Category: Enemies Foreign and Domestic

NYC mayoral aide Cea Weaver who says whites owning houses is racist bursts into TEARS when asked about her mother’s $1.4m Craftsman home

A woke aide to New York City‘s new socialist mayor burst out crying when confronted over her assertion that it is racist for white people to own homes – despite her own mother owning a $1.4m Craftsman house.

Cea Weaver, who runs Mayor Zohran Mamdani’s Office to Protect Tenants, was overcome with emotion when confronted outside her apartment in Brooklyn on Wednesday morning.

The 37-year-old began running down the street after seeing a Daily Mail reporter outside her home, then said ‘No’ through tears when asked if she wanted to comment on her professor mother Celia Appleton’s ownership of the $1.4 million property in fast-gentrifying Nashville.

Weaver appeared to be walking towards a nearby subway station, but then turned back and ran inside her home, which has a ‘Free Palestine‘ poster taped to one of its windows.

She was subsequently seen peering out the same window with the poster in it.

Weaver previously tweeted that ‘homeownership is a weapon of white supremacy’ and that ‘homeownership is racist’ in social media posts that also urged people to ‘impoverish the white middle class.’

In another Twitter missive from 2018, Weaver wrote: ‘There is no such thing as “good gentrifier,” only people who are actively working on projects to dismantle white supremacy and capitalism and people who aren’t.’

Weaver further called on people to ‘seize private property’ and called for the election of communist lawmakers.

Continue reading “”

UBI For Me But Not For Thee? When a nation is colonized from the inside out.

Glenn Harlan Reynolds

The explosive unveiling of the wildly extensive Somali-run daycare scams in Minnesota has drawn attention to a huge shadow economy, and not just in Minnesota. America, it turns out, is full of people, companies, and organizations that basically live off of fraud. We’re not talking old-fashioned waste, like $600 hammers or $1200 toilet seats. We’re talking about entities whose sole reason for existence consists of being a conduit for taxpayer money to flow directly to the people controlling them, with some of the proceeds being diverted to politicians and political organizations.

People are noticing.

This reverses an old joke told by my Nigerian relatives. A Nigerian visits his rich relative in the United States and is awed by the penthouse apartment, the limo, the private jet and so forth. “How did you make so much money?” he asks. The relative points out the window. “See that bridge? 15%. See that shopping mall? 15%. See that train station? 15%.”

The visitor, inspired, returns home to Nigeria and becomes fabulously wealthy. His rich cousin from America visits and says “How did you make so much money so fast?”

“You see that bridge over there?”

“Nope,” responds the confused relative. The Nigerian cousin points at himself and says “One hundred percent!”

Well, this joke has now been turned around. Leaving aside that we don’t really even build train stations, bridges, or even shopping malls in this country anymore, now it’s America where people are pocketing one hundred percent and not even trying to actually deliver any goods or services. That the people doing this are mostly Africans only adds to the irony.

But what happened?

Well, several things. At base, people defraud the government for the same reason that dogs lick themselves — because they can. One of the things you find in these programs is that there are virtually no controls to ensure that the recipients of the money are legitimate, that the money is spent as promised — in essence, that the bridges get built. (Or, in the case of California, the high speed rail lines.) That lack of controls, of course, is no accident. The systems are designed to promote fraud and to make it hard to catch or punish.

Second, the culture is weaker. In a high trust society, people get angry when there is fraud and move to punish and ostracize the perpetrators. In a low-trust society, people expect it.

Continue reading “”

California: Background Check Requirement for Gun Barrel Sales Takes Effect January 1, 2026

California’s narrowing of gun barrel sales to licensed dealers only and background check requirement for said sales takes effect January 1, 2026.

Breitbart News reported that Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) signed the gun barrel controls on October 10, 2025, noting that the new law “will require all gun barrel sales to be conducted by licensed firearms dealers, mandating that said dealers conduct an ‘eligibility check’ before selling a barrel.”

The language of the bill makes clear that a five dollar fee will be added to each barrel sale to cover the cost of the “eligibility check.”

California Attorney General Rob Bonta put out a press release noting that the gun barrel controls take effect January 1, 2026, noting that the new law updates the definitions of “Firearm Accessory” and “Firearm Manufacturing Machine.”

Moreover, the new controls include an “updated definition and cause of action for unlawful distribution of digital firearm manufacturing code to unlicensed individuals” and create a “new criminal offense and civil cause of action for facilitating, or causing another person to engage in, the unlawful manufacture of firearms.”

If a barrel is purchased online, the new law requires that the “seller…ship the barrel to a licensed firearms dealer in California to complete the in-person transaction and final delivery pursuant to section 33700 of the Penal Code (codified by SB 704).”

California has more gun control than any other state in the Union, yet the FBI noted that California led the nation in “active shooter incidents” 2020-2024.

Anti-liberty/gun cracktivist’s
By Mike McDaniel

Some things, death and taxes among them, never change. In the same category are the specious arguments of anti-liberty/gun cracktivists. Whenever a horrific crime like a mass shooting occurs, they blame the gun and the Americans who would never commit such a crime.

They also have additional narratives they hope Americans can be tricked into believing, such as virtually every mass attack is carried out by white men, all of whom are domestic terrorist, racist, transphobic white supremacist, Ultra-MAGA, Nazi, haters determined to destroy “our democracy.”

One such cracktivist is apparently John Davenport:

Graphic: Fordham University Faculty Site. Public Domain.

Dr. Davenport tells us the idea of greater security for students and the public at large is a “fallacy,” and “would not make us much safer.” He should know.  He’s a professor of peace and justice studies, which obviously makes him an expert about peace and justice  and stuff.

Think about it for a minute. How much would it actually cost to put armed guards in every single store and restaurant, every 300 feet or so on beaches and at open air events, in every movie theater and every 200 feet at concerts, at every entrance to every building at any hospital, college, school, church, temple or mosque, at all streets junction where lots of traffic piles up – and so on?

Actually, he’s sort of right. In 2013 even the NRA was advocating armed guards in every school. The usual suspects were against that, and the idea eventually died because the costs were—and are—simply too high. The numbers aren’t exact, but there are more than 110,000 K-12 public and private schools in America.  missiongraduatenm.org/number-of-schools-in-the-us/  Putting even one, full-time armed guard in each school is prohibitively expensive, and far more than one would be necessary.

Continue reading “”

The Trace Finds ‘Hope’ in Doctor’s Idea to Cripple Gun Industry

While the staff of the Bloomberg-funded anti-gun website The Trace are scratching their heads over the “paradox” of steep declines in violent crime without steep reductions in lawful gun ownership, they’re also finding and embracing new gun control proposals that would cripple the firearms industry… and by extension, our right to keep and bear arms.

In The Trace’s look back at gun control efforts this year, the site proclaims that one of the things that gives their reporters “hope” in 2026 is a “Chicago doctor [who] has started a policy experiment that would compel gunmakers in Illinois pay into a compensation fund toward gun violence victims in order to get their state license.”

I wrote about this for our VIP members last month (and for the record, VIP, VIP Gold, and VIP Platinum memberships are currently 74% off when you use the promo code MERRY74, so now’s a great time to join), but in case you missed it, a Chicago doctor named Anthony Douglas is leading the push for a bill called “Responsibility in Firearm Legislation Act.”

Ironically, this bill is an irresponsible piece of legislation that seeks to hold gun companies financially responsible for the actions of violent criminals; not through civil lawsuits, which have long been a favorite tool for anti-gun advocates, but through state-level licensing for firearms manufacturers.

Illinois already requires federally licensed firearm retailers to get an Illinois license before they can operate, but the RIFL Act would impose a new licensing mandate on gun makers as well. And in order to get that license, manufacturers would have to agree to cough up money when one of hteir products is used in a crime. As The Trace describes Douglas’s plan:

Under the plan, a gun company’s annual contribution would scale with how often its firearms are recovered in fatal incidents, shootings, and suicides in Illinois. The more frequently a company’s guns are found to create public costs, the more it would pay. Hospitals could bill the new fund directly for health care costs after a firearm injury. Families could get help with lost wages, emergency relocation, child care, and transportation.

The compensation fund would also serve as a way to hold the gun industry financially accountable without litigation. Taking manufacturers to court rarely proves successful thanks to the gun industry’s broad legal immunity. For two decades, the federal Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, or PLCAA, has insulated gunmakers from most lawsuits over third‑party misuse of their products, meaning that the gun industry is rarely held financially responsible or forced to cover any costs, unlike other industries. The RIFL Act sidesteps that terrain by using a licensing fee to cover compensation instead of damages in court.

Supporters and the bill’s legislative sponsor say lawyers have reviewed the framework and believe it could withstand constitutional scrutiny, although they readily concede the industry would almost certainly sue. “Anything now can be argued in terms of constitutionality,” Douglas said, “but this is designed to avoid PLCAA.”

Yes, thankfully anything that impacts our right to keep and bear arms can be argued in terms of constitutionality, and Dr. Douglas’s big idea utterly fails, despite what anti-gun attorneys might claim.

This bill isn’t just a condition and qualification on the commercial sale of arms, which the Supreme Court said in Heller are “generally permitted”. It imposes a meaningful constraint on the ability to purchase firearms. Most, if not all, gun companies would simply boycott the Illinois market altogether rather than apply for a license that holds them financially responsible for the criminal misuse of their product, and that, in turn, would make it impossible for Illinois residents to lawfully acquire a firearm.

Douglas’s idea, just like California’s “1-in-30” gun rationing law struck down by the federal judiciary, flies in the face of the national tradition of gun ownership. As the Ninth Circuit wrote when upholding a district court decision that held the gun rationing law unconstitutional, “Bruen requires a ‘historical analogue, not a ‘historical twin,’ for a modern firearm regulation to pass muster. Here, the historical record does not even establish a historical cousin.”

Continue reading “”

Democrats really do want you dead

Among the most obvious and glaring indicators of the political divide is the issue of self-defense. Normal Americans—largely but not exclusively Republicans—are in harmony with America’s Founders who understood self-defense is a natural, unalienable, God-given individual right which forms the basis of the Second Amendment. If every American doesn’t have a right to self-defense, a right government does not grant and cannot revoke, what other right matters? If one’s continuing existence depends on size, strength and aggression, we’re degenerating to another dark age.

The police can’t protect anyone and can’t be sued when they don’t.

Because Normal Americans understand the Second Amendment and why the Founders wrote it, they’re comfortable with citizens keeping and bearing arms. They understand that right isn’t limited to handguns, nor does it have anything to do with target shooting, hunting or militia membership. They know the primary reason for the Second Amendment is to allow Normal Americans to deter tyranny, and if necessary, to defeat a totalitarian government.

That, even more than the historic record, the Second Amendment and the Supreme Court’s Heller, McDonald and Bruen decisions, makes Democrat heads explode, because they intend to become that totalitarian government. That’s why they’re always trying to disarm Normal Americans.

Those with anti-liberty/gun intentions tend to be, though not exclusively, Democrats. They don’t recognize unalienable rights and call those who believe fundamental rights come not from government but from God, “Christian Nationalists,” which is not a complementary label. Their faith is in themselves and the one-party state they labor to create. They reject the Second Amendment and the rest of the Constitution because both protect individual rights and limit the powers of government, the powers they want to exclusively, eternally wield.

Individuals have rights; governments have powers.

The Bondi Beach massacre and the Brown University attack starkly reveal the differences in these philosophies and their consequences. When an attack happens, the police will virtually never be there in time. Attackers will have considerable time to kill. If citizens are universally disarmed by law or are obeying “gun-free zone” signs, they’ll be unable to fight back. Australia is essentially a gun-free zone; so is Brown University.

The police would love to be able to stop a shooter, but even if they’re present, which was reportedly the case at Bondi Beach, they may do nothing which gave the killers a free-fire zone for from 10-20 minutes. At Uvalde, some 300 officers allowed a 70+ minute free fire zone. At Brown, they had no role in stopping the attack.

In any attack, someone must call the police. A dispatcher must assimilate the information and dispatch the call. Officers must race to the scene–if any are available. In some places, the nearest officer might be an hour away. When they arrive, they must orient themselves and close with the attacker or attackers without getting killed before they can do any good. And in all that time, unarmed innocents are dying. Or even worse, as happened at Bondi Beach, the police, who are rushing into a dangerously ambiguous situation, might shoot an innocent.

Normal Americans given this indisputable set of facts want willing citizens to go armed. They trust their fellow citizens with motor vehicles, which are far more deadly than guns. They’re willing to extend that trust to guns as well. Do away with gun-free zones, to be sure, but to deter attacks, and to limit damage when they occur, the only sane, effective solution is allowing honest Americans the means to save their own lives and the lives of others. If they’re present when an attack occurs, they know precisely who the good and bad guys are and they’re able to quickly end the attack.

Democrats see things very differently. Just as officials in Australia and Rhode Island did in the immediate aftermath of those attacks, American Democrats reflexively want to disarm Americans. Despite the failure of near-absolute gun-banning laws and regulations, they demand even more, and more punitive, anti-liberty/gun laws.

Normal Americans want everyone, Democrats included, to have the ability to defend their lives, the lives of those they love and even strangers. Democrats want everyone, except their publicly funded security, disarmed. Normal Americans want mass murderers dead and fellow Americans alive. Democrats want mass murders to have free-fire zones and want Normal Americans dead.

What other result can their disarmament policies bring?

Mike McDaniel is a USAF veteran

 

Soros: The Other Billionaire Behind the Anti-Gun Agenda

Everyone knows that former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg is knee deep in funding just about every anti-gun effort that comes around the bend. The man has it bad for gun rights, and I have no idea why, especially as he’s surrounded by armed bodyguards all the time. He can’t be that anti-gun.

He’s just anti-you having a gun.

But he’s far from the only billionaire funding the anti-gun agenda. Another name is one familiar to anyone who follows the left-leaning money trail on pretty much any issue, and that’s George Soros.

As Frank Miniter notes at America’s 1st Freedom, Soros is a major funder of anti-gun efforts via his Open Society Foundations.

Indeed, the Hungarian-born billionaire’s public persona could have been inspired by Ian Fleming’s villains in his James Bond novels. Soros, who is now 95 years old, could be a combination of Dr. No and Ernst Stavro Blofeld (a character the Austin Powers trilogy parodied so well!). Indeed, Soros’ Open Society Foundations can be SPECTRE level nefarious.

The Washington Free Beacon recently jumped into this topic with a piece titled, “‘Assault on Our Sovereignty’: How George Soros Funds Foreign Government Lawsuits Against American Gun Makers.”

The report details how Soros’ Open Society Foundations helped fund the anti-gun group Global Action on Gun Violence (GAGV), which worked with Mexico to bring a lawsuit against U.S. firearms manufacturers, a case that went all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court—the Court ruled 9-0 that Mexico could not make gun makers pay for criminal actions in Mexico.

“Over the years, Soros has funneled $32 billion to the Open Society Foundations, which in turn bankrolls many leftwing causes throughout the world,” explains NRA-ILA.

Indeed, Soros’ money has been used against Americans’ Second Amendment rights for decades.

“In 2000, Open Society published a widely circulated report entitled, Gun Control in the United States. The publication called for a host of new federal and state gun restrictions … . In the early 2000s, Open Society also gave support to gun control groups such as the Million Mom March, the Educational Fund to Stop Gun Violence, New Yorkers Against Gun Violence, and Women Against Gun Violence. Further, the group funded various dubious lawsuits against the gun industry, including a high-profile case brought by the NAACP.

Now, I’m not saying that Soros is a real-life Bond villain. I’m just saying that I don’t know anything that a real-life Bond villain would do differently.

Especially since people compared Elon Musk to just such a character for working with President Donald Trump, when he hasn’t come close to the level of manipulation of our society that Soros has.

Couple his efforts with Bloomberg’s, and what we’ve clearly got here is the money behind the efforts.

While the anti-gunners love to make a big thing about money playing a role in the gun debate, our money tends to come in the form of private individuals donating what they can to organizations they believe in, while the gun control side is funded by billionaires who wouldn’t know what it’s like to have to defend the lives of themselves and their families. They hire people for that and if you can’t afford to do the same, well, you’re just not important enough to live.

I’m sure some will try to flip the script and make out like my issue is some other characteristic of these two men, but it’s not. I don’t even care that they’re rich. That doesn’t bother me at all.

It’s that they’re trying to destroy this country by taking away the very right our Founding Fathers enshrined in the Bill of Rights to protect all others.

Comment O’ The Day
The irony of a jew calling for disarmament of people in the light of an Islamic attack on a Jewish holiday against a people who were defenseless because they were disarmed by their politicians.

Tim Walz Tries to Create a Backdoor Firearm Registry After Gun Ban Fails in State Legislature.

Tim Walz may actually be one of those politicians who really is as dumb as he looks. Despite the DFL’s [Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party] virtual control of Minnesota government, he still couldn’t gin up enough support to push an “assault weapons” ban through the legislature. About that situation, he wasn’t happy.

Not willing to allow that very public failure to stand, he signed two executive orders yesterday designed to generate some, uh, positive headlines in the state’s cooperative legacy press as a way to blunt the effects of the legislative defeat, the latest in a long string of very bad news for the hapless knucklehead who sits in the big chair.

From Northern News Now . . .

Governor Tim Walz signed two executive orders on Tuesday morning, surrounded by DFL lawmakers and advocates for gun violence prevention.

“I do not have the capacity as governor to issue an executive order to get rid of [assault weapons], but what I do have the ability to do is to start to move in a direction,” he said ahead of signing the orders.

The first order, according to Walz, aims to expand the administration’s efforts to provide added education on so-called red flag laws and safe storage practices.

The order will also require insurance companies to submit homeowners’ policy and claims data on firearms, using the state’s existing authority to issue “data calls” to recommend possible policy changes to the legislature.

Using taxpayer dollars to encourage the use of due process-free red flag law firearm confiscation isn’t anything new. It’s been done by the usual suspects at both the federal and state levels. But Walz is also creating a bureaucratic monstrosity he’s euphemistically calling the “Statewide Safety Council.” In practice it will likely serve the same purpose in the Land o’ Lakes as Biden’s now defunct White House Office Gun Violence Prevention.

As the Minnesota Gun Owners Caucus describes it . . .

The newly announced Statewide Safety Council raises serious concerns. The council is composed entirely of appointed officials and pro–gun control advocates, with no representation from the Second Amendment community. Like similar advisory panels in the past, it appears designed to deliver predetermined recommendations aligned with the Governor’s policy goals rather than to provide balanced input or genuine stakeholder engagement.

And then there’s Walz’s attempt to hoover up data on gun owners from insurance companies . . .

“The insurance companies, they need to let us know what the economic impact is,” said Walz, “We know what the economic impact is. We know what the emotional impact is; now we can quantify it.”

The only thing is, economic data isn’t likely the only thing Walz is looking for here. Again from the Minnesota Gun Owners Caucus . . .

We are closely reviewing the legality of Governor Walz’s executive order directing state agencies to gather data from insurance companies, including any information related to firearms owned by peaceable, law-abiding Minnesotans.

We have already heard from dozens of our members who are deeply concerned that the Walz administration is attempting to build a registry of gun owners and the firearms they legally own by using insurance records as a backdoor mechanism.

Let us be clear: any attempt to track or monitor Minnesota gun owners will be met with fierce resistance.

We will take all appropriate legal and legislative action to protect the privacy, dignity, and rights of Minnesotans under the Second Amendment and the Minnesota Constitution.

The Constitution is not a suggestion.

Governor Walz does not get to decide which rights are convenient to ignore.

This looks very likely to be challenged in the courts. Stay tuned.

BLUF
The infrastructure of American decline is operating at full scale right now. The mechanisms are completely visible to anyone willing to look. The solutions are clear and well-defined. The only remaining question is whether enough Americans will demand action before the window of opportunity closes permanently.
Which will America choose?

How America’s Education System Became a Weapon Against Itself
Manufacturing Hatred: How $13 Billion Taught a Generation to Despise Jews and Their Country

When college students tore down posters of kidnapped Israeli children in October 2023, parents asked: where did this come from? The answer lies in curriculum materials developed at Brown University. These materials reached approximately one million students annually in roughly 8,000 high schools across America. What teachers didn’t know, and what parents never learned, is that the professor who shaped these materials was funded by a Middle Eastern government. His purpose was to advance one specific narrative: Israel as a settler colonial project. Not to debate it. Not to present multiple perspectives. To establish it as fact.

“This is not a debate,” Professor Beshara Doumani told a Brown audience in 2016. “And it’s not meant to be a debate.”

This is the root of American antisemitism’s resurgence. But antisemitism is just the visible symptom of something larger. The same infrastructure that taught a generation to hate Jews is now teaching them to hate America. The same foreign funding mechanisms that delegitimized Israel are delegitimizing Western civilization itself. America is being systematically dismantled. One classroom at a time. One algorithm at a time. One generation at a time.

The Hidden Infrastructure

Eleven Middle East Studies centers at America’s elite universities receive $260,000 each annually from the Department of Education under Title VI. That totals $2.9 million in taxpayer funding (National Association of Scholars, 2022). The Cold War-era program was originally designed to develop regional expertise for national security purposes. It became a pipeline for foreign influence when universities discovered they could supplement these federal grants with something far more lucrative.

Since 1981, American universities have accepted $13.1 billion from Qatar, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Kuwait (Bard, 2024). Qatar alone contributed nearly $6 billion. Roughly 73% of these contributions are worth approximately $10.7 billion. None of these billions have any publicly stated purpose despite federal disclosure requirements (Bard, 2024).

The scale is staggering. Cornell received $2.3 billion. Carnegie Mellon took $1.05 billion. Georgetown and Texas A&M each accepted over $1 billion. When you look at Georgetown’s records, you find more than $1 billion with no stated purpose. Just blank spaces where explanations should be.

Here’s what we do know. Saudi Arabia gave Georgetown’s Prince Alwaleed Bin Talal Center $20 million. The funding was structured to “follow” the center’s director. This gave the Saudi government effective control over who held the position (Middle East Forum, 2020). Qatar Foundation International sponsored K-12 teacher training sessions. They covered travel and expenses for American educators attending workshops on Middle East history (Institute for the Study of Global Antisemitism and Policy, March 2025). At least one donation explicitly funded a Palestinian Studies professorship at Brown. The position went to someone who supports boycotting Israel (Bard, 2024).

Continue reading “”

Gun Bans Aren’t Enough for Everytown, Giffords

My colleague Tom Knighton did a great job of poking holes in Everytown’s new “study” accusing some of the biggest gun makers of intentionally arming criminals and turning a blind eye for gun trafficking, but there’s another aspect of the anti-gun group’s report that we need to talk about as well.

In addition to pointing the finger at the firearms industry, Everytown also wants politicians to crack down on tech companies; specifically, those who manufacture 3D printers.

The gun control group claims that the seizure of 3D-printed guns increased by 1,000% between 2020 and 2024, though in the 20 cities they examined that accounted for just 325 firearms seized last year. In its report on Everytown’s “study,” NPR claims that these guns “recovered at crime scenes,” though ATF trace data doesn’t distinguish between a gun that was recovered at the scene of a homicide versus a gun that was traced as a “firearm under investigation” or a “found firearm”.

Everytown also claims that “while these guns are just beginning to proliferate domestically, they have already caused harm prominently abroad, where 3D-printed firearms have been used in military conflicts in Myanmar, by crime organizations in Europe, and in a synagogue shooting in Germany.”

What Everytown doesn’t say is that the 3D-printed guns used in military conflicts in Myanmar are generally used by those resisting the military junta that seized power several years ago. I can understand why Everytown would like to ignore the fact that these guns are helping pro-democracy forces resist government tyranny, but the truth is that 3D-printed guns, like their mass-produced counterparts, are still inanimate objects that can be used for both good and evil.

Several blue states have already cracked down on home-built firearms, but those bans aren’t enough for Everytown and other gun control organizations. They want to see printer controls as well.

Gun control advocates say there are strategies to regulate the printing of these firearms. Companies that make 3D printers could develop algorithms to block the printing of firearms, for instance, or states could make it illegal to publish blueprints for 3D printing a gun.

“I think what makes sense is to explore all of (the strategies) right now, to have every approach and push it forward,” [Giffords Law Center Legal Director David] Pucino said, “because this is such a new area and it’s such a concerning threat.”

When you’re intent on shredding the Second Amendment, I suppose it’s not a big deal to infringe on our First Amendment rights as well.

Make no mistake, what Pucino is calling for is criminalizing speech. If the gun control groups had their way, we could be criminally charged and imprisoned simply for disseminating lines of code. Bernstein v. U.S. Dept. of Justice established more than twenty years ago that code is speech protected by the Second Amendment, so when Pucino says that states could make it illegal to publish codes used for 3D printing gun parts he is talking about putting people in prison for exercising their First Amendment rights.

The Anarchist’s Cookbook contains recipes for making explosives and illegal drugs, yet it remains available for sale in the United States and can be found online as well. If that is protected speech, then lines of code that can be used to help build a gun protected by the Second Amendnment clearly can’t be banned or made illegal.

Pucino might hate this fact, but home-built guns are a part of the national tradition of gun ownership in this country and are generally protected by the Second Amendment. 3D printing undoubtably makes it easier to build a gun at home, but advances in technology don’t cancel out our constitutionally protected rights.

The gun control lobby has become increasingly aggressive in its attempts to infringe on the First Amendment rights of gun owners and the firearms industry. California, for instance, passed a law that prohibited firearm advertising that “reasonably appears to be attractive” to minors that, thankfully, was struck down by the Ninth Circuit as a violation of the First Amendment. It and other blue states have also adopted public nuisance laws that allow for lawsuits against gun makers and sellers over the language and images used in their advertising.

Then there are those efforts aimed, not at government censorship of gun owners, but pressuring private businesses to prohibit peaceable assemblies of gun owners like Friends of NRA dinners. Those efforts aren’t necessarily direct attacks on our First Amendment rights, but when anti-gun politicians join in the calls to shut down these events they arguably do infringe on our right to peaceable assembly.

The push to ban code shouldn’t be seen in isolation, but as yet another front in the gun control lobby’s war on the First Amendment rights of those exercising their Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms.

Mark Kelly: ‘Facts of Shooting Matter, to Some Extent,” But Gun Control Matters More

How in the hell did Sen. Mark Kelly become a Navy captain and an astronaut while being so mentally incompetent? I mean, both of those suggest a degree of intelligence, but Kelly sure has been saying a lot of stupid stuff over the last handful of years, and has been ramping it up into overdrive in 2025.

His previous antics are bad enough, and our sister sites have documented them aplenty, but now he’s talking about the issue that made him a senator. That’s right, he’s talking about gun control, which one would think he’d know about since he helped found one of the largest anti-gun groups in the country.

Unfortunately, he still managed to say some stupid stuff.

Host Anderson Cooper then asked, “We don’t really know anything about this shooter, nor the kind of weapon or weapons he used. How much would that information guide next steps in Rhode Island, potentially nationwide?”

Kelly answered, “Well, it’s all going to be part of the investigation. And those details do matter, to some extent, but we pretty much know how this works, Anderson. Places that have stronger gun laws have less gun violence. If you look around the country, that’s very clear. And countries that have stronger gun laws than the United States have significantly lower rates of gun violence. You travel anywhere in Europe or Asia, you ask anybody if they know anybody who’s ever been shot, and it’s really, really hard to find somebody. You ask that question in the United States, and my experience has been, if I’ve got a room full of people, I ask if anybody knows somebody who’s been shot, it’s about 50%, consistently.”

Let’s start with whether the details matter and to what extent.

Before we can even start to discuss anything about what happened at Brown University, we kind of need to know who the shooter was, how he got his gun, what kind of gun he had, what kind of magazines he had, how he’d been behaving recently, what his history is, and pretty much everything else.

As it stands right now, we know literally nothing. The one person of interest they arrested was released, which one would imagine they didn’t have much evidence tying him to the shooting. Of course, considering the criminal justice system in blue states lately, they might have just not wanted to ask for bail, but I’m a smidge skeptical that wasn’t the case here.

So, with that in mind, we know nothing at all. We don’t, as of this writing, have a description of the suspect, even. We have no clue who did this, but Kelly wants to talk gun control, even though we can’t even look and see what laws might or might not have been involved.

That is absolutely stupid all on its own, but Kelly wasn’t done.

Oh no, he has to double down on his moronic take.

See, while he’s calling for more gun control, this attack happened in Rhode Island.

Rhode Island has gun control laws that make New York look like Texas. They have some of the most intrusive gun control laws in the country, all of which Kelly has championed in some way, shape, or form across the nation. Those laws clearly did nothing at all, since this attack happened, so why is it so important we pass more of what didn’t work in the first place?

Now, onto the other countries thing. All I’m going to do there is point out that our non-gun homicide rates are higher than most of those nations’ total homicide rates, which means it ain’t the guns.

Finally, I have to wonder just what rooms the senator is walking in where half of all people know someone who has been shot. I’ve been in a lot of rooms where I’m the only one who can say that, and these are rooms with a lot of folks in them.

Further, when and where were they shot? How many of those who raised their hands did so because their cousin was shot in Afghanistan in 2015 or something? That kind of matters, you know?

And what about stabbings? Does he ever ask about those in Europe or Asia? I’m willing to bet that a lot of those folks might know someone who has been stabbed.

Regardless, this is about the United States and our laws and rights.

That’s what Kelly never seems to get. The Constitution he swore an oath to support and defend, protects our right to keep and bear arms. Instead, he’s ready to dismiss the facts of a case that we still don’t know, all because his agenda demands gun control, and who cares about details at a time like that?

I’m ashamed to have been in the same service with the man at the same time he was in.

FBI stops planned New Year’s Eve Los Angeles bombing by ‘anti-capitalist,’ anti-ICE terror cell

WASHINGTON — The FBI arrested five members of an “anti-capitalist, anti-government” extremist group on Friday and charged them with an alleged plot to carry out coordinated bombings in and around Los Angeles on New Year’s Eve, according to officials and a criminal complaint.

The “credible, imminent terrorist threat” to five unidentified companies’ logistics centers in Southern California came from radical members of an offshoot of the left-wing Turtle Island Liberation Front (TILF), FBI Director Kash Patel and other law enforcement officials revealed Monday.

The splinter group called themselves the Order of the Black Lotus and passed along an “eight-page, handwritten document titled ‘OPERATION MIDNIGHT SUN’” that laid out the bombing plot to a confidential FBI source, according to a criminal complaint filed Saturday in Los Angeles federal court.

Four of the suspects were collared in Lucerne Valley in the Mojave Desert, where they were captured on video attempting to test improvised explosive devices (IEDs), Los Angeles first assistant US Attorney Bill Essayli told reporters at a news conference.
The quartet — Audrey Ilene Carroll, 30; Zachary Aaron Page, 32; Dante Gaffield, 24; and Tina Lai, 41 — have been charged with conspiracy and possession of an unregistered destructive device. A fifth unidentified suspect was arrested in New Orleans while planning a separate attack.

Carroll and Page led the group and convened a private Signal chat where they used codenames, with Carroll identified as “Asiginaak,” Page identified as “Ash Kerrigan” or “cthulu’s daughter,” Gaffield as “Nomad” and Lai as “Kickwhere.”

The group had begun assembling the “complex pipe bombs” with “homemade gunpowder” in the desert when FBI agents arrested them on Dec. 12.

Continue reading “”

The Twisted World of Gun Control

Gun control advocates and Democrats inhabit a different space. Perhaps it’s another dimension or some kind of odd singularity. Whatever it is, it’s a fantasy, complete with all the trappings, in which facts are not only irrelevant, they’re squashed by whatever claims are made by the faithful.

We’re accustomed to unsupported (and unsupportable) claims, cynical appeals to emotion, and carefully crafted, mass-market propaganda. However, it appears some gun-grabbers, even influential ones, have succumbed to their addiction and actually believe what they say. They have embraced the elves-and-fairies lifestyle.

After Thurston County Superior Court Judge Christine Schaller upheld Washington’s assault weapons ban* last month, Renée Hopkins, CEO of Alliance for Gun Responsibility, released a statement:

“This is another strong affirmation that our state’s gun violence prevention laws are both constitutional and effective. Assault weapons have no place in our communities, and Washington has been clear about that.”

We’re still waiting on the Supreme Court to weigh in on ‘constitutional’ but ‘effective’? This is obviously some new definition of the word not found in any dictionary — ever.

A report from the Washington Association of Sheriffs and Police Chiefs covered violent crime from 2019 to 2024. The report compared the number of offenses and rate per 100,000 population for Washington state to the national stats.

Washington’s violent crime rate rose 8%; aggravated assaults rose 27%; and the murder rate soared 43%.

Compare those figures to the national rates: The U.S. violent crime rate dropped 6%; the rate of` aggravated assaults rose just 2%; and the murder rate fell 4%.

Red flag laws weren’t ‘effective’, either. In the five years from 2019 to 2023, the CDC reported the percentage of Washington suicides committed with a gun rose 7%.

In fairness, if Ms. Hopkins’ concept of ‘effective’ is an increase in firearm-related fatalities, Washington’s statutes are doing an exemplary job.

There was another notable aberration in September of this year. Following a tragic mass shooting in Manhattan, New York Governor Kathy Hochul sought to place blame on Nevada’s lax gun laws.

Hochul bragged about New York state’s gun laws and demanded Congress pass similar laws on a national basis.

Neither Hochul nor the media figured out that all those strong gun laws failed spectacularly. They not only failed to prevent the incident, but there’s also no indication that they impacted the killer at all. Despite this, she wants all Americans to be subjected to those same laws.

All that’s missing is Rod Serling saying, “Presented for your consideration…”

Ensconced in their little pocket of ersatz reality, gun grabbers believe nothing can stand in the way of their desired goals. Even the impossible is disregarded.

Ihlan Omar, the controversial U.S. Representative from Minnesota’s Fifth Congressional District, was captured on video as she spoke to a group:

“We have more guns in this country than we have humans. So one of the things that is going to be important is to create a registry so we know where the guns are. We know when they go into the wrong hands when they’re stolen. And we can actually start a buyback program. I know that some of the Minnesota legislators have had that legislation and that’s something that we should be thinking about on a federal level.”

Her first sentence is irrelevant: We also have more Crayola crayons than people. Left to themselves, they pose exactly the same threat to public safety as firearms — or steak knives, hand tools, or Ford F-150 trucks.
From the second sentence on, Rep. Omar falls back on a popular gun-grabber fantasy: Federal gun registration. There are two obstacles in our world, but it seems they aren’t considered an issue in whatever dimension is occupied by the gun-control crazies.

First, a national registry of firearms or firearm owners is prohibited by federal law and has been since May 19, 1986. 18 U.S. Code § 926 says: “No such rule or regulation prescribed after the date of the enactment of the Firearms Owners’ Protection Act may require that records required to be maintained under this chapter or any portion of the contents of such records, be recorded at or transferred to a facility owned, managed, or controlled by the United States or any State or any political subdivision thereof, nor that any system of registration of firearms, firearms owners, or firearms transactions or dispositions be established.”

The second challenge will be much more difficult to overcome: Americans are not going to register their guns. Only a fraction of the estimated 400 million+ firearms owned by more than 80 million citizens are located in states with long-standing gun registration laws. Attempts to impose new, state-level registration requirements on certain types of firearms delivered ‘disappointing’ results.

Actually believing in gun buybacks indicates a ban fan’s addiction has entered a critical phase, urgently requiring an intervention.

When it comes to restrictions on the legal ownership of guns, control addicts and Democrats cling to beliefs less credible than the Easter Bunny. These strongly indicate there’s no point in future discussions.

On the other hand, there is a pressing need for us to rein in some rogues in Congress and state legislatures who have fallen to the lure of the unicorn.