The Right People

SCENE:  Mitch BERG is waiting to see the movie “Darkest Hour” at a local theater.  Avery LIBRELLE, walking out of a showing of “Brokeback Mountain Part 2:  The Payback”, notices BERG before he notices…er, LIBRELLE.  

LIBRELLE:  Hey, Merg!

BERG:  Er, hey, Avery.  What’s up?

LIBRELLE:  Guns are out of control!  The US has the highest murder rate of any industrIalized country!

BERG:  Well, for starters, that’s not true – Brazil and Russia and South Africa have much higher murder rates than we do.  But I’m curious – why do you limit it to “industralized” countries?   Because the US murder rate, overall, is 94th in the world, per capita.   Which is waaaaay down in the middle of the pack.  Mexico and Russia’s murder rates are twice as nigh; Brazil’s five times; South Africa’s, seven times higher than ours.

LIBRELLE:   But you should only compare apples to apples?

BERG:  Why?  When it comes to murder rates, what logical sense does that make?  I mean, I know why your side does it – but why do you think that is?

LIBRELLE:  You tell me!

BERG:   Because Big Left only cares about dead white people.   That’s why you never hear “gun safety” advocates talking about crime in places like El Salvador, Nicaragua, the US Virgin Islands or Brazil, anymore than you do about places like  Chicago, Newark, Camden, Baltimore, Saint Louis, Detroit, Cleveland, Stockton or Oakland.

LIBRELLE:  Why would we talk about the murder rate in Chicago, Newark, Camden, Baltimore, Saint Louis, Detroit, Cleveland, Stockton or Oakland?   We should compare apples and apples.

BERG  They’re in America.

LIBRELLE:  Are they?

BERG:  (Stares vacaintly for a moment).  Interesting point.

LIBRELLE:  Rethugs are so stupid.

(And SCENE)

 

Berg’s Seventh Law Is Universal And Inviolable

Gun violence prevention control grouips are fond of whipping up “popular” anger against “the gun lobby” – portrayed as an immense, boundlessly wealthy group of heartless white guys with three piece suits and cigars, cackling with glee at the deaths of innocent children.  Big Left has worked overtime to try to demonize civil rights groups, especially the NRA, as 900 pound gorillas that the plucky criminal-safety advocates can’t possibly compete with.

So what’s the truth?

As always – read Berg’s Seventh Law:  “When a Liberal issues a group defamation or assault on conservatives’ ethics, character, humanity or respect for liberty or the truth, they are at best projecting, and at worst drawing attention away from their own misdeeds.”.

And the Law will lead you to the truth.    It always does:

After compiling the numbers we discovered pro-gun control candidates received more than six times more money than pro-gun rights candidates on the issue.

Last year, the largest recipient of campaign cash from pro-gun rights groups in Oregon was Laura Morett. The Republican candidate for state representative and former “Survivor” reality show contestant received $10,132.86 total from the Oregon Firearms Federation and the National Rifle Association (NRA). Despite the infusion of cash, Morett was not successful in defeating state Rep. Paul Evans, D-Salem.

“But Mitch – that’s Oregon!”

The ration is even more lopsided in Minnesota, where the antis outspent the good guys nearly 10:1 in the 2016 legislative elections.

 

 

Suddenly, The Strib Supports States’ Rights And Minnesota’s Permit To Carry Law

The Strib’s Maya Rao writes about the push for national carry permit reciprocity.

The funny part?

The record numbers of Minnesotans who hold permits to carry concealed guns could soon be able to carry their firearms in all 50 states, a move advocates said would preserve the right to self-defense wherever people travel in the country.

But law enforcement leaders in Minnesota and around the country are raising concerns that the proposal, which passed the U.S. House this month, could harm public safety and mean looser regulation of guns in states like Minnesota, with stricter permit requirements than other places.

That’s been the comic irony of the “debate” on this issue ;”progressive” Minnesotans who favor federal control over schoiol lunch menus suddenly turn into Randians on this issue.

And did you catch that muted praise for Minnesota’s carry permit law?  [1]   A law the Strib did its dishonest worst to try to scupper this time 15 years ago?

“If you are a law-abiding citizen with a permit for a concealed carry … you shouldn’t have to turn around every time you reach the bridge to Wisconsin,” said Rep. Jason Lewis, a Republican who helped vote the bill off the House floor this month. It passed 231-198, largely along party lines.

Lewis is largely right; while gun laws should be maintained by the states, there is no rational reason why someone who is a model citizen in Minnesota should be treated as a felon in Illinois, New Jersey or DC.

Other than demigoguery and catering to left-wing prosecutors love of “discretion”, which is a polite word for “the power of life and death over plebeians”.

The proposal has put Republicans at odds with prosecutors around the country. Hennepin County Attorney Mike Freeman, the president of the National District Attorneys Association, said most prosecutors — particularly those overseeing large urban areas — do not support conceal carry reciprocity “because it’s a dive to the bottom” in terms of oversight of guns.

It’s baked wind, of course.   Carry permit holders are not the problem.  Anywhere.  Ever.  The only thing people with carry permits “dive for the bottom” at is crime stats, where they are two orders of magnitude less likely to commit any kind of crime than the general public.

But Mike Freeman maligning law-abiding citizens to preserve is precious discretion?  Thats “dog licks dog”.

The Strib holding up Minnesota’s carry permit law as a model of how it should be done?

That’s man licks dog.

[1] Which is, by the way, not “strict”; it’s reasonable.  It demands training, which has never been actually correlated with public safety, but does make people feel better, which is what “progressivism” cares about.

Lie First, Lie Always: They Can’t Even Write Their Own Lies

Minnesota Gun Owners  Caucus has initiated a new feature – “Anti-Leaks”.   As the GOC describes it, the feature will show leaked communications between gun-grabber groups, documenting the depth and depravity of the conspiracy against your Second Amendment rights.

Yesterday’s installment was a funny one; former Maplewood police chief Paul Schnell – who has been the cop for hire on many of “Protect” Minnesota’s dog and pony shows – got an email from a PR firm working for Gabby Giffords’ organization:

They are, in effect, putting words in the chief’s mouth:

No, I didn’t expect better.

The Unsung Hero

It was five years ago yestarday that Jacob Roberts – a loser and delusional narcissist – walked into the Clackamas Mall in Portland Oregon with an AR15, a pistol and a couple hundred rounds of ammunition, apparently intent on giving his pathetic excuse of a life a big finish.

He murdered two Christmas shoppers – Cindy Yuille and Steven Forsythe – and was by all accounts intent on murdering many more; the load of ammo was a dead giveaway.

Then, Nick Meli – an off-duty security guard with a carry permit and a concealed Glock – drew down on Roberts.

The media’s and law enforcement’s accounts vary from this point – a point that the media  holds against the notion that Meli is a hero.  But by all rational accounts, Roberts saw the gun aimed at him, and did exactly what the FBI, in its study of spree killers after Columbine, said he’d do; delusional narcissists like Roberts (as opposed to terrorists like Omar Matteen) either run away, give up, or kill themselves rather than face the consequences.

Which is what Jacob Roberts did; he retreated into a Gap store and, shortly, shot himself.

The media and Big Gun Control has done its best over the years to bury this story.  Meli himself has been very reticent about being in the public eye.

But it’s the position of this blog that Meli was, and is, a hero who saved many lives that day, and kept Clackamas Mall off the list of infamy that Sandy Hook school would join three days later.

Other than different denouements, the episodes had a lot in common; mentally-ill losers who planned to leave this mortal coil in a blaze of demented, twisted “glory”; buildings full of captive victims; and the big one – both were “gun free zones”.  Clackamas was posted (but, like the Mall of America, those postings were of dubious legal force, although I don’t plan on being the test case); Sandy Hook, being a school, was “gun free” by federal and state law, backed up by potential felony charges.

Which did those kids a lot of good, didn’t it?

Anyway – a salute.

Faithless And Un-Creditworthy

Joe Doakes from Como Park emails:

Congress is working on a bill to make concealed carry permits valid nationwide, same as driver’s licenses.   They’re calling it “reciprocity” but it’s really not.  Reciprocity is what happens when states mutually agree to honor each other’s licenses.  This is being imposed nationally.

Normally, I’m first in line for gun rights. I should be thrilled about this, right?  I’m not.  I’m a principled conservative.  I believe in subsidiarity first.

The right to possess a gun is a fundamental constitutional right.  The right to carry it in public is not so clear.  At this point, if the several states want to honor each other’s permits to carry, they can (and many already do, if you go through the hoops when you get your Minnesota permit to carry).

But just as each state gets to decide the minimum qualifications to pass a driver’s license exam, each state sets its own concealed carry laws.  What works in Montana may not work in Chicago.  That’s not a problem for Congress to solve.  That’s the essence of federalism.

And, of course, since it’s people traveling between states, then Congress will want to regulate it under the Interstate Commerce clause, set national standards, maintain a data-base of permitted carriers, register the serial numbers of their firearms, all administered by the non-partisan and scrupulously honest staff at the AFT or IRS or  . . . .

Joe Doakes

Tips

Joe Doakes from Como Park emails:

History of the Mozambique drill for pistol shooters or, as it’s now called, the Failure Drill.

Some of the hot-shot commenters don’t understand the reason for the break in shooting between the second and third shots.  Why not keep shooting until the target is down?

Lawyers.  You are only allowed to shoot so long as the attacker continues to pose an immanent threat to you.   If you shot twice in the chest, the attacker drops his weapon and raises his hands to yell “Don’t Shoot Me, Bro!” but you continue firing until you’ve emptied your weapon, there’s a good chance some prosecutor will charge you with murder.  You were no longer in danger when you executed an unarmed man.

That’s why the Failure Drill name is important, it reminds us we only take the third shot if the first two fail to accomplish the task.  Bang, Bang, pause to assess while holding the gun on him, then Bang only if necessary.

How long is the pause?  As long as it takes to decide you’re still under attack.  Half a second seems like the bare minimum to me.  In the original Mozambique drill, you lowered your weapon to the ready position pointing at the ground after the second shot and raised it again to fire the third shot.  That cannot be done in less than a second, probably more like two seconds to reacquire the sight picture.  Since we’re not lowering our weapon, we can act more quickly but it still will take about a second to wait, assess, acquire a sight picture on the head, fire the third shot.

That also gives us a better story for the witness stand.  “I only shot him because I was under attack.  And when he persisted, I had to shoot him again.  It’s entirely his decision to continue the attack that ended his life so I am innocent of murder.”

In contrast, this guy is doing it completely wrong.

Joe Doakes

Learn from others’ mistakes.

Lie First, Lie Always: Dadaist Goalposts

This is part 7 of a seven-series tearing apart an article , Busted!  7 Myths About Concealed Carry, Debunked.linked by  linked by specacularly ill-informed DFL House candidate Sara Freeman – who deleted a couple of honest, civil and pointed comments from a post on her campaign’s Facebook page in which she linked to an article from a group called “Resist the Gun Lobby”, entitled (deep breath):

The writers of this article either don’t know any better than to change subjects in mid-paragraph, or assume their audience is too dim to know or care.

MYTH 6: Concealed carry reciprocity doesn’t make it any easier to buy a gun.
You can find this myth in action in an oped published in The Hill, by U.S. Rep. Richard Hudson who stated: “For one, nationwide concealed carry doesn’t make it any easier to buy a gun.”

The purported “bust?”

Gun traffickers frequently cross state lines to obtain guns from states with the weakest laws. Concealed carry reciprocity would make it easier for them to do that. It would tie the hands of law enforcement officers who encounter armed, out-of-state residents, who may be trafficking guns.

It would “tie the hands” of law-enforcement, provided law enforcement assumes anyone from out of state with a gun is a trafficker.

But to investigate gun trafficking –  a felony, by the way – they have to actually find, not people legally carrying guns, but – this may seem tautological, but trust me, it’s lost on the author and their audience – t illegally trafficking them.    Which is a felony, often – as when “selling to felon”) a federal one.

In other words, police will have to do their jobs.

Just as they do now.

Not Your Cops!  Our Cops!:  “Resist the Gun Lobby”‘s final “myth”:

MYTH 7: Law enforcement officers support concealed carry reciprocity.
In this op-ed by John Lott, published by Fox News, Lott writes, “Police officers have very difficult jobs and put their lives on the line every day. What can we do to help make sure that they can come home to their families? One way is to let law-abiding citizens carry guns.”

And the “Bust”:

Major law enforcement groups, including Major Cities Chiefs Association, Police Foundation, and Police Executive Research Forum, oppose concealed carry legislation.

And I bet the SEIU and MoveOn.Org oppose it as well.

Same basic thing; metro police chiefs serve at the pleasure of universally liberal city governments, so they will bark anti-gun bromides on command.  The PERF is even more ludicrous; it’s a left-funded pressure group, of no more independet merit than the Southern Poverty Law Center.

Kinda important, donchathink?

Conclusions:  Every gun control group lies, all the time.  The people who uncritically believe them are idiots who, in a just world, would be barred from voting, with lethal force if necessary.

 

  Resist the Gun Lobby:

https://resistthegunlobby.org/busted-7-myths-about-concealed-carry-debunked-5a3f94b89230

Lie First, Lie Always: This Is How Sausage Gets Made

This is part 6 of a seven-series tearing apart an article , Busted!  7 Myths About Concealed Carry, Debunked.linked by  linked by specacularly ill-informed DFL House candidate Sara Freeman – who deleted a couple of honest, civil and pointed comments from a post on her campaign’s Facebook page in which she linked to an article from a group called “Resist the Gun Lobby”, entitled (deep breath):

Next, they try their hand at clairvoyance – with predictably dismal results:

MYTH 5: Concealed carry reciprocity would NOT override existing state and local gun laws governing where people can carry.
You can see this myth in action in this GunsAmerica article that claims: “It’s important to note that the Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2017 does not tell the states that they have to adopt a certain concealed-carry issuing standard. In other words, the states retain the authority to determine the regulations and process for one to carry in public.”

And the “bust?”

The House version of concealed carry reciprocity would override a host of state and local laws that currently prohibit permit holders from carrying guns in places like bars, daycare centers, places of worship, athletic events, and near polling places. These laws allow private property Anowners to prohibit guns on their property, and enable law enforcement to anticipate where they are most and least likely to encounter armed individuals.

And that “anticipation” – how well is that working for “law-enforcement” and crime victims?

  • In Florida and many other states, a concealed handgun license doesn’t authorize the license holder to carry a concealed handgun into a bar.

Which was why Omar Matteen had to use a potato peeler to kill 53 at the Pulse nightclub.

  • Administrative regulations in Indiana prohibit the carrying of guns in certain casinos and childcare centers.

Regulations the same as the one that protected the kids at Columbine, Red Lake and the Newgate school, didn’t they?

  • Louisiana prohibits the carrying of concealed handguns in churches, synagogues, mosques, and other places of worship, unless special requirements are met.

Which is why nobody was killed by guns in Sutherland Springs (a “gun free zone” under Texas law).

Again – they know they’re speaking to an audience that doesn’t pay attention; to paraphrase Drew Carey, the facts don’t matter.

Part seven is approaching inexorably!

 

Lie First, Lie Always: We Disagree, But We Won’t Tell You Why

This is part 5 of a seven-series tearing apart an article , Busted!  7 Myths About Concealed Carry, Debunked.linked by  linked by specacularly ill-informed DFL House candidate Sara Freeman – who deleted a couple of honest, civil and pointed comments from a post on her campaign’s Facebook page in which she linked to an article from a group called “Resist the Gun Lobby”, entitled (deep breath):

It should come as no surprise that on many of these points, the article doesn’t even try to answer the “Myth” they’re claiming to “bust”:

MYTH 4: Concealed carry permit holders who are lawfully able to carry in their state are often considered “accidental criminals” just because they are traveling to another state with a concealed firearm.

In an article for USA Carry, Ben Findlay wrote, “You probably recall the law-abiding Pennsylvania woman with a valid concealed carry license there who was arrested after driving into New Jersey. She was pulled over for a minor traffic violation and happened to casually mention her .38 caliber revolver concealed in her purse and proudly showed her Pennsylvania permit. She was arrested and faced felony charges and a prison term because she was unaware that it was illegal to carry her handgun in New Jersey, while legal in Pennsylvania. 

The case they’re referrring to is that of Shaneen Allen, a black woman who was arrested in Jersey, not for breaking a meaningful law, but for telling the Jersey State Police she was legally carrying her firearm.  New Jersey, being neo-fascist on guns, takes a passive aggressive approach when it comes to disarming negroes.  Does it work?  Compare crime in Philadelphia and Camden and get back to me.

Does it work?  Philadelphia’s murder rate is an ugly 17.7/100,000 (about double Minneapolis’ rate, and about four times the national average).  Camden’s is double that, and is one of the most dangerous cities in America.

And the so-called “bust”:

Currently, each state decides whether it will recognize concealed carry permits issued by other states. Through reciprocity agreements, states ensure that permit holders from one state can travel to another state with a loaded, concealed firearm without endangering public safety.

Well, no.  More usually – as in Minnesota’s case – reciprocity agreements allow states controlled by crminal-safety advocates to passive-aggressively curtail the rights of visitors.

Part six up next!

 

Lie First, Lie Always: Billions Of Murders, Tens Of Billions Of Acts Of Domestic Violence!

This is part 4 of a seven-series tearing apart an article , Busted!  7 Myths About Concealed Carry, Debunked.linked by  linked by specacularly ill-informed DFL House candidate Sara Freeman – who deleted a couple of honest, civil and pointed comments from a post on her campaign’s Facebook page in which she linked to an article from a group called “Resist the Gun Lobby”, entitled (deep breath):

The next myth proves, yet again, that the writers think their readers are dumber than they think their targets are:

MYTH 3: Laws that make it easier for people to carry concealed guns will reduce crime. Every year, millions of gun owners and concealed carry permit holders use firearms defensively, thwarting crime and attackers.

And the provenance of the article’s claim about the, er, claim?

In this piece from Breitbart, Second Amendment columnist Awr Hawkins writes, “It is interesting to note that the murder rate dropped by 14 percent while concealed carry permits surged. And “the overall violent crime rate” dropped by 21 percent. This is not what the left tells us will happen if concealed carry expands.”

Awr Hawkins?
Who?
In Breitbart?
Not exactly where anyone goes for the latest facts on the subject.
But the so-called “bust?”

There is no credible statistical evidence that shows that weak concealed carry laws reduce crime.

Again, strawman.
There is plenty of evidence that upholding the citizen’s right to self-defense does, in fact, lower crime rates. John Lott, for starters, who after 20 years stands unrefuted. The rules interfering with that right may or may not be relevant, but crime drops.

Part five is on the way!

Lie First, Lie Always: Billions Of Murders, Tens Of Billions Of Acts Of Domestic Violence!

This is part 3 of a seven-series tearing apart an article , Busted!  7 Myths About Concealed Carry, Debunked.linked by  linked by specacularly ill-informed DFL House candidate Sara Freeman – who deleted a couple of honest, civil and pointed comments from a post on her campaign’s Facebook page in which she linked to an article from a group called “Resist the Gun Lobby”, entitled (deep breath):

Billions Of Murders, Tens Of Billions Of Acts Of Domestic Violence!:   The next myth proves, yet again, that the writers think their readers are dumber than they think their targets are:

MYTH 3: Laws that make it easier for people to carry concealed guns will reduce crime. Every year, millions of gun owners and concealed carry permit holders use firearms defensively, thwarting crime and attackers.

And the provenance of the article’s claim about the, er, claim?

In this piece from Breitbart, Second Amendment columnist Awr Hawkins writes, “It is interesting to note that the murder rate dropped by 14 percent while concealed carry permits surged. And “the overall violent crime rate” dropped by 21 percent. This is not what the left tells us will happen if concealed carry expands.”

Awr Hawkins?

Who?

In Breitbart?

Not exactly where anyone goes for the latest facts on the subject.

But the so-called “bust?”

There is no credible statistical evidence that shows that weak concealed carry laws reduce crime.

Again, strawman.

There is plenty of evidence that upholding the citizen’s right to self-defense does, in fact, lower crime rates.  John Lott, for starters, who after 20 years stands unrefuted.  The rules interfering with that right may or may not be relevant, but crime drops.

 

Part 4 coming up.

Lie First, Lie Always: A Good Guy With A Gun Vs. A Dumb Person With A Computer

This is part 2 of a seven-series tearing apart an article , Busted!  7 Myths About Concealed Carry, Debunked.linked by  linked by specacularly ill-informed DFL House candidate Sara Freeman – who deleted a couple of honest, civil and pointed comments from a post on her campaign’s Facebook page in which she linked to an article from a group called “Resist the Gun Lobby”, entitled (deep breath):

Up next, they try to prove that 2+2=Blue:

MYTH 2: People with concealed carry permits are law-abiding and highly trained.

We noticed this myth get picked up in an editorial published by the Richmond-Times Dispatch, in which the editorial board writes, “As a group, persons with permits to carry concealed firearms are far less likely to commit a crime than the general public.”

And it’s true; people with carry permits are a couple of orders of magnitude safer than the general public, which we showed even using stats cherrypicked by a gun grabber “Think Tank”:  the comparison is even starker today, as the number of legal carriers has skyrocketed and the crime rate has plummeted.

But wait – that’s not the point they want to attack!

While many states require concealed carry permit applicants to demonstrate that they have received firearm safety training, the gun lobby has worked aggressively in state capitols to weaken or eliminate training requirements for permit holders.

I’ve observed in this space many times (many enough to label an entire series “Lie First, Lie Always” – gun grabbers believe they can say any bilge they want.

There is no link whatsoever between “uniform training” and safety.  None!

The entire “bust” is a deflection aimed at people not smart enough to know  better.

 

Part 3 up next.

Lie First, Lie Always: Slopping The Gun-Grabber Trough With Intellectual Sileage

Last week, we called out a piece of moral and intellectual cowardice by DFL House candidate Sara Freeman – who deleted a couple of honest, civil and pointed comments from a post on her campaign’s Facebook page in which she linked to an article from a group called “Resist the Gun Lobby”, entitled (deep breath):  Busted!  7 Myths About Concealed Carry, Debunked.

Now, any article that starts with the word “Busted” can be safely assumed to be, well, baked wind.  But every once in a while, it’s good to go through and prove it, if only to show the deepening intellectual depravity of the anti-civil rights movement.

So I read it.

And was I right?

What do you think?

This is the first of a seven part series, covering each of the “Myths” in the article to which Freeman was ill-informed enough to ink.

Faithless And Uncreditable:  First, RTGL goes after the “Faith and Credit” aspects of the proposal:

MYTH 1: Concealed carry reciprocity will make it easy for people to travel with their permits nationwide, similar to how driver’s licenses work.
This myth can be spotted in an op-ed published in the San Diego Union Tribune, in which the author stated: “The concept of reciprocity makes a lot of sense and has worked well in other areas. For example, even though each state controls the issuance of driver’s licenses, all states honor driver’s licenses from each of the other states.”

And the so-called “Bust”?:

Unlike concealed carry permits, driver’s licenses are standard, verifiable documents that meet almost the same criteria in every state. In fact, in order to be recognized by federal agencies, driver’s licenses must meet federal criteria established by the REAL ID Act that contain physical security features including a photo of its holder and uniform data such as identity, date of birth, principal residence address, etc.

A look at the headlines about REAL ID will tell you RTGL’s confidence is a little misplaced.  But they missed the big point:

Concealed carry permits, on the other hand, do not contain uniform information or standard security features…In order to verify the authenticity and validity of a permit, law enforcement would have to contact the issuing agency in the permit holder’s state because no national database — and sometimes no statewide database — containing concealed carry permit information exists.

What the do contain, universally, is the fact that the bearer has passed a background check; that, alone, makes them several orders of magnitude safer than the average citizen.

And that – not a bunch of anal-retentive bureaucratic noodling – is supposed to be the point.

 

Part II coming up soon.

Zero Sum Freedom

Honolulu orders gun owners with medical marijuana prescriptions to turn in their guns:

Gun-owning cannabis patients in Honolulu, Hawaii, aren’t feeling like they’re living in paradise right about now. After all, many recently got a letter from the Honolulu Police Department demanding they either transfer their firearms or turn them over to law enforcement.

“The Honolulu Police Department has sent letters to local medical marijuana patients ordering them to “voluntarily surrender” their firearms because of their MMJ status.

The letters, signed by Honolulu Police Chief Susan Ballard, inform patients that they have 30 days upon receipt of the letter to transfer ownership or turn in their firearms and ammunition to the Honolulu Police.”

Honolulu being a one-party town, what do you think is going to happen?

Oh, yeah – the Feds are saying the same thing.

One Nation, Divided By Logic

Joe Doakes from Como Park emails:

Trump administration deletes 500,000 people from the background check registry.  Gun controllers are frantic.

Federal law prohibits gun sales to a “fugitive from justice” but what, exactly, does that mean?  ATF said it meant somebody who crossed state lines to avoid prosecution.  Massachusetts said it meant anybody with an outstanding warrant, even if it’s for missing a court date over a traffic ticket, so they sent 430,000 names to the database.  Trump went with the ATF definition covering a smaller group.

This is the best line in the article:

“I would imagine 99 percent of Americans don’t want people who have a warrant out on them to be able to buy a gun,” Chipman said. “I can’t believe there is a constituency for wanted people. Wanted people are particularly dangerous. They’ve already proven that they’ll break the law.”

Really?  You want to use that logic?  Okay, let’s talk about illegal immigration and why we ought to round up every single one to ship them back.

Joe Doakes

No, they don’t want to apply the logic.  They want to gull the gullible.

This Is The Profile In Courage That Could Be Your New Representative In 61B

Sarah Freeman is a DFLer running in House District 61B.

And she’s pretty much going to be a puppet of Michael Bloomberg.  And not “puppet” in the cool sense, like “Lambchop” or “Kukla and Ollie”.

No.   The other kind:

In response, two women posted comments.  I thought both womens’ comments were respectful and valid, but saying so would be called “Mansplaining”, so I’ll let you all be the judge:

Now, I happen to know both of these women; Sarah is, in addition to being a shooter, also a left-leaning DFLer on every other issue imaginable (also a friend of mine, as is Lisa).

But both comments were deleted, and both women blocked from Freeman’s site, in a matter of minutes.

Two of these people are gun grabbers. The “group” is another gun grabber.

Which is, of course, of a piece with the contagion of cowardice that seems to be befalling DFL pols lately; not only do they eradicate all hint of dissent from their social media, in many cases they proactively block all conservative commenters, using commercial and non-profit social media control apps, before any interaction takes place (koff koff Tina Liehling koff gutless koff koff).

Oh, other interactions âre perfectly welcome.

Now, it’s a campaign site.  Someone running, even in this stiflilngly “progressive” Minneapolis district (currently “represented” by Paul Thissen) has every right to control the conversation on their campaign website and social media.   It’s legitimate.  Gutless, but legitimate.

The problem is, many elected DFL pols actively stifle inconvenient questions on social media; my favorite example, naturally, was two years ago, when I broke the story of Alondra Cano using constituents’ private information from the City of Minneapolis website  to try to “shame” people who questioned her use of her office to support Black Lives Matter’s attempt to shut down the Mall of Amarica.   When I respectfully but pointedly brought it up on social media and on this blog, Cano blocked me.

It is, of course, because Cano is not only a coward, she is fundamentally anti-Democratic.  She is an intellectual jackboot.

And it appears Ms. Freeman is cut from the same hobnailed material.

Oh, yeah – the article she links to?  We’ll dispose of that tomorrow or Monday.  Easily, and with contemptuous prejudice.

 

Freedom Friday

The record number of background checks received by the National Instant Check System indicate – the second record in a row set on Black Friday – indicate enough firearms were sold in one day to outfit every single active duty Marine:

According to the FBI, over 200,000 background check requests associated with the purchase of a firearm were submitted to the agency on Black Friday, marking a new single-day record. The previous record was set on the day after Thanksgiving in 2016. In both 2017 and 2016, enough guns were potentially purchased on Black Friday to arm every active duty Marine.

Or, to put it another way, to outfit every single active duty service member in the Norwegian Army, Navy and Air Force ten times over.

Words fail me; I shall turn to music:

 

Politics Of Convenience

Chris Coleman – Saint Paul’s utterly undistinguished three-term DFL placeholder mayor for the past 12 years, and yet again a DFL candidate for Governor – released his gun control agenda.

That it’s a monument to DFL Metrocrat entitled ignorance should come as no surprise.

But there’s a dose of the kind of hypocrisy you only find in a one-party city thrown in as well.

Ignorance Is Chris:  The first point makes sense – if you know nothing about the issue.

Requiring background checks on every gun purchased or transferred in Minnesota. There should not be different safety rules for online gun purchases vs. in-store gun purchases.

You already need to get a background check – in stores, or at a federally license dealer if you buy online.

Either Coleman is aiming for the hysteric vote, or he’s being advised by the terminally ignorant, or – and my money’s on this – both.

They Blinded Him With Pseudo-Science:  Next, a bow to the DFLers who think they love them some science because Neil DeGrasse Tyson:

Allowing scientists to do their jobs by rolling back gun lobby restrictions on studying gun violence as a public health issue. We must invest in the Minnesota Department of Health and give researchers the tools they need to help address the epidemic of gun violence.

The notion that crime is a public health issue is balderdash, postulated by that rare breed of “scientists” who start with their conclusion before the actual experiment.  Government is right to withhold funding from this non-scientific “science”.

Guilty Until Proven Guilty:  This next one almost sounds like it makes sense:

Implementing a Gun Violence Protective Order (GVPO) law to create a legal path for family and household members, and law enforcement, to temporarily remove guns and prevent new gun purchases by those who pose a risk to themselves or others.

Sounds like a good idea, especially in the wake of last week’s shooting in California.

But be careful; if this proposal skirts judicial due process, then it’s a camel’s nose under the tent.  Before long, it’ll turn into the terror watch list – any government bureaucrat will be able to put your name into the database over some of the most abstract possible definitions of “risk”.

Among Friends:  But number four?  That’s the funny one:

Requiring mandatory reporting of all lost or stolen guns because we know the sooner law enforcement can identify and recover missing firearms, the more likely we are to keep dangerous people and criminals from perpetrating gun-related crimes. States with mandatory reporting laws report 33% fewer gun-related crimes than states without these regulations.

Does that include buddies of the Mayor?

Like Melvin Carter, who had two guns stolen from his house, but never bothered to report them?  And then went on to become the next mayor of Saint Paul, in part with Mayor Coleman’s endorsement?

Catch And Release

Twenty-odd years ago, when Minnesota and the nation were in the midst of the worst wave of violent crime since the Depression, quite a few jurisdictions – working with groups like the NRA – actually did something useful; they passed a raft of laws enhancing the penalties for using a gun in a crime.

The laws have had an effect; they are certainly part of the reason violent and gun crime dropped 50% in 20 years.

But in Minnesota, we have a congenital problem; our metro area legislators, courts and other jurisdictions just don’t like sentencing people.   It was said that three consecutive Ramsey County attorneys – Tom Foley, Sue Gaertner and John Choi – between them never once actually used those sentence enhancements, dealing them away on plea bargains every single time they had the opportunity.

And the pattern continues,

Earlier this year, we featured the story of a Good Guy with a Gun – an employee at a cell phone store who shot a robber with his permitted handgun.   The robber – once he got out of the hospitals – drew a raft of charges.   His accomplice should have as well.

Earlier this week, what do you suppose happened?

Charges have been dropped against a 32-year-old man who was a suspect in connection to an armed robbery at a Verizon Wireless retailer in Inver Grove Heights, according to court records.

Records show Jamaal Marquie had three charges dropped, including aggravated first-degree robbery, possession of a firearm by an ineligible person and possession of a firearm with a serial number removed.

Nothing new here; we’ve previously encountered metro-area prosecutors bending over backwards to avoid using enhanced gun sentencing.

Is it laziness?  Sloth?  Or not wanting to confirm the NRA’s line for it?

Open Letter To The Law-Enforcement/Media Complex

To:  The Mainstream Media, and the cops and prosecutors who are your sources
From:  Mitch Berg, obstreporous peasant
Re:  World’s Smallest Violin

Dear Cops, Prosecutors and their Media mouthpieces,

Last week, a shooter at a WalMart in the Denver area killed three people.

Colorado being a shall-issue state, and WalMart being an almost-stereotypical hangout for Real Americans [1], a number of people reacted admirably, courageously and appropriately, by drawing their legal firearms and getting ready to engage.

And that just annoys all of you, doesn’t it?

But those who drew weapons during the shootings ultimately delayed the investigation as authorities pored over surveillance videotape trying to identify the assailant who killed three people, police said Thursday.

Let me put this as delicately as it deserves to be put;  f**k you, and your whining about being forced to do your jobs because people had the unmitigated gall to defend themselves.  And the media for carrying this whining as if it’s news.

If someone hears shooting in the room they’re in, and their first thought is “I hope my actions don’t impede the police investigating why I am dead”, rather than defending your life, your family and your community (whether by fight or flight, and I’ll never judge either one), then they are mentally ill; if you think that should be the normal response, then you’re a lot worse.

I used to wonder why the news media and officialdom wondered why people these days trust them less than used car dealers.  Now, I curse their gall for wasting my time asking why they wonder.

[1] Defined, in this case, as “people who take all ten amendments of the Bill of Rights seriously, jointly and severally.

Reporters

Joe Doakes from Como Park emails:

Texas church shooter was an escaped mental patient so he was ineligible to buy a gun.  Really?  One reporter writes the story, every news outlet repeats it using exactly the same words: “Involuntary commitment to a mental institution would have been grounds to deny him . . . .”  Yes, it would have been, if that’s what had happened.  Was it?

Here’s the federal form to buy a gun.  Question 11f is the relevant question.  The instructions on the following page make clear that visiting a mental health institution, or working in one, or having a relative in one, or even being held in one pending trial, is NOT a disqualifying event.  There must be an adjudication by a court that a person suffers from mental illness and is a danger to himself or others.  “Adjudication” means a hearing before a judge with an opportunity to present witnesses in your own defense – a competency hearing.  At this point, I see no evidence that happened to this guy.

Reporters breathlessly scooping each other; commentators expounding upon the implications of false premises; politicians waving the bloody shirt as provocation; and not one of them actually knows what they’re talking about.  No wonder our national conversation on such a serious topic is indistinguishable from white noise.

Joe Doakes

And half the electorate thinks that the media is putting out intelligent, balanced “journalism”.

It’s pathetic.

Another Gun-Free Zone, Another Mass Shooting, And A Couple Good Guys With Guns

First things first:  Berg’s 18th Law is still in full effect;  it’s been mere hours since a man murdered 27 people at Sutherland Springs Baptist Church, near San Antonio; anything you read in the media will be crap.

One thing we do know?  Churches in Texas are “gun free zones”.  Nobody in that church was legally authorized to carry a firearm to defend themselves or their fellow parishioners.

Like nearly all mass shootings, it took place in a “gun free zone”.

Just like David Lillehaug and Nancy Nord Bence like it.

You post your property “no guns allowed?”  I’m not going there.  I’m not spending money, I’m not worshipping, I’m not saying “boo”.  I will consider them a threat to my safety.

No exceptions.

But Wait:  What’s this that the mainstream media is pretty roundly ignoring about the attack?  The shooter was himself shot by…

…an armed citizen:

Stephen Willeford managed to shoot Devin Kelley before jumping in another man’s truck and chasing him down, the Daily Mail reported.

Texas Department of Public Safety chief Freeman Martin said Willeford “grabbed his rifle and engaged the suspect” after Kelley left the First Baptist Church in Sutherland Springs, where he opened fire with an assault rifle and killed 26 people.

And just as law enforcement teaches about mass shootings these days – if you show a mass shooter any resistance, they usually break off the attack, and either give up or kill themselves.

Kelley did both:

The man who killed at least 26 people in a Baptist church in a rural Texas town on Sunday died of a self-inflicted gunshot wound, Wilson County Sheriff Joe Tackitt told CBS News in an interview on Monday morning.

Tackitt said gunfire was exchanged between the gunman and two armed citizens during a vehicle chase after the shootings.

The church was a gun-free zone – naturally.   But the rest of Texas was not.

UPDATE 2:  The USAF apparently neglected to report Kelley’s domestic conviction to the NICS – allowing him to buy the guns he used.

Open Letter To Melvin Carter

To:  Melvin Carter, DFL Candidate for Mayor of Saint Paul
From:  Mitch Berg, irascible peasant
Re:  Gandered

Councilman Carter

I’m Mitch Berg.  I’m one of Saint Paul’s tiny film of conservatives, so you’ve never had the faintest hint of a reason to pay attention to me, and you likely never will.  And it – like everything about Saint Paul’s governance – shows.

But I come today not to bury you, but to show you some common ground.

Councilman Carter, you may be a politician, but otherwise you are by all accounts a law-abiding citizen.    There’s no indication you don’t follow the rules [1].

And yet here you are, getting smeared by the police union (an integral part of the Metro DFL establishment) that you are also a loyal, elected part of) for things that are not you fault, that you’re not responsible for, and that you have nothing to do with [2], *even as* the person who allegedly burgled your house – the bad guy, here – slides anonymously and without ceremony toward his eventual, inevitable catch-and-release date.

In other words, Melvin Carter, yoiu on the business end of the same collective smear Big Left dishes out to *all* law-abiding gun owners; blaming the law-abiding for the actions of the criminal;  burdening the law-abiding but ignoring the criminal.

(“But wait!  It’s not bigotry against gun owners!  It’s racism!”, someone will say.  Why choose? It’s both; the roots of gun control are intensely racist).

Welcome to the party, Councilman Carter.  Perhaps you might want to rethink your party’s assumptions about the rest of us?  [3]

Mitch Berg
The Midway

[1] Including the laws and rules about securing the guns;   the law is about safeguarding kids, not burglarproofing your collection; a trigger lock or locked gun box is ample to meet the law’s requirements.  If the law required us to make every potential danger in our houses theft-proof, we’d all live in fortresses, and we’d all *still* be criminals one way or another.

[2] Other than, of course, the culplability he shares with this city’s current government, ruling party and political class of which he’s a part, of course.

[3] Speaking conceptually, here.  I don’t own guns.  They terrify me.