Another Soros insert
Impeachment Process Started Against Progressive Philadelphia DA Krasner
Pennsylvania Republicans have opened impeachment proceedings against ultra-progressive Philadelphia District Attorney Larry Krasner, accusing him of a “willful refusal” to tackle “unchecked violent crime.”
A trio of Keystone State House representatives announced the drastic move Monday while also unveiling a website, StopKrasner.com, for crime victims to detail their horror stories.
“We recognize it is an extraordinary measure — but the actions that the DA has taken are extraordinary,” said one of the trio, Rep. Josh Kail…….
Cornyn Proves Senate Republicans Didn’t Negotiate, They’re Giving Our Rights Away For Nothing
Following the weekend announcement of a compromise framework for a gun control deal in the Senate, Texas Senator John Cornyn apparently felt the need to address angry constituents who aren’t nearly as enthusiastic as he is about expanding “red flag” laws, enhancing background checks for those under 21 among other points in the deal.
Cornyn partnered with Democrat Chris Murphy of Connecticut to negotiate and broker the deal that got nine other Republicans to sign on, greatly increasing the chances of the final bill clearing the Senate once the legislation is actually written.
There’s only one big problem with Cornyn’s much-heralded achievement: his tweet proves that he wasn’t even trying to actually negotiate anything.
It’s pretty clear what his staffers (it’s doubtful he has the graphics skills or computer literacy to do that) were trying to do with yesterday’s tweet — damage control. By showing us all how the deal he struck with Democrats could have been so much worse, he’s trying to frame the agreement as a grand compromise that saved firearm owners from some of the worst that gun-grabbers had in mind.
The way Cornyn portrays it, if he and his fellow collaborators hadn’t rushed in to give some ground, we’d be facing magazine bans, “assault weapons” sales restrictions, waiting periods, safe storage mandates, and more if Democrats went ahead and scuttled the filibuster to force the House gun control bills through the Senate.
Then they could also pack the Supreme Court and we’d really be stuck, right?
I know the comments section is already filling up with “come and take it” and “shall not be infringed” declarations, but I want readers to notice something else — the things that aren’t on Cornyn’s list of rejected proposals that didn’t make it into the Senate deal.
Why doesn’t that list include anything from the Republican side? Why is there no plan for a federal law to allow armed teachers nationwide? Why wasn’t 50-state concealed carry reciprocity considered? How about deregulating suppressors or removing short-barreled rifles and shotguns from the NFA?
Surely if the Democrats really wanted “common sense gun control” as badly as they claim, they’d have stepped up and paid for it with some sort of compromise. Right?
Instead, what we’ve really learned from Cornyn’s sorry excuse at tamping down the blowback he’s undoubtedly getting is that he never really negotiated with Senate Democrats at all.
Cornyn and the other GOP collaborators who agreed to the framework showed up with no demands at all of their own. They were only prepared to haggle with Democrats over how much the rest of us will give up so he can become GOP leader in the Senate some day.
Senators like Cornyn and Romney didn’t give anything up in the Senate deal. They have security details, large houses in gated communities with armed patrols, and plenty of other measures to keep them and their families safe while the rest of us rubes have to fend for ourselves like nearly everyone else who has ever walked the earth.
Just as it’s awfully easy to spend other people’s money, Cornyn had no qualms about giving our rights away for his own political benefit. He never had any plan to actually negotiate for us, to get something in return in an actual compromise with Democrats. Instead, he got rolled and he couldn’t be happier about it.
Cornyn’s just another elitist who wants to see how we can better serve him. He won’t have to face Texas voters again for four more years, by which time he’s betting the folks back home will have mostly forgotten about this. Sadly, he’s probably right.
Analysis: The Era of ‘Assault Weapon’ Bans is Over
There will not be a new federal “assault weapons” ban this year. Or any year in the near future.
It’s not simply because of Senate Republican opposition either. The Democrat-controlled House of Representatives won’t pass one. It hasn’t even tried to since the party took control in 2018.
In fact, there hasn’t been a new assault weapons ban in 25 years. Only seven states and the District of Columbia have a ban in place at all. Some of those states, including New York and California, have tightened their prohibitions in recent years. But no state has passed a new ban in recent history.
Gun-control advocates haven’t given up on pushing the policy, though. And some top Democrats, including Texas gubernatorial candidate Beto O’Rourke and Vice President Kamala Harris, have even advocated coupling a sales ban with a mandatory buyback.
But the hill to climb for successfully passing a new ban has just gotten steeper.
In the first major poll since the shootings in Uvalde and Buffalo, Quinnipiac University found support for an assault weapons ban actually dropped. It’s now at just 50 percent, which is the lowest level it has ever been since Quinnipiac started asking about a ban in 2013.
The newest finding puts support for banning assault weapons 17 points lower than its peak just a few years ago. It’s just one poll, of course, but others show a substantial drop in support since the national ban passed back in 1994. One of the oldest polls on a ban found support was up at 80 percent.
The Quinnipiac poll is telling beyond just the raw numbers too. In the wake of horrific shootings, such as the recent attacks in Buffalo and Uvalde, support for gun-control measures tends to increase significantly. For nearly every other policy Quinnipiac polled, that was the case. But not for an assault weapons ban.
And, again, it wasn’t just Republicans driving opposition to a ban. Independents also opposed the ban by a three-point margin.
It’s too early to say for sure this trend will continue. More polling will be needed to have confidence that’s the case. However, America has experienced a similar policy transformation in recent history.
Handguns were once the main focus of gun-control efforts. Brady United Against Gun Violence was initially called Handgun Control Inc. and once partnered with the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence which was initially called the National Coalition to Ban Handguns.
In 1959, Gallup found 60 percent of Americans favored a total ban on handguns. But, as time went by, that number began to fall. By 2021, the same poll found just 19 percent support. That’s even though handguns are by far the most common weapon used in homicides and other serious crimes.
That attitude shift likely had a lot to do with the increasing popularity of handguns among the general public. Multiple polls over the past decade or more indicate people buy guns primarily for self-defense. At the same time, handguns have surpassed rifles and shotguns as the best-selling category of firearms in the United States.
Assault weapons may be enjoying a similar effect. While “assault weapon” is a fairly nebulous term with a definition that varies from state to state, it’s usually crafted in a way to target guns like the AR-15 and Ak-47. The National Shooting Sports Foundation calls these guns “modern sporting rifles.”
In 2020, they estimated there were nearly 20 million AR-15s and similar firearms. They are the most popular rifles in the country, and the NRA has even dubbed the AR “America’s rifle.” More Americans own ARs than ever before and likely associate them more with home defense, hunting, and sport shooting than with crime, despite their presence in some of the highest-profile mass shootings.
That doesn’t mean further regulation of assault weapons is impossible. After all, handguns are more highly regulated than rifles or shotguns despite the minuscule support for a total ban on their sales. Similarly, support for age restrictions on purchasing assault weapons has polled very well in the wake of the recent shootings, and New York just implemented that change.
Perhaps that’s where the debate over AR-15s and other “assault weapons” will now focus. Because a total ban on sales is not in the cards anytime soon.
Police Fatally Shoot Armed Man at Duncanville Field House; Campers Unharmed
No children were harmed, the city confirmed Monday morning.
Duncanville police said they were called to the field house at about 8:43 a.m. on reports that an armed man was inside the field house where approximately 250 children between ages 4 and 14 were inside at summer camp.
Duncanville Police Public Information Officer Michelle Arias said Monday morning that officers arrived at the field house within two minutes and entered the building looking for the gunman.
During a search of the area, police said officers found the man armed with a handgun in the gymnasium and exchanged gunfire. The man was shot by police and given medical aid before being transferred to a hospital where he later died.
Duncanville Assistant Chief of Police Matthew Stogner said Monday afternoon that the gunman entered through the lobby and had a discussion with a staff member. It was there, Stoger said, the gunman fired the first shot heard in the building.
Police have not revealed any information about the man or why he entered the building. A car in the parking lot was surrounded by crime scene tape Monday morning and was being investigated. It’s not clear if the car belongs to the gunman.
An 18-year-old camp counselor who was working with about 40 of the children told NBC 5 they were about to play a game when a gunshot boomed above the commotion in the room.
The counselor, Naomi Rodgers, said a staff member then ran into the room and closed the door saying, “We have an active shooter right now!”
“We had to move them all across the room because the building is glass and we had to find a safe space,” Rodgers said. “The shooter actually came to our door … and he said if we didn’t let him see who he wanted to see he was going to shoot the place up.”
Rodgers said the gunman then shot the glass door.
“The glass started to fall and I just started to pray then because that’s all I could do,” Rodgers said. “I know what happened at Uvalde … and I was like this cannot happen. Not today. Not today.”
Families rushed to the field house to pick up their children after shots rang out Monday morning. Parents waited anxiously to be reunited with their loved ones. Families were reunited at a nearby recreation center. NBC 5’s Katy Blakey has the story.
Police said the preliminary investigation indicates the gunman was in at least one other area where children were present but none of them were targeted or injured.
The only injury reported is the fatal shot fired by police that killed the gunman.
After the shooting, the children taking part in summer camps were moved to a nearby recreation center while the shooting was investigated.
Duncanville Police said the police shooting will be investigated by the Texas Rangers.
The RINOs are out in force on the ‘framework’ for new gun laws
It was news that sent shudders through every person who supports the Second Amendment: ten Republican senators have signed on to a “framework” that will allegedly improve gun safety in America. You can guess who these RINOs are — it’s the same bunch who will always agree to limit American rights to keep up with their friends on the Democrat side of the aisle. And while there are a couple of good ideas in the framework, the rest of it is useless, harmful, and/or unconstitutional.
According to a statement from the bipartisan group of senators, they have an agreement in principle for legislation that includes “needed mental health resources, improves school safety and support for students, and helps ensure dangerous criminals and those who are adjudicated as mentally ill can’t purchase weapons[.]” More specifically, the senators have agreed on the following concepts, which I’ve listed along with my comments:
Bullard man cites self-defense in deadly shooting
CHEROKEE COUNTY, Texas (KLTV) – A Longview man was shot dead Sunday evening at the home of a Bullard man.
According to a report by the Cherokee County Sheriff’s Office, deputies were dispatched to a residence in the 8000 block of Farm to Market Road 855 in response to a call that an individual died of apparent gunshot wounds. Upon arrival, deputies found that Tommy Peeler, 69, of Longview man dead from apparent gunshot wounds. Deputies then detained two individuals, Stephen Driskell, 54, of Bullard, and Sue Peeler, 64, of Bullard.
After interviewing the individuals, it was determined that Driskell fired his weapon in self-defense, resulting in the death on Tommy Peeler. Both individuals were then released.
The case is still under investigation and will be forwarded to the Cherokee County District Attorney’s office to be presented to a grand jury.
KCSO Investigating a Bly Mountain self-defense shooting
KLAMATH FALLS, Ore. – At approximately 8:45 AM on Sunday, June 12, 2022, Klamath County Sheriff’s Office deputies along with personnel from Klamath County Fire District 5 and Bonanza Ambulance Service, were dispatched to the 5900 block of Flamingo Dr in the Bly Mountain area east of Bonanza, on a report from an individual that he’d shot someone in self-defense.
Fire personnel were first to reach the scene and began life-saving efforts on Kyle Alan Majestic Sr., 34, of the Bly Mountain area who succumbed to his injuries. Deputies questioned the responsible individual, who alleged that Majestic came at him swinging a dangerous weapon.
The incident remains under investigation and no arrests have been made. KCSO’s investigation is being assisted by the Klamath Falls Police Department, Oregon State Police, and the Klamath County District Attorney’s Office.
Where Second Amendment Supporters Must Take The Offensive
While the best strategy in the short and medium-term for Second Amendment supporters may be fighting “not to lose,” that does not mean that Second Amendment supporters should not take the offensive when it is the right time to do so.
The question is what should the offensive focus on? There are two fronts Second Amendment supporters should think about: Legislative and Legal, the former with two fronts of its own – federal and state. Each will require different strategies.
The Legislative Front At The Federal Level
At the federal level, many of the same things that protect the Second Amendment will make passing legislation harder. This includes the filibuster in the Senate. So, what can be done?
First of all, if Chuck Schumer is no longer Senate Majority Leader, one of the best options will be riders on appropriations bills. This must-pass legislation can be used to prohibit funding some of the worst excesses. That could work for the short term.
Should Second Amendment supporters succeed in retaking the White House, they can them move to address financial deplatforming, take steps to deal with Silicon Valley censorship, and to tighten up the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act. For the short and medium-term, these will be necessary.
The Legislative Front At The State Level
In one sense, all pro-Second Amendment groups have blundered by NOT making financial deplatforming a major issue. State laws prohibiting banks and credit cards from blacklisting gun companies that make legal products should be passed as soon as possible. The best way to prevent corporate gun control is to make such efforts very painful to corporations’ bottom lines.
A similar step could also be to pass their own versions of legislation to harden schools. Not just the buildings themselves, although that is important, but also a program to allow for teachers (or other volunteers) to serve as armed security the same way the armed pilots program worked.
The Legal Front
This is the front where Second Amendment supporters should take the offensive more. After gun bans, the best target would be the licensing schemes like the FOID in Illinois or the system in New Jersey. After NYSRPA v. Bruen, those systems are ripe for going after with litigation.
The courts will also be useful in curbing the excesses of “reg flag” laws, especially at the federal level. Heller, McDonald, and Bruen will help, and even the threat of litigation may deter some anti-Second Amendment legislation or force settlements.
Knowing when to take the offensive will be crucial for Second Amendment supporters in the wake of the likely ruling in NYSRPA v. Bruen. But the real importance is being able to act after defeating anti-Second Amendment extremists via the ballot box at the federal, state, and local levels.
Q: What is the difference between a deer rifle and a sniper rifle?
A: A politician
Guns Kill People, and Tyrants with Gun Monopolies Kill the Most
In the long term, disarmament often leads to mass murder by government.
My forthcoming article in the Gonzaga Journal of International Law examines the comparative risks of too little gun control and too much gun control. Here’s the abstract:
What are the relative risks of a nation having too many guns compared to the risks of the nation having too few guns? Comparing and contrasting Europe and the United States during the twentieth century, the article finds that the United States might have suffered up to three-quarters of million excess firearms homicide over the course of the century—based on certain assumptions made to maximize the highest possible figure.
In contrast, during the twentieth century Europe suffered 87 million excess homicides against civilians by mass-murdering tyrannical governments. The article suggests that Americans should not be complacent that they have some perpetual immunity to being subjected to tyranny.
The historical record shows that governments planning mass murder work assiduously to disarm their intended victims. While victim resistance cannot necessarily overthrow a tyrannical regime, resistance does save many lives.
Part I describes tensions in some treaties, declarations, and other legal documents from the United Nations and the European Union. On the one hand, they recognize the legitimacy of resistance to tyranny and genocide; on the other hand, the UN and EU gun control programs seem to make armed resistance nearly impossible.
Part II contrasts homicide data for the United States and Europe during the twentieth century. First, data about homicides from ordinary crimes are examined. Based on certain (incorrect) assumptions that bias the figure upward, if the U.S. had the same gun homicide rate as Europe’s, there might have been 745,000 fewer deaths in America during the twentieth century.
Next, Part II looks more broadly at homicide, to include homicides perpetrated by governments, such as communist or fascist regimes. In Europe in the twentieth century, states murdered about 87.1 million people. Globally, governments murdered well over 200 million people. The figure does not include combat deaths from wars.
As Part III explains, totalitarian governments are the most likely to perpetrate mass murder. The Part argues against the complacent belief that any nation, including the United States, is immune from the dangers of being taken over by a murderous government. The historical record indicates that risks are very broad. Globally, only eight nations maintained democratic self-government for the entire twentieth century. The refusal of many Republicans in 2020 and many Democrats in 2016 to accept the presidential election results is one of many signs that American democracy is presently in peril.
Part IV shows that governments intent on mass murder prioritize victim disarmament because they consider it to be a serious impediment to mass murder and tyrannical rule.
Finally, Part V examines the efficacy of citizen arms against mass murdering governments. Citizen arms are most effective as deterrents. However, even without changing the regime, armed resistance can accomplish much and save many lives, as the twentieth century shows. Examples include Jewish resistance to the Nazis, Armenian and Assyrian resistance to the Ottoman Empire, Tibetan resistance to Chinese Communist invasion, and the Nuban resistance to the Sudanese regime.
The Conclusion suggests that the UN and EU should adopt a more balanced gun control policy, recognizing the value of citizen arms in protecting the public from tyranny and mass murder.
The article does not argue for or against particular gun control laws, other than gun registration; as the article shows, gun registration often facilitates gun confiscation.
Mass Shooters Are Fueled by the Hatred and Division Sown by the Politics of the Left.
We could say that all mass shootings are inspired by hatred, but many are carried out by deranged individuals, susceptible to violence and possessing no clear and distinct political or religious motives. These disturbed, mentally unstable people are unhinged by the strain of the postmodern age and what they see and experience.
They are receptive to the influences of the perverse degeneration of the popular culture, media sensationalism, and the pursuit of celebrity status, even if they pay with their own lives to achieve the dubious notoriety they seek. Shooting rampages by these types of individuals may be the most common type of mass shootings, at least in the United States.
But there are other types of spree shootings, which are clearly of different varieties, especially those triggered by fanaticism or intense racial, ethnic, or political hatred.
Some shootings are motivated by Jihad and “home grown” Islamic radicalism. Others, perhaps the most odious, are the result of perverted political ideology and the increasing hatred boiling over from the atmosphere of racial and ethnic divisiveness and polarization of politics, largely created by the incitement of violence, directly or indirectly, by the political left and the propagandist media.
On May 14, 2022, Payton Gendron, an alleged “white supremacist,” shot and killed 10 people and injured three others at Tops Market in Buffalo, New York. The media has sensationalized this shooting not only to push for more gun control laws, but also because of the alleged “white supremacist” killer and his racial motivation. Now we are learning that a former FBI agent may have known of the gunman’s plan to commit mass murder, according to two law enforcement officials investigating the case.
According to the Buffalo News, the two law enforcement sources stated that at least six individuals had been communicating with the accused shooter in an online chat room and were invited by Gendron to read about his murderous plans and the target location about 30 minutes before the shooting. None of these individuals tipped the police or FBI prior to the shooting. No other information has been made available to the public from the two officials familiar with the investigation, the FBI, or the U.S. Attorney’s Office.
Suffice to say, the FBI and media propagandists have been heavily the racial hatred narrative, the white supremacy of the shooter, and the fact the gunman used an AR-15. Vice President Kamala Harris and Democrat activist Beto O’ Rourke are, once again, pushing for banning “assault weapons,” especially the AR-15, and in the case of O’Rourke, calling for outright confiscation of those who already possess them legally.
Nothing has been said about much bigger societal problems, such as the increased polarization of America since the Obama administration and the incitement of violence by Democrats and the media — for example, calling rioters “peaceful protestors,” the gaslighting and justifying their criminal behavior, violence, looting and plundering, as reasonable social justice.
In fact, rioters advanced the leftist agenda of promoting chaos that the Democrats and their allies in the mainstream media exploit as a pretext to pass still more laws that affect not the criminal elements in society, but law-abiding gun owners and business people. At the same time, the orchestrated riots provide plunder for the looters, while the public and businesses aren’t protected.
We know that all resources available to the press were utilized for sustaining the constant barrage of negative propaganda. That this takes place in our United States, a nation with a purportedly free and independent press, is unconscionable. That a fifth column within the intelligence community was also deeply involved is abominable.
Where are the objective and intrepid investigative journalists of the mainstream media that should have been investigating these momentous omissions, these gaps in our public knowledge, in the study of criminal mass shooters and the societal factors that contribute to them? And when is the media finally going to admit that armed citizens could have stopped some of these mass murderers or, at the very least, diminished the number of casualties?
The original training requirement – just 37 hours less than the Basic Police Officer course in an Ohio police academy – was a ‘poison pill’ the gun grabbers had stuck in, hoping the bill would never get passed.
Well, live by the politics, die by the politics
Ohio governor signs bill making it easier for teachers to have guns in schools
Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine said Monday that he has signed a bill into law that makes it much easier for teachers to legally carry guns in schools.
The measure drastically reduces the amount of training teachers and other staff are required to undergo before they can possess a firearm on school grounds. Instead of 700 hours of training, teachers will be able to finish in less than 24 hours.
“Our goal is to continue to help our public and private schools get the tools they need to protect our children,” DeWine said. “We have an obligation to do everything we can every single day to try and protect our kids.”
DeWine, a Republican, said in a statement on June 1 that the bill would allow “local school districts, if they so chose, to designate armed staff for school security and safety,” adding that it was more practical than the state’s previous standard.
Sure as the gods made little green apples, Red Flag laws are back in the headlines.
For the people who think these are a great idea, I have one simple question:
How many people have been convicted of misusing a Red Flag law?
Whatever you want to call it — “Misusing”, “False filing”, “Obtaining under perjury”, whatever — a fraudulently-obtained Red Flag law denies the person it was obtained against a civil right. Civil rights that the Government should be bending over backwards to protect.
The first Red Flag law was passed in 1999. 23 years ago. People are people, and someone has blatantly lied to obtain a Red Flag order against someone.
Someone in the last 23 years has misused a Red Flag law to harass someone else. So. Show me their conviction for doing so.
I know about the time someone tried to get a Red Flag order against the cops, and that doesn’t count — some animals being more equal to other animals, and all that.
I’m talking about Joe Average having his civil rights taken away for a year with a misused Red Flag order. It has happened — we all know that it has happened — and I want to see the criminal record of the person who fraudulently deprived someone else of their Second Amendment right for a year.
Any claim of “Well, they’re so well checked that it’s never been abused” it complete and utter horse-puckey — I was in law enforcement for 26 years, that isn’t going to fly.
Absent a conviction, I will accept the name of a judge who rubber-stamped every Red Flag request to cross his desk, never turned one down, and was removed from office because of it.
If you don’t have that information, then your opinion on Red Flag laws means nothing; and you should be ignored.
LawDog
Washington, D.C. – So-called “fact checkers” and Big Tech inadvertently validated Gun Owners of America’s concerns while targeting a tweet as disinformation for censorship.
Immediately following passage of the “Untraceable Firearms” section of H.R. 7910, Gun Owners of America tweeted that the bill would “criminalize disassembling, cleaning, and re-assembling your gun without a firearm manufacturer’s license.”
Despite labeling the tweet “false,” the Associated Press’ source presumes Gun Owners of America’s interpretation might be valid, acknowledges that the bill’s language is “confusing and ambiguous,” and instead claims that no one is likely to “ever be charged under this statute.”
The Supreme Court usually declares such laws “void for vagueness” under the 5th Amendment, but that hardly makes policy analyses of unconstitutionally vague legislation untrue!
In fact, GOA was merely pointing out that the definition of a “ghost gun” was so vague that it included many unserialized parts on guns in circulation today, like a slide on a handgun or an upper receiver on a rifle or shotgun.
With “assembling” a “ghost gun” criminalized by H.R. 7910, gun owners would no longer be able to disassemble their firearms, clean them, and “assembl[e]” them back into “a functional firearm” if even one unserialized part meets the new definition of a “ghost gun.” The fact-checkers claim that this only applies to manufacturers, but the bill states “it shall be unlawful for any person to manufacture…a ghost gun.”
That is why all of the Associated Press’ sources lean heavily on the qualifier “serialized.”
For example, the “AP’S ASSESSMENT” emphasized that the ban didn’t apply to “firearms [with] serial numbers” and a Giffords gun control activist emphasized that the law wouldn’t affect “a firearm that is serialized.” Again, they must have intentionally skipped over the other portion of the same bill that changes the current definition of parts that would be subject to serialization or otherwise be classified as “ghost guns.” Our research indicates that several parts of most modern firearms would meet this new definition (see examples mentioned above).
Therefore, if most guns today are made up of multiple unserialized “ghost gun” parts, as the bill proposes, then you won’t be able to clean your gun without violating the law unless you have a firearm manufacturer’s license.
Big picture: these anti-gun Democrats didn’t even do their own research, because when ATF tried the same definition change last year, GOA and our activists fought back, and ATF later acknowledged and backtracked [Page 24727] this change.
-GOA-
Them: ‘You Must Care!’ Us: ‘No.’
We refuse to care about stupid Democrat obsessions.
We don’t care about climate change. It’s a hoax designed to fill the hole in lib souls that used to be filled with faith, and for the ruling caste, it’s a tool to steal our money and freedom.
We don’t care about some alleged moral necessity to disarm normal Americans. When they whine, “The purpose of guns is to hurt people,” we nod. Yes, they are. Our guns never have and never will hurt anyone who is not a criminal or an aspiring tyrant. But when those categories of bad people get uppity, yeah, we reserve our right to hurt them within the bounds of proper laws and morality.
We don’t care about claims that America was stolen from other people. Like every other patch of inhabitable dirt on the planet, America was conquered from people who conquered it from someone else first. When we make a “land acknowledgment,” it goes as follows: “Yeah, we took it, and now it’s ours.”
We don’t care about their froth-mouthed accusation that America is some sort of racist cauldron of hatred. Many of us served in real racist cauldrons of hatred and have no time for the silly posturing of frivolous ninnies pretending to be white saviors by nattering on about non-existent “white supremacy” – which is a remarkably colorblind concept since anyone who rejects the ideology of the faculty lounge can practice it regardless of race or ethnicity, including people who are black and Latinx – hey, it’s our word now, commies, and we’re never letting you live it down.
And we don’t care about a minor tussle – punctuated by an unpunished government murder of an unarmed trespasser – from over a year and a half ago, except to the extent that the political persecutions that followed must be remedied and avenged. Every non-narc victim of this Stasi witch hunt should be pardoned and the next GOP administration should settle their civil rights suits for the outrageous violation inflicted upon them by a politicized DOJ for huge sums. The guy who shot Ashli Babbitt should be prosecuted – there’s no statute of limitations on murder – and the GOP, once it takes Congress back in November, should investigate the federal agents on the scene, the systemic denial of rights, and the selective prosecutions that followed. That would make for an interesting set of primetime hearings, as opposed to the tedious political onanism of the current kangaroo kommittee.
We don’t care about any of it. And that is important. The left can only impose its will when it convinces us to choose to let them do so. They have to make us care. Look at them. They are a gaggle of mutated misfits, neurotic chicks, academic parasites, grievance hustlers, and femmy doofuses who can’t do a push-up. They can force nothing on us. That’s why they attempt to enlist the power of the state to do it for them, but their real power comes from us going along. When you watch some stupid Star Wars spin-off on Disney, you empower them. When you refuse to vote because you are convinced your vote will never be counted – despite huge election reforms in places like Georgia – you help them. When you let yourself think, “Gosh, maybe this androgenous fatty screaming that I am a privileged tool of the patriarchy has a point because s/he/it would never lie to my face,” you let them win.
No.
Instead, fight for what you care about.
We care that America neither be humiliated by seventh century savages nor abandon our allies to them. We’re going to reform our military into what it was meant to be – an awesome and awesomely unwoke killing machine that strikes terror in the hearts of communists and other terrorists around the globe.
We care that American warriors are no longer sacrificed in stupid wars by people who never pick up a weapon except to shoot their hunting buddies in the face by accident. We’re going to oust the Beltway Cowgirl and her ilk. But not Adam Kinzinger – his new Democrat friends already ousted him through gerrymandering, and it must sure be humiliating to have been so publicly treated like a cellblock punk. No, we’re electing based Republicans who know what time it is. It’s time to fight.
We care that our schools are hardened to protect themselves from the little psychos this sick culture breeds. And we care that they not teach woke nonsense. We’re going to clean them up one school board insurrection at a time, and if the FBI thinks that makes us terrorists, then that’s just another reason to close it down.
We care about the culture enough to make it clear to woke companies that if they side with our enemies, they are our enemies, and there is a price for choosing to be our enemies.
We care about it taking $140 to fill up the tanks of our SUVs when oil is sitting there untouched under the surface of our great land because to get it would offend Gaia and all her followers in Manhattan and Santa Monica. We’re going to elect a new president from the “Drill, baby, drill” caucus.
We care about our kids not becoming the psycho-sexual playthings of skeevy perverts, whether hired by some idiot principal or elsewhere in the culture. We’re going to punch back so hard on these mutants that they’ll understand that der kinder are off-limits or else.
We care about America. We’re well aware that this is the greatest country on earth, the greatest country in human history, and we are not about to give it up to mollify a bunch of tantrum-throwing weenies trying to draw us into the psycho-drama created by their daddy issues.
And we care enough about America to tell these freaks demanding that we care about their Toobin Zoom call litany of gripes, “No.”
Anti-gun activists react to Senate gun control deal
For the first time since 1994, it looks like we’re going to get gun control. In the wake of Buffalo, Uvalde, Tulsa, and Smithsburg, it was probably too much to hope that there wouldn’t be anything at all.
On Sunday, as Cam noted, a bipartisan committee announced they had reached a deal.
Of course, some folks have feelings about it.
US campaigners have welcomed a potential cross-party deal on gun safety reforms but stressed the proposals do not go far enough.
“This is progress even if small,” said David Hogg, a survivor of the 2018 Parkland school shooting in Florida.
Ex-lawmaker Gabrielle Giffords, injured in a 2011 shooting in Arizona, said it was an “important step forward”.
The plans include tougher checks for buyers under the age of 21 and cracking down on illegal gun purchases.
They were announced by a cross-party group of US senators on Sunday. Crucially, the proposals are supported by 10 Republicans, meaning they have the numbers to be voted into law.
President Joe Biden also said the plans were “steps in the right direction” but they fell far short of what he and many Democrats have been calling for.…
“It’s a great first step but that’s just what it is,” Mr Hogg told the BBC. “No single policy is going to stop every shooting but this policy could stop the next Parkland and that’s a good step.”
Except, the measures reported that are most likely to prevent the next Parkland have absolutely nothing to do with gun control.
Increased effort to address mental health and school security will do far, far more than including more information in the background check process would.
Now, to be fair, this could be a whole lot worse.
For most of us, this isn’t likely to create any kind of an issue and we’ll keep going about our lives like we always have. Part of the deal apparently calls for encouraging states to pass red flag laws, but since they can’t actually make them, I think it’s unlikely we’ll see too many take advantage of such “encouragement.”
However, it’s also clear that Democrats won’t be satisfied by this, either.
Sure, they reached a deal here, but it’s far from what they want and they don’t know how to accept that. When these measures fail to stop the next shooting, the 10 Republicans who backed this can expect to hear all about how they didn’t go far enough and it’s still all their fault.
I say this because much of this fails to actually address the root of mass shootings. In fact, it fails to even look for the root of mass shootings. It’s not guns, for crying out loud.
Yet something to think about is that now the pressure to accept more gun control will be greatest since these Republicans have signaled they’re willing to budge. They’re the ones who are going to be targeted to budge yet again.
This is far from over.
Democrats won’t be satisfied with what they’ve gotten and they will begin pressing for all these new regulations they want in the very near future. What just happened won’t even be acknowledged or, if it is, it’ll be labeled too little to make a difference.
Just like every other bit of gun control ever passed.
Some Republicans still have a spine
"Governor Tom Wolf today condemned Republicans in the House Judiciary Committee for refusing to move forward a package of commonsense bills that would help address the gun violence crisis facing Pennsylvania." https://t.co/elhtIcdFj8
— Firearms Policy Coalition (@gunpolicy) June 13, 2022
Ohio’s new permitless carry law goes into effect Monday
With a new state gun law going into effect Monday, allowing people to carry concealed firearms without a license, some might think people are out buying guns.
Not so, says Daryl Upole, owner of Ohio Guns in Ashtabula, a federally licensed firearms dealer.
“Mostly people are concerned about gun control after the Texas shootings,” he said. “As far as the concealed handgun license (CHL), I’ve had no one buy a firearm because of that.”
Ohio joined its neighbors as a “permitless carry” state on March 14 when Gov. Mike DeWine signed into law Senate Bill 215. Under the new law, set to take effect Monday, adults who can lawfully own a firearm will be able to conceal carry a handgun without a permit or background checks.
“It’s important to note that under the new law, you can carry a concealed handgun, but you can’t buy a gun [at a federally licensed dealer] without a background check,” Upole said.