Category: Safety

Just the Beginning: Ten Afghan Evacuees Detained as National Security Risks.

The Biden administration is giving America gifts that will keep on giving for generations to come, and one of the foremost of these gifts is the newly-arrived group of Afghan evacuees: 70,000 are now in the U.S., and the total number is expected to exceed 124,000 before long. One of Biden’s handlers, unnamed in a Wednesday Wall Street Journal report, has admitted that ten of these evacuees have already been detained as risks to national security. Only ten out of 70,000 isn’t bad, right? Sure. But Biden’s handlers’ catastrophic mishandling of the withdrawal from Afghanistan makes it virtually certain that there will be many more.

The reasons for this are clear. Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas noted in late September that 60,000 Afghans had been brought to the United States by that time, including nearly 8,000 who were American citizens or residents of the country, and 1,800 had Special Immigrant Visas (SIV) issued to them for aiding the U.S. military in Afghanistan.

What about the rest? Mayorkas explained:

Of the over 60,000 individuals who have been brought into the United States [from Afghanistan]—and I will give you approximate figures and I will verify them, approximately 7 percent have been United States citizens. Approximately 6 percent have been lawful permanent residents. Approximately 3 percent have been individuals who are in receipt of the Special Immigrant Visas. The balance of that population are individuals whose applications have not yet been processed for approval who may qualify as SIVs and have not yet applied, who qualify or would qualify—I should say—as P-1 or P-2 refugees who have been employed by the United States government in Afghanistan and are otherwise vulnerable Afghan nationals, such as journalists, human rights advocates, et cetera.

The upshot of this is that over eighty percent of the Afghan evacuees were neither American citizens nor SIV holders. So who are they? No one knows. Certainly Biden’s handlers don’t. Congressman Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) recently discovered that 12,000 of the Afghans who were sent to Camp As Sayliyah in Qatar and then went on to the U.S. were not just “individuals whose applications have not yet been processed for approval,” as Mayorkas put it, but had no identification at all. Issa stated: “They came with nothing. No Afghan I.D., no I.D. of any sorts. Those people were all forwarded on to the U.S., and that’s quite an admission. So many people had no I.D. whatsoever and yet find themselves in the United States today based on what they said.”

This is no reason to be concerned, say Biden’s handlers. Another (or maybe the same one quoted before) unnamed “senior official” in the Biden administration assured the Wall Street Journal that “the use of biometric and biographic data was a robust screening strategy, as the U.S. had decades to build up databases of information related to national security threats and crime. The official said it was sufficient to address the lack of paperwork or other identifying information.” The official downplayed any risk: “In the case of Afghanistan, we had quite a lot [of data] because we’ve spent almost 20 years in the country. It was actually a particularly rich set of information in those various databases.”

National Security Council spokesperson Emily Horne added: “The fact that some have been flagged by our counterterrorism, intelligence, or law enforcement professionals for additional screening shows our system is working. Many of the same people criticizing us for bringing in Afghans were on TV calling for us to evacuate as many Afghans as possible in August.”

There are, as you no doubt already realize, not a few flies in this ointment. The Journal also noted that “federal officials interviewed at U.S. bases overseas stated to Republican aides that they didn’t have any training in identifying fraudulent Afghan documents, raising concerns about the validity of documents that were used.” As a result, several Afghans were able to board a flight in Mazar-e-Sharif with fraudulent documents. They were caught, but how many others weren’t? “There were several people who were traveling with fake passports,” the Biden wonk admitted. However, relax: “They did not have Taliban affiliation.”

Great. But the number of evacuees who have already aroused suspicion is greater than the ten who have been flagged as national security risks. The Washington Post reported on September 10 that “the Department of Homeland Security flagged 44 Afghan evacuees as potential national security risks during the past two weeks as the government screened tens of thousands for resettlement in the United States.”

Not only is the potential for deception virtually limitless when dealing with people who have absolutely no identification; it also must be borne in mind that these people have come from a jihadi hotspot and that ISIS, which has a significant presence in Afghanistan, has repeatedly told its operatives in the West to affect Western clothing and a secular outward appearance in order to fool gullible security officials. And Biden’s security apparatus is so very eager to be fooled, it even denies the ideological and theological basis of Islamic jihad terrorism. How, then, can it vet for it? It can’t. And that means that these ten evacuees who have been detained are only the beginning.

The Gun Culture I Know

In a recent Pundit column in these pages, Ruchama Benhamou paints a grim picture of what she calls “gun culture in America.” This culture, she writes, is one where guns “are often used to promote power and incite fear” as opposed to being used for self-defense. This culture has apparently led “to an increase in mass shootings and gun violence all around the country.” How does she know this? Where has she learned of the inner motives of gun owners and their culture? And how does she know her causal claim that the increase in mass shootings and gun violence can be linked to this pervasive culture? We don’t know, for she cites no sources to justify her claims on both points.

My goal here is not to discuss gun policy and its constitutional implications; I have done that elsewhere. Nor do I want to discuss what accounts for much of this nation’s gun violence. I write here to correct the author’s (mis)perception of gun culture. So, allow me to describe the gun culture that I know.

For the readers who don’t know me personally, I must mention that I am a proud gun owner. I carry my firearm religiously, sliding it into my holster whenever I leave my house, be it to the supermarket or to shul. If you ever catch me out and about here in my hometown of Philadelphia, you’d likely not even notice my gun at my side. But it is there, ready to be used in an act of defense to protect me, my family and everyone around me from a lunatic who wishes to do us harm. My firearm was there to protect my neighbor when I heard his house being broken into this past Passover. My gun was there when, at the height of last summer’s riots, I heard someone smash my (other) neighbor’s car windows in the dead of night, frightening my entire household. The only fear my CZ-P10c has incited is in the hearts of those miscreants who stood down the working end of it; to those behind it, it has brought nothing but comfort and security.

And I am not the only one who can attest to this phenomenon. The CDC has noted that “Americans use firearms in self-defense between 500,000 and 3 million times every year.” There are a plethora of stories and anecdotes about good Samaritans using their firearms, like a few years ago:

A concealed-carry permit holder intervened to stop a mentally disturbed man who was endangering drivers by throwing chunks of concrete and metal pipes at cars passing by on the interstate. The man had damaged almost a dozen cars and was holding a large piece of metal when the permit holder drew his handgun and detained the man until police could arrive. One of the drivers whose car was damaged told reporters that she was thankful the permit holder saved her and other drivers from further harm.

The five or so of us guys who carry to shul are a blessing to our congregation, whose members have encouraged us. We are not only trained marksmen, but we are also trained in various levels of first aid. I myself carry a tourniquet in my pocket, realizing that I am likely to use it more than I am likely to draw my gun. Many gun-oriented companies, such as T-Rex Arms or The Warrior Poet Society, emphasize how important it is to be self-sufficient first responders, ready to terminate threats and simultaneously save lives. Any glance at their websites or YouTube pages will make that abundantly clear. Gun ranges across the country often have as much programming dedicated to first aid as they do to marksmanship. It should come as no surprise, therefore, that concealed-carry permit holders are, by far, the most law-abiding demographic of Americans.

Those who are not self-proclaimed members of the gun community and its surrounding culture should recognize how special both are. It is a culture that treasures the sanctity of human life. It is a culture that chooses not to stand idly by in the face of those evil people who have no regard for life or property. It is a culture where, as Thomas Jefferson wrote to George Washington, “One loves to possess arms, though they hope never to have occasion for them.”

This is the gun culture I know. I’m glad you now know it too.

The 5 Best Less Lethal Weapons for Self-Defense

If you’re anything like me, then the protection of yourself and your family is of utmost importance to you. I would contend that none of these less-lethal weapons for self-defense that I will highlight are superior to a firearm in the hands of a well-trained person, but each of them has its place in either civilian or law enforcement arenas. Without further ado, let’s look into some of the most effective and bizarre less-lethal weapons for self-defense that are currently available.

Why Go for a Less-Lethal Weapon for Self-Defense?

First, the term “less-lethal” means exactly what it says. It doesn’t say “not lethal” and it certainly doesn’t say “safe.” From a law enforcement perspective, less-lethal weapons fill a much-needed gap in the use-of-force continuum. From a civilian perspective, less-lethal weapons could be the difference in safety vs. assault, if not life vs. death. I know some of you are probably thinking the same thing I do when considering the effectiveness of less-lethal weapons; that being you’d rather have a firearm than any tool that will be listed below. Let me tell you that I agree. A firearm is the greatest self-defense tool for a violent encounter that has ever been created. In my opinion, the second-best tool to have with you on a daily basis is actually no weapon at all; but more on that at the end.

That said, there are many reasons why a less-lethal weapon could be preferred by some. Some people simply are anti-gun and they refuse to have them in their homes. My brother-in-law and sister-in-law (wife’s side) are exactly this way. They are completely opposed to firearms within their home. Another reason one might not have a firearm is that they live in a dictatorial city like New York or Chicago in which firearm ownership rights are not recognized as they are in much of the rest of the country (which, according to the crime statistics in those two locations doesn’t seem to help much…). In cities like these, a can of pepper spray or a taser may be all that you can legally possess. In that way, less-lethal options become invaluable.

Let’s explore some of the best less-lethal options and you can decide for yourself if any of them may be a good addition to your repertoire.

Continue reading “”

Do tell……………

New study finds little effect from Massachusetts gun control measures on violent crimes

A new study from American University found that the tightened gun-control measures that went into effect in Massachusetts six years ago had little effect on the violent crime rate in the state, raising questions about enforcement of these laws.
“Gun violence remains at the forefront of the public policy debate when it comes to enacting new or strengthening existing gun legislation in the United States,” said Janice Iwama, assistant professor of justice, law, and criminology at AU, who conducted the study. “Yet the political polarization and relatively limited scholarly research on guns and gun violence make it difficult for policymakers and practitioners to enact and implement legislation that addresses the public health and safety issues associated with gun violence.”
The study, published in Justice Quarterly, used modeling and FBI data from 2006 to 2016 to examine the impact of the 2015 gun law on crimes including murder, rape, robbery and aggravated assault.
The law, enacted in the wake of the Sandy Hook, Conn., school shooting by former Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick, paved the way for the creation of a web portal for gun dealers to check the validity of a firearm license and track sales and transfers of firearms. It also tightened requirements for background checks on the sale of firearms and licensing procedures.
Iwama, who authored the study, noted that the entire country, including the Bay State, experienced a drop in crime since the 1990s. Still, Massachusetts had 287,000 violent crimes from 2006 to 2016, including “198,402 aggravated assaults, 70,361 robberies, 19,107 rapes, and 1,698 instances of murder or non-negligent man-slaughter.”
About 1% to 5% of adult residents in each Massachusetts county have a firearms license.
She found that a one percentage point rise in denied licenses and denied licenses due to unsuitability increased robberies by 7.3% and 8.9%, respectively, after the new law took effect. For every other type of violent crime, including rape, murder and aggravated assault, she found no statistically significant change.
Iwama suggested the issue could be caused by uneven enforcement of the laws across counties, an overall lag in enforcement and/or because residents are obtaining firearms in neighboring states with looser gun laws. She recommended that policymakers revisit the legislation to ensure it’s being property applied and enforced.

State Senator Pat Stefano Introduces Legislation To Expand Pennsylvania’s Castle Doctrine Law

HARRISBURG (KDKA) – State Senator Pat Stefano (R-32) is pushing to expand Pennsylvania’s Castle Doctrine law.

HARRISBURG (KDKA) – State Senator Pat Stefano (R-32) is pushing to expand Pennsylvania’s Castle Doctrine law.

Castle Doctrine governs how far a person can go to defend their property.

Stefano introduced new legislation Thursday that would allow Pennsylvanians to use self-defense beyond their home to their property line.

“Forcing law-abiding Pennsylvanians to wait to defend their loved ones until a criminal enters their home could result in the unnecessary loss of innocent life – a tragedy made worse because it could have been prevented,” Sen. Stefano said. “The right to defend oneself should not be limited, as it is in the current weaker standard, based on whether individuals are inside their dwelling or on their property.”

Stefano said the expansion to the law would provide citizens with the ability to, “better protect themselves, their family, and their property.”

The president of Firearms Owners Against Violent Crime, Kim Stolfer, told KDKA the extension in self-defense protections is “absolutely essential.”

Continue reading “”

Oh my: One dead on Alec Baldwin set over prop-gun “misfire” (Updated)

How could a prop gun loaded with blanks have killed a cinematographer on a Hollywood film location? Investigators in New Mexico want to know that too, and that’s not the only mystery in this story so far. The man who fired the shot(s?) was the star of Rust, Alec Baldwin, who hasn’t been charged in the incident, and appears devastated by it:

 

The Santa Fe Sheriff’s Department confirmed Thursday night that Alec Baldwin “discharged” the prop gun that killed Rust cinematographer Halyna Hutchins and injured director Joel Souza on the set of the Western feature film on location in New Mexico.

Hutchins, 42, died not long after being transported to a hospital in Albuquerque, NM this afternoon. Souza, 48, remains in a local hospital; his condition is unknown. …

Deadline earlier reported that Criminal Investigators were called to the scene at Bonanza Creek Ranch just outside Santa Fe as sources informing us that a principal castmember cocked a gun, hitting Souza, 48 and Hutchins, 42, on set. The entire location went under lockdown during the investigation. The castmember, now identified as Baldwin, was unaware of the type of ammunition in the gun, we’re told. A rep from the production said that “Production has been halted for the time being” on Rust and that “the safety of our cast and crew remains our top priority.”

Traditionally, the prop master or armorer is responsible for fire arms and fire arms safety on a set such as Rust.

We should be cautious about first reports on this shooting, as we should be with any such incident. We should be doubly cautious about piling on with people whose politics and personality we don’t approve. At the moment, this looks like a completely unintentional accident that has nothing to do with politics or personality, and there’s no reason at this moment to jump to any conclusions otherwise.

There are a couple of puzzling elements to this, however. If the pistol didn’t have live ammunition, it’s tough to understand how two people got wounded on the set from one shot — possible, but strange. Deadline’s initial report that director Joel Souza was wounded has been walked back subtly since the first reports; he’s now being described as hospitalized for unknown reasons, which is a smarter way to approach this. It’s also strange to see it reported as a “misfire,” which would normally indicate either a non-shot or some sort of explosion in the pistol itself.

Continue reading “”

Ohio Republicans pass bill to ban gun store closures during emergencies

Republicans in the Ohio Senate passed a bill 23 to 7 Wednesday that says local governments can’t close gun stores or confiscate firearms during riots or other states of emergency.

“During the COVID pandemic, it became evident that local, state and federal governments have sweeping powers when it came to emergencies,” Sen. Tim Schaffer, R -Lancaster, said.

Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine carved out an exemption for gun stores in his stay-at-home orders, but other states did not.

“Therefore this bill is critical to proactively define the limits of government’s power to further abuses,” Schaffer said.

Senate Bill 185 would also ban local governments from invalidating concealed carry licenses or closing down shooting ranges.

Current law allows local governments to prohibit the sale or transportation of “firearms or other dangerous weapons” such as crossbows and knives when suppressing a riot or “when there is a clear and present danger of a riot.”

SB 185 would eliminate that provision for everything except dynamite and other explosives.

And that’s a problem for Democrats like Sen. Cecil Thomas, a Democrat from Cincinnati’s Avondale neighborhood.

“You’re denying local governments the ability to protect their communities as they deem appropriate,” Thomas said.

Groups like the Ohio Municipal League opposed the bill in committing, saying it would violate the home rule authority of local governments.

“The Ohio Constitution grants Home Rule authority to municipalities in recognition that a government closest to the people governs best,” Ohio Municipal League Director Ken Scarrett said earlier this month. “Each city and village should be equipped to serve and protect the interests of their communities.”

SB 185 now heads to the Republican-controlled Ohio House for consideration.

Gun-Shy Writer Has Second Thoughts About Defenselessness

Since the start of the pandemic and the corresponding Great Gun Run of 2020/2021, we’ve seen millions of Americans embrace their Second Amendment rights for the very first time, and not all of them are conservatives worried about their individual freedoms being taken away. There’s been a rise in the number of self-described liberals with a growing interest in gun ownership over the past 20 months or so as well, including Samuel Ligon, a novelist and teacher at Eastern Washington University.

Ligon recently wrote about what drove him to take class on basic firearms handling as he debated buying a gun, and as it turns out, it was conservative 2A activists that had the biggest impact on him.

This was a few months after the BLM demonstrations in Spokane, Washington, when the militia was out at night with their guns and camouflage costumes. Kate and I saw them on TV and Twitter, in Spokane and all over the West, men with assault weapons ready for war.

I’d seen them in Olympia, too, armed citizens asserting their rights. The third-grade teachers would usher their students back to the buses, their Capitol tour abruptly over. This was before the Capitol grounds were fenced, before people started shooting each other during weekend protests. In August, Kate and I saw a guy at the Country Store shopping with his wife and toddler with a gun on his hip, a posture I found idiotic, intimidating, infuriating. He was why I wanted to go to gun school. I hated him for walking around like that.

I didn’t tell Kate I was going for weeks, and when I did tell her, she didn’t say much. In fact, she didn’t say anything. I considered canceling, but it had been so hard to get a spot. Everyone wanted to go to gun school. The pandemic — or something worse, whatever it was that had been tearing us apart for years — was working our fear, making some of us conclude that we might have to shoot somebody soon, which is what we mean when we talk about self-defense.

For Ligon, it was the armed response to the “demonstrations” that made him want a firearm for protection, but for many others, it was the riots, looting, and violence in cities from coast-to-coast that made them think about their Second Amendment rights for the first time in their lives. And even after the riots and demonstrations subsided, the violence has remained. Ligon doesn’t say anything about the crime rate in Spokane influencing his desire to own a gun, but homicides in the city doubled in 2020 compared to 2019, and I don’t think the “militia” was responsible for any of them.

But it wasn’t just Ligon who was interested in picking up a firearm. His brother told him he’d bought a gun. His brother-in-law admitted he’d bought a shotgun, though he hadn’t yet purchased any shells.

Continue reading “”

BLUF:
The public is not rendered “safer” when citizens are disarmed, but rendered only more vulnerable to (and powerless against) those who would do them harm.

11 More Reasons Biden Administration Is Wrong About Onerous Gun Restrictions

The Biden administration last month filed a brief encouraging the Supreme Court to uphold New York City’s de facto ban preventing ordinary citizens from carrying firearms in public.

The administration argued that an onerous “good cause” requirement—giving the city’s police department unmitigated discretion over citizens’ exercise of a fundamental right—is a perfectly reasonable regulation.

This court brief is just one of several high-profile actions taken this year by the Biden administration that underscore its lack of commitment to taking the Second Amendment seriously.

New York City’s law, one of a myriad of serious burdens placed on New Yorkers’ right to keep and bear arms, prevents the vast majority of residents from being able to meaningfully protect themselves in public when the government fails to do so. And the government often fails to do so.

In fact, almost every major study on the issue has found that Americans use their firearms in self-defense between 500,000 and 3 million times annually, according to a 2013 report by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

For this reason, The Daily Signal publishes an article monthly underscoring some of the previous month’s many news stories on defensive gun use that you may have missed—or that might not have made it to the national spotlight in the first place.

The examples below represent only a small portion of the news stories on defensive gun use that we found in August. You may explore more by using The Heritage Foundation’s interactive Defensive Gun Use Database. (The Daily Signal is the multimedia news organization of The Heritage Foundation.)

Continue reading “”

Well, that ‘we’ isn’t as inclusive as might be thought.

We Still Haven’t Learned The Lessons Of Luby’s 30 Years Later

Luby’s Cafeteria is one of the earlier mass shootings of our modern era. Predating Columbine, it was a nightmare scenario that the city of Killean, TX is still reeling from 30 years later. That’s certainly understandable.

After all, it was something so unexpected that it would be difficult not to reel.

The tragic Luby’s Cafeteria massacre in Killeen left survivors, residents, and city leaders hoping and praying such a senseless, murderous incident would never happen again in the United States.

“No community is, or could ever be, prepared for the tragedy which struck Killeen on October 16, 1991,” said a 1991 Herald thank-you-to-first-responders display ad from then-Mayor Major Blair and Killeen City Council. “Our hope and prayers are that a similar event will never again occur in any community.”

At the time, the Luby’s tragedy was the deadliest mass shooting in U.S. history, however, that’s no longer the case.

In the three decades since George “JoJo” Hennard, 35, of Belton, drove his blue Ford Ranger pickup through a plate glass window of Luby’s Cafeteria in Killeen and murdered 23 Luby’s Cafeteria lunchtime diners on National Bosses Day, America has mourned 111 mass shootings, eight of those in Texas, in which 846 people were killed, according to a mass shooting database by nonprofit Mother Jones.

Two of those mass shootings occurred at Fort Hood, in 2009 and 2014, in which 16 people were killed in all.

In the decade prior to the Luby’s massacre, according to the mass shooting database, America had nine mass shootings, classified as an attack where three or more victims are killed in a public place.

It’s awful.

One thing everyone can probably agree on is that we haven’t learned our lessons since then. The problem is that we don’t agree on what those lessons actually are.

For the anti-Second Amendment jihadists, though, the lessons are “guns r teh badz.” Never you mind that five people were just murdered with a bow and arrow last week, the problem truly is guns.

Yet there was an actual lesson here:

Former state representative and Luby’s survivor Suzanna Hupp, lost both of her parents in the Luby’s shooting. Hupp, who lobbies for looser gun control laws, said she would’ve been able to stop the shooter if Texas had allowed concealed carry in 1991. She had a handgun at the time, but left it in her vehicle because of the law at the time.

DING DING DING! We have a winner!

Luby’s was a target in part because people couldn’t carry a firearm there. There was little to no chance of meeting armed resistance. Hupp would have been in a position to end the attack before it really got going, but she complied with the law. We saw the same thing happen in Virginia Beach, too.

What’s that phrase? “If it saves just one life,” or something like that? Yeah, I think that’s it.

Look, I’m not saying ending gun-free zones will put an end to mass shootings. I think it’ll stop a lot of them, but someone will still try to shoot up places for whatever demented reason.

What I will say is that we can specifically point to two cases–and who knows how many others we’re unaware of–where someone was barred from carrying a gun, so they were unarmed when a mass shooting happened. If it wouldn’t have made a difference in any of the others, it would have at least saved lives in Luby’s Cafeteria and in Virginia Beach.

But I don’t believe they were the only two cases, either. They’re just the two I know of definitively.

That’s the lesson we can’t seem to learn. We can’t seem to grasp that bad things are going to happen. You’re never going to stop that. But you can minimize the damage by trusting law-abiding citizens with the very rights protected in the Constitution, including the right to keep and bear arms.

Impossible!

BLUF:
And again, we were reminded that the bad guys don’t pay attention to signs banning firearms or illegal weapons.  If they were the kind to abide by rules, they wouldn’t be bad guys.

A Pennsylvania mall that bans guns has mass shooting

Although the daily news always provides plenty of examples of people doing genuinely bad things (assault, robbery, rape, murder, etc.), the fact is that most people in America are law-abiding.  And while some will sit passively while a violent rape occurs directly in front of them, many of these good citizens will act when called upon to do so.  Nevertheless, America’s retail stores and entertainment venues insist on disarming the good guys under the delusional belief that it will stop the bad guys.

The latest example of this urge to disarm comes from Lancaster, Pennsylvania, where a shooting occurred at the Park City Center shopping mall on Sunday afternoon:

Gunshots rang out at the Park City Center in Lancaster around 2:30 p.m., according to Lancaster Online.

Two people suffered gunshot wounds and two suspects were in custody, according to police and the website, which said the injuries were not life-threatening.

An argument broke out between four people outside an international food store, the owner of the store told the outlet. One man brandished a gun during a scuffle, and it was knocked away by a man who then opened fire, according to the report.

Continue reading “”

CCRKBA: ‘KING COUNTY, WA MURDER SPIKE TYPIFIES NATIONAL GUN CONTROL FAILURE’

BELLEVUE, WA – Authorities in Washington’s King County—epicenter of the Northwest’s gun prohibition movement—are alarmed at the continued rise in gun-related homicides and shooting incidents, but nowhere has anyone acknowledged that gun control laws they have supported are an utter failure, the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms said today.

“Nothing more clearly illustrates gun control lack of success than the situation in King County,” noted CCRKBA Chairman Alan Gottlieb. “It is reflective of the national trend revealed in the FBI Uniform Crime Report for 2020, showing murders up by 30 percent nationwide. If restricting the gun rights of law-abiding citizens worked, this should not be the case.”

Gottlieb recited the recent failed history of the Seattle-based, and billionaire-backed gun control crusade beginning in 2014 with statewide Initiative 594, requiring so-called “universal background checks” for all gun transfers. This was followed in 2015 by Seattle’s adoption of a special gun control tax on the sale of firearms and ammunition, which has never achieved the revenue forecast of $300,000 to $500,000 annually, and has only driven business out of the city. In 2018, Seattle’s wealthy anti-gun elitists pushed through another statewide gun control initiative, again contending it would reduce gun-related violent crime, but the exact opposite has happened.

“Let’s look at the embarrassing data,” Gottlieb suggested. “According to the report, this year’s 73 gun-related homicides in King County so far have already surpassed last year’s total of 69, and there are still more than two months to go in 2021. Last year Seattle saw 52 murders, and the year before that there were 35. Seattle’s gun tax took effect in 2016, and that year the city reported just 19 murders.

“Statewide,” he continued, “gun control has likewise failed. In 2015, the first full year after I-594 was passed, the state reported 209 slayings, of which 141 involved firearms, according to FBI data. Last year, according to the Washington Association of Sheriffs and Police Chiefs, the state saw 302 murders, and their data shows 178 involving firearms. FBI data for 2019 shows 135 homicides involving firearms, so that’s quite a jump.

“Instead of using this data to push for even harsher laws,” Gottlieb said, “it is time for the gun prohibition lobby, not just in Washington but across the country, to admit their agenda has failed. It’s time to scrap extremist gun control laws and try something else like supporting our police and locking up violent criminals.”

Gun Culture 2.0 and the Changing Face of Gun Owners in America

I was fortunate to be asked to present on “Guns in America” at the annual conference of the Outdoor Writers Association of America yesterday (6 October 2021). I discussed “Gun Culture 2.0 and the Changing Face of Gun Owners in America.”

I was fairly certain that the presentation would not be recorded, so before I left for Jay, Vermont I recorded an abbreviated (15 minute) version of my talk from my basement studio and uploaded it to YouTube.

Women Want One Thing…And It’s Not Going to Make Liberals Happy

Women want one thing— It’s guns. They want lots of guns. This isn’t anything new. For the Left, this might be a massive revelation, but the truth is this trend has been ongoing for years. Women lining up for concealed carry permits is booming. Women-only firearm courses are booming. Gun sales among women are booming. And if there’s one thing we should know about politics and elections, it’s that it’s probably not the best idea to be against something that a lot of women support, especially white middle-class women.

In Clark County, a lot of women have joined the Annie Oakley courses and the reasoning behind the surge is quite simple. It’s for their protection. It’s the great equalizer when confronted by a violent attacker. The summer of riots that occurred last year. The anxiety over the lockdowns during the COVID pandemic—it all played a part. A mother and daughter who were interviewed for Fox5 Las Vegas’ segment on the female participation in the shooting said they bought a handgun after a home invasion. Being smart, the mother wanted her daughter to know how to shoot and handle a handgun safely.

Women are reshaping the gun industry. It’s one of the underreported narratives over the past couple of years, partially because major outlets don’t want to acknowledge it. It shreds all the anti-gun talking points like shooting is a white male activity. That gun ownership, in general, has racist ties. It’s all historically illiterate garbage. Good on these ladies for exercising their constitutional rights.

‘FBI REPORT SAYS ARMED CITIZENS KILLED MORE CRIMINALS THAN POLICE’ 

BELLEVUE, WA – The FBI Uniform Crime Report for 2020 indicates that armed private citizens killed more criminals during the commission of a felony than were killed by police, and the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms says this data clearly underscores the continuing need for American gun ownership.

“We looked at Tables 14 and 15 in the FBI’s new report that apply to justifiable homicides by law enforcement and private citizens, respectively,” noted CCRKBA Chairman Alan Gottlieb. “Last year, according to the data, armed citizens killed 343 criminals during the commission of a felony while police fatally shot 298 felons.

“If the FBI data published in their crime report for 2020 is accurate,” he continued, “it is ample evidence that the individual right to keep and bear arms for personal defense is as important today as it was when the Second Amendment was adopted as a cornerstone of the Bill of Rights.

“The use of deadly force is not something anybody wants,” Gottlieb observed, “but neither is being injured or killed by some thug during a violent criminal attack. Self-defense may be the oldest natural right, and every time we hear some politician, public official or gun control extremist call for citizen disarmament, we have to wonder which side they’re on. It certainly can’t be on the side of public safety.

“Gun prohibitionists who enjoy their own private security while promoting restrictive laws that take guns out of the hands of law-abiding citizens are world-class hypocrites,” he said. “The same people who want to disarm honest citizens are typically those who support policies that are soft on criminals. They haven’t simply lost perspective; they’ve abandoned common sense.”

CCRKBA has long defended the individual right to keep and bear arms, and encourages gun owners to seek competent instruction on firearms safety and the use of firearms in self-defense. Gottlieb noted how studies show that over 99 percent of cases when a gun is used in self-defense, no shots are fired. The burglar, robber or rapist flees or is held at gunpoint until police arrive, he said.

“This data should send a message to criminals that their chances of recidivism are gradually shrinking,” said Gottlieb, who co-authored America Fights Back – Armed Self-Defense in a Violent Age, and more recently, Good Guys with Guns. “The tide has clearly turned.”

FBI: Over 3.5x More Killed with Knives than Rifles of Any Kind

FBI data released Monday in the Uniform Crime Report (UCR) show over three and a half times as many people were stabbed to death in 2020 than were killed with all kinds of rifles combined.

The UCR shows that 454 people were shot and killed with rifles in 2020 while 1,732 were stabbed or hacked to death with “knives or cutting instruments.”

Breitbart News reported that the previous UCR release showed over four times as many people were stabbed to death in 2019 than were killed with rifles of all kinds.

The exact figures for 2019 were 375 killed with rifles while 1,525 were stabbed to death with “knives or cutting instruments.”

On September 30, 2019, Breitbart News reported that the FBI’s UCR for 2018 showed a similar finding, with over five times as many people stabbed to death with “knives or cutting instruments” as were killed with rifles of any kind.

The broad categorization of “rifles” includes a broad swath of firearms, from bolt action rifles to lever action, pump action, breech action, and beyond. It also includes semiautomatic rifles that take a detachable magazine, which the left often classifies as “assault weapons.” Yet three and a half times more people were stabbed to death in 2020 than were killed with all of these various rifle types combined.

Yes, while ‘getting out of Dodge’ is a pretty good idea, personally, I also think shooting the ‘active shooter’ stands a good chance of solving the problem too. To do that, you need a gun.

FBI agent: How to survive an active shooter situation

The fatal shooting at a Kroger in Memphis, Tennessee on Thursday left at least a dozen people injured, one dead and a nation worried as the threat of active shootings in America lingers.

Former FBI deputy assistant director Daniel Coulson joined “Your World” following the tragedy to share advice on how best to protect oneself if found in an active shooter situation. Step one: recognize when you’re in danger.

“The police are minutes away when seconds matter,” he said. “It’s up to you and your family and your friends to take action, to protect yourself in a situation like this. If you’re in the grocery store and you hear firecrackers going off, that’s not firecrackers. That’s somebody killing people.”

Coulson suggested for shoppers to prepare themselves for a shooting incident without being paranoid by locating the exits and planning to take all belongings and run.

“Do I put my child in a basket and run out the door? Yeah, you do,” he said. “And get space between you and whatever’s going on.”

While customers should identify their exits in all departments of the store, Coulson explained that employees should already be aware of an active shooter plan and have designated areas to lock down and buy time. The former FBI official stressed that shooters who are normally in a hurry will not spend time fiddling with a locked door.

“They want to get this thing over with as quickly as possible,” he said. “If they get delayed by a locked door, they move on… Time is on your side here. Buy time, get yourself out of there but more importantly, try to get out the door. Just leave.”

“It’s up to us to protect ourselves,” he repeated. “Get out. Find a place to defend yourself. If you happen to be armed with a pistol, like I am, then maybe you can do some good there. But your best bet is to leave. Get the heck out.”

Coulson said the investigation into the Memphis shooting will attempt to dig up the now-deceased shooter’s motive and run an analysis on Kroger’s response in adherence to the shooter policy.

Observation O’ The Day
Another reason may just be the concentration of ownership of major media in the hands of a few, very wealthy, people. Wealthy people have feared armed commoners for most of recorded history, and especially since the invention of reliable, concealable firearms, so publication of news likely to encourage gun ownership is discouraged.

There Are Far More Defensive Gun Uses Than Murders in America. Here’s Why You Rarely Hear of Them.

While Americans know that guns take many innocent lives every year, many don’t know that firearms also save them.

On May 15, an attacker at an apartment complex in Fort Smith, Ark., fatally shot a woman and then fired 93 rounds at other people before a man killed him with a bolt-action rifle. Police said he “likely saved a number of lives in the process.”

On June 30, a 12-year-old Louisiana boy used a hunting rifle to stop an armed burglar who was threatening his mother’s life during a home invasion.

On July 4, a Chicago gunman shot into a crowd of people, killing one and wounding two others before a concealed handgun permit holder shot and wounded the attacker. Police praised him for stepping in.

Al Hartmann/The Salt Lake Tribune via AP
According to academic estimates, defensive gun uses — including when guns are simply shown to deter a crime — are four to five times more common than gun crimes.
Al Hartmann/The Salt Lake Tribune via AP

These are just a few of the nearly 1,000 instances reported by the media so far this year in which gun owners have stopped mass shootings and other murderous acts, saving countless lives. And crime experts say such high-profile cases represent only a small fraction of the instances in which guns are used defensively. But the data are unclear, for a number of reasons, and this has political ramifications because it seems to undercut the claims of gun rights advocates that they need to possess firearms for personal protection — an issue now before the Supreme Court.

Americans who look only at the daily headlines would be surprised to learn that, according to academic estimates, defensive gun uses — including instances when guns are simply shown to deter a crime — are four to five times more common than gun crimes, and far more frequent than the fewer than 20,000 murders each year, with or without a gun. But even when they prevent mass public shootings, defensive uses rarely get national news coverage. Those living in major news markets such as New York City, Washington, D.C., and Los Angeles are unlikely to hear of such stories.

Continue reading “”

Little Rock woman providing gun training for women and minorities
Desstoni Johnson is the founder of Fearless Firearm Instruction LLC: a firearms academy in central Arkansas created with women in mind.

LITTLE ROCK, Ark — After her husband bought seats to a concealed carry class as a gift for her 21st birthday, Desstoni Johnson left the class feeling like she didn’t learn a thing.

Many times during class, she felt the male instructor was speaking to everyone except her and the only other woman in the class. Johnson and her classmate would constantly glance at one another wondering if they were the only ones confused and feeling left out.

Instead of becoming discouraged about it, Johnson became motivated to continue practicing and learning as much as she could on her own. It inspired her to want to help others.

“From then on, I couldn’t put guns down. When carrying, I feel I am in control of my own safety and when teaching, I feel empowered knowing I am gifting that same sense of security to other men and women,” said Johnson.

She created Fearless Firearm Instruction LLC, a firearms academy in central Arkansas founded with women in mind.

Continue reading “”