Northern California Confirms 1st Coronavirus Case of Unknown Origin

The nation’s first coronavirus case of unknown origin has been confirmed in Northern California, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) confirmed Wednesday.

“It is a confirmed case. There is one in Northern California,” CDC spokesman Scott Pauley told the Sacramento Bee.

The new case brings the number of infected in the United States to 60, which includes people who’ve been repatriated to the U.S. The CDC said the person contracted the virus without traveling outside the U.S. or coming into close contact with another infected patient, The Washington Post reported.

Transcript for the CDC Telebriefing Update on COVID-19

Audio recording media icon[MP3 – 6 MB]

Please Note: This transcript is not edited and may contain errors.

Welcome and thank you for standing by.  At this time, all participants are on listen-only mode until our question and answer session.  At that time, if you would like to ask a question, please press star then one.  Please be advised today’s conference is being recorded.  If you have any objections, you may disconnect at this time.  Now I would like to turn the meeting over to Mr. Benjamin Haynes.  Thank you.  You may begin.

Thank you.  And thank you all for joining us for today’s update on CDC’s COVID-19 response.  We are joined by the director of CDC’s national center for immunization and respiratory diseases who will give opening remarks.  I will now turn the call over.

Thank you for joining us.  The global novel coronavirus situation is rapidly evolving and expanding.  There are still a lot of news coverage about community spread in a few countries since the last time we talked.

This means that cases of COVID-19 are appearing without a known source of exposure.  Communities include Hong Kong, Italy, Iran, Singapore, South Korea, Taiwan, and Thailand.  Community spread is often a trigger to begin implementing new strategies tailored to local circumstances that blunt the impact of disease and can slow the spread of virus.

The fact this virus has caused illness – including illness resulting in death, and sustained person-to-person spread is concerning.  These factors meet two of the criteria of the pandemic.  The world moves closer towards meeting the third criteria.  Worldwide spread of the new virus.

The U.S. has been implementing an aggressive containment strategy that requires detecting, tracking, and isolating all cases.  As much as possible and preventing more introduction of disease notably at points of entry.  We’ve restricted travel into the United States while also issuing extensive travel advisories for countries currently experiencing community spread.  Our travel notices are changing almost daily.

We’ve also enacted the first quarantine of this scale in the U.S. And are supporting the state department and HHS in repatriating citizens from high-risk areas.  We are doing this with the goal of slowing the introduction of this new virus into the U.S. And buying us more time to prepare.  To date, our containment strategies have been largely successful.  As a result, we have very few cases in the United States and no spread in the community.  But as more and more countries experience community spread, successful containment at our borders becomes harder and harder.

Ultimately, we expect we will see community spread in this country.  It’s not so much a question of if this will happen anymore but rather more a question of exactly when this will happen and how many people in this country will have severe illness.  We will maintain for as long as practical a dual approach where we continue measures to contain this disease but also employ strategies to minimize the impact on our communities.

At this time, there’s no vaccine to protect against this new virus and no medications approved to treat it.  Non-pharmaceutical interventions or NPIs will be the most important tools in our response to this virus.  What these interventions look like at the community level will vary depending on local conditions.  What is appropriate for one community seeing local transmission won’t necessarily be appropriate for a community where no local transmission has occurred.  This parallel, proactive approach of containment and mitigation will delay the emergence of community spread in the United States while simultaneously reducing its ultimate impact.

To illustrate how this works, I’d like to share with you some of the specific recommendations made in the document I mentioned last Friday including some of the steps we would take here if needed.  This document is called Community Mitigation Guidelines to Prevent Pandemic Influenza United States 2017.  It draws from the findings of nearly 200 journal articles written between 1990 and 2016.

This document looked at what can be done at the individual and community level during a pandemic when we don’t have a vaccine or proven medical treatment for the disease.  We’re looking at data since 2016 and adjusting our recommendations to the specific circumstances of COVID-19.  But this posted document provides a frame work for our response strategy.  Based on what is known now, we would implement these NPI measures in a very aggressive, proactive way as he have been doing with our containment efforts.

There are three categories of NPIs.  Personal NPIs which include personal protective measures you can take every day and personal protective measures reserved for pandemics.  Community NPIs which include social distancing measures designed to keep people who are sick away from others.  And school closures and dismissals.  And environmental NPIs which includes surface cleaning measures.  NPIs routinely recommended for prevention of respiratory virus transmission include everyday personal protective measures.

These are preventive measures we recommend during influenza season.  These NPIs are recommended during a pandemic regardless of the severity level of the respiratory illness.  Personal protective measures reserved for pandemics include voluntary home quarantine of household members who have been exposed to someone they live with who is sick.  Now I’d like to talk through some examples of what community NPIs look like.

These are practical measures that can help limit exposure by reducing exposure in community settings.  Students in smaller groups or in a severe pandemic, closing schools and using internet-based teleschooling to continue education.  For adults, businesses can replace in-person meetings with video or telephone conferences and increase teleworking options.

On a larger scale, communities may need to modify, postpone, or cancel mass gatherings.  Looking at how to increase telehealth services and delaying elective surgery.  The implementation of environmental NPIs would require everyone to consistently clean frequently touched surfaces and objects at home, at school, at work, and at large gatherings.

Local communities will need to look at which NPIs to implement and when based on how transmission and disease is and what can be done locally.  This will require flexibility and adaptations as disease progresses and new information becomes available.  Some of these measures are better than none.  But the maximum benefit occurs when the elements are layered upon each other.

Some community level interventions that may be most effective in reducing the spread of a new virus like school closures are also the most likely to be associated with unwanted consequences and further disruptions.  Secondary consequences of some of these measures might include missed work and loss of income.  I understand this whole situation may seem overwhelming and that disruption to everyday life may be severe.  But these are things that people need to start thinking about now.

I had a conversation with my family over breakfast this morning and I told my children that while I didn’t think that they were at risk right now, we as a family need to be preparing for significant disruption of our lives.  You should ask your children’s school about their plans for school dismissals or school closures.

If ask if there are plans for teleschool.  I contacted my local school superintendent this morning with exactly those questions.  You should think about what you would do for childcare if schools or day cares close.  If teleworking is an option for you.  All of these questions can help you be better prepared for what might happen.

CDC and other federal agencies have been practicing for this since the 2019 influenza pandemic.  In the last two years, CDC has engaged in two pandemic influenza exercises that have required us to prepare for a severe pandemic and just this past year we had a whole of government exercise practicing similarly around a pandemic of influenza.

Right now CDC is operationalizing all of its pandemic response plans working on multiple fronts including specific measures to prepare communities to respond to local transmission of the virus that causes COVID-19.  Before I take questions, I want to address the issue of the test kits CDC is developing.

I am frustrated like I know many of you are that we have had issues with our test.  I want to assure you that we are working to modify the kit and hope to send out a new version to state and local jurisdictions soon.  There are currently 12 states or localities around the U.S. That can test samples as well as we are testing at CDC 400 samples were tested overnight.

There is no current backlog or delay for testing at CDC.  Commercial labs will also be coming online soon with their own tests.  This will allow the greatest number of tests to happen closer to where potential cases are.  Last, I want to recognize that people are concerned about this situation.  I would say rightfully so.  I’m concerned about the situation.  CDC is concerned about the situation.  But we are putting our concerns to work preparing.

And now is the time for businesses, hospitals, community schools, and everyday people to begin preparing as well.  Over the last few weeks, CDC has been on dozens of calls with different partners in the health, retail, education, and business sectors.  In the hopes that employers begin to respond in a flexible way to differing levels of severity, to refine their business response plans as needed.  I also want to acknowledge the importance of uncertainty.  During an outbreak with a new virus, there is a lot of uncertainty.  Our guidance and advice are likely to be fluid subject to change as we learn more.  We will continue to keep you updated.  I’d be happy to take a few questions now.

Brittany, we’re ready to take questions.

Thank you.  We’ll now begin our question and answer session.  If you would like to ask a question over the phone, press star, then one and record your name clearly when prompted.  If you need to withdraw your question, press star then two.  One moment as we wait for the first question.  Our first question comes from Lisa from PBS.  Your line is now open.

Good morning.  Thank you for doing this.  I have some more questions about the test kits.  Thank you for what you gave us the update on, but can you go into more detail about how they work?  Can any hospital now just kind of use a swab to get a sample and then send that to the CDC?  And then how long do you estimate it will take to have the kits replaced so that more localities can actually do the analysis and do you have enough money for this kind of field work and test analysis right now?

Okay.  I’m going to start from maybe the part of a patient perspective which is, you know, right now our focus is still on individuals with a travel history that would put them at risk for COVID-19.  Or people who are close contacts of someone who has COVID-19.  Those individuals when they are identified by a health care provider, the health care provider calls the health department.

The health department helps them triage those patients to make — and then the samples are worked with the health department.  Now, as we move forward, though, if we are looking at the trajectory of expecting that there likely will be community spread of this virus in the united states, the case definition may change away from narrowly around people with travel.

Again, that’s what we would anticipate doing as there is community spread.  If that happens, it will be more and more important that the clinicians have a full tool kit.  That’s why the availability of commercial kits would be so helpful.  So in the short-term, it’s the clinician calls the health department.  And either the health department already has the test kit themselves or if they don’t yet have it stood up, they send it to CDC.  Our turnaround at CDC is within a day.

There is a little bit of shipping time.  But that’s the process.  In terms of timing, I think at this point what I would say is we are working as fast as we can.  We understand the frustration of our partners in the health care sector, in health departments.  You certainly can imagine we want to resolve this as quickly as possible.  But we have to make sure that while resolving it, we keep to the highest level of quality assurance.  Because as important as speed is, it is more important that we make sure that our results are correct.

In terms of funding, there’s already been funds available that are helping us with the activities that we have now that is the diagnostic testing at CDC.  And we’ll continue to proceed focused on our priorities which as I’ve said are getting this test kit out to state health departments so they can be doing that themselves as an interim step to getting it commercially available would be a great advancement.  Next question.

Thank you.  And our next question comes from Craig from KNX 1070 news radio Los Angeles.  Your line is now open.

Thank you, doctor.  I appreciate your time.  Couple of questions.  There’s been a lot of talk about what’s being done to prepare for possible people who would be quarantined.  I’d like to know what that is.  And also is the Chinese government leveling with you?  Are they telling you the truth?  Have they given you the straight dope, so to speak, as to what you need to know about the coronavirus?

So in answer to your first question, I would say generally we are working on a daily basis with state and local health departments across the country on exactly those issues.  What are the local considerations for quarantine or isolation and how can they be resolved?  And in each location in the united states, it may end up being a slightly different answer.

Our focus is on the best health of the individual whom we are working with in terms of whether they need quarantine or isolation.  In terms of the Chinese government, there has been a WHO team on the ground in China as well in Wuhan.  There are data coming out from those efforts.  We have a lot of information from china.

Frankly, we have a lot of new information from all the other countries around the world now that are reporting community spread and we are as quickly as possible trying to synthesize that information.  It is providing us more data in terms of making our own estimations in the U.S. Of what we’re going to see.  Communities that are having community spread are certainly very informative in terms of what we might expect in the united states.

And I think that whole body of evidence is frankly coming really quickly at us.  That’s why we have a team of people here at CDC synthesizing it all.

Next question, please.

Thank you.  And our next question comes from Megan from STAT.  Your line is now open.

Hi there.  Thank you so much for taking my question.  I’m wondering if you could expand a little bit on whether you are reconsidering testing people with travel history to other countries now where they might be infected.  And I’m also wondering if you could say whether or not the agency has considered getting tests from another country that’s supplying tests to other nations as well.

So the answer to the first question is certainly, we’re considering what the spread of illness in other countries looks like and how it impacts the potential risk the Americans traveling abroad in those countries.  Those conversations are going on as we speak.  We obviously are working closely with the partners on those considerations.  And when there is new information in terms of case definitions, we’ll definitely publicize that broadly.

You know, as I said, we are still at the stage of containment, but we are already starting to plan for mitigation.  And part of the mitigation planning is the participation of community spread in the united states.  And as that happens, it would certainly dramatically impact how we’re considering who is on the case.  As you can imagine, the symptoms of novel coronavirus look a lot like other viral respiratory diseases that are circulating this time of year.

So it’s going to be difficult for clinicians to differentiate fully on the basis of those — solely on the basis of the symptoms.  In terms of diagnostic tests, what I would say is we’re working closely with FDA on this.  And obviously with the state and local health department partners.  And I think that we are rapidly moving towards getting those kits more available in the U.S.  In the systems that we have.

Really I think we’re close.  I just wouldn’t want to give an estimate of when until we’re there.  But I think we’re close.  And remember, a dozen states now have the kit and are testing and there’s tests available in the U.S.  So I think we’re making forward progress.

Thank you.  And our next question comes from Lena Sun from Washington Post.  Your line is now open.

Thank you.  I had a couple questions.  One is if a dozen states have the kit, then do they still need to send those tests to CDC for confirmation?  Which are the states that have the tests?  And more broadly, your comments today seem to represent a significant escalation in the sort of severity and urgency of the now.  At a briefing this morning for Congress, I believe some members were told that we now face a very strong chance of an extremely serious outbreak.  Is that the CDC’s feeling right now that we face an extremely strong chance of a serious outbreak?

Okay.  So let’s see.  The first question, it’s 12 state or local health departments.  And so it’s not 12 states total.  We are still as a point of part of how we roll out these tests, those tests that are positive still do come to CDC for confirmation.  I think that’s just part of a normal process to ensure we are keeping to the utmost quality control.

I don’t have a list of state or local health departments in front of me, but I think we can provide that.  In terms of a change in tone, I guess what I would say is as I look back on the scripts of the telebriefings that we’ve given over the past month, we have for a long time been saying — we have for many weeks been saying that while we hope this is not going to be severe, we are planning as if it is.

The data over the last week and the spread in other countries has certainly raised our level of concern and raised our level of expectation that we are going to have community spread here.  So I think that that’s perhaps the change of tone you’ve seen.  I think what we still don’t know is what that will look like as many of you know.  We can have community spread in the united states and have it be reasonably mild.

We could have community spread in the united states and have it be very severe.  And so that is what — that is what we don’t completely know yet.  And we certainly also don’t exactly know when it’s going to happen.  I think it would be nice for everybody if we could say, you know, on this date is when it’s going to start.

We don’t know that yet.  And so that’s why we’re asking folks in every sector as well as people within their families to start planning for this because as we’ve seen from the recent countries that have had community spread when it is hit in those countries, it has moved quite rapidly.  So we want to make sure that the American public is prepared.

Thank you.  And as a reminder, if you would like to ask a question, please press star one.  Limit to one question and one follow-up.  Our next question comes from Eben from Fox news.  Your line is now open.

Thank you very much for doing the call today.  There has been some political back and forth now that democrats are accusing the president which essentially means the administration and everything that falls under that as being ill prepared for coronavirus, requesting too little of amount in terms of their request for $2.5 billion.  Do you feel that we are ill prepared from a financial standpoint?  I know you are a clinician and I don’t want you to get too much into politics, but do you have what you need to do your job?

I guess I’ll answer that two ways.  The first is HHS can provide information or answer questions about the funds that are available.  What I can say from my perspective is I’ve been at CDC for 25 years and that if you asked public health officials over the course of that time what they feared as an expectation, it was something exactly like this.

And so the idea that we might have a pandemic of influenza or a pandemic of a respiratory viral infection is something that we’ve known about and have been planning and preparing for.  That’s why we at CDC have been exercising with the state and local health departments.  That’s why the whole of government exercise last year, that’s why we’ve invested so much on the foundation we are now responding.  But that being said, we are never going to ever be able to be so completely prepared that we’re prepared for any inevitability.

We always are going to find that diseases surprise us and that there was some consideration that is slightly different from what we planned for.  So have we made a lot of progress in the 25 years I’ve been here?  Yes.  Are we better prepared today than we were 20 years ago?  Yes.  But are we completely prepared?  You know, diseases surprise us and therefore we need to be reacting to the current situation even if it differs from what we planned for.

You know, in general we are asking the American public to work with us to prepare in the expectation that this could be bad.  I continue to hope that in the end we’ll look back and feel like we are over-prepared, but that is a better place to be in than being under-prepared.

And just like the preparedness for a pandemic influenza provides such a strong foundation for this response, any preparedness we do as a country, at schools, businesses, within our families will always be helpful for whatever the next event is.  And so I don’t think in general that preparedness will ever go to waste.

Next question, please.

Thank you.  Our next question comes from Mike from A.P.  Your line is now open.

Hi.  Thank you for taking my call.  If I could ask a couple.  One is just the latest case count, it’s been a little confusing for some of us just to sort out exactly how many U.S.  Cases there are and how they’re being sorted out.  Second, if you could speak to your best and latest understanding of the severity of the disease.

Of course there’s some news today about the WHO mission coming back and statements about not finding a lot of undetected cases.  I was wondering if that’s related to CDC gearing up for these NPIs.  And lastly, talking about the exercising you’ve been doing, what was the weakness or weaknesses that kept coming up in the exercises that you’re most concerned about and you’re really trying to stay on top of now that we have a real time experience happening?  Thank you.

Okay.  So let me — so let me start by saying that I know the case counts can be confusing.  I will try to sort out what the numbers are as of today and try to explain why it perhaps is a little confusing.  There remain 14 confirmed U.S.  Cases.  We are separating out the cases among repatriated individuals.  So those are 14 U.S. Cases.  12 of those are travelers who returned from an area where disease is circulating.  Two of those are close contacts of another case.  That’s 14.

There are three novel coronavirus patients among people who are repatriated from Hubei that is in the repatriated flights.  And our website says 36 because we updated this yesterday, but in fact as of this morning, there are 40 positives among individuals repatriated from the “Diamond Princess.”  so these are Americans who were on board the “Diamond Princess”  repatriated back to the United States.  And that’s 40.

So that means just to go back that there are 14 confirmed cases picked up through the U.S. public health systems.  And 40 plus 3 makes 43 among individuals repatriated into the United States.  I do hope that helps.  In terms of the severity, I think that there are a variety of reports that give information about severity.  We’ve looked at severity among people, among reported people from Hubei.

We’ve looked at reported people from elsewhere in china.  And certainly the data coming out from Korea and Iran and Italy suggests also deaths which are concerning.  In terms of our messaging today, I really would say that it is more driven by the community spread in other countries than it is specifically from data from china.

And so I think it really is the spreading of COVID-19 through other countries that makes all of us feel that the risk of spread in the united states has — is increasing.  In terms of exercising, you know, there are always small and big things that we learn from exercising.  Maybe two specific things I’ll point out is that our exercising did show us that if we had a pandemic, there were going to be supply issues.

And I think that we are now across the whole of government thinking through and working on those supply issues.  One of them is enough protection for health care workers.  This is clearly a priority. The health care workers put themselves on the front line caring for ill patients and has to be a priority to make sure they are protected.  Another issue is the NPIs.  The non-pharmaceutical interventions.

We have worked across governmental sectors to get input into our planning guidance.  But it’s one thing to plan for those NPIs.  It’s certainly another thing to be able to implement them at a large scale.  And I think one of the reasons that we’re talking about this so proactively today is that we recognize that implementing NPIs at this level that we want to prepare the american people that their lives could be interrupted.  Next.

Thank you.  Our next question comes from Eric of ABC news.  Your line is open.

Thanks, Benjamin.  Thanks, Nancy for taking our questions.  I’m wondering like the chicken and the egg with the case definition and the testing.  If you’re telling us today it’s not a question of if but when there’ll be community spread and it’s very difficult to — for clinicians to know the difference between flu and COVID-19, how come you’re not widening the case definition to test more people?

So let me answer that two ways.  One is that we have more than one layer of surveillance.  I think I talked about this in a previous call, but maybe just to talk about it a little more.  There is a specific patient-under-investigation case definition that really does focus on travel because that is where the cases that are picked up through our public health systems are.  But we are also aware and concerned about the possibility for broader spread in the U.S.

That’s why the Secretary and we announced last week that we were going to be doing more community-based surveillance relying on the infrastructure of our influenza.  So we have already started that surveillance system.  We’re rapidly working within the next couple weeks to expand that more broadly.  As well, we have a variety of other more community-oriented surveillance systems that we’re working to stand up to be able to look for those cases in the community.  So this is proceeding in stages with the one surveillance but community surveillance also rapidly starting.

Brittany, we have time for two more questions, please.

Thank you.  And our next question comes from Lauren from San Antonio Express News.  Your line is now open.

Thank you for taking my call.  I wanted to ask about the 14-day incubation period that has been reiterated by many public health officials including the quarantine of the evacuees.  We’ve seen some isolated reports coming from other countries suggesting that it is possible that the incubation period has been longer in some individuals in other countries who have been quarantined for more than 14 days.  And I was wondering if you guys have any reason to suspect whether the incubation period may be longer than 14 days for those of Wuhan that have been released from their quarantine.

Thank you.  That’s actually a really important question.  And something we’re looking at closely.  Some of the reports that you’ve seen are reports in the media, not reports in peer reviewed literature.  And it impacts our ability to fully scientifically evaluate them.  As I’ve said in previous meetings, there are a team of — there are more than 50 modeling mathematical modeling groups in the United States all working with us to look at a variety of issues around this response to novel coronavirus.

One of the things they’re certainly analyzing is all of the available data on the incubation period.  And the data so far still supports using 14 days as the top window.  In terms of isolated reports elsewhere, there are a variety of possibilities.  One possibility is — there’s a variety of possibilities – what we’ll do is continue to synthesize and evaluate the available data trying to make a data-driven decision.  And if more data becomes available that suggests a longer incubation period, we will certainly be visible and public about that.  I think at this point, we’re still comfortable that 14 days is the appropriate top line for that.

Last question, please.

Thank you.  And our final question comes from Ben from CNN.  Your line is now open.

Hi, thanks so much for taking my question.  This morning while he was traveling in India, President Trump said that he thinks that the coronavirus is a problem that is going to go away.  He seems very optimistic about this and we’re trying to figure out exactly why he believes so strongly that to be the case.  And so my question for you is what information is your agency specifically giving the president and the White House about the current state of the coronavirus outbreak?

As you imagine, we brief the Secretary daily and the Secretary is the lead of the White House task force.  And Ddr. Redfield the CDC director is briefing them daily.  In terms of the course of this illness, we have a — again, a team of mathematical modelers working with us to try to predict the trajectory.  One hypothesis is that we could be hopeful that this could potentially be seasonal.

Other viral respiratory diseases are seasonal including influenza and therefore in many viral respiratory diseases, we do see a decrease in disease in spring and summer.  And so we could certainly be optimistic that this disease will follow suit. But we’re not going to know that until time keeps ticking forward.  We’re going to be, again, preparing as if this is going to continue, preparing as if we’re going to see community spread in the near term.

But I’m always going to be hopeful that that disease will decline either for the summer or that, you know, we’ll be over-prepared and we won’t see the high levels of transmission here in the U.S.

Thank you, doctor.  And thank you, all, for joining us for today’s briefing. Please visit CDC’s 2019 novel coronavirus website for continued updates.  And if you have further questions, please call the main media line at 404-639-3286 or email media@CDC.gov.  Thank you.

Thank you for your participation in today’s conference.  All participants may disconnect at this time.

South Korea virus cases jump again, 1st US soldier infected

The U.S. military says one of its soldiers based in South Korea tested positive for a new virus, the first U.S. service member infected.

A U.S. military statement said the 23-year-old man is in self quarantine at his off-base residence. It says the soldier was originally based in Camp Caroll in a town near the southeastern city of Daegu, where most of South Korea’s virus cases are clustered.

South Korea has almost 1,150 cases of the new coronavirus, the biggest outbreak outside mainland China. About 28,500 U.S. troops are stationed in South Korea as deterrence against potential aggression from North Korea.

Below the Radar: Protecting Communities and Preserving the Second Amendment Act

New York – -(AmmoLand.com)- We have been discussing a number of bills introduced in Congress that are often below the radar of Second Amendment supporters for various reasons. Sometimes, they are not given a lot of press. Other times, they simply seem insignificant. They may not even target our rights directly.

One piece of legislation under the “not a lot of press” category is S 1519, the Protecting Communities and Preserving the Second Amendment Act of 2019. This is legislation introduced by two Second Amendment champions, Senators Charles Grassley of Iowa and Senator Ted Cruz of Texas.

Unlike a lot of the other legislation we have covered, this bill is much more comprehensive. In it, we have fixes to the National Instant Check System, we have something close to the FOPA improvement for travelers introduced by Senator Daines, we have efforts to tackle straw purchases, the expansion of Project Exile, and a host of other provisions that represent significant improvements for those who exercise their Second Amendment rights – or who might wish to do so.

According to a release by Senator Grassley’s office, he and Senator Cruz have been pushing this bill since 2013. That year, when these provisions were introduced as an alternative to anti-Second Amendment legislation favored by the Obama Administration, these provisions secured 52 votes in the Senate, being defeated by a filibuster carried out by anti-Second Amendment extremists.

“Our bill takes necessary steps to ensure that the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms is not infringed and takes commonsense actions to prioritize school safety, punish and deter bad actors, and improve record submissions to NICS. Senator Cruz and I have worked diligently on this bill in the past, and I look forward to this continued partnership,” Grassley said in the release.

In a statement released by his office, Senator Cruz said, “Our bill seeks to increase support for school safety funding, ensure agencies accurately submit records to the NICS, and develop a federal task force to prosecute criminals who illegally purchase a firearm. I urge my Senate colleagues to take a stand with the people of our country and to vote in support of this legislation to stop criminals from getting guns once and for all.”

One other benefit of this bill is that it would not be hard to add additional pro-Second Amendment provisions to it – like Lindsey Graham’s Federal Firearms Licensee Protection Act of 2019, the Home Defense and Competitive Shooting Act, or HR 5301 by Kevin Hern. Those would make this bill even better than it already is.

Second Amendment supporters should contact their Representative and Senators and politely ask that they support S 1519, as well as amendments that would add HR 5301, the Home Defense and Competitive Shooting Act, and the Federal Firearms Licensee Protection Act to this bill. They also should take the time to thank Senators Grassley and Cruz for their efforts over the last seven years to advance this legislation. This legislation would mark a huge step towards the protection of our rights if signed into law.

February 26, 1993.
The First Attack on the World Trade Center.

This is the often forgotten first, and nearly successful, truck bombing of 1 WTC North Tower (Which incidentally was the tower that our friend Lt. Peter Martin of NYFD’s Rescue 2 died in). None of the U.S. government’s indictments against former al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden suggested that he had any connection with this bombing, but his organization used the lessons learned from this failure to seek out knowledge provided by structural engineers to figure out that crashing nearly fully fueled commercial jet airliners into each tower would work.

At 12:18 p.m., a terrorist bomb explodes in a parking garage of the World Trade Center in New York City, leaving a crater 60 feet wide and causing the collapse of several steel-reinforced concrete floors in the vicinity of the blast.

Although the terrorist bomb failed to critically damage the main structure of the skyscrapers, six people were killed and more than 1,000 were injured. The World Trade Center itself suffered more than $500 million in damage. After the attack, authorities evacuated 50,000 people from the buildings, hundreds of whom were suffering from smoke inhalation. The evacuation lasted the whole afternoon.

City authorities and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) undertook a massive manhunt for suspects, and within days several radical Islamic fundamentalists were arrested. In March 1994, Mohammed Salameh, Ahmad Ajaj, Nidal Ayyad, and Mahmoud Abouhalima were convicted by a federal jury for their role in the bombing, and each was sentenced to life in prison. Salameh, a Palestinian, was arrested when he went to retrieve the $400 deposit he had left for the Ryder rental van used in the attack. Ajaj and Ayyad, who both played a role in the construction of the bomb, were arrested soon after. Abouhalima, who helped buy and mix the explosives, fled to Saudi Arabia but was caught in Egypt two weeks later.

The mastermind of the attack–Ramzi Ahmed Yousef–remained at large until February 1995, when he was arrested in Pakistan. He had previously been in the Philippines, and in a computer he left there were found terrorist plans that included a plot to kill Pope John Paul II and a plan to bomb 15 American airliners in 48 hours. On the flight back to the United States, Yousef reportedly admitted to a Secret Service agent that he had directed the Trade Center attack from the beginning and even claimed to have set the fuse that exploded the 1,200-pound bomb. His only regret, the agent quoted Yousef saying, was that the 110-story tower did not collapse into its twin as planned–a catastrophe that would have caused thousands of deaths.

Dems Compete To Out Anti-Gun Each Other In SC Debate

Tuesday night’s Democratic debate featured a single question about gun control, but at least we got a chance to hear from all of the candidates. Unfortunately, every one of them tried to outdo the next in terms of their support for sweeping gun laws that would criminalize the exercise of our right to keep and bear arms.

Joe Biden was first out of the gate, and talked about how he was able to pass the Clinton Gun Ban in 1994 before he took a swipe at Bernie Sanders for voting for the Protection of Lawful Commerce In Arms Act. Biden’s gaffes have been coming fast and furious as of late, and he bizarrely claimed that 150 million Americans have been killed by guns since 2007.  Biden finished by issuing a threat to gun manufacturers that he will come for them if he’s elected. This has been part of his stump speech for at least the past few days, and every time, he looks into the camera and points his finger. It’s such a scripted line, but the Democrat audience in South Carolina ate it up.

Elizabeth Warren, on the other hand, completely changed the subject from gun control to her desire to get rid of the filibuster in the Senate, which she said is needed in order to pass gun control. The thing is, she never got back to the gun control bills she wanted to pass, but spent her entire time rambling about removing the filibuster in order to pass any number of her proposals.

When Bernie Sanders had the opportunity to respond, he swiped back at Joe Biden by noting he had voted for terrible trade agreements. The crowd in South Carolina didn’t like that, and booed Sanders for his dodge. Sanders said the point was that every politician makes a bad vote every now and then, and said his vote in support of the PLCAA was simply that; a bad vote. Sanders proudly touted his “D-” rating from the NRA. Right now, he said, we need to expand background checks, close gun show loophole, and do what Americans, not the NRA, wants.

Bloomberg, who earlier in the debate slipped and talked about having “bought” the congressional seats of dozens of Democrats in the 2018 elections, said that he “has a 6-million person organization” that has put background check laws on the books in twenty states (of course he didn’t talk about the fact that those new laws haven’t led to fewer crimes.

Minnesota Senator Amy Klobuchar stuck to her theme for the night, that Democrats need a midwesterner to win the nation’s midsection in November. She claimed that she was the only one on stage who won in Republican congressional districts while being for the assault weapons ban, hoping to portray herself as a moderate who can bring independents and some Republicans into the Democratic fold, at least on Election Day. And then she brought up her Uncle Dick in the deer stand, which she has done every single time she’s been asked about firearms in a debate setting. At this point, I’m starting to get worried for the guy. It sounds like he’s been up there for months, and it also sounds like Amy Klobuchar doesn’t know any other gun owners besides her uncle who lives in a tree stand.

Buttigieg also stuck to the same talking points he brings up when he’s asked about gun control; namely that anything that even resembles the weapon of war he carried in Afghanistan shouldn’t be sold in this country. And, as always, none of the moderators bothered to ask him a follow up question: if you don’t think modern sporting rifles should be sold in the United States, what do you think should happen to the roughly 18-million rifles in private hands?

The other billionaire on stage, Tom Steyer, was the last to answer, and he said that the real problem is that corporations have bought Washington, D.C., and that specifically, “gun manufacturers own the Senate,” which begs the question: Does Bloomberg then own the House of Representatives? Steyer didn’t bring up any specific gun control proposals, but said he believes that term limits need to be imposed on Congress, and Democrats need to win big in November to have the mandate needed to pass gun control laws.

If you notice, there really wasn’t much discussion about any of the actual proposals from any of the candidates, which are arguably the most anti-gun campaign platforms in our nation’s history. Some candidates didn’t even bother to mention any of their gun control plans, much less attempt a somewhat deep dive in the minute that they had to answer the question.

Gun owners didn’t learn anything new in Thursday night’s debate, but they definitely got a reminder of what’s at stake in the November elections. No matter which candidate on stage ends up as the eventual nominee, the future of our right to keep and bear arms depends on them losing on Election Day.

Auburn Pair Attempt to Rob Couple, Get Shot in The Process

Yesterday we reported on a story that very few details were available on involving an armed robbery and shots fired in Auburn.

As it turns out, it was actually one of the robbery suspects who ended up getting shot, not the robbery victims.

According to WGME, officers arrested 18 year old William Beasley at the scene as he was attempting to provide first aid to his accomplice who ended up getting shot.

Beasley and his accomplice were attempting to rob a couple using a BB gun. The male victim said he needed to retrieve his wallet from the car to give them money. What the man actually retrieved was his 9mm pistol and began firing at the suspects, hitting Beasley’s accomplice.

Beasley’s accomplice was taken to the hospital and is in critical condition. At this time no charges have been filed on the robbery victim who fired the shots.

More charges are expected according to the Sun Journal.

 

U.S. health officials urge Americans to prepare for spread of coronavirus

WASHINGTON/CHICAGO (Reuters) – The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) on Tuesday alerted Americans to begin preparing for the spread of coronavirus in the United States after infections surfaced in several more countries.

The announcement signaled a change in tone for the Atlanta-based U.S. health agency, which had largely been focused on efforts to stop the virus from entering the country and quarantining individuals traveling from China.

“The data over the past week about the spread in other countries has raised our level of concern and expectation that we are going to have community spread here,” Dr. Nancy Messonnier, the CDC’s head of respiratory diseases, told reporters on a conference call.

What is not known, she said, is when it will arrive and how severe a U.S. outbreak might be. “Disruption to everyday life might be severe” and businesses, schools and families should begin having discussions about the possible impact from the spread of the virus, Messonnier cautioned.

In a teleconference later on Tuesday, Dr. Anne Schuchat, the CDC’s principal deputy director, said that while the immediate risk in the United States was low, the current global situation suggested a pandemic was likely.

“It’s not a question of if. It’s a question of when and how many people will be infected,” Schuchat said.

Separately, U.S. Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Alex Azar told a Senate subcommittee there will likely be more cases in the United States, and he asked lawmakers to approve $2.5 billion in funding to fight the outbreak after proposing cuts to the department’s budget.

11-year-old girl brings loaded AR-15 to gun legislation hearing in Idaho

Ohh the Horror! Eek! Gasp! Pearl-Clutch!
See? BS! Goes apoplectic. The Idaho legislators simply yawn.

An 11-year-old girl appeared Monday at a legislative hearing in Idaho, toting a loaded AR-15 assault weapon. Bailey Nielsen was with her grandfather, who is supporting a proposal that would allow visitors to Idaho who can legally possess firearms to carry a concealed handgun within city limits.

Charles Nielsen addressed the committee that voted to send the legislation to the full House as his granddaughter stood at his side with the weapon slung over her right shoulder. She did not speak.

“Bailey is carrying a loaded AR-15,” Charles Nielsen told lawmakers. “People live in fear, terrified of that which they do not understand. She’s been shooting since she was 5 years old. She got her first deer with this weapon at 9. She carries it responsibly. She knows how not to put her finger on the trigger. We live in fear in a society that is fed fear on a daily basis.”

He said Bailey was an example of someone who could responsibly handle a gun, and lawmakers should extend that to non-residents.

“When they come to Idaho, they should be able to carry concealed, because they carry responsibly,” he said. “They’re law-abiding citizens. It’s the criminal we have to worry about.”

There was no notable reaction among lawmakers to the girl carrying the AR-15, and none asked Charlie Nielsen any questions after he testified. Guns are not an uncommon sight in the Statehouse when gun legislation is being debated, particularly handguns on belt holsters. Long rifles such as AR-15s also appear occasionally.

Some Idaho lawmakers are known to carry concealed weapons in the Statehouse. State Police patrol the Statehouse, and one and sometimes two are typically present at committee meetings where emotions can become strong.

Republican Rep. Christy Zito, who is proposing the measure opposed by the three Democrats on the House State Affairs Committee, said the legislation is intended to clear up confusion about state gun laws. Backers also say it will give people the ability to defend themselves if needed.

Idaho residents 18 and older are allowed to carry a concealed handgun within city limits in Idaho without a permit or training following a new law that went into place last summer. The legislation would extend that to any legal resident of the United States or a U.S. armed services member.

In Praise of Wadcutters and Old Men

Old men are not often impressed with the fads of the moment. The millennial movement doesn’t matter to them. They’re not “woke” and never will be. Hillary Clinton referred to them as deplorable because they think that she’s nothing but a corrupt, old, scab on the ass of society. If you don’t believe me, ask an old man sitting on a bench, feeding pigeons (flying rats).
They don’t care. Men reach a certain age when they don’t want drama. They don’t want to fight anyone – and if forced they will not fight fair. They won’t quit and there are no weapons that they won’t use.
Leave men like that alone to their coffee as they sit alone in the Waffle House, reading from an old dog eared book.
Ignore them where they sit in a bar drinking bourbon and smoking a cigar even if it’s a no-smoking bar.
Don’t poke the old men. They will hurt you.
And life in prison when you’re 75 isn’t the threat that it was when you were 25.

Italy reports 6 dead, 229 infected as Europe braces for COVID-19

…. Italian health officials reported Monday that there are 229 people infected nationwide, with six deaths.

There are 101 people in the hospital, and 27 are in intensive care.

The hard-hit northern region of Lombardy reported 172 cases. Five of the deaths are in the Lombardy region……

At least 10 towns in northern Italy, with a population of around 50,000, were locked down Sunday to help stop the spread of the virus.

Iran Denies Cover-Up After Lawmaker Contradicts Official Coronavirus Figures, Says 50 Dead

Take you pick of the numbers from the another country whose rulers are known for lying through their teeth

A member of Iran’s parliament announced on Monday that 50 people had died from the new coronavirus in the city of Qom and accused Iran’s Health Ministry of covering up the true extent of the outbreak in the country. The Health Ministry claims just 12 people have died in Iran from COVID-19, with 66 people sick from the disease. The official numbers in Iran were up from a total of 8 deaths and 43 illnesses reported on Sunday.

Ahmad Amirabadi Farhani, who represents Qom, a city roughly 120 kilometres south of Tehran, told Iran’s semiofficial news outlet ILNA that he believes the death count in his city was far higher than what the Iranian government was saying.

“Up until last night, around 50 people died from coronavirus. The health minister is to blame,” Amirabadi Farhani said on Monday, according to an English translation by Middle East news network Al Arabiya, adding that he believes 10 people are dying per day.

S.Korea reports 161 new cases of coronavirus, brings total to 763

SEOUL, Feb 24 (Reuters) – South Korea reported 161 new cases of the coronavirus, bringing the total number of infected patients in the country to 763, health authorities said on Monday, a day after the government raised its infectious disease alert to its highest level.
Of the new cases, 115 were linked to a church in the southeastern city of Daegu after a 61-year-old woman known as “Patient 31” who attended services there tested positive, according to the Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (KCDC).

KCDC also reported the seventh death from the virus, a 62-year-old man from a hospital in Cheongdo, a county that saw surges in confirmed cases along with nearby Daegu in recent weeks.

Authorities are still investigating the exact cause of the new outbreak, with Patient 31 having no recent record of overseas travel.

That last article about swarms of  Locusts coming to China like a biblical plague?
How about Frogs!
Yeah, and earthquakes fit right in with those plagues too.

Tens of thousands of frogs have appeared on suburban roads in Wuhan and Nanjing, prompting fears among residents that they could be signalling an imminent earthquake.

Tens of thousands of frogs have appeared on suburban roads in Wuhan and Nanjing, prompting fears among residents that they could be signalling an imminent earthquake.

However, earthquake authorities in both cities say that massed ranks of the amphibians do not herald quakes. A resident in the town of Dunkou in Wuhan, the capital of Hubei province, found the road in front of her home covered with thousands of tiny brown frogs, each about the length of a thumbnail, on Monday morning.

‘They are packed so densely that it’s easy for people to stamp on them, leaving a horrific situation,’ she told the Wuhan Evening News.

She said she had to use a broom to drive away some frogs trying to enter her house. Other villagers said the frogs began to gather on the road on Sunday night and many had been squashed by cars.

The woman, who lives in Dunkou, said she was worried because she had heard that animals often acted strangely before a quake and she wondered if the frogs were an omen.

Residents of the town of Jiangxinzhou in Nanjing, Jiangsu , about 600 kilometres away, have encountered a similar phenomenon, the Modern Express reports.

One resident said she was astonished to see a large number of small frogs near her home on Saturday morning.

A Jiangsu Earthquake Bureau official was quoted as saying that the gathering of frogs was a normal phenomenon and there was no need to panic.

‘Animals like chickens, dogs and cats will actually exhibit abnormal behaviour before earthquakes. But it doesn’t mean that once animals behave unusually there will necessarily be an earthquake because there are many factors that can cause animals to act strangely,’ the official said.

A Hubei Earthquake Bureau official said the frogs were gathering on roads because their natural habitat had been reduced.

However, the public panic is not completely baseless. Two days before the deadly Wenchuan earthquake in Sichuan in 2008, the West China City Daily reported that hundreds of thousands of frogs had been seen on the roads of Mianzhu, which was wrecked by the quake.

Intruder shot multiple times, gravely wounded in predawn home invasion

An intruder was shot multiple times during a predawn home invasion Monday in Elmore County.

The ordeal began just before 5 a.m. in the 200 block of Clemons Road in the Flatwood community. Sheriff Bill Franklin said the scene is a residential area that consists of about a dozen or so mobile homes.

A man, who along with his wife and young child, were awakened at 4:55 a.m. by a loud banging at the front door. The homeowner grabbed his 9 mm handgun and went to investigate.

When he got to the front door, he came face to face with 39-year-old Charles Bowne, who lives nearby. At that point, the sheriff said, Bowne told the homeowner, “Give me your (expletive).”

Bowne then reached toward his pocket and the homeowner said he feared the intruder was going for a gun. The homeowner fired four to five rounds, shooting Bowne in the head, bicep, shoulder and left leg, and then called 911.

Try for the torso next time, dude…T-O-R-S-O.
Somewhere in right in the middle, between the Collar bone to Belly button.

Bowne was airlifted to a Montgomery hospital where he is in critical condition. The sheriff said a crack pipe was retrieved from Bowne’s sock.

Franklin said Bowne spent time in prison in Indiana and has previously had at least one other confrontation with another neighbor. He said he does not expect any charges to be filed against the homeowner.

“We don’t have that many home invasions in Elmore County,’’ the sheriff said. “It’s not every morning you wake up at 4:55 a.m. to somebody inside your front door. That’s pretty rough.”

Locusts Could be the Next Plague to Hit China

HONG KONG—Swarms of desert locusts have devastated crops in East Africa, hit the Middle East and moved into South Asia. They’re breeding fast thanks to changes in global climate patterns that have brought about major cyclones and heavy rains, and they are feeding off human food supplies across continents.

So far, India has managed to prevent a swarm of biblical proportions from spilling over into Bangladesh, Burma, and then China—where the coronavirus has already paralyzed much of the country’s activity. But it’s not clear how long that line will hold.

Eastern Africa has been hit the hardest by the xanthic bugs, with fields in Tanzania, Kenya, Uganda, South Sudan, Ethiopia, Eritrea, and Somalia ravaged by 360 billion locusts. Swarms can be city-sized, and one of the largest—located in Kenya—covers about 37 miles by 25 miles. It is so dense that it turns daylight to darkness for anyone caught within.

Alarmist headlines are proliferating, too, many of them drawing parallels with the plagues in scripture. “Bible coming to life?” asked the Jerusalem Post. The swarms appear in the Old Testament, most notably in Exodus as one of the plagues Moses calls down on Egypt, which also is referenced in the Quran. In the New Testament locusts are associated with Revelation 9:3, where they emerge in ferocious swarms that also have the sting of scorpions.

Allusions to the Apocalypse aside, the real life potential for disaster is huge…..

For now, the Himalayan range is acting as a natural barrier for China, insulating its southwestern border from the scourge that is in Pakistan. But the locusts could bank into Southeast Asia, flowing through Bangladesh and up into Burma, landing in China’s Yunnan province, hitting a country that is already locked down because of the coronavirus’ rapid spread.

As fears rise, the state-run media outlet Global Times has been offering ludicrous consolation to the public, claiming that the desert locusts are “eaten by ducks, fried for food,” and “not a threat to China.” And the international arm of state-run CCTV even released a bizarre video of “duck troops” amassing at the border. But the species of locust that is on the country’s doorstep emits phenylacetonitrile, a foul-smelling secretion that is meant to deter predators. Birds typically do not seek them out as a food source.

Spokespersons for China’s Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs claim that there is a “very low risk” of locust plagues hitting China, but a researcher at the Beijing-headquartered Institute of Plant Protection of the Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences suggests more caution.

The agriculture expert, Zhang Zehua, said that Yunnan province (which borders Burma), Guangxi (an autonomous region east of Yunnan), and Sichuan province (north of Yunnan) could be affected in June or July if the plagues are not brought under control in neighboring countries.

Zhang may be right, at least according to India’s Ministry of Agriculture, which issued a notice saying that it expects 200,000 square kilometers (77,200 square miles) of farmland to be blanketed by locusts in June during the onset of monsoon season—when conditions are perfect for ravenous insects to breed.

For now, whether the summer may bring another catastrophe to China depends chiefly on Delhi and Karachi’s efforts to exterminate a storm of insects in a race against the seasons.

Give Me Liberty: A History of America’s Exceptional Idea

Nationalism is inevitable: It supplies feelings of belonging, identity, and recognition. It binds us to our neighbors and tells us who we are. But increasingly — from the United States to India, from Russia to Burma — nationalism is being invoked for unworthy ends: to disdain minorities or to support despots. As a result, nationalism has become to many a dirty word.
In Give Me Liberty, award-winning historian and biographer Richard Brookhiser offers up a truer and more inspiring story of American nationalism as it has evolved over four hundred years. He examines America’s history through thirteen documents that made the United States a new country in a new world: a free country. We are what we are because of them; we stay true to what we are by staying true to them.
Americans have always sought liberty, asked for it, fought for it; every victory has been the fulfillment of old hopes and promises. This is our nationalism, and we should be proud of it.

 

The Case for Nationalism: How It Made Us Powerful, United, and Free

It is one of our most honored clichés that America is an idea and not a nation. This is false. America is indisputably a nation, and one that desperately needs to protect its interests, its borders, and its identity.

The Brexit vote and the election of Donald Trump swept nationalism to the forefront of the political debate. This is a good thing. Nationalism is usually assumed to be a dirty word, but it is a foundation of democratic self-government and of international peace.

National Review editor Rich Lowry refutes critics on left and the right, reclaiming the term “nationalism” from those who equate it with racism, militarism and fascism. He explains how nationalism is an American tradition, a thread that runs through such diverse leaders as Alexander Hamilton, Teddy Roosevelt, Martin Luther King, Jr., and Ronald Reagan.

In The Case for Nationalism, Lowry explains how nationalism was central to the American Project. It fueled the American Revolution and the ratification of the Constitution. It preserved the country during the Civil War. It led to the expansion of the American nation’s territory and power, and eventually to our invaluable contribution to creating an international system of self-governing nations.

It’s time to recover a healthy American nationalism, and especially a cultural nationalism that insists on the assimilation of immigrants and that protects our history, civic rituals and traditions, which are under constant threat. At a time in which our nation is plagued by self-doubt and self-criticism, The Case for Nationalism offers a path for America to regain its national self-confidence and achieve continued greatness.

Why Democratic presidential candidates’ obsession with banning guns is not the answer

With less than a month to go until voting is held in Super Tuesday primaries, Democratic presidential candidates may want to consider how their positions on gun control will affect their chances at the ballot, particularly in Virginia. At a minimum, they can expect a grilling on the topic during any campaigning in the Commonwealth.

The evidence from the peaceful, non-partisan Second Amendment protest in Richmond strongly suggests that voters there are passionate, vocal and well-informed on the issue. And you can bet the national audience will be listening intently as they answer difficult questions not much raised elsewhere so far in their campaigns for president.

For example: What are these politicians trying to achieve with their gun control legislation? Perhaps it is to stop mass shootings (certainly a worthy goal), but 9 out of 10 mass shootings take place in “gun free” zones. Perhaps it is to reduce crime, but Virginia already has the fourth lowest violent crime rate in the nation — some 40 percent below the national average — so additional firearms restrictions seem unlikely to be of benefit.

In fact the only safer states are Maine, Vermont and New Hampshire — all of which have gun laws as lenient or more so than Virginia at the moment, while neighboring D.C., Maryland, North Carolina and Tennessee all have higher violent crime rates. And Virginia’s violent crime and murder rates have fallen consistently over the last 20 years, while at the same time the population has grown by 10 percent and gun ownership by almost 50 percent. This would strongly suggest that tighter gun control brings no benefits but plenty of problems, and there is much additional data to suggest this holds true across the nation.

One of the avenues the candidates are all pursuing is to ban certain types of gun, which they have labelled as Assault Weapons. This despite the fact that the federal Assault Weapons ban of 1994-2004 showed no benefits and, on a thorough examination of the data, may even have increased the criminal use of such weapons. Any such policies would not affect automatic weapons, which are very tightly controlled at federal level. Instead they seem to be centered on AR-15 style rifles, despite the fact that rifles tend to be used in less than 5 percent of all criminal shootings, and would do nothing to limit criminal access to the handguns which feature in over 95 percent of shootings.

And a ban, which would affect around 1,000,000 Virginians and over 45,000,000 Americans by requiring surrender, confiscation and/or registration, is not limited to AR-15 style weapons (and one must wonder if they choose the features of such weapons because they incorrectly believe that AR stands for either Assault Rifle or perhaps Army Rifle instead of the Armalite Rifle company who originally designed it specifically for hunting) but any rifle with any single one of a number of similar features. Such a ban would therefore affect vastly more than just AR-15 style rifles.

In the wake of horrifying mass shootings such as the Virginia Beach and Virginia Tech shootings such a ban might seem reasonable to many, but in addition to the points made above, it would also fail to address additional substantial legal problems. For example the Supreme Court has ruled on more than one occasion that Second Amendment protections extend to weapons “in common use for lawful purposes.” With the sheer quantity of AR-15 style firearms involved, this most popular of rifle styles can certainly be considered to be “in common use for lawful purposes.” So what is the point in proposing policies which may be neither constitutionally permissible nor enforceable?

Such facts might lead town hall participants to ask Democratic presidential candidates how many law-abiding citizens they are prepared to criminalize and demean in their pursuit of gun control? Do they seriously intend to make felons of millions of residents of the Republic? How many casualties are they prepared to inflict on ordinary folks (and law enforcement) who would see themselves as standing up for their constitutional rights and might forcibly resist any attempts at confiscation? How many criminals (or criminally insane) would such legislation deter? And, perhaps most importantly, what benefit would actually derive from a ban on assault firearms?

It might be that what these politicians truly fear themselves is encapsulated in these questions. It may be symptomatic that Gov. Northam’s declaration of a state of emergency to ban guns around the Virginia Capitol on Lobby Day the other week (thus statistically increasing the risks to the crowds and despite much historical evidence of peaceful gun lobbying to the contrary) was because of his own fear of guns in the hands of angry citizens who might refuse to submit to his agenda. It could be that what politicians who advocate gun control truly fear is not violent crime or mass shootings but a future well-armed rejection of their own legislative over-reach.