Category: Safety

Empowering women through self-defense and firearm training
Alpha Female Tactical offers safe learning environment

DEFUNIAK SPRINGS, Fla. (WJHG/WECP) – Firearms are common in the U.S., but not everyone knows how to use them safely. Finding a comfortable learning environment can be particularly challenging for women. Katrina Cain, the owner of Alpha Female Tactical, addresses this need on a private range at Bullets and Bones in DeFuniak Springs.

Cain provides courses and training specifically for women to learn about gun safety and defense. “We wanted to provide a comfortable learning environment for women because it is a male-dominated industry,” said Cain.

The inspiration to start these classes came from Cain’s personal experience. After realizing that few resources and training opportunities were available for women, she decided to take action. “We launched in October of 2020 after I got my concealed carry license and realized I wasn’t shown how to properly handle a firearm—load it, shoot it, or anything. I shot one single bullet, and that qualified me to get my permit at the time. My husband and I felt there needed to be more training for women to become comfortable with firearms.”

Cain is not just advocating for safety on the shooting range. As a deputy at the Walton County Sheriff’s Office, she brings her law enforcement experience to her training. “I see the domestic violence, the crimes, and the issues we have—not only here but worldwide. Things happen. We want every woman to be empowered and confident in her ability to defend herself, her children, or her loved ones.”

Courses at Alpha Female Tactical are designed to give women confidence, regardless of their background. “Especially if they’re coming from a place of trauma or have a history with firearm-related incidents or domestic violence. We want to provide a safe and supportive environment for them to learn how to defend themselves.”

Whether new to firearms or looking to advance their skills, women can find valuable resources at Alpha Female Tactical. “We offer everything from beginner classes for those who have never touched a gun to advanced tactical skills. Our classes include concealed carry, self-defense, hand-to-hand combat, pepper spray, non-lethal, and firearms training.”

Cain emphasized the importance of proper training. “It doesn’t help anyone to carry a firearm without the proper training and understanding of how it functions.”

In a world where personal safety is increasingly important, Cain and her team at Alpha Female Tactical are making strides to ensure women feel empowered and capable of defending themselves.

For more information on Alpha Female Tactical and its courses, visit its website or contact it directly at Bullets and Bones in DeFuniak Springs.

Should You Suppress a Home-Defense Gun?

Just a year or two ago things were looking up for suppressors. With the Hearing Protection Act written and in the legislative works, a semi-friendly House of Representatives and Senate, and the White House seemingly friendly towards signing a bill, things seemed positive for getting suppressors out of NFA jail. No more tax stamps, photos, fingerprints, body probes, and year-long waits just to make your gun run quieter.

Then, politicians did the politician dance, meaning they didn’t do a damn thing except fundraise and stump for reelection. Now, the House has flipped and there’s a better chance that Alyssa Milano will become the new NRA President than the Hearing Protection Act passing before Wolf Blitzer takes an anchor job with the Blaze.

Even still, you can buy one, just like before, as long as you’re prepared to wait. So, today’s question is, with all that headache and waiting around just to get your hands on a suppressor, should you ever consider using one on a home defense firearm? As with anything else, there are pros and cons to consider. Here’s a list of things to ponder.

Continue reading “”

Researchers at Duke University release new study on gun violence

RALEIGH, N.C. (WTVD) — Duke University’s recent study on gun violence showed that not even restrictive gun laws are having a significant impact among gun deaths among children.

Since 2020, guns have ranked as the leading cause of death among people between the ages of one to 18.

The study identified 36 firearm laws including expansive background checks, mandatory waiting periods, safe storage provisions and laws that limit access for people at risk of harming themselves or others.

Surprisingly, there were no notable distinctions between states with and without firearm laws when it comes to firearm deaths among children.

There were also no significant reductions in suicide death rates in states with laws setting minimum ages for possession or purchase of firearms.

‘common use for lawful purposes’

Survey Shows Growing Number of Americans Own Guns For Self-Defense

A new survey from the Institute for Firearm Injury Prevention at the University of Michigan has discovered what most of us already knew to be the case: the number one reason why tens of millions of Americans exercise their Second Amendment rights is personal safety.

The survey quizzed about 2,500 gun owners about their motivation to keep and bear arms, and the vast majority of respondents said self-defense was the most important factor in their decision.

Nearly 80% said they were motivated to get a firearm for personal protection, a proportion that appears to have risen over the past 25 years. No single study has tracked the reasons for gun ownership over time, making comparisons inexact, but similar studies have found that about 26% of Americans reported owning a gun for protection in 1999. Various studies suggest that between 60% and 70% of gun owners said protection was their main motivation for having a firearm from 2017 through 2021.

It’s a trend that has roots in the social upheaval of the 1960s, said Dr. David Yamane, a professor of sociology at Wake Forest University who studies gun culture in the United States and who was not involved in the survey.

“It was a time of profound social unrest and social uncertainty, lots of political movements, cultural change, foreign threats, people listening to crazy music, you know, ‘sex, drugs and rock n’ roll,’ political assassination, riots or protest movements in some cities,” said Yamane, who owns a gun and who financially supports organizations that promote gun ownership.

 

Continue reading “”

The Elephant in the Room: Female Secret Service Agents

It was clear today during the House Oversight Committee hearing on the Secret Service’s failure on July 13 that Director Kimberly Cheatle is either a shameless liar or completely incompetent—probably both. Her refusal to answer the most basic questions about the shooting, which nearly killed Donald Trump, has disqualified her for the job—full stop. She needs to be fired, along with other incompetent Secret Service bureaucrats in the agency.

Among other things, she revealed that she didn’t sign off on Trump’s protective plan that day. In fact, she doesn’t sign off on any of the plans. She also admitted that even though she’s deeply involved in the supposed investigation of her agency’s failures (wherein she is investigating herself), she hasn’t bothered to visit the shooting site.

One issue that repeatedly came up during the hearing was DEI hires in the agency and whether the female agents assigned to Trump were qualified for the job. Last year, Cheatle announced a goal of 30% female recruits, along with a whole host of diversity measures.

Rep. Tim Burchett (R-Tenn.) called Cheatle a “DEI horror story.”

Rep. Ayanna Pressley (D-Mass.) accused Republicans of racism and misogyny because that’s all she knows how to do.

Republicans have exploited this moment to continue to attack programs for racial justice and gender equity in America. Disappointing, but not surprising. I hesitate to repeat their racist and sexist tropes. But in summary, Republicans have wrongfully and shamefully stated that hiring women and people of color hindered the response to the shooting.

Now, this is part and parcel of Republican strategy to constantly attack necessary diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts to undermine the contributions that women, people of color, the disability community, and others each and every day, and it is disgraceful in the wake of gun violence and tragic loss of life.

Asked about diversity hires at the agency, Cheatle replied that she’s focused on hiring the “best and brightest” and “best-qualified candidates.”

But is that true?

I wrote this on our liveblog the day of the shooting:

It’s time to have an adult conversation about the elephant in the room — women in the Secret Service. The question must be asked: Was Trump’s security detail compromised by diversity hires (women, gays, trans people, etc.)? In the case of women, it’s indisputable that men are stronger and faster than women. No one but the hopelessly deluded DEI enforcer believes otherwise. Someone going by the moniker @eyeslashoposted this chart on X today:


(click on image for a larger one)

It shows how the physical fitness standards are lower for female Secret Service trainees—in this case, pushups, with men’s scores on the left. For a man to be considered “Excellent” in the 20s age group, he must complete 55 pushups; for a woman, it’s only 40. Women can get away with only 26 pushups and still be considered “Good.” (Note: a man in his 20s should be able to do WAY more than 55 pushups.)

Eyeslasho added, “Shockingly, a total of only 6 points is required to pass the four-element test,” which includes pushups, sit-ups, chin-ups, and a 1.5 mile run. “And even if you don’t score 6 points, you can still be admitted upon further ‘review and recommendation.'”

“Overall, I’m not impressed by what is physically required of those who enter the Secret Service,” he concluded.

Neither am I.

We’ve all seen the pictures of a bloodied Trump surrounded by his protective detail. The men on the team were tall enough to place their heads between Trump’s head and the shooter; the female agent was significantly shorter, exposing Trump’s head.

Make no mistake: The agent in the picture above was incredibly brave. She placed her body between Trump and the shooter without hesitation and deserves to be praised for her effort. It’s not her fault that she is shorter than the male agents or that someone at the Secret Service placed her in that position.

Diversity, for its own sake, is ridiculous; diversity in jobs where someone’s life is on the line could be deadly.

I work out with some female law enforcement officers, and they are absolute beasts in the gym. But the strongest women in the gym can’t compete with the men when it comes to strength tests.

If I place my life in the hands of the Secret Service, I want the strongest, fastest, and best-trained agent possible. Women can be incredibly strong and fit and can certainly be well-trained. But if I had to choose between a man and a woman of similar age and training, I’d go with the man every time. If someone’s going to have to carry my lifeless body off a dais, I want the guy with huge biceps and legs like tree trunks. “Yasss girl power!” is not going to cut it.

Yes, I know it’s not politically correct to speak about gender in a way that suggests women ≠ to men, but as the managing editor of PJ Media, I don’t demand political correctness. I don’t force writers to use “preferred genders,” unlike other sites (one of which rhymes with “box”). That decision has gotten us demonetized, throttled, and censored, but we refuse to back down. You should demand no less of the websites you frequent.

The Secret Service’s Day Of Reckoning: What Kim Cheatle’s Evasion Means For America

United States Secret Service Director Kim Cheatle sat before the House Oversight Committee yesterday. The committee subpoenaed Cheatle to ensure her appearance. Her responses were predictable and tiresome. Whenever possible, she deflected questions, citing the FBI’s “ongoing investigation.” Her response to every substantive question was a simple variation on a theme — “I’m not going to get into the specifics.”

It’s a response that has rolled with ease off the lips of FBI Director Christopher Wray whenever confronted with the ire of congressional committee members. Anger — genuine or manufactured — displayed as the result of inexcusable incidents of politicization. But, these sorts of responses to congressional oversight committees have become so common they’re mundane.

However, Congress plays a significant role in the automatic and cavalier dismissals of pointed questioning by agency heads. Oversight has become a joke. Unless you’re a Trump appointee or official, contempt of Congress has absolutely no meaning. Steve Bannon and Peter Navarro are the only two examples in living memory of the efficacious use of Congress’ power of contempt. It seems only Democrats have the political will.

Cheatle easily dismissed the blustery, reddened faces congressional inquisitors assumed, like so many tomatoes set atop starched collars. Cursing and grandstanding only serves to elicit reshares on social media, and ensures a few early afternoon hits on broadcast news channels. All very important if you’re obsessed with the perpetual fundraising cycle, and convincing gullible constituents you really care one whit about their questions or concerns.

How do I know this is all a put-on? I’ve witnessed it firsthand. As a member of a dignitary protection detail, I’ve seen behind the veritable curtain, and witnessed the handshaking, back slapping, and laughing transform into Oscar winning tragedies of political theater when the cameras and lights come on. The outrage is a ploy — maybe not for everyone, but for most.

The American people can do the analysis for themselves. Congress doesn’t have the power to fire Cheatle directly, that option is solely within the purview of the lame duck president Joe Biden. But, Congress does control the purse strings, and the power to arrest and jail for contempt.

Cheatle followed the disaster of July 13th with a disastrous day before Congress. With nine days to anticipate obvious questions, she refused to provide a real answer to a single one. There’s no question she has access to accurate, preliminary findings — information the public has a right to know. A quick perusal of the operations plan would tell her who was responsible for covering the building from which the shooter fired.

Democrat members of the House Oversight Committee like Eleanor Holmes Norton (DC) used the publicity opportunity to vamp for gun confiscation. Norton asked Cheatle, “Would Secret Service protectees be safer or less safe if people could carry handguns in D.C?” What that has to do with the most significant Secret Service failure in almost fifty years is beyond the powers of mortal reason.

Incompetence is a feature of Democrat party policy, politics, and governance at every level.

Cheatle also failed to convincingly defend the men and women who responded within three seconds of the first shot fired on the July 13th assassination attempt, or to debunk the plethora of wild conspiracy theories infesting the dark environs of social media.

Keyboard jockeys immediately pounced on the female members of Trump’s protection detail, zeroing in on one in particular who seemed overcome by events. Though performance was certainly an issue during some of the tactical movements leading to securing Trump in his limousine, these criticisms are coming almost exclusively from people who have no dignitary protection background. The same critics have failed to realize the potentially pivotal role played by the Butler County Sheriff’s deputy who was boosted to the roof where the would-be assassin had positioned himself. It is highly likely that the actions of this deputy saved Trump’s life, having disturbed the shooter’s firing rhythm.

Ridiculous conspiracy theories abound. Rep. Jake LaTurner (R-KS) leveled a series of important questions, asking Cheatle to provide detail to dispel the growing body of wild and uninformed narratives surrounding the assassination attempt. She refused.

A particularly laughable theory posits that an FBI Assistant Director (AD) was placed behind Trump in the crowd during the rally. Any surveillance professional knows how ridiculous it is to suggest that an AD would be involved in surveillance at all, much less in one where she’d be placed directly behind Trump, in a position to be photographed countless times. But, this is the kind of nonsense that flourishes in the absence of information from professionals who are in the position to know.

Cheatle did get one thing right: she called the January 13th assassination attempt the worst lapse in decades. Rep. Mike Turner (R-OH) called her incompetent, and demanded her instant resignation. Failing that, Turner called on Biden to fire her immediately. More notably, Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA) compared Cheatle to former USSS Director H. Stewart Knight after the Ronald Reagan assassination attempt, citing his resignation. Khanna said flatly, “I think you should resign.” Humorously, though stated in the most grave tones, Rep. Tim Burchett (R-TN) called Cheatle, “a DEI horror story.”

It has been often said that the Secret Service’s duties are a “no fail mission.” That’s absolutely true. The responsibilities of dignitary protection are too weighty to allow for chance, mistake, or complacency. There are no take backs or do overs. That’s why former Director Stewart tendered his resignation. However, providing an acceptable level of transparency is also a no fail mission. Without it, as we have seen, everyone loses faith in our democratic institutions. That is an existential threat.

We must not just demand, but secure accountability from our representatives. We have an unparalleled opportunity to do just that this presidential election cycle. Trump can exercise executive authority to correct the leadership problems at the Secret Service, the FBI, and across the deep state apparatus.

Debating Body Armor – Legal Battles, Self-Defense and Constitutional Rights in New York

Every day across America, thousands of police officers wear bulletproof vests to protect themselves from violent criminals. However, on May 14, 2022, body armor protected mass murderer Payton Gendron as he shot and killed 10 Black individuals at a Buffalo supermarket.

In response to the Tops Markets massacre, New York State enacted a law banning the sale of body armor to most private citizens. This law is now being challenged by gun rights advocates who argue that it is unconstitutional. A man from Lake View, along with a Las Vegas-based gun rights organization, has filed a federal lawsuit to legalize the purchase and ownership of bulletproof vests and other body armor for private citizens in New York.

The Firearms Policy Coalition and Benjamin Heeter of Lake View claim that the state’s body armor ban infringes on the rights of law-abiding citizens who wish to protect themselves from criminals. The lawsuit argues that body armor is a means of self-defense, not a weapon. “New York’s body armor ban shows that the state’s commitment to authoritarianism has collapsed into absurdity, making it a crime to buy and use simple personal protective equipment,” said Brandon Combs, president of the Firearms Policy Coalition.

Governor Kathy Hochul signed the body armor ban into law in July 2022, just weeks after Gendron, 18, wore body armor he purchased online as he carried out his attack. According to Buffalo police, store security officer Aaron Salter Jr. fired a shot that struck Gendron’s body armor, but Gendron was unharmed and continued his assault, killing Salter and others.

Critics argue that the new law does not ban the sale of the type of hard body armor plates used by Gendron. Governor Hochul has indicated that she will work with the State Legislature to amend the law to ensure it effectively prevents the purchase of such armor.

“Wearing that body armor on that day allowed Gendron to keep shooting people after Aaron Salter shot him,” recalled former Erie County District Attorney John J. Flynn. He noted that while it is rare for criminals to wear body armor during shootings, some law-abiding citizens, such as store clerks in high-crime areas, might also want to wear body armor for protection.

Gendron is currently serving a life sentence in state prison after pleading guilty to murder and domestic terrorism charges. He still faces federal charges that could result in the death penalty.

Combs criticized New York’s laws, claiming they have gone “far off the deep end.” He expressed confidence in overturning the body armor ban, emphasizing the protection of constitutionally guaranteed rights.

The lawsuit also highlights that body armor has saved the lives of over 3,000 law enforcement officers, according to a study by the National Institute for Justice. It states that body armor is commonly used for lawful purposes in every state, with American civilians spending $41.9 million on body armor in 2022, a figure projected to rise to $69.2 million by 2034. The lawsuit argues that a negligible percentage of criminals choose to wear body armor while committing crimes.

Since 1984, it has been a felony in New York to wear a “ballistic vest” while committing a crime with a gun, but only a handful of people have been charged with this crime over the past 40 years.

According to Spartan Armor Systems, an Arizona-based body armor company, New York is the only state that bans most private citizens from buying body armor. The company notes that many states have laws preventing criminals from using body armor.

The effort to repeal New York’s restrictions on body armor follows a recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling that struck down a federal ban on bump stocks. This device, banned by President Donald Trump after the 2017 Las Vegas mass shooting, increases the rapid-fire rate of a semiautomatic weapon. The Las Vegas shooter used a bump stock to kill 60 people and injure about 850 others, firing more than 1,000 rounds into a crowd in just 11 minutes.

States With Stricter Gun Laws See Fewer Gun-Related Child Suicides But No Effect On Homicides, Study Suggests

States with more restrictive gun laws had lower rates of firearm-related suicide among children yet saw no effect on child homicide rates as gun remain the leading cause of death among children—but researchers warn the strict laws may be inadvertently harming Black children, the very group they’re trying to protect.

Continue reading “”

Colorado Finds 1 in 4 Homicides with Firearms are ‘Justifiable Self Defense’

The number of times firearms are used in self-defense is difficult to quantify. In a rare analysis of data concerning deaths related to firearms, the Colorado Center for Health & Environmental data has produced figures that indicate firearms are commonly used for self-defense.

The Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment analyzed 5,287  firearm-related deaths in Colorado from 2016 to 2020. Of those deaths, the vast majority, 73.6%, were suicides. 24.9% were homicides/assaults (about 1316). Of the homicides, 24.7% were justifiable self-defense (about 325).

Firearms availability has minimal if any, effect on overall suicide rates. Firearms availability may increase or decrease overall homicide rates. The preponderance of the evidence is the availability of firearms has either no effect or slightly reduces overall homicide rates. Increasing legal firearms carry appears to have a small but measurable effect in decreasing overall homicide rates.

Continue reading “”

If the ‘outdoors’ has immediate access to me, I’ve got a gun in the pocket.

No Safe Place
No one can predict when and where we might have to defend themselves from a criminal attack.

I just have to shake my head when I hear comments like, “I didn’t carry my gun because, after all, we were just going to church.” Or, “I was only going down to the corner grocery, so I just dropped the little two-shot derringer in my pocket instead of my usual carry gun.” Some people just don’t learn until they survive a real deadly encounter. And that, my friends, is a tough way to learn.

Every month, I try to read the Armed Citizen column in my copy of Shooting Illustrated and you should too. Take the current issue, for instance. They list six deadly encounters, four of which occur in the home. One is at an ATM (no surprise there) and the last involves an encounter between a motorist and a cyclist. Who in the world would expect to have a deadly encounter with someone on a bicycle?

When you bother to educate yourself, you realize that deadly encounters can occur anywhere and when we may least expect it. They occur in churches, parking lots, movie theaters, sporting events, the home and in fact, everywhere that people gather. And the victims are people from all economic levels, from poor to extremely wealthy. Everyone is subject to experiencing a criminal attack and that, my friend, includes you and me.

I don’t want to hurt feelings, but the person who says they will only carry their defense gun when they think they might need it is either a fool or is just playing at personal defense. We carry a defensive handgun because we don’t know when we’ll need it. If we knew, we’d carry a rifle or shotgun … or, better yet, just stay home.

Not long ago, I changed clothes and then set out to run my morning errands. As I was cranking up my truck, I realized that I hadn’t put on my revolver, instead it was lying on the bed right where I had been changing. Since I was only going to the post office and the corner grocery, I was, for a moment, tempted to just go on. But, mentally kicking myself in the butt, I went back in and got my gun. Just a few minutes later I sat in the store parking lot while the city police arrested a drunk who was trying to get a fight started. Even though I was not involved in any way, I gave myself a mental pat on the back and went on about my errands.

When it comes to the folks who are just playing at personal defense, about all we can do is to continue to try to educate them. As for the rest of us, we remind ourselves and each other that no one can predict when and where we might have to defend ourselves from a criminal attack. We went to the trouble to be able to legally carry a defensive handgun, we got good training and we carry all the time because it is our right to do so and it is the smart thing to do.

NBC News Wants to Teach You How to Store Guns Correctly

I grew up watching NBC News because our local TV station was an NBC affiliate. We’d hit the local news, followed by the network news.

It wasn’t until I was a fair bit older–older than I’d like to admit, really–when I realized just how biased NBC News actually was. It was kind of jarring.

They’re especially bad about issues like guns, and I cringe every time I find an article from them on the topic. It’s usually not likely they’ll speak with anyone who understands them and when they do, they aren’t exactly flattering.

So when I saw they published a piece on gun storage, well, I was prepared to be disappointed. Especially when it talked about “experts.” That usually means anti-gun mouthpieces who have never even touched a gun without fainting, so the advice is going to be geared to make guns as useless as possible. That…didn’t happen.

Instead, it’s a sober, reasonable discussion of various methods of gun storage, some of their pros and cons, and mostly just leaves it there.

Yes, it cites studies that claims most gun owners aren’t securing their guns, but those are the studies that are out there. I’m not going to fault the writer for going there when that’s the information available.

This is perhaps the most troubling part of the piece:

Twenty-six states and Washington, D.C., have safe-storage laws that punish gun owners if a child accesses an unsecured firearm. These laws have drawn support from gun safety advocates and the U.S. Surgeon General, but they’re opposed by gun rights groups that argue people should be free to decide when and how to secure their weapons.

That’s not quite how the debate falls–mandatory storage laws have a bad habit of getting in the way of someone’s self-defense needs, which is why gun rights advocates oppose them–so this bit presents a bit of the writer’s bias, but this is someone working for NBC News.

Nothing about this is surprising.

Yet from here, it’s just a brief discussion of some of the gun storage options out there. It’s very brief, so a lot of nuance is missing, and there seems to be a phobia about guns loaded, but it’s not the most terrible article on the topic I’ve ever seen.

So that leads me to wonder why NBC News never thought to write it before.

Oh, I get that Surgeon General Vivek Murthy made headlines recently talking about this as a small part of his overall desire to see our gun rights stomped on, but there was no reason not to discuss this a lot earlier.

We have a reach here at Bearing Arms. The other gun rights sites out there do as well, and ours may well be more targeted than NBC News ever would be, but they have a broader reach and they can speak to the more casual gun owner.

They could have hit this years ago. They could rehash it regularly, even, just to make sure that people know what their options actually are.

Why didn’t they?

For people who seem to believe they have the duty to change the world, this is a simple thing they could have done ages ago.

Defensive gun use and reality

How often do Americans use guns in lawful self-defense? It’s a difficult question to answer, in part because many who send a criminal to flight by merely demonstrating they are armed, never report the incident. The same is true for many who brandish their handguns, or even point them at criminals, instantly convincing them running for their lives is the better part of valor.

Refusing to report is surely common in blue states, where law-abiding citizens can be virtually certain if they report lawful self-defense, they’re far more likely than the criminal that forced them to defend themselves to be arrested and prosecuted. Even in red states, many don’t want to take the chance.

Another factor that has become obvious during the Biden administration is as many as 7,000 police agencies—surely most if not all blue—have stopped reporting crimes, particularly violent crimes. This represents about a 35% reduction in the number of cities reporting crimes. No reports of crime, no crime exists, and leftists can claim huge reductions in violent crime even as they decriminalize crime and refuse to prosecute criminals.

There have, however, been a number of studies whose results are revealing. The Clinton administration conducted such a study, secure in their belief the results would conclusively prove lawful self-defense with guns was rare, a result they planned to use in pushing even more gun control schemes. To their horror, they found as many as 1.5 million such cases per year. They tried to hide the result, but it eventually leaked. Another study, which, to the horror of anti-liberty/gun cracktivists has stood the test of time and every attack, indicates as many as 2.5 million defensive gun uses per year, and in only 8% of those cases, was it necessary to shoot the criminal attacker. In 82% of cases, merely revealing a handgun and/or demonstrating the will to use it were sufficient to end an attack. In such cases, we can never know if the criminal was intent on robbery, rape, kidnapping or even murder.

The Centers For Disease Control have long been prohibited by law from using taxpayer dollars to advocate for gun control, which has not, of course, stopped them. A recent CDC report has been revealed to be ridiculously unprofessional and invalid. Conducted entirely by telephone, it had these four primary problems:

1. They were unable to determine whether firearms were stored loaded or unloaded during the phone interviews.

2. They were only able to obtain data from the eight states, which is statistically meaningless.

3. Some respondents did not want to disclose whether they had a firearm in their home.

This is surely a major factor in that Americans have never been more mistrustful of the government, particularly when speaking about gun ownership.

4. All of the data was self-reported to the researchers, and therefore “subject to social desirability and recall biases.”

One might also wonder why the CDC, which is ostensibly supposed to be dealing with disease vectors, should be spending time and money on an incompetently done telephone survey about gun storage in the home. As one might imagine, the survey ignored lawful defensive gun uses, the need for which is one of the primary reasons Americans keep firearms in their homes. By the way, the CDC was forced to admit the aforementioned flaws.

Why would anyone want to suppress the truth about lawful, defensive gun uses? They do irreparable damage to the anti-liberty/gun narrative, which holds guns are inherently evil,  and so are those who own them. They have the mystical power to compel their owners to murder. Guns exist only to kill the innocent—that would be leftist favored victim groups–and far fewer people own guns than the “gun lobby” claims, yet guns are everywhere, are responsible for unimaginable carnage and must be banned. Despite there being few guns, anyone owning a gun is virtually certain to kill a family member, despite firearm accidents being at a 100 year+ low.

There’s no logic or reproducible results supporting anti-liberty/gun “research,” which is why those that advocate that position simply resort to lying, which lies are eagerly and uncritically trumpeted by most of the media. Fortunately, Americans have wised up. For nearly 60 consecutive months, they’ve bought more than a million guns a month. They may not be willing to tell the government how many guns they own or how they use them, but they’re more than willing to use them to protect their families, and if necessary, to preserve our representative republic.

That’s what really scares our self-imagine elite.

Running The Defensive Lever-Action Rifle.

Any firearm has its own manual of arms, and the lever-action rifle is no exception. The armed citizen who chooses to use a lever gun for personal defense should know safe carry techniques and efficient and safe loading and unloading methods. And, just as with any other defensive firearm, we need to practice safe, efficient techniques when firing at the range and during dry practice.

When not carrying the lever gun I prefer that the magazine be loaded and the chamber empty. When encountering a threat or potential threat I have the option of levering a round into the chamber when I pick up the rifle and then lowering the hammer to the safety notch or, in the case of later model guns, engaging the external safety. The other option is to run the lever, chambering a round as I bring the gun to my shoulder and address the threat.

Whether the gun has a safety or not, I don’t like the idea of walking around with the hammer cocked. It is just an added safety measure to lower the hammer unless one is actually about to fire the gun. And no time is lost when the shooter cocks the hammer as he brings the gun to his shoulder and the sights onto the target.

In practice sessions it is important to get into the habit of firing and cycling the action without taking the gun down from the shoulder. The gun stays in the shoulder pocket while we fire our shot, cycle the action with a live round, and get back on target. With practice, one can also top off the magazine (tactical reload) without removing the gun from the shoulder.

Since the majority of lever-action rifles load from the right side of the receiver, the shooter will have to use their right hand to reload, regardless of whether they are right or left-handed. And one will just have to practice a little with a belt-mounted ammo slide or butt cuff on the gun to see what works best for the individual. Obviously, loose cartridges in a pocket should be avoided if at all possible. Just as with our defensive handguns, dry practice with the lever action is important. Dummy rounds can be purchased and used to practice various loading and unloading methods.

With most lever-action rifles the only way to unload them is to cycle the live rounds through the action and eject them. The only safe way to do this is to keep the muzzle pointed in a safe direction and make doubly sure that the trigger finger is nowhere near the trigger. It is critical to pay close attention to the unloading operation, go slowly, and focus on safety.

When firing and cycling a lever action it is important to do it with some force; my friend Richard Mann says, “Do it like you’re killing snakes.”  Running the lever gently can lead to what we call a short stroke, that is when the bolt fails to chamber a round. You run the action with the same forcefulness that you run a pump shotgun.

In short, the lever-action rifle can be an excellent choice for personal defense, but it is critical that the armed citizen learn how to run it safely and efficiently. Those who haven’t grown up hunting with lever guns would be well advised to sign up for one of the several defensive classes that are offered. In fact, professional classes are always a good idea regardless of a person’s experience level.

W.Va. Campus Self-Defense Act to take effect July 1

On July 1, Senate Bill 10, the W.Va. Campus Self-Defense Act, will take effect in West Virginia. Passed by the West Virginia Legislature in 2023, the Campus Self-Defense Act allows a person to carry a concealed pistol or revolver on the grounds of an institution of higher education, with some exceptions, if that person has a current and valid license to carry a concealed deadly weapon.

The West Virginia University Campus Safety Steering Group has been working for many months in coordination with several sub-groups, including one focused solely on what is commonly known as campus carry, on how the law will be implemented across the WVU System.

These, in conjunction with signage, will assist in informing where licensed concealed pistol and revolvers are not allowed on the Morgantown, Keyser, Beckley and Health Sciences campuses.

Facilities has started installing signs in areas specifically exempt from the law under BOG Finance and Administration Rule 5.14 — Deadly Weapons, Dangerous Objects and the W.Va. Campus Self-Defense Act.

Ultimately, it is up to the concealed carry license holder to know the specifics of the law and BOG Rule and to follow the regulations while on campuses throughout the WVU System. Violations will be addressed on a case-by-case basis.

Additionally, please review the FAQs for updated information, including a section specifically for Health Sciences, a step-by-step What To Do if You See Someone on Campus With a Gun guide and storage locker requests for qualifying students living in residence halls.

Occupants of “sole occupancy” offices wishing to request an approved sign for a prohibited area can do so by submitting a signage request.

Faculty members are encouraged to use the Faculty Senate-approved statement addressing concealed carry in their syllabi. It is available at facultysenate.wvu.edu/home.

The University wants everyone to feel safe on campus and works each day on measures to help ensure that. For example, the University Police Department offers active shooter, self-defense and verbal de-escalation training.

Comment O’ The Day
Are you surprised the gooberment lied in a report? – Jessica J

Citing Fake Mass-Shooting Data, US Surgeon General Declares ‘Gun Violence’ a Public Health Crisis

United States Surgeon General Vivek Murthy declared that “gun violence” constitutes a public health crisis Tuesday but cited fake mass-shooting data from the long-debunked Gun Violence Archive to support his spurious claims.

Murthy presented his finding in a 40-page Surgeon General advisory, titled “Firearm Violence: A Public Health Crisis in America.”

“While mass shooting deaths represent only about 1% of all firearm‑related deaths in the U.S., the number of mass shooting incidents is increasing. According to data published by Gun Violence Archive, the U.S. experienced more than 600 mass shooting incidents each year between 2020 and 2023, compared to an average of less than 400 annual mass shooting incidents between 2015 and 2018,” the Surgeon General’s advisory states.

In his report, Murthy cites data from the Gun Violence Archive more than four times.

Founded in 2013, the GVA quickly became the administration’s source of choice for mass-shooting data because they hype the numbers. The small nonprofit came up with its own extremely broad definition of a mass shooting, which says anytime four or more people are killed or even slightly wounded with a firearm regardless of the circumstances, it’s a mass shooting. For example, according to the GVA there were 417 mass shootings in 2019. The FBI says there were 30, because it uses a much narrower and more realistic definition, which excludes gang-related and drug-related shootings, which the GVA includes in its data.

Murthy is not the only member of the Biden-Harris administration to use fake data from the GVA. Biden and his handlers have cited GVA’s mass-shooting data throughout his presidency in speeches, written statements and social media.

Continue reading “”

The Truth on Permitless Carry, More Guns Create Safer Communities

I grew up in the inner city of St. Louis in a single-parent household. We faced poverty, hunger, violence, and decay. It was a daily struggle that I assumed was the life of every black family in America. I didn’t know the world that existed outside of my neighborhood.

But by God’s grace, I saw a glimmer of light in the distance and chose a different path. I joined the St. Louis Police Department’s Prisoner Processing Division, where I learned about the true threats that plague our society, what public safety really means, and why we should hold our Constitutional Rights—especially the Second Amendment—close to our hearts.

After 16 years, I left the Police Force but never lost focus on protecting people. So, I continued training individuals in self-defense and started an organization called Aiming for the Truth to focus on changing the underlying factors that drive violence in our communities.

A critical part of my job – as both a firearms coach and someone who is trying to generate wholesale change in impoverished communities – is showcasing truth while dispelling lies surrounding violence, firearms, and the Second Amendment.

Thanks to the anti-freedom people and organizations, most of us grow up seeing firearms as a tool for chaos, not a means to peace. But here’s the truth: Guns in the hands of law-abiding citizens create safer communities. But you don’t have to take my word for it–the data proves it.

In a recent paper from the Firearms Research Center at the University of Wyoming, senior fellow K. Alexander Adams assesses the research surrounding “Constitutional Carry,” a law under consideration in North Carolina that 29 other US states have adopted. In short, this legislation allows qualified citizens to carry a firearm without a weapons permit.

“The relationship between constitutional-carry laws and homicide is negative, which is the opposite of what gun-control activists have predicted,” wrote Adams. In fact, “Constitutional-carry laws were associated with about 6% lower homicide rates. The doomsday scenarios of constitutional-carry opponents are not supported by social science.”

Adam referenced a study published by the Center for Justice Research earlier this year that affirmed his national research.

“Beginning June 13, 2022, Ohio became the 23rd state to allow its citizens to carry a concealed weapon without a permit. In the year following, crime involving guns dropped across Ohio’s eight largest cities as a whole and in six of the eight individually.”

Adams also name checks the John Locke Foundation, quoting from a column published in Carolina Journal, “When analyzing violent crime rates of constitutional carry states (with enough data) in years since enactment, the states either reflected the national trend in violent crime or showed a relative decrease in their violent crime rates.”

As lawmakers in North Carolina contemplate passing gun rights legislation, it’s vital for them to seek and vocalize the truth. We know the gun control lobby are lying – and will continue to lie – about permitless carry – and the Second Amendment more generally – because they want power. If they can convince citizens that their rights can – and should – be compromised, freedom diminishes as the ruling class consolidates control.

So, considering the facts, figures, and future of this great nation, let’s endeavor to spread and amplify the truth – even when it doesn’t fit neatly into a political party or ideology.

Let’s talk about the Black Wall Street Massacre in Tulsa and why gun control is simply Jim Crowe 2.0.

Let’s share the stats about Gun Free Zones becoming the choice location for mass murder and expose the detrimental impact of “assault weapons bans” as they threaten the safety and civility of our communities.

Permitless carry boils down to individual responsibility. The ability to exercise your rights without government intervention. While some try to paint these laws as a recipe for disaster, the data tells another story – a story that young men and women who grew up like me deserve to hear.

CHICAGO EDITORIAL BOARD: ‘WORRIFYING’ THAT LAW-ABIDING GUN OWNERS ARE DEFENDING THEMSELVES

Last weekend, Chicagoans witnessed a weekend that saw at least 71 people shot. Tragically, nine of the victims died from their injuries. Just two weeks ago, Chicagoans survived a weekend that saw at least 44 people shot. Tragically, at least eight of the victims died from their injuries.

In a city where criminals know they can get away with violence and criminal shootings – even when police are involved – it’s not surprising that law-abiding Chicagoans would consider arming themselves and, God-forbid, having to use their firearm for self-defense or to protect their families.

That’s just too much for The Chicago Tribune editorial board. The media masters there went out and did the most editorial board thing possible and decried such a trend.

“Worryingly, we’re seeing more signs of that phenomenon in Chicago, with three separate episodes over the last weekend in which would-be victims proved to be both armed and willing to fire at their assailants,” the board chose to write.

It must be nice to live in such an Ivory Tower.

Continue reading “”

NC Appeals Court Rules Gun Storage Law Doesn’t Apply to Unloaded Firearms

A North Carolina appellate court has thrown out a woman’s conviction on manslaughter and other charges, ruling that she didn’t violate the state’s gun storage law because the firearm accessed by her teenage son and a friend was unloaded when it was left unsecured.

The unanimous ruling by the three-judge panel might not be the last word in the case, since prosecutors can still appeal to the state Supreme Court, but for now Kimberly Cable is free from the convictions handed down by a trial judge two years ago.

On July 2018, Cable’s son had another boy — both of them 16 years old — over at his house for the night, according to case documents. At 2 a.m., her son went in the bedroom of Cable and her husband as they were sleeping and retrieved an unloaded .44-caliber Magnum revolver that authorities say Cable possessed and a box of ammunition, both laying on top of an open gun safe.

The son showed his friend the revolver and placed it and the ammo on the top of a gun safe in his bedroom. The friend then asked the son if he wanted to play Russian roulette. The friend quickly put a bullet in the revolver, pointed it at himself and fired, dying instantly, the documents said.

What a nightmare for everyone involved. I’m sure that Cable and her husband trusted their teen to be responsible around firearms, given that her husband is a gunsmith. Unfortunately, it sounds like their kid succumbed to peer pressure, and a life was needlessly lost as a result.

While North Carolina law states, in part, that “any person who resides in the same premises as a minor, owns or possesses a firearm, and stores or leaves the firearm (i) in a condition that the firearm can be discharged and (ii) in a manner that the person knew or should have known that an unsupervised minor would be able to gain access to the firearm, is guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor”, the appellate court ruled that an unloaded firearm can’t be discharged, and therefore doesn’t fall under the storage mandate.

Court of Appeals Judge Jefferson Griffin, who wrote the panel’s opinion, said the appeals court had never interpreted the phrase before and it was ambiguous.

He said past and present criminal law, combined with a legal rule that favors defendants for ambiguous laws, leads to the conclusion that the phrase means the firearm must be loaded.

That means Cable’s revolver was not stored in violation of the law, he wrote. The second similar firearm storage conviction against her also was reversed because there was no evidence to suggest a minor gained access to other weapons, and the involuntary manslaughter conviction was vacated because the safe-firearm conviction involving the revolver was reversed, Griffin said.

It’s a heartbreaking case, but I think the panel made the right call here. Under the statute, prosecutors had to prove both that the firearm that was taken without permission from Cable’s bedroom was in a condition where it could have been discharged and in a manner where Cable should have known that her son and his friend could get ahold of it. While Cable pretty clearly left the revolver out where it could be accessed by anyone in the home, by leaving it unloaded she kept it in a condition where it could not immediately be discharged.

I’m not a fan of gun storage mandates, in part because they impose a one-size-fits-all “solution” to a wide variety of gun owners. But while Cable may not have violated the law, she and her husband arguably violated common sense by leaving their revolver next to a box of ammo on top of a gun safe while their son had his friend in the home.

I’ve always trusted my own kids to be safe and responsible with firearms, but when my overly social son was in high school and our home was regularly filled with his buddies, I also made sure that my collection of firearms, like my liquor cabinet, was off-limits to them. Not because the law required it, but because I remember some of my own idiotic behavior from my teenage years.

Cable’s decision can be dumb, especially in hindsight, without it being a crime. But her case will almost certainly lead to demands to change North Carolina’s gun storage law even if the state Supreme Court upholds the decision from the appellate panel, and gun owners in the state will have to be on guard against any attempt to impose more heavy-handed mandates this session.