Category: Deceit O’ The Day

How the government covers for anti-gun media

I tend to be pretty critical of media bias. After all, I used to actually believe that media bias wasn’t really a huge thing, that those who saw it were really just upset that the news wasn’t biased in their direction.

Then I grew up. I saw all the examples of bias as supposed journalists went out of their way to push slanted reporting as hard fact.

Yet over at Ammoland, they’re looking at someone else’s bias, a bias that helps the media get away with stuff you or I never would.

A broadcast journalist using a hidden camera enters a gun show, purchases two “80-percent” gun kits, then goes to the state attorney general’s office where two agents help complete and assemble the guns before firing them on a range—allegedly violating state and federal gun laws in the process—while the camera records it all.

During a Sunday morning interview with a network news anchor, a nationally-known gun rights leader is challenged to discuss a 30-round magazine held by the anchor, on a show broadcast from the nation’s capital, where such magazines are known to be illegal.

A nationally-known broadcast journalist produces a special about gun control during which the video is edited to make it appear several gun rights activists are speechless when asked how felons or terrorists might be prevented from purchasing guns without background checks.…

A look back over the years suggests a pattern of “gotcha” journalism that seems to invariably get a pass, and gun rights activists are calling foul, as there is the perception that news agencies are using the First Amendment to undermine the Second Amendment. Grassroots activists contend that if private citizens did the same things depicted on screen, they would almost certainly face prosecution.

In other words, it seems government officials are heavily biased as well and are benefiting the media when they conduct actions that would destroy anyone else.

Time and time again, some in the media have outright broken laws, broadcast it, and gotten away with it because they’re advancing the narrative that certain parties in the government actually agree with.

For example, Katie Couric got away with deceptively editing a “documentary” so it appeared gun rights activists had no answer for a question because the judge argued it “demonstrated the sophistry” of the plaintiffs. Yet to call the actual response–the one Couric removed and pretended didn’t exist–sophistry is to take a position on the validity of those arguments.

That’s an act of bias that has no place in a courtroom.

Yet time and time again, government officials–either law enforcement or in the courts–have taken a side.

That means it’s imperative that such officials be targeted for removal from office. Lawsuits, campaigns, petitions, whatever it takes, we need to hold these people accountable for their blatantly biased actions in favor of a blatantly anti-gun media.

This is nothing more than political grandstanding from a known anti-gun politician to try to garner support for her campaign for Florida goobernor.

In any case, ATF and/or DOJ can’t do anything about this – and Fried undoubtedly knows that – as the prohibition on drug users is under Federal statute law  18 U.S.C. § 922(g), and Marijuana as a Schedule 1 drug under Public Law 91-513 (1970)- not just bureaucrap regulation and repeal has to go through Congress.

This suit will eventually get thrown out of court, but probably not before the election this fall, which – again – you can be assured, Fried knows too.

Nikki Fried suing Biden, ATF over cannabis prohibition on Form 4473
Florida’s Agriculture Commissioner says she is suing for 2A rights of cannabis users.

Florida’s Agriculture Commissioner Nikki Fried has always been a bit of an enigma in the Sunshine State. She’s the only Democrat elected to statewide office. She’s running for governor against popular Republican incumbent, Gov. Ron DeSantis, if she can make it through a tight Democratic primary. Her office oversees Florida’s Concealed Weapon and Firearm Licensing program, and she’s a former lobbyist for the cannabis industry and a vocal cannabis advocate.

Fried has said publicly she possesses both a Florida CWFL and a state medical marijuana card — Florida is one of 37 states that have legalized medicinal cannabis. This has raised questions about how Fried purchases firearms, because of the cannabis prohibition on the 4473. The form asks would-be gun purchasers if they are an unlawful drug user, and it explains that cannabis is still considered an illegal drug under federal law:

“Warning: The use or possession of marijuana remains unlawful under Federal law regardless of whether it has been legalized or decriminalized for medicinal or recreational purposes in the state where you reside.”

Lying on a 4473 is a federal crime punishable by up to five years in prison.

Now, according to NBC News, Fried is suing the Biden-Harris administration, the ATF and U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland over the cannabis prohibition on the 4473, claiming that it violates the Second Amendment rights of lawful cannabis users. She brought the lawsuit officially as the state’s Agriculture Commissioner, on behalf of three Floridians who she claims were barred from purchasing firearms based upon their use of medical cannabis. The suit has yet to be formally filed — NBC says they were given a draft copy, which Fried’s staff said they hoped to file today, on 4/20.

Continue reading “”

ATF’s War on Privately Made Guns Based on Fake Numbers

Was the ATF’s war on privately manufactured firearms based on bad information?

That is the question that AmmoLand News wants to be answered.

For a bit of background…. the ATF’s attack on unfinished frames and receivers was largely based on the work of former Special Agent in Charge of the Los Angeles Field Division, Carlos A. Canino.

Special Agent Canino told the Bloomberg-funded propaganda website,, the Trace,,, that 41% of all firearms recovered were “ghost guns.”

But was that number truly accurate?

That is what the Second Amendment Foundation’s Investigative Journalism Project wanted to know. So, they reached out to the ATF to get answers. And to their credit. ATF’s Public Affairs Spokesperson, Erik Longnecker, actually answered SAF’s email.

Longnecker stated that he contacted the ATF’s LA Field Division, the source of the suspicious number, but they could not verify Canino’s wild claim.

Keep in mind this now unverifiable data is what kicked off the BIDEN-ATF war against homemade firearms.

This bogus information will shut down American companies and cost 1000s of people their jobs when the new rule surrounding homemade guns is unveiled later this month. More importantly, Americans will be severely hampered in their ability to make their own guns because of bad data.

So, what is the point of pushing flawed data?

Well, that question is easy to answer. The gun grabbers want to confuse & conflate stolen guns with obliterated serial numbers,,, with perfectly legal homemade firearms. That way, they can demonize a historical American tradition and push for it to be banned.

The ATF teaming up and providing unverifiable information to the propaganda arm of the Bloomberg anti-gun machine is just another example of why it is time to defund and disband the out-of-control government agency.

One of the main problems with the data about unserialized firearms is that most statistics do not separate home-built firearms from factory-made guns that had the serial numbers scratched off. Most cops have never even seen a gun made from an 80% kit show up at a crime scene. It is easier for criminals to buy a stolen gun on a street corner than it is to build a pistol from a Polymer80 kit.

It is part of the gun-grabbers playbook.

When they didn’t like bump stocks, they exploited a tragedy to empower the ATF to change the rules to ban the device. These underhanded tactics aren’t new. This is what they do.

It’s also called ‘gas lighting’

Obama: Hey, I warned you that Putin “was always ruthless”

One of the advantages that clairvoyants and eminences grises have is the ability to remind us of the accuracy of their forecasts. Barack Obama took advantage of that Wednesday at the University of Chicago, discussing his prescient alarms over the threat that Vladimir Putin posed to world order. It’s a couple of days old but worth watching to recall his brilliance at the time:

Oh, wait — sorry, that wasn’t the correct clip, was it? My bad. I seem to have had a mix-up in my Official Barack Obama Brilliance Media Catalog. That was from 2012, when Obama lectured Mitt Romney on the dangers of al-Qaeda shortly after bailing out of Iraq and allowing the AQ affiliate there to turn into ISIS and necessitating a return of our military in 2014.

Let me look again. I think this is the one where Obama explains how tough he was on Putin:

Doggone it — I clearly need an intern to go back through my indices and reorganize. I’m pretty sure that this is the one that demonstrates Obama’s firm resolve to deal with Putin and his allies, especially when committing atrocities:

Ahem. Sorry, dear readers, I’m just having one hell of a time finding where Barack Obama ever took Putin seriously as a threat … at least while in office. The New York Post finally helps out with this clip of Obama lecturing Jeffrey Goldberg about his leadership in dealing with the Russian tyrant. Ironically, one of the themes of this event was — wait for it — “disinformation”:

Continue reading “”

I’m sorry, when something is pushed this hard (now a 5th shot?) with so much goobermintbux being made off it, and the CEO of one of the companies making the money makes such statements, it pegs both my Horse and Bull $#!+ meters. Excuse my French.

Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla Describes Vaccine Skeptics as ‘Criminals’

Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla described people who question his company’s experimental vaccine as “criminals” during an interview earlier this week. The Pfizer CEO recently lobbied the FDA to approve a fifth shot in the fall, which is expected to be approved.

An interviewer first drew attention to the “challenges” being faced by big tech companies in combatting “vaccine information” during a sit-down with Bourla. “Correct me if I’m wrong, but I believe I’ve heard you talk about those who would deliberately peddle misinformation as ‘criminals.’ Is that something that you stand by?” Bourla was asked.

“Yes, I do,” replied the Pfizer CEO. “Because they are literally [costing] lives. They know what they are saying is a lie, but they do it despite that.” Bourla then referenced a vaccine injury story and characterized all vaccine injuries as “lies.”………….

My whole utility bill isn’t even close to $500. SloJoe’s senility strikes again

Another Day, Another Clean-up on Aisle 46: Biden Drops a Whopper on Renewable Energy

As sure as the sun rises in the east every day, two things are certain: First, Joe Biden — whose relationship with the truth is arm’s length at best — is going to say something that makes no sense at all, make up something really stupid, exaggerate or minimize the hell out of something, or purposely lie his ass off.

Bank it.

Second, there will be another clean-up in aisle 46. A White House staffer or a senior member of the administration is going to “correct” or explain what Joe meant to say, or didn’t mean to say, while the lapdog media flies wingman.

Bank that, too.

In today’s case in point, as reported by the New York Post, the White House was forced to correct the claim Biden made during his remarks announcing the planned release of 180 million barrels of oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve over the next six months: Americans who use renewable energy to power their homes could save “about $500 a month on average.”

If your home is powered by safer, cheaper, cleaner electricity, like solar or heat pumps, you can save about $500 a month on average.

Just one problem. Not even close to the truth. Biden overstated the estimated savings by $5,500.

Within hours — why hours? — the administration was forced to make a correction: it sent out a transcript of the bumbling Biden’s remarks with the word “month” crossed out and the word “year” added in brackets. According to the Post, the fact sheet sent to reporters prior to the speech contained the correct numbers.

If I were a cynic, I’d suggest Lyin’ Biden does this crap on purpose, knowing full well that more people will see him say “it” than will see a corrected transcript. Nah, that’s giving Corn Pop’s pal far too much credit.

Continue reading “”

SloJoe lies through his teeth and ‘walks back’ what he said previously even as he denies doing so.
Which likely means he got his chocolate ice cream ration threatened for going off script and was told what to say when the question came up.

17 Inconvenient Facts For the Gun-Control Movement

Imagine if you only read The Washington Post and only watched MSNBC and like-minded media outlets. If you did that, you might be deceived into thinking America is a regular Wild West Show of daily mass shootings. You might think guns themselves are evil and that crime is the fault of people who legally own firearms. You might even believe that an American citizen could simply go online and buy a machine gun, as former President Barack Obama (D) once told us. You might also think that suppressors are the tools of assassins, and that semi-automatic rifles with pistol grips are commonly used by criminals. Perhaps you’d even surmise that President Joe Biden (D) was making a good point when he suggested a ban on pistols chambered in 9 mm.

At best, many of these gun-control narratives are simply based on ignorance of firearms. At their worst, a considerable percentage of the mainstream media’s storylines regarding the Second Amendment are outright falsehoods meant to convince people to vote away their freedom.

Every issue of America’s 1st Freedom is filled with sourced facts and honest perspectives designed to arm citizens with the truth, but sometimes these kinds of list articles are needed to refute the shotgun patterns of anti-Second Amendment propaganda coming from the mainstream media and gun-control groups.

Continue reading “”

The lies the media refuses to call out

The media isn’t exactly friendly towards gun ownership. We all know this, so I’m not exactly breaking news here.

However, they will still occasionally take issue with outright lies, even if they ultimately agree with the position.

There are some lies they won’t bother to call out, and this is one of them:

What is known about the links among gun prevalence, gun purchasing trends and gun violence?

We’ve known for a long time that the more access there is to firearms in a society, the more firearm violence there is likely to be. It’s been shown in comparisons of societies and U.S. states with different levels of firearm ownership.

During the pandemic, as purchasing picked up across the country, we learned there was – at least early on – a relationship between an increase in gun purchases above expected levels and a later increase in violence above expected levels.

As 2020 went on, that signal was lost, except for domestic violence, because many other things were contributing to increases in violence.

We’ve known no such thing about access to firearms.

We’ve been told that such a link exists, but when you look at the studies that claim this, you can see serious problems with every single one of them.

For example, when comparing societies or even different states, it’s impossible to truly control for other variables that may somehow impact violent crime. While the prevalence of guns may exist, so do numerous other factors that can easily contribute to the problem.

Issues like jobs, education, population density, and a host of other factors all have been argued to contribute to crime. So why wouldn’t they also be a factor where guns are easily accessible?

That’s a question the media never answers.

Nor do they seem to consider why this knowledge is so unquestionable despite crime skyrocketing someplace like Los Angeles, which doesn’t have easy access to firearms?

It’s because the media simply doesn’t care about the truth.

They’ve pushed the gun control narrative with every fiber of their being. They’ll have a gun-control advocate on the primetime talk shows to calmly discuss their point of view, but gun rights advocates are often paired with another gun-control activist so they can debate the issue, tilting the balance so people are really getting inundated with one side.

Media personalities have to know what they’re doing, just like they have to know that this idea that we know definitively that increased access to guns somehow makes violent crime higher is bogus.

They know and they don’t care.

They like these kinds of lies because they can hold up those flawed studies and say they’re only spitting facts, trusting that most people wouldn’t understand why those studies are complete and utter BS. They’re hoping you’re too stupid to learn how to read a study, learn to find the flaws in a given study, then criticize it for being what it is, an attempt to push a narrative.

Frankly, I’m kind of sick of seeing this nonsense from our media. The thing is, I don’t expect to ever see them do better, either.

Don’t ask me, I’m not a biologist

BLUF:
Jackson’s hearings are over, but the exchange will resonate. The issue of wokeism is becoming a bigger and bigger deal for Republican voters, and the fact that President Joe Biden’s nominee would not answer Blackburn’s straightforward questions will be difficult for Democrats to defend in this year’s midterm elections.

Democrats, Judge Jackson, and the ‘woman’ problem

DEMOCRATS, JUDGE JACKSON, AND THE ‘WOMAN’ PROBLEM. The important thing to remember about the now-infamous “define ‘woman'” exchange between Sen. Marsha Blackburn and Biden Supreme Court nominee Ketanji Brown Jackson is that Blackburn telegraphed her pitch. It wasn’t a gotcha question. It didn’t come out of nowhere. No one should have been surprised.

On the opening day of Jackson’s hearings before the Senate Judiciary Committee, a day mostly devoted to senators giving their opening statements, the Tennessee Republican told Jackson the topics that she, Blackburn, would question Jackson about the next day. “I’ve got a few areas that I’m going to want to delve a little bit further with you,” Blackburn said. “Right now, when I talk to Tennesseans, one of the most important things that they bring up is the issue of parental rights, and wanting to be able to rear their children as they see fit.”

Blackburn said parents are concerned about a “progressive agenda” in public schools. “Educators are allowing biological males to steal opportunities from female athletes in the name of progressivism,” she said. “Some girls have been forced to share locker rooms with biological males. Rather than defending our girls, those in power are teaching them that their voices don’t matter. They’re being treated like second-class citizens, and Americans need a Supreme Court justice who will protect our children and will defend parents’ constitutional right to decide what is best for their own kids.”

That’s what Blackburn said on Day One of the hearings. So it should have been a surprise to no one that she raised the topic when it came her time to question Jackson on Day Two. Blackburn brought up a case called United States v. Virginia, in which the U.S. government sued Virginia over the Virginia Military Institute’s male-only admissions policy. The Supreme Court struck down the policy in a 7-1 vote, and Blackburn quoted from the majority opinion written by liberal icon Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

“Supposed ‘inherent differences’ are no longer accepted as a ground for race or national origin classifications,” Ginsburg wrote. “Physical differences between men and women, however, are enduring: ‘The two sexes are not fungible; a community made up exclusively of one sex is different from a community composed of both.'” Those were Ginsburg’s words that Blackburn quoted. She then asked Jackson, “Do you agree with Justice Ginsburg that there are physical differences between men and women that are enduring?”

Blackburn’s question was fair, on point, and, given her opening remarks the day before, entirely predictable. But Jackson was not prepared.

Continue reading “”

BLUF:
So, to unpack this in retrospect, these former intel heads admitted they did not “have evidence of Russian involvement,” but all were in total agreement because of their suspicions from afar? And like seagulls at the beach, most of the press ate it up………

We heard a lot about collusion during the Trump era, but the real collusion happened between broadcast, print and social media all working together to either squash or dismiss the Hunter Biden laptop story.
Hunter Biden, now one of the most successful first-time artists in the history of art, apparently is the third rail of journalism. Because, despite the New York Times report verifying his laptop and his damning emails, CBS Evening News, ABC’s World News Tonight, NBC’s Nightly News and CNN committed zero seconds to it on the air in the past week, according to the Media Research Center.

Ask yourself this: What if Donald Trump Jr. were under investigation by the IRS and the FBI for the same reasons. Would we also see this kind of muted coverage?   We all know the answer to that question.

Hunter Biden, the protected third rail of journalism

Seventeen months after the New York Post broke its exclusive bombshell regarding emails from Hunter Biden‘s abandoned laptop, the New York Times – widely considered the nation’s “newspaper of record” – finally got around to confirming the story’s authenticity.

But even when the Times finally admitted there were emails showing Joe Biden‘s son involved in seemingly shady deals and influence-peddling of the family name for profit, it still did its best to bury the lede.

“Hunter Biden Paid Tax Bill, but Broad Federal Investigation Continues,” the Times recent headline reads before this sub-headline: “The Justice Department inquiry into the business dealings of the president’s son has remained active, with a grand jury seeking information about payments from around the world.”

The reader needs to go (checks notes) 24 paragraphs down before reading anything about verifying the contents of the laptop.

“People familiar with the investigation said prosecutors had examined emails between Mr. Biden, Mr. Archer and others about Burisma and other foreign business activity. Those emails were obtained by The New York Times from a cache of files that appears to have come from a laptop abandoned by Mr. Biden in a Delaware repair shop. The email and others in the cache were authenticated by people familiar with them and with the investigation,” explains the story with three bylines.

The “revelation” is certainly an about-face from the way the Times and other major news outlets first reported on the Post exclusive that came shortly before the 2020 presidential election. Headlines included:

Continue reading “”

THE RUNAWAY COST OF VIRTUE-SIGNALLING:

As gasoline prices in the US continue to surge to an unprecedented $7 a gallon in some places, President Joe Biden seems more interested in finding someone to blame than mitigating the problem. ‘Make no mistake, inflation is largely the fault of [Russian president Vladimir] Putin’, the president said on Friday at the House Democratic Caucus Issues Conference. The president then cited a ‘fact checker’ in the New York Times and a Washington Post op-ed to counter anyone daring to lay the blame for skyrocketing prices at the feet of the president of the United States.

I guess if you’re going to gaslight working-class Americans who have been struggling with historic levels of inflation for over a year now, it’s good to have legacy media outlets backing you up.

Of course, Biden is right that his decision to ban Russian oil and gas from the US market – a popular move, which 80 per cent of Americans approved of – has exacerbated these trends. But in trying to lay the blame of a year-long trend entirely at Putin’s feet because of a war that started three weeks ago, Biden is erasing the ongoing struggle American families have been facing, enlisting a foreign foe to cover for his domestic failures.

Biden is also attempting to erase the words of…Joe Biden:

The Road to Serfdom—We’re Almost There

We are learning March 18 something that apparently slipped under the radar for a few days.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) “quietly” made some changes to its data tracker website on March 15, removing tens of thousands of deaths from COVID-19, nearly a quarter of which were those for young people under 18.

They tell us this occurred because of a “coding logic error.”

I wonder how many they would have had to remove if they included those who were registered by hospitals—for profit or otherwise—as having died from the virus when they had multiple other of what we have learned to call co-morbidities. (If there’s one thing we can say for the pandemic, it built our vocabularies.)

In other words, they didn’t necessarily die of COVID-19, but the hospitals said they did, a different kind of coding error, I guess.

The number would likely be staggering.

This supposed “coding logic error”—whatever that may be; the CDC doesn’t precisely tell us—could indeed be symbolic of, or even actually encompass, the entire pandemic.

From this we can make the assumption, if we haven’t already, the pandemic was, and is, extraordinarily overblown, an event that figuratively and literally threw us back to the Middle Ages with people locked down, masked, force vaccinated, businesses shut, schools closed, and science turned inside out, leaving the entire globe in chaos.

And yet, to adopt the title of Neil Sheehan’s book about the Vietnam War, the whole thing was “A Bright Shining Lie.”

Of course, people died, but they do for myriad reasons under varying circumstances. That’s been the condition on planet Earth from time immemorial. More died in this instance because simple and immediate treatments were abjured in favor of far more expensive ones dangerous in themselves.

But that is only one of the reasons the pandemic became as pervasive as it did, taking over all our lives. How did it come to pass that what could have been an unpleasant, even severe, but containable health problem evolved into a civilization-destroying pandemic?

Even now, at this early stage, we must ask the age-old question, cui bono—who benefits? The answer lies in a statement with which we have recently become all too familiar:

“You will own nothing, and you will be happy.”

Happy that COVID is over? Oh, no. Not really. They didn’t mean that.

Many now recognize that sentence for what it is—the marching mantra of the “Great Reset.”

Continue reading “”

DON’T BELIEVE THE HYPE. SMART GUN TECH STILL NOT READY FOR PRIMETIME

By Larry Keane

There is a media blitz afoot, pitched by developers of authorized user recognition technology equipped firearms; what the media refers to as so-called, “smart guns.” Several of these companies herald that this is the year when they will finally bring their product to market. It might be a little premature to start popping corks, though.

Despite reports praising companies preparing to launch options for consumers, and polling showing Americans may be open to considering this concept, one critical question remains: Are buyers willing to risk their life on authorized user recognition technology?

So long as the answer from firearm purchasers remains “No,” retailers will not sacrifice shelf space for an unreliable product consumers don’t want to buy.
Prove It
Morning Consult released polling of Americans’ relative “acceptance” of “smart guns” and pitches a rather optimistic outlook.

“After decades of delays and controversy over smart guns, 2022 could be the year that the new weaponry is brought to market.”

The article reports Americans are “interested” in “smart” gun technology and “support the development” of the firearms. Less than half, 43 percent, of those surveyed say they are “very interested” or “somewhat interested” in personalized guns equipped with authorized-user technology, while more than half, 54 percent, aren’t. NSSF’s polling in 2019 showed that just five percent said they were inclined to purchase a so-called “smart gun” with 70 percent saying they still had concerns about reliability.

Firearms equipped with authorized-user technology involves adding electronics that in theory only allows a gun to be fired by a verified, authorized user after unlocked by using either a fingerprint, a pin code or through embedded field communication (RFID) connected to a smartphone or other Bluetooth device. Firearm owners know that guns must work as designed each and every time. There’s no room for failure. Adding in electronics to guns adds points of failure and could have horrific consequences for those who rely on them for self-defense.

LodeStar Works Inc., is one developer working to hit the market this year. President and CEO Gareth Glaser is hopeful. Glaser said, “It’s been around a long time now. Everybody uses one form or another of authentication technology on their smartphone.”

The problem for developers lies in the fact that support for “technology development” does not equate to, “I will buy a smart gun.” Not to mention a firearm is incomparable to an iPhone or Bluetooth speaker. Phones and guns are completely different products and equivocating them is beyond tone-deaf to the firearm market that has seen elevated sales largely driven by concerns for personal safety. If the facial or fingerprint recognition on your iPhone doesn’t recognize you, you’re inconvenienced. If your firearm doesn’t unlock in a time of need, you could be dead.

Failing Track Record

The hype for “The Year of the Smart Gun” began early. Leading up to SHOT Show® 2022 in Las Vegas, these new companies were pitching their products as the “hot” new thing.

“Exclusive: Smart guns finally arriving in U.S., seeking to shake up firearms market,” read a Reuters headline. “‘Smart Gun’ Companies Aim For 2022 Commercial Release,” said another. “Are ‘smart guns’ finally arriving in the U.S.? Here is what we know,” was the headline from The Deseret News. The article began, stating as fact, that “Smart guns…will finally become available to American consumers after decades of questions regarding reliability.”

The Reload was the most measured and accurate. “‘Smart Guns’ Come to the Industry’s Trade Show Amid Hype and Skepticism.”

The history of this technology is not one of success, including hacked and failing test runs. A demonstration by LodeStar prior to SHOT Show® 2022 failed too. A demonstration to show off the technology to shareholders shows an individual loading, chambering and clicking the fingerprint keypad on the side of the 9 mm handgun equipped with the authorized-user technology.

“Alright, ready? Everybody got ears? Alright. Two rounds coming,” he says before firing. Only one round successfully fired while the demonstrator is visibly seen and heard pulling the trigger multiple times for the remaining round before the video abruptly ends. That’s during a controlled test under ideal conditions and in front of the media.

Continue reading “”

Anti-gun groups are being defrauded by people who are in the movement just to line their pockets.

‘Violence In Boston’ Founder Monica Cannon-Grant And Husband Indicted On Federal Fraud Charges

BOSTON (CBS) – A federal grand jury has indicted Monica Cannon-Grant and her husband Clark Grant, the founders of Violence In Boston, on more than a dozen charges for allegedly using the nonprofit for their own benefit.

The U.S. Attorney’s Office for Massachusetts announced on Tuesday that Cannon-Grant, 41, and Grant, 38, both Taunton residents, are facing charges as part of an 18-count indictment.

A grand jury found the couple allegedly led a series of schemes designed to defraud Violence in Boston donors, the Massachusetts Department of Unemployment Assistance, and a mortgage lending business based in Chicago.

Federal prosecutors allege the couple intended to use charitable donations for their personal benefit.

Continue reading “”

When Demand for Racism Exceeds Supply, Fake It! Guess Who Scribbled an ‘N’ Bomb on a High School Wall This Time.

These stories have become as ubiquitous and annoying as that 1-877-Kars 4 Kids jingle.

A “white supremacist” writes something racist on a school wall. The students are SHOCKED! How could a drooling, white nationalist goober infiltrate their scholastic utopia? (Was it the janitor???) The angry students skip class to protest the hatred! White students tearfully rally around their black friends and vow to protect them from the tiki-torch-wielding bushwhackers who are likely patrolling the streets at night, nooses in hand, looking for a minority to lynch.

The school’s principal or dean valiantly vows to oust the seething bigots and restore the racial equilibrium that has so violently been shattered.

Finally, there’s a break in the case! A black kid did it. Again.

There has been yet another Jussie Smollett copycat caper of racial hatred that doesn’t exist, this time at Our Lady of Mercy School for Young Women in Rochester, N.Y.

The following message was scribbled on a restroom wall: This school is filled with a bunch of [plural of N-bomb]. Get out or else!

It was not immediately clear who was expected to “get out or else!”

Form the battle lines! True racism has come to Lady of Mercy! Cue up the virtue signaling! Take to the streets and protest before looking into the situation! We need tears, LOTS of tears!

“I cried a lot,” Janna Smith, a senior at the school, stated. “I felt ‘what am I doing if things like this keep happening every day?’ I talked to my mom and she said this happened for a reason, use this to make change.”

Quick, get a BLM flag from your Aunt Tifa!

Apparently, Lady of Mercy is a hotbed of bigotry!

“I’ve seen my fair share of racist acts, microaggressions, things like that that happen at Mercy,” said former student Morgan Reese. “I have never seen anything to the level of what I saw today and it scares me that my two younger sisters have to go to school somewhere where they don’t necessarily feel welcome.”

Has Morgan learned nothing in the last four years? Fake hate crimes are all the rage. Surely the school staff smells the oldest hoax in history, right?

Wrong! The faculty, not to be out-duped by a bunch of young girls, fell hard for the fake hate bait as well and sent this email to parents of the defiantly not racist students:

Dear Mercy Parents and Guardians,

This morning, just before Advisement, we interrupted classes with an overhead announcement. We informed the students of graffiti that was found in one of the students’ bathrooms. This was our message to the students:

“Please pardon this interruption for this important announcement. This morning, we found graffiti in a high school bathroom that wrote out the n-word and said, ‘Get out or else.’ We are investigating this and will hold those responsible, whether they are Mercy people or not.

Let us be clear, anyone who uses this language and is disparaging to our Mercy girls and Mercy community is not welcome at Mercy. We are unequivocally a school that embraces diversity and inclusion. We are a Catholic school, committed to gospel values of faith, hope, and love. The world is full of hate and violence. We want all of you to reflect on how Mercy can be a place of love and peace. What role do you play in creating such an environment?

Counselors, administrators, and Mrs. Dickey will be available in the Wellness and Counseling Center during Advisement and throughout the day to support anyone who feels unsafe. We will convene assemblies on this topic this week and will be notifying your parents of this. Thank you; that is all.”

Tears, flags, and protests: the mostly white students did their jobs. The faculty vowed swift justice and volunteered the soft shoulders of counselors, administrators, and even Mrs. Dickey, in case frightened students needed reassurance of diversity, equity, and inclusion at Lady of Mercy. Not to mention, there would be programming, meetings, and even more diversity training.

Police response was swift and the investigation went quickly. A black kid did it.

Imagine going to a school so free of racism, you feel the need to invent some. Poor lambs. The struggle is NOT real.

Hey, wait a minute! The school stated the following: “Let us be clear, anyone who uses this language and is disparaging to our Mercy girls and Mercy community is not welcome at Mercy.”Does this mean the hoaxer will get booted out of the school? HAHAHAHAH! I’m guessing not.

If only there was a way for the school administrators to have seen this coming! Wait, I know: fakehatecrimes.org lists over 460 incidents, and a ton of these hate hoaxes took place in schools and colleges.

Below The Radar: Stopping the Fraudulent Sales of Firearms Act

Second Amendment supporters often have to make difficult decisions. Not in the sense of Glock vs. Colt vs. Springfield Armory, but more along the lines of how to address a given piece of anti-Second Amendment legislation.

Take for instance the Stopping the Fraudulent Sales of Firearms Act, known as S 3776 and HR 6997. The legislation purports to prohibit the importation, sale, or manufacture of firearms “by means of false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises.”

On the face of it, this seems unobjectionable. Nobody wants to be sold a firearm on the basis of misrepresentation or a false promise, right? But there are red flags when Second Amendment supporters think things through some more.

For starters, the Senate bill is sponsored by Dianne Feinstein, a long-standing enemy of our Second Amendment rights. So that is a red flag right there. Her co-sponsors include Cory Booker and Richard Blumenthal, also committed opponents of the Second Amendment.

Aside from who sponsors it, there is one other question: Who decides what constitutes “false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises?”

This is a big deal on multiple fronts. Remember how the CDC is getting back into the gun-control business? They worry that it will be used to justify censorship by Silicon Valley is big, but this legislation could add another threat.

Suppose some anti-Second Amendment extremist decides that those who advertise firearms for self-defense are making ““false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises?” That now becomes a new way to hit someone with a five-year jail term and a felony conviction.

This also is a way to “legalize” suits like the one brought against Remington over Sandy Hook. Never mind that the rifle used was stolen (after the shooter killed the rightful owner), the claim from the suit was centered around the advertising. In other words, prove there was “false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises” in the advertising, and all of the sudden, it becomes easier to sue gun manufacturers.

This is a dangerous end run around the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act. Again, we need to remember what Feinstein said so long ago on 60 Minutes. She wants an Australia-style ban, but if she can’t have it, she’ll figure out what she can get legislatively (see the Age 21 Act). Or she’ll enable other attacks outside the legislative process.

What makes it doubly hard is that this bill seems very reasonable, so Second Amendment supporters have to be very careful about the optics while opposing it. After all, nobody wants to support those who sell anything (including firearms) with “false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises.”

Second Amendment supporters need to contact their Representative and Senators and politely urge them to oppose the Stopping the Fraudulent Sales of Firearms Act. Then. They need to work to defeat anti-Second Amendment extremists via the ballot box this November.