Question O’ The Day
How many U.S. Presidents in modern history have announced ‘food shortages’ before they occurred?
The answer is: Only President Biden.
Quip O’ The Day
At one point I would have dismissed this sort of thing as conspiracy theory. But the conspiracy theorists’ track record isn’t bad, these days . . .
Observation O’ The Day
Past Week:
Elon Musk bought Twitter
CNN+ died after being online less than 1 month
(Chris Wallace could not be reached for comment as he’s re-repolishing his resume’)
Joe Rogan announced 2 million new subscribers to his Spotify podcast
Spotify dropped Barack & Michelle Obama’s podcast
Federal Judge struck down the travel mask mandate
See: Did We **** Up (Again)?
QOTD:
Now we have a new potential issue showing up with severe hepatitis in young people which has no reasonable link to covid vaccines, since in nearly all people of that age they’re not eligible to receive them. But, ominously, it is linked to an adenovirus that, in the past, has no known causation for hepatitis.
This raises a question: Has co-infection with another adenovirus, along with the vector being introduced to an unwitting person either in the form of the J&J or AstraZeneca vaccines, resulted in reassortment in the body and a transmissible adenovirus that causes liver damage?
11 countries now reporting outbreak of hepatitis in children.
The World Health Organization said it is investigating an outbreak of acute hepatitis among children that now involves 11 countries, including the United States.
Among the 169 reported cases, at least one child has died from this inflammation of the liver and 17 children needed liver transplants, the WHO said Saturday in a statement.
“It is not yet clear if there has been an increase in hepatitis cases, or an increase in awareness of hepatitis cases that occur at the expected rate but go undetected,” the WHO said. “While adenovirus is a possible hypothesis, investigations are ongoing for the causative agent.”
The symptoms “among identified cases is acute hepatitis with markedly elevated liver enzymes,” the statement added.
Hepatitis is typically caused by a virus. Adenoviruses are common, can spread between people and can cause people to be mildly or severely ill. Among these recent infections, adenoviruses have been detected in at least 74 cases, but they typically don’t cause severe hepatitis in healthy people. The common viruses that cause acute viral hepatitis, including hepatitis viruses A, B, C, D and E, have not been detected in any of these cases, according to the WHO.
While most of the children did not have a fever, many reported gastrointestinal symptoms such as abdominal pain, diarrhea and vomiting “preceding presentation with severe acute hepatitis,” as well as increased levels of liver enzymes and jaundice, CNN reported.
Most of the 169 cases were reported in the United Kingdom, which had 114. Nine cases were reported by the Alabama Department of Health last week.
Investigators are also aware of 13 cases in Spain, 12 in Israel, and smaller numbers in Belgium, Denmark, France, Ireland, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway and Romania. The children are between the ages of 1 month and 16, CNN reported.
Russian explosions point to Ukraine’s embrace of the British special forces model.
Storage tanks at a major oil depot in the Russian city of Bryansk exploded early on Monday. Was Ukraine responsible?
These incidents all appear to fit well with Ukraine’s military strategy.
Bryansk, 62 miles from the Ukrainian border, is beyond the range of most drone systems in Ukraine’s possession. Unconfirmed video from the Bryansk incident indicates the sound of a missile in the terminal attack phase. Considering this noise and Bryansk’s relative distance from Ukraine, short-range ballistic missiles may have been responsible. Regardless, the explosion will disrupt energy replenishment efforts for Russian military forces in Ukraine.
The explosion also dilutes Putin’s credibility in claiming that his war on Ukraine is not a war, but rather a limited “special military operation.” When stuff keeps blowing up in Russian cities, it’s hard to convince the residents of said cities that Russia isn’t at war.
Fatal shooting outside downtown Tampa restaurant was self defense
The shooter was being beaten by three men outside a downtown restaurant when he opened fire, prosecutors conclude.
TAMPA — The shooter who killed a man outside a downtown Tampa restaurant on Feb. 27 was acting in self-defense and will not face criminal charges, the Hillsborough State Attorney’s Office has determined.
Prosecutors said an argument inside Bello Bar & Kitchen, 903 N Franklin St., extended outside that night, where the eventual shooter was thrown to the ground and attacked by three men: Adrian Diaz, Kevin Zayas and Freddy Santiago Jr.
Prosecutors said the shooter, whose name was not released, pulled his gun and fired multiple shots, with one bullet striking Diaz, 23, in the head and killing him. Zayas and Santiago, whose ages were not available, survived and will face battery charges, prosecutors said.
A news release from the State Attorney’s Office details the events that led up to the shooting:
The victim was inside Bello Bar & Kitchen with his girlfriend when he got into an argument with Zayas, which prompted Santiago and Diaz to “crowd” around him until he left for his car. While the victim was gone, security footage captured Santiago arming himself with a butter knife and a drinking glass.
The victim then returned to the bar. Zayas walked over to him and punched him, which prompted the staff of Bello Bar & Kitchen to force the group outside. Things escalated there, with Santiago throwing the glass at the victim and stabbing him repeatedly with the butter knife.
The three then got on top of the victim and beat him. The victim got onto a knee, drew his gun and fired.
The State Attorney’s Office said the victim initially fled the scene but called 911 from a nearby intersection. Once police arrived, he returned and gave his handgun, which he has a license to carry, to officers from the Tampa Police Department.
Security cameras captured the entire encounter, the State Attorney’s Office said, which backed up the victim’s story.
“After our thorough analysis, we have determined that the facts and evidence of this incident prove that the victim reasonably believed he was in fear of imminent death or great bodily harm when he used deadly force,” the State Attorney’s Office said in a statement.
Neither Zayas nor Santiago had been booked into the Hillsborough County Jail as of Monday afternoon.
Interesting little tidbit for our friends 7 times ‘south of the border’, but I’d say they are likely already aware of it.
Biden Is Deporting Venezuelans to Colombia
Record numbers of Venezuelan migrants have crossed into the United States from Mexico in recent months, hoping to apply for asylum. U.S. immigration authorities reported 24,819 Venezuelan border crossers in December 2021, compared to just 200 one year prior.
Despite the compelling case many Venezuelans have for seeking refuge in the U.S., the Biden administration is denying many of them that opportunity. Instead it is quietly deporting them to Colombia—a policy that resembles a controversial Trump administration practice.
Citing 42 USC 265, a public health provision that was also invoked by President Donald Trump, President Joe Biden thus far has expelled more than 1 million migrants who crossed the U.S.-Mexico border, preventing Venezuelans and many others from applying for asylum. Colombia will be a deportation destination for Venezuelans who have previously lived there, according to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).
Trump, no champion of immigration, offered Venezuelan nationals protection from deportation in one of the final moves of his presidency. But he also “deported an unknown number of Venezuelans through a third country,” the Associated Press reported in October 2020.
Candidate Biden criticized Trump for the deportations, saying in October 2020 that “it’s abundantly clear he has no regard for the suffering of the Venezuelan people.” Yet President Biden is also deporting Venezuelans to third countries.
Beyond this inconsistency lies an even more nonsensical one. In March 2021, Biden’s DHS announced an 18-month “temporary protected status” for Venezuelans already present in the U.S. That designation, which protects migrants from expulsion, is reserved for people fleeing an “ongoing armed conflict,” “an environmental disaster, or an epidemic,” or “other extraordinary and temporary conditions.” The designation applies to 320,000 Venezuelans in the U.S. but excludes newcomers, despite the Biden administration’s explicit recognition that America should be a safe haven.
Colombia, despite its own political and economic challenges, has welcomed the 2 million Venezuelan refugees who have traveled there as Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro drives the country into the ground. Colombia has even created a path to citizenship for its Venezuelan migrant population. But the U.S. is far better situated than Colombia to host Venezuelans, more than 5.4 million of whom have left their country since 2014 in what amounts to the second-worst refugee crisis in the world, topped only by the huge Syrian exodus.
Biden’s decision to send away refugees who are eager to become Americans belies his avowed “regard for the suffering of the Venezuelan people.”
MIRROR, MIRROR ON THE WALL Who’s the dumbest one of all?
I never expect much sense from victim-disarmers, but the CT Mirror’s Mark Robinson may have set a new low bar.
The 2nd Amendment doesn’t say that
Let’s not buy into misconceptions about the 2nd Amendment when advancing Gov. Lamont’s gun control proposals.
What might those misconceptions be?
Public perception and debate only changed a little more than a generation ago. Until recently, this has been the overwhelming consensus among Americans and in the courts. Ever since the aftermath of the War of 1812 (when veterans returned home from war with their firearms) the federal government has regulated and restricted the right to bear arms, and did so without political controversy.
According to “A Well Regulated Right: The Early American Origins of Gun Control,” by Saul Cornell and Nathan DeDino, during the decades after the Revolutionary War, the sale of firearms was forbidden to Catholics, slaves, indentured servants, and Native Americans.
He went there: Gun control is good because there is no individual right to arms, and we used to disarm Catholics, slave, and Indians.
Holy s[…].
Say… since slavery was legal then, does he want to re-institute that as well?
Moving on.
In U.S. v Miller in 1936, the Supreme Court ruled on a case involving the National Firearms Act, (which was passed after the St. Valentine’s Day Massacre). In that case, the Court ruled unanimously that the 2nd Amendment pertains to militias and not to individual rights.
Aside from the chronological error (MILLER was 1939, which gives you an idea of how well Robinson studied this issue), MILLER was about the status of the defendant’s sawed-off shotgun, not individual RKBA. Specifically, the Court ruled that the Second Amendment protects the right to keep and bear militarily useful arms, and that no evidence was presented showing that the military used short-barreled shotguns; thus, registration of a non-militarily useful arm could be required. No such evidence was presented because the defendant had died, and with no one to pay their bills, his attorneys didn’t show up to argue the case. (And keep that “militarily useful part in mind.)
But in 2008, in District of Columbia v Heller, Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia wrote for the majority, ruling that the 2nd Amendment did create an individual right to bear arms. That is – literally – the first time the high court took this position.
No. The Court found that the Second Amendment protects a preexisting right.
Nor was this the first time that SCOTUS had found the Second to be an individual right. The Supreme Court has ruled that way since at least 1857 (hint: SCOTUS ruled against Dred Scott because if he was a free man, he would have a right to bear arms just like anyone else). If Robinson had bother reading the HELLER decision, he might have noticed that Scalia cited numerous prior precedents for an individual right.
Robinson has a little list of further infringements that he wants CT Governor Lamont to impose.
Close the loopholes in assault weapons laws
Remember that “militarily useful” part of MILLER? If “assault weapons” are nasty, military-style arms, then MILLER (and HELLER) already found that we have an individual right to them. Shall we go there; in court, I mean?
Make domestic violence convictions an automatic disqualifier for obtaining a gun permit
Well, that seems a little redundant, since a domestic violence conviction already makes possession of a firearm a crime. Doubly redundant since CGS § 29-28(b) also mentions that no permit may be issued to anyone prohibited under 18 USC 922.
Perhaps Robinson could spend some time perusing Connecticut General Statutes regarding firearms. Our Gun Culture Primer might help, too.
Until then, he should keep his mouth shut and avoiding proving himself an ignorant fool.
Colorado town scales back gun control proposals
I’m a fan of preemption. In fact, I wish we had federal preemption when it comes to gun control laws, though there’s no chance of that happening anytime soon.
In Colorado, they don’t have it. They used to but don’t anymore, which is causing a bit of a problem, to say the least.
But public outcry forced one city to at least scale back its attempts at gun control.
The Edgewater City Council has significantly scaled back — at least for now — most of what it planned to consider in way of new gun rights restrictions being encouraged by an anti-gun advocacy group, after dozens of residents and others emailed and showed up at an April 19 work session to express their displeasure on possible ordinances targeting gun owners.
Edgewater is a metro-area home rule city of just over 5,000 people bordered by Denver to the east, Lakewood to the south and west, and Wheat Ridge to the north.
The potential ordinances that the council decided to continue discussion on were:
- Prohibiting open carry of guns city-wide.
- Prohibiting licensed concealed carry in city-owned buildings and parks.
- Prohibiting licensed conceal carry in daycare centers and preschools.
- Banning so-called “ghost guns,” a name given by anti-gun activists to guns made by individuals, but that do not have serial numbers.
- Setting a waiting period for buying a firearm of 3-10 days.
- Dealer regulations with an effective date grandfathering in Edgewater’s one gun dealer.
- Mandatory reporting requirement for lost or stolen guns, which is already covered under state law.
The initial proposal included a local assault weapon ban and a ban on 50-caliber ammunition as well as “armor-piercing” ammo.
Local officials claim reporting of the earlier proposals was “misinformation” despite the information coming from the city’s website.
I guess the city is promoting the fake news and everyone else is wrong for taking them at their word.
Anyway, they got pushback. That’s a very good thing, especially since not everyone who spoke up is on the right politically.
Numerous Edgewater residents spoke out at the April 16 meeting against the proposed measures, with some saying they don’t expect the council to listen, nor do they believe the items taken off the list will remain off the list.
“I’ve watched our city council make laws restricting the freedom of the law abiding in line with progressive political philosophy for a long time,” said resident Larry Welshon. “In this case they are gutting the Second Amendment through incremental disassembly. I’d be delighted to be wrong, but past history proves this council is progressive.”
Welshon reminded the council that in a survey conducted by the city in 2021, only 47 percent of residents believe the council acts in their best interests.
But not all who spoke out against the ordinances could be considered conservative in their viewpoint.
“I am about as liberal as the day is long,” said resident Randy Novack, who said he was a neighbor to one of the council members whom he agrees with most times. “However, I’ve been shooting since I was a kid.”
So it’s not just that the council is progressive, but they’re anti-gun despite some self-described liberals in the city not being anti-Second Amendment.
That’s quite fascinating.
It’s also why preemption is such an issue. Edgewater, Colorado is a city of fewer than 6,000 people. It’s not difficult to imagine someone passing through such a city and running afoul of at least one of these anti-Second Amendment proposals, especially if this is just the beginning as some believe.
Suddenly, someone who intends to abide by the law may well find themselves facing criminal charges. Preemption helps to mitigate much of this.
Of course, since Colorado decided to drink the gun control Kool-Aid, this is the kind of thing we’re going to keep seeing from them.
And people in places like Edgewater, which borders Denver, are ultimately going to pay the price for this particular flavor of stupidity.
The one saving grace, though, is that the people of these cities still get a say and they’re not afraid to tell their community leaders to back off.
Now they just need to shut down the rest of these proposals that will accomplish absolutely nothing.
TN: House Passes 18-20 Year Old Adults Eligible for Carry Permit
On April 21, 2022, the Tennessee House voted 64 to 28 to pass HB 1735. A similar bill in the Senate is known as SB 2291. The bill is an incremental step toward restoring Second Amendment rights to young adults. The bill requires the department of safety to issue an enhanced handgun carry permit to people who are at least 18 years of age, and meet the other requirements which apply to people 21 and older. Previously, the minimum age was 21. From legiscan.com, bill text:
(b) Except as provided in subsection (r), any resident of Tennessee who is a United States citizen or lawful permanent resident, as defined by § 55-50-102, may apply to the department of safety for an enhanced handgun carry permit. If the applicant is at least eighteen (18) years of age and is not prohibited from possessing a firearm in this state pursuant to § 39-17-1307(b), 18 U.S.C. § 922(g), or any other state or federal law, and the applicant otherwise meets all of the requirements of this section, the department shall issue a permit to the applicant.
In a compromise, the bill prohibits people aged 18 to 20, who have the enhanced permit, from transporting or storing firearms at all sorts of schools; then grants exceptions to those with military connections, as listed in the bill:
(e) Notwithstanding subsection (a), this section does not apply to a person who is under twenty-one (21) years of age and transports or stores a firearm or firearm ammunition in the person’s motor vehicle while on or utilizing a public or private parking area that is located on any public or private school campus, grounds, recreation area, athletic field or any other property owned, operated, or while in use by any board of education, school, college or university board of trustees, regents or directors for the administration of any public or private educational institution, unless the person:
(1) Is at least eighteen (18) years of age; and
(2)
(A) Is an honorably discharged or retired veteran of the United States armed forces;
(B) Is an honorably discharged member of the army national guard, the army reserve, the navy reserve, the marine corps reserve, the air national guard, the air force reserve, or the coast guard reserve, who has successfully completed a basic training program; or
(C) Is a member of the United States armed forces on active duty status or is a current member of the army national guard, the army reserve, the navy reserve, the marine corps reserve, the air national guard, the air force reserve, or the coast guard reserve, who has successfully completed a basic training program.
SECTION 5. This act takes effect July 1, 2022,
The Tennessee legislature has only a few more days to pass the reform bill if they are going to. The legislative session ends on May 7, 2022. The Senate has a large majority of Republicans, 27 to 6. If the bill passes the Judiciary Committee and is voted on in the Senate, it will likely be sent to Governor Bill Lee for his signature. It is not certain that Governor Lee would sign the bill, but it seems likely. He signed the Constitutional Carry bill a year ago in 2021.
WKRN characterized HB 1735 as giving “18-year-olds the right to carry a gun.” From whnt.com:
NASHVILLE, Tenn. (WKRN) – If you’re 18, it is unlawful to smoke or drink before turning 21, but Tennessee House lawmakers want to give 18-year-olds the right to carry a gun.
Opponents say the bill would increase gun crimes and self-harm, but supporters say it’s a constitutional right all adults should have. HB 1735 lowers the age from 21 to 18 to lawfully carry a handgun openly or concealed.
As shown in the actual bill, the legislation does not “give” anyone anything. It simply allows 18 to 20-year-olds the opportunity to apply for an enhanced carry permit.
Across the nation, permit holders have shown themselves to be more law-abiding than police officers.
AK is pleased the 24 is still popular:
Combinations in Pairs: Two Savage 24s
THE OLD DO-ALL COMBO GUN: SAVAGE MODEL 24 REVIEW
The basis of the combination gun is a standing-breech, break-action system with a rebounding hammer. Naturally, the first was a .22 short, long, or long rifle barrel over a .410 bore. Weighing some 7 pounds and measuring only 41 inches, the combo solved the problems of whether to bring a rifle or shotgun afield, adding the best of both worlds into one handy platform.
Pro-Gun Group’s Increasing Power and Influence Upsets All the Right People in Oklahoma.
Wayne Shaw seemed to have all the conservative credentials needed to win reelection to his state Senate seat in Oklahoma two years ago. The mild-mannered pastor with deep ties to the community had a solidly conservative voting record during his eight years in office.
But when Shaw, as chair of the Senate Public Safety Committee, declined to hear a bill to allow people to carry guns into bars, he drew the ire of an unemployed truck driver who was passionate about gun rights.
The angry gun advocate, Don Spencer, belonged to a local pro-firearms group. In short order, he and his friends recruited a Republican challenger for Shaw, held a fundraiser in his district and helped defeat the incumbent in the primary.
“I’m not opposed to guns,” said Shaw, who was stunned by the development. “But that (guns in bars) is a good way of throwing gasoline on a fire.”
Spencer’s feat is an example of a phenomenon in red states where the Republican Party is moving farther and farther to the right: The most potent political forces aren’t always the long-established organizations that have groomed candidates and advanced legislation for decades. In the current climate, little-known outsiders, even without pedigree or money, can become powerbrokers quickly if connected to incendiary issues like guns or abortion. And almost any officeholder can become vulnerable.
M&P 15/22s Banned At Appleseed Events After Out Of Battery and “Run Away” Discharges
While I can’t seem to tear myself away from Bearing Arms long enough to head west to the home range at Ramseur as much as I would like, I am still an instructor at Project Appleseed. In my opinion, it offers some of the best positional rifle marksmanship training you can obtain anywhere for the price, and you’re treated to an incredible civics lesson with the cost of admission. I highly recommend it to everyone.
A warning was issued a short time ago on the Appleseed instructor forum that the popular Smith & Wesson 15-22 is banned from Project Appleseed events nationwide after a series of out of battery discharges recorded at several events.
I’m not going to embellish or sugarcoat anything for you; this is the notice, as it was written.
To: All Appleseed Instructors
Subject: TEMPORARY BAN ON SMITH & WESSON M&P 15/22 USE AT APPLESEED
EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY, THE USE OF SMITH AND WESSON M&P 15/22’S AT AN APPLESEED IS HEREBY BANNED UNTIL SMITH & WESSON FORMALLY INVESTIGATES THE PROBLEM AND ISSUES AN OFFICIAL CORRECTIVE ACTION. THE AOC WILL NOTIFY THE CADRE WHEN THIS BAN IS LIFTED.
The AOC has received a rash of reports regarding safety issues with the Smith & Wesson M&P 15/22, including a shooter getting injured as a result of an out-of-battery discharge (see reports below).
As responsible Instructors, we have a duty to maintain safety at our events. If we know a rifle to be potentially unsafe, we shouldn’t allow it on the line at all.
At this time the least risk course of action would be to exclude the Smith & Wesson M&P 15/22 from future events until Smith & Wesson formally investigates the problem and issues an official corrective action.
What journalist doesn’t get about “ghost guns”
Whatever the topic of the day is, there are some who will think they’re experts in it. While people have a right to their opinions and a right to voice them, I’m always amused by how idiotic some of the takes actually are.
This is especially true when it comes to “ghost guns.”
I put the words in quotes because, well, most of the people who sling the term want to use it because it sounds scary. Most don’t really understand much of anything about the topic at hand, only the talking points politicians and activists sling around.
Take this story from the Las Vegas Review-Journal by Clarence Page titled, “What the right doesn’t get about ‘ghost guns’”
In it, it shows that Page doesn’t get a lot himself.
An often-repeated story about W.C. Fields holds that as he approached the end of his life, a friend was surprised to find him reading a Bible.
“Looking for loopholes, m’boy,” he reportedly explained. “Looking for loopholes.”
That scene comes to mind these days as I hear the standard response given by the National Rifle Association, the Gun Owners of America and other gun rights groups to even the most modest attempts to inject a little sanity into our nation’s gun laws.
The latest example of loophole-seeking has emerged in the recent pandemic of “ghost guns.” I’m not talking about the spirits of deceased firearms. “Ghost guns,” as many have been learning, is a street nickname for home-assembled firearms. Their parts can be 3D printed or ordered over the internet and constructed at home like Ikea furniture to produce a full-fledged gun.
The bad news is in their illegality. Buyers of unfinished parts or components have not been required to undergo a background check, and their weapons have no serial numbers, which makes them virtually impossible for police to trace.
Except most guns used by criminals are virtually impossible for police to trace…at least, to trace in any meaningful way that helps to solve a crime. Most guns are illegally acquired in the first place, meaning the trace gives them a name and an address of someone who bought the gun, but they’re not the criminal.
With all this talk about tracing, you’d think crimes couldn’t be solved without it. Yet more than half of all firearms are stolen.
Now, Mr. Page, tell me how tracing will help?
But as stupid as that comment is, Mr. Page ramps it up to 11 with this nonsense:
BLUF:
Either we are witnessing a cascade of unlikely events within a 60-day timeframe, or the institutions upon which Putin depends to stay in power–the security services, the military, and the oligarchs–are shaken by Putin’s War in Ukraine. The actions he is taking will either stiffen the resolve of those institutions…or it won’t.
6 Russian Oligarchs Commit Suicide in Mysterious Outbreak of Epstein Syndrome
List of Russian oligarchs who have been found dead in mysterious circumstance since Jan, per Newsweek
✔️ Sergey Protosenya
✔️ Vladislav Avaev
✔️ Vasily Melnikov
✔️ Mikhail Watford
✔️ Alexander Tyulyakov
✔️ Leonid Shulmanhttps://t.co/amSoDp4xJM#StandWithUkraine️— Alex Raufoglu (@ralakbar) April 22, 2022
Very few parts of Russian society have drawn more interest than the so-called “oligarchs.” These are incredibly wealthy men with political connections to Putin’s inner circle because, in the totalitarian kleptocracy that is Russia under Vladimir Putin, if you don’t have political ties to Putin’s inner circle, wealth doesn’t bring you power; it brings you a one-way trip to a Siberian labor camp.
Obama Calls for Internet Speech Regulation
In a speech delivered at Stanford University, President Barack Obama called for more censorship of social media speech. He argued that without regulation, social media will have “frightening implications.”
“People are dying because of misinformation,” Obama said.
Obama continued to say that the “profound change that’s taken place and how we communicate and consume information,” is one of the greatest threats to democracy.
“Social media platforms aren’t just our window into the internet. They serve as our primary source of news and information. No one tells us that the window is blurred, subject to unseen distortions and subtle manipulations,” the former president noted.
Obama said that social media companies need to be regulated, including being held responsible for content posted by users.
“If we do nothing, I am convinced that the trends we are seeing will get worse,” he said.
“Without some standards, the implications of this technology for our elections, for our legal system, for our democracy, for rules of evidence, for our entire social order, are frightening and profound.
“Tech platforms need to accept that they play a unique role in how we as a people and people around the world are consuming information, and that their decisions have an impact on every aspect of society. With that power comes accountability and in democracies, like ours, at least, the need for some democratic oversight.”
Obama singled out former Trump advisor Steve Bannon and Russia’s President Vladamir Putin as people who have leveraged misinformation.
“Autocrats like Putin have used these platforms as a strategic weapon against democratic countries that they consider a threat,” he said. “People like Putin and Steve Bannon, for that matter, understand it’s not necessary for people to believe this information in order to weaken democratic institutions. You just have to flood a country’s public square with enough raw sewage. Is that to raise enough questions spread enough dirt? Plant enough conspiracy theorizing that citizens no longer know what to believe?”
Obama said he was not surprised to learn that Putin was accused of trying to influence the 2016 presidential election through social media.
“What does still nag me though was my failure to fully appreciate at the time just how susceptible we had become to lies and conspiracy theories – despite having spent years being a target of disinformation myself,” he said.
“Putin didn’t do that. He didn’t have to. We did it to ourselves.”
Wellllll. It seems that Polk County Florida Sheriff Grady Judd isn’t alone in his thoughts about how to handle bunglers
Florida sheriff says homeowners are ‘more than welcome’ to shoot intruders
A sheriff in Florida is encouraging residents to take gun safety courses after a homeowner fired multiple shots at an intruder on Wednesday, stopping the individual who allegedly broke into several homes.
Police arrested Brandon J. Harris, 32, who was arrested after allegedly breaking into several homes in Pace, Florida, and was stopped by a homeowner who fired multiple gunshots at him, according to the Pensacola Daily News.
Calls of the break-ins began to come into the sheriff’s office at around 4:30 p.m., according to police. Harris is being charged with attempted burglary with assault, resisting arrest, criminal mischief, attempted larceny, and several other charges.
Brandon J. Harris (Santa Rosa County Sheriff’s Office )
Santa Rosa County Sheriff Bob Johnson said in a press conference on Thursday that one of the homeowners fired gunshots at Harris, and said that he was arrested after being cornered in a house that he allegedly broke into.
“Probably 20 deputies get there, the dogs are out, and he’s jumping fences and breaking into houses as he goes,” Johnson said. “One of the homeowners, he was breaking into their house, and they shot at him. So he continues to run, we finally corner him in a house that he broke into on Tom Sawyer and we cornered him in a bedroom.”
Johnson also encouraged other residents to follow in the homeowner’s footsteps and take gun safety classes, adding that they are “more than welcome” to shoot anyone who is breaking in to their house.
“I guess they think they did something wrong, which they did not. If someone’s breaking into your house, you’re more than welcome to shoot them in Santa Rosa County. We prefer that you do, actually. So, whoever that was, you’re not in trouble, come see us. We have a gun safety class we put on every other Saturday,” Johnson said.
The sheriff added that residents who take the course will shoot a gun “a lot better,” and maybe save taxpayers some money.
“If you take that, you’ll shoot a lot better, and hopefully you’ll save the taxpayers money,” Johnson said.
Johnson also described Harris as a “frequent flyer,” noting that he has been arrested 17 times before.
“You hear me talk about frequent flyers all the time. Our first interaction with this individual came when he was 13 years old. Since then, he’s had like 17 arrests,” Johnson said. “We sent him to prison for six and a half years for home invasion, and he just can’t seem to get the picture of crime does not pay.”
There’s an old joke:
Want a 5.56 NATO chamber? Fire 1000 rounds through your .223.
Nowadays, it’s less expensive to just have the throat reamed.
.223 Remington vs. 5.56 NATO: What You Don’t Know Could Hurt You
Is firing a 5.56 NATO cartridge in your .223 Remington chambered AR15 dangerous? Or do Internet forum-ninjas and ammunition companies selling you commercial ammo instead of surplus overstate the dangers? Believe it or not, a real danger exists, and some gun owners who think they are doing the right thing may not be safe.
The Cartridges
The .223 Remington and 5.56×45 NATO cartridges are very similar, and externally appear the same. But there are some differences that lie beneath the surface.
The 5.56 case has thicker walls to handle higher pressures, meaning the interior volume of the case is smaller than that of a .223. This will alter the loading data used when reloading 5.56 brass to .223 specs.
Some 5.56 loads have a slightly longer overall length than commercial .223 loads.
The Chambers
The significant difference between the .223 Rem and 5.56 NATO lies in the rifles, rather than the cartridges themselves. Both the .223 and 5.56 rounds will chamber in rifles designed for either cartridge, but the critical component, leade, will be different in each rifle.
The leade is the area of the barrel in front of the chamber prior to where the rifling begins. This is where the loaded bullet is located when a cartridge is chambered. The leade is frequently called the “throat.”
On a .223 Remington spec rifle, the leade will be 0.085”. This is the standard described by the Sporting Arms and Ammunition Manufacturers’ Institute, Inc. (SAAMI). The leade in a 5.56 NATO spec rifle is 0.162”, or almost double the leade of the .223 rifle.
A shorter leade in a SAAMI spec rifle creates a situation where the bullet in a 5.56 NATO round, when chambered, can contact the rifling prior to being fired. By having contact with the rifling prematurely (at the moment of firing), chamber pressure can be dramatically increased, creating the danger of a ruptured case or other cartridge/gun failure.
The reverse situation, a .223 Rem round in a 5.56 NATO gun, isn’t dangerous. The leade is longer, so a slight loss in velocity and accuracy may be experienced, but there is not a danger of increased pressures and subsequent catastrophic failure.
How serious is the danger of firing 5.56 ammo in .223 guns? Dangerous enough that the SAAMI lists 5.56 military ammo as being not for use in .223 firearms in the technical data sheet titled “Unsafe Firearm-Ammunition Combinations.”
ATK, the parent company of ammunition manufacturers Federal Cartridge Company and Speer, published a bulletin entitled “The Difference Between 223 Rem and 5.56 Military Cartridges.” In this bulletin, ATK stated using 5.56 ammo in a .223 rifle could result in “…primer pocket gas leaks, blown cartridge case heads, and gun functioning issues.”
However, the danger may be lower than SAAMI or ATK suggest. In Technical Note #74 from ArmaLite, the company states “millions of rounds of NATO ammunition have been fired safely in Eagle Arms and ArmaLite’s® SAAMI chambers over the past 22 years,” and they have not had any catastrophic failures.
According to ArmaLite:
“Occasionally a non-standard round (of generally imported) ammunition will fit too tightly in the leade, and resistance to early bullet movement can cause elevated chamber pressures. These pressures are revealed by overly flattened primers or by powder stains around the primer that reveal leaking gasses.”
What Do You Have?
So, if you own a rifle chambered for the .223 for 5.56, do you know for which caliber it is really chambered?
Many match rifles are chambered in .223 Remington (SAAMI specs) for tighter tolerances, and theoretically better accuracy.
Many of the AR-15’s currently sold on the market are made for the 5.56 NATO cartridge. If you own one of these, you should be fine with any .223 or 5.56 ammunition.
However, ATK dropped this bomb in the bulletin on the .223/5.56:
“It is our understanding that commercially available AR15’s and M16’s – although some are stamped 5.56 Rem on the receiver – are manufactured with .223 chambers.”
So, even if your AR is stamped 5.56, is it really? Check your owner’s manual or call the company directly and make sure you get an answer you feel comfortable with.
As if the confusion regarding the .223 vs 5.56 chambers wasn’t enough, there is a third possibility in the mix, that is being used by at least one major manufacturer. The .223 Wylde chamber is a modified SAAMI-spec .223 chamber that allows for the safe use of 5.56 NATO rounds, but maintains tighter tolerances for better accuracy.
Yeah, yeah… What’s the bottom line?
Here’s the bottom line. If you want to follow the safest possible course, always shoot .223 Remington ammunition. The .223 Rem cartridge will safely shoot in any rifle chambered for the .223 or 5.56.
If you want to shoot 5.56 NATO rounds, make sure you have a rifle designed for the 5.56 military cartridge. Shooting 5.56 in a normal .223 Rem rifle can result in bad things.
Suspected burglar shot by Geneva Co. homeowner
FADETTE, Ala. (WDHN) — Early Friday morning, a Wiregrass homeowner shot an intruder twice with a handgun — after telling him to leave and then a struggle between the two.
Authorities say the suspect was in the process of burglarizing the rural residence when the homeowner awakened to a sound from the back door.
Emergency responders arrived at a trailer off Audy Lane in eastern Geneva County’s Fadette community, just after 3 a.m. this morning.
Geneva County Sheriff Tony Helms says he and Geneva/Dale District Attorney Kirke Adams will gather all the evidence before charging the suspect.
“We worked the scene at the time, we’ve spoke to several witnesses there and several other locations and we’ve referred to the District attorney,” Sheriff Helms. “And determine what the charges will be. But at this time we don’t see any charges against the homeowner.
Sheriff Helms says once the suspect is released from the hospital he will be arrested and charged with the “Home invasion”
How the government covers for anti-gun media
I tend to be pretty critical of media bias. After all, I used to actually believe that media bias wasn’t really a huge thing, that those who saw it were really just upset that the news wasn’t biased in their direction.
Then I grew up. I saw all the examples of bias as supposed journalists went out of their way to push slanted reporting as hard fact.
Yet over at Ammoland, they’re looking at someone else’s bias, a bias that helps the media get away with stuff you or I never would.
A broadcast journalist using a hidden camera enters a gun show, purchases two “80-percent” gun kits, then goes to the state attorney general’s office where two agents help complete and assemble the guns before firing them on a range—allegedly violating state and federal gun laws in the process—while the camera records it all.
During a Sunday morning interview with a network news anchor, a nationally-known gun rights leader is challenged to discuss a 30-round magazine held by the anchor, on a show broadcast from the nation’s capital, where such magazines are known to be illegal.
A nationally-known broadcast journalist produces a special about gun control during which the video is edited to make it appear several gun rights activists are speechless when asked how felons or terrorists might be prevented from purchasing guns without background checks.…
A look back over the years suggests a pattern of “gotcha” journalism that seems to invariably get a pass, and gun rights activists are calling foul, as there is the perception that news agencies are using the First Amendment to undermine the Second Amendment. Grassroots activists contend that if private citizens did the same things depicted on screen, they would almost certainly face prosecution.
In other words, it seems government officials are heavily biased as well and are benefiting the media when they conduct actions that would destroy anyone else.
Time and time again, some in the media have outright broken laws, broadcast it, and gotten away with it because they’re advancing the narrative that certain parties in the government actually agree with.
For example, Katie Couric got away with deceptively editing a “documentary” so it appeared gun rights activists had no answer for a question because the judge argued it “demonstrated the sophistry” of the plaintiffs. Yet to call the actual response–the one Couric removed and pretended didn’t exist–sophistry is to take a position on the validity of those arguments.
That’s an act of bias that has no place in a courtroom.
Yet time and time again, government officials–either law enforcement or in the courts–have taken a side.
That means it’s imperative that such officials be targeted for removal from office. Lawsuits, campaigns, petitions, whatever it takes, we need to hold these people accountable for their blatantly biased actions in favor of a blatantly anti-gun media.
Duh.. Violent crime increasing the most in high crime neighborhoods
The rise in gun homicides in the United States is having reverberating political ramifications at the federal, state, and local levels, with many elected officials falling back into “tough on crime” policies to curb the violence. This punitive turn can be seen in President Joe Biden’s proposed federal budget, in which he calls for “more police officers on the beat” and allocates an additional $30 billion for state and local governments to support law enforcement. Many local leaders are mirroring this approach, centering their gun violence prevention strategies on increasing funding for police and rolling back criminal justice reforms.
What these enforcement-based approaches fail to recognize is that the recent rise in homicides is more nuanced than it appears. Rather than a widespread dispersal of gun violence within cities, the increases in gun homicides are largely concentrated in disinvested and structurally disadvantaged neighborhoods that had high rates of gun violence to begin with. This geographic concentration is a persistent challenge, not a new one—and it requires targeted solutions to improve outcomes in disinvested places rather than reverting to the old “tough on crime” playbook.
This piece takes a deeper look at patterns of gun violence in four cities—Chicago, Nashville, Kansas City, Mo. and Baltimore—and finds that each city’s gun homicide increases were driven predominantly by increases in neighborhoods where gun violence has long been a persistent fixture of daily life, alongside systemic disinvestment, segregation, and economic inequality. These patterns point to the longer-term need to address the place-based factors that influence violence and invest in the critical community infrastructure that has not only been proven to make communities safer, but can also help them thrive.
