If You Can’t Ban It, Overregulate It: Democrats War on Guns Continues

In 2020, my husband and I took a concealed carry course at Magnum Shooting Center in Colorado Springs. The class itself was approximately four hours and covered a number of topics related to gun ownership and safety. After the classroom instruction, we spent an hour on the range.

What surprised me about this course was that a fair portion of it included instruction on Colorado laws, and specifically, what to do if I were ever in a situation when I needed to discharge my weapon (answer, get a lawyer).

Indeed, even in cases of clear self-defense, legally owning a gun and using it to protect yourself can ruin you financially if the person you shot decides to come after you in court. What’s more, this happens regularly. Someone shoots a would-be perpetrator in self-defense, and the assailant turns around and presses charges.

If the above sounds outrageous to you, you’re not alone. But, owning a gun and using it for protection is not as straightforward as you might think. That’s because while Colorado Democrats in the General Assembly can’t outright ban gun ownership thanks to the Second Amendment, they’ve made fair progress toward making gun ownership impractical. And while Republicans are trying to safeguard Second Amendment rights, they’re facing an uphill battle. Here’s what just happened in the Colorado House of Representatives and why it matters to the overall picture of gun ownership.

Restricting Constitutional Carry

Colorado is currently considered an open carry state. That means if you’re legally allowed to possess a firearm, you can open carry it as long as it’s not in a restricted area. However, in 2021, Democratic lawmakers successfully passed Senate Bill 21-256, allowing local governments and municipalities the right to enact any gun law or regulation it wants, as long as that rule is not less restrictive than current Colorado law.

That means places like Boulder can now legally ban open carry of firearms even though open carry is legal under Colorado’s state law. And indeed, that’s what’s happening. So far, Denver is the only area to prohibit open carry, but liberal places like Boulder will follow.

In response to the above, Representative Ron Hanks (Republican, D-60) introduced House Bill 22-1033, “Constitutional Carry of a Handgun.” If it’d passed, HB 1033 would allow anyone 21 years or older who is legally permitted to own a handgun, to also be permitted to carry that weapon concealed without a concealed carry permit. In other words, if you’re 21 or older and you legally own a gun, you wouldn’t have to attend a class and then get a permit to carry that gun under your jacket. More importantly, HB 1033 would’ve repealed part of SB 256. It stated, “The bill repeals local government authority to regulate open or concealed carry of a handgun, including repealing the authority of special districts and the governing boards of institutions of higher education, as applicable.”

After Hanks introduced HB 1033 to the House, it was assigned to the House Committee on Public & Behavioral Health and Human Services. And on Feb. 8, after less than three hours of deliberation, Democrats voted to postpone HB 1033 indefinitely on a party-line vote.

Republicans’ Hands are Tied

Over the past year, The Maverick Observer has detailed how Democrats in the Colorado General Assembly have worked to increase barriers to gun ownership. And with recent bills like HB 22-1086 successfully making their way through the legislative process (link to be included once my article is published), 2022 will end with even more bureaucratic red tape. Make no mistake, the end goal is to overregulate guns into obscurity.

Republican lawmakers like Hanks have tried to push back on these measures, but because Democrats make up a majority in both the House and Senate, and Colorado has a Democratic Governor, these efforts have almost zero chance of passing and are, essentially, dead on arrival.

If the above concerns you, you can take a number of actions. First, contact your representatives and tell them how you feel about the continued encroachments to your Second Amendment rights. Second, sign up to testify either for or against bills making their way through the legislative process. And third — and arguably the only way to enact change given the current makeup in the General Assembly — vote in November for representatives who support the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

Ohio Republicans follow Florida’s lead with bill banning sex education in grades K-3

Republican lawmakers in Ohio have put forward their own version of Florida’s “Parental Rights in Education” bill, legislation that prohibits teachers from giving lessons on sexual orientation or gender identity at younger grade levels.

H.B. 616, introduced by Republican state Reps. Jean Schmidt and Mike Loychik, states that no public school community school, or private school that accepts vouchers, shall “teach, use, or provide any curriculum or instructional materials on sexual orientation or gender identity” in kindergarten through third grade.

For students in grades four through twelve, discussion of these topics in “any textbook, instructional material, or academic curriculum” is restricted to material that is “age-appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students in accordance with state standards.”

“The classroom is a place that seeks answers for our children without political activism,” said Schmidt in a statement to the Columbus Dispatch. “Parents deserve and should be provided a say in what is taught to their children in schools.”

Continue reading “”

That’s ironic.
“This doesn’t work, so we need more of it!”
California gun laws didn’t stop a shooting that happened in California.

Dianne Feinstein Calls for Federal Adoption of California Gun Laws in Wake of California Shooting

Federalizing California’s laws is the answer to preventing future mass shootings like the one that happened in California this weekend, according to one of the state’s senators.

Dianne Feinstein (D., Calif.) called for a collection of new federal gun laws in response to a shootout in Sacramento, California, on Sunday morning, which left six dead and a dozen injured. She said Congress should adopt universal background checks, bans on “assault weapons” and “ghost guns,” as well as an ammunition magazine capacity limit to prevent similar future killings.

“Congress knows what steps must be taken to stop these mass shootings, we just have to act,” Feinstein said in a press release.

However, all of the policies Feinstein advocated for are already law in California. The state has among the strictest gun laws in the country. It has long required background checks on private sales of used guns, banned a continually expanding list of “assault weapons,” limited the capacity of ammunition magazines to ten rounds, and outlawed unserialized firearms.

Feinstein admitted many of the details of the shooting were “still being investigated” when she issued her statement. Police hadn’t apprehended any suspects when she weighed in on a solution. Details remain limited on what happened during the shooting, but reports indicate shots were fired after an early-morning fight outside a nightclub in a crowded downtown area of the city. Three suspects with serious criminal records have now been apprehended, according to Sacramento Police,

Federal law precludes at least two of the men from possessing firearms due to their previous convictions. Additionally, one of the men has been charged with illegal possession of a machinegun, another federal crime.

Feinstein was not the only one to call for new federal gun laws in response to the shooting. President Joe Biden (D.) advocated for many of the same policies during his comments on the killings.

“We also continue to call on Congress to act,” Biden said on Sunday. “Ban ghost guns. Require background checks for all gun sales. Ban assault weapons and high-capacity magazines.”

The refrain has become a common response from gun-control advocates in the wake of high-profile shootings. They often argue while California’s gun laws are strong, looser laws in neighboring states undermine those policies. Advocates say federal gun laws are required to ensure criminals cannot obtain banned guns or accessories across state lines and then illegally transport them back into California.

“Of course, this isn’t an isolated event,” Feinstein said. “It’s the latest in an epidemic of gun violence that continues to plague our country. Enough is enough. We can no longer ignore gun violence in our communities.”

However, there are no reports the suspects in Sacramento’s shooting obtained their guns from outside the state. They would have been breaking federal law by obtaining them regardless given their criminal histories.

Sacramento Police are asking anyone with more information on the shooting to contact them at (916) 808-5471 or the Sacramento Valley Crime Stoppers at (916) 443-HELP (4357). They are offering a reward of up to $1,000 for information, and callers may remain anonymous.

The author finds hisslef in a dissonance quandary.
He’s for gun control, but believes more of it useless as what California has now didn’t work.
He’s for early release -parole- from prison, but is ‘troubled’ by these murders.
He keeps that up and he’s likely to burst a blood vessel in his brain.

Sacramento Mass Killing Shows Failure of Gov. Gavin Newsom’s Crime Agenda
Alleged killer was released from prison six years early. Electronic monitoring, or just keeping him in prison, would have saved six lives

One of the alleged shooters in a mass shooting that killed six people in Sacramento last Sunday was released from prison six years early by the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, even though the man has a long and violent criminal record.

The Sacramento District Attorney’s office strongly opposed the man’s early release, claiming, correctly, “If he is released early, he will continue to break the law.”

Responsibility for the mass shooting, which killed a homeless woman, lies with Governor Gavin Newsom who appointed the head of the California Department of Corrections, which already reduced California’s prison population by nearly 30,000 inmates since 2019, and is seeking to reduce it by an additional 76,000.

The tragedy could have been prevented had Martin not been released, or been released under strict parole supervision, including electronic monitoring, and unannounced searches of his home by a parole officer for weapons.

“Despite a two-page letter to the Board of Parole Hearings urging that Martin remain in custody,” reports the Sacramento Bee, he won his release and was in Sacramento on Saturday night recording himself on a Facebook Live video brandishing a handgun hours before the shooting.”

Gov. Gavin Newsom used the incident to demand more gun control, tweeting “We cannot continue to let gun violence be the new normal.”

But there is little reason to believe more gun control would have prevented the killing. California already has the most gun control laws of any state. The automatic gun Martin apparently used is already illegal. And there is little reason to think Newsom’s proposal to let individuals sue people who help people get guns would have prevented Martin from getting a gun.

Continue reading “”

What Gun Restriction Would Biden Pass That Isn’t Already the Law in California?

“We must do more than mourn — we must act,” President Joe Biden said on Sunday’s shoot-out in downtown Sacramento that killed six. Biden called on Congress to ban ghost guns, pass “universal” background checks, ban assault weapons, and repeated the lie that gun manufacturers have special immunity from liability.

California already has “universal” background checks. It has “red flag” laws and domestic-violence gun confiscation (often, without any real due process). It has an assault-weapon and magazine ban, deputizing citizens to enforce them. California has safe-storage laws and a ghost-gun ban. The state has a firearm-sales record and the strictest gun-dealer regulation in the nation. It empowers local authorities to further regulate firearms but not to deregulate. It has raised the allowable age even to buy a shotgun or rifle from 18 to 21. In most municipalities, concealed-carry permits are almost impossible to get.

California is home to 111 laws — not counting the thousands passed in cities and counties — that restrict “the manner and space in which firearms can be used,” according to Boston University School of Public Health. “California has the strongest gun laws in the United States and has been a trailblazer for gun safety for the past 30 years,” says Giffords Law Center. The only thing California hasn’t done is outright ban semi-automatic weapons, which is where all these incremental restrictions are meant to lead.

The Hypocrisy of Gun Control Elitists

In 2020, then-presidential candidate Michael Bloomberg was asked how he could continue to demand gun control while being protected by private guards equipped with the same firearms and magazines that he wanted to ban others from owning. “Does your life matter more than mine or my family’s or these people’s?” Bloomberg’s response, in essence, was that he was not an ordinary person. He was a celebrity and billionaire who received more threats than most people: “That just happens when you are the mayor of New York City or you are very wealthy.”

At the same time, another big-city Democrat politician known for pushing gun control on the lower orders was being shielded by a small army of police officers, presumably at the taxpayers’ expense. The Chicago Sun-Times recently disclosed that a special police security detail, Unit 544, was created two years ago to protect Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot, her home and office, and to “oversee her personal bodyguard detail.” The special unit consists of approximately 71 officers, in addition to the mayor’s existing “separate personal bodyguard detail” of 20 officers.

Both cities – ex-Mayor Bloomberg’s New York City and Lightfoot’s Chicago – are experiencing horrific surges in violent crime. The most recent “CompStat” report from the NYPD indicates rapes, robberies, felony assaults, burglaries, grand larceny, and auto thefts have all increased significantly as compared to the same time last year, and the Chicago Police Department’s (CPD) own “CompStat” contains the same dismal message.

While privileged politicians float above this wave of criminality, untroubled by threats to person or property, less exalted individuals are forced to rely on whatever police resources may be available or become their own version of Unit 544.

Last week in Chicago, for instance, a 70-year-old Uber driver, threatened by robbers who then carjacked his vehicle, had to wait 75 minutes before police could respond. Police assigned to serve the area had been drastically reduced to 261 officers, the “lowest monthly staffing level for the district since at least August 2017,” so no one was available to take the assignment until the next shift began. The problem isn’t restricted to that police district: overall, more than 660 CPD officers retired in 2021, almost double the number of retirees in 2018, and recruiting of new officers dropped during the pandemic. Carjacking reports, meanwhile, have set a new monthly record as of February 2022, up 390% from February 2019.

The impact on public safety is what makes Lightfoot’s private defense force of almost 100 officers all the more outrageous. In 2020, residents had already complained that patrol officers in areas close to Lightfoot’s home were redeployed to the mayor’s residence. It’s at odds with the mayor’s oft-used theme of “all hands on deck” to address public safety using a “coordinated and collective effort,” if scores of the deckhands are used for what amounts to private security work. And Lightfoot herself can’t pretend that police resources aren’t affected, because the creation of Unit 544 coincided with her proposal to cut the CPD budget by $80 million as part of addressing a pandemic–related citywide budget shortfall.

According to the Chicago Sun-Times, Lightfoot asserts her special police detail became necessary because in 2020, there was “a significant amount of protests all over the city, and some of them targeted [] my house.” (News reports from 2020 indicate that the protests included, ironically, calls to remove police from schools, for reforms to the CPD, and to defund the police.) A 2020 news report quotes Lightfoot defending, as well, the closing off of residential streets around her home to activists, because of threats to her safety. “[T]he situation can’t be compared to protests at former mayor Rahm Emanuel’s home given the pandemic… This is a different time – like no other.”

John Catanzara, president of Chicago’s Fraternal Order of Police, observes that “[w]hile murders are soaring, while districts are barebones for manpower, all that matters [to Lightfoot] is protecting her castle.”

Of course, it is completely reasonable for Lightfoot to take lawful measures to protect herself and her family, the same as anyone else, but her situation is arguably no more dire nor compelling than the crisis of crime faced by every other Chicago resident today.

The problem is that the mayor, and others like her, are the same anti-gun advocates who see no contradiction between demanding ever more pointless restrictions on the ability of constituents to legally access firearms for self-defense, and ensuring their own safety with assigned police bodyguards and armed security. Ordinary citizens don’t need guns because the police will protect them – even if crime climbs to levels not seen in decades and there’s upward of an hour’s wait on a 911 call.

These people would have you believe that this isn’t gun control elitism in action – it’s just that they aren’t like you and me. After all, if you don’t have bread you can always eat cake.

Comment O’ The Day

“As a mother of seven, I am used to distractions and sometimes even outbursts,” 

About that “GOP states have higher murder rates” study

I debated long and hard about giving this “study” from the moderate Democratic group Third Way even a paragraph’s worth of attention because of how shamelessly unscientific it is, but I’ve seen enough chatter about it online that I feel like I can’t ignore the problems I have with it, especially since I’m sure that gun control activists will be pointing to what Third Way has to say as evidence for the need for more gun control laws.

Let’s start with the premise for the “study,” which Third Way calls “The Red State Murder Problem” even though their own summary demonstrates that’s not exactly the issue.

  • The rate of murders in the US has gone up at an alarming rate. But, despite a media narrative to the contrary, this is a problem that afflicts Republican-run cities and states as much or more than the Democratic bastions.

In other words, what Third Way’s research shows is that the increase in violent crime beginning in 2020 was seen across the board. I don’t think there’s any disagreement on that, though it should be noted that there were also areas of the country that saw declines in homicides in 2020, including blue-state Baltimore and red-state Oklahoma City. In fact, here are the cities with the biggest increases and decreases in homicides in 2020, as reported by the anti-gun outfit Everytown for Gun Safety. Let’s start with the cities that saw the biggest murder spikes.

  1. In seven cities, the gun homicide rate at least doubled in 2020 compared to 2019: Lubbock, TX; Des Moines, IA; Fresno, CA; Vallejo, CA; Trenton, NJ; Columbus, OH; Syracuse, NY; and Milwaukee, WI.

By the way, those crack researchers at Everytown say there were seven cities where the gun homicide rate doubled, but I count eight cities up there. Third Way looked at states that voted for Trump vs. states that voted for Biden in 2020 as their “red/blue” metric, which in this case means that cities in three Trump states had double digit increases in the gun homicide rate, compared to five cities in Biden states. This completely cuts against Third Way’s hypothesis about the increase in homicides being a red state problem, but it gets even worse from there.

Continue reading “”

Like True Commies, the Democrats Create Crime Then Use Crime Stats to Take Our Guns

This Crime Wave Brought to You by Democrats

Democrats love mass shootings. It’s their best chance at taking away our guns. We saw it happen in Australia back in 1996 when some wackjob killed 35 people and Australians HANDED OVER THEIR firearms — 700,000 or so to be exact, because, you know, safety, I guess…?

As you have probably heard, a mass shooting in Sacramento, Calif., left six people dead and 15 more wounded. The story isn’t getting a ton of traction because the shooter is most likely not Muslim or white. The media loves when the shooter is a Muslim because terror attacks keep people focused on the news. Lefty media will drag out a mass shooting when the shooter is white because it backs up the lie that most mass shooters are angry, drooling white guys in NRA hats.

That’s right, a lie. As I’ve reported, 67% of mass shooters are black. Most people don’t realize that fact because the Pravda press perpetuates the myth that mass shooters are white dudes who got fired from Denny’s. When people hear “mass shooting,” they assume a white guy flipped out and blazed up a McDonald’s. Democrats want you to believe that. Sure, you heard about the Sacramento shooting, but did you hear about the 11 people who were shot the day before at rapper Big Boogie’s concert in Texas? I didn’t until just now. I’ve never even heard of Big Boogie. I wonder why the media ignored that story? Awww, we know! Let’s put it this way, no MAGA hats were recovered at the crime scene.

FACT-O-RAMA! Stalin, Castro, Mao, and Pol Pot took guns away from their people before slaughtering them. Biden wants to take your guns too. Why? Because he’s a communist and that’s what commies do.

This is how it works: the Democrats let criminals out of jail and then got rid of bail laws to keep them out. They defunded police departments nationwide. Criminals do what criminals do: they shoot people. When there is a mass shooting, Democrats say, “Look! Another mass shooting! Let’s take guns from law-abiding people!”

Continue reading “”

I used to attribute this to ignorance. No longer. This is straight up stupidity and mendacity

Warriors Coach Steve Kerr Wants Gun Laws that Already Exist in Wake of Sacramento Shooting

Golden State Warriors coach Steve Kerr reacted to Sunday’s shooting in Sacramento by pushing gun laws that already exist in California.

FOX News quoted Kerr saying, “I don’t think moments of silence are going to do anything. At some point … our government has to decide are we going to have some common sense gun laws, it’s not going to solve everything, but it will save lives.”

He added, “Despite the fact that 80 to 90% of Americans support background checks and you know, you think about all of the common sense laws we could and should put in place.”

Background checks via the FBI’s National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) have existed in every state since the mid-1990s. Moreover, California adopted universal background checks in the 1990s, which means every gun sale in the state–retail or private–requires a background check in order to be legal.

So the background checks Kerr is pushing already exist in California.

Breitbart News noted that President Joe Biden also responded to the Sacramento shooting by pushing gun controls that are already the law in California.

FOX News quoted Biden:

Ban ghost guns. Require background checks for all gun sales. Ban assault weapons and high-capacity magazines. Repeal gun manufacturers’ immunity from liability. Pass my budget proposal, which would give cities more of the funding they need to fund the police and fund the crime prevention and intervention strategies that can make our cities safer. These are just a few of the steps Congress urgently needs to take to save lives.

California already bans “ghost guns,” has universal background checks, bans “assault weapons,” and bans “high capacity” magazines.

Police noted there were multiple gunmen involved in the Sacramento shooting and also pointed out that the incident was preceded by a fight.

CNN quoted Sacramento Police Chief Kathy Lester saying, “We know that a large fight took place just prior to the shootings. And we have confirmed that there are multiple shooters.”

A stolen gun was recovered at the scene of the shooting.

All those state and federal laws about possession of guns by crims being illegal….and they just don’t seem to work.

26-Year-Old Arrested in Connection With Sacramento Mass Shooting, Police Chief Says

SACRAMENTO, Calif. — Sacramento police have arrested a 26-year-old man in connection with Sunday’s deadly mass shooting, the city’s police chief confirmed.

Dandrae Martin was taken into custody and booked on charges of assault with a firearm and being a prohibited person in possession of a firearm, police Chief Kathy Lester told KCRA 3’s Ty Steele in an exclusive interview Monday morning.

Continue reading “”

New Study Finds Persistent Cardiac Abnormalities in Teens Who Experienced Myopericarditis Following COVID-19 Vaccination

A new study published in the Journal of Pediatrics is shedding light on how long heart abnormalities from COVID-19 vaccine- induced myopericarditis may last in children.

The typically-rare disease, which can lead to sudden death, is a combination of two significant adverse events that can occur after receiving a COVID-19 mRNA injection known as myocarditis (inflammation of the heart), and pericarditis (inflammation of the outer lining of the heart). 

The study, which was conducted at Seattle Children’s Hospital, focused on a cohort of 16 children between the ages 12-17. All 16 patients were diagnosed with myopericarditis within one week of receiving their second Pfizer COVID-19 shot and had experienced chest pains and elevated serum troponin when first seeking treatment. 

Patients were monitored for three to eight months after their initial study, and despite responding to treatment, cardiac magnetic resonance imaging demonstrated a “persistence of abnormal findings”  in most patients.

Consistent with a statement released by the American Heart Association regarding the risk of sudden cardiac arrest when exercising with heart inflammation, the study’s participants were restricted from strenuous physical activity upon discharge.

Man fatally shot; initial investigations indicate self-defense

A man was shot and killed in what Citrus County Sheriff’s Office authorities believe to be an act of self-defense.

Sheriff’s office deputies responding to a disturbance at around 4:28 a.m. Saturday, April 2, found 36-year-old Kyle Davis dead near the back door of a home off of West Mistflower Place in Homosassa Springs, according to sheriff’s office spokeswoman Brittney Carman on Monday.

Carman said preliminary investigations revealed Davis had struck a woman, who then returned to her house with significant injuries.

When the woman’s roommate, a man, tried to figure out what happened to her, Davis forced his way into their home and attacked the woman’s roommate. During the fight, Carman said, the roommate was able to retrieve his pistol and fatally shoot Davis.

Carman would not identify the woman or her roommate because they are both listed by the sheriff’s office as victims in the case.

“At this time, initial findings are indicating that this shooting was in self-defense,” she said. “However, this is still an open, active investigation, and no further details will be provided.”

Comment O’ The Day

Let’s pause for a moment and consider how they are simultaneously blaming “ghost guns” (i.e. home-made firearms with no known manufacturer) at the same time they want to hold gun manufacturers liable for guns being used in crimes.

Statement by President Joe Biden on the Mass Shooting in Sacramento | The White House

Today, America once again mourns for another community devastated by gun violence. In a single act in Sacramento, six individuals left dead and at least a dozen more injured. Families forever changed. Survivors left to heal wounds both visible and invisible.

I want to thank the first responders in Sacramento, and all those across the United States, who act every day to save lives. We know these lives were not the only lives impacted by gun violence last night. And we equally mourn for those victims and families who do not make national headlines.

But we must do more than mourn; we must act. That is why my Administration has taken historic executive action to implement my comprehensive gun crime reduction strategy — from standing up gun trafficking strike forces to helping cities across the country expand community violence interventions and hire more police officers for community policing.

We also continue to call on Congress to act. Ban ghost guns. Require background checks for all gun sales. Ban assault weapons and high-capacity magazines. Repeal gun manufacturers’ immunity from liability. Pass my budget proposal, which would give cities more of the funding they need to fund the police and fund the crime prevention and intervention strategies that can make our cities safer. These are just a few of the steps Congress urgently needs to take to save lives.

I suspect, not much, except blabber some more.

Putin Won’t Go, Russia Won’t Collapse—So What Will Biden Do About Ukraine?

Another séance with the ghost of Cardinal Richelieu explains Putin’s objectives in Ukraine: Russia will ruin and depopulate Ukraine, the way Richelieu reduced large parts of Germany to cannibalism during the Thirty Years War. Shortly after I conjured the spirit of Europe’s greatest (and nastiest) strategist, the Telegram channel of Russia’s most fanatic nationalist, Aleksandr Dugin, featured the item below:

NATO says the military phase of the conflict in Ukraine is far from over. Of course, no one will let Zelensky make peace.

Ukraine is not a subject, but an object, where the Zelensky regime is not an actor, but a tool.

Therefore, it is necessary to take into account the intentions of the enemy and use the period of the military phase of the operation to continue the methodical destruction of the military infrastructure of Ukraine, and taking into account NATO’s course of prolonging the conflict, it is advisable to consider moving on to the destruction of industrial facilities in the territories of Ukraine that lie outside our interests, especially paying attention to those objects that Ukraine, for obvious reasons, will not be able to restore. Later, such a convenient opportunity to complete the deindustrialization of Ukraine may not present itself.

An “opportunity to complete the deindustrialization of Ukraine.” Putin isn’t defeated or baffled or confused. He’s turning the crank on the meatgrinder. One doesn’t have to read too far into these lines to conclude that Putin hoped that Zelensky would cut a deal on his terms once Russia invaded, but when Zelensky refused to cut a deal, Putin moved to Option B, which is to erase most of Ukraine from the face of the earth. That’s not as difficult as it sounds. Putin will keep the bits he wants in the Southeast (Donetsk and Luhansk), leave the West to factory farming, and pound the rest to rubble with artillery and air power.

Ukraine’s national population of 45 million had fallen to just 33 million by 2020 because half the working-age population left. Another 5 million refugees have fled, and millions more will leave before Russian cannons fall silent. There won’t be enough working-age Ukrainians left to begin reconstruction. Putin claimed on Feb. 23 that the West intended to turn Ukraine into a NATO missile platform with a 300-mile distance to Moscow. If he can’t get Ukraine to accept neutrality with Russian control over its southeast provinces, he’ll eliminate the threat Richelieu-style.

It’s horrible. But what’s going to stop Putin? To flatten Ukrainian cities, all the Russians need is artillery. All the Javelin anti-tank missiles in the world won’t do any good.

Continue reading “”

Russian Offensive Campaign Assessment, April 3.

Immediate items to watch

  • Russian forces will likely complete their withdrawal from Kyiv along the Sumy axis in the coming days and will probably abandon their remaining positions around Konotop and Sumy thereafter.
  • Russian troops around Kharkiv will likely continue to focus on supporting the shift of the main effort via Izyum toward the southeast and may pull back from the immediate environs of the city.
  • Russian and proxy forces will attempt to increase the scope and scale of offensive operations to complete the linkup between the Kharkiv-Izyum axis and occupied Luhansk.
  • Russian forces will likely secure Mariupol in coming days, and may attempt to launch renewed offensive operations northwest from the city in an effort to seize Donetsk Oblast.

Ukraine has won the Battle of Kyiv. Russian forces are completing their withdrawal, but not in good order. Ukrainian forces are continuing to clear Kyiv Oblast of isolated Russian troops left behind in the retreat, which some Ukrainian officials describe as “lost orcs.” Russian forces had attempted to conduct an orderly retreat from their positions around Kyiv with designated covering forces supported by artillery and mines to allow the main body to withdraw. The main body of Russian troops has withdrawn from the west bank of the Dnipro and is completing its withdrawal from the east bank, but the retrograde has been sufficiently disorderly that some Russian troops were left behind.

The war is far from over and could still turn Russia’s way if the Russian military can launch a successful operation in eastern Ukraine. The current line of Russian occupation in southern and eastern Ukraine is still a significant gain in Russian-controlled territory since the start of the war. If a ceasefire or peace agreement freezes a line like the current front-line trace, Russia will be able to exert much greater pressure on Ukraine than it did before the invasion and may over time reassemble a more effective invasion force. Ukraine’s victory in the Battle of Kyiv is thus significant but not decisive.

The disorder of the Russian withdrawal suggests that at least some of the units now reconcentrating in Belarus and western Russia will remain combat ineffective for a protracted period. Russian troops attempting to refit after pulling back from around Kyiv will likely have to reconsolidate into their units, identify which soldiers are still present, sort out their equipment and assess its combat readiness, and generally reconstitute before they can even begin to receive replacements and new equipment and prepare for further combat operations.

Russian forces are likely abandoning the east bank of the Dnipro fully as well, withdrawing from around Chernihiv to the north and from Brovary to the east. Russian troops will likely seek to hold a salient around Konotop and Sumy long enough to allow their forces to complete their retrograde from near Kyiv but will then likely withdraw back to Russia from almost all their positions west of Kharkiv.

Moscow is attempting to concentrate reserves and some units pulled from the fight around Sumy to reinforce its offensive operations in the east but is encountering serious challenges in that effort. The Ukrainian General Staff reported on April 3 that Russian soldiers are resisting and in some cases refusing orders to enter or re-enter the war effort. The General Staff asserted that the two battalion tactical groups (BTGs) that moved from South Ossetia toward Donbas less than a week ago refused to fight and that plans to move them back to South Ossetia are in train.[1] The General Staff claimed that about 25 soldiers of the Russian 31st Separate Airborne Brigade refused orders to re-enter combat citing excessive losses.[2] The General Staff also asserted that commanders at various echelons in the Russian 3rd Motorized Rifle Division have refused to participate in combat operations.[3] We have no independent verification of these reports, but they are credible in light of the losses Russian forces have suffered and of independent reports of Russian soldiers killing commanders and commanders committing suicide from earlier in the conflict.

Russian efforts to advance its offensive operations in eastern Ukraine made limited progress in the past 24 hours. Fighting continues in Mariupol and on the Izyum-Severodonetsk axis.

Key Takeaways

  • Ukraine has won the Battle of Kyiv, and Russian forces are completing their withdrawals from both the east and the west banks of the Dnipro in disorder.
  • Russian forces retreating from around Kyiv will likely need considerable time before they can return to combat.
  • Incidents of refusals of orders to engage in combat operations among Russian units continue and may lead to the redeployment of two BTGs that had arrived near Donbas within the last few days to their home stations in South Ossetia.
  • The continued existence of an independent Ukrainian state with its capital in Kyiv is no longer in question at this time, although much fighting remains and the war could still turn Russia’s way.

Continue reading “”

Hmm. seems the answer is: Have a big enough gun, know how to use it, and if you decide a bear needs shooting, SHOOT THE BEAR AND KEEP SHOOTING UNTIL IT STOPS AND GOES AWAY, OR IS DEAD, or you are.

Lessons From Handgun Defense Failures Against Bears

In 2016, this correspondent and others started searching for incidents in which a handgun was fired to defend against a bear or bears, and failed to stop the attack by driving off or killing the bear.

Access to a defensive tool, such as a shotgun, rifle, bear spray,  handgun, hatchet, or knife all present similar problems. Therefore we only considered cases where a handgun was actually fired. If we were looking at the effectiveness of bear spray, we would only look at cases where the bear spray was actually sprayed.

To prevent selection bias, all cases where a handgun was fired defensively against a bear or bears, which could be documented, were included.

People on the Internet claimed handguns were ineffective in defending against bears. Over years, we found 120 cases where handguns were effectively used in defense against bears. We found three failures.

The three failures included failures against the three bear species found in North America, one each of polar, grizzly, and black bears.

Here are the details of the three cases, presented in chronological order, followed by analysis and commentary:

Continue reading “”