I don’t advise the use of warning shots. If the situation is bad enough that it’s time to go to guns, don’t waste ammo on something that’s not the problem. Take care of the problem.

Homeowner screamed and fired a warning shot before ultimately killing home intruder

A Mississippi homeowner shot and killed a man breaking into a residence Friday morning, police report.

Dispatchers received a 911 call just before 6 a.m. Friday morning about an unwanted person on Johnson Circle. As officers were on their way, the caller remained on the phone with 911 as the situation escalated, Adams County Sheriff TravisPatten said.

“He began to break windows around the residence and found an unlocked metal security door under the carport. He opened that door and then started trying to kick in the other door behind that. Once that door came open, the homeowner fired a warning shot first and then fired another shot which struck the suspect in the arm. The bullet proceeded on through his chest and he was pronounced dead on arrival.”

Patten added homeowners said they didn’t know Harris.

Adams County Coroner James Lee identified the man as 35-year-old Gari Harris.

“It’s another sad day in Natchez,” Lee said. “As always, my prayers go out to all of the families involved.”

The incident occurred on Johnson Circle, Patten said the man appears to have broken windows and tried to kick in the door of the residence before he was shot.

He was pronounced dead on arrival, he said

“At this time, we do not know why he was at that house,” he said. “He did the same thing at another residence up the street as well.”

He said the homeowners were taken to the sheriff’s office for questioning but it appears that they were acting defensively.

“Mississippi is a castle doctrine state,” he said. “While this subject was beating on the windows and doors, the homeowner screamed several times for him to leave making it clear that he was not wanted there. Even after he fired the warning shot, he continued trying to get into the residence.”

They’ve only cared about the Constitution when its powers were a benefit to what they wanted.

To confiscate guns, Democrats demoncraps are ready to destroy the courts and the Constitution

Most Democrats demoncraps in Congress do not care about institutions or the “commonsense” gun control proposals they profess to support. They want full-scale gun confiscation, and they don’t care how many norms and institutions they need to destroy to accomplish it.

Rep. Mondaire Jones (D-NY) laid out where the Democrap Party stands and why Republicans should not humor any Democratic “deal” on gun control. “If the filibuster obstructs us, we will abolish it,” Jones said. “If the Supreme Court objects, we will expand it, and we will not rest until we’ve taken weapons of war out of circulation in our communities.”

Rep. David Cicilline (D-RI) put it more bluntly: “Spare me the bulls*** about constitutional rights.”

Does Jones or Cicilline know anything about these “weapons of war” they want to ban and confiscate? Of course not. Cicilline said that he couldn’t think of a “single incident” where “an assailant using an assault weapon” was stopped by someone with a gun, even though such an example happened just last week in West Virginia. More prominently, there was Stephen Willeford, the man who confronted a shooter at a church in Sutherland Springs. Grabien’s Tom Elliott has a list of self-defense stories, with 315 examples going back to Jan. 1, 2019.

Jones is embarrassingly uneducated as well. When asked, he said that “semiautomatic weapons would qualify as assault weapons.” He then said that handguns “would not qualify” as assault weapons, even though the vast majority of handguns are semiautomatic. “Semiautomatic” simply means the gun fires one bullet every time the trigger is pulled and that you don’t need to cock or load the gun after every shot. Jones is either lying about not wanting to ban handguns or, more likely, he has absolutely no idea what he’s talking about.

The same is true for President Joe Biden, who wants to ban 9 mm guns because “a 9 mm bullet blows the lung out of the body,” and “there is no rational basis for it in terms of self-protection.” Biden wants you to think that the most popular handgun caliber in the country is like a sci-fi weapon. The White House then walked back the idea that Biden supported a handgun ban. Either the White House is lying now, or Biden, who has been advocating gun control for years, still has not learned a single fact about what guns are or how they work.

Democrats constantly trip over themselves on gun control, repeating blatant falsehoods and calling for gun control policies that contradict their rhetoric. While they claim their policies are commonsense and moderate, their rhetoric indicates that the only way they can get what they want is through gun confiscation, whether they are openly pursuing it or not. As Cicilline and Jones helpfully illustrated, they will destroy the Senate, the Supreme Court, and the Constitution to do so.

‘Killing Weapon’? So he wants what; Nerf Guns with marshmallow bullets? Using any gun is using a ‘killing weapon’. That’s why they’re referred to as a class of ‘deadly weapon’
And, again, it’s not about ‘need’. That comes from communism.
“From each according to his ability, to each according to his need”
— Karl Marx

“It’s a killing weapon, and we don’t need them.” Sisolak blasts assault weapon ownership at rally

****

Sisolak claimed assault style weapons weren’t designed for self defense calling them “weapons of war” not protected under the second amendment.

“The nonsense that it’s a right, well then why isn’t it a right to have a rocket launcher, or to drive a tank instead of a car,” he said……..

In point of fact, you can have a rocket launcher and a fully armed tank, as well as artillery. All it takes is money, and in the case of explosives, proper storage. And yet these mental midgets get elected to high office.

99.99% of NICS denials are not prosecuted because they are false denials.

THE Red-Headed libertarian™ Profile picture

The Second Amendment was inspired by British plans to disarm every American.

A part of you probably already knew this, but didn’t have the details.

I’m about to chill you to the bones And give you every piece of evidence you need moving forward. So buckle up.
It began In 1768, “the freeholders” led by John Hancock and James Otis, met in Boston at Faneuil Hall and passed several resolutions. Including “that the Subjects being Protestants, may have Arms for their Defense.”

The royal governor rejected this proposal.

So this petition was circulated under the pseudonym “A.B.C.” (Who was more than likely Sam Adams)Image
Shortly after Sam Adams’ petition was circulated, per the Boston Evening Post, (Oct. 3, 1768) British troops took over Faneuil Hall.

And per The New York Journal, (Feb. 2, 1769) they ordered colonists turn in their guns.Image

Continue reading “”

BLUF
Disarmament, national or personal, is not a moral stance, but the abandonment of morality.

Gun controllers have had a field day with the inaction of the Uvalde cops, but it never occurs to them that’s who they are, standing around, wringing their hands and waiting for someone to tell them what the plan is, so they don’t have to make any difficult choices in the face of a crisis.

Gun control is the moral idiocy of the irresponsible blaming those who have taken responsibility.

The Moral Idiocy of Gun Control
Is it more moral to own a gun or to pay someone else to do it for you?

I was chatting with a horrified Swedish visitor who described a visit to Nevada.

“There was this grandmother, an elderly lady, and she took out a gun from her purse,” he told me, shaking his head.

We were having this conversation in a city which had racked up 77 shootings in just one month.

Few New Yorkers legally own guns. The NYPD has issued around 40,000 handgun permits in a city of over 8 million. That’s around one handgun for every two-hundred New Yorkers.

Don’t assume that the parts of the city with the most guns are the most dangerous.

The vast majority of handgun permits are in Staten Island, which has the lowest crime rate in the city, as opposed to the Bronx, with the highest. Manhattan has few legal guns relative to its population while the white working class areas of Brooklyn have some of the most legal guns.

The Daily News, which interviewed a criminologist as part of its anti-gun crusade, found that he was “puzzled”. “Some people see a mugging in the Bronx, and they want to get a gun on Staten Island,” he argued. “That’s not rational, but some people really want guns.”

Perhaps one of the reasons that there are fewer muggings in Staten Island is that more of the folks there can prevent them. Muggers, like most predators, prefer victims who don’t fight back.

Continue reading “”

Observation O’ The Day

Until the early 20th century ‘enlightened govt’ meant limited govt. Then the Bolshevik dream of a new Soviet man challenged the idea of God with a vision of man made socially engineered universal order, and at a stroke aristocracy became cool again.
The reason I think the new aristocracy will fail has nothing to do with conservatives or Republicans but rather the belief that no top down system of control has enough computing power and sufficiently low latency to deal with complex reality. –Richard Fernandez

Rep. David Cicilline: ‘Spare Me the *BS* About Constitutional Rights’

Democrat Representative David Cicilline of Rhode Island said a bit of the anti-gun left’s quiet part out loud in a House hearing on Thursday when he went on a rant against the constitutionally protected rights of the American people.

Cicilline’s outburst came after concerns were raised that Democrat proposals for federal restrictions on firearms — such as red flag laws — would violate Americans’ right to keep and bear arms as well as infringe on their due process rights.

“You know who didn’t have due process?” Cicilline asked, growing heated. “You know who didn’t have their constitutional right to life respected? Kids at Parkland, and Sandy Hook, and Uvalde, and Buffalo, and the list goes on and on,” he said. “So spare me the bullsh*t about constitutional rights.”

When asked to yield, Cicilline snapped back, “no I will not yield, and I will not yield for my entire five minutes so don’t ask again.”

Brushing aside the obvious irony that Cicilline and his party continually attempt to deprive unborn children of their right to life — he’s repeatedly insisted that abortion is “constitutionally protected” and the Susan B. Anthony List notes that Cicilline “has consistently voted to eliminate or prevent protections for the unborn including to force taxpayers to pay for abortion domestically or internationally.”

So, of course, if Cicilline and Democrats are committed to depriving Americans of any rights before they’re born, it’s no issue for him to try trampling on the rights of Americans once they’re born.

While it would seem that running with the “Americans’ constitutional rights mean nothing to us” line wouldn’t be smart politics for the party already set to get shellacked in November’s midterms, the increasingly radical Democrat Party seemed to embrace what Cicilline said.

Dems and leftists on Twitter amplified and cheered Cicilline’s outburst while MSNBC host and NBC News contributor Katie Phang tweeted a video of the rant, saying “This is EXACTLY the kind of messaging Democrats need.” We’ll see how that kind of messaging works in the days ahead in Congress as Dems try to force additional firearm restrictions through the House and Senate — and in November when voters determine who will represent them and which party will control the legislative branch.

It Took Two British Civil Wars to Plant the Seeds of American Liberty

In the previous installment of this series, I gave the historical and religious background of the English Civil War — which planted the seeds of every significant institution that would take root in American soil. As we noted before, there were many concrete issues at stake in the struggle between the Crown and Parliament.

Rural people, gentry, nobles, high-church Anglicans, and persecuted Catholics feared that the power of Parliament would benefit city-dwellers, merchants (including slave-traders), nouveau riche speculators, and radical Protestants. So they rallied behind the efforts of monarchs such as James I and his son Charles I to increase the king’s own power, independent of Parliament.

This led them to support a political theory which James I called “the Divine Right of Kings.” On this view, the king embodied the law itself, which was identical to his will. Obedience to God required obedience to His appointed ruler on earth, leaving no justification for resistance or revolt. As David Kopel notes in The Morality of Self-Defense and Military Action, James’ theory was new to Englishmen. It was quickly denounced both by Calvinists and Catholics.

Ancient Absolutism, Revived

The theory had ancient precedent. The absolute power of Roman emperors, oriental monarchs, and other pre-Christian rulers was still the norm outside of Europe even in the 17th century. It was only the collapse of the Western Roman empire that allowed for much more decentralized political institutions to emerge. The rediscovery of Roman law during the Renaissance gave monarchs a powerful, prestigious weapon in their quest to consolidate power.

Feudal barons would zealously guard their independence throughout the Middle Ages, yielding concessions from kings like the Magna Carta. The Church would assert her rights, and protect her vast institutional wealth and land-holdings, wielding moral authority over the people.

Continue reading “”

“Do Something” Is Not A Serious Policy And Will Not Prevent Mass Shootings

Just to point out that people who believe NICS and other ‘background checks’ actually check into a person’s background are misinformed at best. All that happens is a check is made to see if the person has been entered in the FBI’s list of prohibited people; felons, mentally defective, etc.
You want a real check into your background? Submit an SF-86 form when applying for a job that requires a security clearance.

Opinion: Put more guns in the hands of older people

In the aftermath of this most recent rash of crazed shooters killing innocent citizens and children while they are going about their normal lives, it is urgently incumbent upon all our lawmakers in Raleigh and Washington, to give North Carolina’s senior citizens a fighting chance to defend themselves against the increasing numbers of evil killers just itching to get into a crowd and open fire.

One thing our legislatures can do now is enact a law allowing seniors — 65 and above — to carry a concealed weapon without a license or other restrictions — in addition to “Open-Carry” laws already on the books in many states.

Here are a few common sense reasons to pass this law ASAP:

1. Very few crimes are committed by this age group and many — if not most — seniors are living on fixed incomes and can’t afford expensive classes, licenses, or other legal obstacles to carrying a concealed weapon for self-defense.

2. The same thorough background checks that apply to everyone else should also apply to seniors and anyone with a history of mental illness and convicted felons should not be allowed to carry a weapon.

3. All mandatory testing, training, fingerprinting, firearms safety and proficiency courses should be waived as most seniors have had many years of experience using a gun safely.

4. Since seniors are generally not any kind of threat and the least likely of all citizens to commit a crime, arming our seniors would enhance the public safety of all of America’s population.

DeKalb homeowner shoots, kills man trying to break into his apartment

Police say a homeowner shot and killed a man who was trying to break into his DeKalb County [Georgia] apartment.

Police said the shooting happened around 1:45 a.m. Thursday on the 2800 block of Panthersville Court.

When police got to the scene, they found a man shot to death. The homeowner said the man was trying to break in.

Police are not charging the homeowner and he has not been identified.

The man who was killed has also not been identified.

This looks like they want the proposed laws to be so ludicrous they know it will never pass in the Senate. Typical grandstanding.

Pelosi’s gun control package defines a high-capacity magazine as 10 rounds

The gun control package proposed by House Democrats identifies “high-capacity” magazines as holding 10 rounds or more.

The proposed new limit on ammunition clips is part of the six-piece gun-control package that the House Judiciary Committee is marking up Thursday during an emergency meeting……….

Because there are Enemies, Foreign and Domestic

As I posted back in March

Here’s the reason why we will retain our arms. Morons like this who either forgot, or never believed the oath of office they took. Now foresworn this one is.

As the former Commanding General of the Infantry Center at Fort Benning and Chief of Infantry, I know a bit about weapons. Let me state unequivocally — For all intents and purposes, the AR-15 and rifles like it are weapons of war. A thread:

Those opposed to assault weapon bans continue to play games with AR-15 semantics, pretending there’s some meaningful differences between it and the M4 carbine that the military carries. There really aren’t. 2/

The military began a transition from the M16 to the M4, an improved M16, some years ago. The AR-15 is essentially the civilian version of the M16. The M4 is really close to the M16, and the AR-15. 3/

So what’s the difference between the military’s M4 and the original AR-15? Barrel length and the ability to shoot three round bursts. M4s can shoot in three round bursts. AR-15s can only shoot single shot. 4/

But even now, you can buy AR-15s in variable barrel lengths with Weaver or Picatinny rails for better sights and aiming assists like lasers. Like the military, but w/o the bayonet. 5/

But our troops usually use single shot, not burst fire. You’re able to fire a much more accurate (deadly) shot, that way. Note: you can buy our Advanced Combat Optical Gunsight on Amazon. So troops usually select the same fire option available on AR-15. 6/

That is why the AR-15 is ACCURATELY CALLED a ‘weapon of war.’ It is a very deadly weapon with the same basic functionality that our troops use to kill the enemy. Don’t take the bait when anti-gun-safety folks argue about it. They know it’s true. Now you do too. 7/7

He apparently can’t even realize now that he contradicts himself in the same speech.

This is not about taking away anyone’s guns… Here’s what we have to do: ban assault rifles and high capacity magazines. –SloJoe

 

Chicago man shoots, kills another man who confronted him with knife

CHICAGO – A Chicago homeowner shot and killed another man who confronted him with a knife in his garage Wednesday afternoon, police said.

Around 2 p.m., police say a 36-year-old man was inside his Logan Square garage in the 2700 block of North Monticello when a 53-year-old man armed with a knife approached him.

The victim pulled out a gun and shot the offender in the head, police said.

The offender was pronounced dead at the scene. The victim did not sustain any injuries, police said.

Area Five detectives are investigating.