Empowering women through self-defense and firearm training
Alpha Female Tactical offers safe learning environment

DEFUNIAK SPRINGS, Fla. (WJHG/WECP) – Firearms are common in the U.S., but not everyone knows how to use them safely. Finding a comfortable learning environment can be particularly challenging for women. Katrina Cain, the owner of Alpha Female Tactical, addresses this need on a private range at Bullets and Bones in DeFuniak Springs.

Cain provides courses and training specifically for women to learn about gun safety and defense. “We wanted to provide a comfortable learning environment for women because it is a male-dominated industry,” said Cain.

The inspiration to start these classes came from Cain’s personal experience. After realizing that few resources and training opportunities were available for women, she decided to take action. “We launched in October of 2020 after I got my concealed carry license and realized I wasn’t shown how to properly handle a firearm—load it, shoot it, or anything. I shot one single bullet, and that qualified me to get my permit at the time. My husband and I felt there needed to be more training for women to become comfortable with firearms.”

Cain is not just advocating for safety on the shooting range. As a deputy at the Walton County Sheriff’s Office, she brings her law enforcement experience to her training. “I see the domestic violence, the crimes, and the issues we have—not only here but worldwide. Things happen. We want every woman to be empowered and confident in her ability to defend herself, her children, or her loved ones.”

Courses at Alpha Female Tactical are designed to give women confidence, regardless of their background. “Especially if they’re coming from a place of trauma or have a history with firearm-related incidents or domestic violence. We want to provide a safe and supportive environment for them to learn how to defend themselves.”

Whether new to firearms or looking to advance their skills, women can find valuable resources at Alpha Female Tactical. “We offer everything from beginner classes for those who have never touched a gun to advanced tactical skills. Our classes include concealed carry, self-defense, hand-to-hand combat, pepper spray, non-lethal, and firearms training.”

Cain emphasized the importance of proper training. “It doesn’t help anyone to carry a firearm without the proper training and understanding of how it functions.”

In a world where personal safety is increasingly important, Cain and her team at Alpha Female Tactical are making strides to ensure women feel empowered and capable of defending themselves.

For more information on Alpha Female Tactical and its courses, visit its website or contact it directly at Bullets and Bones in DeFuniak Springs.

Either they’ve been bought and paid for, or they’re closet moslems.

Tim Walz repeatedly hosted Muslim cleric who celebrated Oct. 7 and shared pro-Hitler website link

Democratic vice presidential nominee Tim Walz, on at least five occasions as governor of Minnesota, hosted a Muslim cleric who celebrated Hamas‘s Oct. 7 attack last year on Israel and promoted a film popular among Neo-Nazis that glorifies Adolf Hitler, the Washington Examiner found.

The imam, Asad Zaman of the Muslim American Society of Minnesota, joined other Muslim leaders in May 2023 for a meeting about mosque security with Walz’s gubernatorial office in Minnesota. Zaman also spoke at a May 2020 event to call for peaceful protests with the governor during the riots in Minnesota sparked after George Floyd’s death. In April 2019, the cleric delivered an invocation before Walz’s state address — just months after Zaman called for an end to a government shutdown at a press conference with Walz in January 2019.

Zaman, moreover, attended a May 2019 event that Walz hosted for Ramadan, social media posts show.

Walz’s ties to Zaman could serve as problematic baggage for the Minnesota governor as he campaigns with Vice President Kamala Harris, the Democratic presidential nominee. News of the ties also comes after a Washington Free Beacon report this week found Walz spoke at a 2019 event with an antisemitic scholar who has defended terrorism against Israel.

Continue reading “”

The Bombing of Nagasaki, August 9, 1945

The Target Committee appointed by President Harry Truman to decide which Japanese cities would receive the Little Boy and Fat Man atomic bombings did not place Nagasaki among their top two choices. Instead they identified Kokura as the second target after Hiroshima. In Kokura, a city of 130,000 people on the island of Kyushu, the Japanese operated one of their biggest ordnance factories, manufacturing among other things chemical weapons. The Americans knew all this, but strangely had not targeted the city yet in their conventional bombing campaign. That was one of the reasons the Target Committee thought it would be a good option after Hiroshima.

The third choice, Nagasaki was a port city located about 100 miles from Kokura. It was larger, with an approximate population of 263,000 people, and some major military facilities, including two Mitsubishi military factories. Nagasaki also was an important port city. Like Kokura and Hiroshima, it had not suffered much thus far from American conventional bombing.

After the bombing of Hiroshima on August 6, workers on Tinian island labored intensely to put the finishing touches on the Fat Man bomb and prepare it for use. This was a plutonium implosion device of far greater complexity than the Little Boy bomb used at Hiroshima, which used uranium-235 in a fairly conventional explosive mechanism. The scientists and ordnance experts at Los Alamos had agonized for years over how to use plutonium in an atomic weapon, and Fat Man was the result.

The decision to use Fat Man just days after the explosion of Little Boy at Hiroshima was based on two calculations: the always-changeable Japanese weather—the appearance of a typhoon or other major weather event could force deployment to be postponed for weeks—and the belief that two bombings following in quick succession would convince the Japanese that the Americans had plenty of atomic devices and were ready to keep using them until Japan finally surrendered. Reports of approaching bad weather convinced the Americans to drop the next bomb on August 9.

Continue reading “”

August 9, 2024

480BC – The Persian emperor Xerxes receives the response by King Leonidas of Sparta to his demand that the Greeks hand over their arms; Μολων λαβέ “Come and take them!”.

Coffee-Dementia Link Continues to Unfurl
— Two studies hint at protective relationships for some coffee and tea drinkers

PHILADELPHIA — Coffee and tea intake were associated with long-term cognitive changes in older adults, two prospective studies presented at the Alzheimer’s Association International Conference opens in a new tab or window (AAIC) suggested.

Among 6,001 Health and Retirement Studyopens in a new tab or window participants in the U.S., drinking two or more cups of coffee a day was associated with a 28% lower risk of dementia over 7 years compared with drinking less than one daily cup (P<0.05), reported Changzheng Yuan, ScD, of the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health in Boston and the Zhejiang University School of Medicine in China, in a poster presented at the meeting.

Moderate tea drinking — up to two cups a day — was also associated with a lower dementia risk compared with no tea consumption (P<0.05).

Continue reading “”

Federal Judge Tosses Majority of Mexico’s Lawsuit Against Gun Makers

For the second time, a federal judge in Massachusetts has dismissed the vast majority of Mexico’s lawsuit against multiple U.S. gun makers that accuses the companies of knowingly and willfully facilitating cartel violence south of the border. U.S. District Judge F. Dennis Saylor first threw out Mexico’s complaint in 2022, opining that the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act precluded Mexico’s lawsuit, but the litigation was reinstated by the First Circuit Court of Appeals a short time later.

Now Saylor has once again dismissed the case against six of the seven gun makers sued by the Mexican government, ruling that the plaintiff has been “unable to muster sufficient proof to establish a sufficient relationship between the claimed injuries and the business transactions of any of the six defendants in Massachusetts.”

The core question for jurisdictional purposes is whether Mexico’s claims against the six moving defendants “arise” from their business transactions in Massachusetts. See Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 223A, § 3(a).

As to those defendants, the connection of this matter to Massachusetts is gossamer-thin at best. The government of Mexico is obviously not a citizen of Massachusetts. None of the six moving defendants is incorporated in Massachusetts, and none has a principal place of business in Massachusetts.

There is no evidence that any of them have a manufacturing facility, or even a sales office, in Massachusetts. None of the alleged injuries occurred in Massachusetts. No Massachusetts citizen is alleged to have suffered any injury. And plaintiff has not identified any specific firearm, or set of firearms, that was sold in Massachusetts and caused injury in Mexico.

Furthermore—and despite the generous use of the word “defendants” throughout—the complaint does not actually allege the existence of a joint enterprise, joint venture, or civil conspiracy among the various defendants. There is no question, therefore, that personal jurisdiction must be proved separately as to each of the six moving defendants.

At its core, plaintiff’s jurisdictional theory is based on statistical probabilities.

Its reasoning may be characterized as follows:
(1) each of the six moving defendants sold firearms to distributors and retailers in each of the 50 states;
(2) each of the six defendants sold some (undetermined) number of firearms to Massachusetts-based distributors or retailers;
(3) some (undetermined) number of the firearms that were sold by each of the six defendants nationwide were illegally trafficked to Mexico;
(4) some (undetermined) number of the firearms that were trafficked to Mexico caused injury there; and therefore
(5) at least some of the firearms sold by each of the six defendants to Massachusetts entities must have caused injuries in Mexico.

Mexico’s legal team, which includes former Brady Campaign attorney Jonathan Lowy (who now heads up an outfit called Global Action on Gun Violence), brought in an economist to try to estimate the number of guns that were originally purchased in Massachusetts but were trafficked to Mexico. The judge, however, wasn’t persuaded by what she found.

To do so, she relied upon two principal datasets: a set that recorded the manufacturer of certain firearms recovered in Mexico between 2010 and 2021, and a “trace and recovery” dataset created by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (“ATF”) concerning firearms recovered in Mexico between 1989 and 2001.

She then used that data to estimate the number of firearms that she believes were likely trafficked into Mexico after a Massachusetts sale over the last ten years. 

As explained below, however, that report is problematic in multiple respects—beginning with the fact that Congress has prohibited the use of the ATF data in any civil action, and thus a critical foundation of her opinion must be disregarded.

Furthermore, her opinion stops short of estimating the number of firearms manufactured by each defendant that actually caused an injury in Mexico—a critical link to connect defendants’ business in Massachusetts to plaintiff’s claims. Under the circumstances, her opinion is not sufficient to prove the necessary jurisdictional nexus.

That’s embarrassing for the gun control activists, or at least it would be if it didn’t give them a new talking point about Congress tying the hands of “gun safety advocates” when it comes to using ATF data. As far as the Mexican government is concerned, however, Saylor’s ruling is a total loss. The only remaining defendants are Smith & Wesson, which was headquartered in Massachusetts during the time period in question, as well as a wholesaler who wasn’t a part of this particular request to dismiss the case.

While Mexico’s lawsuit, which seeks $10 billion in damages from gun makers, isn’t completely dead, Saylor’s ruling is a big step in that direction. The final blow to the litigation could come from the Supreme Court, which is set to consider the gun companies’ appeal of the First Circuit ruling that reinstated the lawsuit in its September 30th conference. As the gun makers argued in their cert petition:

To be clear, Mexico’s complaint does not include any groundbreaking factual revelations, nor does it uncover any secret dealings between the cartels and America’s firearms companies.

Instead, Mexico’s suit challenges how the American firearms industry has openly operated in broad daylight for years. It faults the defendants for producing common firearms like the AR-15; for allowing their products to hold more than ten rounds; for failing to restrict the purchase of firearms by regular citizens; and for refusing to go beyond what American law already requires for the safe production and sale of firearms.

In Mexico’s eyes, continuing these lawful practices amounts to aiding and abetting the cartels. According to Mexico, American firearms companies are liable because they have refused to adopt policies to curtail the supply of firearms smuggled south—such as making only “sporting rifles,” or combining sales to those with a “legitimate need” for a firearm (as defined by Mexico).

This lawsuit is basically an attempt to allow the Mexican government to impose its own preferred gun control policies on the U.S. firearms industry by blaming gun makers for cartel violence.

SCOTUS should grant cert and dismiss the case altogether, but we won’t know if the Court will grant cert for another few months.

Disabled Vietnam veteran shoots, kills home intruder

ALBUQUERQUE, N.M. – It’s the makings of a nightmare, but when a local veteran woke up recently, it was his terrifying reality.

Danny Ricketts says a person with a knife tried to get into his window, but he was also armed. Ricketts says he grabbed the gun from his nightstand, shot the intruder, and then called police.

When police got to his apartment near San Mateo and Zuni early Monday morning, they found the intruder down the street.

Ricketts wishes it was all a bad dream.

“I looked at the window and I didn’t see any blood and I didn’t see any bodies. So I thought I missed initially and I was kind of grateful at that,” said Ricketts.

He woke up early in the morning to his bedroom window slamming.

“I could see it was a knife sticking under the window, sort of wiggling back and forth, and the window was coming up,” Ricketts said.

With his PTSD, the Vietnam War veteran keeps a weapon close by.

“I keep a pistol on my nightstand under a hat. I reached and got it and I said, I still don’t know quite what I said, ‘What the f**k you doing, get the h*ll away from here’ something like that,” said Ricketts.

Then, he fired one round and the person took off.

“This was folded in such a way the bullet went through three layers at first,” said Ricketts.

Police haven’t released the suspect’s name, but surveillance video from a neighbor shows him running by after the shooting.

Ricketts called 911, but the intruder later died in the street.

“When I was in the police car I could see in the distance the body, and I asked the detective if it was the body of the person I shot, and they said ‘Yeah’ and I felt kind of bad,” Ricketts said.

Police say, as of now, Ricketts is justified in the shooting.

“Sounds like this gentleman the other day he called police, he secured his firearm I believe, he told them exactly what happened,” APD Spokesperson Gilbert Gallegos.

KOB 4 saw another example of this in late March when police say Joseph Rivera broke into Anissa Tinnin’s Albuquerque home. She was there with her 4-year-old granddaughter. She called the police but took matters into her own hands.

Gallegos says while they can’t tell you what to do if you’re in a similar situation, they can tell you what not to do.

“We’ve seen instances too where people may have felt a fear but, and then they go chasing the individual, and continue to shoot at them. That’s where it really gets pretty questionable as to whether you’re defending your life at that point,” said Gallegos. “You can protect yourself if there’s a fear of harm or protect somebody else. You can’t protect your property by using deadly force.”

Gallegos says APD is currently investigating five other homicides in the city that are looking justified as well.

The district attorney’s office always has the final say though if charges will be filed.

Remember ‘Marooned‘ ?

Boeing Starliner astronauts might not return to Earth until next year

Aug. 7 (UPI) — Boeing Starliner astronauts, stranded at the International Space Station after a weeklong test flight turned into a two-month stay due to thruster problems, may be forced to fly home on SpaceX in 2025, NASA has admitted.

NASA updated reporters Wednesday at a news conference, which Boeing did not attend, on the timeline for crew members Butch Wilmore and Suni Williams. The astronauts have been in space for 63 days with no return date in sight.

Wilmore and Williams arrived at the ISS on June 6 on what was the first crewed test flight of Boeing’s Starliner capsule. The mission was supposed to be the final step before NASA certified Boeing to fly crews to and from the space station, before faulty thrusters stranded the pair in June.

“We’re in kind of a new situation here, in that we’ve got multiple options,” Ken Bowersox, associate administrator for NASA’s space operations mission directorate and a former agency astronaut, told reporters Wednesday.

“I would say that our chances of an uncrewed Starliner return have increased a little bit on where things have gone over the last week or two,” Bowersox said. “But again, new data coming in, new analysis, different discussion — we could find ourselves shift in another way.”

“We don’t just have to bring a crew back on Starliner, for example. We could bring them back on another vehicle,” Bowersox added. The space agency is expected to make a final decision as early as next week.

“Our prime option is to return Butch and Suni on Starliner,” Steve Stich, manager of NASA’s Commercial Crew Program said. “However, we have done the requisite planning to make sure we have other options open, and so we have been working with SpaceX to ensure that they’re ready to respond.”

NASA said it is now considering sending only two astronauts, instead of four, on September’s SpaceX Crew-9 mission to leave space for Wilmore and Williams to return to Earth on SpaceX Dragon in February 2025. SpaceX has been transporting astronauts to and from the ISS since 2020.

“We’re not ready to share specific crew names for the contingency plan,” ISS program manager Dana Weigel told Space.com. “We’ll go look at future manifests and just see what makes sense for the overall crew compliments going forward.”

On Tuesday, NASA announced SpaceX would delay the Aug. 18 launch of its Crew-9 mission, more than a month, to Sept. 24. The delay will give NASA and Boeing more time to repair Starliner’s five of 28 reaction control thrusters which misfired during docking at ISS on June 6.

While NASA said Starliner can safely undock from ISS, there is still uncertainty over how its thrusters would operate during the ride back to Earth.

“Starliner ground teams are taking their time to analyze the results of recent docked hot-fire testing, finalize flight rationale for the spacecraft’s integrated propulsion system and confirm system reliability ahead of Starliner’s return to Earth,” NASA said in a statement Tuesday.

Stich told reporters Wednesday that tests on the ground revealed that a small Teflon seal swells under high temperatures, which could be to blame for Starliner’s thruster problems.

“That gives us a lot of confidence in the thrusters, but we can’t totally prove with certainty what we’re seeing on orbit is exactly what’s been replicated on the ground,” Stich added.

Despite not attending Wednesday’s briefing, Boeing has maintained its confidence “in Starliner’s return with crew.”

“We still believe in Starliner’s capability and its flight rationale,” the company said in a statement Wednesday, as it also admitted the possibility that a different vehicle could bring the astronauts home.

“If NASA decides to change the mission, we will take the actions necessary to configure Starliner for an uncrewed return.”

SAF Vows to Take Maryland’s Semi-Auto Ban to the Supreme Court

The Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) has announced they will seek Supreme Court review in Bianchi v. Wilkinson, SAF’s challenge to Maryland’s assault weapons ban, after the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the law.

“Today’s decision from the 4th Circuit is unsurprising given their prior decision in Kolbe,” said SAF Executive Director Adam Kraut.
“We believe, much like in Kolbe, the court’s analysis is flawed and that the challenged law is unconstitutional. We will be filing a petition for certiorari at the Supreme Court, as this case presents an excellent vehicle for the Court to settle this debate once and for all.”

In the 65-page opinion, judges for the majority wrote: “The assault weapons at issue fall outside the ambit of protection offered by the Second Amendment because, in essence, they are military-style weapons designed for sustained combat operations that are ill-suited and disproportionate to the need for self-defense.”

Chief Judge Diaz drafted a concurring opinion, with five other judges joining. Judge Richardson drafted a dissenting opinion, with four other judges joining stating: “The Second Amendment is not a second-class right subject to the whimsical discretion of federal judges. Its mandate is absolute and, applied here, unequivocal…In holding otherwise, the majority grants states historically unprecedented leeway to trammel the constitutional liberties of their citizens.”

Joining SAF in the case are the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, Field Traders, LLC., the Firearms Policy Coalition, and three private citizens, David Snope, Micah Schaefer and Dominic Bianchi, for whom the case is named. “The court relied heavily on the distinction between ‘military style’ arms and those appropriate for self-defense use,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. “This distinction runs completely contrary to the mandates of Heller and Bruen, and now sets the stage for another petition for SCOTUS review of the case.”