Missouri Making Moves to Bump School Safety Up a Notch or 12

Keeping students safe is as universal of a goal as you’re going to find in such a divided country. The problem, however, is that we’re divided to a point that we can’t even agree on how to keep them safe. Some people want to restrict the rights of ordinary people to such a degree that they can delude themselves into thinking students can’t be hurt by violent people.

The rest of us recognize that violent people aren’t going to be stopped with laws. If they were, the laws against hurting kids would be more than enough.

So, in that vein, it seems Missouri is stepping up the game a few dozen notches and really taking the goal of keeping kids safe seriously.

Continue reading “”

Many Police agencies have never liked the idea that people can and will -legally- take matters into their own hands


Des Moines Police Issue Bizarre Warning After Self-Defense Shooting

It’s not uncommon for police or sheriffs to issue a warning after a defensive gun use in their communities, but generally they’re admonishing criminals to be aware of the fact that armed citizens have the right to protect themselves.

In a twist, the Des Moines, Iowa police department is warning legal gun carriers after a shooting near a park in Des Moines, Iowa last month that’s been deemed to be a justifiable use of force on the part of an armed citizen.

In that incident, a group of individuals tried to rob a 22-year-old of his belongings, including a gun he was carrying. Little did they know that the armed citizen, who was sitting in his car when he was confronted by the group, had a backup gun on him, and the armed citizen shot and killed one of his attackers in self-defense.

Though the 22-year-old isn’t facing any charges, the Des Moines police appears to be using this as an excuse to chastise those of us who exercise our right to bear arms on a regular basis.

Law enforcement officials explained that self-defense shootings, which are more commonly associated with police officers, are increasingly being seen among civilians.

“There’s been several changes in gun laws here in Iowa over the years. And the one thing that we’ve seen, the byproduct of that is there’s more guns out there,” said DMPD Sgt. Paul Parizek.

Since 2021, Iowa has been a constitutional carry state, allowing any law-abiding adult to carry a handgun without a permit.

Police emphasized that self-defense with a firearm is only justified under strict criteria. Deadly force can only be used if there is a reasonable assumption that one’s life or wellbeing is in immediate danger.

“Somebody can’t drive by and flip you off, and you can’t shoot them. That’s not a response for that. You can’t say I was scared they were going to get out of their car. There has to be a threat,” Parizek said.

Based on Parizek’s comments, folks might be left with the impression that gun owners carrying under Iowa’s permitless carry law are causing all kinds of problems, but that isn’t the case. Last year the city saw ten homicides, which was a 33% decrease compared to 2024. So far this year police have investigated at least eleven homicides, but we know that one of those cases has been deemed a justifiable use of deadly force, and there may be others as well.

We’re also now five years in to Iowa’s experience as a permitless carry state, so if the city does end up seeing a spike in homicides this year I doubt that the law will have anything to do with it. Crime analyst Jeff Asher’s Real Time Crime Index shows other cities in permitless carry states are seeing big declines in murders; with Houston, Fort Worth, Memphis, Kansas City, New Orleans, Birmingham, Cincinnati, and Jacksonville all down by more than 20% so far this year.

If the Des Moines PD wants to remind folks about when it’s appropriate and legally okay to use lethal force, so be it. Still, it’s bizarre to use a legally justified use of deadly force as the reason to do so. It would be far more appropriate to use this incident to warn would-be robbers in the city that they’re putting their lives at risk by engaging in violent crimes, but for some reason I can’t fathom, the DMPD seems more concerned about lawful gun owners than armed robbers.

Here’s Another Reason Cops Aren’t Checking to See If It’s a BB Gun Pointed at Them

[Which one is which? Can YOU tell?-Miles]

When a gun is pointed at you, even for a split second, the barrel seems a whole lot larger than it really is. I’ve been unfortunate enough to experience that due to someone’s unsafe gun handling, so I’m talking from first-hand experience. Because of that, I don’t get worked up when there’s an officer-involved shooting, and the person shot by the police has a BB gun. I hate that it happened, and I feel awful for the officer, because I know that’s got to screw with a person’s head.

They’re not going to measure the barrel diameter before acting because they can’t.

However, there’s another reason why officers shouldn’t be getting blasted by ignorant people when something like that happens. That reason is that BB guns aren’t harmless.

Initial information informed deputies that an adult male, later identified as 33-year-old Geovanni Malacara-Hernandez, had been injured from an accidental discharge of a pellet or BB gun involving a young child.

Once deputies, Othello EMS and Adams County Fire District 5 arrived on scene, they began performing life-saving efforts “for a prolonged period of time,” according to the Adams County Sheriff’s Office. Malacara-Hernandez was then transported to Othello Community Hospital where medical personnel continued performing life-saving measures.
Unfortunately, Malacara-Hernandez succumbed to his injuries and died.

Police are investigating.

Now, there’s not much more available in this story other than what I’ve just shared, so we don’t know the specifics of whether it was an actual BB gun, a pellet gun, or what the weapon was specifically. Pellet guns are useful for hunting small game, which means they’re capable of putting down things a bit larger than a squirrel or rabbit. BB guns typically aren’t, but there have been reports of fatal shootings with them.

These aren’t toys. Yes, we buy them for kids, but responsible parents tend to treat them like firearms, and for a very good reason. They can injure or kill someone.

No, they’re not as deadly as actual firearms, but that’s beside the point.

So, when you consider this, think about a police officer rolling up to a suspect, only for that suspect to produce a BB gun. Either the officer knows it’s a BB gun or he doesn’t. In most cases, he doesn’t, but let’s say he does this time. Should he just assume that he’ll be the rule rather than the exception who gets killed with an air pistol? Should he simply let himself get shot and pray that the odds are in his favor?

What about the armed citizen? We can find ourselves in the exact same position.

I’m not talking about the legality of anything, mind you. I’m not an attorney, and while I’m an opinionated cuss about all kinds of things I probably should remain silent on, I’m not trying to delve into what will happen in a court of law.

I’m talking about what should happen in that courtroom. What should happen is that, whether police officer or private citizen, anyone who points a BB gun at someone should be shot in self-defense, because it’s not a toy they were pointing at the good guy with a gun. It actually shouldn’t get to that courtroom, because like it or not, a BB gun is a lethal weapon, much like a skateboard or a baseball bat can be lethal weapons, even if we buy them for our kids.

School president cites study finding guns don’t increase crime to oppose campus carry.

UPDATED – President Elizabeth Chilton’s opposition to campus carry included a study that found no link to increased crime

New Hampshire lawmakers should vote down campus carry because some people might feel less safe, according to a university president.

Editor’s note: The article has been updated to show the legislation is dead.

Legislators were considering House Bill 1793, which would prohibit public universities from regulating guns on campus and establish a commission to study campus carry. The bill officially died last Thursday, however.

According to a student government survey cited by The New Hampshire, a majority of respondents said they would be less likely to attend UNH if campus carry were allowed. In response to the perceived campus climate, the student senate passed a resolution opposing the bill.

President Elizabeth Chilton also took an institutional stance against the law, sending out both a campuswide message and testifying to the state senate judiciary committee. She (pictured) submitted testimony along with Don Birx, president of Keene State College and Plymouth State University, and Mark Collopy, the police chief for UNH.

They said “research from states that have adopted campus carry has found increased fear of crime, lower perceptions of campus safety, and reduced confidence in campus police.”

But neither study found a link to actual crime and campus carry.

Continue reading “”

Missouri schools could hire armed ‘rangers’ under bill sent to governor

A bill to create a new faction of school protection officers with “physical fitness superior to a U.S. Marine” got final approval from Missouri lawmakers in the final days of the legislative session.

The legislation seeks to allow schools to hire volunteer or paid guards called “Missouri Rangers” who could carry a gun on school grounds.

The bill’s sponsor, Republican state Sen. David Gregory of Chesterfield, told senators he wanted to give schools “a choice to have a higher trained armed guard.”

He compared current protection-officer requirements to that of a “Walmart guard with a gun.” Currently, schools can appoint teachers and administrators as school protection officers, allowing them to carry a gun or “self-defense spray device” with training and a concealed carry permit.

School protection officers must undergo a minimum of 112 hours of training, according to a Department of Public Safety rule. The state also has school resource officers, which are law enforcement officers with an additional 40+ hours of training related to school safety.

Gregory’s legislation proposes a maximum of 160 hours of training, specifying that the program must include lessons on “close-quarter combat,” bomb and arson training, de-escalation and others.

Prior to training, rangers must pass a physical fitness test. For those 35 and younger, they must “complete a minimum of 40 pushups in less than one minute” and be able to run 1½ miles in less than 12½ minutes. The legislation asks the state’s Peace Office Standards and Training Commission to identify lower standards for older applicants.

The bill’s first pass through the Senate brought little opposition, garnering the support of groups like the St. Louis County Police Association in its first committee hearing. In early April, just two senators voted against the proposal, but Senate Democrats unanimously voted against it when it returned to the chamber last week with less than a day before session adjourned for the year.

House Democrats unanimously rejected the proposal, uncomfortable with the proposition of having more firearms in schools.

“The answer to guns in schools is not more guns in schools,” said state Rep. Elizabeth Fuchs, a St. Louis Democrat, advocating instead for mental health support for students.

Their arguments did not sway House Republicans, who unanimously voted in support of the bill.

State Rep. Burt Whaley, a Republican from Clever, has experience training school staff on what to do in case of a shooting. The key benefit of having a ranger, he said, was being able to quickly respond to threats.

In one school he trained, the local law enforcement estimated that it could take up to 45 minutes for them to arrive.

“It is typically another person with a gun that knows how to use it, that’s trained how to use it … they’re usually the ones that are able to subdue (a threat),” he said.

The bill follows other proposals passed last year addressing security concerns, like laws directing schools to share emergency operations plans with local law enforcement and report school safety incidents to the state’s education department.

Some of the provisions passed in last year’s legislation have yet to be implemented because of a lack of funding, such as a requirement to equip schools with bleeding control kits and train staff on how to apply a tourniquet.

Gov. Mike Kehoe has until mid-July to sign or veto bills before they become law.

Tennessee Legislation Expanding Castle Doctrine Protections Awaits Governor’s Approval

The Tennessee Conservative [By Paula Gomes] –

Legislation that lowers the standard for use of deadly force on private property, expanding Castle Doctrine protections, is awaiting Governor Bill Lee’s approval.

Tennessee lawmakers passed HB1802/SB1847, sponsored by Representative Kip Capley (R-Summertown-District 71) and Senator Joey Hensley (R-Hohenwald-District 28), after intense debate.

The legislation allows for the use of deadly force if a person “reasonably believes deadly force is immediately necessary to prevent the other’s imminent commission of arson, burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, or aggravated cruelty to animals” in the event the person using deadly force cannot protect their property any other way or if the use of force by other means would expose them or someone else to risk of death, serious bodily injury or grave sexual abuse.

Shooting someone in the back is not justified under the bill’s protections and Tennessee’s current self-defense standards are not erased by the legislation, still requiring a threat involving serious bodily injury or death.

To fall under self-defense statutes, an amendment clarified that in using deadly force, a person must not be engaged in conduct that would constitute a felony or Class A misdemeanor, such as inviting someone onto your property to sell you illegal drugs, and is present where they lawfully reside.

When the bill passed in the Senate, it did not include the House amendment and had to be returned for concurrence, but the legislation is ready for Lee to take action on, and is slated to take effect July 1st, 2026.

Which Country Has the Worst Gun-Related Violence? It’s NOT the U.S

By Dave Workman

The nation with the highest total gun deaths—in spite of what you may have read or heard—is not the United States.

According to a report at How Stuff Works, basing its findings on data from the past, it’s Brazil, where more than 49,000 gun-related deaths were reported in 2019. And, as this report noted, “Determining what country has the most gun violence depends on how you measure it, whether by total gun deaths or gun death rates per 100,000 people.

“Globally,” the narrative added, “firearm violence varies widely between countries and is shaped by factors like gun laws, economic conditions and access to firearms. While some nations have the highest total gun deaths, others have the highest rates of firearm homicide.”

The How Stuff Works report acknowledges “The United States stands out among high-income countries for its high rates of firearm mortality. It has one of the highest gun death rates compared to peer countries and leads in civilian gun ownership.

“Nearly two-thirds of firearm deaths are suicides,” the report adds, “while gun homicide rates remain significantly higher than in other high income nations.”

Then, along comes World Population Review, again apparently relying on 2019 data, noting that Mexico has a far higher gun death rate than the U.S. (17.23 per 100,000, opposed to 4.42 per 100,000, with Brazil at 5.81 per 100,000). The data shows Mexico recorded 22,355 homicides for that year, Brazil racked up 12,266 and the U.S. reported 15,186.

Source: Statista

At this point, shouldn’t someone ask if the victims are any less dead in a lower-income nation than a so-called “high-income country.”

Continue reading “”

DeSantis Signs Law Arming Trained College, University Faculty After FSU Shooting

A year after a gunman opened fire on Florida State University, trained college and university faculty can carry guns onto campus under a bill Gov. Ron DeSantis signed Friday.

“It puts the bad guys on the defense — they don’t know who’s going to be able to offer them resistance,” DeSantis said during a Miami press conference. “We’ve taken this more seriously than probably anyone else has … in our state’s history.”

He referred to Florida’s guardian program, a state initiative allowing schools to train certain staff or hire security to wield firearms for self-defense. It was created for public K-12 schools in 2018 following shootings at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School that left 17 dead. The tragedy unfolded while a sheriff’s deputy delayed confronting the gunman for nearly five minutes.

DeSantis later removed him from office.

Under the new law, HB 757, the program will be extended to colleges and universities. Staff hoping to become guardians must complete 144 hours of training — 132 hours with firearms. Although the program isn’t mandatory, college and university presidents have the power to appoint their school guardians.

“Sadly but undeniably, institutions of learning have become targets of violence in our state and other states,” Senate sponsor Don Gaetz, a Republican from Crestview, said in a written statement.

“As parents and grandparents, we want our students to be safe and secure when they are on campus. This legislation ensures our institutions will use commonsense safeguards as well as high-tech systems to prevent violence where possible and respond quickly and effectively when needed.”

The measure comes 13 months after 20-year-old Phoenix Ikner shot to death two and wounded five others outside FSU’s busy Student Union in the middle of final exams. Police shot him in the jaw three minutes after he opened fire, and prosecutors are seeking the death penalty.

Despite the speedy response from law enforcement, lawmakers agreed new reinforcements were needed. This included funding for more locks on classroom doors — after some students reported that they couldn’t lock themselves away from the shooter — and increased security measures.

Other provisions in the package signed Friday include:

  • Makes it a second-degree felony to fire a weapon within 1,000 feet of a school.
  • Promotes the use of a mobile suspicious activity reporting tool, like FortifyFL, to quickly alert law enforcement to dangerous circumstances.
  • Requires a student’s threat assessment reports and psychological evaluations to be transferred from a K-12 school to their college or university upon enrollment.
  • Mandates schools create family reunification plans, active assailant response plans, and threat-management teams.
  • Requires schools to annually conduct security risk assessments.
  • Increases training for faculty and staff to identify and respond to mental health problems.
  • Further connects students with mental health services.

Good Guy with Gun Helped Stop Cambridge Shooter

A former Marine “who was legally carrying a gun” helped Massachusetts State Police stop and apprehend a man shooting at cars in Cambridge, Massachusetts, on Monday, according to Police1.

Breitbart News reported that the alleged attacker, 46-year-old Tyler Brown, opened fire on cars on Cambridge’s Memorial Drive around 1:30 p.m. CBS News noted that Brown was allegedly shooting at “passing cars” before being shot numerous times by a Massachusetts State Trooper.

On Tuesday, WHAS 11 pointed out that the officer did not act alone. They noted, “A State Trooper and a Marine veteran were nearby, jumping into action and shooting the suspect.”

NBC 10 observed that a witness said the former Marine came to her car at some point during the ordeal and shielded her so she could escape.

The witness said, “A man came, went around his car and pulled open my car door and made like a barricade. He had a gun and he told me to run, and I ran and then I just ran as fast as I could.”

Two individuals suffered life-threatening wounds from Monday’s attack.

Oops…Class Cancelled After High School Resource Officer Leaves – And Loses – His Gun in a Bathroom.

Classes have been canceled Tuesday at Forest View Educational Center in Arlington Heights [Illinois] after a school resource officer lost their firearm in a restroom, the school said. Arlington Heights police said a school resource officer removed his service weapon while inside a restroom just before dismissal Monday. He realized it was gone moments later.”

As a trained law enforcement officer, that can be…awkward. But remember, our betters in the gun control industry tell us — with monotonous regularity — that only LEOS have the training, skills and mindset necessary for the awesome responsibility that is carrying a firearm.

Still, you have to wonder how long after his constitutional it took for Officer Snoozy to realize that his pistol wasn’t in his holster. Long enough, apparently for someone to have grabbed the gat before the cop could double back and check the stall.

Officers searched the building, reviewed surveillance video, and called in multiple K-9 unites trained to detect weapons, but the gun was never found. A school officials said they received confirmation that the gun is not in the building.

We certainly hope it turns up soon. The students will love the free day off today on a suburban Chicago spring Tuesday, but those young skulls full of mush need some educating. Because after all, the children are our future. We need to teach them well and let them lead the way. And it would be really great if that curriculum covers gun handling basics like… it’s a really bad idea to unholster your firearm and leave it in a bathroom stall.

Justice Scalia’s majority opinion in Heller had this to say about what arms meant:
The 18th-century meaning [of arms] is no different from the meaning today. The 1773 edition of Samuel Johnson’s dictionary defined ‘‘arms’’ as ‘‘[w]eapons of offence, or armour of defence.’’ Timothy Cunningham’s important 1771 legal dictionary defined ‘‘arms’’ as ‘‘any thing that a man wears for his defence…’’


NY AG Claims Body Armor Isn’t a Second Amendment Right

BUFFALO, NY — A legal battle is brewing in New York over whether law-abiding citizens have the right to purchase and own body armor for personal protection. Attorney General Letitia James has formally requested a federal judge to dismiss a lawsuit filed by the Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC), which challenges the state’s ban on the sale of this defensive gear to most civilians.

The FPC originally filed the lawsuit on behalf of New York residents who simply want the ability to protect themselves. In response, the state is arguing that body armor is a “dangerous and unusual” item that falls outside the protections of the Second Amendment. Attorney General James’s office claims that because modern body armor didn’t exist when the Constitution was written, it shouldn’t be covered.

However, this line of reasoning seems to ignore a key Supreme Court ruling. In the 2016 case Caetano v. Massachusetts, the court affirmed that the Second Amendment isn’t limited to 18th-century technology. Justice Samuel Alito pointed out that even firearms commonly used for self-defense today, like revolvers and semi-automatic pistols, did not exist back then. The court’s logic was clear: new technology doesn’t negate a constitutional right.

The True Purpose of Body Armor

New York’s argument portrays body armor as a tool for criminals, suggesting it turns a person into a “fortified threat” and is part of a “mass shooter’s toolkit.” This perspective overlooks the fundamental nature of body armor: it is purely defensive. Unlike a firearm, body armor cannot be used to inflict harm. Its sole purpose is to stop projectiles and protect the life of the person wearing it, which is the very essence of self-defense. Many everyday citizens, from late night convenience store clerks to people living in high crime neighborhoods, seek this protection for peace of mind.

The state’s ban was enacted following the tragic 2022 mass shooting at a Buffalo supermarket. Now, groups like the National Rifle Association are pushing back, stating that such laws only penalize law-abiding citizens. They argue that criminals, by their very definition, do not follow the law, so a ban on body armor only prevents good people from having another tool to ensure their own safety.

This case is being watched closely, as its outcome could set a precedent for whether states can prohibit citizens from owning defensive gear, raising critical questions about the modern application of the right to self-defense.

New Pew Research Confirms ‘Assault Weapons’ Rarely Used in Crimes

Pew Research has released some interesting and new collated data on gun-involved crimes in the United States in 2024, and their stats confirm what Second Amendment advocates and those opposed to bans on so-called assault weapons have been saying for decades: they are rarely used in crimes of any kind in the United States.

According to Pew, rifles of all kinds (including so-called assault weapons) were involved in just 3% of gun-related homicides in 2024. Handguns were involved in 53%, with “undetermined” firearms involved in 42% of homicides.

The Supreme Court rejected the idea that handguns could be banned just because they were the most popular choice of weapon for criminals, but gun control advocates are arguing that a category of commonly-owned firearms that is much less popular among violent criminals can be outlawed.

Of course, it’s not garden variety criminals who the gun control lobby invoke in their arguments about banning “assault weapons.” They regularly proclaim that AR-15s and other semi-automatic rifles are the weapon of choice for mass shooters. A 2023 report by the Secret Service’s National Threat Assessment Center, however, found that 74% of active shooters between 2016 and 2020 used handguns, while 32% used long guns (some used both, which is why the numbers don’t add up to 100%). Even among the most depraved criminals, handguns are far more common than “assault weapons.”

Pew also found far fewer active shootings overall in 2024; 24 separate events, which is a decline of almost 66% compared to the 61 recorded in 2021. Incidentally, Pew uses the FBI’s definition of an active shooting:  one or more individuals actively engaged in killing or attempting to kill people in a populated area.

Continue reading “”

karol markowicz with SBR

How I became a gun person

It was Shani Louk’s mangled body that was keeping me from sleeping. She had been beautiful and bright, a real person, having a good time on a warm night. Then she was dead, her body mistreated, the girl gone. She could have been me. I used to dance all night at festivals under the stars too. She could be my daughter, in a few years, heading to a field to hear the music.

Or it was the Bibas family. I also have redheaded children. That could be me clutching my ginger boys, distraught, afraid, missing.

The days and months after October 7th caused sleeplessness like I had not experienced before. Wide eyed, middle of the night, a stress knot in my chest, a tightness I had never known.

When the panic of the first few days subsided, my sleeplessness took on a new pattern. It wasn’t fear or despair anymore. It was anger. “How could they have been so defenseless,” I’d ask myself in the dark, sick with the knowledge that our family would have been just as helpless as any family that day. They were me, I was them.

Inbar Lieberman was a name I’d come to repeat to myself. Inbar was 25 years old on October 7th and head of security at Nir-Am, a kibbutz near the Gaza border. On that day, Lieberman heard explosions nearby and ran to unlock the armory. Her quick thinking, but also specifically her weaponry, saved her kibbutz. Nir-Am suffered no losses that day.

I had long been a supporter of the Second Amendment but it had been entirely theoretical. I was born in the Soviet Union, came to the United States as a small child and embraced everything it meant to be American. You should absolutely have the right to own a gun. We are a free country of free men. The only way to maintain that freedom, as history has shown so often, is to be armed. I fully believed this. But growing up in Brooklyn meant I didn’t know anyone who actually exercised this right. If something happened, you were meant to call for help and hope for the best.

Unfortunately, I had the opportunity to test this call for help. In the last five years, my public image has increased and I have received several threats. I had gone to the police in Brooklyn for one explicit death threat, texted to my phone, but was told there wasn’t much they could do. I had walked into the police precinct ready to spend some time there, give a statement, help with clues. I was outside five minutes later. They didn’t even take down my information. No one was coming to save me.

When our family moved to Florida three years ago, I planned to get more serious about shooting and eventual gun ownership. But we got comfortable in Florida quickly. We felt secure and safe. My husband and I meant to go learn to shoot but never quite got around to it. Everything was so peaceful, it was hard to motivate towards owning guns. October 7th was the reminder: Peace ends quickly.

I knew Jews were changing on guns even before the 7th, I had written about it. But I myself had not changed yet. I had shot a gun only once before, four years prior, on my friend Will Cain’s property in Texas. He had shown me how to hold his shotgun correctly, that it wasn’t a bazooka to rest on top of my shoulder. It was fun but I had seen it as an outdoorsy activity like fishing or golfing. Thinking about shooting as a mechanism for saving our lives is a different sensation.

By October 13th, we were at the gun range. A girl walked out of the shooting area with a huge Star of David necklace and a Chanel bag. My people had gotten the message loud and clear.

In my Florida conservative media world, it was easy to get a better understanding of guns. Buck Sexton and his brother Mason took me to an outdoor course to practice with a variety of weapons. John Cardillo took us gun shopping for the first time and introduced us to the owner of an excellent gun store. Our “gun guy,” Manny, is mild mannered and an extremely polite gentleman. He could be your accountant but he sells the finest weaponry and shoots machine guns with a smile on the weekends. His calm and patient demeanor was helpful when we tried to figure out what we needed. He understands that we are afraid. He has seen a serious uptick in Jewish customers since the 7th.

Manny’s explanations are rational. He isn’t a loose cannon. He told us if you have the option to get away from a confrontation, that is always best. If you can not, you must be ready. He is blunt. He says things like “your handgun is there to get you to your real gun.” We internalized all of his advice. We have guns now, plural.

Once you become a gun owner, so many wrong ideas around guns come into clear focus. “Gun free zones” were always kind of funny, a bad guy will obviously ignore a sign as quickly as he will any number of laws, but they become absurd when you know the only time you’re going to know a good guy is carrying in a gun-free zone is when you’re thanking him. Or the idea that some guns should be illegal. None of the data on banning certain guns makes sense. Most gun deaths happen with handguns and over half of those are suicides. No one is taking my AR-15 because they want to “do something” about guns. And anyway, that gun was lost in a boating accident.

The gun owners we know take training very seriously and so do we. A gun is not a purchase you make and then stick in a drawer for a rainy day. Much like driving a car, learning how to shoot a gun takes practice and requires muscle memory. Unlike driving, a regular activity you do on good days and bad days, if the day ever comes that you will need to use your gun, it will likely be the worst, most stressful day of your life. The idea behind training is to get to a point where your muscle memory will take over, in chaos and fear, and you will know exactly what to do should it ever be required.

The more you train the less the whole thing feels like a joke. It stops being “tee-hee, I own a gun” and becomes a far more practical thing that you just do. How will you carry it? What feels comfortable? This gun or that gun.

“I thought you felt safe in Florida. Why have guns?” a visiting friend from Israel asked us. We do feel safe in Florida, especially as we watch the eruptions of Jew hatred in our old city. But the idea that New York City could become a hotbed of Jew-hatred was once far-fetched too. It’s exactly the “it could never happen here” feeling that has lulled so many Jews before me into complacency. We have not just been killed by our enemies in places like Israel. We’ve been killed by friends and neighbors, in Spain, in Poland and so on. Our guns say: not us, not this time.

There is no reason for a Jew not to be armed in 2024. So much of Jewish culture revolves around being the helper. We expect people to help those in trouble. We count on armed people to step in. When the call comes “someone should do something!” we don’t plan to wait around. That someone will be us.

“We aren’t ‘gun-people,’” some people say. There’s some pride in it. Who, me? Oh no, I don’t own guns, I’m not that kind of person. But unsaid is that the not-a-gun-person expects someone else with a gun to come and protect them at just the right moment. They count on police, security, military to come and help in a real crisis. The not-a-gun-person can never step up and stop a violent attack on someone, they can never protect others, can never be the hero themselves. They can save themselves, maybe, but they’ll never be the one that everyone turns to at a time of emergency. There’s something intrinsically anti-Jewish about this. We have an obligation to each other but the anti-gun Jew can’t meet it. That should be a source of shame not pride. You’re not just a not-a-gun-person. You’re a can’t-help person.

What I want is for my kids to say something else. Yes, we are gun people, actually. I want my kids to grow up shooting, to be good at it, to be comfortable with it, to know their role is not to wait for someone else. We’ll also deter. We send the most peace-bringing message of all: We own guns, we train with guns, we have an arsenal, you do not want it with us. We will help others, we will be the people that step in.

Dylan Sprouse ‘Tackles’ Trespasser and ‘Holds Him at Gunpoint’ After Wife Barbara Palvin Spotted ‘Creepy Guy’ at $2 Million Property

Actor Dylan Sprouse reportedly tackled an intruder and held him at gunpoint after the man allegedly broke into the $2 million Hollywood Hills property the “Suite Life” star shares with wife Barbara Palvin.

Law enforcement officials received a call from “Victoria’s Secret” model Palvin, 32, at around 12:30 a.m. on April 17, according to the Los Angeles Times, which reports that the fashion star told authorities she had seen a “creepy guy” outside of their Los Angeles home.

Palvin is understood to have reported the incident as a potential robbery.

Although the police have released little information about the circumstances of the arrest, unnamed sources told TMZ that Sprouse, 33, had tackled the trespasser and then held him at gunpoint until the police arrived and took him into custody.

The unnamed suspect is not thought to have entered the couple’s home.

Police told the outlet that the suspect was taken into custody and there were no injuries.

Neither Sprouse nor Palvin has publicly commented on the invasion, which, according to TMZ, is not the first time someone has tried to gain access to the couple’s home.

Law enforcement sources told the outlet that “the situation was more like trespassing than a full-blown attempted burglary.” However, no further details about any potential charges have been shared.

Continue reading “”

The Most Important Lesson of the Iran War Is to Buy Guns and Ammo

It’s remarkable how the real world always illustrates the Founders’ wisdom, graphically and undeniably. Take the current situation in Iran. It’s a country with a great history, full of intelligent people run by a bunch of backward, semi-human savages with a ridiculous apocalyptic theology that is so brutal it killed 30,000 or so of its own people a few months ago just to stay in power.

And now it’s still in power, at least over its own people, despite the United States and Israel righteously devastating its conventional military capabilities. You can sync its navy, shoot down its Air Force, and smash its missiles; the power on the ground requires contending power on the ground. Our glorious alliance with Israel – suck on that podcast dorks – cannot kill every goat molester with an AK-47 and a conviction that the more he murders, the more virgins he gets.

That job belongs to the people of Iran, and unfortunately, they don’t have the tools to do it. They are disarmed, and therefore, they are serfs, not citizens, much like the English and Australians. In Iran, the answer to the problem of securing freedom and justice is the same as it is here in America and everywhere else:

Guns.

Guns are freedom. Guns are liberty. Guns are the last bulwark – a real one, not one that enjoys watching the pool boy cavort with his wife – of freedom. Of course, it’s not actually guns that secure freedom. It’s violence. Some dumb people will tell you violence never solves anything.

The only people who can tell you violence never solves anything are people for whom the problem of violence has been solved by other people who know what the hell they’re talking about and who use violence to solve the problem of violence.

Continue reading “”

Elitist Chicago Doc: Average Citizens Don’t Need Armed Self-Defense Because the Poor ‘Don’t Benefit’ From Guns

Dr. Anthony Douglas, the smug University of Chicago trauma resident and arrogant mastermind behind Illinois’ Responsibility in Firearms Legislation (RIFL) Act, stepped up in a legislative hearing last week and belched up a heaping helping of elitist bile blended with a soupçon clinical detachment: “I think poor people don’t benefit from owning firearms,” he pronounced.

What the little people need, the good doctor says, is more “education and resources.” Translation: more tax dollars funneled to “non-profits” with little to no return on the taxpayers’ investment.

Besides, the physician and gun-control researcher claims it isn’t good guys or gals with guns who stop evil predators…all evidence to the contrary. As such, it really should be harder for the poors to get their hands on firearms to defend themselves and their families.

His solution, then, is pricing guns out of reach of law-abiding, responsible citizens who lack bodyguards, private security details, or live in gated enclaves. In Murder City, USA—Chicago—where gang thugs roam free, that’s not social policy, that’s sadistic malpractice.

Was this clown high? Does he have a full punchcard at the local dispensary? Because this delusional drivel sounds like it was baked in a dorm room cloud of weed.

Let’s drag his elitist fantasy out into the reality that is Chicago, the city that’s been mercilessly documented by Wirepoints.org through FOIA records from the Chicago Police Department itself.

High-priority 911 calls—Priority Level 1 and 2, the ones defined as “imminent threat to life, bodily injury, or major property damage”—are the exact emergencies Chicagoans face every day: shots fired, person shot, assault in progress, armed robbery, domestic battery. In 2019, before the progressive crime wave fully metastasized, 19% of those urgent calls had “no officers available” for immediate response.

By 2021, Wirepoints found that number had exploded to 52%—406,829 high-priority incidents in which dispatchers literally had zero cops to send. In 2022 it hit roughly 60%.

Through all of 2023, 56% of high-priority calls—437,000 of them—sat in backlog with no units available. Even in 2024, through mid-May, getting a response was still a coin-flip 50%: 127,000 out of 256,000 urgent calls in which nobody came.

That’s not “delayed,” that’s “we have no police available to send to you.”

Wirepoints documented thousands of “assaults in progress,” “batteries in progress,” “person with a gun,” and “shots fired” calls where callers were told to shelter in place while the city’s response system collapsed. In some districts, entire shifts passed with zero proactive patrol time because every available cop was already buried in backlogs that stretched 30 minutes, an hour, sometimes as long as four hours. Chicago’s own inspector general has long since confirmed the department can’t even log arrival times for huge chunks of emergency calls.

So Dr. Douglas’s prescription isn’t compassion, it’s pure, venomous elitist contempt. He (allegedly) stares at blood-soaked gurneys every shift, but still demands that we disarm the victims instead of the criminals—or fix the catastrophic policies that left over half of emergency calls with “no units available.” He wants to tax gun makers into oblivion so that self-defense becomes a rich man’s luxury that only hypocrites like him can afford.

Spare us the sanctimonious impacted fecal matter, Doctor. The poor in Chicago aren’t sipping lattes in faculty lounges debating “resources.” They’re barricading their doors and praying they make it to and from work safely and survive day to day while the failed system in which you have so much faith leaves them twisting in the wind.

They have and need the same constitutional right to armed self-defense that you take for granted from the comfort of your bubble. In the real Chicago, where cops aren’t available to show up half the time, that arrogance and contempt leaves innocent people to be victimized and slaughtered.

The Center Square has the full testimony. Read it and seethe . . .

A proposed bill gun owners say will price lower income buyers out of the market continues to get attention at the Illinois state capitol.

Opponents of House Bill 3320 estimate the Responsibility in Firearms Legislation, or RIFL Act could tack on thousands of dollars in taxes to one firearm purchase, and that would price lower income people out of exercising their Second Amendment rights.

Advocates for the bill, like Dr. Anthony Douglas, said there’d be minimal added cost.

“I think poor people don’t benefit from owning firearms,” Douglas said during a House Gun Violence Prevention Task Force subject matter hearing of the bill Wednesday. “I think more people benefit from access to education, access to resources.”

State Rep. Patrick Windhorst, R-Harrisburg, said that’s an elitist opinion and people of lesser means want to be able to protect themselves.

“The Second Amendment of the Constitution of the United States guarantees that to them,” Windhorst said. “And it’s really not our place to say, ‘well, we think you’re better off not having this thing,’ which is the tone of this committee.”

BLUF
The Second Amendment’s purpose is to ensure that people can meaningfully defend their natural and unalienable rights, including the right to life. No policymaker can claim to take this protection seriously while, in practice, proudly limiting victims to a 3-inch knife in a gunfight.

Gun Control Advocates to Victims: Just Bring a Knife to the Gunfight.

Last month, at Old Dominion University in Norfolk, Va., a gunman opened fire in a classroom full of ROTC cadets. He killed the ROTC instructor and injured two others before several cadets subdued him — with one cadet using a knife to stab him to death.

To rational people, the shooting clearly evidenced the combined failure of gun control and soft-on-crime policies to protect innocent victims. The perpetrator, who’d been convicted of terrorism charges in 2016, was supposed to be serving an 11-year prison sentence but had been released early under a drug treatment program for which he was supposed to be ineligible. He’d then simply ignored the state’s laws regarding gun possession by felons, background checks, and carrying guns on college campuses, all on his way to ignoring laws prohibiting murder and acts of terrorism.

The responses from many anti-gun public officials were telling: in their view, the attack on disarmed college students clearly evidenced a need to further restrict the right of innocent victims to keep and bear arms in self-defense —and suggested that armed self-defense isn’t that important in the first place.  After all, as one Virginia Democrat insinuated, if the cadets at Old Dominion could subdue their assailant without a gun, why can’t you?

All of it missed the point entirely.

Despite what gun control advocates would have you believe, the right to keep and bear arms plays a vital role in public safety. Americans use their firearms to defend themselves and others far more often than many people realize. Even the notoriously anti-gun Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has acknowledged that most studies on the issue find that between 500,000 and several million defensive gun uses occur every year in the United States. An extensive 2021 national survey conducted by a Georgetown professor further substantiated this reality, concluding that Americans used their firearms defensively an average of 1.2 million times a year.

Continue reading “”