White House Hosts State Lawmakers, Launching ‘Safer States Agenda’

Approximately 100 state lawmakers were invited to the White House Wednesday for the official introduction of the Biden-Harris administration’s Safer States Initiative, which reportedly outlines “key actions states should take” to “reduce gun violence.”

The White House unveiled an eight-page “Safer States Agenda,” which includes the following recommendations:

  1. Establish a State Office of Gun Violence Prevention
  2. Invest in Evidence-informed Solutions to Prevent and Respond to Gun Violence
  3. Strengthen Support for Survivors and Victims of Gun Violence
  4. Reinforce Responsible Gun Ownership
  5. Strengthen Gun Background Checks
  6. Hold the Gun Industry Accountable

Essentially, it is Joe Biden’s gun control scheme repackaged from his 2020 presidential campaign.

There is very little in the plan about holding violent criminals responsible for crimes they commit, with or without firearms. Part of the Biden-Harris proposal is aimed at funding law enforcement efforts to “hold shooters and gun traffickers accountable.”

Continue reading “”

California Is Attempting an Expedited End Run Around the 2A

California is trying to sneak in a ruling that will exclude almost everyone except law enforcement from teaching a concealed carry class.

The California Department of Justice sent out a notification on Monday about some proposed changes in California’s concealed carry instructor qualifications. The changes might mean more than half of the current qualified instructors could no longer teach a concealed carry class in California.

Some instructors have told me they didn’t even get the email, and the deadline to voice any concerns or disapproval is this Friday. The DOJ will make the final decision about the rule change, and they will need no vote from the state legislature to pass it. This is being rushed through and will go into effect on January 1st.

Continue reading “”

BLUF
Without a military leadership that understands the purpose of war, the next time we may not lose thousands, we could lose millions. And we could lose the United States of America.

THIS IS WHY AMERICA FORGOT HOW TO WIN

Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin stopped by the Reagan National Defense Forum to deliver an address titled, ‘A Time for American Leadership’. What leadership lessons did he have to offer?

“I learned a thing or two about urban warfare from my time fighting in Iraq and leading the campaign to defeat ISIS,” he told his audience. “Like Hamas, ISIS was deeply embedded in urban areas. And the international coalition against ISIS worked hard to protect civilians and create humanitarian corridors, even during the toughest battles. So the lesson is not that you can win in urban warfare by protecting civilians. The lesson is that you can only win in urban warfare by protecting civilians.”

He then went on to lecture that “we will continue to press Israel to protect civilians” and” that “protecting Palestinian civilians in Gaza is both a moral responsibility and a strategic imperative.”

Gen. Austin headed Central Command from 2013 to 2016. Obama officials blamed Austin for telling Obama that ISIS was “a flash in the pan” (while Austin’s people denied he said that.) Central Command’s intelligence failures against ISIS were so bad that they resulted in an investigation into whether intelligence had been falsified to make it look like we were winning.

By the fall of 2016, after 3 years of fighting, ISIS had only lost a third of its territory in Iraq and Syria. That was in large part because the Obama administration refused to allow the military to properly hammer ISIS. Under Trump, our hands were no longer tied and we hit ISIS hard.

Despite Austin’s claims that victory against ISIS came from protecting civilians allied with the Islamic terror group, the reality was just the opposite. Fussiness over civilian casualties during the Obama administration translated neither to victory nor civilian lives saved. On Austin’s watch, airstrikes against ISIS killed civilians, but that was always inevitable.

It’s impossible to take out Islamic terrorists whose entire operating model is to fight from behind and around civilians without civilian casualties. The choice is between a long grueling war, which Obama and Austin gave us, or a short devastating campaign, which Trump gave us.

What the Obama administration refused to understand in either Iraq or Afghanistan is that the leading cause of civilian deaths are the Islamic terrorists we are fighting. During the Holocaust, Jewish groups pleaded with the FDR administration to bomb concentration camps, despite the inevitable civilian casualties, because it would have stopped the killing. The Allied campaign hit Nazi-controlled territories hard, with little regard for civilian casualties, because only ending the war quickly would stop the killing. If we had fought WWII by today’s rules, we would still be fighting it and for that matter it’s not at all impossible that we would have long since lost it.

Continue reading “”

American Forces Attacked by Iranian Proxies 84 Times in 52 Days and Biden Does Nothing

US military installations in Iraq and Syria have been attacked by Iranian proxies nine times since Friday. According to senior defense officials, this brings to 84 the number of attacks on US forces since October 17, resulting in injuries to 66 American servicemen. The highest profile of those attacks was an attack on the US embassy in Baghdad. It was hit by a volley of 60mm mortar rounds on Thursday, and there were no casualties

Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin used the occasion of his phone call with Iraqi President Mohammed Shia al-Sudani to condemn the attacks as “acts of terrorism” that “endanger Iraq’s internal security.”  He also “made clear that attacks against US forces must stop.”

As Austin made clear, it is no secret that Iranian proxy groups are behind the attacks (New Drone Attacks on US Forces in Syria, Iranian Proxies Claim Responsibility).

The same provocations are taking place in the Red Sea by the Iranian-back Houthis in Yemen. A US Reaper drone was shot down over international waters (Yemeni Houthis Shoot Down US Reaper Over Red Sea, the White House Response Is Crickets). Houthi drones targeted a US destroyer.

I’m sure that the usual isolationist fringe will say, “Why do we have troops in those countries? Why are our ships sailing in international waters? Shouldn’t they be on our southern border?” Those may be fair questions, but it is also immaterial and a shameless dodge. The National Command Authority has ordered our military to those locations to carry out American foreign policy. But in an environment where our troops have been attacked on 84 separate occasions in 52 days, we have launched a grand total of six airstrikes in the same time frame.

We allow Iranian proxies to lob rockets and mortar rounds at our troops. We’ve accepted, on average, one American casualty per day since October 17, and It is only a matter of time until Americans get killed. And the reason they do it is that there is zero risk attached to attacking Americans or American ships or aircraft because Joe Biden is so afraid of offending the Iranians that he’d rather see the coffins arrive at Dover AFB than have panties soiled under the man-dresses in Tehran.

Continue reading “”

Biden/Buttigieg DEI Policies Endanger the Country. They Don’t Care.
The FAA is seeking people suffering from “severe intellectual and psychiatric disabilities” to be air traffic controllers.

The country currently is in the throes of an epidemic of mass insanity and irrationality. The manifestations of the disorder are too numerous to cite, but the explosion of the DEI plague being pushed by the government, many businesses, and the intellectual pigmies in most of the media, must be included in any list of the most egregious. As currently advocated and practiced by our leftist “elites,”1 it is incompatible with rationality, common sense, and morality, among other things, and, as the Wall Street Journal, not to mention the Supreme Court, have pointed out, the U.S. Constitution.

There is a brand of this particular wokeness that is relatively unknown to the general public, but that is particularly irrational and dangerous.  It is the Federal Aviation Administration’s relatively young DEI mandates. These Biden/Buttigieg DEI commands now apply to the employment of FAA air traffic controllers in an insidious way, a way that threatens the safety of our skies and of anyone who flies.

WHAT DO AIR TRAFFIC CONTROLLERS DO?

To understand how insidious and dangerous the FAA’s DEI policies are, it is necessary to examine briefly just what air traffic controllers do and the nature of the job. The description that follows includes some detail about their tasks. Bear with me because it shows that being an ATC is not a job for dummies, or even for intellectual giants who cannot make crucial decisions in a short amount of time while under great stress.

First, just to be considered for possible employment, an ATC candidate must first pass a battery of seven tests covering numerical calculations, progressively difficult memory tests, problems involving rapidly changing image relationships, visual computer problems simulating collision avoidance, reading comprehension, logical reasoning, and a personality test. A description of the tests and sample problems are here. Take a stab at some of the sample problems to see how difficult they are and the built-in time limitations and pressures.

By the time they finish their training, ATCs must be experts in a number of areas that affect safety. These include weather, types of aircraft and their characteristics, navigation and the use of multiple types of navigational aids, effective communications with pilots, and radio and radar operations. To ensure pilot and passenger safety, ATCs must be skilled in, among other things, math, including the ability to make quick calculations in a dynamic environment, problem-solving, effective communication, and split-second decision making.

Continue reading “”

Maryland attorney general wants new hearing in gun licensing case

BALTIMORE (AP) — After a federal appeals court struck down Maryland’s handgun licensing law last month, the state attorney general is requesting a new hearing where more judges would consider the case, which could have significant implications for gun rights across the country.

On Nov. 21, a three-judge panel on the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond issued a 2-1 ruling that found it was unconstitutionally restrictive for Maryland to require people to obtain a license before purchasing a handgun. The process of obtaining a license can take up to 30 days.

In the majority opinion, the judges said they considered the case in light of a U.S. Supreme Court decision last year that “effected a sea change in Second Amendment law.”

The underlying lawsuit was filed in 2016 as a challenge to a Maryland law requiring people to obtain a special license before purchasing a handgun. The law, which was passed in 2013 in the aftermath of the mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School, laid out a series of necessary steps for would-be gun purchasers: completing four hours of safety training that includes firing one live round, submitting fingerprints and passing a background check, being 21 and residing in Maryland.

Several state leaders, including Democratic Gov. Wes Moore, expressed opposition to the recent appeals court ruling and have pledged to fight it.

Maryland Attorney General Anthony Brown filed a petition Tuesday asking the full 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to hear the case, which would mean 15 judges instead of three.

“The Second Amendment does not prohibit states from enacting common-sense gun laws like Maryland’s handgun licensing law,” Brown said in a statement. “My office will continue to defend laws that are designed to protect Marylanders from gun violence.”

Polymer80’s Injunction Stayed for Supreme Court

The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals has stayed Polymer80’s injunction issued against the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) frames and receiver rule (ATF final rule 2021R-05F) in Polymer80 v. Garland until the Supreme Court of The United States (SCOTUS) can decide whether to grant a writ of certiorari in VanDerStok v. Garland.

Polymer80 sued the ATF in a Texas federal court over the ATF rule against what the Biden administration calls “ghost guns” and the ATF refers to as privately manufactured firearms (PMF). The company is the country’s biggest seller of unserialized 80% frames and accounts for the vast majority of the market. After the injunction was issued, it returned to selling complete kits, including the frame, jigs, and drill bits.

The Fifth Circuit’s stay on the injunction was expected after SCOTUS stepped in and stayed injunctions for other companies, such as 80 Percent Arms and Defense Distributed in VanDerStok v. Garland. The stay allowed the ATF to enact the frames rule. The stay will last until a writ of cert is denied, or SCOTUS issues a judgment.

“IT IS ORDERED that Appellants’ opposed motion to stay the injunction pending appeal is GRANTED. In accordance with the stay granted by the Supreme Court in Garland v. VanDerStok, if a petition for a writ of certiorari is not timely sought in VanDerStok, this stay shall terminate automatically as of the date on which the petition was due; and if a petition for a writ of certiorari is timely sought in VanDerStok, this stay shall remain in effect until either (a) the date on which the Supreme Court denies certiorari, at which time the Supreme Court’s stay will terminate automatically, or (b) if the Supreme Court grants certiorari, the date on which the Supreme Court issues its judgment,” the order reads.

In the VanDerStok case, Justice Amy Coney Barrett and Chief Justice John Roberts joined the progressive members of the Supreme Court in issuing the stay until the government files a writ of certiorari with the court. The other Republican-appointed judges would have let the injunction stand until the final decision.

Continue reading “”

Apple Reveals Governments Use App Notifications to Surveil Users

In a chilling revelation that feels all too familiar, Apple has confirmed that governments are using push notifications for the surveillance of users — an imposition on personal freedoms and a glaring example of state overreach.

This unsettling news was disclosed in response to Senator Ron Wyden’s urgent communication to the Department of Justice. Wyden highlighted that foreign officials have been pressuring technology companies for data to track smartphones via apps that send notifications.

These apps, he noted, put tech companies in a pivotal role to assist in governmental monitoring of app usage.

Senator Wyden urged the Department of Justice to alter or revoke any existing policies that restrict public discourse on the surveillance of push notifications.

In a reaction to this, Apple stated to Reuters that Wyden’s letter presented them with an opportunity to divulge more information about government monitoring of push notifications. The tech giant clarified, “In this case, the federal government prohibited us from sharing any information. Now that this method has become public we are updating our transparency reporting to detail these kinds of requests.”

The letter from Wyden reportedly stemmed from a “tip” about this surveillance activity. An informed source confirmed that both foreign and US agencies have been requesting metadata related to notifications from Apple and Google. This metadata has been allegedly used to link anonymous messaging app users to specific accounts on these platforms.

While the source, speaking to Reuters, did not specify which governments were involved, they characterized them as “democracies allied to the United States” and were uncertain about the duration of these requests.

“In this case, the federal government prohibited us from sharing any information,” Apple said in a statement. “Now that this method has become public we are updating our transparency reporting to detail these kinds of requests.”

Apple, meanwhile, has advised app developers to refrain from including sensitive data in notifications and to encrypt any data before it is incorporated into a notification payload.

However, this relies on the developers’ initiative. Importantly, metadata such as the frequency and origin of notifications remains unencrypted, potentially offering insights into users’ app activities to those who can access this data.

The news, which is hardly unexpected yet nonetheless deeply troubling, underscores the precarious path we seem to be treading, one that veers ominously towards policies that infringe on civil liberties.

The key cog in a functioning democracy, our judicial system, and its informed oversight exists precisely to prevent such oversteps. It endows a suspected individual with the crucial right to mount a robust defense against unwarranted infiltration by the state government. Alarmingly, the situation at hand eerily mirrors scenarios where private entities and individuals are strong-armed into being active partners in such covert operations, all the while being legally bound to cryptic silence.

Quip O’ The Day
“Ooh no, not their performance reviews!!!! The horror!”

 

CRPA Files Suit Against LA Sheriff’s Department To Enforce CCW Policies

Moments ago, CRPA filed suit against the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s office challenging the “constitutionality of (its) carry permit issuance policies and laws that make it extremely difficult, if not outright impossible or impermissibly time consuming” for such a permit to be obtained.

Ever since the announcement of the Bruen decision, CRPA has fought to bring CCW application and issuance processes in line with the new standard.  Still, certain jurisdictions drag their feet and continue to create unnecessary delays, add onerous fees, and implement other bureaucratic hurdles to stall CCW issuance (as evidenced by the responses to our poll late last week).

Today’s filing is the next step in this ongoing effort. Joining us in this lawsuit are our strategic partners at Second Amendment FoundationGun Owners of America, and Gun Owners of California. You can read the filing in its entirety by clicking here.

“CRPA has let it be known that across all of California’s 58 counties, we will be vigilant and relentless in our efforts to ensure that post-Bruen CCW policies and procedures are in place and followed,” stated CRPA President & General Counsel Chuck Michel. “This is all a part of the CRPA’s CCW Reckoning project.  Today’s lawsuit could easily have been avoided if the Constitution was observed and the Bruen decision was followed.”

I sometimes wonder what we’re paying them for.


US intel not aware of Hamas’ plan for Oct. 7 attack on Israel, John Kirby says.

The US would do the “same thing’’ Israel did if it suffered an attack like the Oct. 7 assault, a top Biden administration official said Sunday — while admitting US intelligence was unaware of a battle plan from Hamas that Israel obtained over a year before the attack.

“[Israeli officials] have every right and responsibility to go after the terrorist group that perpetrated these attacks and planet and oh, by the way, has made clear they’re going to do it again and do more,” National Security Council spokesman John Kirby told “Fox News Sunday.”

“We would do the same thing — any nation would,” Kirby said.

Kirby also referred to the recent reported revelation about Israeli security failures in the run-up to the bloody terrorist rampage.

More than a year before the deadly attack, Israeli officials obtained a roughly 40-page blueprint outlining Hamas’ battle plan but dismissed it as unachievable for the terror group, the New York Times reported last week.

Kirby suggested that the US did not learn about the document, dubbed “Jericho Wall,” when its staunch ally Israel did.

“The intelligence community has indicated that that they did not have access to this document,” Kirby told “Meet the Press” on Sunday.

“They have no indications at this time that they had any advance warning of this document or any knowledge of it.”

Continue reading “”

This Sneaky Senator’s Insider Trade Isn’t the Most Corrupt Part of This Story.

When a senator who sits on the Health Committee makes a big bet on a small, home-state medical devices company that just happens to get mucho moolah from the federal government, and then that stock goes up more than 40% in the weeks after said senator’s big bet, it’s the opinion of this mostly humble columnist that there’s some real shady stuff going on.

But it gets worse.

Earlier this month — November 8, to be exact — Sen. Tina Smith (D-Minn.) purchased up to $250,000 in shares of Tactile Systems Technology (TCMD). TCMD shares had been on a real losing streak in 2023, down more than 60% from its 52-week high of $26.11. The price was down nearly another third, to $10.27 from $12.61, in the 48 hours before Smith made her big buy.

Buy the dip, of course. What’s remarkable is just how quickly TCMD recovered over the next three weeks — up 43% since the Minnesota senator plunked down her big bucks on a Minnesota company in an industry that Smith’s committee oversees.

That’s just one trade by one senator.

Financial analyst Quiver Quantitative called it “the most suspicious congressional stock trade I’ve seen in months.”

In May of last year, Quiver built “a trading bot that buys stocks that are being bought by politicians.” In a flat market, Quiver’s congressional bot’s fund is up 20% in just 18 months.

The sliminess is bipartisan. Here’s one example of how Quiver’s bot has performed by following the Tesla trades of one Democrat and two Republicans.

How’s your portfolio doing?

“It’s worth noting,” QQ reminds investors, “that despite the outperformance of the Congress Buys Strategy, it may still be held back by weak disclosure regulations.” Congresscritters, under the 2012 STOCK Act signed by President Barack Obama, have 45 days to disclose their stock transactions — but the penalty for late disclosures is all of $200.

So, yes, you could build a portfolio based on what people like Sen. Smith buy and sell, but you still wouldn’t do as well as they do because you’ll be up to 45 days behind their trades. Or longer if they decide to pony up the $200 for late disclosures.

But it still gets worse.

Quiver claims to have traced 7,912 STOCK Act violations, but “only a few have been investigated.” If any of those investigations have actually gone anywhere, it would be news to me. But Congress writes the laws governing Congress, so what would you expect?

That’s why, as far as I’m concerned, the most scandalous part of any of this is the mainstream media’s absolute silence on the matter.

As Bill Whittle put it to Right Angle viewers years ago, the press is supposed to act as a healthy society’s antibodies — gathering in the bloodstream at the site of any corruption to reveal and destroy it. And yet when a sitting member of the Senate Health Committee, whose “husband is an investor with a focus on medical industry stocks,” is making a killing on a volatile health company’s shares, it results in precisely zero stories in the mainstream media.

That’s despite Quiver’s revelations getting more than two million views on Twitter/X — the preferred social media platform of American journalists.

We know what Congress gets out of all this, so what’s the media’s payout?

The Trace Accidentally Shows How Little Brady Bill Did

It’s been 30 years since the Brady Bill passed. This was the bill that mandated all licensed gun dealers had to conduct background checks on anyone trying to buy a firearm.

It was heralded as a huge step forward. After all, before the law went into effect, felons could walk into gun stores and buy a firearm. They weren’t supposed to–it was illegal for them to do so–but they could just lie and say they weren’t a felon. In most states, that was enough.

So then the law changed. The Brady Bill went into effect and after 30 years, The Trace has decided to look at some numbers as to just how effective it’s been.

Let’s take a look at a few.

2,266,746

The number of federal background checks that resulted in a denial

These denials occurred because an FBI search of the NICS indices turned up a record that legally disqualified the person from owning firearms. This total does not include denials in states where state or local law enforcement handles the background checks. In 2023, the Bureau of Justice Statistics estimated that federal and state agencies combined had denied a total of 4.4 million firearm background check applications since 1994. [FBI and Bureau of Justice Statistics]

3 in 20 (or 1.5 percent)

The proportion of firearm background checks that result in a denial

This estimate from the Bureau of Justice Statistics encompasses denials issued at both the state and federal levels. Between 1998 and 2020, state and federal background checks blocked an average of 509 prohibited gun purchases and permits each day. However, when BJS looked solely at 2019 and 2020 — a period that overlaps with the pandemic gun-buying surge — the average number of denials jumped to 878 per day. [Bureau of Justice Statistics]

1 in 2 (or 51 percent)

The proportion of denials that are the result of felony convictions

Federal law prohibits people from owning firearms if they have been convicted of a felony or certain misdemeanors. Since the national background checks system went into place, this prohibitor has been the most common reason applications are denied. Compared to the FBI, state and local agencies deny for felony reasons at a lower rate, but one that still accounts for the largest proportion of denials. State and local agencies deny applications for state prohibitions and mental health reasons at a higher rate than the FBI. [FBI and Bureau of Justice Statistics]

Now, more than 2.26 million denials sounds like a lot, but what The Trace isn’t including in their numbers are false denials. They might be denied and counted as someone with a felony, only the person in question isn’t a felon. NICS gets it wrong a fair bit because, well, they’re people. That’s going to happen.

So the number of felons being denied guns is actually lower.

Further, this is over 30 years. When you consider just how many guns are bought and sold annually in the US, the just over 75,000 denials we see on average per year doesn’t sound particularly staggering.

And The Trace notes that only half of them are for felonies.

See, while they’re celebrating how effective the Brady Bill is, what I’m seeing here is that criminals are getting plenty of guns and they’re not getting them from gun stores. They’re not even trying to get them from gun stores.

Why would they? Most know they can’t get one lawfully anyway–many of those who do try to get a gun don’t realize they can’t own a firearm anymore–so they look for alternate way to obtain one.

They bypass the Brady Bill framework entirely so they never show up in the denial numbers.

So hundreds of millions of people have bought guns over the last 30 years, undergoing background checks that make them feel like they’re the criminal, all while doing next to nothing to actually stop criminals from getting guns because the criminals just went a different direction.

Well, I personally don’t hardly believe anything the goobermint says.


BLUF
“The manipulation of statistics to create a narrative ultimately scares people. Whether the goal is for ratings or more gun control, it pushes people, especially women and mothers, to fear guns,” said Miller. “And that just isn’t right.”

We Can’t Believe These Agencies
Too often, the U.S. government skews statistics on gun use to push false narratives.

While Americans are frequently confronted with stories centered on guns being used to take lives, few are aware that many more humans are likely saved by firearms every year. A key reason for this lack of understanding is unreliable federal crime data—data that has too often been skewed by anti-gun politics.

As currently defined by the FBI, active-shooter incidents involve individuals who kill or attempt to kill people in a populated, public place, even if only one shot is fired or the intended target is not struck. Shootings that are related to other criminal activities, such as robberies or drug-turf wars, are not included in the FBI’s “Active Shooter Incident” reports.

But, according to economist John Lott, there was an abundance of cases missing or misidentified by the FBI, and while the FBI acknowledged errors, the Bureau failed to update the reports for accuracy purposes. Lott is the president and founder of the Crime Prevention Research Center (CPRC), and also worked in the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) up until January 2021 as senior advisor for research and statistics evalutating the FBI’s reports.

“The FBI continues to report that armed citizens stopped only 14 of the 302 active shooter incidents that it identified for the period 2014-2022. The correct rate is almost eight times higher. And if we limit the discussion to places where permit holders were allowed to carry, the rate is eleven times higher,” wrote Lott. He further noted, “[O]ut of 440 active shooter incidents from 2014 to 2022, an armed citizen stopped 157. We also found that the FBI had misidentified five cases, usually because the person who stopped the attack was incorrectly identified as a security guard.”

He also emphasized that while the FBI claims that just 4.6% of active murderers were halted by law-abiding citizens carrying guns, his research found that the figure was at least 35.7%. A false statistic—like this 4.6%—misleads people and can prevent good policies from being passed.

Indeed, without reliable crime data, it is impossible to have a fair “gun-control” debate, and yet the FBI continues to depend upon minimal data sets to reach conclusions meant to encapsulate the entire country.

Continue reading “”

Contra Costa County Sheriff Won’t Allow CCL Holders to Carry With Red Dots, Lasers, or Pistol Lights 

Months ago, the California Rifle & Pistol Association heard from a member that Contra Costa County Sheriff David Livingston has some rather unique restrictions on the guns that his office will qualify for carry by residents in the county.

If you’re unfamiliar with California’s byzantine carry laws, applicants for a license must qualify with each specific firearm they intend to carry. Each handgun’s serial number appears on your carry license. Most counties will allow up to three firearms, but some limit you to only one. Sheriffs have wide latitude in what they will and won’t qualify for carry.

We were told that Sheriff Livingston won’t qualify applicants if they attempt to qualify with a pistol that has a laser, red dot sight, or a pistol light attached (night sights are allowed), and found the page at the bottom of this post on the county’s web site. We wrote to ask the Sheriff for his rationale for these restrictions and this week we heard back from him.

Unfortunately, Sheriff Livingston won’t budge on this policy. He writes that he has a “Firearms Committee” he consults on these questions. He tells us the committee is made up of employees with a wide range of backgrounds, all of whom are firearms instructors. The committee recommended against changing the policy.

The reasons for excluding these accessories are (I summarize here, these aren’t quotes) . . .

Continue reading “”

“Everybody want to sanctuary until it time to do sanctuary stuff”


How it got started:
Mayor Rahm Emanuel: ‘Chicago Always Will Be A Sanctuary City.’

Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson Blames City’s Illegal Immigrant Crisis on ‘Right Wing Extremism’ (Video).

 

PRESIDENT BIDEN’S REELECTION CAMPAIGN TARGETS GUN CONTROL

President Joe Biden’s campaign is waking from its slumber and vowing he will “finish the job” on gun control as a central pillar of his pitch to stay in The White House for another four years.

The Biden-Harris reelection campaign is circulating memos and reaching out to friendly media to make the case that President Biden will use a second term to usher in gun control’s radical unconstitutional agenda. That includes banning America’s most popular-selling centerfire rifle, the Modern Sporting Rifle (MSR). That also means defying the will of Congress. White House officials are playing up bipartisan efforts but are making it clear that they are willing to strike out unilaterally if Congress doesn’t knuckle under to their demands.

“The president demonstrated that he can get things done, working across party lines when necessary, on our own where we can’t,” White House Deputy Chief of Staff Bruce Reed told The Messenger.

‘Finish the Job’

President Biden has already made clear he’s not listening to American citizens when it comes to guns. An NBC News national poll indicated that the majority of Americans live in a gun-owning household for the first time. The Biden-Harris reelection campaign, though, will lean on the political favors they’ve delivered for special interest gun control – specifically the deep-pocket donors who expect a return for their campaign donations.

President Biden continuously calls for Congress to re-enact the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban, which even the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reported had no effect on reducing crime.

“Who the hell needs an assault weapon that can hold, in some cases, up to 100 rounds?” President Biden said just last month. This is the line of attack that he’s coupled with veiled threats of using U.S. military force against its own citizens.

“If you wanted or if you think you need to have weapons to take on the government, you need F-15s and maybe some nuclear weapons,” he said in 2021.

Weaponizing ATF

President Biden has made his attacks on the firearm industry central to his administration, starting with calling firearm manufacturers the enemy to most recently halting U.S. firearm exports without explanation. In between, he’s pushed the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) to punish the firearm industry through a zero-tolerance policy that has seen a sharp increase of federal firearms licenses revoked or surrendered for minor clerical errors.

President Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris promised they would use the ATF as a blunt force instrument to hammer the firearm industry – simply because they don’t agree with Second Amendment rights. The ATF has published Final Rules – one to redefine frames and receivers and another to ban pistols with attached braces. Both have faced legal headwinds with various courts deciding that the ATF overreached its authority to write criminal law without Congressional input or approval. It is the responsibility of Congress to write law and for the Executive Branch to execute that law. Both Final Rules created criminal penalties without a vote in Congress.

Most recently, ATF Director Steven Dettelbach spoke to Harvard University where he doubled back on a pledge to U.S. Senators that he would “use the tools Congress gives” and instead advocated for increased gun control. He told the audience he agreed that the administration should pursue an MSR ban and also push for universal background checks. Both would be Constitutionally-specious. The U.S. Supreme Court held in Heller that the U.S. Government cannot ban an entire class of firearms and in order for universal background checks to work, it would necessitate a national firearm registry. That’s still forbidden by federal law.

Scaring Voters

President Biden isn’t just sharpening his attacks on the firearm industry. He’s scaremongering voters too. His reelection campaign circulated a memo titled, “Trump’s America in 2025: More Guns, More Shootings, More Deaths.”

“A Donald Trump presidency will mean more guns in schools and more guns in the hands of criminals, all because he thinks being pro-gun makes him look tough,” Biden campaign spokesperson Seth Schuster said in a statement, according to The Hill. “But his refusal to stand up to the gun lobby to protect our kids makes him weak and a coward.”

The Biden-Harris campaign counts it as a feather in their cap that they caved to gun control special-interest demands to create an Office of Gun Violence Prevention that’s stacked with gun control lobbyists. While they blame others challenging them for unsubstantiated claims that gun owners had carte-blanche access to the Oval Office, the Biden administration literally gave gun control lobbyists an office in the Eisenhower Executive Office Building on The White House grounds.

Biden-Harris campaign staffers are scaring voters that the same protections they enjoy on those protected grounds would create chaos should similar protections be afforded to schools and private citizens. It just doesn’t make sense. Criminals – especially violent criminals – have shown time and again that posting “gun-free zone” signs doesn’t deter crime. Meanwhile, investigations have shown that violent criminals sought soft targets where they knew they wouldn’t be confronted by armed security or private citizens protecting themselves with firearms.

President Biden’s pledge to “finish the job” means the end of Constitutional rights. The presidential election is less than a year away and the primary means of preventing these efforts is through the ballot box.

But Trump is a Fascist

Mayor Eric Adams finally had the guts to call out Biden for the border crisis. Almost immediately after, the FBI opened a bribery investigation against him.Then they seized his phones and iPads. Now a liberal activist came forward and is accusing him of sexual assault from 3 decades ago.

And if you’re wondering why no democrat or leftist ever openly defies the party….this is why.