Category: Media

BLUF:
You want to talk about disgusting, immoral, extremist rhetoric that helps fuel violence? Look no further than the Sun’s editorial itself. The individuals responsible for this garbage should be ashamed of themselves, and frankly, they should be looking for new employment. The fact that the editorial is still posted without correction (or better yet, a complete retraction) on the Las Vegas Sun website speaks volumes about the contempt the paper’s publisher has not just for conservatives, but its readers as well.

Paper blames “right wing rhetoric” for blue-on-blue political violence

What’s behind the attempted assassination of Louisville, Kentucky mayoral candidate Craig Greenberg earlier this week? Authorities in the city haven’t announced a potential motive, but the editors of the Las Vegas Sun newspaper think they’ve cracked the case: far-left activist Quintez Brown shot at Greenberg because of the “the talk coming from the right about civil war and political violence.”

No, seriously. Despite the fact that the political preferences of the alleged shooter were already well-known by the time the Sun published its editorial on Tuesday morning, the Sun really decided to pin the blame for the shooting on “right-wing rhetoric“.

The alleged shooter, a 21-year-old political activist, was arrested near the scene and later charged with attempted murder along with four counts of wanton endangerment.

While there’s been no indication yet that the activist had ties to any right-wing organizations, the shooting comes amid a rise in threats against politicians fueled by increasingly violent rhetoric coming from extremist Republicans.

The New York Times documented this trend in a story last week based on a review of more than 75 indictments related to threats against lawmakers since 2016.

“In recent years, and particularly since the beginning of (Donald) Trump’s presidency, a growing number of Americans have taken ideological grievance and political outrage to a new level, lodging concrete threats of violence against members of Congress,” the newspaper wrote, adding that the threats “surged during Trump’s time in office and in its aftermath, as the former president’s own violent language fueled a mainstreaming of menacing political speech, and lawmakers used charged words and imagery to describe the stakes of the political moment.”

What breathtaking dishonesty on the part of the Sun’s editors here. If they knew that the suspect was a “political activist,” then they damn sure knew the politics of his activism, yet they apparently chose to completely ignore the facts in order to insinuate to their readers that this was a case of some angry right-wing nut job taking a shot at a Democrat.

Continue reading “”

The author makes a small mistake:
“There are no NEWLY MANUFACTURED ‘assault rifles’ [machineguns] being sold to private individuals in the United States.” is wrong.
All the ones that were transferable before May 1986 are still transferable and – at increasingly higher prices due to the market principle of ‘supply and demand’- are still being bought and sold. Other than that, he’s written well.

After 30 Years Of Lies, NY Times Admits “Assault Weapons Are A Myth”

In a stunning op-ed released Friday, the NY Times finally admitted that “assault weapons” are a made-up political term fabricated by anti-gun Democrats.

Op-ed writer Lois Beckett also admitted that once the term was manufactured and used to outlaw a class of weapons that dishonest anti-gun Democrats had used to con an entire nation, nothing happened.

It was much the same in the early 1990s when Democrats created and then banned a category of guns they called “assault weapons.” America was then suffering from a spike in gun crime and it seemed like a problem threatening everyone. Gun murders each year had been climbing: 11,000, then 13,000, then 17,000.

Democrats decided to push for a ban of what seemed like the most dangerous guns in America: assault weapons, which were presented by the media as the gun of choice for drug dealers and criminals, and which many in law enforcement wanted to get off the streets.

This politically defined category of guns — a selection of rifles, shotguns and handguns with “military-style” features — only figured in about 2 percent of gun crimes nationwide before the ban.

Handguns were used in more than 80 percent of murders each year, but gun control advocates had failed to interest enough of the public in a handgun ban. Handguns were the weapons most likely to kill you, but they were associated by the public with self-defense. (In 2008, the Supreme Court said there was a constitutional right to keep a loaded handgun at home for self-defense.)

Banning sales of military-style weapons resonated with both legislators and the public: Civilians did not need to own guns designed for use in war zones.

On Sept. 13, 1994, President Bill Clinton signed an assault weapons ban into law. It barred the manufacture and sale of new guns with military features and magazines holding more than 10 rounds. But the law allowed those who already owned these guns — an estimated 1.5 million of them — to keep their weapons.

The policy proved costly. Mr. Clinton blamed the ban for Democratic losses in 1994. Crime fell, but when the ban expired, a detailed study found no proof that it had contributed to the decline.

They created and then banned a class of weapons.

“Assault weapons” is a made-up term, used to scare citizens into thinking that military weapons were commonly being sold and used on the streets of the United States. Thanks to a dishonest and incompetent media, millions of Americans thought (and still think) that machine guns could simply be purchased at the local gun store. The reality that the Hughes Amendment to the Firearm Owners Protection Act outlawed the manufacture of automatic weapons for the civilian market in 1986, was always hushed up.

Yes, it has been 28 years since a single machine gun was manufactured for the American public. There are no assault rifles being sold in the United States. There are only firearms that look like weapons of war, but which lack their ability to fire multiple shots with a single pull of the trigger.

These firearms—AR-15s, AKMs and similar rifles—while incredibly popular with America’s law-abiding gun culture, simply aren’t used in many crimes. This should be surprising, since they are now among the most popular firearms sold in the United States in the past decade. The AR-15, in particular, is the most popular rifle sold in the United States year after year, and there are ten times as many in civilian hands as there are visually similar M4/M16 assault rifles in the entire U.S military.

But career criminals don’t want long guns. They want firearms that are compact and easy to conceal.

The op-ed concludes that violent homicides are primarily a poverty issue disproportionately concentrated among small groups of particularly violent young men, a stunning and rare admission that poverty and the drug trade are the primary problem driving murder, not access to firearms.

Don’t expect this sort of stunning admission of the facts to mark a change in cover from the Times, however. The brief bout of lucidity will quickly fade behind the veil of Alzheimer’s liberalism, and we’ll hear the rest of the deranged gaggle of op-ed writers to quickly fall back into the mantra of “Guns are bad, the NRA is evil, we need more taxes, government, citizen control, etc.”

Still… it’s nice to see that every once in a while a real and honest thought can escape from the morass of Manhattan, however fleeting that honest thought may be.

NBC flops in primetime to open Winter Games.

If the first night of coverage is any indication, NBC will have a tough time in the ratings with the 2022 Beijing Winter Olympics.

Thursday’s primetime coverage of the Beijing Winter Olympics averaged 7.25 million viewers on NBC, marking the smallest primetime Olympic audience ever on the network. The previous low was 8.5 million for the final night of competition at last year’s Tokyo Summer Olympics.

Continue reading “”

ESPN Guy Says China’s Genocide is No Worse Than Red States Requiring Voter ID.

The U.S. declared last year that the actions against Uyghur Muslims in the Xinjiang region of China as genocide. But according to ESPN’s J. A. Adande, committing genocide against Uyghurs is no worse than red states requiring voter ID.

This moron actually said this on Friday’s Around the Horn. Adande said Americans should not question what these modern-day Nazis are doing to Uyghurs:

This creep is comparing voter ID to genocide, slave labor, concentration camps, forced abortions and forced sterilizations.

ESPN should fire this guy not for his incendiary comments, but for being this dumb on national television. Keep in mind, the city in which Adande lives, Chicago, has required ID to enter restaurants, bars and gyms.

Continue reading “”

A woman from a communist country explains liberty to a Canadian reporter

Something from last year, recently discovered

58% Of Voters Agree: Media Are ‘Enemy of the People’

Voters overwhelmingly believe “fake news” is a problem, and a majority agree with former President Donald Trump that the media have become “the enemy of the people.”

A new national telephone and online survey by Rasmussen Reports finds that 58% of Likely U.S. Voters at least somewhat agree that the media are “truly the enemy of the people,” including 34% who Strongly Agree. Thirty-six percent (36%) don’t agree, including 23% who Strongly Disagree. (To see survey question wording, click here.)

The survey of 1,000 U.S. Likely Voters was conducted on July 7-8, 2021 by Rasmussen Reports. The margin of sampling error is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence. Field work for all Rasmussen Reports surveys is conducted by Pulse Opinion Research, LLC. See methodology.

The ‘gentry class’ has gotten too full of itself

One More Time: It’s Not ‘Gun Violence’ It’s Gang Violence.

Every time you hear a politician or a media personality mention “gun violence,” you should mentally translate that phrase to “gang violence.” Not only that, but ask yourself if that politician or media outlet has an agenda by mislabeling gang violence as something entirely different.

Obviously politicians who have enabled the “criminal justice reforms” that have directly resulted in the out-of-control increases in violent crime across America don’t want to talk about criminals and gangs. In fact, California’s Gov. Newsom even went so far as to actuall apologize for using the word “gang” when describing the organized groups of criminals who commit crimes (otherwise known as ‘gangs’).

Rather than correctly identify those who commit the majority of violent crimes in this country, countless failed and inept politicians like the Land of Lincoln’s Governor J.B. Pritzker and Murder City, USA’s Mayor Lori Lightfoot instead blame law-abiding gun owners.

They continue to promote more gun control laws and more government spending to redirect peoples’ attention away from the failures of their feckless policies and misplaced spending priorities.

As for the media, there’s a reason the great majority of Americans don’t trust them any more. Nine percent of Americans now have “a great deal” of trust in what they hear in the media. To put that into perspective, roughly four percent of the population think lizard people “control our societies by gaining political power.”

Too many of today’s media members are nothing more than Democrat party operatives with bylines who dutifully spout leftist talking points. They willfully ignore stories that are bad for their political allies and their agenda. Or they cover them…with a pillow. Until they stop moving.

At the same time, they’re quick to castigate law-abiding gun owners for the actions of actual criminals, terrorists, and lunatics who commit crimes with firearms.

The next time you see some politician or candidate talking about the problem of so-called “gun violence,” call them out on it. Pols usually squirm if you make them address the real issue that drives the majority violent crime in cities: gangs.

In centers of corruption like Chicago, they may aggressively deflect the discussion away from gangs because a lot of gangs in places like Chi-town have some very cozy relationships with local elected officials to provide votes in exchange for the politicians avoiding discussions about gang-related crimes.

As for the media, do the math. If they’re trumpeting talking points like “gun violence,” they’re probably gaslighting you about other topics too. Look deeper to see what else they’re lying to you about.

Okay. I’ll repost this Thursday.

Can We Make Thursday ‘Everybody Blog About Mass Formation Psychosis Day?’

Recall that people are trying to de-platform Joe Rogan for hosting Dr. Robert Malone, who has popularized the “Mass Formation Psychosis” theory to explain public reaction to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Well, here’s some news for you: They can’t de-platform everybody.

If all of us with access to digital platforms — bloggers, columnists, people on Twitter and Facebook, etc. — will unite behind this idea, we can defeat these censors and make it impossible for them to suppress the idea.

Therefore, I propose that this Thursday, Jan. 27, be declared “Everybody Blog About Mass Formation Psychosis Day.” The objectives:

Continue reading “”

Twitter Locked Out Congressional Candidate Joe Kent Over Tweet Supporting Gun Rights

Twitter suspended the account of Joe Kent, a Republican congressional candidate from Washington state for tweeting in support of gun rights. He had to delete the tweet to recover his account.

“We will never give up our gun laws,” Kent tweeted. “Gun laws are infringements of our god given rights.WA state is back at it, a week ago we caught the board of health discussing forced quarantine, now the legislature going after our 2A. No 2A + forced quarantine = Australia.”

Kent, a retired Green Beret, is running for Congress in Washington state.

“Today I was suspended for defending 2A & calling out WA state’s COVID policies including the potential of forced quarantine,” Kent tweeted after he recovered his account.

He vowed to fight Big Tech if he is elected.

“I will NEVER stop defending our 2A & fighting COVID mandates. When I get elected to Congress I will help Break Up Big Tech,” Kent wrote.

Speaking to Breitbart, he said Twitter is targeting those challenging Biden’s foreign policy.

“Twitter’s suspension of me is without cause,” Kent said in a comment according to Breitbart. “In the past 24 hours I have tweeted my concerns about Biden recklessly escalating tensions with Russia over Ukraine. It is clear that Twitter is trying to silence credible voices that are questioning Biden’s disastrous foreign policy.”

He added: “This is big tech limiting my voice as an American and as a political candidate. It’s very telling that they focused on me over my take on an issue that has bipartisan establishment & mainstream media support; another war. The establishment is craving war and won’t tolerate dissent.”

BLUF:
To Biden and Democrats, violent crime is a gun crime problem, but they ignore that 92% of violent crime has nothing to do with guns. And they ignore that defensive guns uses are four to five times more common than gun crimes.

The bottom line is that the media could do a much better job of asking politicians such as Biden tough questions on crime. If we want to save lives and protect people from violence, we need those questions asked.

What Reporters Should Ask Biden About Guns at His Promised Press Conference on Wednesday

President Biden’s remarks after the hostage situation at the synagogue in Texas leave more questions than answers.

What were the motivations for the attack occur? A full day after a Pakistani Muslim attacked a synagogue on the Jewish sabbath to gain the release of Aafia Siddiqui described as the “Lady of al Qaeda,” Biden doesn’t know. The synagogue was near where Siddiqui is held. But when asked why the attacker targeted that synagogue, Biden again responded that he didn’t know but promised more at a press conference on Wednesday.

Those answers are surely much better than the answers given by the FBI on Saturday, where they were not sure of the motive but ruled out the attack being “specifically related to the Jewish community.” The investigation should go forward, but it is troubling that the FBI’s immediately concluded no connection between a radical Pakistani Muslim trying to free a prominent al Qaeda member and an attack on a synagogue. The “massive backlash” forced the FBI to walk back its claim.

But there are other important problems with Biden’s comments. While he concedes that “you can’t stop something like this if someone is on the street buying something from somebody else on the street,” what he does know is that this type of attack occurs because “there’s so many guns that have been sold of late; it’s just ridiculous.”

His first suggested solution? Background checks. Presumably, he means background checks on the private transfer of guns – so-called “universal background checks.” The problem is that even if such a law had been in effect and perfectly enforced, it wouldn’t have stopped one mass public shooting this century.

Continue reading “”

BLUF:
……as violent crime soared in the 1990s, states expanded gun rights in the form of concealed carry, driving violent crime down.
I’m sorry, but unless you have an answer for that, I don’t really care what you have to say
And when it comes to the Rittenhouse case, the only takeaway is that when you’re faced with a violent mob, you need all the firepower you can manage.

There are no gun control lessons out of Rittenhouse trial

Kyle Rittenhouse was found not guilty of murder by a jury. Even before that, though, we know he was innocent of all charges because we watched the whole thing unfold on video. We knew he was innocent.

Now, though, Rittenhouse is a free man, but some are using his situation to try and advance gun control.

No, it doesn’t make a lot of sense. Yet this isn’t the first op-ed I’ve seen that tried to make that case.

As the country awaits a U.S. Supreme Court decision in a New York state case that may create a federal constitutional right to carry guns outside the home, what lessons can the nation draw from the recent acquittal in Wisconsin of Kyle Rittenhouse and the convictions in the murder of Ahmaud Arbery in Georgia?

The obvious first lesson is that no one would be dead, maimed or going to prison if the men in these cases had not possessed firearms or had just left their weapons at home. The man Rittenhouse maimed learned that his self-proclaimed constant gun carrying not only did not protect him or others, but simply added him to the victim count when he pointed his gun at Rittenhouse.

No, we didn’t learn any such lesson.

Continue reading “”

SAF LAUNCHES HUGE TV EFFORT WARNING OF ‘UNPRECEDENTED ASSAULT’ ON 2A RIGHTS

BELLEVUE, WA – The Second Amendment Foundation today announced a huge new TV effort launching the week of Jan. 3 to warn America of a coming attack on Second Amendment rights.

SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb said the foundation’s message will be broadcast 220 times during the first week on more than 20 cable television networks.

“The well-financed gun prohibition movement is poised to strike in an effort to make up for lost time due to Joe Biden’s failure to get the gun prohibition agenda through during his first year in office,” Gottlieb said. “We’re expecting an unprecedented assault on Second Amendment rights heading into the new year. Anti-gunners will grasp at straws to grab every headline they can, and make no mistake, they are determined to help Biden go after your rights in 2022.

“That’s why we’re kicking off the New Year with a record number of pro-gun rights TV spots in a single week,” he added. “The threat to our Second Amendment rights cannot be over-stated. The billionaire-backed gun ban lobby is fearful of a gun rights ruling from the Supreme Court this summer, and a power flip at the mid-term elections, so they will be pushing Biden and their allies on Capitol Hill and in several states to get things done now, before they lose the political muscle to push their agenda.”

SAF will broadcast its 60-second message on several networks including CNN, MSNBC, Fox News, Fox Business, Newsmax TV, One America News Network, Destination America, Bloomberg, BBC America, Discovery Channel, American Heroes Channel, SYFY (Science Fiction), TLC (The Learning Channel), TruTV, DirecTV, The Weather Channel, HLN, Dish TV, and CNBC.

“There is no time to waste,” Gottlieb cautioned. “We’re going to hit the ground running in order to grab the high ground and block the momentum of an anti-rights movement determined to smash the right to keep and bear arms. We’ll be asking viewers to call a special toll-free telephone number – (888) 762-0221 – to help in this battle, because once you lose your rights, you will never get them back.”

CNN Now Openly Questioning President Biden’s Mental Health

It is widely understood that CNN trends to the left.  They don’t seem to be denying it any more, so why should anyone else?  The mainstream media in America is now widely understood to be partisan entertainment, and that’s just fine.  In many ways, it helps us gauge the truthiness of what we’re hearing, understanding that it comes through a filter of political spin.

So when the liberal-leaning network actually suggests that President Joe Biden’s mental capacity is slipping, it’s important to stand up and take notice.

A CNN correspondent said Wednesday that Joe Biden ‘seemed confused’ in his ABC News interview earlier this week, when the president appeared to mix up COVID-19 at-home tests and antiviral pills.

Biden, 79, spoke to ABC’s David Muir for 20 minutes in an interview that aired on Wednesday and defended his administration against criticism of its handling of the pandemic and readiness for the rapidly spreading Omicron variant, but also admitting that there were certain mistakes made.

When asked about complaints that the lines to get tested for COVID-19 were excessive, with waits of over five hours in New York City as one example, Biden said that 500 million at-home tests had been ordered.

But several times he referred to the tests as ‘pills’ – potentially thinking of the Pfizer antiviral pills, which were federally approved on the same day.

CNN didn’t mince their words.

‘Repeatedly throughout this interview – President Biden seems confused and was confusing the half a billion tests that they’ve ordered with a half a billion pills,’ said Jeff Zeleny, CNN’s chief national affairs correspondent.

While the move is certainly surprising, at least in terms of CNN’s willingness to espouse such an idea, some of the confusion that we’ve seen from the President is undeniable.

Certainly more to his brand of proggie politics. Good riddance
FYI CNN+ is supposed to come online early next year as an internet ‘streaming’ channel

Chris Wallace Leaves Fox News for CNN+

On Sunday, Fox News anchor Chris Wallace announced that is departing the network “effective immediately,” and will be joining CNN+ to host a weekday show. Wallace announced his abrupt departure at the end of Fox News Sunday, the show which he had hosted since 2003, according to CNN….

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?

Question O’ The Day
So… what’s the point of this article? They’re arguing that self-defense cases involving guns demands a higher level of scrutiny than self-defense cases that don’t involve guns, then seem to imply that there is a systemic issue of allowing judges to determine foregone conclusions (like they can in many contexts) when deciding the facts of a case. Then they proceed to use two high-profile cases as an example, then admit that neither case involved a foregone conclusion.

Seriously, what point are they trying to make, exactly?

Both the display of a firearm and the pointing of a firearm at another person are threatening acts that ordinarily would create a reasonable apprehension of death or serious bodily injury in another person, and thus should be viewed as prima facie evidence of aggression.

This is their point:
They want the mere existence of a visible gun on your person to remove your right to defend yourself.

When it comes to guns and claims of self-defense, juries need guidance
As a general matter, a criminal defendant loses the right to claim he acted justifiably in self-defense if he was the initial aggressor or provocateur

Jurors in two recent high-profile homicide cases involving guns and claims of self-defense have spoken. In one case, the jury found the defendant, Kyle Rittenhouse, not guilty on all homicide charges. In the other case, the jury found Greg and Travis McMichael and William “Roddie” Bryan guilty of murder in the death of Ahmaud Arbery.

Important factual differences contributed to the different verdicts in these cases. The skill sets of the attorneys and dispositions of the judges involved played a role as well.

One thing both cases had in common, however, was that each judge gave the jury an initial-aggressor or provocation instruction. The fact that the juries in the two cases were given such an instruction yet reached opposite conclusions indicates that the mere giving of such an instruction in self-defense cases will not predetermine the outcome.

Until these two cases, few people were aware of the initial-aggressor limitation on the defense of self-defense. Now, that limitation has become part of the national conversation.

Continue reading “”

How to Lie About Guns, New York Times Style

One of the easiest ways to lie and not get sued for libel is to simply do so through exclusion. The New York Times is famous for this and if you don’t know enough about guns they can make things sound pretty bad, just by leaving out a little bit of information. In the wake of the Kyle Rittenhouse Verdict we ought to brush up on the tactics of far-left media. To do so, we simply just need to look to the past. Back in March of 2021, I found an article so egregious that I decided to go ahead and fill in the blanks. I believe the resulting work should be saved and used to inform anybody who is arguing for more gun control without all of the facts. For reference the original article can be found here:

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/24/us/ruger-ar-556-boulder-shooting.html

You’ll see that the author is attempting to paint Ruger’s AR-15 pistol and the 5.56 round in a darker light than it deserves.

The article opens with the basic facts and uses that tired old phrases like “military-style semiautomatic rifle and pistol.” Of course, the author leaves out that they are “military-style” in appearance only. Camouflaging a Kia doesn’t make it an M1 Abrams tank. As the piece starts to “develop,” the author also goes on to write, “Statements from the police and the charging documents did not make it clear which of the weapons was used in the attack, but it appeared at least one is a semiautomatic derivative of the assault rifles that have long been used by the American military.”

For starters, holy long sentence Batman. I had to read it a few times to keep up with it all, leaving just the catchphrases like “assault rifles” and “American military” to stand out. However, if you read it a few times you pick up what is being said. The guns being referenced are derivatives as opposed to copies because they are semi-automatic, like a common pistol. This is unlike the military’s fully automatic M4 carbines. Only folks who know guns are going to know that and only a few are going to be that dedicated to pull all of that from this poorly structured sentence.

Later on, I found what is arguably the poorest display of journalism in the entire article. The author goes on to state, “According to a police affidavit, the suspect charged with 10 counts of murder, Ahmad Al Aliwi Alissa, bought a Ruger AR-556 semiautomatic weapon, essentially a shortened version of an AR-15 style rifle marketed as a pistol, six days before the killings took place. It is also unclear if that weapon was used in the shooting on Monday.”

Wait…if  it’s “unclear” that this gun was used at all, why does this article include this statement? Actually, why is there even an article entitled “What we know about the gun used in the Boulder shooting” in existence? The Times didn’t need 284 words to put this piece together, thanks to this statement I can do it with just one, “Nothing.”

About halfway through is where I found the most manipulative piece of information and this is where the author states “Both the AR-15 style rifle and the Ruger version fire the same small-caliber, high-velocity ammunition, which was first developed for battlefield use.” Sure, the 5.56 was built for the military… To replace the current, larger cartridge that was regarded as uncontrollable and too powerful for common battlefield use! I’ve had enough with media like this trying to make the 5.56 round out to be some sort of baby-killing monster. It’s one of the least-potent centerfire rifle rounds on the market, considered by most to be too small even for deer hunting. Is it more powerful than a pistol round? Sure, but almost any given rifle has more power than any given handgun.

As things begin to wrap up the author proceeds to attempt to make large-format pistols look like the “ideal” tool for mass shootings where she says “Based on their size, ‘AR pistols’ are much easier to conceal than a typical AR-15 carbine or rifle. According to the manufacturer’s website, the Ruger AR-556 pistol comes with either a 9.5-inch or 10.5 inch-long barrel, while a typical AR-15 has at least a 16-inch barrel.” Pretty convenient that she left out the fact that common pistols have barrels from 2 to 6 inches and are capable of the same rate of fire and in most cases, capacity. So although an AR Pistol is easier to conceal than a rifle or shotgun, it’s far less concealable than many other semi-automatic firearms.

As a New Yorker, I have been conditioned to read between the lines and sadly that’s where you are going to find the facts in dribble like this. It’s a shame that our publication doesn’t reach the same people who read the Times, because it would be nice to give the Times’s readership a complete and balanced idea of what that this firearm is—and more importantly what it isn’t. This, my friends, is why we must remain vigilant and never shy away from the conversation. We can only change an informed mind and that duty lies squarely at our feet.