*sniff*
Smells like some goobermint stooge dropped some propaganda around here

*ahhHRRMMM*

‘Lady Al Qaeda’ the woman Texas synagogue hostage-taker wanted freed: She planned chemical attacks on Empire State Building and Brooklyn Bridge and demanded juror at her trial be DNA tested to see if they were Jewish

Who is Aafia Siddiqui? Details on the woman mentioned during negotiations by the man who took a North Texas synagogue hostage

……By all accounts in the trial record, Siddiqui was a combative defendant, refusing to come to court.

“She also complained that a Zionist conspiracy existed and would prevent her from getting a fair trial,” the judge said at her sentencing. “Indeed, during the course of the proceedings, she said ‘All I did say was that Israel was behind 9/11.’”…..

Nope.  Nothing ‘related to the Jews’ here. Nope, nope, nope


FBI Makes Claims Motive of Man Taking Hostages at Synagogue Was ‘Not Specifically Related to Jewish Community’

As was covered last night, a man who is now dead took multiple people hostage for nearly 12 hours on Saturday at Congregation Beth Israel in Colleyville, Texas. Not only did the man take a rabbi and others hostage during shabbat services, but he demanded the release of Dr. Aafia Siddiqui, who is suspected of having ties to al-Qaeda and was convicted of trying to kill U.S. military officers while in custody in Afghanistan. Yet once all the hostages had been released and were safe, the FBI said during a press conference that the man’s motive was not tied to targeting the Jewish community………..

Tracing Spurious Claims

Since leading anti-gun researchers acknowledged no connection between the 2020 surge in firearms sales and violence, unscrupulous anti-gun advocates must cite underwhelming statistics as meaningful evidence.

That’s what The Trace did, in an article written in collaboration with FiveThirtyEight. We’d expect a more sophisticated analysis from FiveThirtyEight, but this is what Nate Silver’s outfit gave the world:

New Data Suggests a Connection Between Pandemic Gun Sales and Increased Violence.”

Ominous, right? The operative word here is “suggests.” They can’t use anything stronger because this is a very rudimentary analysis – there is no identification of causality. There is no actual statistical test to even indicate an association between the two variables.

Bloomberg’s activist-journalists looked at ATF reports showing the number of firearms traced broken out by the time between retail sale and tracing. They report that the number of firearms traced within a year of retail sale increased significantly from 2019 to 2020. The so-called journalists try to humanize the data by pointing to a pair of examples, developing the strongest emotional levers they could muster. Those cases are, of course, awful but are unlikely to be representative of all such traces.

So, the number of firearms traced within a year increased in a year in which the number of all guns sold increased. That seems proportional. The Trace covers this point, too: the ratio of guns traced within seven months of retail sale to all gun sales has increased annually since 2013. That sounds much more dramatic than the proportion increased from about 0.11% to 0.3% from 2013 through 2020.

That is eleven-one-hundredths of a percent to three-tenths of a percent. Naturally, that means that 99.7% of firearms are not traced within seven months of their acquisition.

Continue reading “”

RUTGERS STUDY: NEW GUN OWNERS ARE ‘IMPULSIVE.’ NEW GUN OWNERS BEG TO DIFFER

Antigun think tanks and politicians push narratives that private citizens don’t “need” firearms for self-defense so they shouldn’t have them. That narrative has fallen apart over the past two years of rampant rioting and civil unrest as the same groups called to defund police.

The same antigun collectives are pushing a new narrative to dehumanize new gun owners with the tactic of shaming Americans into not exercising their Second Amendment. New gun owners have their own thoughts.

New Antigun ‘Science’

Researchers from Rutgers University,  as reported by The Philadelphia Inquirer, saw the historic surge of firearm sales over the past two years and had to do something. They slapped together a behavioral study on 2020 – 2021 first-time gun buyers.

Continue reading “”

Not one thing SloJoe wants would have stropped that

Biden Uses Sandy Hook Anniversary to Call for More Gun Control

Joe Biden put gun control back on the front burner, using the ninth anniversary of the Sandy Hook mass shooting to call for stricter gun control laws, according to CNN.

Calling the shooting—committed by a disturbed young man who murdered his mother and took her legally-purchased firearms to the school in Newtown, Conn.—an “unconscionable act of violence,” Biden said he wants the U.S. Senate to pass three pieces of legislation. One expands background checks, another would prohibit gun ownership by “abusers,” and the third would reportedly create “community violence intervention” programs under the “Build Back Better” program.

CNN’s report portrayed Biden’s wish list as “limited scope” measures. But the president’s gun control agenda is hardly that. It includes a ban on so-called “assault weapons” and original capacity magazines. There would be waiting periods and other hoops through which law-abiding gun owners would have to jump while criminals would continue ignoring the laws and remain fairly well-armed.

This comes as Rasmussen Reports a new daily presidential tracking poll showing Biden’s popularity remains at a low, with only 21 percent of likely voters strongly approving of his job performance. On the other side, 47 percent of likely voters “strongly disapprove” of his job performance.

An unidentified “senior White House official” admitted to reporters that none of the president’s agenda items are enough “to fully solve this problem.” So Biden wants Congress to act.

That may not be likely with the midterm elections on the horizon in 2022. There is lots of speculation Republicans may capture at least one house of Congress, and possibly both the House and Senate, effectively slamming a door on Biden’s agenda.

For the present, CNN noted anti-gun Connecticut Sen. Chris Murphy is hopeful “negotiations could resume in the coming weeks to produce some bipartisan reform.” But what does that mean? When CNN talks about “gun reform” and “gun safety,” they’re talking about gun control. Grassroots gun rights activists call that “camo-speak,” because it camouflages what gun control advocates are actually seeking.

The White House “official” said Biden is still looking for a nominee to head the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. Earlier this year, Biden had to embarrassingly withdraw the nomination of former ATF agent David Chipman because of his advocacy of gun bans and tighter gun regulation. Gun rights activists from across the country flooded Capitol Hill with opposition to Chipman.

Meanwhile, Biden is under fire for being unable to handle the current crime crisis in major cities, with violent crime and homicides on the rise. According to Fox News, “At least 12 major cities, including New York, have already set historical murder records in 2021. Robberies and assaults are also on the rise, and retailers in major cities across the country are reporting an uptick in organized smash-and-grab crimes during the busy holiday shopping season.”

*cough* BULL$#!+ *cough*

Smells like propaganda to me.


FEMA chief says powerful storms ‘new normal’ in era of climate change.

Powerful storms like the ones that tore through parts of the central United States this weekend are the “new normal” in an era of climate change, the top federal emergency management official said on Sunday.

Deanne Criswell, the FEMA administrator, said her agency was prepared to bolster resilience in the face of more severe weather.

“This is going to be our new normal,” Criswell told CNN’s Jake Tapper on “State of the Union.”

“The effects we are seeing of climate change are the crisis of our generation,” Criswell said. “We’re taking a lot of efforts at FEMA to work with communities to help reduce the impacts that we’re seeing from these severe weather events and help to develop systemwide projects that can help protect communities.”……………………..


⇓ ⇓

 

Lefties Freak out on Conservatives for Doing Exactly What They Told Them to Do

and someone asked for an example of the leftist echo chamber?

When it smells like propaganda………..


– Study included justifiable self defense
– Study used a model to ASSUME an ESTIMATED homicide increase
– Cited a study that stated: “Unrealistic to expect the existence of a new FFL to change the homicide rate”
– Increased homicides were “limited mostly to counties that have a high percent of Black residents.”


Scientific American Headline: Where Gun Stores Open, Gun Homicides Increase

When Illinois passed a law in 2014 permitting the concealed carrying of firearms—becoming the last of the 50 states to do so—Sam Rannochio opened Check Your 6, Inc. in the Chicago suburb of Arlington Heights. The store sells handguns and rifles, and also offers concealed-carry classes. “The two kind of go hand-in-hand together,” Rannochio says.

Check Your 6 was one of hundreds of gun dealerships that opened across the United States between 2010 and 2017, notes a preprint study that was published last month on social science research website SSRN and has not yet been peer-reviewed. According to the study, which looked at county-level data nationwide over a 17-year period, when the number of gun dealerships within 100 miles of a given area went up, the number of gun homicides in that area also increased in subsequent years—even as nongun killings declined overall (see graphic). Majority-Black communities bore the brunt of that violence, the study found.

They first tried to say the 2nd didn’t mean what it plainly said.
Now they apparently acknowledge it does mean what it says, but it’s not relevant.
I think they know they have nothing but BS left to support their BS.

They are right about 2 things though:

Quote O’ The Day
1 The gun debate has gone far beyond judicial interpretations of the Second Amendment and these days has much more to do with personal, political and partisan identity.
2 Before you even get to the Constitution, there’s a huge array of other laws super protecting the right to keep and bear arms.


Why the Second Amendment may be losing relevance in gun debate

In the bitter debate over gun control, battle lines are often drawn around the Second Amendment, with many in favor of gun rights pointing to it as the source of their constitutional authority to bear arms, and some in favor of tighter gun control disagreeing with that interpretation.

But if the purpose of the debate is to reduce the tragic human toll of gun violence, the focus on Second Amendment is often misplaced, according to many experts on guns and the Constitution.

Joseph Blocher, professor of law and co-director of the Center for Firearms Law at Duke Law School, described the patchwork of state laws that exists across the country as a “buffer zone” for the Second Amendment.

Continue reading “”

Actually I’ve seen the reverse. While I suspect the demand is still there, the prices I’ve seen online for the popular calibers, e.g. 9mm, 5.56mm, 12g, has decreased and they’re more available than a year ago.

Now what I do see is a shortage in the supply of reloading gear, powder, primers, brass and bullets.


‘Overwhelming demand’: US gun sales continue to soar

The COVID-19 pandemic, coupled with record sales of firearms, has fueled a shortage of ammunition in the United States that’s impacting law enforcement agencies, people seeking personal protection, recreational shooters and hunters — and could deny new gun owners the practice they need to handle their weapons safely.

Manufacturers say they’re producing as much ammunition as they can, but many gun store shelves are empty and prices keep rising. Ammunition imports are way up, but at least one U.S. manufacturer is exporting ammo. All while the pandemic, social unrest and a rise in violent crime have prompted millions to buy guns for protection or to take up shooting for sport.

“We have had a number of firearms instructors cancel their registration to our courses because their agency was short on ammo or they were unable to find ammo to purchase,” said Jason Wuestenberg, executive director of the National Law Enforcement Firearms Instructors Association. Continue reading “”

1, Interesting to see they didn’t mention that the controversy comes from Chipman’s involvement at the Branch Davidian siege

2, “If confirmed, David Chipman would be the most qualified director the ATF has ever seen, an agency that’s purpose is to enforce existing gun laws.”–Shannon Watts.
She’s more on the nose than she realizes. This is an admission that the ATF exists for no other purpose than to stomp over peoples civil liberties. If that’s the metric by which she’s using to infer his qualifications, he’s definitely a good choice.


NRA and Republicans out to hobble Biden’s choice for top gun law role

David Chipman’s nomination to lead the ATF could be in trouble – which would be a serious blow to gun control advocates

The nomination of David Chipman to lead the principal agency that enforces federal gun laws is stalling as Republicans and the National Rifle Association (NRA) seek a major symbolic victory on the ever contentious issue of gun rights.

This week Merrick Garland, the attorney general, urged the US Senate to confirm Joe Biden’s pick to head the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) where he will play a crucial role in the struggle against gun violence.

The intervention was the latest warning sign that the nomination of Chipman might be in trouble – which would be a serious blow to gun control advocates

Continue reading “”

BLUF:
For those intending to watch ABC News’ “One Nation Under Fire,” they would do well to remember that what is being presented is propaganda, not reality. It will be another part of the effort to separate gun owners from their firearms, turn local police departments into mere appendages of a national police force, and prepare the nation for the imposition of the left-wing Marxist agenda.

ABC News’ “One Nation Under Fire” Will Promote the Lie About Gun Violence in the U.S.

ABC News is launching another attack on gun rights, starting Sunday. Its project, called “One Nation Under Fire”, will join with ABC affiliates across the country as well as with Good Morning America and GMA3Variety, which made the announcement, breathlessly rejoiced that “various ABC-owned stations may also contribute their own reports on findings in their area of coverage.”

So, what will ABC News be using as its source to back up the attack? False data from the Gun Violence Archive, long considered to be biased in favor of more gun regulations and controls.

Said Pierre Thomas, ABC News’ chief justice correspondent, “We hope this is going to give us a better sense of who, what, where and why and that people will walk away from this with a much better sense of what’s happening.” That would include, of course, according to Variety, “solutions that might help reduce gun violence.”

Those watching to the end will no doubt have their opinions formed in the cauldron of canards, misinformation, and distortions served up by Gun Violence Archive.

Continue reading “”

A ‘study’ using interviews of sixteen seasoned citizens and thirteen medicos and the researchers use it as a venue to merely regurgitate their previous anti-gun views.

And just to point out:
Read These Taxpayer Funded Antigun Research Projects
The Centers for Disease Control recently announced the projects funded by more than $7.8 million dollars to “Prevent Firearm-Related Violence and Injuries.”
Let’s take a look at some of the projects receiving CDC funding:
Dr. Ali Rowhani-Rahbar of the University of Washington will receive $1.5 million over three years for a project that “will identify the context, antecedents, and consequences of handgun carrying among adolescents who reside in rural communities in order to inform culturally appropriate and community-specific interventions.” “This project is intended to inform the development, adoption, and refinement of non-punitive prevention approaches to address factors that influence handgun carrying and reduce the burden of firearm-related injury among youth in rural communities.”

This project would seemingly build on Rowhani-Rahbar’s previous work on the topic through an NIH grant, and he has published dozens of articles and studies on firearms and firearms-related policies. He is the Co-Director of the Firearm Injury and Policy Research Program at Harborview Injury Prevention & Research Center at the University of Washington.

Gun for young people are baaaaaad.
Guns for old people are baaaaaaad.
Guns are baaaaaaad!


Should There Be ‘Gun Retirement’ for the Elderly?

MONDAY, May 17, 2021 (HealthDay News) — Just as some elderly drivers need to give up their car keys, older gun owners may eventually face “firearm retirement.” And a preliminary study suggests they are open to the idea.

In focus-group interviews with older gun owners, researchers found that many had considered putting limits on their firearm access — though they usually hadn’t yet laid out plans for when and how.

It’s an important issue, given that 40% of older Americans live in a home with a gun, said lead researcher Laura Prater of Harborview Injury Prevention and Research Center at the University of Washington in Seattle.

The concern, she said, is that a significant number of those seniors have or will develop dementia or major depression. If they have easy access to a firearm, they could harm themselves, accidentally or intentionally.

No one wants to wrest firearms from the hands of older adults who can use them safely, Prater said.

The point, she stressed, is that gun owners, family members and health care providers should talk about the future — including what should happen with household firearms once a person’s health makes access a hazard.

“We should be treating this like a normal conversation,” Prater said, “just like you plan for other things, like driving, retirement or finances.”

A big takeaway from the interviews was that gun owners accepted the concept of firearm “retirement.”

“Older adults want to be responsible gun owners,” Prater said.

“What they weren’t open to,” she added, “was someone else making the decision for them.”

That means planning is key — before, say, early-stage dementia advances. One place to start, Prater said, is with a “firearm inventory,” where the older adult and family members account for all firearms in the home.

Many owners, Prater noted, have multiple firearms, and family members or other caregivers are not always aware of them.

Some older adults might want a “transition period,” she said, starting with disposing of firearms that are not being used. (Local laws vary on how to do that, Prater noted.)

The current findings are based on interviews with 16 older gun owners, as well as 13 geriatrics specialists.

Continue reading “”

Analysis: Dogs Can’t Smell Serial Numbers and the Dangers of Mindlessly Repeating Police Narratives

Dogs, no matter how well trained, can not tell if a gun has a serial number engraved into it or not.

That is not the impression you would get if you listened to KSBY’s report on Santa Barbara, California’s new police dogs, though. The NBC affiliate chose to frame their story on the dogs through the lens of their ability to detect so-called ghost guns.

“The [ghost] gun might look similar to any regular weapon; however, it’s missing one major piece: registration to make it legally owned,” KSBY reporter Melissa Newman said. “Today, I got a first-hand look at the only K9 in the county trained to detect them.”

The K9 is actually trained to sniff plastic, steel, and gun powder. That’s it. He can’t smell whether a gun has a serial number engraved in it. He doesn’t know if the owner has a registration paper from the state government for it. That is exactly what Santa Barbara County Sheriff’s Deputy Shane Moore tells the station eventually.

“Zeke is trained to alert on what we call polymer 80’s, and it’s like the grip part of the handgun. He’s also trained to alert on the steel, the slides, and the ammunition we use for firearms,” Deputy Moore told the news station.

Moore is oddly trying to conflate a company that sells unfinished gun parts, Polymer 80, with the gun parts themselves. So, let’s be clear. The grip on a gun made with Polymer 80 parts is made out of, you guessed it, polymer, just like a Glock or Smith & Wesson pistol sold at the store. There’s no real difference in materials for parts used in homemade guns or retail firearms.

KSBY eventually acknowledges this obvious fact, but they commit to this bizarre framing anyway.

The whole piece reads like a police department wanted to brag about how they’re doing something to combat the specter of “ghost guns,” and nobody at KSBY thought twice about how ridiculous the narrative was. Police departments often want to show people they are actively fighting criminals, and local news often wants to play up threats to juice ratings. Those incentives align in all sorts of bad ways, but occasionally they combine to make everyone involved with the story look utterly ridiculous.

I believe most police are trying to do the right thing most of the time. But that doesn’t mean you have to take everything they say or do at face value. You absolutely shouldn’t do that with police spokesmen or any other kind of government official if you’re a journalist.

There’s a major difference between respecting law enforcement and mindlessly repeating anything they have to tell you. This principle extends well beyond firearms, but it’s certainly true here. Some police, especially those in public relations, like to frame rights primarily as impediments to easier police work. And while life would be easier on law enforcement if we allowed them to search anyone for any reason they saw fit, or let them arrest anyone for merely owning a gun, it would make life quite a lot worse for everyone else.

So, the next time a police officer tries to tell you a story about how their new K9s are trained to smell the difference between a serialized gun and an unserialized one, maybe take that with a grain of salt.

BLUF:
This redefinition follows a new trend. When the Left doesn’t like something and can’t bring it down with sound arguments, they change the meaning of the word.

DICTIONARY CHANGES MEANING OF ‘ANTI-VAXXER’ TO ANYONE WHO DOESN’T SUPPORT MANDATED VACCINES

The Merriam-Webster dictionary changed its definition of “anti-vaxxer” to mean anyone who opposes laws that mandate vaccination.

Not joking:

Image

BLUF:
T. Patrick Hill Ph.D. is an associate professor at Rutgers University where he teaches ethics and law in the Edward J. Bloustein School of Planning and Public Policy.

⇑⇑⇑THIS is why you must take extreme care in selecting which college, if any, you send your children to. Because these are the idiots who will be filling your children’s minds with crap like this⇓⇓⇓


Gun ownership, yes! As a right, no! | Opinion

So, we have to change the national conversation. A basic reason for the interminable debate over gun violence in America has been the general assumption that there is a right to a gun. However, given the nature and function of rights, is it conceivable that a gun as such, regardless of any consequences, good or bad, of its use, qualifies for that status? That is the question that has been and continues to be unexamined.

As long as it does, the very absurdity of such a notion will continue to offend our common humanity. With each new mass shooting, the shooter often possesses a gun to which, he has an unqualified and inviolable right to have, including the consequences of its use. But if a gun can be used with such devastating consequences, how can its possession qualify for the status of a right? A standard response has been that it is people, not guns, who shoot people. The sophistry here should be obvious.

Put simply, a right is a claim made to something perceived as a benefit to be enjoyed. The strength of the claim is derived from the basis on which the benefit is viewed as a right. That basis will also be a measure of the value, relative or absolute, separable or inseparable, of the benefits to be enjoyed. This also enables us to prioritize among rights, as a civil right like the right to vote, and a human right like the right to liberty, with human rights superseding civil rights.

The right to liberty, as a human right is both absolute and inseparable by virtue of its basis, which is being human. In the absence of being at liberty, one’s identity as a human being is at its core compromised. Liberty, in other words, is integral to human beings, by virtue of birth, and is independent for its origination of any authority such as the United States Constitution, which does not initiate but only confirms it. Despite the substantial difference noted between civil and human rights, it is clear that the function of a right in both instances is the same. It justifies the claim to enjoy the benefits of the objects to which a right is asserted, with the consequence that actions taken under the right are rightful actions. If so, then it is reasonable to ask what actions were taken under the right to a gun might be justified.

The most obvious issue that comes to mind is self-defense. But a Harvard study showed that people used a gun for self-defense in 1% only of 14,000 crimes committed between 2007-2011, suggesting that society has more effective alternative means of self-defense. That aside, gun ownership data are decidedly negative for society. A 2018 survey confirmed that American civilians own 393 million guns, even as other research shows unequivocally that households with guns are less safe, and run a higher risk for accidental deaths, suicides and domestic homicides. Compared with Canada’s gun-related death rates of 0.47 deaths per 100,000 people, the rate of gun-related deaths in the United States is nine times higher at 10.6 deaths per 100,000 people. In comparison with Denmark where the rate is 0.15 deaths per 100,000 people, the rate in the United States is 29 times higher.

Coincidently, during COVID-19, gun sales in the United States have grown exponentially, accompanied, according to research at the University of California-Davis, by an 8% increase in violence across the country. Last year, 41,000 people were killed because of gun violence.

Concede the Second Amendment was intended to confer the right to a gun, then in light of the inevitable loss of life in America from guns claimed as a right, one must also acknowledge an unavoidable trivialization of rights generally in which the rights to life or liberty of thousands have been sacrificed to secure the right to a gun. What absurdity is this not? Whatever the Second Amendment means, it must not be such as to allow a right to a gun to offend humanity by trivializing our rights to it.

Yes, they’re words and the words we use do matter.
The aliens that are here illegally are illegal aliens.
Why use ‘inclusive language?
Propaganda to cloud men’s minds.


Biden administration orders CBP, ICE to stop using the term ‘illegal alien’

​T​he Biden administration has ordered federal immigration enforcement agencies to nix the use of terms like “illegal alien” and “assimilation” when referring to illegal immigrants, in favor of more “inclusive language,” according to a report on Monday. ​

The new directive was included in a memo sent to the heads of Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Customs and Border Protection as part of an effort by the Biden White House to build a more “humane” immigration system, the Washington Post reported, citing copies it obtained.​​

According to the document, “alien” will become “noncitizen or migrant,” “illegal” will be called “undocumented,” and “assimilation” will be referred to as “integration.”​​

“The words we use matter,” Troy Miller, a senior CBP official, said in his memo.

Continue reading “”