CDC Data Shows Constitutional Carry States Have Fewer Total and Gun-Related Homicides

In September of 2021, Texas became the twenty-first state to allow some form of permitless or “constitutional” carry. That means in Texas, if you are at least 21 years old and you are not prohibited from lawfully possessing a firearm under Texas or federal law, you can carry a handgun without a permit either openly or concealed.

Since Texas enacted its law, four other states have done the same, bringing the total of constitutional carry states to 25.

While there are some differences in how these states have implemented constitutional carry (e.g., a couple of them require you to be a resident of the State to carry, while others set an age minimum, etc.) it’s fair to say that overall, half of all states now allow citizens who can legally possess a firearm to carry at least a handgun without a permit. This national wave has been a tremendous victory for gun rights and continues the trend of expanding the right to carry.

Of course, not everyone was pleased that Texas chose to respect the right to keep and bear arms. The news of constitutional carry in the Lone Star State was met with the all of the usual sky-is-falling warnings of doom from all of the usual anti-gun suspects.

For example, Ari Frielich, state policy director for the Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, said that permitless carry could drastically endanger Texas residents and even law enforcement officials.

The research is clear that flooding public spaces with more hidden loaded guns in more hands makes them less safe. It turns more arguments, road rage incidents, and fistfights into shootings, more injuries into burials, and it can create a civilian arms race in communities most impacted by violence.

Freilich’s talking points are hardly original. Every time a state adopts constitutional carry, anti-gun groups, as well as much of the media (but I repeat myself), warn that every minor dispute will turn into a bloody shootout and the state’s homicide rate will therefore skyrocket. They also claim that the “research is clear” in favor of their arguments.

But is it really?

With so many states now having enacted some form of constitutional carry, this is no longer a hypothetical question. While some states have only recently enacted these laws, most others have had them for several years.

As of 2020, the most recent year for which detailed CDC data is available, 16 states had already embraced constitutional carry. By looking at the homicide rates in those states as well as their gun homicide rates in particular, we can get an idea of whether constitutional carry states actually are more dangerous than the nation as a whole.

If the anti-gun argument is correct, constitutional carry states should be far more violent, especially in the crime-surge year of 2020.

Fortunately, the CDC provides very detailed statistics on public health, including data on underlying causes of death, so we can check. The statistics are reported online through the CDC’s WONDER tool, an acronym which stands for “Wide-ranging ONline Data for Epidemiologic Research.” All of the data I am about to discuss can be found through that tool.

The overall US homicide rate was 7.5 per 100,000 in 2020, and the gun-related homicide rate was 5.9 per 100,000. Here is the data for each of the 16 states that were constitutional carry in 2020:

Continue reading “”

Appears more people are seeing the light.

IWF hits on one big problem with gun control

With a name like Independent Women’s Forum, one might expect it to not be all that independent and to actually parrot a lot of Democratic talking points. We know that most women tend to vote Democrat, though far from all.

Yet the organization actually takes the term “independent” seriously. I’ve seen far too many good things to come out of the group to think otherwise.

Today was no exception. They do a “two truths and a lie” thing and today, they talked about gun control.

We can all agree that we want to see fewer mass killings and less gun violence. The question is whether stricter gun-control laws will improve the situation or make it worse. Because of the politicized nature of gun policy, it’s essential to get past the rhetoric and sift through the facts to answer that question.  How much do you know about gun control? Can you identify which of the following is the lie?

A. New gun control legislation will reduce crime.

B. More guns in more public places leads to less gun violence.

C. There are far more defensive gun uses than murders in a given year.

Now, your average daily Bearing Arms ready is going to know which are which. However, not everyone does, which is why a format like this works.

So just what did IWF say?

A. FALSE. In short, gun control legislation does not focus on the root causes of human behavior, including violence, crime, and untreated mental illness. At the heart of gun control initiatives is the hope that criminals will obey the law, but, in fact, they rarely do.

Congress, as well as state legislatures, would have us think that just one more gun-control law will magically reduce crime. But they have been saying that for decades, with no evidence of improvement. Then they offer the same legislation again.

Instead of reducing crime, new gun control legislation would:

  • Not change criminal behavior. It only creates a false sense of security.
  • Make law-abiding citizens less safe, especially victims of domestic violence.
  • Turn law-abiding citizens into instant felons for ordinary, safe behavior.
  • Be cost prohibitive for the poorest families to protect themselves.

Now, the other two are obviously true, so I won’t touch on them. Instead, I want to comment on this, which is important.

While “shall not be infringed” will win applause in the Second Amendment community, mostly because it’s accurate, it’s not a winning message with those on the fence in any way. Talking about our rights may be completely accurate, but its reach is limited.

This approach, however, is one that can work.

It also has the benefit of being accurate.

Violent crime is violent crime. No one feels better that they were robbed with a knife as opposed to a gun. No one mourns the loss of a loved one less because they were beaten to death rather than shot. All violent crimes should be looked at similarly because, at the end of the day, it’s the people who are violent.

Focusing on that, on the behavior and how to prevent it, is something that can ultimately convince people that gun control isn’t the answer.

It’s easy to get ‘consensus’ when you persecute and prosecute anyone who disagrees.

Image

I guess Ukraine & Russia have been too much in the news & Kim feels he needs to act up like spoiled children do.

North Korea fires ballistic missile over Japan.

North Korea has fired a ballistic missile over Japan, in what appears to be a deliberate escalation to get the attention of Tokyo and Washington.

The missile travelled 4,500km (2,800 miles) before falling into the Pacific Ocean – far enough to hit the US island of Guam if it took another trajectory.

It is the first North Korean missile launch over Japan since 2017.

Japan issued an alert to some citizens to take cover. The US and South Korea responded with joint bombing drills.

The South Korean joint chiefs of staff said four aircraft from each side had taken part in the exercise, firing at a mock target on an uninhabited island in the Yellow Sea. A statement said the drill demonstrated Seoul and Washington’s will to respond sternly to the threat from Pyongyang.

The UN prohibits North Korea from testing ballistic and nuclear weapons. Flying missiles towards or over other countries without any pre-warning or consultation also contravenes international norms.

Most countries avoid doing it completely as it can easily be mistaken for an attack. While it is not as big as a nuclear test – which could be next – it can be considered hugely provocative.

People in the north of Japan, including Hokkaido island and Aomori city, reportedly woke up to the noise of sirens and text alerts which read: “North Korea appears to have launched a missile. Please evacuate into buildings or underground.”

As the missile flew overhead, they were warned to look out for falling debris. Many appeared to remain calm according to reports, with one video showing Tokyo commuters walking calmly as loudspeakers blared out warnings.

But others were more shaken. “If a missile hit, I was worried it would be a big problem not only here but also nationwide,” Aomori resident Kazuko Ebina told the Asahi Shimbun newspaper.

Officials later said the intermediate-range ballistic missile fell into the Pacific Ocean far from Japan, and there were no reported injuries.

It had covered the longest distance ever travelled by a North Korean missile, and reached a height of around 1,000km – higher than the International Space Station.

Japan’s Prime Minister Fumio Kishida described the launch as “violent behaviour”, while defence minister Yasukazu Hamada said Japan would not rule out any options to strengthen its defences including “counterattack capabilities”.

The US National Security Council spokesperson Adrienne Watson called it a “dangerous and reckless decision” that was “destabilising” to the region.

The launch comes as Japan, the US and South Korea have been working together to strengthen their defences, in response to the growing threat posed by the North.

Last week, the three countries conducted naval exercises together for the first time since 2017. Such drills have long antagonised Pyongyang leader Kim Jong-un, who views them as proof that his enemies are preparing for war.

Following the combined exercises in 2017, North Korea fired two missiles over Japan in response. A week later, it conducted a nuclear test.

Recent intelligence has suggested that North Korea is getting ready to test another nuclear weapon.

It is expected that North Korea would wait until after China – its main ally – holds its Communist party congress later this month.

But some experts are now asking if it could come sooner than expected – they believe Tuesday’s launch shows that North Korea is preparing the ground for a nuclear test.

The missile launch is the fifth carried out by Pyongyang in a week. On Saturday, two rockets came down in waters outside Japan’s exclusive economic zone.

Many of North Korea’s missile tests are conducted on a high, lofted flight path – reaching a high altitude, avoiding flights over its neighbours.

But firing over or past Japan allows North Korean scientists to test missiles under circumstances “that are more representative of the conditions they’d endure in real-world use”, analyst Ankit Panda told news agency Reuters.

These actions have contributed to enduring tensions between North Korea and Japan, rooted in Japan’s colonisation of Korea from 1910 to 1945 and the North’s abduction of Japanese citizens in the past.

Earlier this month, North Korea passed a law declaring itself to be a nuclear weapons state, with leader Kim Jong-un ruling out the possibility of talks on denuclearisation.

Pyongyang conducted six nuclear tests between 2006 and 2017, incurring widespread sanctions.

The East Asian state regularly defies the ban on nuclear and missile tests, saying it needs to bolster its defences.

Loretta Lynn, coal miner’s daughter and country music queen, dies, age 90.

NASHVILLE, Tenn. (AP) — Loretta Lynn, the Kentucky coal miner’s daughter whose frank songs about life and love as a woman in Appalachia pulled her out of poverty and made her a pillar of country music, has died. She was 90.

In a statement provided to The Associated Press, Lynn’s family said she died Tuesday at her home in Hurricane Mills, Tennessee.

“Our precious mom, Loretta Lynn, passed away peacefully this morning, October 4th, in her sleep at home in her beloved ranch in Hurricane Mills,” the family said in a statement. They asked for privacy as they grieve and said a memorial will be announced later.

Lynn already had four children before launching her career in the early 1960s, and her songs reflected her pride in her rural Kentucky background.

As a songwriter, she crafted a persona of a defiantly tough woman, a contrast to the stereotypical image of most female country singers. The Country Music Hall of Famer wrote fearlessly about sex and love, cheating husbands, divorce and birth control and sometimes got in trouble with radio programmers for material from which even rock performers once shied away.

Continue reading “”

BLUF
Americans who cherish their Second Amendment right are compelled to file yet again, ever again, another round of lawsuits: a tedious, expensive, eternal process. And this will continue if unthinking sorts among the polity continue to vote the same unprincipled rogues and prevaricators into public office.

THE IRONY OF THE HANDGUN TRAINING MANDATE IN NEW YORK’S AMENDED GUN LAW

Anyone who possesses a handgun, or any functional firearm, should be familiar with its operation and, ideally, proficient in its use.

Few gun owners would object to that, and few would argue the responsibility to obtain understanding and proficiency of use rests with the individual, not the “nanny state” to require it.

Yet, a burning question, asked rarely, if ever, but one that needs to be asked and answered is this:

Should the State mandate handgun training when the individual undertakes that responsibility upon himself, where that responsibility properly belongs anyway, and where State handgun training is, then, time-consuming, unduly expensive, and clearly redundant?

In that normative question rests a pressing legal one:

“Does the State have the legal right to require handgun training and, if so, from where does that purported legal right to mandate handgun training derive?”

There is nothing in the natural law right of armed self-defense as codified in the Second Amendment of the Bill of Rights of the U.S. Constitution that expressly says or alludes to a training requirement as a condition precedent to one exercising the right to bear arms, as a natural law right accruing to the individual. But is this assertion, true? Granted, it requires explication and qualification:

Continue reading “”

Psaki Buries Her Knife in Biden’s Back

Jen Psaki is usually wrong, not because she’s stupid, but because she’s an ideologue, a rabid partizan, and statist zealot. And, she seems to savor a well placed lie. But that’s expected from a former White House press secretary, and William and Mary graduate, who spent her entire tenure contorting the borders of reality, gleefully creating fictions to explain Joe Biden’s precipitous decline into senility.

Joe Biden has always been a dummy. Obama admitted it when he commented on Lunch Bucket Joes’ propensity to always screw things up. Biden is a comic book character inked and colored by media hacks and stooges like Psaki.

Jen’s recent statement is a concession to the spectacular proportion of Joe Biden’s failures. To ignore this would produce a lie that would simply be too big to sustain its own mass — even Psaki has to face the facts at some point:

“If it is a referendum on the president, they [democrats] will lose. And they know that.”

The Biden calamity is everywhere. Even casual, single issue voters are forcefully confronted by Biden’s imbecility, ineptitude, and brittle vindictiveness at every turn. Contrary to Psaki’s statements, no one down ballot is safe from this democrat owned and operated national calamity.

He’s that mean old man, raging in his senility from the front porch at all the kids enjoying a bright summer’s afternoon — a pervert showering with his daughter and sniffing the hair of little girls. With a grumpy, malevolent, misanthrope occupying the White House, the November election cycle is there for the taking — and Jen knows it, is gathering her skirts, hoping to salvage a shred of credibility.

The only things standing in the way of a sweeping Republican win in November are the calcified crony capitalists like Mitch McConnell, diddling the Chinese yen in his pocket. Or the moon-faced warmonger Lindsay Graham. This brand of Republicanism is in league with Democrat statists who all vie, like squealing piglets, at the slop trough of tax payer funded slush.

Continue reading “”

Woman shoots her accused rapist in foot after he breaks into home

A woman says she was raped in her bedroom before she grabbed a gun and shot at her accused rapist several times, according to police in Oklahoma.
She struck him in the foot, then “left the scene out of fear for her life,” Tulsa police said in a news release shared on Facebook.
Officers were called to the shooting in northeast Tulsa at about 1:55 p.m. Sunday, Oct. 2, according to the post. The man, identified as Wilfredo Gomez, was taken to a hospital.
Sometime during the investigation, the woman called police and reported she had been raped before shooting Gomez, authorities said.
“The woman said Wilfredo Gomez came to her house, forced his way through the door, pushed her into a bedroom, and sexually assaulted and raped her,” police said. She shot several times, hitting him once in the foot after the attack.
The woman had a protective order against Gomez, according to police.
Gomez was arrested and taken to the Tulsa County Jail, where he faces charges of rape by force or fear after former conviction of a felony and violation of a protective order.

DoD’s Report on the Investigation into the 2017 Ambush in Niger

On October 4, 2017, four U.S. Army Green Berets and four Nigerien soldiers were killed in action during an ambush of a joint U.S.-Nigerien mission outside the village of Tongo Tongo, Niger. On May 11, 2018, the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) released a detailed video-graphic depiction of the ambush and an eight-page summary of a much longer classified report on the events leading up to, during, and immediately following the ambush. Given the new information provided by DoD, the public has the opportunity to consider the risks U.S. forces were operating under, as well as the lessons DoD has derived from the events and the recommendations the investigation generated.

Q1: Why did DoD conduct this investigation?

A1: The ambush marked the highest-casualty event in Africa for the U.S. military since the Black Hawk Down incident in 1993, when 18 Army Rangers lost their lives. Sergeant First Class (SFC) Jeremiah Johnson, Staff Sergeant (SSG) Bryan Black, SSG Dustin Wright, and Sergeant (SGT) LaDavid Johnson were all killed in action during the engagement with militants from the Islamic State in the Greater Sahara (ISGS).

Immediately after the ambush, the U.S. media and some members of Congress conveyed surprise that U.S. forces were in harm’s way in Niger and wanted to know why the unit was so vulnerable in the case of an attack. Furthermore, the recovery of Sgt. LaDavid Johnson’s remains was delayed by 48 hours. Senior leaders at DoD stated that the purpose of the investigation was to understand whether mistakes were made and to provide more details to the families of the fallen. In a press conference approximately three weeks after the attack, General Joseph Dunford, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, explained what DoD wanted to know:

We owe the families of the fallen more information, and that’s what the investigation is designed to identify. The questions include, did the mission of U.S. forces change during the operation? Did our forces have adequate intelligence, equipment and training? Was there a pre-mission assessment of the threat in the area accurate? Did U.S. force—how did U.S. forces become separated during the engagement, specifically Sergeant Johnson? And why did they take time to find and recover Sgt. Johnson?

Q2: Who conducted the investigation?

A2: U.S. Africa Command (AFRICOM) conducted the investigation. Major General Roger Cloutier, AFRICOM’s chief of staff, was the lead investigator. The draft was then reviewed by General Thomas Waldhauser, commander of AFRICOM, and General Dunford before being approved by Secretary of Defense James Mattis.

Q3: Why were U.S. forces in Niger in the first place?

A3: The Trump administration, in a report required by the National Defense Authorization Act, states that U.S. forces are in Niger to “train, advise, and assist Nigerien partner forces.” During his October press conference, General Dunford was more expansive in his explanation: “Service members in Niger work as part of an international effort, led by 4,000 French troops, to defeat terrorists in west Africa. Since 2011, French and U.S. troops have trained a 5,000-person west African force and over 35,000 soldiers from the region to fight terrorists…affiliated with ISIS, Al Qaeda and Boko Haram.” The summary report echoes these statements and adds that the unit involved in the ambush were deployed to train and equip “a new Nigerien Counter Terrorism (CT) Company” and to conduct operations “with a separate Nigerien unit, until the new CT Company reached full operational capacity.” At a press conference presenting the summary report to the public, Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs Robert Karem stated that the U.S. military presence in Niger “is necessary because the establishment of terrorist safe havens in the Sahel could pose a significant risk to U.S. national security interests.” Karem also noted that the United States supports ongoing French CT operations in the region.

Continue reading “”

THE BATTLE OF COP KEATING
One of the most desperate battles of the Global War on Terror in Afghanistan led to two Medals of Honor being awarded.

On the morning of October 3, 2009, members of the U.S. Army’s Black Knight Troop (3-61 Cav, 4th Brigade Combat Team, 4th Infantry Division) were attacked at their base – Combat Outpost Keating – by more than 300 well-armed Taliban soldiers. Located deep within Afghanistan’s remote and mountainous Nuristan province, COP Keating was established in 2006 as a base of operations for U.S. Army personnel seeking to stop the flow of soldiers and munitions arriving from nearby Pakistan and as a place to direct and support counterinsurgency efforts in the nearby villages. The deadly attack on October 3 led to the deaths of 8 U.S. Army servicemen and wounded another 22. The remarkable courage and heroism shown during this desperate battle led to numerous decorations, including Medals of Honor for Staff Sergeant Clinton Romesha and Specialist Ty Carter.

Continue reading “”

These are memories of men I know and some of them, I have worked with

Martin “Marty” Moreno

No alternative text description for this imageNo alternative text description for this image
It’s been a few years since the Huey unit was sent to support “humanitarian efforts” in Somalia. The day we arrived we were greeted with indirect fire, dilapidated tents, and two seater porta potties. Great times!!! It all comes with a cost.

Background: The color picture of the Huey in the stadium was gifted to me by a ground operator take on October 3 or 4th. There is an image of me taken on Oct 2, 1993 with an MH-60 in the background. If you were there and saw the blue jeep, a band of Huey mechanics pulled it from a pile of concertina wire and breathed life back into her. It’s amazing what a role of Copenhagen could get you.

Turning point: It was at this point I knew I wanted to be in Special Operations. I had a good career and am proud of all my accomplishments and mistakes. Without these experiences I would not be the person I am today.

To all that lost their lives or a piece of themselves on this day, you are not forgotten.

Brad Halling
No alternative text description for this imageNo alternative text description for this image

Black Hawk Down: Thoughts from my memoirs – 3 October 1993
Last entry in my journal… I would not see it again for several months. (Pic 2)
While today I will not write about the battle but instead remember the fallen. I will continue from my memoirs after the 4th of October but today let’s remember their families and the men that gave all:

MSG Gary Gordon, MSG Griz Martin, SFC Randy Shugart, SSG Daniel Busch, SFC Earl Fillmore, SFC Matt Rierson[killed the next day],  CPL Jamie Smith, SPC James Cavaco, SGT Casey Joyce, PFC Richard Kowaleski, SGT Dominick Pilla, SGT Lorenzo Ruiz, SSG William Cleveland, SSG Thomas Field, CW4 Raymond Frank, CW3 Cliff Wolcott, CW2 Donovan Briley,  SGT Cornell Houston, PFC James Martin JR.

Tom Satterly

See the source image

29 years has passed, some of which have been my darkest days.

29 years of dark decisions, both professionally and personally.
29 years of denial, acceptance, struggle, failure, denial again with even greater struggle and more failures.
But to be here today, 29 years later, I finally feel like the darkness is behind me.

The memories are forever; and thank God for that. I don’t want to forget.
But now I choose which memories I focus on. They are of how they lived and the many life lessons I gained by working for and alongside them. They will always be part of my life and my story. I’m beyond grateful and honored by that. They are the definition of heroes. I will do my best to honor you daily, brothers.

Coming back from Somalia didn’t happen until I was able to face the grief disguised as anger. Hell I still get angry and I still have to work on where to put it. But time has been a great teacher and I’ve learned more about myself since I started facing and fighting my demons than by trying to ignoring them (unsuccessfully at that).

It was a hard road, lots of struggle and hurt people along the way, but I got that chance to get it wrong and try again. I kept going until I could get past my ego and finally make positive changes in my life. Now I choose to share that with anyone who will just ask for it.

I wish I could help each and every hurting soul with my experiences of what not to do in hopes of helping them get on the right path sooner.

I lost a lot 29 years ago.
Friends, innocence, empathy and compassion.
I choose to focus on those things I can get back and honor those I can’t.

To all of you who know. It was an honor serving with you 29 years ago.
Honor all those who can’t, by living a good life.

– Tom Satterly

It’s not ‘seemingly unrelated’.
Pagans have always sacrificed their children to their gods

 

 

 

 

 

 

Joe Biden Compares Himself to the Devil

President Joe Biden has been incessantly bringing up abortion, in hopes that the issue will save the Democrats from losing their narrow majorities in the House and Senate in the upcoming November midterm elections. On Sunday night, Biden’s tactic got even more desperate, and bizarre, as he appeared to compare himself to the Devil.

Biden’s tweet mentions how his father told him “don’t compare me to the Almighty,” but “to the alternative,” presumably the Devil. The president then goes on to tweet a seemingly unrelated point claiming “Democrats want to codify Roe. Republicans want a national ban on abortion,” and that “The choice is clear.”

In addition to making quite an odd comparison, Biden isn’t even being all that truthful. As Guy has highlighted, the Democrats don’t merely want to “codify Roe v. Wade,” but rather expand it through extremist legislation known as the Women’s Health Protection Act (WHPA). The bill would not only make abortion legal up until birth without limit, it would invalidate pro-life laws passed at the state level.

Further, the “national ban on abortion” that Biden is referring to is a 15-week abortion ban, with exceptions, to reflect that unborn children can feel pain at this point and that the particularly brutal method is also more dangerous for women. Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) introduced the legislation last month.

Lindsey Graham (R-SC) introduced the legislation last month.

The Sunday night tweet brought about considerable attention, and as our friends at Twitchy highlighted, some suggested the tweet was so nonsensical that it actually made it likely Biden himself wrote it.

Other users also pointed out how Democrats have a veto-proof majority in Congress before, and yet failed to pass such legislation then. This included during the first few years of the Obama administration, during when Biden even served as vice president. Along with such urgency has also brought about a more radical position from the Democratic Party, which has not only rejected the mantra of keeping abortion “safe, legal, and rare,” but even opposes the Hyde Amendment, which protects taxpayers from having to fund elective abortions.

Biden, who presents himself as Catholic, has brought up faith in the context of abortion before. “I happen to be a practicing Roman Catholic, my church doesn’t even make that argument now,” Biden claimed just last month, as Sarah covered. The president was referring to Graham’s bill. As Sarah also pointed out, Biden lied about the bill’s exceptions as well, which include rape or incest that a woman receives treatment for and for when it is reported if there is a minor involved.

The Catholic Church takes an abundantly clear stance against abortion. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), who is similarly pro-abortion, has been told by Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone of San Francisco that she should not present herself for Holy Communion.

In response to such a tweet, RNC Director of Faith Communications Andrew Brennan told Townhall that “Democrats will lie and desperately try to distort their pro-abortion agenda to mislead voters. Folks aren’t buying it. In 36 days Americans will vote to reject Democrats’ radical, out-of-touch late-term abortion extremism.”

Such fear-mongering from Biden and fellow Democrats doesn’t appear to be working, as polls not only show that abortion just isn’t that major an issue for voters, but also that Republicans are gaining in the polls.

Happy Anniversary to ‘Let’s Go Brandon!’

It’s hard to believe it, but one year has passed since Americans nationwide began using the ironic catchphrase “Let’s Go Brandon!” to mock Joe Biden.

It all started with an interview when NBC reporter Kelli Stavast claimed during an interview with NASCAR driver Brandon Brown that chants of “F— Joe Biden!” at the NASCAR Xfinity Series race at Talladega were actually “Let’s go, Brandon!”

The phrase was quickly adopted by conservatives as a family-friendly alternative for expressing anger and defiance at Joe Biden and his policies, as well as a dig at media bias. Before long, “Let’s Go Brandon!” went from a viral social media meme to being recited at sporting events all over the country. It wasn’t a short-lived fad either; it became a chart-topping song on iTunes, and it even made its way into the House chamber.

Triggered leftists insisted the phrase was vulgar. At-home fitness company Peloton even banned its users from using the hashtag #LetsGoBrandon and other variants on their profiles. Some on the left have even tried to reclaim the Brandon moniker by giving Biden the nickname “Dark Brandon,” which is just as silly as it sounds.

My personal favorite moment was when Joe and Jill Biden did a video call into NORAD to see where Santa was on Christmas Eve last year. After speaking with some kids, a father said to the Bidens: “I hope you guys have a wonderful Christmas as well. Merry Christmas, and Let’s go, Brandon.”

“Let’s go, Brandon. I agree,” Biden replied.

It was awesome.

“Let’s Go Brandon” has gone through quite a journey over the past year. It’s been amusing, to say the least, and I can’t wait to see what other joys it will bring this coming year.

SCOTUS turns away challenges to Trump-imposed ban on bump stocks

The Trump administration-imposed ban on bump stocks, crafted through ATF regulations instead of actual legislation, will remain in effect for the foreseeable future after the Supreme Court turned away two challenges to the ban that had been winding their way through the courts since shortly after the ban was imposed in 2019.

The Court declined to intervene to stop the administrative action from taking effect several years ago, but Second Amendment activists and gun rights groups continued to challenge the ban in the years since, and last week justices took up the two cases in conference. Monday’s order list didn’t contain the good news that 2A advocates were hoping for. Instead, the Court rejected the challenges without dissent from any of the six justices who voted earlier this year to overturn New York’s “may issue” carry laws in NYSRPA v. Bruen.

The bump stocks challenge, however, did not deal directly with the scope of the right to bear arms under the Second Amendment. The challengers instead said the government did not have authority to ban bump stocks under the National Firearms Act, a law enacted in 1934 to regulate machine guns. In 1968, the Gun Control Act expanded the definition of machine gun to include accessories “for use in converting a weapon” into a machine gun, and the ATF concluded when it issued the ban that bump stocks meet that definition.

The groups challenging the ban said the legal definition of machine gun has been distorted beyond recognition and argue that courts should not defer to the federal agency’s interpretation.

The court turned away two related appeals, one brought by Clark Aposhian, a Utah gun lobbyist who had purchased a bump stock before the ban took effect, and another led by Gun Owners of America and other gun rights groups. Lower courts upheld the ban, although judges on the Denver-based 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals and the Cincinnati-based 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals were divided in both cases.

To say this is a disappointing result would be putting it mildly, and there most certainly will be consequences to the justices’ refusal to hear either case. The Biden administration has already used the same executive authority that then-President Trump used to direct the ATF to craft its bump stock ban to target unfinished frames and receivers sold in DIY gun-making kits, and the Court’s inaction will only embolden anti-gun officials and the gun control lobby to further abuse the scope of executive branch authority to impose even more gun control laws that don’t have enough support to win congressional approval.

The decision is also very bad news for the hundreds of thousands of Americans who lawfully purchased bump stocks before the ATF suddenly reversed course and declared them to be machine guns. Possession of a bump stock is now the same as possessing a machine gun in terms of federal law, which makes any gun owner who still owns one of the devices subject to a $250,000 fine and the possibility of up to a decade in federal prison.

While the Supreme Court will have other opportunities to weigh in on executive branch overreach that infringe on the right to keep and bear arms, unfortunately that’s because there are other areas of infringement taking place. Not only are the ATF’s new rules on frames and receivers being challenged in court, but the pending rules that could turn millions of AR-style pistols equipped with shoulder braces into short-barreled rifles subject to the registration provisions of the National Firearms Act are also facing litigation. Still, the gun control lobby and the Biden administration are almost certain to take advantage of today’s inaction by SCOTUS, and with gun control groups already lobbying behind the scenes for the ATF to regulate AR-15s and other semi-automatic firearms as if they’re machine guns as well, the ATF could soon take aim at the tens of millions of modern sporting rifles in the hands of gun owners… not to mention the lives and liberties of those gun owners themselves.

December 5, 1992, President George Bush orders the U.S. military to join the U.N. in a joint operation known as Operation Restore Hope, with the primary mission of restoring order in civil war torn Somalia.

January 20, 1993, Bill Clinton, takes office as President.

June 5 1993, 24 Pakistani soldiers under U.N. command are ambushed and killed in an area of Mogadishu controlled by of Mohammed Farah Aidid

June 6, 1993, the U.N. Security Council issues Resolution 837, calling for the arrest and trial of those that carried out the ambush

August 22, 1993,  after several attacks on U.S. forces, President Clinton orders an elite military strike force to deploy to Mogadishu to capture Aidid.

August 23, 1993, Task Force Ranger arrives at Mogadishu and begins operations

October 3, 1993, TF Ranger conducts a raid into the Bakaara market in downtown metropolitan Mogadishu in order to capture high value targets associated with Aidid. The raid, expected to be of a short duration, devolves into a protracted overnight fight with the Task Force suffering multiple dead, wounded, missing and captured .

Veterans reflect on Battle of Mogadishu

Continue reading “”

A Case Report: Multifocal Necrotizing Encephalitis and Myocarditis after BNT162b2 mRNA Vaccination against COVID-19

The current report presents the case of a 76-year-old man with Parkinson’s disease (PD) who died three weeks after receiving his third COVID-19 vaccination.
The patient was first vaccinated in May 2021 with the ChAdOx1 nCov-19 vector vaccine, followed by two doses of the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine in July and December 2021. The family of the deceased requested an autopsy due to ambiguous clinical signs before death.
PD was confirmed by post-mortem examinations. Furthermore, signs of aspiration pneumonia and systemic arteriosclerosis were evident. However, histopathological analyses of the brain uncovered previously unsuspected findings, including acute vasculitis (predominantly lymphocytic) as well as multifocal necrotizing encephalitis of unknown etiology with pronounced inflammation including glial and lymphocytic reaction. In the heart, signs of chronic cardiomyopathy as well as mild acute lympho-histiocytic myocarditis and vasculitis were present.
Although there was no history of COVID-19 for this patient, immunohistochemistry for SARS-CoV-2 antigens (spike and nucleocapsid proteins) was performed. Surprisingly, only spike protein but no nucleocapsid protein could be detected within the foci of inflammation in both the brain and the heart, particularly in the endothelial cells of small blood vessels.
Since no nucleocapsid protein could be detected, the presence of spike protein must be ascribed to vaccination rather than to viral infection. The findings corroborate previous reports of encephalitis and myocarditis caused by gene-based COVID-19 vaccines.