"She No Longer Works There"

http://townhall.com/columnists/johnstossel/2014/06/25/omission-control-n1855230

"Reporter Sharyl Attkisson's story sounds familiar to me: A major network got tired of her reports criticizing government. She no longer works there."

---

"There are people who simply would rather just avoid the headache of going after powers that be because of the pushback that comes with it, which has become very organized and well-financed," she says on my TV show this week. 

I left ABC for similar reasons. When I began consumer reporting, I assumed advertisers would censor me, since sponsors who paid my bosses wouldn't want criticism. But never in 30 years was a story killed because of advertiser pressure. Not once.

I hear that's changed since, and big advertisers, such as car dealers, do persuade news directors to kill stories.

You can find the John Stossel article by following the embedded links, and decide for yourself how much you  believe.  (Or you can read "BIAS", by Bernard Goldberg; I'll loan my copy to personal friends.)

While I'm not entirely certain that I buy the story as written, a funny thing happened on the way to the forum:

EVERY attempt to do the "Blog This" function of Google failed.  I finally had to resort to manually copying the weblink, creating a new post, and building it from scratch.

It worked, eventually, but I was surprised that Google/Blogspot didn't treat this article the same as every other article I've BLOGGED for the past ten years.

I know, It's Just Me, and I did something differently from the way I've blog-referenced the past FOUR THOUSAND ARTICLES ... (most of which actually made it to print, by the way.)

Just saying.

Grapes of Wrath

I just finished reading "Grapes of Wrath" .. the 2014 re-published "75th Anniversary" issue.

Has it been three quarters of a century since John Steinbeck wrote this accolade to The Human Condition?

I know only one thing; this was the most difficult novel to read in my (mumble-mumble) decades of reading everything I could get my hands on.  I usually read a book a day.  This one took me sixteen (16) days to complete its reading.

It's not that it's hard to read ... it's a beautifully written story about Hard Times in America.

And that's just what made it so DAMN hard to digest.

Anyone who can witness this difficult period in American history, learn how hard-scrabble honest folks were deliberately starved to death (by their countrymen) without a tear in his eye .. well, I don't want to know him.

It wasn't that "people" weren't capable of being sympathetic to the folks they called "Okies" (as a term of derision; they perforce considered them subhuman, because if they didn't, they might have to give up their own sustenance to support staring Americans.)  It's just that everyone was frightened during the Great Depression about the very really possibility that they were just one paycheck away from starvation and destitution, for themselves and their children.

People were thrown off their homes by armed deputies; a bulldozer would come through and crush their shacks to rubble, and then continue to plow the entire property because The Bank had to make a profit, or the bankers would find themselves on the road, too.

Damn!  I'm glad I wasn't alive during the Thirties!

I saw the movie, with Henry Fonda, years ago.  But that has little to do with the book (except for one scene).  The Joads were images in monochrome there.  In the book, they became real to me.

I've been a critic of "Social Support" programs, because in the Modern Era they often seem nothing more than a Political Boondoggle.

But it could happen again, and in a rich country (which America was NOT, in the Great Depression), I now understand why there has to be some kind of .. at least a "BootStrap" program for folks who really want to work, who are to proud to accept charity, and find themselves having to do "The Hard Thing" because ... that's all they have.

So, what's the country going to be like in 20#?  See here for a slightly different viewpoint, in a modern version of The Grapes of Wrath.

Teaser Quote:

Another young American soldier is being buried while family and friends watch, having been killed by an Improvised Explosive Device while attempting to suppress "insurgents"—in Ohio. He was trying to keep them from shooting the bulldozer drivers demolishing suburban neighborhoods, clearing the land for a "return to nature" under a United Nations mandate.

(H/T: Larry Codrea)

Oh, you have got to go reread Grapes of Wrath!

Your Cell Phone Is Constitutionally Protected

John Lott's Website: Note that the Obama administration supported police being able to search people's cell phones without a search warrant:

The Constitution still stands, and it's a "living document" in the sense that  your private communications cannot be examined without a warrant.

(Thanks to John Lott for keeping us informed about this.)

What this means is that the Law enforcement people who have braced you for ... say ... allowing your dog to run unleashed in the county park, cannot casually browse through your text messages to determine whether you INTENDED to do so.

And they cannot use any information they found there as evidence of any other information; including evidence of a felony.

So if you just bought a new shotgun and you've used your phone to tell your best friend how neat it is, they can't start their own 'unofficial' Gun Registration Database using information gathered there.

Does this apply to email?  Well, if you sent the message to your friend, that's presumably banned.  If you have accessed your email through your computer?  Since the phone is able to send email as readily as your computer, it's a logical extension to assume that is also constitutionally protected.

However, I don't have any references to specifically declare it.  So if you have the tagline saying "Sent from my IPOD" or "Sent from my ANDROID" ... it wouldn't hurt to delete that default setting.

Not Safe For Work ... according to the EPA (And They Should Know!)

EPA Employees Told to Stop Pooping in the Hallway - Fedblog - News - GovExec.com:

Environmental Protection Agency workers have done some odd things recently. Contractors built secret man caves in an EPA warehouse, an employee pretended to work for the CIA to get unlimited vacations and one worker even spent most of his time on the clock looking at pornography. 

It appears, however, that a regional office has reached a new low: Management for Region 8 in Denver, Colo., wrote an email earlier this year to all staff in the area pleading with them to stop inappropriate bathroom behavior, including defecating in the hallway.

Boehner plans to file suit:

 Republicans have voiced frustration with Obama's second-term "pen and phone" strategy of pursuing policy changes without Congress -- particularly environmental rules via the Environmental Protection Agency.  

AND WHILE WE'RE ON THE SUBJECT ....


How about Lois Lerner's "My Dog Ate My Email" defense?

Computer Expert tell us what we already know:  "No way in HELL there are no backups!"
(Okay, not a direct quote.)

The latter two links are to videos.

Media Bias?

I think ... um, gee, I'm not sure ..... (another video).

Map Of Self Defense Stories Using Firearms | Guns Save Lives

Map Of Self Defense Stories Using Firearms | Guns Save Lives:

The map below shows all of our stories geo tagged on a map. Many stories do not give the exact addresses for obvious reasons, but we try to get the points as close as possible with the information provided. The map shows incidents recorded from August 1, 2011 – Present. There may be handful (less than a dozen stories) recorded prior to that.

Guns Save Lives has a map of self-defense stories ... go take a look at it.   It's interesting to note where the incidents tend to 'cluster'.

H/T: The War On Guns

Paul Hendrix resigns from USPSA under allegations of cheating | Gun Nuts Media

Paul Hendrix resigns from USPSA under allegations of cheating | Gun Nuts Media:

Posted on June 23, 2014 at 13:48 
By now you’ve heard of Paul Hendrix, the USPSA Range Officer accused of cheating. Posted on the Area 6 Facebook page today, here is his “apology” and resignation: 

 To the members of USPSA Area 6. I have spoken with people that I trust and respect their views. In review it appears that I have fallen short in safeguarding the trust and duties place with me in this sport. I apologize for those shortcomings. I accept the full responsibility for my shortcomings, as well as, any pain or embarrassment caused. I have resigned my membership in this great organization. At some point in my future I hope to rebuild that trust.

Humbly Submitted,

Paul Hendrix 

As posted by Caleb, the author of the original article.  Go HERE for his comments.

Fifty Five OH Thousand Dollars Worth of SQUAT in Chicago!

Money for nothing: State paid UIC $498,355 for subpar study | Early & Often:
(June 21, 2014)

The state spent almost half a million dollars on a flawed study of Gov. Pat Quinn’s now-defunct anti-violence program — the Neighborhood Recovery Initiative — after officials rejected a more rigorous evaluation that would have been free, auditors say.

Of course we're glad that the Governor of Illinois has made some effort .. not matter how feeble, to reduce the level of "Gun Violence" (Which equates to Violence regardless of the mechanism) in Chicago.

Unfortunately, our expectations were somewhat higher than his; we would have expected (had we knowb the effort was being made) that some suggestions to resolve the situation would have been made.

It's not an entirely BAD result; that SOMEBODY was at least recognizing that there Is A Problem in Chicago (not that Mayor Rahm Emmanuel has noticed) can be counted as A Good Thing.

Too bad no solutions were offered by the study.
Too bad that a bunch of weasels ignored the situation long enough for the contract to run out.
Too bad nobody took the problem seriously.
Too bad that kids are still shooting each other on the Mean Streets of Chicago.
But HEY!  Somebody noticed that there was a problem; should have been worth something!

I'm been blogging about Chicago Hoodlums for quite a while .. I would gladly have identified the SYMPTOMS of Chicago's murder rate for ... oh, I don't know .. 10% of the cost?

What a bunch of freaking morons .., they spent enough to buy every gun on the street a hundred times over, and for NOTHING?                

Chicago (Mayor Rahm ...) here's the solution and I give it to you for free.  It isn't Gun Laws; it's societal fixes.

Make jobs for kids, and for fathers.  I don't care if it's for fixing the potholes in the streets or .. I don't know, finding lost dogs?

It will cost you a LOT less than the price of of incarcerating Kids Gone Wrong.  And it will give your people some pride ... which they can now only find by shooting each other.

For $500,000, what could you have done for Your People?

Never mind, it doesn't matter. You have already thrown away your best chance to really Make A Difference.

Of course, it wouldn't have looked as sexy in the newspapers as having Funded A Study ... even if it  did come up bonkers.

Freakin'' Liberal Dorks!
You don't even know how to run a STUDY!
I wonder how much of that $500,000 went into your pockets!
Never mind; I expect Mayor Rahm to be buing a new penthouse or something RSN

He'll probably sublet it out to The Pres next month.

And they wonder why we hate them so?

H/T:  SAYUNCLE
LATER:   FOLLOW UP BY CLAYTON CRAMER

It's all about what the meaning of "IS", is .....

When school shootings are anything but:

Well, we’re all for whatever allows people to sleep at night. But the bottom line is that every parent in the world is really only interested in the likelihood that their children are walking around near people bearing arms.

well ....
 we've got people on both sides of the fence talking about what constitutes a "School Shooting".

The Gun Grabbers are hollering that "74 School Shootings This Year", and the Gun Rights folks saying it's "Only 15" or "Only 3" or whatever number you choose to use to present your side of the argument.

 It doesn’t matter to them whether an incident was an accident, an assault, a homicide or a suicide. All they know is bullets are flying, or might fly, near their children. To some small extent, we can empathize with the gun lobby’s desperation. 

Both sides are in agreement ... sort of ... that there's a Semantic element involved; most of us agree that it would be nice (but perhaps not necessary) if we could agree on terms.  Such as: "What Defines A "School Shooting"?

 That's not likely to happen, because there's too much chatter and most of it is vituperative.  It's a Zero-Sum Game here, and nobody is willing to say "you're right" because that means the same as "I'm Wrong", and that is NOT going to happen today.  (As much as both sides, occupied by responsible and reasonable adults, would dearly LOVE to find a middle ground .. this week, there ain't No Such Thing"!)

The Left Side (anti) goes on to say about the Right Side (pro):

It doesn’t have much to stand on, from a morality standpoint, and that’s why we’re seeing these attempts to control the ethical environment. From a practical standpoint, however, don’t expect anything to change, because they’re also sitting pretty on a pile of craven politicians and lobbying organizations. 

Did I forget to mention that it gets ugly, down there in the Trenches?

It's pretty clear that the "Progressive, Liberal, Democratic, Near-Sighted 'if it saves just one child' (and 'never mind our Constitional Rights') folks consider the Right-Wingnuts to be immoral and selfish and not socially responsible.

On the other hand, the "Right-Thinking Americans Who Want To Preserve Our Constitution Regardless of the Liberal Progressive Pap-thinking Leftests" are not entirely unable to sling a few stones.  ("If It Saves Just one Child" misses a lot of important stuff in the middle!)

Gets confusing, doesn't it?

Maybe we can forget the sides for a minute?  Lord knows *_I_* can't keep track of who's slandering whom!

To continue:

 But, unlike the gun lobby, we don’t believe the occasional slaughter of children is an acceptable price to pay for unfettered access to firearms. Unlike politicians who take money from gun lobbyists and the gun industry, we don’t believe that dead or traumatized children are worth extra votes on election day.

That's the real Money Quote, isn't it?

It comes down to 'the slaughter of children', every time.

The Right says: " hey, you're talking about Gang-Bangers in Chicago".
The Left says: "no, we're talking about children who have access to guns in their home and shoot themselves and others by accident or ignorance".

What we're really talking about is .... both issues, and ignoring each other.

I've got my own opinion, and I can quote statistics with the best of them.
Statistics don't tell the whole story, though.

We probably will never find a common ground between the people who are "afraid of guns", and the people who are 'afraid to be without guns'.  (And you can be outraged about either description ....for or against either position ... but that ain't helping.  So just STFU and listen for a minute, dammit!)

I don't know if it's possible to find a Common Ground between the two groups.  I DO know that there are less people in every demographic who are killed by guns via suicide or accident (defining 'accident' as somebody shooting themselves or others with no understanding that the gun may fire) than are killed by deliberate homicide.   And you know that's true, so let's just talk about the folks that shoot other folks for a while, okay?

And I know that "accident" may also be defined as "knowing the gun may fire, but not intending to shoot the person who is hit". (Which strongly suggests "Shooter Negligence" more than "Shooter Inexperience" .. if it becomes a Talking Point.)

But if we can define a common ground, let's talk about something which is "Do-able".  Not something which is pie-in-the sky unfeasible, such as taking all guns away from everyone except for Police of Military.

Those two groups are (forgive me for saying so) not necessarily all that competent; and suggesting that they're more responsible than your average citizen is also not necessarily true.  Can we agree on that?

Probably not. and that may be the crux of the issue.  So, we're basically talking about possession of firearms by private citizens, okay?

What about if you have a group of private citizens who have proven .. by whatever means you choose to measure competence (training, whatever) that they are responsible and competent to own a gun.

Not only are they 'competent' and 'reliable', but they are 'experienced' (by another debatable measure.)

Would everyone agree that this group might conceivable be "allowed" to possess a firearm, under whatever restrictions we might agree on?

That's the REAL crux of the question.

Because, you know, we can't wave a magic wand and make all guns disappear .. however much you might wish so devotedly that it was possible.

Ain't gonna happen.  We will never get rid of all the guns in the country.

And there will STILL be unstable people in possession of firearms.

So .. why don't we quit farting around with the petty crap, and start talking about what WE can do when unstable people start shooting people?  Rely on the police, who aren't there?  Or rely on the stable responsible that we've decided are "okay" to own a firearm"  (Or haven't we agreed that there are some people, even if they are a minority, who can be trusted?)

The NRA has a very unpopular saying: "The Only Solution to a Bad Guy with a gun is a Good Guy with a gun".

The Left has a real problem with that.

Does The Left have a better solution to offer?  (And remember ... I am NOT going to give my guns to The State:  Didn't work in Australia, didn't work in England, and didn't work in Canada!)

Anyone?

I'm running out of steam.  Pushing a rock up hill here.  Can I get a "Well ... maybe ..." from someone on the side that wasn't want ANYONE to have a gun?

Would YOUR doctor certify YOU as competent to Concealed Carry?

Many doctors concerned about physician involvement in concealed-weapon permit process | Science Codex:

 A new survey of North Carolina doctors finds that many are concerned about the increasing number of requests they are receiving to assess their patients' competency to carry concealed weapons. In particular, a majority of physicians who responded to the survey said they were worried about the potential ethical consequences in the doctor-patient relationship if they participated in the concealed-weapon permit process.

This would be a FIRST EXPERIENCE for most of us.

As American attitudes are leaning more strongly toward insisting that people who are .. I hate to use the term, but ...ALLOWED to carry weapons, they increasingly rely on their trusted doctor to say: "Hey, Joe's a Good Man!"

Unfortunately, your doctor might be as reluctant to say you won't go kill anybody as you might be to say the same about your doctor.

Is your doctor professionally competent?
Are you mentally competent?

 "This is not a small problem," said Dr. Adam Goldstein, corresponding author of the study and a professor in the Department of Family Medicine at the University of North Carolina School of Medicine. "More than 20 percent of the physicians we surveyed have been asked to sign competency permits for concealed weapons, and a majority of them do not feel they can adequately assess the physical or mental competence of their patients to safely have a concealed weapons permit."

 Who is on the stick here?

The answer is ... both of you are very much on the stick today, and the reason is that Americans are looking at Mental Competence as a measure of whether any single person should be 'granted' the right to carry a weapon.

Oh sure, the Second Amendment says it right there: "... Shall Not Be Infringed ..."!

But what does that mean?

Most of us know Crazy Willy; you know, the guy with the long hair and sloppy shoes with no socks, who wanders through the neighborhood all day muttering to himself as he watches his toes?  (Okay, maybe you don't have a Crazy Willy in you life, but I do and -whew- he isn't me.)

Felons give up their Constitutional Right to carry a firearm.  Okay, they've proven themselves congenitally disposed to misuse their rights.

Crazy Willy?  He can count his toes and I don't care, but I also don't care to see him packing a .45.  I do NOT trust Crazy Willy.  And I'm pretty sure his Psychotherapist (who sees Crazy Willy 3 times a week) wouldn't want to 'certify' his patient, either.

But .. why not?  What has he got to lose?

Besides his wife, his life, and his license to practice .. if he's wrong.

Okay, so sometimes it's a "No-Brainer"; some people obviously shouldn't be trusted with a firearm.

What if your state requires certification by a "Medical Practitioner" that YOU are competent to own (and perhaps carry) a firearm?  Do you trust your doctor that far?

 The study, published as a research letter in the June 29, 2014 issue of the New England Journal of Medicine, is believed to be the first that examines physicians' attitudes, beliefs and behaviors regarding their emerging role in the assessment of physical and mental competency and the licensing of concealed weapons.

 More important; does HE trust YOU that far?

Colorado Governer Explains .. sort-of ... we think. Maybe. Or maybe not.

Hickenlooper supported gun magazine limit because of staffer promise - The Denver Post:
(June 19, 2014)

Gov. John Hickenlooper told county sheriffs at a recent gathering he felt conflicted about supporting a bill that limited ammunition magazines, but because one of his "staff made a commitment," he felt compelled to sign it into law.
 "To be honest, no one in our office thought it would get through the legislature," Hickenlooper, a Democrat, said in an unedited video recorded by the conservative group Revealing Politics. "There were several Democrats who said without question they weren't going to vote for it."

 .. Hickenlooper didn't believe in the bill, no one in (his) office thought it would "get through the legislature", but still one of his "staff made a commitment" ?

So he felt obliged compelled to support that single committed staff member ... who was not in his office?

What the heck?  He has a 'staff' member who is not 'in (his) office'?

Well, hell, no WONDER he's "Conflicted"!  He doesn't even know whether his committed staff member is a member of his staff.

He can't tell the truth from a lie without a teleprompter.

(Sound familiar?)

(Video available here, but the background hum is so annoying on this 11 minute video that I couldn't stand more than a few seconds of viewing.)

Gabby Y MArk on Facebook. YAYYYY!

What an absolute thrill today for our... - Coalition to Stop Gun Violence:
(June 18, 2014)

What an absolute thrill today for our staff to see Gabby Giffords and Captain Mark Kelly at a wonderful Center for American Progress event titled "Protecting Women from Gun Violence." Senator Amy Klobuchar, South Carolina police chief Saundra Rhodes, Rob Valente of the National Domestic Violence Hotline, and domestic violence survivor Sarah Engle of Wisconsin made up a fabulous panel that talked about what we can do to ‪#‎ProtectAllWomen‬.

Wonderful!  Fabulous!
What we can do to ProtectAllWomen ...
   who are totally vulnerable to physical assault by Violent Mean Men ...

Oh, DO go read the comments!

(Is a Nobel Peace Prize in store for Gabby and Mark?  They are SOOooooo likeable!  I wish I could get shot in the head so people would like me, too!)

[GUSH]

(Does that include the 50,000  men who died in Vietnam (some of whom were my friends), and the thousands who died in the middle East? And the First Responders who died on 9/11?  And the policemen who take a bullet so you don't have to?)

Mississippi has 2nd highest rate of gun deaths

Mississippi has 2nd highest rate of gun deaths:

In addition to hospitality and humidity, Mississippi also is among the leaders in the nation for gun deaths, according to a report issued by a crime prevention advocacy group.
 In fact, the Magnolia State has the second highest rate of gun deaths – at nearly 18 deaths per 100,000 residents – in the country, following neighbor Louisiana perched at the top of the list compiled by the Violence Policy Center.

Do these studies include suicides?
I ask because I have driven through Mississippi .. this is the only state where I saw a man plowing a field behind a mule.  If that was my only choice, I would be sorely tempted to suicide.

 The study found that states with weak gun violence prevention law and higher rates of gun ownership tend to have more gun deaths, while states with stricter laws and lower ownership, such as Rhode Island, have much lower rates of gun-related deaths.

Do these studies include Chicago and Washington, D.C.?  I thought not.   These are among the municipalities with the highest murder rates in the nation .. and with the most strict gun-control laws.

It isn't the laws, it's the society.

Personal to Josh Sugarman:
When you insist that more laws are needed, you're not paying attention to reality.  The laws only work for the people who are inclined to obey the laws.  When the people ignore the laws .. the law-abiding have no 'fall-back' options.  And it is this option which you are attempting to remove.

I would call you a stupid f**king Son-of-a-Bitch, but I'm pretty sure you know exactly what you are doing.  You don't care about the people; you only care about the laws.  Well, that and promoting a sinecure by which you can profit from the misery of millions.  It's not being Socially Responsible, but (given certain mendacious criteria) one cannot call it "Stupid".

I take back the "stupid" part.
The "F**king Son-of-a-Bitch" part, however, seems entirely appropriate.

 In Mississippi, more than half of its residents own guns. 

Where are the statistics? I don't trust the VPC (agenda-driven at best) and any time they make a bold statement such as this .. without showing supportive sources AND without referencing death rates by cause by state ... it sounds just like a LIE to me.

There are Lies, Damned Lies, and Statistics.  In your case, you don't even bother with Statistics.

That shows how believable you are, doesn't it?

"Gun violence is preventable, and states can pass effective laws that will dramatically reduce gun death and injury," states VPC Executive Director Josh Sugarmann. "Our analysis also shows that states with weak gun violence prevention laws and easy access to guns pay a severe price with gun death rates far above the national average."

Yes gun violence IS preventable; but states can NOT legislate "...the rate of gun deaths and injury".   That's just so much hogwash; you and VPC know it. There was never a law which would not be broken; and every time a death results from a broken law, VPC and their (your) agenda-driven cronies are first to announce that: "We Need tougher Laws!"

As if firearms are not the most highly regulated retail product in the world.  Pthaaaa!

[end personal]

VPC is a hope-and-dream organization, hiding their propaganda behind un-cited statistics in pursuit of their hidden agenda; to totally eliminate firearms from the American culture.

And if their dream is realized, then this country is reduced to Rule By Brute Force.
Anyone who is bigger and stronger, and able to intimidate the weak, can dominate the American public.

At least, those who cannot afford to hire armed body-guards is subject to Rule by  Brute Force.

VPC, the Brady Bunch ... they seem comfortable with taking away YOUR means of self-defense.  When they go out in public, they and their lackeys are invariably accompanied by armed guards.

(See, for example, here, and here.) (But also see here.)

That is just how comfortable they are, in their elitist/well-funded status.

A pox on both your houses!

Lock Up Your Gun!

McManus to Gun Owners: Lock Up Your Gun Every Time You Get Home!:

 Following the deaths of two children in San Antonio after they got their hands on guns that had been left lying around the house, Police Chief William McManus is issuing a heartfelt appeal to holders of Concealed Handgun Licenses---lock up your guns!

Um ... no, I don't think so.

Any 'children' who break into my LOCKED house (I live alone) and find my guns, and shoot themselves?  Or their play friends?

Darwin Moment.

Most of my guns reside in the gun safe; those that do not, are stashed where they are 'difficult to access' unless you already know where they are .. and sometimes even then, if you're a child.

Children are not welcome in my home, for that reason.  Any parent who allows his child to roam free, to the extend of breaking through locked doors and ransacking my house?

You're the criminal.  You are responsible.

Parents: teach your children about guns, even if you hate guns and wouldn't have one in your home .... teach your children.  Listen to Eddie Eagle, if it helps.

STOP!  DON\'T TOUCH! WALK AWAY!  TELL AN ADULT! etc.

If you don't teach your children about guns, they'll find out themselves.  The hard way.

They're not MY children; I can live with that.

Can you?

NOTE:  This is not intended to suggest that I am indifferent to mishaps which may endanger the health or life of a child; the intent is to impress upon parents that THEY are singularly responsible for teaching their offspring the knowledge, wisdom and forbearance which will enable their brats to grow up to be Progressive Parents who believe that a child's search for knowledge and experience should not be hindered by parental admonitions.

The 3.5 Rules of Gun Safety:

Deputies: Man shoots stranger in leg while trying to sell gun | HeraldTribune.com:

 Masotti took the gun out of a lock-box and “racked the slide,” which involves manually moving the gun's slide so a gun can load the first round of ammunition from a magazine into its chamber. As he tried to adjust the gun, it fired a round into the stranger's right thigh. Masotti tried to give the handgun to a friend, who arrived just after the shooting, to hide, but Masotti's friend refused to hide the gun and instead stayed in the parking lot with the victim. 

Things to remember:

1. ALWAYS keep the gun pointed in a safe direction;
2. ALWAYS keep your finger off the trigger until you're ready to shoot;
3. ALWAYS keep the gun unloaded until ready to shoot.
4. The Florida Rule: "Hey, Y'all!  Watch THIS!"

Showing The Results Of Gun Control

Chicago Homicide Rate 1960-2012; Showing The Results Of Gun Control | Extrano's Alley, a gun blog:

The effects of the State of Illinois FOID law, the Gun Control Act of 1968; Fred Roti’s gun ban bill Mayor Jane Byrne signed into law, and other hindrances to private gun ownership have all done their part to drive Chicago’s violent crime and murder rates sky high.

Here's a novel suggestion: Chicago should make it illegal for cops to carry guns.
Everybody else?  Knock yourself out, go buy whatever makes you feel comfortable.

What?  They could do worse?

OOPS! My Bad ....

Investigation Underway After Officer Fired Gun In Courthouse  CBS Miami:

"I'm the ONLY ONE here who is qualified to carry this gun".

Yeah, well ....

Court interpreter Peter Fleitas says he worries every day about the weapons in the family law courthouse. “These accidents happen. They should not allow anyone in the building with a gun. That’s definite. They should have other means to restrain people,” said Fleitas.

What he said.

Tips On Staying Alive When the Bullets Start to Fly

Tips On Staying Alive When the Bullets Start to Fly:

For the past couple months, shootings seem to be all I see on the news. Violence is running rampant, and though the people doing the shootings seem to definitely have mental illnesses or grudges, you can’t help but wonder if this is the new status quo for our country. With all the attention and media hype given to the subject, (I’d go so far as to bet that if the media stopped reporting and sensationalizing this violence, the number of shootings would drop – but what do I know?) as well as the always present debates of gun control and help for the mentally ill, it seems to me that these acts of violence are becoming more and more prevalent in society today as a way to “show the world” what your problems are, what your beliefs are, and how far you’ll go to show what a martyr you’ll be for your own cause. It’s appalling and frightening – and a reason to be prepared.

Geek Advice:

RUN!   

Run away as fast as you can, and find something solid to hide behind!

If you do anything else, you will either get shot, or find yourself searching for an affordable lawyer because ... let's face it ... your friendly neighborhood GOVERNMENT has no interest in protecting someone who carries a gun for 'self-defense'.

Or for any other reason, except perhaps to rob a liquor store.

Drone Alert!

Oregon Company To Create Drone-Detecting Devices | The Daily Caller:

An Oregon company is developing drone-detecting devices because of peoples’ concerns about privacy and drone use. Domestic Drone Countermeasure has started a Kickstarter campaign to develop these sensors. And according to The Verge, DDC has been working on this technology for over a year. Their desktop sensor system will be able to identify when a drone is within 50 feet*. “There are legitimate uses for domestic drones, but there are still concerns about privacy and surveillance by various entities,” said Amy Ciesielka, founder of DDC.

* That's just SILLY!

Your Government's drones can spy on you from much higher altitudes!

5 Dead, 19 Wounded in Weekend Chicago Violence | NBC Chicago

5 Dead, 19 Wounded in Weekend Chicago Violence | NBC Chicago: Latest homicide took place around 7:30 p.m. near 55th Street and Lake Shore Drive

So, it was a relatively quiet weekend in Chicago?

Mayor Rahm: Has it occurred to you that "Hope and Change" isn't working for you?  Maybe you should .. I don't know .. actually DO something more than merely HOPING that things will CHANGE! Has that proved to be an inadequate method of leadership?

Just believing really HARD in Fairies isn't going to keep Tinker Bell alive.

Just thought I would mention that; feel free to ignore my hopeful wishes.  You've ignored your constituents, so this shouldn't prove very difficult for you.

After all, you're only responsible for the welfare the entire city of Chicago.  You managed to ignore the welfare of a Nation for years.   This should be a slam-DUNK for you!

Dear Carlolyn B. Maloney ....

You're an idiot ... you know that, don't you?

Oh, you're a politician, and so I repeat myself.

Sorry.

(PS: So are your friends, the editors of the New York Times who give you free column inches to say absolutely nothing ... illiterately ... operating within a Hidden Agenda?   Has it occurred to you that they are giving you space to make a fool of yourself in public because they are laughing at you behind your back?  No, I suppose not.)

Congress and Guns - NYTimes.com:

“Legislating Ignorance About Guns” (editorial, June 17) rightly points out the shocking lack of research into the causes of gun violence and what might be done to lessen the toll. That is why I have introduced legislation in the House (H.R. 4707) to fund critical gun violence research.

"I'll be blamed for this!"

[Video] WHY I CARRY: Suspect Brutally Beats Pregnant Clerk During Robbery:
(June 21, 2014)

The video shows the suspect enter the store, mill around for a few moments and then brutally punch the pregnant clerk in the face before taking money out of the register. Now, a gun would obviously not have helped the woman as she was sucker punched, but she certainly could have drawn it before the suspect got around the counter and been ready.

THIS is how "Non-Firearms" violence looks.  It isn't pretty.

Note to Robber:  We're better off without you.

(H/T: "Guns Save Lives")

Note the detachment of the assailant/robber.  He just wants the money; he doesn't care about anyone or anything else.

Where are you "more safe" than clerking in a Cell Phone Store?

This happened in Florida, but it could happen any where.

The sheer brutality ... I've watched people die, I've done worse.

But not worse than this.

I don't think that the outcome would have changed if this woman was carrying a firearm; she was completely brutalized by a single punch.

I disagree; being armed would not have changed a single moment.  If I was the victim, and I were armed, I would probably acted in exactly the same way .. including her dismay at discovering that the cash drawer had been emptied; her first thought was probably:

"I'll be blamed for this!"

This is probably close to what a "Home Invasion" looks like, if anyone videotaped one.  Complete and immediate domination by the invader(s) and the "resident" completely unprepared for "The Worse Thing That Can Happen".

Except nobody got killed.  That's A Good Thing ... and isn't that a Sad Thing to say?

Could be worse: they could have stayed in Minnesota

Somali-Americans leave homes, friends in Minnesota to fight alongside ISIS jihadis | Fox News:
(June 22, 2014)

 As many as 15 Somali-American men have left their homes in Minnesota in recent months to travel to the Middle East and join up with ISIS, the jihadist army at war with Syria and Iraq, according to Minnesota Public Radio.
 The fighters appear to have made the decision to go fight with Islamic State of Iraq and Syria/Levant while the terror group was fighting to overthrow Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad, but some may now be in Iraq, where the marauding group is seeking to topple Baghdad.
 "A Muslim has to stand up for [what's] right," Abdirahmaan Muhumed told MPR News through a series of Facebook messages dating back to the beginning of the year. "I give up this worldly life for Allah." 

It's just a short step from leaving America for the sake of committing Jihad in the Middle East, to deciding to stay in Minnesota for the same purpose:

Overthrowing a political entity which holds goals and values with which the "Jihadists" do not agree.

Well.  Americans did the same thing in the 18th Century, and for much the same reason.  Is that the same thing?

Possibly.