Study Finds Moms NOT More Likely To Back Gun Control

“If you were a mom, you’d feel differently. You’d back gun control!”

Have you ever heard this argument? Has someone literally tried to shame you into backing gun control by claiming that if you were a mother, you’d somehow have a completely different view of people’s rights?

I have, and I’m sure I’m not alone.

To be fair, there’s a lot of talk about moms in the gun control ranks. Moms Demand Action, for example–I know, I know, it sounds more like an adult website featuring older women than a gun control group, but it is. They’re not alone either. The Million Mom March, for example.

However, a recent study decided to take a look and see if motherhood actually affects one’s views on gun control.

When it comes to support for gun control policies, mothers are not significantly different than women without children, according to new research published in the Journal of Elections, Public Opinion and Parties. The findings indicate that parenthood doesn’t have a substantial impact on gun control views in the United States.

“I’ve always been interested in topics around gender and parenthood in American politics where I think, maybe, how a group or political dynamic is portrayed in the media may not actually reflect the underlying dynamic that well,” said study author Steven Greene (@HankGreene), a professor of political science at North Carolina State University.

“For example, 14 years ago, Laurel Elder and I co-wrote, ‘The Myth of “Security Moms” and “NASCAR Dads”: Parenthood, Political Stereotypes, and the 2004 Election.’ So much media and public attention around gun control has focused on moms (e.g., the Million Mom March) that we were anxious to explore this dynamic to see how much motherhood seemed to explain gun attitudes.…

The researchers had hypothesized that fatherhood would push men towards more conservative attitudes on gun control policies, while motherhood would push women towards more liberal attitudes. But after controlling for sociodemographic variables, there was little evidence that parenthood had much impact.

Mothers held more liberal views on guns control compared to the general population. But this appeared to be unrelated to motherhood. Women were more liberal than men in general on questions related to gun laws and regulations. But there was no evidence that mothers’ opinions on guns were more liberal compared to women without children. In fact, mothers were slightly more likely to support less restrictive gun laws.

However, what does this really change? Not a whole lot. The anti-gunners will continue to pretend they represent mothers in totality and we’ll continue to know better.

What this does, though, is provide an important data point.

See, what anti-gunners love to do–and they’re generally able to with the help of a complicit media–is try to paint a small group with some shared identity as speaking for the group in totality. In this example, moms.

They also do it with March For Our Lives.

Remember how there was all that hype, about how the younger generation was going to step up and save us. However, support for gun control is dropping among those under 30. March For Our Lives doesn’t represent young people, it represents March For Our Lives members.

The same is clearly true with groups like Moms Demand Action and moms across the country.

and on an earlier note:


Governor’s veto of concealed carry increases likelihood of historic veto session

Governor John Bel Edwards vetoes legislation granting the right to conceal carry a firearm without a permit for ages 21 and up. The bill had popular support in both chambers during the session. Edwards said while he supports Second Amendment rights, he believes conceal carry is a large responsibility and one should undergo proper training………

The veto of the concealed carry bill on the heels of a veto to ban transgender females from competing in women’s sports has increased the likelihood of the first-ever veto session to be called.

Morris said he’s optimistic a session will be called and conceal carry will become law in Louisiana.

“We may make a little bit of history here, but we’ll have to see, I don’t know yet but I’m hopeful because I think a lot of the legislation that did get vetoed are things that the citizens of Louisiana really want,” said Morris.

The measure received wide support during the session it passed in the Senate on a 27-9 vote and in the House 73-28.

Paul crankin the 9mm Tippmann Gatling Gun at at the Whittington Center,

Dangerous, Threatening Rhetoric is the Tactic of Tyrants

Only tyrants threaten the use of force against their own people. On Wednesday, President Biden remarked,  “If you wanted or if you think you need to have weapons to take on the government, you need F-15s and maybe some nuclear weapons.”

This is reminiscent of California’s infamous Chinese-spy-bedding Congressman, Eric Swalwell’s threats via Twitter back in 2018, when he said about a hypothetical war against gun owners, “And it would be a short war my friend. The government has nukes….”

Both references to nuclear weapons is designed to do one thing: to intimidate America’s  armed populace.

 

Drilling down, the core question is why do these politicians distrust the people with the arms the Constitution guarantees their right to keep and bear? What are they doing, or planning, that makes civilian disarmament a priority? If civilian gun ownership isn’t a threat, why are lawful gun owners constantly conflated with criminals, scapegoated for crimes they didn’t commit, and their rights under incessant, incremental attack?

The reason is the power of an armed civilian populace is not to be underestimated, and they know it.

All men have the potential to be tyrants. As Aristotle warned . . .

The three aims of the tyrant are, one, the humiliation of his subjects; he knows that a mean-spirited man will not conspire against anybody; two, the creation of mistrust among them; for a tyrant is not to be overthrown until men begin to have confidence in one another — and this is the reason why tyrants are at war with the good; they are under the idea that their power is endangered by them, not only because they will not be ruled despotically, but also because they are too loyal to one another and to other men, and do not inform against one another or against other men — three, the tyrant desires that all his subjects shall be incapable of action, for no one attempts what is impossible and they will not attempt to overthrow a tyranny if they are powerless.

Wednesday’s speech was a prime example of attempts to humiliate, foment mistrust, and lay the foundation for plans to render popular action ineffective, just as Aristotle described. Biden’s ham-handed remarks about the government’s arsenal of F15s and nuclear weapons were intended to mock and humiliate anyone who believes she is free citizen, not a subject. Anyone who believes her life if worth defending against those who wish her harm. Anyone who subscribes to the historic values enshrined in our Constitution.

The second tactic was intimidation, the use of divisive language, stoking fear and mistrust amongst our fellow citizens by scapegoating gun owners. He all but blamed us for higher crime rates rather than looking at other, more politically inconvenient factors such as defunding, demonizing, and demoralizing police forces throughout the nation.

Biden tried to stoke fear of modern sporting rifles, of which there are about 20 million in common use in the United States. Attempting to ban them over arbitrary, mostly cosmetic features defies all logic. If it wasn’t so clearly tyrannical, it would almost be humorous.

Finally, Aristotle recognized that tyrants desire to render their subjects incapable of acting. In Biden’s case, through civilian disarmament. How would one actually accomplish this? Enter Biden’s ATF Director nominee and current gun control lobbyist, David Chipman. The man refused to identify what constitutes and “assault weapon” because he knows it will be far more convenient to let that definition be whatever the tyrants want or need it to be.

In the end, Biden’s speech was embarrassing and his empty threats pathetic. America’s gun owners will not be intimidated. If gun-grabbing politicians didn’t fear the people, they wouldn’t spend so much time, energy, resources, and linguistic wrangling attacking Second Amendment rights.

We rest easy knowing our constitutional foundations, and the pre-existing rights codified therein, have brought us to this. Not to disappoint the President, but we know that the Supreme Court has already ruled that we have an individual right to possess arms in common use. That’s a feature, not a bug as this very moment was thoughtfully crafted and designed by the Framers. Our duty and responsibility is to uphold the Constitution.

 

What is Behind Gen. Mark Milley’s Righteous Race Sermon? Look to the New Domestic War on Terror.
The overarching ideology of Pentagon officials is larger military budgets and ongoing permanent war posture. Their new war target, explicitly, is domestic “white rage.”

For two hundred forty years, American generals have not exactly been defined by adamant public advocacy for left-wing cultural dogma. Yet there appeared to be a great awakening at the Pentagon on Wednesday when Gen. Mark Milley, the highest-ranking military officer in the U.S. as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, testified at a House hearing. The Chairman vehemently defended the teaching of critical race theory at West Point and, referencing the January 6 Capitol riot, said, “it is important that we train and we understand … and I want to understand white rage. And I’m white.”

In response to conservative criticisms that top military officials should not be weighing in on inflammatory and polarizing cultural debates, liberals were ecstatic to have found such an empathetic, racially aware, and humanitarian general sitting atop the U.S. imperial war machine. Overnight, Gen. Milley became a new hero for U.S. liberalism, a noble military leader which — like former FBI Director Robert Mueller before him — no patriotic, decent American would question let alone mock. Some prominent liberal commentators warned that conservatives are now anti-military and even seek to defund the Pentagon.

It is, of course, possible that the top brass of the U.S. military has suddenly become supremely enlightened on questions of racial strife and racial identity in the U.S., and thus genuinely embraced theories that, until very recently, were the exclusive province of left-wing scholars at elite academic institutions. Given that all U.S. wars in the post-World War II era have been directed at predominantly non-white countries, which — like all wars — required a sustained demonization campaign of those enemy populations, having top Pentagon officials become leading anti-racism warriors would be quite a remarkable transformation indeed. But stranger things have happened, I suppose.

But perhaps there is another explanation other than righteous, earnest transformation as to why the top U.S. General has suddenly expressed such keen interest in studying and exploring “white rage”. Note that Gen. Milley’s justification for the military’s sudden immersion in the study of modern race theories is the January 6 Capitol riot — which, in the lexicon of the U.S. security state and American liberalism, is called The Insurrection. When explaining why it is so vital to study “white rage,” Gen. Milley argued:

What is it that caused thousands of people to assault this building and try to overturn the Constitution of the United States of America? What caused that? I want to find that out. I want to maintain an open mind here, and I do want to analyze it.

The post-WW2 military posture of the U.S. has been endless war. To enable that, there must always be an existential threat, a new and fresh enemy that can scare a large enough portion of the population with sufficient intensity to make them accept, even plead for, greater military spending, surveillance powers, and continuation of permanent war footing. Starring in that war-justifying role of villain have been the Communists, Al Qaeda, ISIS, Russia, and an assortment of other fleeting foreign threats.

According to the Pentagon, the U.S. intelligence community, and President Joe Biden, none of those is the greatest national security threat to the United States any longer. Instead, they all say explicitly and in unison, the gravest menace to American national security is now domestic in nature. Specifically, it is “domestic extremists” in general — and far-right white supremacist groups in particular — that now pose the greatest threat to the safety of the homeland and to the people who reside in it.

In other words, to justify the current domestic War on Terror that has already provoked billions more in military spending and intensified domestic surveillance, the Pentagon must ratify the narrative that those they are fighting in order to defend the homeland are white supremacist domestic terrorists. That will not work if white supremacists are small in number or weak and isolated in their organizing capabilities. To serve the war machine’s agenda, they must pose a grave, pervasive and systemic threat.

Viewed through that lens, it makes perfect sense that Gen. Milley is spouting the theories and viewpoints that underlie this war framework and which depicts white supremacy and “white rage” as a foundational threat to the American homeland.

Continue reading “”

Our Woke Military Is a Disaster on Every Level

Our Woke Military Is a Disaster on Every Level

Hi, everybody! Welcome to the latest edition of “Stream of Kurtiousness,” the Townhall VIP special feature where I sit and talk about stuff, things, and do-ins. So here we are. Let’s go. What do we got?

We got drag queen shows at Air Force bases. Not just any Air Force base. No, it’s Nellis Air Force Base, home of the fighter pilot training school where you’re supposed to forge on the anvil of combat training the world’s greatest fighting force. They had a bunch of dudes dressed like chicks walking around, and this was an official sponsored event, and it’s like, what the hell is going on? A drag show, folks. A drag show.

Want to know what else is a drag? Not having won a war in 20 years. That’s a super drag. And it’s really, really annoying. It’s getting old. It’s getting tiring.

 

Let’s face it; our military is in a really bad way. It’s a disaster on every level.

Did you see Chief of Naval Operations Admiral Mike Gilday, Four Stars, get up before Congress, and they start asking him embarrassing questions like why are you having our guys read Henry Kendi Ibram Rogers whatever the hell his name is?

Here’s the thing, everybody goes, “Well, Kurt, aren’t generals conservative?” Well, they’re conservative as an adjective, not conservative as a noun. Okay? They’re not like you and me. Keep in mind, they’re at the top of the pyramid in a socialist organization where they tell you what to do, where to go, what to say, what to wear, who you’re doctor is going to be; they tell you everything. And if you’re a general, you really like that.

Now, I was Guard as well as Army. I was active duty and Guard, so I kind of had both of those worlds, but when you’re Guard, you tend to, I don’t know, have a freaking life. And you know, we would get attitude from the active duty guys, “You’re not a real soldier.” And I’m like, “Well, I had to meet every standard you did to become a Colonel.” Every single one, including War College, which you didn’t need to be a Colonel, but it still helped. So, I did that, and I was successful. And I was successful at an entirely different career, too.

There was a little healthy competition, but now, it’s a total sh**show.

These guys are socialists; they are not conservatives like you or me. In fact, they distrust it, because as conservatives, we believe in empowerment. We believe in pushing down to the lowest decentralized level the authority of people to run their own lives. That’s everything generals hate!

Continue reading “”

If You Want to Support Women’s Rights, Then Support their Right to Defend Themselves

I remember what it felt like the first time I had my sense of newly built security ripped from me. I had just turned 19. I was so young. I was just a kid. Like most young people, I never thought that it could happen to me.

At the time I was in the military, living off base in Missouri with a female roommate. After about a week of noticing things were “off” in the house (the back door would be unlocked, then open physically, etc.) I brought it up at work.

Some of my co-workers said I was working too much. They even suggested I go speak to someone in mental health… but I kept listening to my gut instincts as I have done my entire life. That ultimately is what ended up keeping me safe.

Shortly after informing my work about what was happening in our house. The break-in happened. The local police got involved, the base got involved… everyone knew. As a result, my commander ordered us back on base because that was all he could do to keep us safe.

My roommate and I had been targeted and as a result, the only way to avoid us being put directly in danger was to be ordered onto a military installation with 24/7 security.

Soon after, I received orders to move down to Florida. I had gotten married and thought after moving I’d feel safer.

I was wrong. In fact, things got worse. Even at home, I didn’t feel safe. I had no way of defending myself. When it got dark outside, I’d go around making sure every door and window was locked. I couldn’t even sleep through the night. I had regressed to an almost child-like state of being afraid of the dark. I felt weak, afraid, even violated.

My husband was getting ready to deploy, so he was gone most of the time. I bought a big dog, but that didn’t help. I was suffering from a form of trauma, and it was a major problem.

But then a friend, a technical sergeant, explained to me what a concealed-carry permit was — and it changed my life forever.

In the military and law enforcement, guns are a tool that we all learn to use that allows us to defend ourselves. There is a misconception in parts of our society that label guns as “dangerous, evil weapons for destruction,” but that wasn’t my experience.

I quickly applied for my concealed carry and I was (until recently) able to sleep through the night again. I felt at that time that I could defend myself. I finally felt like myself — a young woman able to live her life to the fullest.

It was a wonderful transformation — one that I expanded on recently in an episode of my podcast, “Luna Talks with Anna Paulina.”

With my sense of security restored, I felt I had to share my story. I wanted people, especially women, to know they had an alternative way of dealing with fear and trauma. Little did I know this endeavor would cause such backlash, especially on social media.

My civilian friends didn’t understand why I needed a gun, even though I went through a traumatic experience. And these women’s clothing companies with which I was working wanted to cut ties with me after I began posting online about my story and using firearms.

The strangest response was people saying they didn’t want me to be political. I didn’t think I was being political. To me, the Second Amendment isn’t a political issue. It’s a matter of basic protection. I was simply sharing experiences to get people to realize that self-defense is an option. Was I not exhibiting the ultimate support for women by empowering them to feel safe and secure?

Yet I was being called a “terrorist” and “a baby killer.” But I didn’t care. I knew there were people out there who would benefit from my story.

This issue is especially relevant after COVID-19. According to the National Commission on COVID-19 and Criminal Justice, incidents of domestic violence spiked more than 8 percent nationwide in 2020 following lockdown orders. And mind you, these were just the reported incidents; so many victims don’t come forward.

What I went through was only a fraction of what many women endure. According to the Rape, Abuse, and Incest National Network, one out of every six American women have been the victim of an attempted or completed rape in their lifetime. What a sad and horrifying statistic.

Yet self-defense for women isn’t promoted in mainstream society — especially not in our schools — and there’s often a stigma around firearms (I know firsthand from the demonization I endured).

But if we truly want to empower women to be victors, not victims, shouldn’t we teach women how to defend themselves? Shouldn’t we demonstrate for girls how to feel secure and confident in a cruel world? Isn’t that a better long-term strategy than, say, decrying the patriarchy during a college seminar?

So, let me conclude with this: Thank God for the Second Amendment.

I want to pass this message on to people everywhere — especially women and victims of domestic violence. Because if we truly want to help, we should be empowering them, not hindering their God-given right to self-defense.

Army Finally Defines ‘Extremism’ When It Comes to Screening Out ‘Hate Group’ Members.

The Army has decided to ask all applicants for enlistment a question about an association with “extremist/hate groups” in the screening process. This requirement might seem reasonable. However, according to the latest communication, extremism is defined in terms of individual belief and advocacy.

In a recent congressional hearing, Senator Tom Cotton questioned Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin regarding racially-charged exercises and training content presented during the 60-day stand-down to root out extremism. Austin disavowed the concepts that members of the military reported receiving training on. Representative Jim Banks (R-Ind.) also questioned Chief of Naval Operations Admiral Michael Gilday about placing How to Be an Anti-Racist by Ibram X. Kendi on a recommended book list for sailors. From Gilday’s answer, it is doubtful he ever read the book that some social justice warrior lackey probably placed on the list.

Yet social justice content is leaking its way into the military through some mechanism. Now, the Army Recruitment Command uses subjective and easy-to-politicize criteria to identify potential “extremists” who wish to enlist. This change comes amid the Pentagon considering ways to intensify social media scrutiny in background investigations.

On June 22, an Ops Flash instructed Army recruiters that the inclusion of a question regarding any association with “extremist/hate” organizations must be answered and uploaded for all applicants for commissioning in the Army before testing, before the physical exam, and before military entrance processing. The required form updated the gang participation question that has been asked since the 1990s:

Army critical race theory
Army form screenshot.

Suspecting that the definition of a gang is more commonly held than that of an “extremist/hate organization” in the current political environment, I reached out to the Army Press Desk for clarification asking three questions after reviewing the Ops Flash and new question:

  1. Is this initiative only part of the Army recruitment process or for all branches?
  2. It appears to apply only to officer candidates. Is this accurate?
  3. Is there a standard definition or list of extremist/hate groups? In the current political environment, this seems very open-ended.

Continue reading “”

A Biden minion blames America’s crime spike on the NRA.
Well, I’ve never yet found a demoncrap that made sense anyway, so…


What a Top Biden Staffer Said About the NRA and the Spike in Crime Makes No Sense

As Katie wrote yesterday, the Biden gun grab is coming. They’re prepping it. They’re doing a test-run with this regulation tweak on pistol stabilizers that will place 10-40 million law-abiding Americans in legal jeopardy. These people did nothing wrong, but the firearms they own must be registered, disassembled, or turned over to authorities to avoid legal action. It will be the largest gun confiscation and registration effort ever. And now, Biden announced new initiatives for gun dealers concerning background checks. It’s not new, by the way. It’s already illegal to conduct straw purchases, falsify your background check form, and knowingly sell to criminals or other prohibited persons.

And now, top Biden adviser Cedric Richmond went on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” to blame the National Rifle Association (NRA) for the spike in violent crime. Well, first, he picked the right network because MSNBC is only meant to stroke the fragile egos of liberal America. It does well to keep their moral superiority complex well fed. Second, he said that the NRA has governed the country for too long. Uh, what? As Chris Martin of America Rising notes, Democrats control the White House and both chambers of Congress. What the hell is he talking about?

It’s the same old tired game. With the NRA in serious legal and financial trouble, Richmond is doing his part to drive the stake into the heart of the nation’s oldest civil rights organization.

Just look in the mirror, man. Your party’s embracing of defunding the police, passing disastrous bail reforms, and letting hundreds of rioters, looters, and arsonists from last summer go is what’s causing this crime spike. You’re telling them they’ll get away with it. This isn’t hard, sir. When a major party decides to adopt a pro-crime stance, mayhem will ensue in the areas this party dominates politically, which would be the cities.

 

Biden’s Gun Control Speech Was A Mistake

Joe Biden had one real goal in Wednesday’s speech announcing a five-point plan to address the rising violent crime rate in many American cities; reassure voters that Democrats have a strategy that will reduce the increasing lawlessness and reverse the spike in crime that began last year.

Instead, the big takeaway from his rambling and semi-coherent remarks was his off-topic warning to Americans that if they want to take on the government, they’ll need F-15s and nuclear weapons. An address that was supposed to show that the president was focused on violent crime turned into a half-hearted stump speech for gun control, and maybe cannon control as well.

Recent polls have shown that Biden isn’t trusted to handle the crime issue, and I can’t imagine that yesterday’s disastrous turn at the podium made voters feel any better.

Polls signal growing unease over crime, a potential liability for Biden and Democrats in next year’s midterm elections. A Yahoo News/YouGov poll released in May found that nearly 50% of respondents said crime is a very big problem in the U.S. About 36% of respondents at least somewhat approved of Biden’s handling of crime, while 44% at least somewhat disapproved.

Republicans have accused the president of being soft on crime, saying he has not done enough to rebut some liberals who call for cutting spending on police departments. Biden has repeatedly said he does not favor defunding the police.

It’s true that Biden announced that cities can use hundreds of billions of dollars in COVID relief funds to spend on law enforcement efforts, but the officer shortage in many cities can’t simply be blamed on budget issues. Instead, as the New York Times reported a few days ago, officers are retiring, resigning, and joining suburban agencies because of the hostility towards law enforcement shown by many Democratic politicians and elected officials in cities from coast-to-coast.

“We have lost about one-third of our staff to resignation and retirement,” said Chief David Zack of the Asheville Police Department in North Carolina — more than 80 officers out of a full complement of 238. “Certainly with the way that police have been portrayed and vilified in some cases, they have decided that it is not the life for them.”

Those reductions in Ashville echo a nationwide trend. A survey of about 200 police departments indicates that retirements were up by 45 percent and resignations by 18 percent in the period between April 2020 and April 2021, when compared with the preceding 12 months. The percentage of officers who left tended to be larger for departments in big or medium-size cities, according to the Police Executive Research Forum, a Washington policy institute that will release full data next week.

“It is an evolving crisis,” said Chuck Wexler, the organization’s executive director.

Biden could have engaged in a full-throated attack on the Defund the Police movement, but he can’t risk alienating the Democrats’ base, so instead he pilloried gun owners. He could have issued a stark warning to violent criminals that the Department of Justice is going to be coming after them, but instead he warned “rogue gun dealers” that the ATF will have a zero tolerance policy on violations of agency rules and regulations.

A speech that was ostensibly designed to make Americans feel better about Biden’s handling of violent crime instead left many of us scratching our heads. Even Biden defenders like Geraldo Rivera were less than impressed by the president’s remarks.

“Compassion aside, where was the passion? That speech was as laid back as the program he is proposing,” said Rivera.

The longtime journalist, who has reported on violent crime and other major issues throughout his career, said that Biden’s allocation of resources toward summertime social programs for urban and endangered youth and stemming illegal firearm sales will not go far toward solving the problem.

“This is the civil rights issue of our time, murder has become the leading cause of death, if this is not an emergency, what is it?” he later asked.

Now, Geraldo is wrong about murder being the leading cause of death in the United States (heart disease, cancer, COVID-19, accidents, Alzheimer’s, diabetes, and suicides are each responsible for far more deaths than homicide), but he’s right that Biden’s speech was “laid back.” I’d actually call it somnambulate, but seeing Sleepy Joe at the podium isn’t exactly a new phenomenon either.

The biggest problem for Biden is that he can’t actually acknowledge why we’re seeing a rise in violent crime. Biden wants to blame legal gun owners and federally licensed firearm dealers, when we know that the vast majority of gun owners will never commit a violent crime and that criminals are getting their guns on the illicit market or through family and friends. The White House refers to an 18-month increase in violent crime, when we all know that shootings and homicides really increased a year ago, after the death of George Floyd in Minneapolis and the riots and destruction that followed in many cities.

Biden’s address on Wednesday may have checked a box, but I doubt it moved the needle in terms of public opinion on his handling of violent crime. By continuing to call for more restrictions on legal gun owners at a time when millions of Americans are embracing their Second Amendment rights for the very first time and his unwillingness to get tough on those actually responsible for violent acts, the only people Biden really reassured were his gun control allies. When it comes to everyone else, Biden would have been better off politically saying nothing at all.

BLUF:

In my humble opinion, the Biden/Harris administration, the legacy media and the folks at The Trace and other anti-rights groups are scared witless by the Second Amendment Sanctuary movement…..
As the movement grows — and it is growing by leaps and bounds — we will see more attacks from politicians, which will then be parroted by their staunch supporters in the legacy media, assuming, that is, they can break a reporter loose from their hard-hitting, investigative coverage of Joe Biden’s ice cream cone du jour.

No, NPR, there aren’t 400 Second Amendment Sanctuary counties in the US — there are 1,930

Taxpayer funded National Public Radio tries to downplay and trivialize the Second Amendment Sanctuary movement, without letting the facts get in their way.

To be clear, there are 1,930 counties that have now become Second Amendment Sanctuaries, which is more than 61% of all the counties in the United States.

Of these counties, 1,137 made the decision to protect the Second Amendment on their own. The rest are located in the 15  states — the most recent being Texas — that declared themselves Second Amendment Sanctuaries, according to Noah Davis of sanctuarycounties.com and its companion site constitutionalsanctuaries.com.

Davis has the most up-to-date maps and data available on the topic. He has tracked the Second Amendment Sanctuary movement since its inception in his home state of Virginia.

The fact more than 61% of the country has chosen to protect the Second Amendment rights of their citizens has largely been ignored by the legacy media. If they have bothered to do a story on sanctuaries at all, their goal has been to downplay if not belittle the movement. Of course, that, friends, is what we call spin.

Taxpayer subsidized National Public Radio is the latest to try to torpedo the movement, which is growing every single day.

On NPR’s June 21 edition of “Here & Now,” the host falsely states there are only 400 counties that have become Second Amendment Sanctuaries, not 1,930. This is a common error among the legacy media. Davis has said it stems from a story originally published more than a year ago by Bloomberg’s anti-gun propaganda factory — The Trace. The story keeps rebounding around the internet, even though the numbers have increased significantly, because of lazy reporting and shoddy research.

Continue reading “”

F-15S & NUCLEAR WEAPONS: BIDEN SHRUGS OFF 2A IN GUN CONTROL SPEECH

Just over a week before the country’s Independence Day celebrations, President Biden delivered a speech on gun control in which he ridiculed the meaning, feasibility, and intent of the Second Amendment.

In an event meant to be the kickoff for another round of anti-gun legislation and executive actions for an Administration just 155 days in the White House, Biden tried to frame the Constitutional gun rights argument to justify his proposed efforts.

“The Second Amendment, from the day it was passed, limited the type of people who could own a gun and what type of weapon you could own. You couldn’t buy a cannon,” he said.

While the first part, about the Amendment “limiting the type of people,” is somewhat true– for example, the gun rights of enslaved and in some cases even freed blacks were often denied in the Southern States from the earliest days of the Constitution despite the Second Amendment– Biden fails the fact check on cannon ownership. As we have covered before, anyone with the desire and extra cash could acquire their own battery of fully functional cannon without any government paperwork or permission until 1968. 

With that being said, modern breechloading artillery is still available in the “Land of the Free and Home of the Brave,” provided it is registered with the federal government and properly taxed. Still, legacy artillery systems such as muzzleloading black powder field guns, do not require tax stamps.

Biden also went further into the woods against what the Second Amendment protects, arguing the enumerated right had something to do with hunting, although many in the gun rights community point out that Washington didn’t cross the Delaware to get to a duck blind.

“No one needs to have a weapon that can fire over 30, 40, 50, even up to 100 rounds unless you think the deer are wearing Kevlar vests or something,” he said, although magazine capacity restrictions have only been adopted in nine states– and have been recently found to be Constitutionally suspect by a federal court. Further, industry data suggests consumers in the U.S. own at least 230 million detachable magazines, with about half of those able to hold more than 10 cartridges, the traditional threshold for a “large-capacity magazine” in restricted states.

Then, Biden seemed to paint the Second Amendment’s potential check against tyranny, a concept that dates to the days of Constitutional framer James Madison, as ludicrous in the days of modern warfare, notwithstanding the realities of multi-domain modern insurgency.

“Those who say the blood of lib- — ‘the blood of patriots,’ you know, and all the stuff about how we’re going to have to move against the government. Well, the tree of liberty is not watered with the blood of patriots. What’s happened is that there have never been — if you wanted or if you think you need to have weapons to take on the government, you need F-15s and maybe some nuclear weapons,” he said.

The quote Biden ramblingly alluded to, drawn a 1787 letter from Founding Father Thomas Jefferson– author of The Declaration of Independence and later third U.S. President– to William Smith, John Adams’ secretary, can be argued to be directly related to the right to keep and bear arms and was penned at the time of Shays’ Rebellion in Massachusetts.

We have had 13 states independent 11 years. There has been one rebellion. That comes to one rebellion in a century & a half for each state. What country before ever existed a century & half without a rebellion? & what country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to facts, pardon & pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots & tyrants. It is its natural manure.

It is not the first time that Biden trotted out the Jeffersonian quote in relation to his view on gun policy. In February 2020, while on the campaign trail for the Democratic nomination for President, he argued at a town hall event in New Hampshire that, “Those who say ‘the tree of liberty is watered with the blood of patriots’ — a great line, well, guess what: The fact is, if you’re going to take on the government you need an F-15 with Hellfire Missiles. There is no way an AK-47 is going to take care of you.”

Winchester 9mm 115 gr Ammunition Recall

Olin Winchester, LLC is recalling the following lots of 9mm Luger 115 grain Full Metal Jacket and 115 grain Jacketed Hollow Point pistol ammunition.

Symbols: Q4172, RED9, USA9JHP, USA9MMVP, USA9W, WW9B

Lot Numbers:
SC03LD44, SC03LD45, SC03LD46, SC03LD47
SC13LD1, SC13LD6, SC13LD18, SC13LD44, SC13LD45, SC13LD46, SC13LD47
SC52LD44, SC52LD45, SC52LD46, SC52LD47
SC62LD44, SC62LD45, SC62LD46, SC62LD47
SC72LD44, SC72LD45, SC72LD46, SC72LD47
SC92LD44, SC92LD45, SC92LD46, SC92LD47
SD10LD1, SD10LD3, SD10LD6, SC10LD12, SD10LD18, SD10LD46, SD10LD47
SD50LD1, SD50LD3, SD50LD6, SD50LD11, SD50LD12, SD50LD18, SD50LD46, SD50LD47
SD60LD1, SD60LD3, SD60LD6, SD60LD11, SD60LD12, SD60LD18
SD70LD1, SD70LD3, SD70LD6, SD70LD11, SD70LD12, SD70LD18
SD80LD1, SD80LD3, SD80LD6, SD80LD11, SD80LD12, SD80LD18

Winchester has determined the above lots of 9mm Luger 115 FMJ and JHP ammunition may contain propellant that does not properly ignite and burn when the cartridge is fired. Ammunition containing propellant that does not properly ignite and burn may result in a bullet remaining in the barrel (i.e., a bullet-in-bore obstruction). Firing a subsequent bullet into the bore obstruction could cause firearm damage, rendering the firearm inoperable and subjecting the shooter and bystanders to a risk of serious personal injury.

DO NOT USE WINCHESTER® 9MM LUGER 115 FMJ / JHP OF THE ABOVE SYMBOLS THAT HAS ANY OF THE ABOVE LOT NUMBERS.

To determine if your ammunition is subject to this notice, review the Symbol and Lot Number. If it is any of the above Symbols and Lot Numbers, immediately discontinue use and contact Winchester toll-free at 844-653-8358 for free UPS pick-up of the recalled ammunition. Upon receipt of your recalled ammunition, Winchester will ship replacement ammunition directly to you or issue you a reimbursement check.

This notice applies only to the above 9mm Luger 115 FMJ and JHP Symbols with the above Lot Numbers. Other Symbols or Lot Numbers are not subject to this recall.

If you have any questions concerning this 9mm Luger 115 FMJ / JHP pistol ammunition recall please call toll-free 844-653-8358, write to Winchester (600 Powder Mill Road, East Alton, IL 62024 Attn: 9mm Luger Recall), or visit our website at www.winchester.com.

 

Comment O’ The Day

MorDAC;

You want to understand ‘white rage’? Okay… How about living your whole life watching one particular segment of society make every conceivable wrong decision. Miss every available opportunity afforded them. Do things in their lives that make failure a foregone conclusion…. And yet, after all that – they get to blame me for their problems they created.

And when, after 60 years, I’m a little fed up with it – I’M the problem?

States he doesn’t really know what it is, but still advocates for it.
This is the intellectual level of the current military command structure.
Yes, you read Marx, Lenin and even Mao.
You do that to – as SunTzu put it – understand the enemy as well as you understand yourself.
You do not teach a theory though that is 180° opposite to what America stands for.


Chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff Defends Critical Race Theory

General Mark Milley, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, explained in a House Armed Services Committee hearing Wednesday why he supports bringing Critical Race Theory into the American military while admitting “I’ll obviously have to get much smarter on whatever the theory is.”

“I do think it’s important, actually, for those of us in uniform to be open-minded and be widely read,” Milley said. “And the United States Military Academy is a university, and it is important that we train and we understand,” he added as a rationale for teaching Critical Race Theory.

“I want to understand ‘white rage,’ and I’m white, and I want to understand it,” said the most senior military officer in America, linking the term to the events at the U.S. Capitol on January 6th.

Understanding Critical Race Theory, according to Milley, is important to find out “what is it that caused thousands of people to assault this building and try to overturn the Constitution of the United States of America? I want to find that out,” he said. “I want to maintain an open mind here and I do want to analyze it. It’s important that we understand that. Because our soldiers, sailors, airman, marines, and guardians come from the American people, so it is important that the leaders, now and in the future, do understand it.”

In defending the practice of including Critical Race Theory in military training, Milley noted “I’ve read Karl Marx, I’ve read Lenin, that doesn’t make me a communist. So what is wrong with understanding, having some situational understanding about the country for which we are here to defend?”Milley then criticized those who oppose the integration of Critical Race Theory, saying “I personally find it offensive that we are accusing the United States military, our general officers, our commissioned, non-commissioned officers of being ‘woke’ or something else because we’re studying some theories that are out there.”As Katie reported earlier in June, Rep. Michael Waltz (R-FL) sent multiple letters to West Point in order to learn how Critical Race Theory was being implemented —not just studied or considered — and ring the alarm on CRT’s damaging outcomes.

“On the battlefield, skin color doesn’t matter. All that matters is merit & mission,” Waltz tweeted about his inquiry. “Critical Race Theory’s antithetical to the unity needed for service to our country & that’s why I’m getting to the bottom of why it’s being taught to our future leaders at our military academies.”

Critical Race Theory Seeks to Undermine Equality and the Constitutional Order.

In its own words, critical race theory seeks to overthrow America’s system of government. Leaked mandatory training documents from Iowa’s Mississippi Bend Area Education Agency (MBAEA) make this clear.

critical race theory
Leaked document from Iowa’s Mississippi Bend Area Education Agency.

The document clearly separates CRT from “traditional civil rights,” saying it “questions the very foundations of the liberal order, including equality theory, legal reasoning, Enlightenment rationalism, and principles of constitutional law.”

This helps explain the sudden shift in rhetoric away from equality and toward “equity.” This massive moving of the goalposts is based on CRT’s principles.

According to documents leaked to Benny Johnson of Turning Point USA and Newsmax TV, the MBAEA is forcing hundreds of teachers into this training at taxpayer expense. Not only is it designed to fracture and undermine our entire basis of law, it’s openly racist and it’s politically vindictive.

LEAKED DOCUMENTS from Iowa School System show Teachers are FORCED to classify ‘Make America Great Again” as a type of “racism” & “white supremacy.”

This is done through MANDATORY Critical Race Theory training FORCED on teachers at taxpayer expense.

Trump won Iowa by +9 points pic.twitter.com/6xEuVJpv7g

— Benny (@bennyjohnson) June 22, 2021

 

Among the terms the MBAEA’s training insists are “white supremacist” are “colorblindness,” celebrating Columbus Day, believing that “we’re just one human family,” and, of course, “Make America Great Again.”

Again, this is mandatory training in Iowa, in government schools. MBAEA’s equity officer is Kim Hoffman.

Read through Johnson’s entire Twitter thread. The documents provide clear proof that CRT is intentionally destructive.

 

Johnson reached out to Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds (R).

 

Iowa’s legislature did ban critical race theory in its schools in its 2021 session. But if teachers are already indoctrinated? If they’ve been forced to subscribe to cultish beliefs as the price of keeping their jobs?

Witness says Good Samaritan shot the gunman in Olde Town Arvada

ARVADA, Colo. — On Tuesday, the Arvada Police Department chief identified John Hurley as the Good Samaritan who was killed during Monday’s shooting in Olde Town.

The chief called Hurley a “true hero.” Witnesses told Denver7 that Hurley confronted the gunman.

Hurley was 40 years old and lived in Golden. A friend described him as an outspoken activist.

Hurley, veteran Arvada Police Officer Gordon Beesely and the gunman, Ronald Troyke, were killed in the shooting on Monday afternoon in Olde Town Square.

Bill Troyanos was working at the Arvada Army Navy Surplus store on Monday afternoon when Hurley walked into the business. He said Hurley was inside for just a few minutes when they heard gunshots outside and saw the gunman in the plaza. Troyanos said Hurley swiftly pulled his gun from his holster and jumped into action.

“He did not hesitate; he didn’t stand there and think about it. He totally heard the gunfire, went to the door, saw the shooter and immediately ran in that direction,” Troyanos said. “I just want to make sure his family knows how heroic he was.”

A manager at a business nearby who asked not to be identified said he was outside when he heard Hurley urge people to get to safety.

“He turned back and looked towards everybody at the restaurant and told us that he (the gunman) is coming, that he is coming back and that we should get inside,” the manager said. “I ran to the back of the store, closer to the alley, kind of ‘nooked’ myself in a corner just to feel safe.”

Troyanos said he witnessed Hurley confront the gunman.

“Mr. Hurley shot him. I think I heard 6 shots from his gun, maybe 5,” Troyanos said.

He said the gunman fell against a parked vehicle.

Officials have not released information on who fatally shot Hurley. They also haven’t confirmed who shot the gunman.

Continue reading “”