No man has a natural right to commit aggression on the equal rights of another, and this is all from which the laws ought to restrain him.
— Thomas Jefferson
February 19, 2025

?
Any landing you can walk away from is a good landing amiright
pic.twitter.com/558JHI0nRt— Dale Stark (@DaleStarkA10) February 18, 2025
Mr Keane is one of the top 3 men put forth to be the new ATF director
Gun Control Lawmaker Makes Actual Threats of Public Violence in Congress
By Larry Keane
Congressman Robert Garcia (D-Calif.) reminded the country last week why the Second Amendment is so vital to the United States.
The former Long Beach mayor called on the Democratic Party to “bring actual weapons” in the “fight for democracy.”
Those are chilling and dangerous words coming from a lawmaker who wants to strip every law-abiding citizen of their rights to keep and bear arms. Rep. Garcia made the call-to-action at the same time he used derogatory language to belittle Elon Musk, who has been heading up President Donald Trump’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE).
The remarks weren’t the product of heated and passionate debate. He planned them. Rep Garcia brought a poster-sized photo of Musk to the hearing, referring to the image as a “d— pic.”
After that, he doubled down. On both his foul language and his call to arms.
“I think [Musk is] also harming the American public in an enormous way,” Rep. Garcia told CNN’s host Brianna Keilar, according to Fox News. “And what I think is really important and what the American public want is for us to bring actual weapons to this bar fight. This is an actual fight for democracy, for the future of this country.”
‘Incite Violence’
The row is rooted in President Trump’s slashing of the federal workforce, a promise he made on the campaign trail. Rep. Nancy Mace (R-S.C.) wasn’t standing for it. She quickly introduced a censure resolution saying “violence, threats of violence, or attempts to incite violence against Federal employees should not be tolerated in the House of Representatives.”
“The Left is running like roaches with the light on over @DOGE,” Rep. Mace posted on X. “@RepRobertGarcia went far beyond the pale last night, calling for weapons to be used against @ElonMusk. This won’t be ignored. We’re making an example out of him.”
Rep. Garcia dismissed anyone considering taking him at his word for American citizens to heed his call and take up arms for his agenda.
“Obviously, I was using a figure of speech,” Rep. Garcia told The Long Beach Post.
Except he wasn’t. And he didn’t. Rep. Garcia said he wanted the Democratic Party to “bring actual weapons.” Then, he doubled down on it.
This might be the first time Rep. Garcia has indicated any support for private firearm ownership. He’s in favor of banning Modern Sporting Rifles (MSRs) and banning adults under 21 from possessing a firearm. He also wants so-called “universal background checks” which would require a national firearm registry to work and would be very convenient that Rep. Garcia would know exactly who owned what firearms and where they are stored. Rep. Garcia wants to institute a federal licensing system. That would be even more convenient because he could ensure only those who support his political agenda would be approved.
Sound Orwellian enough? Not for Rep. Garcia. He wants people to “bring actual weapons” in his fight against President Trump and those carrying out his agenda. That’s an actual threat of war. Pitting Americans against a duly-elected president and the administration carrying out that president’s agenda – and the duly-elected Congress and the judiciary – isn’t only maniacal. It’s the very definition of tyranny.
Utah House Overwhelmingly Approves Bill to Teach Kids REAL Gun Safety
A bill mandating true gun safety in Utah schools has sailed through the state House, but anti-gunners are doing their best to derail the measur as it heads to the state Senate for approval.
HB 104 is a common sense measure that would require all public school students to learn about the safe storage and handling of firearms on three separate occasions between kindergarten and the end of sixth grade. Rep. Rex Shipp, the primary sponsor of the legislation, says the instruction would be age-appropriate, with younger kids essentially being taught the advice given by the NRA’s Eddie Eagle.
“A lot of times when they don’t have any firearms in their homes or don’t do any hunting and shooting, then these kids are not taught what to do when they come in contact with a firearm,” Shipp said.
Who could object to teaching young kids not to pick up a gun? Oddly enough, gun control advocates are the main opponents of the measure.
Gun violence prevention advocates have applauded Utah Republicans this year for growing gun safety education programs, but some argue those lessons should only be aimed at adults.
The proposal unfairly places the responsibility of gun safety on children rather than their parents, said Barbara Gentry of the Gun Violence Prevention Center of Utah. “Guns and gun safety are the responsibility of the adult gun owner, not school children,” Gentry said. “We support schools sending home materials to parents outlining the importance of safe storage in keeping our families and schools safe from gun violence.”
Jaden Christensen, a volunteer with the Utah chapter of Moms Demand Action, said lawmakers should instead look to grow programs that teach parents the importance of keeping firearms away from children.
“The burden should always be on adults,” Christensen said.
Utah law already mandates that any parent or guardian of a minor who fails to make reasonable efforts to remove a firearm from the minor’s possession is criminally liable, so adults are already “burdened”, as Christensen put it.
Even with that law in place, however, there are going to be some adults who just don’t give a damn. So why shouldn’t we also teach kids what to do if they see a firearm?
For younger kids, Eddie Eagle’s advice to “stop, don’t touch, run away, and tell an adult” might suffice, but there’s nothing wrong with age-appropriate gun safety lessons that offer older children and adolescents more detailed advice on gun storage and safe handling of firearms.
The abstinence-based approach advocated by Christensen and other prohibtionists is downright dangerous. In making real firearm safety taboo, the gun control activists only increase the chances that a kid who runs across a gun will be fascinated and intrigued enough to pick it up. Taking the mystery out of a gun can go a long way towards keeping kids safe from harm, and it’s utterly ridiculous that these activists would prefer children be left in the dark instead of getting a real education.
The good news is that in Utah, anyway, the gun control advocates aren’t likely to get their wish. With overwhelming approval in the state House, HB 104 looks to be in pretty good shape now that its in the upper chamber. And for those anti-gunners intent on keeping their own kids clueless about what to do if they run across a gun, they can take comfort in the fact that there’s an opt-out provision in the legislation, so even if it becomes law they can still ensure that their children are ignorant when it comes to real gun safety.
BREAKING: The Department of Education has canceled $600 million in "teacher training grants," which do little more than promote left-wing race and gender ideologies. It's time to shut it all down. pic.twitter.com/qdkVvZTaH3
— Christopher F. Rufo ⚔️ (@realchrisrufo) February 17, 2025
I am old enough to remember when my father, with just a high school education, could support our family. I remember when my mother could afford to stay home and raise us.
This was the norm.
Our government waste and corruption stole that from today's families.— I am Ken (@Ikennect) February 15, 2025
“Wear none of thine own chains; but keep free, whilst thou art free.”
– William Penn
February 18, 2025

Child shoots, kills 2 home intruders in self-defense
MANCHESTER, Ky. (WKYT) – Two people are dead after a juvenile thwarted a home invasion attempt.
Kentucky State Police Trooper Scottie Pennington posted on Facebook on Saturday that Clay County 911 contacted KSP after two people were found shot in Manchester.
When troopers got there, they found that the two men shot had tried to break into a home and steal firearms from a safe.
Pennington says that after the two broke in, a juvenile living in the home saw them holding guns and shot them both with a handgun.
The two men were identified as Roger Smith, 44 and 51-year-old Jeffrey Allen.
Pennington says the investigation is ongoing.
This is a developing story.

He would’ve been a great camp guard https://t.co/vM7OB0q3w2
— Kurt Schlichter (@KurtSchlichter) February 17, 2025

“Gun owners fought hard to elect a president who would take a sledgehammer to Biden’s unconstitutional gun control policies, and today, President Trump proved he’s serious about that fight,” Aidan Johnston, a director for Gun Owners of America, said in a statement. “We hope that this executive order is just the first of many victories reestablishing our Second Amendment rights during the Trump administration.”
Gun safety advocates are sounding the alarm, including those galvanized by the devastating high school massacre that took place seven years ago Friday in Parkland, Florida.
“Trump’s priorities couldn’t be more clear. Spoiler: it’s not protecting kids. Gun deaths finally went down last year, and Trump just moved to undo the rules and laws that helped make that happen,” said Natalie Fall, Executive Director of March For Our Lives, in a statement. “He is going to get Americans killed in his thirst for vengeance and eagerness to please the gun lobby and rally armed extremists. Remember the next time that a mass shooting happens, Trump did everything in his power to enable it, not prevent it.”
— Mark Follman in Trump Prepares to Wipe Out Years of Progress on Gun Violence
Europeans Don’t Get Free Speech, and Neither Does CBS News, Apparently.
The network had a true banner weekend.
JD Vance spoke over the weekend at the Munich security conference on behalf of the United States — the primary topic was Ukraine, for obvious reasons — but instead of discussing the immediate geopolitical matter, he took his time at the rostrum to deliver a harsh message to the European grandees gathered there about the enemy “within.” And he wasn’t subtle in identifying that threat as the overreaction of Europeans to dissident populist parties:
The threat that I worry the most about vis-a-vis Europe is not Russia, it’s not China, it’s not any other external actor. What I worry about is the threat from within. The retreat of Europe from some of its most fundamental values: values shared with the United States of America.
I was struck that a former European commissioner went on television recently and sounded delighted that the Romanian government had just annulled an entire election. He warned that if things don’t go to plan, the very same thing could happen in Germany too.
Now, these cavalier statements are shocking to American ears. For years we’ve been told that everything we fund and support is in the name of our shared democratic values. Everything from our Ukraine policy to digital censorship is billed as a defense of democracy.
But when we see European courts canceling elections and senior officials threatening to cancel others, we ought to ask whether we’re holding ourselves to an appropriately high standard. . . .
Now, within living memory of many of you in this room, the Cold War positioned defenders of democracy against much more tyrannical forces on this continent. And consider the side in that fight that censored dissidents, that closed churches, that canceled elections. Were they the good guys? Certainly not.
You may be outraged or shocked to see Vance speaking so bluntly to our European allies, but I, for one, am not. I wrote about the canceled Romanian elections last December with shocked disbelief at the casual annulment of democracy on the flimsiest of pretexts — and in truth, merely for going unexpectedly wrong for the establishment party in power — by people who constantly scream about “democracy.” Near as I can tell, NR was one of just five serious outlets in all of American political media to even bother with a commentary about what was otherwise a completely ignored and blandly reported travesty of democracy. (“Nothing to see here, move along.” And always, the paper-thin excuse: “Why are you complaining? You don’t want the Russians to win, do you?” No, but I don’t like being transparently condescended to, either.)
My only disagreement with Vance is that I suspect he is either making an intellectual category error or — more disingenuously but intelligently — arguing like a Straussian, subtly undermining his nominal point to demonstrate the hypocrisy of everyone he’s speaking to in the audience.
Let me explain rather simply: The Europeans do not believe in “free speech” in the same way Americans do, and never really have. Anyone who has spent even a moment’s worth of study on the differences between Continental, British, and American speech laws — and how they have historically evolved — knows that Europe as a whole knows no legally defined conception of true freedom of speech and that England once had it but, without a written constitution to turn tradition into fundamental law, has seen it eroded in recent decades.
Only in the United States, with its First Amendment, are such principles codified — and foregrounded — in a way that has not only shaped our culture from its earliest days but preserved that untamable expressive freedom that is most essentially American within us. (I say for the better; Nina Jankowicz would argue for the worse.)
Vance’s entire speech is 20 minutes long and worth reading in full — he is the Trump administration’s most effective advocate by far — but allow me one further excerpt from what must have landed in the room like a rhetorical punch in the face. (You rarely see this sort of schoolmasterly rhetoric deployed by United States diplomacy to properly scold Europe — it is usually instead deployed by Europeans to lecture us.)
I believe deeply that there is no security if you are afraid of the voices, the opinions, and the conscience that guide your very own people. Europe faces many challenges.
But the crisis this continent faces right now, the crisis I believe we all face together, is one of our own making.
If you’re running in fear of your own voters, there is nothing America can do for you. Nor for that matter, is there anything that you can do for the American people who elected me and elected President Trump. You need democratic mandates to accomplish anything of value in the coming years.
No wonder the Germans were weeping by the end of it all. Vance had called everybody in the audience on their bluff. “You’re not afraid of your own people, are you?” Of course they are. (And also, let’s not kid ourselves, either: They have their reasons, especially if they’re Germans.)
You know who also is terrified of the people? CBS News. Yes, CBS had a true banner Sunday for itself this weekend by tagging along with Vance to Munich. And they made it clear they were on the side of the Europeans weeping about having to listen to the angry voices of their constituents.
Margaret Brennan made headlines pontificating about the origins of the Holocaust from too much “free speech” — a topic for tomorrow’s Carnival of Fools because few in the media have more willingly donned clown makeup in recent weeks — but really it was 60 Minutes’ remarkable praise of Germany’s anti-free-speech laws that took the cake for me.
Now, 60 Minutes has had a pretty rough go of it lately, to be fair. I don’t think Donald Trump has a leg to stand on in his lawsuit against them (for editing a Kamala Harris interview), and I refuse to dignify the matter with serious comment — everything I said about that was already said when I discussed his equally repulsive “revenge lawsuit” against Ann Selzer.
But watching 60 Minutes’ hosts nod sympathetically along with German state prosecutors and investigators as they calmly explained that every random racist internet insult in their country was a prosecutable crime was both mildly horrifying — they presented this to America as a preferable alternative — and perfectly explanatory as to their current position at the bottom-most tier of American public respect: They fear us and think we, as citizens, deserve to be informationally “managed.” Why shouldn’t we hold them in equal contempt? They’re as post-democratic in their impulses as Elon Musk, the man they hate, who happily avers they should be sent to prison. Musk, whatever his other qualities, is clearly a megalomaniac with zero respect for anything except the gratification of his own impulses. CBS theoretically aspires to something more.
Abolishing the Income Tax
Something that might actually happen? And the implications go beyond lower taxes.
Could we look for an end to the individual income tax? Maybe.
President Trump has talked about ending the income tax and replacing it with tariffs and spending cuts. Most people pooh-poohed that as unrealistic. But lots of Trump talk that was dismissed as unrealistic is coming true in the era of DOGE.
Blogger Brian Wang thinks it’s a realistic possibility that a the income tax could go. He writes:
Getting to $1.2 trillion of spending cuts is very doable. This could then boost GDP growth to 4-5% per year and reduce interest rates to 2-3% which would cut another $300-400 billion of interest payments.
I know people have trouble believing these things will happen but a lot of it is clearly being executed. . . .
The bills are coming from congress to officially reorganize or virtually eliminate agencies.
The federal government brought in $2.18 trillion in individual income tax revenues. Elon Musk has predicted $2 trillion in savings through DOGE-inspired cuts. Reduced interest rates on the federal debt brought about by reduced spending would cut outlays further.
Estimates are that a 10% universal tariff would bring in about $2 trillion in revenues. Under these circumstances, it’s realistic to talk about abolishing the income tax and still paying down the national debt.

It is bad enough that so many people believe things without any evidence. What is worse is that some people have no conception of evidence and regard facts as just someone else’s opinion.
– Thomas Sowell
