Be Careful What You Wish For: Gun Grabbers Worry NRA’s Successor Would be More Far More Pro 2A

Alex Yablon is a former writer at Michael Bloomberg’s anti-gun agitprop generation station, The Trace. In the Slate piece quote below, he indulges in a little wish-fulfilment fantasizing about what a post-NRA gun rights landscape might look like if the New York AG succeeds in taking the gun rights giant down.

Even the ACLU concedes that full dissolution of the NRA would be wrong and highly unlikely. And Yablon concludes that any successor organization to rise from the NRA’s ashes would likely be far more doctrinaire in its support of the Second Amendment than the NRA ever was.

If [New York Attorney General Letitia] James succeeds [in dissolving the National Rifle Association], the court will direct her to find other groups who could take control of the NRA’s infrastructure, which could restart a national gun rights advocacy group. She would be bound by law to solely consider whether successor groups share the NRA’s values and are free from any taint of corruption. “The groups would have to be absolutely squeaky clean, but they could have really aggressive Second Amendment politics,” [New York Council of Nonprofits attorney Michael] West said.

Continue reading “”

Making vaccines is hard. You’re trying to kill the bug, without making the patient sick, or worse, killing them.
It’s that ‘The cure can’t be worse then the disease‘ thing…….again.

AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine study halted after ‘potentially unexplained’ illness

Late-stage studies of AstraZeneca’s COVID-19 vaccine candidate are on temporary hold while the company investigates whether a recipient’s “potentially unexplained” illness is a side effect of the shot.

In a statement issued Tuesday evening, the company said its “standard review process triggered a pause to vaccination to allow review of safety data.”

AstraZeneca didn’t reveal any information about the possible side effect except to call it “a potentially unexplained illness.” The health news site STAT first reported the pause in testing, saying the possible side effect occurred in the United Kingdom. Continue reading “”

DAN RATHER TRIES A VARIATION ON “FAKE BUT ACCURATE”

Jeffrey Goldberg’s claim that President Trump disparaged American soldiers who died in Normandy is collapsing. As we have noted, John Bolton, no friend of Trump, was present when the president allegedly made the comment. Bolton says it didn’t happen.

Similarly, former Deputy White House Chief of Staff Zach Fuentes, who was also in the room, denies that Trump made the remarks attributed to him. He says:

I did not hear POTUS call anyone losers when I told him about the weather [in France]. Honestly, do you think General Kelly would have stood by and let anyone call fallen Marines losers?

Of course not. Fuentes, by the way, is unhappy with Trump over his treatment of Gen. Kelly. Thus, Fuentes has no incentive to defend Trump in this matter, other than regard for the truth.

Dan Rather inadvertently provides further evidence that Goldberg’s claim is falling apart. Earlier, as we noted, Rather tweeted that the story had seemingly been “confirmed” by other sources. Now, Rather is falling back on a variation of “fake but accurate” — the “defense” of Rather’s 2004 story about George W. Bush’s military service.

“Whether [Trump] said it or not, it is believable,” Rather told callers to a show he was hosting. Later, Rather cited the “terrible things” Trump said about Senator John McCain.

But Trump had a beef with McCain, whom he regarded as a rival and then a foe. Trump often disparages rivals and foes. There is no pattern of him disparaging bystanders, much less brave soldiers who have been dead for many decades.

In any case, the standard in journalism shouldn’t be whether a story is believable, but whether it is supported by non-fabricated evidence. Dan Rather was fired because he didn’t honor this distinction.

Clearly, he hasn’t learned his lesson. But then, he has little to lose these days.

“IN THE TRUMP ERA, ONE “INDEPENDENT” INSTITUTION AFTER ANOTHER HAS EXPOSED ITSELF AS FAITHLESS, CORRUPT, AND UTTERLY PARTISAN”

ACLU Official Attacks University For Admitting Nick Sandmann While Professor Denounces His “Anti-Intellectual” Views 

I have previously written, as a long supporter of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), about my concern over how the venerable group has changed under its current leadership, including a departure from its long robust defense of free speech. Recently, the ACLU has abandoned its famed neutrality and has not supported some on the right while supporting those on the left. Now, the ACLU’s Samuel Crankshaw in Kentucky has targeted Transylvania University for admitting Nick Sandmann, who was falsely accused of abusing a Native American activist in front of Lincoln Memorial. (Crankshaw identifies as an ACLU staffer on social media) Despite various media organizations correcting the story and some settling with Sandmann, some in the media have continued to attack him.  Yet, it is far more alarming to see an ACLU official rallying people against a young man whose chief offense appears to be that he is publicly (and unapologetically) conservative and pro-life.

Crankshaw went to Facebook to alert people that Sandmann would be attending the college and expressing veiled outrage that the school would admit someone with his opposing views. He warns that this kid is “more dangerous” than figures like Milo Yiannopolous.  The “danger” is that a young freshman holds conservative views that are shared by roughly half of this country: Continue reading “”

Well, Claire always did have crap-for-brains.

FORMER SENATOR SAYS ‘WOMEN SICK OF ALL THESE GUNS.’ WOMEN SAY OTHERWISE

Former U.S. Senator Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.) was replaced by voters in 2018 and is now a political talk show pundit. During a discussion about the violence erupting in America’s communities, including Kenosha, Wisconsin, Portland, Oregon and her home-state St. Louis, Missouri, Sen. McCaskill opined women are “sick of all these guns.” Data shows she couldn’t be more mistaken.

Not So Show-Me Senator
Missouri is a state with strong Second Amendment approval and Sen. McCaskill tried to hide her antigun beliefs while in office. She was caught talking about her support for more gun control when she thought no voters would hear. Even her staff was recorded describing the senator’s Second Amendment voter deception. When pressed why she wasn’t more vocal for gun control, a staffer bluntly stated, “But she doesn’t openly go out and support groups like Moms Demand Action or just like other groups that are related to that. Because that could hurt, her ability to get elected.”

On gun control, Sen. McCaskill supported a grab-bag of favorites, including reinstating a so-called “Assault Weapons Ban,” limiting so-called “large capacity magazines,” expanding background checks and even voting against a right-to-carry reciprocity bill. Continue reading “”

Paul’s comment on a post deserves its own post

WHAT IS GASLIGHTING?
The term originates in the systematic psychological manipulation of a victim by her husband in Patrick Hamilton’s 1938 stage play Gas Light, and the film adaptations released in 1940 and 1944. In the story, the husband attempts to convince his wife and others that she is insane by manipulating small elements of their environment and insisting that she is mistaken, remembering things incorrectly, or delusional when she points out these changes.

The play’s title alludes to how the abusive husband slowly dims the gas lights in their home, while pretending nothing has changed, in an effort to make his wife doubt her own perceptions. The wife repeatedly asks her husband to confirm her perceptions about the dimming lights, but in defiance of reality, he keeps insisting that the lights are the same and instead it is she who is going insane.

We are living in a perpetual state of gaslighting. The reality that we are being told by the media is at complete odds with what we are seeing with our own two eyes. And when we question the false reality that we are being presented, or we claim that what we see is that actual reality, we are vilified as racist or bigots or just plain crazy. You’re not racist. You’re not crazy.
You’re being gaslighted.

New York State has twice as many deaths from Covid-19 than any other state, and New York has accounted for one fifth of all Covid-19 deaths, but we are told that New York Governor Andrew Cuomo has handled the pandemic better than any other governor. But if we support policies of Governors whose states had only a fraction of the infections and deaths as New York, we’re called anti-science and want people to die. So, we ask ourselves, am I crazy?
No, you’re being gaslighted.

We see mobs of people looting stores, smashing windows, setting cars on fire and burning down buildings, but we are told that these demonstrations are peaceful protests. And when we call this destruction of our cities, riots, we are called racists. So, we ask ourselves, am I crazy?
No, you’re being gaslighted.

We see the major problem destroying many inner-cities is crime; murder, gang violence, drug dealing, drive-by shootings, armed robbery, but we are told that it is not crime, but the police that are the problem in the inner-cities. We are told we must defund the police and remove law enforcement from crime-riddled cities to make them safer. But if we advocate for more policing in cities overrun by crime, we are accused of being white supremacists and racists. So, we ask ourselves, am I crazy?
No, you’re being gaslighted.

The United States of America accepts more immigrants than any other country in the world. The vast majority of the immigrants are “people of color”, and these immigrants are enjoying freedom and economic opportunity not available to them in their country of origin, but we are told that the United States is the most racist and oppressive country on the planet, and if we disagree, we are called racist and xenophobic. So, we ask ourselves, am I crazy?
No, you’re being gaslighted.

Capitalist countries are the most prosperous countries in the world The standard of living is the highest in capitalist countries. We see more poor people move up the economic ladder to the middle and even the wealthy class through their effort and ability in capitalist countries than any other economic system in the world, but we are told capitalism is an oppressive system designed to keep people down. So, we ask ourselves, am I crazy?
No, you’re being gaslighted.

Communist countries killed over 100 million people in the 20th century. Communist countries strip their citizens of basic hman rights, dictate every aspect of their lives, treat their citizens like slaves, and drive their economies into the ground, but we are told that Communism is the fairest, most equitable, freest and most prosperous economic system in the world. So, we ask ourselves, am I crazy?
No, you’re being gaslighted.

The most egregious example of gaslighting is the concept of “white fragility”. You spend your life trying to be a good person, trying to treat people fairly and with respect. You disavow racism and bigotry in all its forms. You judge people solely on the content of their character and not by the color of their skin. You don’t discriminate based on race or ethnicity. But you are told you are a racist, not because of something you did or said, but solely because of the color of your skin. You know instinctively that charging someone with racism because of their skin color is itself racist. You know that you are not racist, so you defend yourself and your character, but you are told that your defense of yourself is proof of your racism. So, we ask ourselves, am I crazy?
No, you’re being gaslighted.

Gaslighting has become one of the most pervasive and destructive tactics in American politics. It is the exact opposite of what our political system was meant to be. It deals in lies and psychological coercion, and not the truth and intellectual discourse. If you ever ask yourself if you’re crazy, you are not. Crazy people aren’t sane enough to ask themselves if they’re crazy. So, trust yourself, believe what’s in your heart. Trust your eyes over what you are told. Never listen to the people who tell you that you are crazy, because you are not,
you’re being gaslighted.

Sophocles said: “What people believe prevails over the truth.”
And that’s what the media are trying to exploit.

…..it’s important to understand how the coverage you are getting is being shaped, and by whom.

‘You’re Not Allowed To Film’: The Fight To Control Who Reports From Portland.

“YOU’RE NOT ALLOWED TO FILM!” is a cry you hear incessantly at protests in Portland, Oregon, always shouted at close range to your face by after-dark demonstrators. You can assert that, yes, you can film; you can point out that they themselves are filming incessantly; you can push their hands away from covering your phone; you can have your phone record them stealing your phone—all of these things have happened to me—and none will have any impact on their contention that “YOU’RE NOT ALLOWED TO FILM” and its occasional variation, “PHOTOGRAPHY EQUALS DEATH!”

I cannot say who came up with these anti-camera battle cries. But it’s easy to understand why protesters use them: to shape the narrative the country sees about the protests. And that narrative, in my estimation after many weeks covering street clashes in a city where I lived for 15 years, is 90 percent bs.

I wondered, the first time I attended the protests at the federal building back in July, who all these young people with PRESS emblazoned on their jackets or helmets were. I asked one such guy who he worked for.

“Independent Press Corps,” he told me. As it turned out, dozens of other young PRESS people happened to work for the same outfit, which I at first assumed was a fancy way of saying “I want to report stuff and stream it on my Instagram.”

This turned out to be naive. The IPC is an organized group in league with the activists, and it is usually their footage you see streamed online and recycled on the news: mostly innocent protestors being harassed and beaten by police. Continue reading “”

Cardinals legend Lou Brock dies Sunday afternoon at 81

St. Louis Cardinals’ Hall of Famer Lou Brock, who had fought through a number of medical conditions in recent years, died Sunday afternoon. He was 81.

Brock will be remembered for many accomplishments. He was the National League’s all-time leader in stolen bases with 938. He had 3,023 hits. He was a first-ballot electee into the National Baseball Hall of Fame and Museum. Continue reading “”

Man wounded after kicking in door of Fort Worth residence in home invasion

A man was shot and wounded early Wednesday after he kicked in the front door of a Fort Worth home in what police say was a possible attempt to steal guns from the residence, police said.

The wounded suspect fled the scene and police continued their search for him Wednesday. The home invasion occurred just before 1:30 a.m. in the 700 block of Roaring Springs Road.

Witnesses told Fort Worth police that after he entered the home, the suspect began assaulting a woman. Her son shot the suspect in the leg.

The woman who had been assaulted in the home refused medical treatment, police said. The suspect jumped into a nearby vehicle, possibly accompanied by a woman, and drove to his sister’s home on Bonita Drive, but he fled again once he learned that his sister had called police. His companion was with him, Fort Worth police said.

Wonderful idiot copy writers. The homeowner shot to defend himself, not because the thug was trespassing.

Homeowner shoots man who trespassed on his Bangor Township property

BANGOR TOWNSHIP, Mich. — A homeowner shot a man in the foot after he trespassed on his Bangor Township property, Deputy Chief Hothman Misane said.

The homeowner confronted the 25-year-old Bangor man at his home in the 27000 block of 66th Street on Sept. 2, 2020.

The suspect then became aggressive and charged at the homeowner, Misane said. During the fight the suspect was shot in the foot.

The suspect was taken to South Haven Hospital for the injury

Journalism’s New Propaganda Tool: Using “Confirmed” to Mean its Opposite.
Outlets claiming to have “confirmed” Jeffrey Goldberg’s story about Trump’s troops comments are again abusing that vital term

ONE OF THE MOST HUMILIATING journalism debacles of the Trump era played out on December 8, 2017, first on CNN and then on MSNBC. The spectacle kicked off on that Friday morning at 11:00 a.m. when CNN, deploying its most melodramatic music and graphics designed to convey that a real bombshell was about to be dropped, announced that anonymous sources had provided the network with a smoking gun proving the Trump/Russia conspiracy once and for all: during the 2016 campaign, Donald Trump, Jr. had received a September 4 email with a secret encryption key that gave him advanced access to WikiLeaks’ servers………

IT SEEMS THE SAME MISLEADING TACTIC is now driving the supremely dumb but all-consuming news cycle centered on whether President Trump, as first reported by the Atlantic’s editor-in-chief Jeffrey Goldberg, made disparaging comments about The Troops. Goldberg claims that “four people with firsthand knowledge of the discussion that day” — whom the magazine refuses to name because they fear “angry tweets” — told him that Trump made these comments. Trump, as well as former aides who were present that day (including Sarah Huckabee Sanders and John Bolton), deny that the report is accurate.

So we have anonymous sources making claims on one side, and Trump and former aides (including Bolton, now a harsh Trump critic) insisting that the story is inaccurate. Beyond deciding whether or not to believe Goldberg’s story based on what best advances one’s political interests, how can one resolve the factual dispute? If other media outlets could confirm the original claims from Goldberg, that would obviously be a significant advancement of the story.

Other media outlets — including Associated Press and Fox News — now claim that they did exactly that: “confirmed” the Atlantic story. But if one looks at what they actually did, at what this “confirmation” consists of, it is the opposite of what that word would mean, or should mean, in any minimally responsible sense. AP, for instance, merely claims that “a senior Defense Department official with firsthand knowledge of events and a senior U.S. Marine Corps officer who was told about Trump’s comments confirmed some of the remarks to The Associated Press,” while Fox merely said “a former senior Trump administration official who was in France traveling with the president in November 2018 did confirm other details surrounding that trip.”

In other words, all that likely happened is that the same sources who claimed to Jeffrey Goldberg, with no evidence, that Trump said this went to other outlets and repeated the same claims — the same tactic that enabled MSNBC and CBS to claim they had “confirmed” the fundamentally false CNN story about Trump Jr. receiving advanced access to the WikiLeaks archive. Or perhaps it was different sources aligned with those original sources and sharing their agenda who repeated these claims. Given that none of the sources making these claims have the courage to identify themselves, due to their fear of mean tweets, it is impossible to know. Continue reading “”

Not really ‘news’ to anyone who’s been recently been to a gun store.
And the prices of what is available! Wheew-ee.
Reloading supplies still appear widely available…for now.

COVID hoarding hits ammunition supplies; ammo shortage continues to get worse

(KELO) — It’s an issue hunters and gun enthusiasts have run into many times before, but this year, an ammo shortage just continues to get worse.

“We try to sell ammo, but that’s been a challenge in 2020. It’s very, very hard to find ammo,” said South Dakota Military Heritage Alliance Executive Director Brian Phelps.

The gun range at the Alliance is now limiting ammo purchases when people come to use the range.

“We’ll limit them to one box of ammunition vs. the normal 300 to 500 rounds,” Phelps said.

That’s because replacing some of those rounds is nearly impossible right now.

“Our guys will sit online and work with our manufacturers, and as soon as they see ammo available, they’re hitting buy. It goes that quick once it’s available,” Phelps said.

Right now, there’s no end in sight to this tight market. Continue reading “”

The hypocrisy of anti-Second Amendment veterans

SOME VETERANS in politics and media have taken it upon themselves to rescue Americans from the “dangers” of firearms, specifically the AR-15.

Their contention is that these are “weapons of war” and therefore unfit for civilian use. Pat Ryan, an Iraq War veteran who had run for Congress in New York’s 19th district, ran a campaign ad in 2018 expressing his desire to “get rid of assault rifles.” In the wake of the Orlando shooting, Congressman Seth Moulton, a former Marine officer, stated on Twitter that “I know assault rifles. I carried one in Iraq. They have no place on America’s streets.”

As a Marine trained on the use of numerous military-grade weapons, Seth and others should know better.

The original definition of “assault rifle” from a 1970 Army Field Manual (FSTC-CW-07-03-70) has been re-purposed by the anti-gun movement to nebulously define firearms they believe civilians should not own. One of the four requirements for the field manual’s definition of an assault rifle is a “select-fire” option (i.e. you can toggle settings between single shot and fully automatic or burst). The fact that the AR-15 currently sold to civilians in America only has a single fire option means it does not meet their definition of an assault rifle. And, just in case anyone’s wondering, the “AR” in AR-15 stands for “Armalite Rifle” not “Assault Rifle.”

But details like these don’t matter to the gun control lobby, and the issue with these anti-gun veterans is that they believe they know better than the rest of us. They tout their combat experience with these “weapons of war,” demanding that we trust their message and heed their warning.

The irony is either they do not know what they are talking about, or, worse, they have suppressed that knowledge in order to appease the politics of the time. At its core, this issue is less about civilian ownership of AR-15s and more about the elitist mentality of any veteran who believes civilians are incapable or irresponsible when it comes to firearms.

As a Marine Corps officer, I carried the same M4 in Iraq that Seth Moulton did. During my time in Iraq, my Marines investigated an officer who had experienced a “negligent discharge,” where he almost accidentally shot and killed another Marine.

In Iraq, I also witnessed a court martial trial for one of my Marines who had threatened to shoot an NCO in his chain-of-command. Tragically, we also saw a Marine who used his rifle to take his own life.

Human error and human factors affect members of the military just as much as civilians. Should we prevent veterans from owning firearms because they have a higher-than-average rate of suicide compared to the rest of the U.S. population?

At the end of the day, if a person is responsible and knowledgeable about the firearms they own, what difference does it make if he/she is veteran or civilian?

Governor Chris Sununu has done a great job stemming the tide of anti-gun legislation coming through the New Hampshire Legislature. Unfortunately, anti-gun veterans threaten to tip the scales of the discussion in favor of more gun control because they claim to know better than the rest of us.

Most veterans I know do not want to outlaw AR-15s or limit civilian firearm ownership and it is time for the silent majority of pro-Second Amendment veterans to speak their minds, especially in an election year.

If we fail to do so, we are foregoing a responsibility to speak out against the same injustices we joined the military to defend against. And sadly, this issue extends beyond just the discussion of Second Amendment rights.

The “I-know-better-than-the-average-civilian” mentality has become the de facto stance of the corrupt and powerful in our government. Look no further than the Crossfire Hurricane investigation, where a handful of rogue officials sought to undo the will of the people.

Mike Judge lives in Mason.

 

Review: ‘Gun Control Myths’ by John R. Lott, Jr, PhD

Doctor of Economics John Lott, Jr. is the expert on gun research because he’s done most of it. His Crime Prevention Research Center is the central repository of answers to all questions about the wrongness of gun control and how in truth guns save lives.  More Guns, Less Crime (his classic introduction) and his previous book The War on Guns are the perfect foundations for Gun Control Myths—together these form a compendium that addresses most of the fraudulent claims that have been made about how guns surely (but don’t) cause “gun violence”.

I know Dr. Lott, and believe me, he’s no Dan Quayle. He’s the real thing—an ultra-conscientious researcher who makes all his data public, willingly considers criticism, and addresses newly published research by others as well as conducting his own projects to add to our knowledge base. This behavior is exactly opposite to that of nearly all other gun-related researchers, who often for not-so-good reason obscure their data, use skewed analyses, and achieve their preferred results.

In Gun Control Myths he doesn’t attempt to cover every misleading idea about guns, but has chosen to address the biggest issues of today. He begins by correcting the errors of several of the seemingly comprehensive summaries in circulation about the dangers of gun ownership. He moves on to thorough discussions about mass shootings, which are so preoccupying although very rare and more often than the media reports, ended by good guys with guns.

There has been too much manipulative politicization for far too long about guns used badly by criminals and psychopaths. In addition to correcting media misreporting, Lott points out the FBI’s “political biases [and] corruption” beginning with the Obama administration that have not been fully rooted out. This reflects worry about many levels of government picking winners and users in how they interpret laws that blatantly infringe on citizens’ “right to keep and bear arms”.

Lott is admirable in accepting no organizational funding, which leaves the non-profit CRPC running on a shoestring compared to Bloomberg and blue state millions pouring into generating anti-gun studies every year. Thankfully, the excellence of CRPC’s work continues to win on quality if not quantity.

Do you value graphs and tables? There are scores and scores, from both sides of the “debate” as he shows there’s really none. How about footnotes? There are hundreds. Appendices? Six, over 17 pages and online. John Lott leaves no room for misunderstanding at any level of inquiry.

It would be nice to refer to an index, which is absent. However, that’s a minimal issue because the chapters are clearly focused on particular topics, which makes it easy to find a specific item or reference again.

There’s no question that, as Lott concludes, “the reality is that an armed citizenry is as necessary as it’s ever been.” And given the threats lined up against our staying rightfully armed, we must arm ourselves with the facts to oppose the false “truthiness” of the anti-gun movement.

John Lott again gives us the ammunition we need.

Robert B Young, MD

— DRGO Editor Robert B. Young, MD is a psychiatrist practicing in Pittsford, NY, an associate clinical professor at the University of Rochester School of Medicine, and a Distinguished Life Fellow of the American Psychiatric Association.

Another business with the ‘Mysterious Stranger’ perquisite

Park Manor robbery: Man shot, killed while trying to rob South Side gas station

CHICAGO (WLS) — A man trying to rob a gas station in Park Manor on the South Side Thursday night was shot and killed in the process, Chicago police said.

The man tried to rob the gas station in the 6700-block of South Cottage Grove Avenue about 9:50 p.m. with a shotgun, police said. But another individual shot the would-be robber in the back and face before the shooter left the store, according to police. The man who was shot was transported to University of Chicago Medical Center, where he later died. The Cook County medical examiner’s office identified him as 55-year-old Tyrone Smith. He lived in Park Manor.

The shooter has not yet been found, police said. Area One detectives are currently investigating. No one else was injured during the incident.

Man shot in the arm after attacking ex-girlfriend, 2-year-old child

SAN ANTONIO – A man was shot in the arm and may face charges after attacking his ex-girlfriend and her 2-year-old child on the West Side, according to San Antonio police. The incident happened a little after 8 p.m. Friday in the 3700 block of Wurzbach Road.

Officers were called to the scene for a report of a shooting. Upon arrival, police saw a 25-year-old man standing outside of the residence shot in the arm, officials said. The man was not cooperating with officers during the investigation and also appeared intoxicated, police said.

Police said the incident happened after the man came over to his ex-girlfriend’s apartment, and they argued over property. The man then reportedly grabbed his ex-girlfriend by the neck and threw her down to the ground, police said. The man also went and allegedly grabbed her 2-year-old child by the neck, and that’s when his ex-girlfriend reached into her purse, grabbed a gun and shot him once in the arm, according to SAPD.

The man’s injuries were non-life-threatening, and he was taken to University Hospital.

Police said the woman acted in self-defense, and the man that was injured may face charges.