Sorry. You’ll have to excuse the lack of posts today. Pops is in the Hospital with who knows what going on for certain. Tomorrow being his 98th birthday may have something to do with it, but who knows for certain.

MILES FORTIS REDDET (Milesfortis will return)

BLUF
Back in the United States, American Farm Bureau Federation Chief Economist Dr. Roger Cryan estimates that a Sri Lankan-style move would cut domestic grain crop production by about 50 percent within two to four years of implementation, leading to massive price hikes and acute shortages of basic commodities……

Should California – or the nation –  take the path of most destruction and implement restrictions or even fertilizer bans, the social and economic impacts would be catastrophic and could hearken back to the conditions during the Great Depression of the 1930s – except this time there wouldn’t be any bread lines because there wouldn’t be any bread.

From Sri Lanka to Salinas

Ah, Sri Lanka.

In 2020: a beautiful, agriculturally self-sufficient island nation full of tea and tourists and holder of the highest “Environmental, Social, and Governance” (ESG) investor rating in the world.

And then, as part of the larger “green” effort spurred on by international Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs), woke capital, and, seemingly, a desire to sit at the big table at the various and sundry global initiative conferences, President Gotabaya Rajapaksa banned the use of manufactured fertilizer in order to create a more climate-friendly sustainable farming sector.  In April, 2021, the country went all-organic overnight.

What could possibly go wrong?

By the end of last year, Sri Lanka became unable to feed itself, prices for food (especially rice) and fuel and other daily basics skyrocketed, the tea crop – and the hundreds of millions it earns in international trade – was decimated.  The nation defaulted on its foreign debt, had rolling power blackouts, the tourists are staying away in droves, and Sri Lanka,  already wracked by corruption and COVID, spiraled out of control.

The public’s response?  Even though the fertilizer ban had already been partially rolled back, just last month Rajapaksa’s presidential palace was stormed by thousands of everyday Sri Lankans and he had to flee the country – last word was that he was holed up in Singapore.

(Side note to Nancy Pelosi and Liz Cheney – this is what an actual insurrection looks like:)

It seems Kermit was right – it ain’t easy being green.

But, considering the state’s claim to be the global leader in fighting climate change, can California – with its extremely powerful “climate lobby” that was able to ban the future sales of new gas-powered vehicles, a concept that would have been unthinkable a very few years ago –  be far behind?

California’s commitment to confronting climate change cannot be underestimated., as proven by the 86 different climate partnerships, or “bilateral and multilateral agreements with national and subnational leaders” the state as entered into.  (The list can be found here:  https://www.energy.ca.gov/about/campaigns/international-cooperation/climate-change-partnerships .)

Additionally, a quick tour of state department websites finds numerous examples of “green,” “sustainability,” and “climate” pages and plans; even the state’s prisons get into the act with its climate change plan: https://www.cdcr.ca.gov/green/cdcr-green/climate-change-adaptation/ .

It should be stressed that California is not above shooting itself in the foot when it comes to climate issues. Thursday, the legislature passed a bill mandating 3,200-foot “buffer zones” around all – new and existing – oil and gas wells, a move which would practically eliminate the industry – and its 13,000 jobs – in the state.

Continue reading “”

Biden’s soulless screed a smokescreen for what really ails the nation.

Last night[Thursday], the same president who almost exactly a year ago disgracefully abandoned 14,000 Americans and tens of thousands of our allies to the Taliban decided to lecture the US on “the continued battle for the soul of the nation.”

Let that sink in for a moment or two.

In that speech, Joe Biden tried to take the high ground for democracy against authoritarianism — just a week or so after eviscerating the constitutional check on the presidency by claiming the executive branch has the authority to print and appropriate between $600 billion and one trillion dollars to transfer debt from Biden’s base voters to the rest of the taxpayers.

Let that one sink in for another moment or two. Especially after Biden described “the work of my presidency” as returning the US to the founding documents of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence.

Joe Biden isn’t the solution for what ails the American soul. He’s not even really the main disease of what ails the American soul. Joe Biden is a demagogue who floated to the top of a morass that has been building for decades, and who only sees the problem to the extent that it benefits or harms Biden’s interests.

To wit — here’s how Biden framed the problem in this prime-time speech from Independence Hall [corrected]:

And here, in my view, is what is true: MAGA Republicans do not respect the Constitution. They do not believe in the rule of law. They do not recognize the will of the people.

They refuse to accept the results of a free election. And they’re working right now, as I speak, in state after state to give power to decide elections in America to partisans and cronies, empowering election deniers to undermine democracy itself.

Ahem. One can certainly believe this to be true of “MAGA Republicans.” What about the Democrats and progressives that rioted in the streets of Washington on January 20, 2017, in an attempt to disrupt the inauguration of Trump? How about the way that Democrats — even mainstream Democrats — labeled themselves “The Resistance” almost immediately after the 2016 election, which preceded that Inauguration Day riot and helped fuel it? And for that matter, what about the pointless two years of “Russian collusion” allegations that turned out to be based on Hillary Clinton’s oppo research?

Continue reading “”

New York prosecutor promises discretion in enforcing new “gun-free zones”

While New York’s new carry restrictions are now in effect, it looks like enforcement of the laws is going to vary wildly across the state. Gov. Kathy Hochul, for example, has proclaimed that anyone not issued a permit by September 1st is going to have to apply under the new laws, while at least one county clerk (and I suspect there are many more) say they’ll continue to process all permits received before the 1st under the old rules (minus the “good cause” requirement struck down by the Supreme Court a couple of months ago).

The same confusion reigns when it comes to the state’s nearly endless number of new “gun-free zones” mandated by recently enacted gun control measures. Under the statute signed by Hochul it’s a felony offense to carry in a “sensitive place”, and even accidentally setting foot inside a prohibited place while carrying could result in a four-year prison sentence.

New York City Mayor Eric Adams has already promised that the new laws will be strictly enforced, but the prosecutor and police chief in Syracuse say they have no plans on putting concealed carry holders behind bars, at least if their only “crime” is carrying where it’s not allowed.

Violators will have their weapons confiscated while prosecutors investigate any other criminal activity, District Attorney William Fitzpatrick said. Their cases will be referred to the judge who granted them concealed-carry licenses in the first place, possibly leading to the revocation of their carry privileges.

… The DA noted there’s bound to be widespread confusion over which places are off-limits. Technically, walking on the sidewalk in front of a school with a gun is considered a felony. So is walking through downtown Syracuse’s Clinton Square or Columbus Circle, both public parks where guns are always banned.

In addition, a Syracuse-based federal judge on Wednesday wrote an opinion suggesting that the state’s new law — including the long list of prohibited locations — was unconstitutional under the Second Amendment. That ruling, however, was not binding and so the law is in effect as written.

Still, Fitzpatrick suggested, that ruling had an impact on how law enforcement will handle the new restrictions.

Law enforcement won’t be proactively enforcing the new law by trying to catch legal gun-owners in prohibited locations, Syracuse Police Chief Joseph Cecile said.

“It will be complaint-driven,” the chief said.

The idea here seems to be that if the concealed carry holder in question has a history of wandering into “gun-free zones” while carrying, or there are other criminal offenses that took place at the same time, charges might be warranted. An inadvertent incident or innocent mistake, on the other hand, wouldn’t be punished by prison time, though it could still lead to someone losing their ability to lawfully carry altogether. It’s unclear from the news story just how quickly someone will have their firearm returned to them once that investigation into other criminal activity has concluded, however, and that’s a big concern. I’m glad that Fitzpatrick says he won’t be charging accidental violations of the law, but if there are no charges then there should be no gun confiscation either.

The U.S. District Court judge in Syracuse who ended up allowing the new laws to take effect because he determined that the plaintiffs did not have standing to sue acknowledged in his ruling that, if the plaintiffs did have standing, he would have ruled in their favor on many of the challenges they brought forward… including the “sensitive places” language.

Given that the judge maintains that the Supreme Court has “effectively barred” any location beyond schools, government buildings, legislative assemblies, and courthouses from being labeled a “sensitive place” off-limits to legal carry; it would have been nice if Fitzpatrick and Cecile had announced that those would be only locations where they would enforce the “sensitive places” statute, but we may see other District Attorneys around the state come to that conclusion on their own. New York’s latest gun control laws have not only created chaos and confusion, but I suspect some civic (and civil) disobedience as well.

Leaked memo states that in NYC anyone carrying a firearm, legally, is now presumed guilty until proven innocent

NEW YORK CITY, NY – Leaked documents from the New York Police Department (NYPD) indicate that anyone carrying a firearm is now presumed guilty until proven innocent.

The new guidance highlighted in the leaked memo proves that almost anywhere in New York City — public or private — is a gun-free zone.

It basically states that unless someone is a police officer or a former cop, no one can bring their legal firearm out of their house for protection, like on public transportation.

The memo, titled New York State Restrictions on Carrying Concealed Firearms, states very clearly in its “key points”:

“Anyone carrying a firearm is presumed to be carrying unlawfully until proven otherwise.”

The other “key points” are listed below:

Possessing a firearm in New York City requires a special license issued by the New York City Police Department;

Carrying a firearm in New York City requires a concealed carry license issued by the New York City Police Department;

License holders are required to carry their license when carrying a firearm and must provide their license to law enforcement upon request; and

Recent changes in law do not impact the way officers conduct investigative encounters. Officers may stop an individual when the officer has reasonable suspicion that an individual is carrying a firearm (Level 3) and may frisk that individual since the officer has reasonable suspicion that the individual is armed and dangerous.

The memo also describes what are to be considered “sensitive” and “restricted” locations throughout the city. According to the memo:

“Even though a person may be licensed to carry a firearm, they may not bring a firearm to a ‘sensitive’ location … All private property (residential and commercial) that is not on the sensitive location list is considered ‘restricted.’ People who are licensed to possess firearms may not bring firearms to a restricted location unless they get permission from the property owner.”

Expect Silicon Valley Censorship To Ramp Up with ‘Civic Integrity Policy’

United States – -(AmmoLand.com)- With the news that Twitter is bringing back its “Civic Integrity Policy,” Second Amendment supporters need to be ready for censorship to ramp up. This is something that has been building up for a long time.

Of course, this is just one possible avenue of attack. There have been other revelations about censorship – at least on Twitter’s part – that Second Amendment supporters should take note of. If anything, these revelations, at a bare minimum, will need some serious oversight by Congress, and some serious corrective actions will be needed.

Those actions will require substantial Congressional majorities and, alongside efforts to halt financial de-platforming, are probably the most important battles for Second Amendment supporters to win – more important than constitutional carry or other legislative fights. Don’t take my word for it – look at what Google did with regard to crisis pregnancy centers after a push from Letitia James.

Yes, the same Letitia James who sought the NRA’s dissolution. Regardless of how you feel about abortion, this is a bad sign.

Silicon Valley’s actions will force many Second Amendment activists to confront a very hard question:

How do we reconcile using the power of government when we ourselves have expressed suspicion – if not opposition – to increasing the size and scope of government? Because at this point, it looks increasingly likely that we will need to use government power to protect our First Amendment rights on at least a short-term basis, and it probably may be for the long haul.

Some of it will be using Congress to check the executive branch – in essence, invoking Constitutional powers – to rein in efforts by various agencies to get social media companies to censor based on such pretexts as “medical misinformation” or even just “misinformation” in general. That is not going to be the big issue.

The big issue will be addressing the fact that these companies also act independently, and their censorship decisions didn’t just come from the government. How much was government influence? That is currently unknown, but perhaps the litigation by the attorneys general of Missouri and Louisiana will change that.

As private entities, they have the same freedom to associate – or not associate – as we do, to a large extent. How much of the censorship is their own doing? We don’t really know. Could the Elon Musk saga change things on Twitter? That is an unknown, as well.

That will require answers. Some will come from the litigation, some from the Congressional hearings. Some, we may not know for sure. How much will the litigation reduce the censorship (we shouldn’t presume it will end all of it)? Again, we don’t – in fact, we can’t – know.

One thing is certain: Second Amendment supporters will have a lot of work to do to defeat anti-Second Amendment extremists via the ballot box at the federal, state, and local levels this coming November and the November two years from now. Get out the vote!

37 Months Straight: America Is Buying 1 Million Guns A Month

While they might not be the super records of years past, guns and overall firearms sales are still going through the roof.

According to newly released FBI data, background checks exceeded 2.51 million in August, which was consistent with the previous two summers. However, Small Arms Analytics & Forecasting (SAAF) estimates August 2022 U.S. firearms unit sales were at about 1.4 million units, a year-over-year decrease of 3.8 percent relative to August 2021. The decrease affected the handgun segment (−2.7 percent) significantly less than it did the long-gun segment (−7.2 percent). SAAF’s firearms unit sales estimates and forecasts are based on raw data taken from the FBI’s National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS), adjusted for checks unlikely to be related to end-user firearms sales.

“Normally August sales are ‘bumped up’ relative to July sales by about 10% to 30%, but this has not been the case for the past three years, possibly reflecting different purchasing patterns since covid-19 arrived in the U.S,” said SAAF Chief Economist Jurgen Brauer.

Even with the decline, however, August 2022 was the 37th consecutive month topping more than one million civilian firearms sold – and by a considerable margin.

Strong Second Amendment Support: A Reason for Guns Sales Boom?

Strong firearms sales suggest continued support for the Second Amendment, even as there have been – or more likely in reaction to the – continued calls from lawmakers for additional gun control measures. Earlier this summer, the United States House and Senate passed a bipartisan gun-reform bill, which President Joe Biden subsequently signed into law. That $13 billion measure had been designed to toughen background checks for the youngest gun buyers, keep firearms from more domestic violence offenders, and also to help states put in place red flag laws that make it easier for authorities to take weapons from people who are thought to be “dangerous.”

Opponents of the law have suggested it unfairly punishes law-abiding citizens while doing little to keep guns out of the hands of criminals.

“August’s figures show there is a clear and steady desire by the American public for lawful firearm ownership,” the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF), the firearms industry trade association said via a statement, reported by Newsmax.

“Consistently throughout the year, background check figures for firearm sales at retail have put 2022 on pace to be the third strongest year, behind only the outsized years witnessed in 2020 and 2021. August’s figures of 1,286,816 background checks was slightly ahead of July’s that came in at 1,233,115,” the NSSF statement continued.

“This also marks 37 months straight of background checks exceeding 1 million. Americans are choosing their gun rights by the millions each month while gun control politicians talk only of efforts to deprive them of their Constitutional rights. They are voting with their wallets. Politicians would be wise to heed to the will of Americans lawfully exercising their Constitutional rights and instead focus their efforts on locking up criminals that misuse firearms,” the NSSF said.

Guns Sales Keep Booming, Gun Companies on the Move

This year has also seen many firearms manufacturers pulling up stakes to move out of the “blue states” – especially those with strict gun control measures such as Massachusetts and Connecticut – to more pro-friendly “red states.”

Earlier this year, Smith & Wesson has moved its headquarters from Springfield, Mass. – once the center of “Gun Valley” since the American Revolution – to Tennessee, while at least 20 other firearms, ammunition, and gun accessory companies have also made similar moves. Beretta USA has actually led the efforts, as it moved its production to Tennessee in 2014, relocating some 200 jobs from Maryland.

In addition, just last year, Oklahoma lawmakers even launched a study to determine how to attract gun makers best, while governors from six states attended this year’s SHOT Show (Shooting, Hunting, Outdoor Trade Show), the industry’s annual trade event held each January in Las Vegas. The six governors made the trek to promote their states to the industry.

“These states are openly attracting the industry. Some of them have been very aggressive,” Mark Oliva, spokesman for the NSSF, told The Washington Post.

Though President Biden and some lawmakers may still believe that Americans are clamoring for “gun control,” the sales data tells another tale.

In religion and politics people’s beliefs and convictions are in almost every case gotten at second-hand, and without examination, from authorities who have not themselves examined the questions at issue but have taken them at second-hand from other non-examiners, whose opinions about them were not worth a brass farthing.–Mark Twain

FPC Secures Partial Preliminary Injunction in Lawsuit Challenging ATF “Frame or Receiver” Rule

FORT WORTH, TX (September 2, 2022) – Today, Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) secured a partial victory in VanDerStok v. Garland, in the form of a partial and limited injunction in its lawsuit challenging the ATF’s rule that would create new terms and enact a slew of regulations for the agency to enforce. The opinion can be viewed at FPCLegal.org.

“The Final Rule’s redefinition of ‘frame or receiver’ conflicts with the statute’s plain meaning,” wrote Federal District Court Judge Reed O’Connor in his Order. “The definition of ‘firearm’ in the Gun Control Act does not cover all firearm parts. It covers specifically ‘the frame or receiver of any such weapon’ that Congress defined as a firearm. 18 U.S.C. § 921(a)(3)(B). That which may become a receiver is not itself a receiver.”

Specifically, today’s ruling:

  • Finds that the plaintiffs are likely to succeed in their challenge to the ATF’s “Frame or Receiver” Rule;
  • Grants a preliminary injunction as to plaintiff Tactical Machining, but does not grant a preliminary injunction in regards to Tactical Machining’s customers, other manufacturers or retailers, or any other individuals interested in buying the affected products; and,
  • Gives the plaintiffs an opportunity “to submit further briefing and evidence on the scope of the injunction” by September 8th, with a response from the government due 7 days later.

“This is an important initial victory, but we have much more work to do in this case,” said FPC’s Senior Attorney for Constitutional Litigation Cody J. Wisniewski. “We look forward to presenting the Court with additional arguments and moving this case towards a full decision recognizing the deep flaws with the Agencies’ Rule as soon as possible.”

FBI: No end to soaring gun sales

President Joe Biden’s anti-gun crusade, echoed in major cities where liberal majors are blaming guns for the rise in young gangbanger killings, is having no impact on the uninterrupted three-year surge in firearm sales.

The FBI reported this week that sales have been over 1 million for 37 straight months, historic numbers.

Gun background checks for August were the third-highest on record for the month, 2,518,137. When adjusted for sales versus security and other checks, sales were likely 1,286,816, according to the National Shooting Sports Foundation, an industry trade group.

“August’s figures show there is a clear and steady desire by the American public for lawful firearm ownership,” said the group.

“Consistently throughout the year, background check figures for firearm sales at retail have put 2022 on pace to be the third strongest year, behind only the outsized years witnessed in 2020 and 2021. August’s figures of 1,286,816 background checks was slightly ahead of July’s that came in at 1,233,115. This also marks 37 months straight of background checks exceeding 1 million. Americans are choosing their gun rights by the millions each month while gun control politicians talk only of efforts to deprive them of their Constitutional rights. They are voting with their wallets. Politicians would be wise to heed to the will of Americans lawfully exercising their Constitutional rights and instead focus their efforts on locking up criminals that misuse firearms,” the NSSF said.