Edmonton ‘Mass Shooting’ Sees 60 or 70 Shots Fired, One Dead, Six Wounded

Mohamod Mohamod, 22 years old, and Said Ibrahim, 23 years old, were both later found, arrested and charged with first-degree murder, as well as multiple counts of discharging a firearm with the intent to endanger life.

The third suspect has been positively identified as Said Osman, 27 years old. Police are conducting a “Canada-wide” search for Osman, who is wanted for the same crimes as the other two suspects.

Two people have been charged and police are combing the country for a third suspect after dozens of rounds were fired outside a lounge in North Edmonton at around 2:45am on Saturday.

Seven people were wounded by the bullets at the time, and one of them, since identified as Imbert George, 28 years old, has since died in hospital of his multiple injuries. Two of of the other victims are still in serious condition, and continue to be treated in hospital.

The incident occured just outside of the Ertale Lounge in the vicinity of 124th Street and 118th Avenue, and local authorities suspect that gang-related activities and issues may have had something to do with the shooting.

Police Chief Dale McFee commented during an audio interview the following day that “There [were] approximately 60 or 70 shots fired at a crowd.”

“The video, obviously, is evidence so I can’t show it, but it’s horrific,” continued an obviously shaken McFee.

 

The DeSantis Doctrine.

You gotta hand it to a guy who convinces Democrats to die on the hill of defending perverted groomers talking about sex with little school kids. It’s on-brand for their fellow travelers at The Lincoln Project, but you would think that Democrats actually want to win elections. But no – they want to make the schools safe for pedos, and they don’t care who knows it. But they’ll care plenty in November when parents around the country come out and vote for The Party of Not Hitting on Der Kinder.

Donald Trump has his record of achievement – economic success and peace abroad. But Ron DeSantis has the DeSantis Doctrine, sort of like the Monroe Doctrine, except instead of keeping shady foreigners out of our hemisphere, the DeSantis Doctrine keeps woke fascists out of our lives.

It was DeSantis who started the fire that burned the pyre of Democrat hopes and dreams they jumped onto in their campaign against the Florida anti-grooming statute. But that’s only his latest fight with the elite. DeSantis has been laying down the law in Florida, literally, and in a way even Donald Trump never did. At some level, Donald Trump still has some residual respect for the trappings of the elite. He’s impressed by name universities and huge corporations, and for all his much-justified complaining, he still cavorts with institutions that hate him, like the NYT. He’s not yet completely done with the institutions, but DeSantis is. DeSantis is all honey badger, laying waste and making the rubble bounce.

Continue reading “”

RUSSIAN OFFENSIVE CAMPAIGN ASSESSMENT, MARCH 17:

March 17, 5:30pm ET

Russian forces did not make any major advances and Ukrainian forces carried out several local counterattacks on March 17.[1] Russian forces made little territorial progress and continued to deploy reserve elements—including from the 1st Guards Tank Army and 810th Naval Infantry Brigade—in small force packets that are unlikely to prove decisive. Russian forces continue to suffer heavy casualties around Kharkiv, and Russian attempts to bypass the city of Izyum are unlikely to succeed. Russian forces continued assaults on Mariupol on March 17 but did not conduct any other successful advances from Crimea.

Key Takeaways

  • Russian forces continue to make steady territorial gains around Mariupol and are increasingly targeting residential areas of the city.
  • Ukrainian forces northwest of Kyiv launched several local counterattacks and inflicted heavy damage on Russian forces.
  • Ukrainian forces repelled Russian operations around Kharkiv and reported killing a regimental commander.
  • Ukrainian intelligence reports that Russia may have expended nearly its entire store of precision cruise missiles in the first twenty days of its invasion.
  • Russian forces deployed unspecified reserve elements of the 1st Guards Tank Army and Baltic Fleet Naval Infantry to northeastern Ukraine on March 17.
  • Russia may be parceling out elements of the reserve force that could conduct an amphibious operation along the Black Sea coast to support ongoing assaults on Mariupol, further reducing the likelihood of a Russian amphibious assault on Odesa.
  • Ukrainian forces shot down 10 Russian aircraft—including five jets, three helicopters, and two UAVs—on March 16, and Ukrainian forces continue to successfully contest Russian air operations.

Russian forces face mounting difficulties replacing combat casualties and replacing expended munitions. The Ukrainian General Staff stated on March 17 that Russian forces will begin another wave of mobilization for the Donetsk People’s Republic’s (DNR) 1st Army Corps on March 20.[2] Ukrainian intelligence continued to report Russian forces face difficulties manning both combat and support units and increasing desertion rates.[3] The General Staff further reported that Russian forces are increasingly using indiscriminate weapons against residential areas because they used almost their entire supply of “Kalibr” and “Iskander” cruise missiles in the first 20 days of the invasion.[4] It is unclear if the Ukrainian General Staff means Russian forces have used almost all precision munitions earmarked for the operation in Ukraine or almost all missiles in Russia’s total arsenal—though likely the former.

Continue reading “”

The Democrats Are Trying to Hide a Very Dirty Secret About Electric Cars

The Left views electric cars like the Rings of Power. It’s predictable but also pathetic. Driving electric cars saves the environment, says the left-wing drone. It emits next to nothing regarding carbon emissions, except that it does. Do liberals think we don’t know that this whole fad is a con game? Where do you think the energy that powers the batteries comes from? Fairies? Electric cars aren’t as efficient as gas-powered vehicles, but you pay more because…of feelings. Screw that. Green energy is a backdoor to communism from greenies who talk more about controlling the means of production than saving Mother Earth. Clean energy is a grift and political crony project aimed at giving fat cat donors tax breaks. Solyndra forever ruined this industry. I don’t care what anyone says, it’s all a long miserable exercise in subsidizing sub-par products.

Coal is what powers your electric car. Do liberals even know that? The very people who mock states like West Virginia don’t seem to know that these areas allow them to drive their precious, overpriced electric cars (via The Federalist):

To advance their climate agenda and deflect backlash about rising gas prices, Democrats are telling Americans that driving electric cars is for the greater good of the environment, fully knowing the charging stations for these cars are not fossil fuel free.

In reality, one of Tesla’s Supercharger stations was reported to get 13 percent of their energy from natural gas and 27 percent from coal. Power plants burn coal to generate electricity to power electric cars and emit a higher fossil fuel footprint than the left would care to admit.

While these vehicles may be falsely advertised, many who invest in these overpriced cars are able to avoid paying the currently outrageous gas prices. Still, Americans’ growing reliance on electric cars and the batteries they require will increase our dependence on countries such as China for materials.

“Chinese companies, particularly CATL, have secured vast supplies of the raw materials that go inside the batteries,” The New York Times reported in December. “That dominance has stirred fears in Washington that Detroit could someday be rendered obsolete, and that Beijing could control American driving in the 21st century the way that oil-producing nations sometimes could in the 20th.”

By increasing our use of electric cars, the United States will require more lithium batteries and will further rely on China to sustain our supply.

Well, isn’t that peachy. Liberals seem to have the yellow fever when it comes to China, or at least they’re a bit kinky when it comes to their wanting to be dominated by this country. Gas prices began to soar when Joe Biden took a hatchet to the Keystone Pipeline and our own oil and gas industry. That’s just a fact.

With the Ukraine war raging now, and sanctions being slapped on Russia for their invasion, the line the Biden White House is selling right now is ‘if you worried about $8/gallon for gas, you should buy a…$50k+ electric car.’ It’s almost too good to be true. You cannot make it up. The Democrats’ plan to ease gas price pain for a large swath of Americans is to force them to buy vehicles they can’t afford. A part of that is due to liberals being idiots. The other part is that it shows how the Democratic Party doesn’t know working people anymore. It’s all urban-based, rich, over-educated, and very white people making these snide remarks. The professional Left is the Democratic Party—and these people view those who drive pick-up trucks as neo-Nazis.

The dirty little secret is that a lot of fossil fuels are used to power the liberal delusions behind their electric car fetish. The Federalist did a great job sifting through the nonsense.

Law profs claim lack of gun control fueling “small arms race”

Generally speaking, I really love my job. I get to talk to interesting people, cover an issue that I’m passionate about, and can maybe even make a difference every once in awhile in terms of keeping bad laws off the books and putting good laws in place.

One of the few downsides, however, is having to subject myself to a lot of the dumb arguments made by the gun control lobby and their allies in the media and academia. The latest? A new paper by two law professors at the University of Oklahoma and the University of Houston who claim that a lack of gun control laws is fueling what they call a “small arms race” across the country.

On November 19, 2021, Kyle Rittenhouse was acquitted of homicide charges stemming from his killing of two people—Anthony Huber and Joseph Rosenbaum—at a protest of police violence in Kenosha, Wisconsin. Rittenhouse had armed himself and traveled to the protest, purportedly to defend Kenoshans’ property against looting.

The acquittal sparked substantial public outrage about the state of gun laws and about the legitimacy of the criminal justice system more generally.

In a similar case, Travis McMichael, Gregory McMichael, and William Bryan were charged with murdering Ahmaud Arbery in Brunswick, Georgia. There, the defendants believed that Arbery was engaged in criminal activity and pursued him with a gun.

When Arbery took action to protect himself, Travis McMichael shot and killed him. Here too, many were concerned that an acquittal would lead to greater vigilantism. And while the jury ultimately convicted, Georgia law would have also allowed acquittal in a similar or even identical  case.

Such cases have raised public concern that certain states’ gun-use and self-defense laws effectively invite malicious individuals—including vigilantes and white supremacists—to kill with impunity.

Funny how both the acquittal of Kyle Rittenhouse and the conviction of the McMichaels and William Bryan are both evidence of the need for more gun control laws, according to the professors. I’m particularly amused by the statement that Georgia law could have led to an acquittal, because that’s how the law works in virtually every criminal case that goes to trial. Juries have the option of finding defendants guilty or not guilty, and the fact that they choose between those verdicts based on the evidence presented isn’t in and of itself a sign that we need more or less laws.

Continue reading “”

ANALYSIS: The Real Problem with ‘Gun Violence’ is Media Bias

Reporting on the revival of a “controversial unit within the New York Police Department” to tackle increased violent crime by going after firearms, CNN headlined its story using an all-too-familiar term that has become firmly entrenched in the media’s lexicon: “gun violence.”

CNN’s headline was as subtle as a heart attack: “NYPD deploys Neighborhood Safety Teams to battle gun violence.”

A quick perusal of one day’s headlines from around the country found nearly a dozen stories all talking about “gun violence,” leaving one to conclude the problem with crime is guns, rather than criminals.

But at this point, what can one expect when the New York Times is finally acknowledging a probe of Hunter Biden, and that it had obtained emails “from a cache of files that appears to have come from a laptop abandoned by Mr. Biden in a Delaware repair shop. The email and others in the cache were authenticated by people familiar with them and with the investigation?”

The New York Times is now the subject of a scathing critique by Michael Goodwin at the rival New York Post, which is all about media bias during the 2020 presidential election campaign. The content of those emails could have swung the election for Donald Trump, Goodwin suggests, but they were withheld from the American public by a “Big Government, Big Tech and Big Media cabal” determined to keep Trump from being re-elected.

Ammoland looked at Hunter Biden’s hard drive last November, focusing on excerpts from Joe Biden’s daily newsletter titled “Office of Vice President Joe Biden News Briefing,” published when the Delaware Democrat was no longer serving as vice president, and before he entered the 2020 campaign.

Then, as he is now, Joe Biden was no friend to the Second Amendment. He gets cover from the same media which has adopted the gun prohibition lobby’s vocabulary.

As noted recently at Liberty Park Press, “’Gun violence’ is a term created by the gun prohibition lobby (often incorrectly identified by the establishment media as ‘gun safety’ or ‘gun reform’ groups). The term, say Second Amendment activists, demonizes guns while essentially relegating other types of violence involving other weapons as somehow less significant.”

To combat this “gun violence,” anti-gunners want to ban so-called “assault rifles.” These are semi-auto sport-utility rifles, but they look “menacing” and they evidently frighten gun haters who have taken to calling them “weapons of war.”

But a look at the FBI Uniform Crime Report for any given year reveals more people are fatally beaten, bludgeoned or stabbed than people shot with rifles of any kind, or shotguns. While certainly true that firearms are used the most in homicides, one never reads about “knife violence” or “baseball bat violence,” while the victims are just as dead. News agencies don’t seem to get this. Long guns are used in a fraction of all homicides.

Continue reading “”

Whether or not you agree with the legality of marijuana, these businesses have a problem. The owners are almost unable to get business banking services,  and thus business credit card services, which makes it a cash only business and a tempting target for thugs.

Suspected pot shop robber fatally shot in Covington

COVINGTON, Wash. — A suspected pot shop robber was fatally shot Thursday night in Covington.

King County sheriff’s deputies were called at about 8 p.m. to the 27600 block of Covington Way Southeast.

A witness told KIRO 7 that the suspected robber had put someone in a headlock in the parking lot.

The suspect then walked the person to the pot shop with a gun to their head, according to the witness.

KIRO 7 was also told that an armed worker at the pot shop confronted the suspect, stopping them from going in, which is when the worker shot the suspect in “self-defense.”

The investigation is ongoing.

Seems like some politicians are more concerned with ‘civility’ than doing their job of ‘securing rights’ of the people.

Wyoming Senate takes a stand on civility

At some point during the Wyoming Legislature’s just-completed budget session, one representative walked up to another and asked why his cohort had to be so mean.

Rep. Bob Wharff (R-Evanston) was on the receiving end of that question, posed by Rep. Cyrus Western (R-Big Horn), and he recollected the exchange to WyoFile. The representative from Evanston stood his ground.

“I told him, ‘The problem is, we are fighting a battle, we are at war,’” Wharff recalled. “These people are attacking our Second Amendment rights. If we don’t stand up and push back — and I honestly believe this — if we don’t defend our Second Amendment rights, all our other rights go out.”

Continue reading “”

What a prosecutor, not.

Justin Smith case dismissed
Craig man’s attempted murder trial does not go to jury after motion granted

A judge dismissed a case that included charges of attempted murder against a Craig man Wednesday.

Justin Smith, who had been accused in September of attempted murder of a man whom he was alleged to have stabbed, did not have his case proceed to trial after defense made a motion for dismissal, and judge Sandra Gardner granted the motion.

Smith is now free and clear of the charges.

A trial was scheduled for May 23, but the court dismissed the case ahead of the jury proceedings after Wednesday’s hearing.

Smith’s charge had stemmed from an incident in which police said he had stabbed a man who had entered the Craig house where Smith was living at the time. Police said he stabbed the man, who recovered from the wounds, three times. Smith contended he was acting in self defense.

In a phone interview with the Craig Press Thursday, Smith said that his alleged victim had entered his house with two other men at 1 a.m. without warning or invitation. Smith said he had pointed a gun at the men, but put the gun down at their urging. Smith said at that time one of the men picked up the gun and, menacing him, attempted to rob Smith. When Smith was going to a back room to get the money the man was instructing him to retrieve at gunpoint, Smith said he then turned suddenly and stabbed the man.

Smith, who was 31 at the time of the incident, turned himself into Moffat County Jail in mid-September, shortly after the incident. He was also charged at the time with Felony Menacing.

Had the case proceeded to trial and Smith been found guilty, he would have faced a possible maximum penalty of 32 years in the Department of Corrections.

Deadly shooting by Clarksville Pike, shooter claims self-defense

NASHVILLE, Tenn. (WZTV) — No charges are being placed currently after a deadly shooting of a man by a Clarksville Pike convenience store clerk on Thursday morning as detectives continie to investigate the clerk’s claim of self-defense.

The victim was identified as 23-year-old Cornell M. Evans of Memphis, according to Metropolitan Nashville Police Department (MNPD).

North Precinct officers were dispatched to a shooting call at the 7-eleven store on 3200 Clarksville PIke around 5: 30 a.m.

The clerk, 23-year-old Devyon Johnson, told detectives that Evans entered the store and went directly to the restroom, staying there for an unusual period of time.

This prompted Johnson asking him to leave. Johnson said Evans exited the bathroom in a furious state as he berated him and other employees.

After Evans was repeatedly asked to leave and left the store, Johnson walked to the front of the parking lot, trying to persuade Evans to leave the property.

While on a sidewalk in front of the business, Johnson said Evans approached him aggressively and took a fighting stance.

A physical fight began and Johnson said as he was being punched from behind, he drew a pistol and shot at Evans to protect himself.

Evans was rushed to Vanderbilt University Medical Center where he died shortly after arrival.

Johnson provided a detailed statement to Homicide detectives and the case will be staffed with the District Attorney’s Office at the conclusion of the investigation.

DON’T BELIEVE THE HYPE. SMART GUN TECH STILL NOT READY FOR PRIMETIME

By Larry Keane

There is a media blitz afoot, pitched by developers of authorized user recognition technology equipped firearms; what the media refers to as so-called, “smart guns.” Several of these companies herald that this is the year when they will finally bring their product to market. It might be a little premature to start popping corks, though.

Despite reports praising companies preparing to launch options for consumers, and polling showing Americans may be open to considering this concept, one critical question remains: Are buyers willing to risk their life on authorized user recognition technology?

So long as the answer from firearm purchasers remains “No,” retailers will not sacrifice shelf space for an unreliable product consumers don’t want to buy.
Prove It
Morning Consult released polling of Americans’ relative “acceptance” of “smart guns” and pitches a rather optimistic outlook.

“After decades of delays and controversy over smart guns, 2022 could be the year that the new weaponry is brought to market.”

The article reports Americans are “interested” in “smart” gun technology and “support the development” of the firearms. Less than half, 43 percent, of those surveyed say they are “very interested” or “somewhat interested” in personalized guns equipped with authorized-user technology, while more than half, 54 percent, aren’t. NSSF’s polling in 2019 showed that just five percent said they were inclined to purchase a so-called “smart gun” with 70 percent saying they still had concerns about reliability.

Firearms equipped with authorized-user technology involves adding electronics that in theory only allows a gun to be fired by a verified, authorized user after unlocked by using either a fingerprint, a pin code or through embedded field communication (RFID) connected to a smartphone or other Bluetooth device. Firearm owners know that guns must work as designed each and every time. There’s no room for failure. Adding in electronics to guns adds points of failure and could have horrific consequences for those who rely on them for self-defense.

LodeStar Works Inc., is one developer working to hit the market this year. President and CEO Gareth Glaser is hopeful. Glaser said, “It’s been around a long time now. Everybody uses one form or another of authentication technology on their smartphone.”

The problem for developers lies in the fact that support for “technology development” does not equate to, “I will buy a smart gun.” Not to mention a firearm is incomparable to an iPhone or Bluetooth speaker. Phones and guns are completely different products and equivocating them is beyond tone-deaf to the firearm market that has seen elevated sales largely driven by concerns for personal safety. If the facial or fingerprint recognition on your iPhone doesn’t recognize you, you’re inconvenienced. If your firearm doesn’t unlock in a time of need, you could be dead.

Failing Track Record

The hype for “The Year of the Smart Gun” began early. Leading up to SHOT Show® 2022 in Las Vegas, these new companies were pitching their products as the “hot” new thing.

“Exclusive: Smart guns finally arriving in U.S., seeking to shake up firearms market,” read a Reuters headline. “‘Smart Gun’ Companies Aim For 2022 Commercial Release,” said another. “Are ‘smart guns’ finally arriving in the U.S.? Here is what we know,” was the headline from The Deseret News. The article began, stating as fact, that “Smart guns…will finally become available to American consumers after decades of questions regarding reliability.”

The Reload was the most measured and accurate. “‘Smart Guns’ Come to the Industry’s Trade Show Amid Hype and Skepticism.”

The history of this technology is not one of success, including hacked and failing test runs. A demonstration by LodeStar prior to SHOT Show® 2022 failed too. A demonstration to show off the technology to shareholders shows an individual loading, chambering and clicking the fingerprint keypad on the side of the 9 mm handgun equipped with the authorized-user technology.

“Alright, ready? Everybody got ears? Alright. Two rounds coming,” he says before firing. Only one round successfully fired while the demonstrator is visibly seen and heard pulling the trigger multiple times for the remaining round before the video abruptly ends. That’s during a controlled test under ideal conditions and in front of the media.

Continue reading “”

1 I think Putin believed his own propaganda.
2 From this performance, it begs the question if the Russian military ever really was the threat we always believed it was, and spent so much time, effort and money on defending against it. Well, the military/industrial complex sure made a fortune.

BLUF:
Russia—whose economy before the invasion was about the size of Italy’s—may have spread its efforts too thinly and the modernization effort also appears to have been undermined by fraud and corruption, said analysts including Michael Clarke, a former director of the Royal United Services Institute, a London think tank, and now associate director of the University of Exeter’s Strategy and Security Institute, citing estimates that some 25% of the invading force are conscripts.

Weapons systems haven’t performed well and commanders pretended they had capabilities that weren’t there, Mr. Clarke said. Of Russia’s effort to create a “large, modern army,” he said: “The part which is modern is not large, and the part which is large is not modern.”

How Russia’s Revamped Military Fumbled the Invasion of Ukraine
Moscow spent years upgrading its capabilities, only to see the armed forces fail their first major test, confounding earlier Western assessments and giving Ukraine a boost

For over a decade, Russia spent hundreds of billions of dollars restructuring its military into a smaller, better equipped and more-professional force that could face off against the West.
Three weeks into Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, its first big test, the armed forces have floundered. Western intelligence estimated last week that 5,000 to 6,000 Russian troops had been killed, some of them poorly trained conscripts.
The dead included four Russian generals—one-fifth of the number estimated to be in Ukraine—along with other senior commanders, according to a Western official and Ukrainian military reports. The generals were close to the front lines, some Western officials said, a sign that lower ranks in forward units were likely unable to make decisions or fearful of advancing.
Russian troops turned to using open telephone and analog radios following the failure of encrypted communications systems, the Ukrainian Defense Ministry has said, making them vulnerable to intercept or jamming. Russian officers were likely targeted after their positions were exposed by their use of open communications, Western military analysts said.
In the strategically located town of Voznesensk, Ukrainian forces comprising local volunteers and the professional military drove off an attack early this month, in one of the most comprehensive routs Russian forces have suffered since invading Ukraine.
Russia’s failings appear to trace to factors ranging from the Kremlin’s wrong assumptions about Ukrainian resistance to the use of poorly motivated conscript soldiers. They suggest that Russia and the West overestimated Moscow’s overhauls of its armed forces, which some military analysts say appear to have been undermined by graft and misreporting.
The military’s previous outings in staged maneuvers and smaller operations in Syria didn’t prepare it for a multipronged attack into a country with a military fiercely defending its homeland, said Michael Kofman, director of Russia studies at CNA, a nonprofit research organization based in Arlington, Va.
“The failures that we’re seeing now is them having to work with a larger force than they’ve ever employed in real combat conditions as opposed to an exercise,” he said. “These exercises that we’ve been shown over the years are very scripted events and closer to theater than anything else.”

Continue reading “”

It is an often repeated line that SloJoe has always been on the wrong side of a foreign policy decision even since he set foot in office as a senator

BLUF:
The Arab ministers are telling the US that if it cannot see a terrorist group for what it is, the Arabs are capable of doing so.

The message that many Arabs are sending to Washington is that the appeasement of the mullahs and failure to stand with friends in the Arab world is emboldening the Houthis and other Islamic terrorist groups that are threatening not only Arabs and Muslims, but the US and other Western countries as well.

If the Biden administration and its friends reach a new deal with Iran’s mullahs, we are likely to see more Arabs come out against the US.

Saudi Arabia’s then Minister of Foreign Affairs, Adel al-Jubeir, already warned years ago, “We have made it very clear that if Iran acquires a nuclear capability we will do everything we can to do the same.”

The Arabs consider Iran a lethal threat to their national security and the stability of the entire Middle East and other parts of the world. If the Biden administration is going to align itself with the mullahs, it will lose the support of its Arab and Muslim allies, who feel bitterly betrayed and fear that nuclear weapons will end up in the hands of these very mullahs and their terrorist groups.

A Final Warning from Arabs to Biden

  • In a message directed at the Biden administration and the other Western powers involved in the Vienna negotiations, the Arab countries said that Iran and its terrorist militias are continuing to create chaos and instability, especially in Syria, Iraq, Yemen and Lebanon.
  • The Arabs, including the Arab League, are telling the Biden administration that, in their view, it is not only Iran that threatens their security, but also its terrorist proxies, including Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, Hezbollah, and the Houthis.
  • The Arabs are clearly worried about the financial and military aid that Iran is providing to the terrorist groups.
  • Any deal with Iran will further strengthen these groups and encourage them to step up their terrorist attacks.
  • The Arabs are also worried that when Iran obtains nuclear weapons, they will sooner or later find their way into the hands of its terrorist proxies and other terrorist groups, including Islamic State (ISIS) and Al-Qaeda.
  • “This president [Biden] is deaf. He cannot be trusted.” – Ali Al-Sarraf, Iraqi political analyst, Al-Arab, March 12, 2022.
  • If the Biden administration and its friends reach a new deal with Iran’s mullahs, we are likely to see more Arabs come out against the US.
  • “We have made it very clear that if Iran acquires a nuclear capability we will do everything we can to do the same.” — Adel al-Jubeir, then Saudi Minister of Foreign Affairs, to CNN, May 9, 2018.
  • The Arabs consider Iran a lethal threat to their national security and the stability of the entire Middle East and other parts of the world. If the Biden administration is going to align itself with the mullahs, it will lose the support of its Arab and Muslim allies, who feel bitterly betrayed and fear that nuclear weapons will end up in the hands of these very mullahs and their terrorist groups.

In what appears to be an eleventh hour and desperate warning to the Biden administration against striking a deal with the Iranian regime, four Arab countries have expressed deep concern over Iran’s ballistic missile program and ongoing support for terrorism.

In a statement issued in Cairo on March 9, the Arab Quartet Committee — Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Bahrain and Egypt — said that Iran continues to interfere in the internal affairs of Arab countries and play a role in sowing sectarian discord among them by supporting and arming terrorist groups such as the Houthi and Hezbollah militias.

The statement was issued amid growing concern in some Arab countries, that the US and other Western powers could reach a deal with Iran to revive the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, also known as the Iran nuclear deal.

Continue reading “”

From earlier;
Yeah, give guns to others but want to take guns from us.

The U.S. will directly transfer the following equipment to the Ukrainian military as part of the latest package, according to a White House fact sheet:

800 Stinger anti-aircraft systems
2,000 Javelin anti-armor missiles
1,000 light anti-armor weapons
6,000 AT-4 anti-armor systems
100 Tactical Unmanned Aerial Systems (armed drones)
7,000 small arms for both military and civilian use (100 grenade launchers, 5,000 rifles, 1,000 pistols, 400 machine guns and 400 shotguns)
Over 20 million rounds of ammunition
25,000 sets of body armor
25,000 helmets

I remember something very similar this was in a movie.
So does someone else.

Beyond Stand Your Ground: Second Amendment Immunity Defense is the Next Legal Frontier

Lee Williams;

Florida’s Stand Your Ground statute and similar laws in other states can offer immunity from prosecution when someone uses deadly force to defend themselves, and affords them quick access to an appellate review if the case doesn’t go their way.

In other words, if a defendant involved in a defensive shooting invokes a Stand Your Ground defense, their case can be dismissed before a trial even begins if it is proven they are entitled to statutory immunity, or appellate judges can be brought in quickly to make sure the case gets handled correctly.

When a defendant files a Stand Your Ground motion, their case is put on hold. Prosecution is halted. The trial court must hold a “Stand Your Ground” hearing – a sort of mini trial – to determine whether the defendant’s use of force meets the standards for Stand Your Ground immunity.

At this point, the burden shifts to the prosecutors, who must then prove by “clear and convincing evidence” why the defendant is not entitled to immunity from prosecution.

After this mini trial, the judge can either dismiss the charges or allow the case to go forward. However, if the charges are not dismissed, the defendant can file a Writ of Prohibition, which quickly bumps the case up to an appellate court for review. This writ can save the time it normally takes to get to the appellate level — usually as much as 18-months to two years — because it allows the defendant to forego a jury trial, sentencing and other delays and present their case directly to the appellate judges, who can affirm or deny their writ.

Stand Your Ground was created to protect people from unjust, malicious or politically motivated prosecutions after they acted in self-defense. By shifting the burden of proof to the state and by making an appeal quick and easy, the law has become a powerful tool, which some believe should be expanded to include other statutes involving Second Amendment rights.

“We need a Second Amendment immunity defense for anything involving the lawful possession of a firearm,” said former Florida prosecutor Lisa Chittaro. “It should mirror Stand Your Ground statutes, but it needs to be broader. It should allow defense attorneys to ask the court to find immunity under the protections of the Second Amendment quickly and efficiently and if they don’t, it should provide a quick route to the appellate level without having to go through the entire court process, which can take years.”

Chittaro pointed to several types of criminal cases that should be covered by Second Amendment immunity. Most involve arrests stemming from gun-free zones, such as schools, sporting events and airports. Many of them lack knowledge – a major factor in a criminal case – much less actual intent to commit a crime.

“If a parent picks up their child from school and they forgot their firearm and someone sees it and complains, they should be covered by Second Amendment immunity,” she said. “The same goes for other gun-free-zone prosecutions where there was no knowledge or intent.”

The problem with most of the prosecutions resulting from arrests in prohibited places, is that police and prosecutors often forget that Americans have a constitutional right to keep and bear arms. A trial judge and/or appellate court should review these cases to determine specifically if it involved this constitutionally protected right, or if the defendant knowingly and with intent committed a crime. Besides, in many states, the list of prohibited places grows every time their legislature meets. This is lawfare – pure and simple.

Every prosecution stemming from an arrest in a prohibited place should begin with an acknowledgement of the defendant’s Second Amendment rights, especially since gun-free zones infringe upon these rights. If a case involves absentmindedness, and not knowledge or the specific intent to commit a crime, judges need to toss them out. It is, after all, what the Framers had in mind when they wrote the Second Amendment.

The Iowa governor says gun control is not the answer.

Reynolds says strict gun control is not the answer after drive-by shooting

DES MOINES, Iowa — Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds had a message Wednesday on the deadly drive-by shooting outside of East High School last week.

At an event Wednesday, Reynolds called the shooting a heartbreaking tragedy but argued stricter gun laws are not the answer.

“The tragedy is our educational system is letting these kids down. They should have been in school. We should be figuring out resources to help them stay there,” Reynolds said.

Instead, she says the focus should be on keeping kids in the classroom.

“Let’s figure out how we get these kids in school, get them the education they need and set them up to be successful. Not set them up for jail or a life of crime. And so that’s where we’re going to continue to focus. We have gun laws. We have laws on the books right now for guns, and those weren’t accessed legally,” Reynolds said.

Des Moines police haven’t determined how the teens got the guns, but say they were possessed illegally because they were minors.

Fifteen-year-old Jose Lopez was killed in the shooting on March 7.

Two teenage girls were injured and remain hospitalized. Four of the suspects that are charged as adults have their first court appearance on Friday. However, one of them will not physically be in court because he entered a written appearance.

Iowa Democrats criticized Reynolds for placing blame on public schools.

House Minority Leader Jennifer Konfrst released a statement saying, “Iowans know the real tragedy is that a 15-year-old has died and two remain in the hospital. Instead of using our Iowa values to bring us together, Reynolds is using this tragedy to vilify teachers and drive Iowans apart.”

Des Moines Schools Superintendent Tom Ahart said Monday, “It’s unfortunate that our state and our country have become a place where firearms are far too easily accessible. We remain committed to protecting our students and staff, but real change to gun laws and access would go a long way to help us.”

A well written article, but she still makes the – unfortunately near usual – ignorant error about the 2nd amendment. The right to keep and the right to bear arms, as defined by the Supreme Court as 2 separate but intertwined rights, were not given by the amendment! The amendment was a restriction on goobermint from infringing on rights that preexisted even the U.S.

The Second Amendment and the Sovereignty of a Nation

As the world watches the Ukrainian people bravely fight for their sovereignty against Russian President Vladimir Putin’s invasion of their country, I am reminded of the importance of the Second Amendment enshrined in the U.S. Constitution.

The right to bear arms has been viciously attacked in the past few decades as an archaic vestige of a bygone era. However, as many Ukrainians take up arms for the first time in their lives, it serves as a stark reminder of why our Second Amendment rights at home are critical for the survival of our nation.

Many Americans are familiar with the Second Amendment and how its foundation -as described by our nation’s Founding Fathers – was to grant citizens the right to defend themselves against a tyrannical government. Usually, this understanding is only applied in the case of a tyrannical U.S. government; however, Ukraine has proven that the right to bear arms can be fundamental in protecting the sovereignty of a nation against a hostile foreign government.

While the value of the Second Amendment is disputed within American society, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has—in a dramatic reversal of his initial stance against the legalization of weapons—reversed his policy in the face of Russian aggression. Zelensky recently not only called on ordinary Ukrainians to take up arms in the defense of their nation, but concurrently stated that the Ukrainian government would issue weapons to any citizen who requested one.

Though a judicious decision by Zelensky, many Ukrainians—in preparation before the conflict—had limited experience with firearms. For example, in viral images weeks before the invasion, Ukrainians were seen wielding wooden rifles in an attempt to gain as much training as possible with firearms. While honorable, this deficit in knowledge across the agrarian nation, has no doubt harmed their readiness against the Russian forces.

While the Russo-Ukrainian conflict provides a fresh example of why Americans’ right to bear arms is so critical, there are other examples here in the United States of Americans taking up arms in order to defend their rights. For example, look no further than the Deacons for Defense and Justice. Founded in 1964, the group of Black World War II veterans armed themselves to defend against the Ku Klux Klan as black Americans marched for civil rights against the Jim Crow South. These American patriots looked tyranny in the face and took up arms in the name of liberty and justice. From the Deacons for Defense and Justice to the Battle of Athens, Tennessee, Americans have used the Second Amendment to protect against those who sought to oppress a population.

This is why the Second Amendment is so important for the security of the American people and the prosperity of the United States. From Ukraine to within our own shores, a legally armed citizenry can serve as a deterrent to a wide array of potential threats. Many Americans recognize this and have taken the time to get proper firearms training as, according to one study, over 60 percent of American gun owners have formal training.

So, while some Americans continue to debate the value of the Second Amendment, let us not forget the people around the world who have no such rights and cannot defend themselves against an oppressive government. Let us not take for granted the gift of our Founding Fathers that has allowed millions of Americans the right to self-defense and a formal education on how to properly use arms.

The United States stands as one of only three nations in the world that has enshrined the right of its citizenry to bear arms, and the significance of this rare clause in the U.S. Constitution has enabled us to become the beacon of the free world. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine should serve as a reminder of the blessings we in the United States take for granted, and buttress American support for our Second Amendment rights for the sake of the sovereignty of our great nation.

License-to-Carry Applications Have Skyrocketed In Philly — Even More Than You’d Think
“When I saw how high the numbers were, I had to call our stats department to make sure they were right,” a Philadelphia Police Department representative told us.

It didn’t surprise me a bit to learn that license-to-carry applications in Philadelphia have risen over the past year. First, you have the constant reports of shootings, carjackings and other violent crimes in the city. Second, the Philadelphia Police Department made it dramatically easier to apply for a license to carry, starting in January 2021. But I wasn’t exactly ready for just how big this increase has been. And neither was the Philadelphia Police Department, it seems.

“When I saw how high the numbers were, I had to call our stats department to make sure they were right,” police department spokesperson Jasmine Reilly told me after I requested the data.

From 2017 through 2020, the number of license-to-carry applications in Philadelphia held about steady, ranging between 11,049 and 11,814 applications each year. But in 2021, 70,789 people applied for licenses to carry guns.

In other words, license-to-carry applications more than sextupled last year. And in January of this year, the number of applications continued its upward trajectory. (The Pennsylvania State Police publish an annual report showing the number of licenses issued in the counties surrounding Philadelphia as well as in the rest of the state, but a spokesperson for PSP says that data isn’t yet available for 2021.)

Wake Forest University sociologist David Yamane, author of the 2021 book Concealed Carry Revolution, says there’s a well-established trend over the past few decades of gun culture in America shifting from guns for sport, like hunting and target shooting, to guns for personal defense. “This trend has accelerated during the pandemic and other events of the last two years,” he says, adding that licenses to carry surged right along with gun ownership. “But this increase in Philadelphia is exceptional.”

Continue reading “”

Columbia, SC to roll back gun control amid state threats

Some cities think they should pass gun control measures regardless of what rules the state may have in place. In South Carolina, for example, they have preemption. That means cities are forbidden from trying to have local gun control in place. Columbia, South Carolina seemed to think that rule didn’t apply to them.

Now, they’re trying to roll back the gun control measures they passed so they don’t lose state funding.

Columbia will move forward with repealing a series of gun-control measures after bowing from a court fight with S.C. Attorney General Alan Wilson and not wanting a fight with state lawmakers who have the power to fund much-needed city projects.

Columbia, with the backing of then-Mayor Steve Benjamin, passed a series of gun ordinances in 2019 making it illegal to possess firearms within 1,000 feet of a school; allowing gun seizures from people under an extreme risk protection order, commonly known as a “red flag” law; and a rule that added buildings where homemade firearms known as “ghost guns” are constructed to be subject to the city’s nuisance laws.

Wilson sued the city in 2020, arguing that state law preempted local authority on the gun regulations. A Richland County judge sided with Wilson in 2021.

The City Council gave initial approval March 15 to roll back the gun rules in a split vote. Mayor Daniel Rickenmann and council members Aditi Bussells, Howard Duvall and Joe Taylor voted to repeal. Council members Tina Herbert, Ed McDowell and Will Brennan voted against taking the ordinances off of the books.

It seems some of the City Council objected to the idea that they lost the court case. Of course, they did.

The confusion was because the city planned to appeal, but withdrew the appeal the day of the vote. However, that wouldn’t have changed matters in the least. Preemption laws have been upheld time and time again, so there’s no reason to believe South Carolina’s preemption law would have been an exception.

This leads us to what state lawmakers were considering to push the city back on the straight and narrow.

State Rep. Kirkman Finlay, a Columbia Republican and member of the House budget-writing committee, said he urged a city lobbyist and some council members to outright repeal the rules after the deferred vote or risk jeopardizing his ability to secure backing for $170 million the city requested from lawmakers for a number of projects.

At the top of the list is a $35 million request to fix train crossings that can snarl traffic around downtown.…

Finlay has proposed a bill in the House that would allow the state to withhold money for municipalities that do not follow state law.

Frankly, it’s certainly an option that states should at least consider.

See, the problem with far too many preemption laws is that they lack any real teeth. A municipality can pass a gun control law and while it may be illegal, it can linger indefinitely for any number of reasons. Usually, it’s because private citizens lack standing to challenge such a measure unless they’ve been impacted–that often means “arrested”–and if the state opts not to do its job, you get quite the mess.

We’ve seen it happen in Pennsylvania, for example.

Threatening to withhold funding for various projects may be a good incentive to keep places like Columbia from trying to pass their own gun control measures.