Un-Hogged

A Parkland kid realizes he’s been used:

“My whole message is I was propped up as an expert. The whole message was these kids are the real experts,” [Cameron] Kasky told Fox News Radio’s Benson & Harf on Wednesday. “Look, I have some very intelligent friends. Some friends who can intellectually run circles around me, but I’m not the expert in pretty much anything.”

Survivors of the Parkland shooting received wall-to-wall cable-news coverage in its aftermath. Kasky gained national notoriety after telling Senator Marco Rubio of Florida that looking at him felt like looking “down the barrel of an AR-15,” during a town hall weeks after the shooting. Kasky now claims to regret that interaction and says he hopes to meet with Rubio to apologize.

Kasky is also doing something a lot more adults should:

The 17-year-old now plans to start his own podcast, Cameron Knows Nothing, featuring subject-matter experts as part of his mission to change the way he participates in the public debate surrounding gun control and other politically charged issues.

Not tripling down on one’s ignorance (aka “Hogging”) – if this could become a trend…

 

Overheated

So yesterday, the Feds handed down a yuge win for people who’d make firearms using 3D printers.  A settlement with “radical libertarian” Cody Wilson – who first posted 3D printer files for firearms on his website “defcad.com”, was settled on First and Second Amendment grounds.

And Big Left – in this case, through technology site “Wired” – is having the predictable fit:

“This should alarm everyone,” says Po Murray, chairwoman of Newtown Action Alliance, a Connecticut-focused gun control group created in the wake of the mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in 2013. “We’re passing laws in Connecticut and other states to make sure these weapons of war aren’t getting into the hands of dangerous people. They’re working in the opposite direction.”

When reporters and critics have repeatedly pointed out those potential consequences of Wilson’s work over the last five years, he has argued that he’s not seeking to arm criminals or the insane or to cause the deaths of innocents.

Let’s take a step back for a moment here.

Street criminals don’t have access to 3D printers.  They don’t spend the money for the materials – which are, by the way, still pretty exotic and expensive – to do 3D printer projects.  They don’t have the hobbyist’s drive to do the tinkering that inevitably follows building your own firearm, even from kit parts, much less from parts you “build” yourself using a bleeding-edge technology.  They don’t spend the money on that tinkering (gunsmithing is not a cheap hobby).

The people you need to worry about are the ones who will send their friend or girlfriend or grandma to buy a gun, or steal one of the 400,000,000 that are already out there, in (generally) working order, ready to go.

This reminds me of the “Plastic Gun” controversy 30 years ago, when Glock started marketing polymer-frame guns; “they’ll go through airport security”, Big Gun Control chanted, unaware that the Glock has a barrel, bolt and springs made of enough good ol’-fashioned steel to perhaps even wake up the TSA drone operating the scanner, no matter how hung over they are.

And it reminds me – it’s impossible to have a rational debate about firearms, gun laws, gun crime or the Second Amendment with 99% of the antis – because their entire “knowledge” of the issue comes from erroneous or context-mangled “research”, word-of-mouth gleaned from the ignorant but effusive, dystopian fantasy, and agenda-driven narrative.

 

Why Do Liberals Want Children To Be Murdered (Even After They’re Born)?

Obama’s education secretary urges people to boycott schools “until gun laws are changed”:

Duncan said in an interview Saturday that the idea was intended to be provocative but that an aggressive approach like a school boycott is needed if gun laws are ever going to change. He has school-age children and said if this idea were to gain traction, his family would participate.

“It’s wildly impractical and difficult,” Duncan said. “But I think it’s wildly impractical and difficult that kids are shot when they are sent to school.”

44 kids in five years.  It’s 44 too many, of course.

But kids are safer in school than at home, on the street, at the mall – anywhere.

Former Secretary Duncan – the poor children of liberal parents managed to survive ’til birth without getting killed; why do you keep putting them in danger?

This Is The Minnesota Gun Control Movement

Joe Campbell is a PR flak for an agency that does “work” for “Protect” Minnesota, Minnesota’s ghoulish gun-grab group.

Rob Doar is a friend of this blog, a married father and a guy who works his butt off for civil rights, having spent this past session lobbying, pretty much on his own time for the MN Gun Owners Caucus.  He’s one of the good guys.

This is what Joe Campbell tweeted about Rob:

It’s hard to have a civil debate with people who are garbage.

 

Play Progressive Games, Win Progressive Prizes

Dario Anselmo is the lone Republican representing Edina.

Now, considering the Democrats that run in Edina these days – Anselmo beat Ron Erhardt, after all – it might be fair to say that of the options available, Anselmo passes the Buckley test (the most conservative candidate who can win) under the circumstances.

But as we’ve noted in the past, Anselmo is a prominent turncoat on the gun issue.  He’s one of few Republicans found at Moms Want Action events; the sole gloss of “bipartisanship” in the extreme-left gun control movement.

But if he’d hoped that his accomodationalism would buy him any favor from Big Gun Grab (a wholliy owned subsidiary of Big Left?)

Well, what do you think?

For Anselmo, a bitter lesson was learned this week when, after months of supporting limits to Second Amendment rights in order to curry favor with far left gun control advocates “Moms Demand Action,” his opponent, Heather Edelson, was effectively endorsed. Heather wears pearls; you can’t say she doesn’t know Edina. But this endorsement puts paid to the idea that if Republicans only find the illusory “common ground” with the other side, they will be rewarded for their efforts.

Moms Demand Action is part of “Everytown for Gun Safety,” a radical gun control group largely financed by Michael Bloomberg.

So he danced with the devil, and didn’t even get his thirteen pieces of silver, apparently.

Anselmo was frequently the lone Republican at Moms’ rallies at the State Capitol. This garnered him the approval of Democrats in the media like Lori Sturdevant but at the cost of discouraging his base, for which one could be forgiven in thinking Anselmo believes he doesn’t need.

Having contempt for the people who put you there – even if you don’t really know that – is a bad, bad plan.

Question: wonder if Lori Sturdevant will castigate the Action Moms for their lack of bipartisanship?

Dereliction

Glenn Reynolds on the institutional deflection after Parkland:

Despite receiving a warning directly from the Russian government, the FBI failed to stop the Tsarnaev brothers from staging the Boston Marathon bombing. Despite having plenty of resources, the Charlottesville police failed to stop a car attack that left a woman dead. The FBI interviewed Omar Mateen, the Orlando Pulse nightclub shooter, and considered criminally investigating him. They didn’t — possibly because his father was an FBI informant.

The FBI also missed numerous “red flags” before the San Bernardino shooting. And despite having lots of warning, the FBI, the Broward County schools and the Broward Sheriff’s Department under Sheriff Scott Israel all failed to stop Nikolas Cruz from shooting up a high school.

And yet these repeated failures — among others — keep getting swept under the rug as we look for “solutions” to the problem of violence. No doubt Israel and the others whose incompetence made it possible for Cruz to kill his classmates were relieved to see our national discourse veer into questions of whether Laura Ingraham should lose sponsors for mocking David Hogg’s college-admissions failures, instead of their own failures to do their jobs.

Deflecting to “gun control” certainly takes heat off of the likes of Chicago mayor Rahm Emanuel and the carnage on his watch, and that of his Democrat predecessor Bill “Rifle Up Your Butt” Daley.

Mayors of failed cities do a lot of deflecting, don’t they?

Our Cravenly Dishonest Media

Channel 11 – which long since gave up any pretense of not being a DFL PR firm – notes that Remington, America’s oldest gun maker, has filed Chapter 11.

Now, people were talking about the likelihood, and even imminence, of Remington’s demise a solid year ago, as the Trump election caused panic-buying of guns (except in certain “progressive” circles) to slow down.

And before that, when people were panic-buying everything that looked like a gun, down to and including pop tarts chewed into gun shapes, people were pointing out that panic-buying was the only thing keeping Remington in business, so unsound was it even during the salad days of 2015-16.

So what did the Kare Bears have to say about it?

It also follows large student-led rallies across the United States calling for stricter gun laws after the mass shooting at Parkland High School in Florida in February.

For that matter, it also follows most of March Madness, the Oscars, and the Tide Pod controversy.  Each of them had as  much to do with Remington’s troubles as the Potemkin Protests.

Proof, Pudding, Etc.

Joe Doakes from Como Park emails:

Kid with gun in school shoots girl, shoots boy, gets shot by armed cop in school.  Shooting over.

A good guy with a gun stopped the shooting.  Armed police inside the school immediately engaged the shooter. Nobody died.

Everything we’ve been saying about ineffective gun control was proven true in the Florida school.

Everything we’ve been saying about effective crime prevention was just proven true in Maryland.

But notice the Democrat congressman instantly leaps to the same old idea – background checks.  Didn’t work in Florida, wouldn’t have worked here, but they’re the first words out of his mouth.

Joe Doakes

Seems pretty obvious.

Which hasn’t stopped some of the less-bright lights on Big Left to tell us “who are you gonna believe – the narrative, or your lying eyes?”

You Have The Right To Remain Off The Record. Should You Choose To Waive That Right…

“I accepted the results of an opinion poll taken in a country where it was illegal to hold certain opinions. You can imagine the poll-taking process: “Hello, Mr. Peasant, I’m an inquisitive and frightening stranger. God knows who I work for. Would you care to obstensibly support the dictatorship which controls every facet of your existence, or shall we put you down as in favor of the UNO opposition and just tear up your ration card right here and now?””

— P. J. O’Rourke, Give War A Chance

I got an email from Minnesota Public Radio news the other day.

And it was a tough call.

On the one hand, I generally think MPR News is above board.  Generally.

On the other, they have gotten funding for “gun violence” coverage from the Joyce Foundation which was, before Michael Bloomberg’s billions inundated the market, the biggest funder of criminal-safety groups in the US.  And while I can’t show a cause-and-effect relationship, I have my suspicions that that funding caused MPR to make some bad editorial decisions.  (I’ve asked MPR News for comment – but they don’t talk on an official basis with plebeians).

I thought about it.

Then I read the website the email linked to (images of survey provided below; click on them to see full size).

 

And I just have to ask (although MPR never answers questions) = are you serious?

Did anyone actually answer?

I mean, I would – I own no guns, because they terrify me, and I’d never shoot another human being for any reason.

But given MPR’s close ties to the Metro DFL, I would just love to know what they were thinking – and what they thought shooters would think.

Dear Pawns

To:  Parkland High School Students / Sudden Media Stars
From:  Mitch Berg, peasant
Re:  Your sudden stardom

Students,

First things first – I’m sorry for the trauma that happened to you and your school.  You might want to have a word with not just the FBI, but your school board, who was apparently aware of Nik Cruz’s growing madness.

Anyway – condolences.

Now – you’re not gonna like this, but some of you will thanks me, someday.  I’m going to do something none of the adults in your life – especially those people whew flew down from Washington and New York with the bales of airline tickets and hotel reservations, barely hours after the shooting – are going to do.

I’m going to tell you the truth.

You’re being used.

I get it.   You’ve been through a traumatic experience.  But you need to know that none of the things you’re ostensibly campaigning for would have prevented the shooting at your school.

Background checks?  Florida has a huge gap it the mental health information it reports to the feds.  Just like Minnesota.  It wouldn’t – didn’t – work.

Banning “Assault Weapons?”  It’s been tried – you were toddlers when the last ban ended.  Even its supporters said it was just a feel-good law that did nothing about crime.

Bagging on the NRA?  Yeah, that’ll save lives.

Repealing the Second Amendment?   Please.  Mass shootings and denying the right to keep and bear arms is not correlated with mass shootings.

Look, I get it; when I was your age, I thought the NRA was a CIA plot to make gun companies rich.  it was an idea put in my head by the parents and grandparents of the people chaperoning you around DC and the CNN studios.  They are using you as another way to try to turn the tide in a political battle they’ve been losing for thirty years, now.

You are being used as props.  Pawns.  Stage dressing.

Most of you will figure it out someday, with any luck.

That is all.

The Gray Wasteland

Kevin Williamson sums up a vast expanse of “suck” in re the NYTimes’ coverage of gun issues:

he New York Times is uniquely bad on the subject of firearms. There are two ways to understand that sentence, and both apply: Among major news publications, the Timesregularly exhibits an unparalleled level of illiteracy on the subject of firearms, and it exhibits comparable illiteracy on practically no other subject. Even on such self-acknowledged weak spots as American religion, the Times rarely sinks to the level of outright stupidity that characterizes its coverage of firearms and related crimes.

That’s just the introduction.  It gets worse.  Read the whole thing.

Life Cycle Of Uselessness

It was over a year ago that we carried the story of the Pillsbury Foundation’s buyback fiasco.   Which doesn’t narrow it down much; while the buybacks last year in Minneapolis were very poorly organized, their effect on crime was the same as any other buyback program.

Nil.

But this buyback was different in one way; unlike other buybacks that just sell guns for scrap (allowing criminals to dispose of crime guns without leaving a paper trail), the guns gathered were doing to be donated to “artists” to do “art” that was supposed to “raise awareness” about “gun violence”.

A friend of the blog writes:

more “gun art” that will never be displayed on anyone’s wall

The Pillsbury folks paid for this apparently

The only thing really on display (at least in the objects pictured) is the paucity of imagination in these “artists”

Look at the things that have created great art over the centuries:  Longing, anger, the search for justice, the search for God, the quest for beauty – lots of motivations.

“Spoiled, subsidized, entitled, Urban Progressive Privilege-sotted pseudo-“artists” barking like dogs on their political masters’ command” isn’t one of them.

Facts In The Dark: If You Get Your News About Gun Crime/Laws/Owners From NPR, You Are Starting The Race With One Leg Tied Behind Your Back

Over the weekend, NPR came out with a “Fact Check” piece about whether Chicago is “proof” that gun laws don’t affect crime.

Is the “fact check”, well, factual?

It’s NPR and they’re talking about guns. What do you think?

NPR starts with Sarah Huckabee Sanders’ post-Vegas press conference statement:

“I think one of the things we don’t want to do is try to create laws that won’t stop these types of things from happening,” Sanders said Monday. “I think if you look to Chicago where you had over 4,000 victims of gun-related crimes last year they have the strictest gun laws in the country. That certainly hasn’t helped there.”

Pointing to Chicago to suggest that gun laws don’t work is not a new talking point — Trump claimed Chicago had “the toughest gun laws in the United States” in a 2016 presidential debate; his fellow Republican candidate Chris Christie likewise pointed to Chicago as a place with high crime despite tight gun laws.

Now, if you’re a Right to Keep and Bear Arms person, you know what that really means; the idea that tight regulations on law-abiding civlilians owning guns hasn’t the foggiest impact on crime, at best, and a negative impact at worst.  That – crime and death, and how infringing freedom for the law-abiding doesn’t affect either – is what we’re concerned about.

And what does NPR focus on?

The Fussy Tangent:   Hey, at least NPR acknowledges the real problem, sort of:

It’s also true that there were more than 4,000 shooting victims in Chicago in 2016. It’s also true that Chicago has suffered a massive amount of gun crime recently. In 2016, homicides in Chicago sharply rose, mostly as a result of gun homicides, as the University of Chicago crime lab found in a January report.

Gun homicides in the city rose by 61 percent between 2015 and 2016. That helped make the gun homicide rate…25.1 per 100,000 residents in 2016, compared to 14.7 in Philadelphia and just 2.3 in New York.

But never mind all the carnage and death.  It’s Huckabee-Sanders’ assertion that’s the real issue!

But it’s not true that Chicago has the toughest gun laws in the country, as other fact checkers have also repeatedly found…”We generally think of California as having the strongest gun laws in the country,” said Hannah Shearer, a staff attorney at the Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence. “The whole state’s laws are pretty strong.”

The center has given California an A rating and ranks it No. 1 in terms of the tightness of its gun laws.

Ah.  So law-abiding citizens are disarmed, and criminals are deterred only by the ministrations of the Chicago Police Department – but they’re not the “toughest” laws, according to the abstract reasoning of a gun grabber group?

This is not a “fact check”.  This is an ideological purity test.

It gets worse.

The Mean Streets Of Hammond:  NPR next revisits the old canard; Chicago would be safe, if it weren’t for those darned Hoosiers and Badgers:

It’s important to remember here that Chicago is very close to two states that have relatively weak gun laws: Wisconsin and Indiana. So while it’s easy to pick on Chicago (or any other high-crime city) for its ugly statistics, says one expert, taking bordering states into account weakens this gun-advocacy talking point.

“It’s not a scientific study. It’s an anecdote,” said Philip Cook, a professor of public policy studies at Duke University. “They might have pointed to Washington, D.C., back in the days when D.C. banned handguns and yet had high gun-violence rates. Those bans are only at best partially effective, because the borders are permeable.”

So why aren’t Indiana, Wisconsin and Virginia stacking up bodies like cordwood?    If availability of guns were the problem, then wouldn’t places like North Dakota, New Mexico and Wyoming be shooting galleries?

NPR does try to drill further into the issue:

2015 study of guns in Chicago, co-authored by Cook, found that more than 60 percent of new guns used in Chicago gang-related crimes and 31.6 percent used in non-gang-related crimes between 2009 and 2013 were bought in other states. Indiana was a particularly heavy supplier, providing nearly one-third of the gang guns and nearly one-fifth of the non-gang guns.

Other evidence corroborates this — a 2014 Chicago Police Department report found that Indiana accounted for 19 percent of all guns recovered by the department between 2009 and 2013.

NPR has found correlation, not a cause.  Yes, there are guns from other states to fill the black market demand for firearms.  Every single one of them is the result of a felony – a theft (a state felony) or a “straw purchase”, a person with a clean record buying a buy and giving/selling it to a criminal, which is a federal felony.

Is it because Indiana has “lax” gun laws?

Or is it because the US Attorney for Northern Illinois announced that his office wasn’t going to spend time prosecuting “straw buyers” anymore?  Because he wanted to focus his office on politically-sexy prosecutions, and nobody ever got elected to the Senate by showing off a record of  prosecuting gang-bangers’ girlfriends, junior high pals and grandmothers?

So, In Summary:  The NPR “fact-check” ignored the actual point of the Trump Administration’s statement – that gun control and public safety are not in any way linked, and in some cases may be inversely correlated –  to pedantically nitpick Huckabee Sanders’ conceptually accurate statement about the legalities, and issue a deflection about other states’ laws that actually reinforces the Pro-Civil Rights’ side’s point.

Facts In The Dark rules this article as part of the NPR’s effort to be part of Big Left’s Praetorian Guard.  

The New Phrenology

“Protect” Minnesota is having a “conference”, and they’re soliciting speakers:

Well – certain speakers:

The Northstar Conference Planning Committee is seeking proposals for presentations of 20, 30 or 60 minutes by individuals with appropriate academic credentials and/or recognized professional expertise related to the study or field of gun violence prevention that:

1. Present data-driven and evidence-based research or information about gun violence and its prevention.

2. Relate to one or more of three general subject blocks:
• health care, mental health, suicide prevention
• domestic violence, criminal justice, policy and legislation
• socioeconomic factors, disparities, urban gun violence

3. Have clearly-defined educational objectives that align with continuing education goals for public health, health care, mental health, law enforcement, or other professionals.

4. Are culturally sensitive and take into account the diverse backgrounds and outlooks of those in attendance.

The Planning Committee is particularly seeking presentations that address the following topics:
• racial and ethnic disparities
• adverse childhood experiences
• suicide risk factors and prevention among veterans, seniors, youth, and the LGBT community
• domestic violence risk assessment and prevention
• opioid addiction and gun violence
• the effects of mass incarceration on gun violence
• gun violence in the media
• successful community policing strategies
• effective legislation, public policy, and legal practices

Huh-wha?

Fortunately, a friend of the blog took the time to translate that description into clear, culturally-oppressive English:

Let me summarize that job description:

1. must hate guns with the passion of 1000 suns. Have plan to strip them from law abiding citizens.

2. Find ridiculous way to link gun control to something legit, such as health care and make it appear as yin and yang.

3. Experience with organize protesters and resistance parties in different peoples parents basements.

4. Make sure white people with guns are the enemy as often as possible.

Disregard minority on minority gun violence in its entirety.

Remember – “Protect” Minnesota has never, not once, made a single substantial, original, true statement.  This “conference” looks like it’ll push that to new levels.

Lie First, Lie Always: They Think You’re Stupid

Further evidence of the statement “”Protect” Minnesota has never – not once – made a statement that was simultaneously substantial, original and true” came to us yesterday in the form of a press release from their “Research Director”, the onimatopaiec Richard Gigler.

Gigler is reading the same numbers I related to you a couple weeks ago, showing that crime has dropped sharply across Minnesota in the last year.

But the takeaway from any given type of evidence depends on a lot of things; in this case, whether one is inept at statistics, or one represents a group that pathologically lies about gun owners and knows their audience isn’t smart enough to know they’re being lied to.

In this case, as “evidence” that “more guns don’t mean more safety”, Gigler notes that the percentage of homicides committed by guns “…rose by 1%”   Of course, they didn’t; they rose by two thirds of a percent, and even that is a statistical anomaly caused by the drop in overall homicides, not a hike in gun homicides (which, as we noted, dropped 23% in the past year!).

But the lie-via-incompetence is worse than that – because the number of homicides dropped, and the percentage of homicides involving a gun “rose” as a fluke of statistical background noise…

…as the number of guns in law-abiding civilians hands rose sharply, and the number of carry permittees hit record numbers.

Meaning that the percentage of guns used in crimes dropped.

Again.

Why do you suppose it is that “Protect” Minnesota can’t tell the truth?

Please Please Please Please Do This

beg of you (where “you” = Big Left):

According to a Facebook event created by the Women’s March, the protest against the NRA will take place on Friday, July 14 and Saturday, July 15 in Fairfax, Virginia. The rally will begin on July 14 at 10:00 AM in front of the NRA headquarters in Fairfax. At noon, the 18-mile march from the NRA headquarters to the Department of Justice in DC will begin. The rally at the Department of Justice will begin at 10:00 AM on July 15.

Wear lots of pink hats, and dress as vaginas.  Please, please please please.

“Occupy Symbolic Meaningless New York Red Carpet” appears to be progressing apace.

And get all the lavish media overcoverage you can get.  I beg of you.

The ad is a “response” to an NRA ad that the proverbial “some” found provocataive:

Mallory explained to HuffPost why the NRA ad featuring [conservative pundit and NRA affiliate Dana] Loesch was particularly problematic and dangerous.

“This particular NRA ad, in our judgement, is very dangerous,” Mallory said. “It is specifically calling for members of the NRA and other gun owners to take up arms to address protesters or to push back against protesters, particularly people of color and people who support as us protesters and as black and brown people.”

Mallory is a hysterical ninny.

And the hypocrisy stews and fumes over the left’s response to the NRA like the humidity in New Orleans.  This is the left that’s been wrapping itself in “Resistance” romance – styling itself after the French, Poles, Norwegians, Danes, Yugoslavs and others who risked their and their families lives to kill Germans and collaborators, with guns, knives, bombs, garrotes.    A movement whose violent rhetoric is expressed through phrases like “Punch a Nazi” (where “Nazi” = anyone to the right of John McCain) and “Bash the Fash” and, in one episode (so far), a committed Democrat attempting mass murder on Republican congressmen.

So yeah, shrill harpies.  Hold your march.  Go big.  I beg of you.

Lie First, Lie Always: The Media Are The Gun Grabbers’ Stenographers

Q: How can you tell a gun grabber is lying?

A: They are attempting to communicate via any way, shape or form.  Verbally or non-verbally.  In any language.

John Lott on how the media – knowingly or not – inflates the gun grabbers’ numbers.  And as national carry permit reciprocity gains speed in Congress, it’s going to get worse.

And it touches on something readers of this blog knew almost a decade ago; the pro-criominal-safety lobby’s pet “think” tank is a room full of lying sacks:

The Violence Policy Center (VPC), the source of these claims, asserts that in the 10 years from May 2007 to April 2017, U.S. concealed handgun permit holders were responsible for 969 nonself-defense gun deaths (with any type of weapon, not just handguns).

We’ve dealt with the VPC and their “statistics” on this blog before, and found them to be pure garbage.  Nohitng’s changed since then:

Looking at the VPC numbers for 2016, they claim that 26 permit holders supposedly committed 29 homicides. With over 15 million permit holders nationwide last year, those deaths amount to 0.2 homicides per 100,000 permit holders.

However, there is an arrest and investigation virtually anytime a permit holder uses a handgun in a public place. Almost all of the 2016 cases are listed as pending, and most of the defendants will be acquitted on account of self-defense.

So as I noted in my 2009 piece on the swine at the VPC, they treated all ambiguous cases as cut and dried murder.  And it gets worse:

The tally of 969 deaths is the result of triple and even quadruple counting. Michigan — by far the worst state according to VPC numbers — supposedly suffered 78 homicides and 390 suicides. Supposedly, Michigan was the site of over 40 percent of all deaths attributed to permit holders.

The main problem is that pending cases are counted in the same way as convictions. The Michigan State Police report the number of pending cases and convictions each year.

But since most cases never result in a conviction and many cases can be listed as pending for two or three calendar years, this results in massive over counting.

An additional 30 cases are added in, as a result of news stories. Apparently, no effort was made to check if these cases were already accounted for in the state police reports.

A case that ends in acquittal will, therefore, be counted four times if it is covered in a news story and is pending for three years. Over the past 10 years, 17 Michigan permit holders were convicted of homicide, not 78.

That comes to 1.7 cases per year, out of 560,000 permit holders in June 2016.

Which gives permittees a homicide rate about one quarter that of the state of Minnesota, and about 1/120th the rate for Michiganders as a whole.

That’s over two orders of magnitude safer than the general public.

And yet what do  you suppose the media reports, with airtight incuriosity?

The VPC’s only “violence policy” is their policy of genocide toward the truth.

“Gun Violence Prevention” And Its Inevitable Consequences

Hugo Chavez and his successor, Nicolas Maduro, banned and confiscated all civilian firearms.

And now, as the Maduro regime’s support frays under the complete collapse of the Venezuelan economy, he’s re-arming…

…well, the right Venezuelans:

“A gun for every militiaman!” Venezuelan president Nicolas Maduro said to uniformed militia members outside the presidential palace, Fox News reported on Tuesday. The Bolivarian militias, created by Maduro’s predecessor Hugo Chavez, already number in the hundreds of thousands and are being used to supplement the regime’s armed forces. Maduro is boosting the number of armed supporters in hopes of keeping control over the country from what he labels “imperialist aggression.”

Yet again – the necessary precursor to dictatorship was the disarming of the law-abiding.

Just a further lesson – there can be no compromise with the tyrants – be they Nicolas Maduro or Michael Bloomberg or Nancy Nord Bence.

Ever.

Open Letter To The Entire Twin Cities Media

To:  The Entire Twin Cities News Media
From:  Mitch Berg, ornery peasant
Re:  The Reverend Nancy Nord Bence

Back during my brief and unlamented reporting career, I had not a few editors and producers warn me off using certain sources – the ones that had a habit of feeding them bum information.

I’m going to do the same for you today.  To wit:

On the subject of guns, the Reverend Nancy Nord Bence – the director of “Protect” Minnesota – has never made a single, substantial, original, true statement. 

Not One..

Every word in there is a key qualifier.  I don’t doubt that she makes true, substantial, original statements about other things – Lutheran theology (I’ll let you Missouri Synod people mix it up on that), her family, sports trivia, whatever.   Those are not at issue.

But on the issue of guns, gun laws, gun owners, violence statistics, then the Reverend Nord Bence and her organization have never – not once – made a single statement that is simultaneously substantial, original, and true.

She/they may have made statements that are substantial and true – like, repeating broad statistics from the Department of Justice website (before they embroider them, anyway) – but the statements aren’t original.

They may have said things that are substantial and original – like “Stand your Ground is a threat to minorities and immigrants” – but it’s not true.   It’s devoid of fact.

The Reverend may have said things that true and original – like “Ron Latz supports our agenda” – but they were not substantial contributions to the debate; they were, as lawyers say, de minimis.  

And of course, as we’ve shown in several long series of threads on the Reverend, her predecessor in the office, and their “organization”, they have a long history of saying things that are substantial but unoriginal and false; of things that are original but insubstantial and false, and of course things that are true but insubstantial and unoriginal.  That goes without saying.

But the overriding realization is that the Reverend, and her precessessor Heather Martens, and their entire organization have yet to say a single thing on Second Amendment issues hat is simultaneously all three things – original, substantial and true.

And I’ll welcome the chance to prove it to any or all of you, point by point, with or without the Reverend there to speak on her behalf. The challenge is rhetorical – she openly tells her group never to engage with dissenters, and all too many of you in the media indulge her inability to defend her largely fraudulent agenda.

But this isn’t about her.  This is about you.  You need to stop treating the Reverend and her group as a legitimate source on Second Amendment issues.

She is not.   She feeds you false information, and you – God bless you all, journos tend not to know much about the subject – run it without any serious fact-checking.

More tomorrow.

Liberal Messaging

On issue after issue after issue, the left’s messaging strategery seems to have changed to “pummel the public with inflammatory, scaremongering lies; the votes of the gullible, the incurious, the demented and the un-bright count the same as the votes of smart people, and are easier to secure”.

Focusing on the 2nd Amendment “debate” – it’s the one I read most constantly – the evergreen example is “Stand Your Ground laws allow people to KILL people because of the way they’re dressed”.

It’s balderdash, as we’ve explained in this space over and over.  The smart people know this.  The dumb people…

…are the intended customer for that particular lie.

With that in mind, New York’s junior machine apparatchik Kirsten Gillibrand has sounded off with a level of perspicacity reminiscent of Betty McCollum:


I was going to say “someone’s been watching too many “Miami Vice” reruns” – but that’d be too charitable.  While most liberals (and some Republicans) start out dumb on the gun issue, and some don’t get smarter (McCollum, ibid), it’s not like these hamsters exist in a vacuum.  It’s not like some NRA lobbyist, somewhere, hasn’t made Senator Gillibrand aware that silencers are far from silent.

Which means one of two things: Sen. Gillibrand is incurious about anything that doesn’t comport with the narrative she’s been given by her superiors, or she doesn’t care, and passing the narrative is the only goal.

I’m inclined to think “b”.

Lie First, Lie Always: Numbers

Last week at the hearings on  the “Constitutional Carry” and “Self-Defense Reform” bill, the clown antics of Ross Derp (or whatever his name was) got the headlines.  (Update:  It was Ross Koon.  I regret the error).

But something even more indicative of the anti-gun, criminal safety movement was buried in the background

But first, a quick factual tangent:

Berg’s Nineteenth Law:   It’s time to inaugurate Berg’s Nineteenth Law – one of my list of iron-clad laws of human political behavior.    It’s a law because it is always true.

The law reads as follows:

No Minnesota gun control group has ever made, nor will they ever make, a statement of fact that is simultaneously

  • Substantial
  • Original, and
  • True

OK.  Back to last Wednesday.

Dubious:  Before the hearing, “Protect” MN – the pack of ELCA-coiffed biddies who have “led” Minnesota’s clownish gun control “movement” (speaking physiologically, not politically, here), attempting to undercut the “Constitutional Carry” bill, distributed lists of people who’d been rejected for carry permits to the legislators on the committee.

Erick Lucero, from the solid red Northwest, picked up the narrative:

The organization passed out packets to each representative on the committee that contained names of constituents in their districts who were denied permits. Rep. Lucero’s packet consisted of 61 pages with approximately 15 denials on each page, making a grand total of 915 denials. All of the denials listed Hennepin as the county of denial.

So – nearly a thousand denials in Lucero’s district alone?

Sounds pretty damning!

But…

Lucero quickly noticed a discrepancy.

Lucero’s House District 30B exists almost entirely in Wright County. The only exception is the City of Hanover which is split between Wright County and Hennepin County. Of the 3,200 residents in Hanover, only a quarter reside in the Hennepin County portion.

In other words, “Protect” MN would have you believe that every man, woman and child in the Henco portion of Hanover had applied for a permit and been denied, 1.12 times over.  Every liberal exurban anti-gun zealot, every toddler, every man-jack breathing human in the Henco portion of Hanover!

Lucero says this is a classic example of how the left skews facts.

“The anti-Constitution, anti-Second Amendment, gun grabbers pervert statistics and use false information to to promote their anti-gun agenda,” Lucero said.

Being a sitting legisaltor, Lucero must be at least a little diplomatic.

I have no such restriction.

“Protect” MN/s entire “strategy” is to spout bullshit to fool the uninformed, the gullible, the incurious, the casually-irate, and Joan Peterson.

They are liars who think – hope – that Minnesotans are too dumb to know any better.

Lie First, Lie Always: The Anti-Gun Amateur Hour

Earlier this morning at the House Public Safety Committee hearings on the “Stand your Ground” billl, a “pro-bill” testifier erupted in a caracature of a pro-Trump, white supremacist tirade; at one point, he reportedly said it was time for gun owners to return to “lynching” people.

Then he got up and walked out.

He’s utterly unknown to Minnesota’s close-knit 2nd Amendment activist community.

The moment I saw the photo (a screen grab from video),  that voice in my head that monitors stereotypes screamed “Carlton graduate and non-profiteer paid to be a false-flagger”.

Sometimes you can judge a book by its cover.

“He” registered for the event as “Ross Koon”

And, sure enough, searching for “Russ Koon” leads you to a Facebook profile.

And here’s his publicly-visible post:

So he misrepresented himself about being a pro-gunner, and his “testimony” was a “satirical” sham designed to defame people he pretty much hates.

That’s pretty much the whole story, right?


Of course not.  Anti-gun ghoul Joan Peterson tweeted instantly:

Coincidence that the doyenne of Minnesota criminal-safety is right there ready to go with a tweet in support of this bit of “satire?”

But that’s just a clenched old liberal exercising her penchant for overheated hypberbole – right?

Of course not.   Mr. Koons’ pro-criminal-safety pedigree goes back a ways.  Turns out Mr. Koon’s mother is one Mary Koon.  And Mary Koon is a pastor at ultra-liberal Oak Grove Presbyterian Church, and publicly lists as her “likes”…

…Moms Want Action.

(“But” you might say, “that doesn’t make her a member!”.  Perhaps.  On the other hand, it’s pretty much all you need to do to be counted as a member, so we’ll run with it).

So let’s sum it up:

  • The scion of one of Minnesota’s white, privileged “elite” liberal families lied about his personal beliefs, in order to…
  • Slander gun owners in front of the legislature, and did it…
  • …with the obvious, full knowledge of Minnesota’s anti-gun/pro-criminal-safety “elite”.

This was just the most egregious episode in a hearing where the anti-gunners essentially beclowned themselves, treating the hearings like a private flash mob.

Keep up the good work, Reverend Bence!

(Thanks to the crew from MNGOC for all the research on this post)

UPDATE:  From a witness:

He didn’t immediately leave the building. I watched him get hugs and attaboys from several of the anti-gunners present, including the lady in charge of handing out red Everytown shirts.

This was no random happenstance.

Bad Information

Rep. Erin Maye-Quade sent this bit out to her constituents earlier this week:

Looks familiar, doesn’t it?

It’s the same, precise set of fallacious claims made by The Reverend Nancy Nord Bence a few weeks ago.

Neither of the bills would “eliminate” the permit to carry.  That’s not the point, of course, so we’ll let that slide for now.

 

Neither bill will eliminate background checks for purchasing firearms.  Having a card saying you’ve got a clean background is more or less irrelevant; if a cop has time to see a card, they’ve got time to run your driver’s license or car’s license plates and make sure you’ve got a clean record themselves.  The carry permit does nothing but price the right to self-defense out of reach of working-class people.

And the last paragraph is gibberish.  Guns sold online have to go through a licensed firearm dealer, lest they break a slew of federal and state laws on both ends.  Every firearm sold at a gun show in Minnesota gets a background check already.  And the only thing separating a legal and illegal personal transaction is the participant’s honesty and willingness to tell the government what they’re up to.  Criminals don’t, and never will.  It’s not that complicated.

For most of us.

Rep. Maye Quade is either:

  • Grossly ininformed
  • Taking part in a disinformation campaign.

Given that Maye Quade’s wife is a field worker for the Bloombergs, I suspect the answer is “both”.