Women And Guns

Gun control in America, since pre-Revolutionary times but not letting off in the least over the past 50 years, is largely about disarming African-Americans.  Because while #BlackLivesMatter, our powerstructure doesn’t think they “matter” enough to give them the means to defend themselves like any other citizen.

But I digress.

Along with ethnic and social minorities, the left is intensely skeevy about the idea of women with firearms.  Because as everyone knows, nothing “empowers” women like being completely dependent on external parties like the police to defend womens’ lives and safety.

And it shows in this piece from Rochester’s KTTC TV from last week, about the number of women getting carry permits in southeastern Minnesota.

The report, by reporter Devin Bartolotta, starts:

More Minnesotans are packing heat…

Scraaaaaaaaatch

What?

“Packing Heat?”

(facepalm)

WHY IN THE FLAMING HOOTIE-HOO DOES THE REPORT HAVE TO RELY ON THE DIMMEST, DUMBEST CLICHÉ IN THE ENTIRE AMERICAN MEDIA?

We’re four words into the story, and already KTTC can’t help but resort the Mike Hammer/Mickey Spillane-vintage honker “packing heat” to refer to “carrying a firearm”?

I’m sorry.  It’s completely thrown off my approach, here.

I’ll try again over the noon hour.

http://m.kttc.com/w/main/story/125765940/

The Media And The Screamingly Obvious

On Monday, 68 year old Raymond Kmetz walked into the New Hope City Hall with a shotgun, shooting and wounding two police before other police killed him.

And the Pioneer Press, in relating official Minnesota’s confusion as to how Mr. Kmetz got his gun, revealed a number of truths about the gun issue (for the multi-millionth time) that, for some, could be a teaching moment, if they’re smart enough to be taught.

The man who brought a pistol-grip shotgun to New Hope City Hall on Monday night and started firing at police officers before being gunned down was not legally allowed to have a firearm, authorities said Wednesday.

Wait – so now the media is telling us that people who aren’t supposed to have guns…can get them?

Someone with a long history of mental illness, who had been incarcerated twice for making terroristic threats, subject to numerous restraining orders, and whose possession of a shotgun was a federal felony, was able to find a gun?

The next thing you know, they’ll be telling us that people with felony records can get them!

What next?  Juveniles with gang affiliations?

The answer, obviously, is to disarm the sane and the law-abiding.

Surprise, Surprise

Who predicted this?

Oh, yeah – all the good guys.

Since Illinois started granting concealed carry permits this year, the number of robberies that have led to arrests in Chicago has declined 20 percent from last year, according to police department statistics. Reports of burglary and motor vehicle theft are down 20 percent and 26 percent, respectively. In the first quarter, the city’s homicide rate was at a 56-year low.

“It isn’t any coincidence crime rates started to go down when concealed carry was permitted. Just the idea that the criminals don’t know who’s armed and who isn’t has a deterrence effect,” said Richard Pearson, executive director of the Illinois State Rifle Association. “The police department hasn’t changed a single tactic — they haven’t announced a shift in policy or of course — and yet you have these incredible numbers.”

As you were.

Good Guys 1: Idiot 0

One of the most important things you learn in Minnesota carry permit training is that having that permit doesn’t make you a junior lawman. Find me a legal carry permit holder who believes that their permit entitles them to wade into disputes, gun drawn, like Dwight Schrute, and I’ll show you someone who should probably have their permit re-examined.

But it’s hard to find those examples – because carry permit holders almost never do anything quite that stupid. Are there examples? I’m sure there are, somewhere – there are likely several million carry permitees nationwide, and in a group that large, you’re going to have someone who screws up, sometime. I just can’t think of any recent examples right now. I doubt you can either.

Now, if you follow any of the “Gun Grabber” chat rooms and Facebook pages you’ll find all sorts of bellicose talk from anti civil rights people; claims that they’ll raise a commotion if they see someone with a permitted firearm, or even make up crimes and call the police.

Few of them (outside the media) have done anything about it so far.

Until this week, anyway:

.According to the sheriff’s office, Michael Foster, 43, saw Clarence Daniels, 62, in the Walmart parking lot with a gun holstered under his coat.

Foster followed Daniels into the store, put him in a choke-hold and brought him to the ground, the sheriff’s office said. He then started yelling that Daniels had a gun.

Mr. Foster is being charged with battery. I hope Mr. Daniels presses charges with vigor and glee.

Further proof, really, the biggest danger involved with the law-abiding carry of firearms is the ninnies who oppose it.

UPDATE:  Oh, yeah – there’s a racial angle.  The attacker was a white guy.  The innocent carrier, black.

Racist.  Just like every single gun control law.

Let’s Get Ready To Lobbbyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy!

Next Monday – January 26 – will be the first annual MInnesota Gun Owners Lobby Day (MNGOLD).

It’ll start with a rally in front of the Capitol.

After that, we – you, me, all of us – will do something that normally only highly-paid union stooges get to do; lobby the legislature. We’ll go inside, and politely, fairly and civilly meet with every single legislator, and let them know face to face that we’re watching, and that we vote.

Arrange your time off now! I am!

More details from the Gun Owners Civil Rights Alliance (Web, Facebook, Twitter) and the MN Gun Owners Political Action Committee (Web, Facebook, Twitter).

Discredited

Joe Doakes from Como Park emails:

Star Tribune finally deigns to report that Department of Public Safety altered the Application to Carry a Pistol form, to include more than a dozen illegal questions. Heather Martens is fine with that.
Heather Martens . . . said some of the questions on the form reveal information that may not turn up in a background check. Further, she said, where 80 percent of the state’s gun deaths are by suicide, even the simplest questions may get honest answers. “I could say that some of those questions are very important questions, and there’s no downside to asking them,” she said. “I wish they asked everybody who is buying a gun, ‘Are you planning on killing somebody with this?’ and a certain number of people are going to say yes. That’s just the way it is

First, it’s not 80%, it’s less than 70%. Still tragic, but let’s be honest about the numbers.

Second, the percentage doesn’t matter; the questions weren’t asked on an Application to Commit Suicide. Suicides don’t get permits.
Third, as Rep. Tony Cornish pointed out, the questions are irrelevant because only information law enforcement needs is exactly what turns up in a background check.

Fourth, notice the smooth slide away from the subject at hand – Permit to Carry – over to her pet peeve – Permit to Purchase. Too bad the reporter doesn’t have a clue about gun rights, so she doesn’t notice she’s being lied to by misdirection.

Joe Doakes

Dear reporters here in Minnesota; why do you keep going to Heather Martens for information on firearms issues?

If you had a source in any other area who always give you false information, and always made your reporting wrong, would you keep going back to them?

There really isn’t any excuse for this, anymore.

The Bad News

Minnesota human rights advocates got the Department of Public Safety to roll back a series of intrusive and, I suspect, illegal questions on the Minnesota carry permit application form yesterday.

That’s all to the good – as I noted below.

Now, let’s talk about reporting.

Channel 5′s Beth McDonough reported the story.  You can go to the link to watch it; the fella in the maroon shirt is not “Corey Bowman”, but in fact Andrew Rothman, president of the Gun Owners Civil Rights Alliance.  Editing glitches happen.

But what I’m going to do is emphasize all of the elements in the online story that are prejudicial, signs of bias, or lead to much bigger questions – or would, if we had a news media that was interested in asking big questions of government, which we largely do not.

I’ll add emphasis to the parts of the story with the problems:

The way you apply for a permit to carry a gun in Minnesota is back to the way it was.

It’s all because of 18 questions on a new application. Some argue it asks for too much information.

Like a lot of Minnesotans Corey Bowman owns a gun, “being a hunter and avid outdoorsman.”

Helping to give Minnesota a reputation as the land of 100,000 guns. [1] In fact, 165,000 people have permits to carry, according to state records—the most ever in Minnesota.

To get a permit to carry, you have to fill out an application, one standard form. But before Tuesday, that application contained 18 fewer questions. Some of those include: whether you’ve been in treatment for substance abuse, fled the state to avoid prosecution or if you’ve been convicted of a crime as a juvenile.

Those questions lasted less than 36 hours online, because of backlash from gun rights enthusiasts.  [2]

“At worst, it’s creating dozens of additional opportunities for somebody to make an accidental mistake that results in the denial of their permit application or even criminal charges,” according to Andrew Rothman with the Gun Owners Civil Rights Alliance.

The now-former application said the information was required, leaving the impression the permit couldn’t be processed without all the questions answered. And that’s okay with Corey Bowman.   [3]

These are the kind of questions that would pick out the people that don’t need to have the firearms,”  [4] Bowman said.

The Department of Public Safety told us it updated the permit to carry form to reflect changes made by lawmakers in 2014.   [5]

So let’s go through them one by one:

  1. Nobody has ever called Minnesota anything of the sort.  For starters, there are at least 2.5 million guns in Minnesota.  I get it – reporters like their snappy quips.  But please.
  2. Was Martin Luther King a “civil rights enthusiast?”  Are the people who are protesting police brutality “civil liberties enthusiasts?”  Were the Occupy Minneapolis people “rape and filth enthusiasts?”  No.  Someone who tinkers with model airplanes in his spare time is an “enthusiast”; people who fight for civil rights are “activists”.  Unless, apparently, it’s the Second Amendment.
  3. Well, that’s great.  Who the hell is Corey Bowman?  I’m sure he’s a fine person and al, but why is Corey Bowman’s opinion important to us?  He’s an authority on carry permit law because he’s a hunter?
  4. No.  The permits are issued or denied based on information that is available to police for the asking; criminal and court records and things in that weight class.  This was nothing but a petulant attempt to try to trip people up.
  5. What changes in the law?  Other than the domestic abuse law – which affected permits after they were issued, and for which the information needed to deny permits is already automatically available to the police – there were no changes in the law in the 2014 session that anyone I know can think of.

More on this, hopefully, tomorrow.

The Good News

The state Department of Public Safety, operating outside the bounds set by the Legislature, added a series of additional questions to the online (and at some point, one presumes, print) Minnesota carry permit application form.

Some of those include: whether you’ve been in treatment for substance abuse, fled the state to avoid prosecution or if you’ve been convicted of a crime as a juvenile.

The backlash from Minnesota gun owners got those changes removed in a day and a half.

The Minnesota Republican Party could learn a lot from Minnesota’s Second Amendment human rights activists.

Sure, there’s bad news.  Or should I say, Bad News.

Back at noon with that.

Pick Your Battles

In the days since the Paris Charlie Hebdo and Jewish Deli massacres, it’s become fashionable in media circles to say, in one language or another, “I Am Charlie Hebdo”.

I’m not.

The French paper was sort of like the American satirical institution South Park – with an unhealthy dose of that traditional drug of the European idle elite, mindless and often nihilistic pseudointellectualism.   And among that class’ fatal conceits in the days since the massacre is the idea that free speech will win out over terror.

It’s BS, of course:

Freedom and individual liberty can, and must, win over terror; “The pen is mightier than the sword” could only have been written by someone who never had to bet his life, and certainly not his family’s lives, on it.

Against civil, political opponents, speech is fine; against those who’d kill you, our freedoms need a more aggressive, tangible defense.

But Charlie Hebdo was not the criminals; the terrorists were.

Along with big media outlets like the AP and the NYTimes, I’ve been asked why I don’t run Charlie Hebdo’s cartoons.  Unlike the AP and the Times, I’m not a hypocrite – I don’t get any particular kick out of offending peaceful, law-abiding members of any faith just because I can.  Most Muslims, especially in America, want nothing to do with violent Shi’ite or Wahhabi extremism; I feel no need to piddle on their faith to stick it to terrorists…

…especially because my “beat” in Minnesota, and we have plenty of thin-skinned personality cultists in this state who don’t take satire well:

Anyway – just as the best defense against bad speech is better, louder, good speech (which this blog and my show are), the best defense against a bad guy with a gun remains…:

…a good guy, or gal, with a gun; uniform optional and, in extremis, not strictly necessary.

Satire is many things; it is not bulletproof.

Turn Out For Freedom!

Two weeks from today – January 26 – will be the first annual MInnesota Gun Owners Lobby Day (MNGOLD).

It’ll start with a rally in front of the Capitol.

After that, we – you, me, all of us – will do something that normally only highly-paid union stooges get to do; lobby the legislature. We’ll go inside, and politely, fairly and civilly meet with every single legislator, and let them know face to face that we’re watching, and that we vote.

Arrange your time off now! I am!

More details from the Gun Owners Civil Rights Alliance (Web, Facebook, Twitter) and the MN Gun Owners Political Action Committee (Web, Facebook, Twitter).

We Are All Charlie – In More Ways Than One

Some say last week’s attack in Paris underscores a change in terrorist tactics – from high-overhead, difficult attacks on “hard” targets (targets that are in some way defended), like the US Embassies in Nairobi and Dar Es Salaam, the USS Cole, and even US airliners on 9/11, to “soft targets” like the Nairobi Mall, schools in Pakistan and Nigeria, tourist hotels and synogogues, and rooms full of recalcitrant journalists in cities where guns are banned in fact or effect.

It’s a trend that intelligence officials say makes the fight against terrorist threats more complex and potentially more disturbing because the kinds of attacks now grabbing global headlines require far less planning and are harder to detect and disrupt.

It’s not a new trend, of course; after 9/11, Al Quada attacked a disco in Bali, buses and trains in London and Madrid, and countless other “soft” targets.  And the PLO was massacring Israeli school children in their kibbutz classrooms and buses (the 1970 Avivim Massacre, the Kiryat Shmona massacre, and the Ma’alot Massacre) over forty years ago.

There are those who say the answer is to give police and intelligence even more power than they already have – which makes sense on the one hand, and pushes us further down the slippery slope toward having no freedom at all, in which case the terrorists will have not only won, but they’ll keep killing people anyway.

The Israeli examples are instructive, of course; after the three heart-wrenching massacres I list above (which killed 42 school children altogether), the Israelis started allowing teachers to carry legally-permitted guns in the classroom.  Over time, that morphed into security guards, which I think is a step back, but the point is they turned “soft targets” into “hard targets”.

In parts of the US, “soft targets” are a little harder; many, many people have made themselves into “harder targets” with their legally-permitted firearms, to the chagrin of not a few murderers (spree killers rather than terrorists, although to the would-be victim, the distinction is secondary).

And Minnesota is one of those places with a fairly enlightened civilian carry permit law.  It could be better – see Arizona, Alaska, Vermont and Wyoming – but it’s gotten better over the past decade.

So Minnesota targets should be just that little bit “harder”, right?

Oh, no.

(Sad trombone).

Back to the drawing board there.

Tickets To The Theatre

Joe Doakes from Como Park emails:

This case explains the Minnesota law on when you can plead self-defense. The burden is on the Defendant to prove facts to the judge before being entitled to argue self-defense to the jury. The judge decides what defense you can present to the jury. You have no Right to plead self-defense.

That’s fine for this guy, he’s an obvious trouble-maker; but what about the next time a White guy shoots a Black yute and Al Sharpton’s mob shows up? Are we going to get even-handed justice or political theatre that denies God-given rights existing long before the Constitution was adopted?

I showed this case to an acquaintance, who said:

“As for the question whether this Defendant had a reasonable belief of personal threat to his well-being: Of course he did. Only White, liberal, former-prosecutors-appointed-judges don’t know that.

In this Defendant’s world, in the cesspool that he swims, the true state of affairs, the reality, the actual fact is that yes, whoever is banging on the door at that time of night is more likely than not armed, and is almost certainly there to do you harm. It’s as true for a Black man living in North Minneapolis as for an Italian in Brooklyn or a Cuban in Miami.

Liberals can’t reconcile this reality with their self-delusion as to the underclass. They believe the Poor are Victims and Victims are Passive, except when they’re erupting in well-deserved riots against Rich White people. The notion that people in the under-class routinely behave worse than people in the middle class is contrary to The Narrative. Liberals prefer their vision of reality to the Defendant’s objective reality and thus deny him a chance to justify his actions.”

I think Minnesota’s law is too strict. If you want to argue self-defense, you ought to be allowed to. The jury can sniff out when it’s a bogus
claim. Preventing Defendants from putting on a defense is bad policy.

Joe Doakes

i’m trying to imagine a group that would push back harder against having their discretion pared back than prosecutors and the police; judges would probably qualify.

But Joe is right. That would’ve been one of the handy benefits of the “Stand Your Ground” law the Governor vetoed a few years back.

Next Week: Make Your Voice Heard!

Just under four weeks from today – January 28 – will be the first annual MInnesota Gun Owners Lobby Day (MNGOLD).

It’ll start with a rally in front of the Capitol.

After that, we – you, me, all of us – will do something that normally only highly-paid union stooges get to do; lobby the legislature.    We’ll go inside, and politely, fairly and civilly meet with every single legislator, and let them know face to face that we’re watching, and that we vote.

Arrange your time off now!  I am!

Open Letter To Bremer Bank

To: Bremer Bank
From: Mitch Berg, Ornwry Peasant
Re: Your Wish Is My Command

Dear Bremer,

Couldn’t help but notice this photo:

IMG_3117.JPG

It’s one of your banks, apparently newly posted with a sign declaring the bank a safe place for criminals.

Oh, I know – what it really says is Bremer Bank doesn’t want people to bring guns into their branch. Of course, all the sign really does is tell the law-abiding gun owner – the ones who will actually obey the signs – that your bank would prefer that we remain disarmed while on your property, notwithstanding the fact that the criminals, being criminals, will not.
Now, I don’t have any money in your bank, and you won’t be losing much by my saying “I never will”.

But we law-abiding shooters talk. And I have a hunch we’re gonna be talking about this sign.

Think about it.

That is all.

When Scheduling For Next Month…

Just under four weeks from today – January 28 – will be the first annual MInnesota Gun Owners Lobby Day (MNGOLD).

It’ll start with a rally in front of the Capitol.

After that, we – you, me, all of us – will do something that normally only highly-paid union stooges get to do; lobby the legislature. We’ll go inside, and politely, fairly and civilly meet with every single legislator, and let them know face to face that we’re watching, and that we vote.

Arrange your time off now! I am!

More details from the Gun Owners Civil Rights Alliance (Web, Facebook, Twitter) and the MN Gun Owners Political Action Committee (Web, Facebook, Twitter).

They Really Never Do Waste A Crisis…

According to Big Gun Control, the reason that the two policemen in New York City – a city that is historically among the most hostile to the law-abiding gun owner, a place that is doing its passive-aggressive best to scupper the spirit of Heller and McDonald, while more or less living up to their letter, a place that still is mired in the stone-age in terms of the attitudes of the political class toward the law-abiding gun owner…

…is that it’s too easy to get guns in New York.

Since the victims were Asian and Latino, I guess they couldn’t blame race…

Selective Disservice

When gun grabbers compare crime rates between the US and Europe, if you ever noticed that they focus entirely on lethal shootings?

There’s a reason for that:

“There are over 2,000 crimes recorded per 100,000 population in the UK, making it the most violent place in Europe. Austria is second, with a rate of 1,677 per 100,000 people, followed by Sweden, Belgium, Finland and Holland. By comparison America has an estimated rate of 466 violent crimes per 100,000.” The Guardian
So hey, Europe, how ’bout you shut the f*** up about gun control?

The left’s duplicity about the real comparison in crime rates between the US and Europe is verging on Berg’s law territory.

Marias

For those of you who thought Stalin had been dead for over sixty years?  His spirit lives on in this video by anti gun zealot whackdoodle Rejina Sincic – which urges kids to steal their parents’ guns and give them to their teachers.

Leave aside the Orwellian appeal to kids to spy on their parents for the “babadthink” of own ing firearms in the home; she’s also asking kids to commit not a few crimes.

In Minnesota, as far as I understand the law, the kid is…:

  • Stealing private property – although their parents might not press charges, it’s pretty much felony larceny; that’s not an inexpensive pistol.
  • A minor carrying a handgun – at least a misdemeanor, depending on the state.
  • Carrying a concealed handgun outside the house without a permit – a misdemeanor or felony, depending on the state.
  • Carrying a handgun onto school property – a big-time felony.
In a more restrictive state?  If the teacher and other staff didn’t react appropriately (call the police without touching the firearm, have the entire school locked down and sealed off until HazMat teams can arrive), they could well be charged with a crime or two, themselves, ignorance of the law notwithstanding.

Am I missing anything?

Ms. Sincic’s Twitter Feed (@QueenSincic) is predictably trite about the issues that, I’m sure, Ms. Sincic doesn’t know she’s raised.

So if you go to Twitter, please, I beg of you – urge Ms. Sincic to appear on the NARN with me on January 4.

Insert Narrative Here

To the more deranged parts of the American left, everything is evidence for their narrative.

For example – whether temperatures rise or fall, it’s all evidence of man-made global warming.

And a couple of New York police get killed by an apparently deranged man angered, according to his social media postings, by the Brown and Garner killings?

Why naturally – it’s the guns’ fault.

No, really – there’s a crisis not to be wasted here, for the Left.  To Big Left, this is yet another chance to warm over gun control.

As if more laws would have saved those two cops.

When Lies Are All You Have

If you’ve been reading this blog’s coverage of Second Amendment issues for any length of time, you’ll note that one of my most air-tight theses is that Minnesota’s gun control movement – not just its leaders, the hapless Heather Martens, the hopeless Joan Peterson and the comical Jane Kay, and its camp followers in the political class like Dakota County attorney Jim Backstrom and Chaska police chief Scott Knight, but the entire movement, from Michael Bloomberg and the Joyce Foundation all the way down - can not seem to make a single substantively true factual statement. 

And the reason for this would seem to be, as a matter of fact,  that they can’t.

Tomorrow: Freedom Needs You

Don’t forget – tomorrow is the Minnesota Gun Rights Seminar and Member Meeting.

It’ll be at the Chaska Community Center starting at 9AM. Come out, hear some great speakers, and find out what the good guys are going to be doing in the coming year.

And most important: become one of the good guys.

For more info, check out the Gun Owners Civil Rights Alliance (Web, Facebook, Twitter)

This Saturday: Help Save Freedom

Don’t forget – this Saturday, December 13 is the Minnesota Gun Rights Seminar and Member Meeting. 

It’ll be at the Chaska Community Center starting at 9AM. Come out, hear some great speakers, and find out what the good guys are going to be doing in the coming year.

And most important:  become one of the good guys.

For more info, check out the Gun Owners Civil Rights Alliance (Web, Facebook, Twitter)

Encouraging News

During the Los Angeles “Rodney King” riots over twenty years ago, one of the most redeemingly hope-inspiring images was that of the city’s Korean shopkeepers took to their streets and rooftops to defend their stores from looters.

At a very difficult time in American history, Americans used their constitutional liberties to keep barbarism at bay.

I’m not an especially emotional person – far from it – but I feel a little swell in my heart when I see the images.  Like the “You can’t take our freedom” speech from Braveheart, the images of the plucky Koreans make me proud to be American – and human.  (Here’s the story, complete with political subtext).

And it was with that in mind that I found this story to be so inspirational:

A group of four black Ferguson residents reportedly armed themselves and descended upon a white-owned business following a grand jury’s decision not to indict police officer Darren Wilson in the fatal shooting of Michael Brown. But unlike many of the Ferguson demonstrators, the armed men were there to protect the business, not destroy it in protest.

The well-regulated militia.

The men told the Las Vegas Review Journal that they feel indebted to the white store owner, Doug Merello, who has given them employment over the years.

The black residents reportedly chased off groups of teenagers who allegedly wanted to loot the store. They also reportedly had a close-call after they were mistaken for looters by soldiers with the Missouri National Guard. One of the men was reportedly handcuffed temporarily until Morello could explain to the soldiers what they were doing at his business.

This is a great and noble thing.

How Can You Tell “Moms Want Action” Is Lying?

Oh, please.  Like I even need to finish the punch line.

But some of you have been under rocks for a while (vide Governor Messinger’s Flint Smith’s Dayton’s re-election).  So for your benefit:

“Their lips are moving, and/or their fingers are typing something”. 

To wit:  Moms Want Action sent out a post-election thank-you to their supporters (and quite a few Real Americans who get their updates as well):

Many thanks to those of you who made hundreds of phone calls in support of Sen Al Franken. His re-election means that both of our US senators are lawmakers who support gun-sense legislation. Gun violence prevention was not a major campaign theme for any federal candidate, [And why do you suppose that is? - Ed.] although a few did mention it. Notably, US. Rep. Betty McCollum’s campaign materials called it out, and state attorney general candidate Andy Dawkins of the Green Party did, too (McCollum won re-election; Dawkins failed to unseat Lori Swanson)

Side note:  Betty McCollum runs in a district that would elect a wheelbarrow full of manure to Congress, if the DFL endorsed it. 

And what Moms Want Action failed to tell you is that while Lori Swanson may be an interventionist, activist who’s continued her predecessor and mentor Mike Hatch’s policies on nattering away at private business, she is one of the better state AGs in the country on gun rights.  So the Moms would be more honest to say that the pro-gun candidate utterly destroyed the only AG candidate who explicitly mentioned support for gun control and the Bloomberg Oompa-Loompas. 

But here’s the big one.  I’m bolding it for emphasis:

All of Everytown’s endorsed candidates in Minnesota won re-election. Yay!

Oh, did they? 

Follow the link to Everytown’s extraordinarily badly-designed site.  Look for “Filter by State”, and select “Minnesota”. 

Scroll down. 

Do you see Will Morgan?   “Moms Want Action”/”Everytown” offered him endorsement; the then-incumbent was arrogant enough to figure he didn’t need the votes of pro-2nd-Amendment Real Americans to win in District 56B. 

And Roz Peterson absolutely brutalized him with an eight point upset win.

So what is it we say, again?

“If a gun-grabber group says it, it’s probably a lie”. 

Pass the word.

The DFL Embraces Evil With A Big French Kiss

The DFL has a long, filthy history of dropping hit pieces in the closing hours of campaigns that would make people who care about petty annoyances like “right and wrong” and ‘truth” puke up their skulls.  Classic example – this piece from 2010, which tried to whip up ingorant anti-Arab sentiment against King Banaian – who happens to be of Armenian descent. 

But the people who do Democrat “Farmer” Labor Party hit pieces don’t bother with right and wrong.  Their ends justify their means.

I cited this piece, dropped against Stacey Stout in House District 43B, on the show over the weekend.  I called it “Evil”. 

It is. 

Here’s the front:
20141116-170204-61324262.jpg

Uh oh.  An abusive guy (are there any other kind in the DFL’s world?  Other than Pajama Boy, I mean?)

And here’s the back:
20141116-170204-61324964.jpg

This ad proves that the DFL is counting on finding a plurality of incurious cretins.  And in 43A, it apparently worked. 

Let’s go through this point by point:

Stout, like most people who don’t see “people with swastika armbands” as a government model to emulate, opposed a DFL proposal to take guns away from people accused, as opposed to convicted, of domestic abuse. 

The “Gun Show Loophole” is a fraud; every gun show I’m aware of requires an NICS background check, and require a police-issued “Permits to Purchase” to buy a gun.  The bill the DFL refers to would have required people to transfer all firearms via a Federal Firearms Licensed dealer.  That means if you’re handing a gun down to your kid, or lending a shotgun to your friend for duck season.  This does nothing but raise the price of firearms (FFLs don’t work for free) and create a paper trail for every gun – the same trail that police departments in Connecticut and New York are trying to use to confiscate firearms. 

As to her opposing a background check for “assault weapons?”  That was a proposal that would have added a second,  utterly redundant background check for buying such weapons. 

Stout made the right call in all three cases – if “following the law and the Constitution” is what you care about, which for the Democrat party it is not. 

Taking those stances, in favor of the law-abiding citizens’ civil liberties, and turning them into “support for rape and domestic abuse?”

If you’re a DFL official, you might want to steer clear of me today. 

And if you voted for Peter Fischer over this ad?   Sorry for all the two-syllable words.