Category: You Can’t Make This Up

Deer hunting causes gun violence, researchers claim
Researchers admit their data was flawed, use it anyway.

In what may be the most poorly conceived and horribly researched study ever published by The Journal of the American Medical Association during its entire 141-year history, a trio of anti-gun researchers now claims deer hunting is associated with a substantial increase in firearm violence.

To arrive at their laughable conclusion, the authors used data from the infamous Gun Violence Archive, which has been debunked dozens of times and is well known for its shoddy research and biased statistics.

Even the authors admitted there were problems with the GVA data. “Our study relies on shooting data from a single source, the GVA. Data from GVA have been shown to have a bias toward incidents that receive more media attention and do not include comprehensive counts of firearm suicides,” the report states.

Despite these inherent biases, the researchers used the GVA data anyway. They didn’t allow the facts to interfere with their preconceived and biased narrative.

The report, “Deer Hunting Season and Firearm Violence in US Rural Counties,” which was released Wednesday, was written by Patrick Sharkey, PhD; Juan Camilo Cristancho, BA, and Daniel Semenza, PhD.

Sharkey is affiliated with Princeton University’s School of Public and International Affairs. Cristancho works at the University of California, Irvine’s School of Education, and Semenza is affiliated with the New Jersey Gun Violence Research Center at Rutgers University.

The researchers sought to investigate “the association between the start of deer hunting season and shootings in rural counties of the US.”

They compared shootings during the first three weeks of deer season to a week prior to the season opener. The authors claim there was a “substantial increase in shootings” during the start of deer season, which they said calls for additional gun control, of course.

“The findings highlight the role of firearm prevalence in gun violence and suggest the need for focused policies designed to reduce firearm violence in areas with substantial hunting activity during the first weeks of deer hunting season,” the report states.

About the author

Patrick Sharkey, PhD, led the research team.

“Dr. Sharkey had full access to all of the data in the study and takes responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis,” his report claims.

According to his Princeton bio, Sharkey’s research focuses on “urban inequality, violence, and public policy.” He is also the creator of AmericanViolence.org, a website that claims it provides “comprehensive, updated data on violence from as many of the largest 100 largest U.S. cities as possible.”

AmericanViolence.org, like Sharkey’s recent study, relies upon debunked data. “In the latest iteration of the site we have drawn more heavily on data on fatal and nonfatal shootings published by the Gun Violence Archive, an excellent resource that has tracked all forms of gun violence in the United States over time,” the website states.

Continue reading “”

“So, Biden has to drop out because his record is so good?”

It’s all right there. Joe had to drop out because his not dropping out would have damaged democracy. He dropped out to protect democracy.

That’s literally what he SAID. – Henry Bowman

Trump Gunman Flew Drone Over Rally Site Hours Before Attempted Assassination
Discovery adds to growing list of stunning security lapses that almost led to former president’s killing

The gunman who tried to kill Donald Trump was able to fly a drone and get aerial footage of the western Pennsylvania fairgrounds shortly before the former president was set to speak there, law-enforcement officials briefed on the matter said, further underscoring the stunning security lapses ahead of Trump’s near assassination.

Thomas Matthew Crooks flew the drone on a programmed flight path earlier in the day on July 13 to scour the Butler Farm Show grounds ahead of Trump’s ill-fated rally, the officials said. The predetermined path, the officials added, suggests Crooks flew the drone more than once as he researched and scoped out the event site.

The 20-year-old would-be assassin fired at least six rounds from the roof of the American Glass Research building roughly 400 feet away from where Trump spoke, killing one spectator, critically injuring two others and leaving Trump with a graze wound to the ear. A Secret Service sniper team shot back, killing Crooks, whose motive remains a mystery.

Multiple investigations are under way into how a gunman was able to climb onto a rooftop with a clear line of sight to Trump and open fire with an AR-15 rifle. Police had become suspicious of Crooks more than an hour earlier, when officers saw him milling about the edges of the rally with a range finder and a backpack.

Secret Service agents respond after the Trump rally shooting on Saturday in Butler, Pa. PHOTO: EVAN VUCCI/ASSOCIATED PRESS

The use of the drone was just one way in which authorities have said Crooks planned his attack. Crooks, described by friends as very smart yet withdrawn, began researching the site shortly after the Trump campaign announced the rally on July 3, and registered for the event on July 7, officials said. He visited the farm show grounds a few days later to scope it out.

On July 13, officials said, he returned with a pair of homemade bombs that appeared to be designed to be set off by remote control, as they were fitted with a receiver like the kind used to set off fireworks remotely. Investigators found the rudimentary explosives in Crooks’ car parked close to the grounds, along with a ballistic carrier, or vest, with three, 30-round magazines in it, an indication that he might have wanted to cause greater carnage.

Crooks in recent months had received several packages to his home marked “hazardous materials,” officials said. He did online searches for dates of Trump rallies, but also searched for information about next month’s Democratic convention and President Biden, providing a mixed bag of clues for investigators to sort through as they try to determine what, if any, ideology he ascribed to.

Local officer encountered gunman just before he shot toward Trump at rally, sources tell AP

BUTLER, Pa. (AP) — On the heels of an attempt to kill him, former President Donald Trump called Sunday for unity and resilience as shocked leaders across the political divide recoiled from the shooting that left him wounded but “fine.”

A former fire chief attending the rally with family was killed, as was the gunman. Two other people were also critically wounded.

The presumptive Republican presidential nominee said the upper part of his right ear was pierced in the shooting. His aides said he was in “great spirits” and doing well.

“I knew immediately that something was wrong in that I heard a whizzing sound, shots, and immediately felt the bullet ripping through the skin,” he wrote on his social media site. “Much bleeding took place.”

In a subsequent social post Sunday, Trump said “it was God alone who prevented the unthinkable from happening.”

“In this moment, it is more important than ever that we stand United, and show our True Character as Americans, remaining Strong and Determined, and not allowing Evil to Win,” his post said.

Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro on Sunday identified the rallygoer who was killed as Corey Comperatore, a former fire chief from the area, and said he “died a hero.”

“His wife shared with me that he dove on his family to protect them,” Shapiro said. He declined to discuss the condition of two others who were wounded.

The FBI identified the shooter as Thomas Matthew Crooks, 20, of Bethel Park, Pennsylvania, which is about 50 miles (80 kilometers) from the scene of the shooting. An FBI official said investigators had not yet determined a motive.

Secret Service agents fatally shot Crooks. The gunman attacked from an elevated position outside the rally venue at a farm show in Butler, the agency said.

Not long before shots rang out, rallygoers noticed a man climbing to the roof of a nearby building and warned local police, according to two law enforcement officials.

One local police officer climbed to the roof and encountered Crooks, who pointed his rifle at the officer. The officer retreated down the ladder, and Crooks quickly took a shot toward Trump, and that’s when Secret Service snipers shot him, said the officials, who spoke to The Associated Press on condition of anonymity to discuss an ongoing investigation.

Continue reading “”

What Is This ‘Team’ Karine Jean-Pierre Is Referring To?

Tuesday’s White House press briefing wasn’t much better than the one from the day before, though at this most recent briefing, Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre did make a telling and concerning point beyond those specifically to do with President Joe Biden’s health. As she and other Biden allies have been claiming, we don’t need to worry about concerns with the president, because he has a “team.”

As Fox News’ Peter Doocy pointed out that “we know the president says that his health is fine, but it’s just his brain, and that he’s sharpest before 8:00,” Jean-Pierre cut him off to insist the president “was joking,” deciding to emphasize “I just want to make sure that that’s out there.”

Before Doocy could get to the heart of his question, he and Jean-Pierre ended up getting into a back-and-forth about “what’s the joke,” with the press secretary offering “he was speaking off the cuff, and he was making a joke, arguing “you know the president, he likes to joke a lot.”

After Jean-Pierre insisted several more times that “it’s a joke” when Biden himself makes comments about his age, Doocy finally was able to get to his original question.

“He’s sharpest before 8:00p.m.,” Doocy pointed out once more. “So, say that the Pentagon at some point picks up an incoming nuke; it’s 11:00 p.m. Who do you call? The First Lady?”

Jean-Pierre’s answer was that Biden “has a team.”

“He has a team that lets him know of any–of any news that is pertinent and important to the American people. He has someone–or–that is decided, obviously, with his National Security Council on who gets to tell him that news,” she offered.

Comments from former Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) and his experiences with Biden have been frequently coming back up. Doocy quoted him saying how First Lady Jill Biden “was there as well” for their meetings.

“When the First Lady is in these meetings, is she making decisions, or is she just,” Doocy started to ask, also asking if she’s “advising the president.” Jean-Pierre cut him off, though, to insist “no,” that “the president is the president of the United States” and “he makes decisions.”

Jean-Pierre became even more testy when Doocy asked about First Son Hunter Biden, who is now a “gatekeeper.” Like the first lady, Hunter has been instrumental in keeping Biden in the race for reelection.

“President Biden has told me before he and his son don’t have any business dealings together,” Doocy reminded as he asked a key question. “So, what is Hunter Biden doing in White House meetings?”

Jean-Pierre stuck to Biden being “very close to his family, as you know” and the timing of the 4th of July holiday for Hunter’s presence, despite how “there is a report that aides were struck by [Hunter’s] presence during their discussions,” as Doocy reminded. Earlier this month, NBC News reported on Hunter being at meetings, and how that presence concerned aides.

“Look, I can’t — I’m — I’m certainly not going to get into private conversations that o- — that occur,” Jean-Pierre also insisted.

When Doocy asked “can you say if Hunter Biden has access to classified information,” Jean-Pierre responded with a “no.”

Jean-Pierre is hardly the only one to reference that Biden “has a team.” Immediately following that disastrous debate almost two weeks ago now, Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA), a surrogate of the president, offered “we have a great team of people that will help govern. That is what I’m going to continue to make the case for.”

Rep. Chip Roy (R-TX), who on that same day as Khanna’s remarks filed a resolution calling on Vice President Kamala Harris to make use of the 25th Amendment, pointed to such remarks as further reason why the cabinet needs to be convened.

Roy also brought up concerns with “a team” with Fox News recently, specifically this idea of “hav[ing] a president by committee” making clear “that is unacceptable, our founders rejected it, it is deeply offensive and unconstitutional.”

We continue to see such examples as the reason why a president coming off as increasingly unfit is supposedly fit to serve another four-year term.

Former Judge has Crap for Brains

Quote of the Day

One problem with the court’s approach is that it is formalist, pedantic—soulless.
It wrongly suggests that the court should give the words in a statute a form-over- substance significance that focuses on dictionaries, and historic word usage while ignoring the basic right at stake or the basic evil a law aims at ending.

In the abortion case, an anti-abortion court could have turned the decision on weighing a life or potential life protected by the Constitution against the liberty of a woman to control her own body—another right protected by the Constitution.
Rather than methodically marching to the foregone conclusion that women had no rights historically, the court could have overturned Roe simply by restriking the balance of rights in favor of a life or potential life that might be lost in abortion.

Rather than spending their time fixated on the interior life of a gun, the court in Cargill could have considered what the law was obviously aimed at limiting—guns that mindlessly spew multitudes of bullets and threaten public safety. Laws have values in them—life, liberty, public safety, etc., and when the court ignores them in favor of games with words, it undermines respect for the institution.

Thomas G. Moukawsher
Former Connecticut complex litigation judge and a former co-chair of the American Bar Association Committee on Employee Benefits. June 25, 2024
Bump-Stock Ruling Reveals a Supreme Court Obsessed With Word Play | Opinion (msn.com)

I dropped my jaw in amazement reading this.
He thinks judges should weigh the pros and cons and examine how they feel about the topic to decide the case?
Really?
That is the job of the legislators when making the laws. If he were to have it his way we would end up with bump stocks being legal or illegal depending upon which judge was assigned to our case. Abortion doctors and the women who employed their services would be sent to jail or on their way, again, depending on what judge they were assigned or perhaps even the mood of the judge that day.

Word mean things and the law depends on the precise meaning of the words used to create those law. If not, then the result will be injustice and chaos. You just won’t know what is an ordinary everyday activity and what a multiple year felony.

This guy is a former judge! Well, maybe this is the reason he is a former judge. He has crap for brains.

You literally can not make this up.