive,” they wrote. “In a campus environment where grades, leadership, and peer belonging often hinge on fluency in performative morality, young adults quickly learn to rehearse what is safe.”

Waldman told Campus Reform that one of the “most compelling” findings of the study is the “role of fear” in the findings, and that the same influences affect students and professors alike.

“Our data suggest that many professors, concerned about professional repercussions or cancellation, engage in performative displays of progressive orthodoxy rather than authentic expression,” said Waldman.

Romm added that, without open inquiry, “we risk continued erosion of social cohesion, growing distrust, and a decline in the cognitive skills necessary to navigate complex societal challenges.”

Conservative students have historically faced backlash for their beliefs on college campuses. Last year, Fox News interviewed college students who said they felt unable to express conservative opinions at their respective institutions.

Belmont University student Mya Conrad described being “yelled at” by professors, while Wisconsin students William Blathras and Gaby Gerard reported fearing academic consequences.

Campus Reform has contacted Forest Romm for comment. This article will be updated accordingly.

Lawsuit challenges Denver, state over gun & magazine bans.

DENVER–A Colorado gun rights groups and three Denver-area gun owners on Tuesday filed a federal lawsuit challenging Denver’s decades-old ban on so-called “assault weapons,” as well as Colorado’s statewide prohibition on standard-capacity ammunition magazines, arguing both laws violate the Second Amendment.

The suit was filed in U.S. District Court by the Colorado State Shooting Association (CSSA), the Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC), and individual plaintiffs Ray Elliott, Trevor Alley and Michael Vitco, all Denver residents.

CSSA is the Colorado state affiliate of the National Rifle Association (NRA).

At issue is Denver’s 1989 ordinance banning the sale, manufacture and possession of firearms the city labels “assault weapons,” and Colorado’s 2013 law banning magazines that hold more than 15 rounds. The complaint argues both laws are, in practice, magazine restrictions as Denver’s ordinance defines a banned “assault weapon” chiefly by whether it accepts a magazine over 15 rounds.

Continue reading “”

Hey Tech Bros, the Model for Surviving on the AI Frontier is Guns

Technology being the biggest, most society-altering industry means that questions of technological freedom have high stakes. If what Anthropic and OpenAI are allowing the government to do to their models becomes the norm, it will be more destructive to freedom than any gun control law.

These companies have raised $125 billion and $190 billion in funding, respectively. Companies committed to freedom would spend a few basis points of their funding to sue the government and preserve the technological freedom that the internet has forged. Instead, the current incumbents are willingly buffalo jumping away the freedom that is their birthright, trading it for a pat on the head from the US government.

The steelman of their position is that if they don’t go along, they won’t have companies left to defend. The rebuttal is that if they do go along, they won’t have companies worth defending.

People often think of tech freedom through a First Amendment lens, because that’s the only mainstream framework to articulate a technical legal argument for “The government is required to leave me alone.” But as tech becomes more dangerous — AI! drones! humanoid robots! biochemical research! — the Second Amendment is the better fit.

The Second Amendment embraces the idea that dangerous technology should be decentralized, and that the bad things about that will be solved by the good things about it. Gun rights are winning because they’ve leaned into that. AI is every bit as pivotal for individual freedom, so we should think about the rights to create, sell, buy, and possess it through the same lens.

— Open Source Defense in AI is the frontier of the Second Amendment