Liberal Focus on Criminals ... and Citizens are criminals

America’s Obsession with Powerful Handguns Is Giving Criminals Deadlier Tools - The Trace:

There are more high-caliber pistols available on the civilian market in the U.S. than ever before. In the last two decades, manufacturers have pumped out huge quantities of these guns, marketing them as weapons perfectly suited for a specific purpose: repelling human attackers.

"The Trace" (arguably, an offshoot of The Daily KOS .. a notorious Liberal blogger who is knee-jerk reactionaryily against the Second Amendment Rights of American citizens) is focusing on the sales records of "high-caliber" firearms.

It's mission statement is:

The Trace is an independent, nonprofit and nonpartisan news organization dedicated to expanding public understanding of gun violence in the United States. There is an urgent need for the knowledge that public interest journalism can provide, because in this case one problem — America’s epidemic rates of shooting deaths and injuries, which leave 33,000 people killed annually and another 79,000 wounded — is compounded by another: a shortage of information about the issue. It is The Trace’s mission to close that deficit through daily reporting,investigations, analysis, and commentary on the policy, politics, culture, and business of guns in America.

(Just so we all understand the background of the website.)

Why did The Trace make this statement?

Because it makes the news.

Not because it's a significant factor in The War Against Guns.  It's just another liberal website with the intention to counter Conservative Talk.  They have already established their political stance; now they're pursuing their mission statement.  We could expect no better from them.

The whole thing is (as you suspected) merely a Talking Point which they figure will give them the high ground ... moral equivalence ...because if they talk about POWERFUL HANDGUNS they can make it seem as if standard defensive calibers are somehow A Bad Thing.

Oh, and about that whole ... manufacturers have pumped out huge quantities of these guns    ....  thing?

Well, hell yes!  Any manufacture makes the product which is in great demand by their market.

America ... when's the last time you saw a .22 short?  A .22 Long?  Even the venerable .22 Long rifle has its niche market, which is plinking at tin cans and varmint shooting at close range.   NOBODY today builds a firearm which is restricted to the anemic .22 short or the ineffective .22 Long cartridge.

Of COURSE the demand for more effective (defensive rounds) has increased.  They build the product which sells, and since the recent trend of  'mass shootings' has focused on Public Places, Americans have armed themselves to defend against "The Threat Which Must Not Be Named"!

And since the original article is careful not to define the term "High Caliber", it's logical to assume that (by their terms) the .22 Long Rifle falls within the category.  Or not.

They don't cite the source for their 'statistics'.

And they lament the "... shortage of information about the issue" ??

PS: It's worth your while to see what Herschel has to say about the issue:

Crowd thrilled w/ surprise!

I'm pretty sure I don't understand the vindictive parts.


Kellyanne Conway celebrates her historic win; Left focus on Conway’s body, hurl sexual slurs – twitchy.com: 

Honoring the ultimate hero at the Mercer "Heroes and Villians" party on Long Island. Crowd thrilled w/ surprise!

It must be a Liberal/Progressive thing that ordinary people aren't suppose to 'get'.

Whew!

Thank God I'm not a Liberal Progressive ... the things they say embarrass me, and I'm I'm an ex-Army platoon sergeant.

I thought I knew all the ways to curse someone.  There's a lot about cursing I haven't yet learned .. nor do I want to learn!

I'll never be a Liberal Progressive, if this is the example they embrace.

NSFW!

"Get Training"

The Shooting Wire today included an excellent commentary on the problems of training would-be gun handlers (AKS: "New Shooters") in the safe gunhandling practices, which include drawing from the holster.

"Get Training" | Shooting Wire:
(Rich Grassi: December 09, 2016)

We continue to face a huge number of new gun owners and new shooters – something that had its beginning in 1986 with the advent of 'shall-issue' concealed carry permits, continued through the years of the Clinton gun ban from 1994 until its sunset, and really ramped up in the age of internet forums, internet video and the Global War on Terror. Something that continued the drive to more private gun ownership was self-identification of the Democrat Party as the "Party of Infringement" (h/t, Stephen Wenger) and a federal government that continued to be threatening as certain individual states rushed to get state-level infringements of their own passed.  

Still, to the new gun owners and new shooters, we've all been saying "Get Training!"

Grassi points out that there are so many new shooters, there are not enough experienced/qualified instructors to provide the training which they need.   And again, even people who have some experience shooting pistols are usually not experienced in drawing from the holster.

Which is a special skill ... and that is not intuitively obvious!

Trending story that Clinton won just 57 counties is untrue

Well, this is less embarrassing for the Democrats.

But not MUCH less embarrassing!


Trending story that Clinton won just 57 counties is untrue | U.S. ELECTIONS:

NEW YORK (AP) — Dec. 6, 2016 9:39 AM ESTA trending story that claims Hillary Clinton won a total of 57 counties in the presidential election is untrue. The Associated Press finds that Clinton won 487 counties nationwide, compared with 2,626 for President-elect Donald Trump. The story appeared on several viral content sites that cater to some of Trump's supporters. It also falsely claimed that Clinton outpaced Trump by more than 2 million votes in the five counties that comprise New York City, which the story said accounted for the entirety of her lead in the national popular vote. An AP count finds that Clinton beat Trump by roughly 1.5 million votes in New York City. Nationwide, Clinton holds a popular vote lead of more than 2 million. The AP considers parishes in Louisiana as counties in election tallies. Washington, D.C., and Alaska have a single statewide reporting unit. Virginia's count includes 95 counties and 38 independent cities.

[emphasis added]

I love this gag!

Jedi Girl’s Terrifying Telekinetic Prank Is A TOTAL FREAK OUT! You’d Be Freaked Out Too!: What if telekinesis is real? How would you react? Hidden camera experiment captures the frantic reactions of unsuspecting customers at a New York City coffee shop as they witness a most bizarre telekinetic event.

Doctors ... talk funny

Out of the Frying Pan and Into the Line of Fire – Doctors for Responsible Gun Ownership:

 Americans have been spared a potentially devastating assault on our right to armed self defense, thanks in no small part to the efforts of gun rights organizations and the votes of gun owners across the country.  But until laws and judicial appointments secure these critical victories, our patient will not be out of the woods.  The Second Amendment has made it to the transplant unit, but continuing efforts are still required lest it succumb. 

 Despite his recent statements, prior to the presidential election cycle Donald Trump’s public positions on the right to keep and bear arms have been at best inconsistent.  It is imperative that supporters of the Second Amendment maintain the pressure on the incoming Trump administration and other politicians to make the appointments and enact the legislation that they have promised.  Until these steps have been completed, our patient is not out of jeopardy.  

 Until a Second Amendment friendly majority is re-established on the Supreme Court, our right to keep and bear arms lingers near death.  Until national concealed carry reciprocity is established, like “The Boy in the Plastic Bubble,” our personal freedoms will continue to end at arbitrary lines on the map.  Until federally mandated, so-called “gun free zones” are abolished, our schoolchildren will remain targets for those bent on evil.  Until the National Firearms Act of 1934 is reformed, pointless restrictions that contribute nothing to public safety will continue to plague us.  Ill-conceived and arbitrary magazine capacity bans will continue to afflict us until that issue is effectively addressed as well. 

But they speak the truth.  (Well, these guys do!)

"I Saw Mommy Kissing Santa Claus"

"No shit, I was there, this really happened!"

Yep.   Tuned into my local radio station and they're running vintage "Christmas Season Songs" (not carols, but the schmaltzy stuff that I remember from my very early childhood".

I'm tempted to keep tuned until they play "All I Want for Christmas Is My Two Front Teeth", but I don't want to spoil my dinner.

But I don't mind spoiling YOUR dinner!

Hard-Charging Congressional Examination by Senator McClain (2005)

The Greatest Congressional Testimony Ever Given - YouTube:

 Published on Dec 1, 2016 this guy does not care about anything he says whatever he wants video from 2005

No, I have no idea what this is all about.

Apparently, at least some of the participants are equally clueless.

I kept waiting for Drew Carey to appear.  He couldn't make it so he sent this guy.

Actually, I was hoping for Mimi Bobeck's testimony.

The Grown-ups Win One

I'm pleased that at least one California judge understands the difference between Fantasy and Reality.

Shooting Wire:
(December 02, 2016)

 NEWTOWN, Conn. - A California Appellate Court has reversed the Fresno Superior Court's dismissal of the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) and the Sporting Arms and Ammunition Manufacturers' Institute (SAAMI) lawsuit seeking an injunction to block enforcement of the state's ammunition microstamping law and remanded the case back to the lower court to hear arguments. 

 "We are pleased by today's ruling because it means we will now be able to prove in court that this ill-considered law must be enjoined because it is literally impossible to comply with its requirements, and the law never requires the impossible. We have long maintained that this nascent, unproven and unreliable technology should not have been mandated. When we ultimately prevail in this case, law-abiding consumers in California will once again be able to purchase new models of pistols this law currently prevents our industry members from selling in the state," said Lawrence G. Keane, NSSF Senior Vice President and General Counsel.

What this means, of course, is that California shooters may have one less Impossible Thing to do before breakfast.    Doesn't it feel good when you fight the Jabberwocky, and win?

The YouTube School of USPSA Competition

I'm looking forward to teaching my Introduction to USPSA class this coming Saturday because it's going to be SO EASY!

The class is only 3 days away, and the sign-ups have been available for a month, but so far nobody has contacted me to pre-register!   Which is surprising, because it is sponsored by my home club, and we don't charge you for the class.

And it's too bad, because when you get a chance to learn about USPSA competition and it doesn't cost you anything but a few hours of your time (one Saturday afternoon) and a couple of boxes of ammunition.

That's a bargain that's hard to find.

 Looking at the USPSA website, I can't find any place where people can look up clubs which offer this training.  I think that information should be available for potential new shooters.   And I wouldn't expect to find it on the official website, because most of the people who are doing this training are offering private or semi-private lessons/classes.

But private classes take enough time to deal with each individual shooter to correct problems, provide guidance, and evaluate student performances.  Those which teach a group, rather than an individual, allow students to learn from each others' mistakes as well as their Good Practices.

One resource which I have found (for those who can't find or afford a private class) is You Tube.

I've spend the past  couple of evenings surfing YouTube channels for videos of training sessions.   I haven't seen anyone teaching an actual class, but several are available showing individual training sessions.

Unfortunately, even long videos don't show you everything you need to know to begin competing in USPSA matches.

Usually, the videos are limiting their content to one of three categories:

Practicing "From The Holster"

I ran across an old (2010) article at "The Truth About Guns" titled How Not To Draw A Gun From a Holster

From the article:

The holster action starts at 1:19. The wisdom of holstering a gun on an empty chamber is open to debate. The main disadvantage: racking the slide is a complicated maneuver at the exact moment in your life when you don’t need any complications.

I'm glad to see these young men practicing; they clearly need it.  One guy took about 10 seconds to engage 3 pepper poppers; it took him five shots to knock them down.

Here's the video:


(Turn the volume down ... the music is annoying and too loud)

I'm glad to see them practicing, because they clearly need it, but they'r practicing bad habits.

Here's how it should look:



Her time: 13 seconds

Of course, she started with a loaded pistol in her holster.

But his honesty is terrifying

ALL Celebrities are ... almost without exception ... liars, egotists, over-achievers and often insecure.  This category includes specifically Entertainers and Politicians.

If this sounds like an overly broad castigation of people whose names we all know, it's not.

In order to present themselves in front of an audience, these people NEED to be driven to success in their chosen fields.   I couldn't do that, and perhaps you couldn't either.


There's a story about James Dean in the movie GIANT:  he needed to go on camera for a major scene in the movie, and there was a huge crowd of 'civilians' watching the filming at the outdoor location.

When called for the next scene, Dean got out of his chair,walked over to the corral, unzipped his trousers and urinated all over the fence posts.  When he finished, he zipped up and told the Director (George Stevens)"   "Well, if I can piss in front of a hundred strangers, I guess I can do this scene."

That's why Entertainers and Politicians need to be so extroverted:   they have to do the things that not everyone can do.

And that's why politicians need to be Bigger Than Life.  (Ronald Reagan was the perfect exemplar of both, by the way.)

Which leads us to the main point: Joe Huffman

'House Of Cards' Star Neve Campbell Admits She's 'Terrified Of Donald Trump White House Victory' | The Huffington Post:
(01/03/2016 14:52 | Updated 01 March 2016)

“He’s an ideologue, he’s got extreme ideas, and people are looking for a big change at the moment, at the opposite end from Bernie Sanders. “And there is a good amount of ignorance in America, of people who are angry and disappointed but don’t educate themselves in why, and how it can be fixed. “They see someone off the cuff and broad, and they think ‘ok, that’s the voice we need, just someone honest. “But his honesty is terrifying.

"Off The Cuff and Broad ... Honest .. Terrrifying"

Well, yes.   That's the way it should be.  An American President should be all these things.  If the President Elect of the United States of America can't inspire awe in a television actress, how can he be expected to inspire respect and awe in the contentious diplomacy needed to maintain America's image of the Big Dog on the international political scene?

If I exercise my 2nd Amendment Rights, Should I feel like a 2nd Class Citizen?

I've asked this question before, and I still haven't found "A Good Answer".
My  personal answer is to yield to my family preference ... but I've never felt comfortable with it;

New York Times: What To Do If A Guest Wants to Bring a Gun to Thanksgiving Dinner - The Truth About Guns:

No doubt Anonymous’ sister rolled her eyes at the anxiety in her sibling’s voice when the question was presented.Mr. Galanes’ response: Follow up. Ask, “How did Jim feel about leaving his gun at home?” In the event of pushback (or noncommittal dithering), add: “We know that Jim is a responsible gun owner. We just don’t want guns in our home.” If you continue to believe she’s shining you on, install a metal detector at the front door. Happy Thanksgiving!

Yes, I've been exposed to the same question in my family, and I've never felt comfortable with it.

The answer is a personal response, and so far I've always yielded to the preference of my family.

 When I asked "I suppose it would better not to bring my gun to the wedding" (for example), my family has always been negative ... and I have always acquiesced to their preference.

I've never felt comfortable that I bowed to their preference, and I'm darned if I know whether it was better for me to feel uncomfortable, or for them to feel uncomfortable.

Ultimately, I think it's better that they not know that I continue my usual habit of carrying.

If they can see that I am armed, I am not "doing it right".
If they feel uncomfortable knowing I'm armed in a social situation, I'm not carrying "concealed", and that't My Bad; there should never be a circumstance when I'm obviously carrying.

But that's the whole point.  Do I have a responsibility to inform them that I'm carrying?

I feel a responsibility to inform my family that I'm armed in social situations.  Perhaps I'm offering them a choice which is not fair to them, because nobody else in the family carries a firearm.

And perhaps I'm asking them a question  (should I leave my gun at home?) which causes them great discomfort, and in doing so I'm asking them to tell me that I should not carry in a familial situation?  I get the impression that they would rather I had not asked, because they really didn't want to deal with the question.

Should I ask their permission to carry in a family gathering?
Or should I merely tell them, so they are informed?
Or should I just carry without informing them; leaving them outside the "Decision Curve"?

I've been carrying for decades.  My family is aware (although I haven't made an issue of it), and of course there has never been a cause for it to become an issue.  But when I ask if it's 'appropriate' for the moment, the answer from my family is invariably "NO!"

Who do I listen to:  My family (to whom I will lie, and carry anyway), or my conscience?

Ot to my personal judgement?

Rethinking Firearms Safety (Redux)

Beth at Delta Defense has a fresh Point of View about training New Shooters:

She had a "Pointing The Gun At The Instructor" moment, and found herself in an uncomfortable situation which is not unfamiliar to any firearms-for-newbies instructor:

BUT she turned it into a learning experience for the instructors!

Rethinking Firearms Safety | Pacifiers & Peacemakers - USCCA: ;

A few hours later, as we were out on the shooting range, putting their fresh knowledge and skills to work, one of the ladies, excited about her very first shot, briefly turned to high-five her friend … with the muzzle of her revolver pointed straight at my husband. He immediately stepped over and corrected the issue, taking the time to review that the muzzle needs to be pointed in the safest direction (downrange, in this case) at all times! 

(All Emphasis Added)

I quite concur!

In my six  (+) years experience teaching an "Introduction to USPSA" class, I've often seen class participants who become overly exuberant with their newfound expertise ... and immediately forget everything they've learned .. especially that which made them feel so exuberant.

The mantra which Beth & Company have espoused is "Not A Safe Direction" (printed on the shirts of the instructors!)

I quite agree, and I think that there are some reasonable t-shirt designs which I may consider adopting in the near future for the benefit of my own classes ... and for myself!

However, that mantra that I personally inject into my own classes is this:

RULE NUMBER ONE: DO NOT FRIGHTEN THE RANGE OFFICER!

Not as pithy as "NOT A SAFE DIRECTION", admittedly.  And perhaps it's excessively exclusionary.

But I teach the USPSA rules, which include:

1. Finger off the trigger when moving (except when engaging targets)
2. MUZZLE! (keep it pointed downrange)
3. SWEEPING (don't point the gun at your own personal body parts)
4. DROPPED GUN (if it hits the ground and you're not touching it, you're outta here!)
5. D&D (Drunk and Disorderly: which means no intoxicants or rude behavior on the range)
6. Over The Hill (if the round goes over the berm, you go home)
7. Chearing (competition is an orderly sport; if you break the rules, you go home)

Those are my personal interpretations, but for new shooters they're easier to remember than the dozen pages in chapter 15 of the USPSA rule book.




x

Tell It To The Judge

Trump's Victory Has Fearful Minorities Buying Up Guns - NBC News:

 In one high-profile incident, the live-streamed aftermath of the shooting of Philando Castile at a traffic stop at the hands of police in Minnesota sparked country-wide outrage and was ruled manslaughter. That and another death in Louisiana sparked a protest in Dallas, which a sniper took advantage of to kill five police officers.

You don't have to be a threat to the cops.  You just have to be reasonable.

I was pulled over by a local policeman a few years ago for speeding.

He was right; my Lady was sick, needed a refill of her Cancer medicine from the Pharmacist,
I was more concerned about getting the pain-relieving drugs to her as quickly as possible than I was about driving safely.

It was dark when the policeman pulled me over, and I recognized that he may not feel safe in the encounter.   I knew that he had called my license plate in, and they had told him that I had a CHL (Concealed Handgun License).

When he pulled me over, there was a 3 minute delay while he checked up on me through the radio.

During that time I pulled out my drivers license, my insurance card, and my CHL.

When he approached my car, I had the interior lights on, my hands on the wheel, and those three documents in my hand.  He asked me for my drivers license, and I gave him all the the information he needed to know (and which he had probably already received from his station downtown).

After I gave him the three documents, we chatted for a few minutes.  I acknowledged that I was driving too fast, and explained why.  I was in the wrong, so I was not confrontational.

Hell, he had me dead to rights.

But he wasn't afraid of me.

Even though I told him that I had a pistol in the compartment between the front seats.

My hands were in plain sight on the steering wheel at all times ... again, with the interior light on.

I was no threat to him.

He let me go with only a warning.  Well, it probably helped that I hadn't had a ticket in the past 5 years, but I HAD a warning on a speeding charge 6 years earlier.  That didn't matter.

Folks ... if you're pulled over by a cop, you probably deserve it.  Even if you think you do NOT deserve it, the best thing you can do (especially if you have a CHL) is to NOT present a threat!

If you think it's a bum rap, go to court and explain it to the judge.  He probably doesn't have a gun.

(I actually had that experience 20 years ago ... explained the situation to the judge: he let me go because I manned up and because I was trying to merge with fast traffic at the off-ramp of a bridge.)

I'm not black, so I can't speak to their experience.
All I an say is ,,, well, I've already said it: man up, don't be a jerk, take the ticket if you deserve it.

If you don't deserve it, tell it to the judge.

Not Going To Happen

This Lawsuit Could Shatter ALL Federal Gun Control Laws:

Put bluntly, this could be huge. When Shane Cox began selling his homemade firearms and silencers out of his military surplus store, he stamped “Made in Kansas” on them to assure buyers that a Kansas law would prevent federal prosecution of anyone owning firearms made, sold and kept in the state.

For the last half century, federal laws have repeatedly been established as an over-riding mandate over states rights.   So this isn't going to happen.

Eisenhower made that clear in 1954 during "Brown vs the Board of Education" in Topeka, Kansas,
... and later (1957) in Little Rock in terms of segregation:

On May 17, 1954, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Brown vs. Topeka Board of Education that segregated schools are "inherently unequal." In September 1957, as a result of that ruling, nine African-American students enrolled at Central High School in Little Rock, Arkansas.

I agreed with him (Eisenhower) then, and I still do.  *  I'm not sure today that States' Rights shouldn't get a larger say in this issue, but that's because I'm as biased on the issue of gun rights today as I was on human rights 60 years ago.

But this discussion isn't about home-made silencers; it's about what the Federal government encourages, vs what it discourages.

Basically, I guess my point is that I believe in the rights of the individual.  Whether to get a good education, be treated like anyone else, or to to build his own firearms ... that's an individual right.

When the government supports individual rights, I side with the government.

When the government decides it knows better than the individual, I side with the individual.

I still believe that the government ,,,  municipal, regional, state or federal ... is the servant of the people.

When the politicians begin to think they have the right (or the duty) to restrict the rights of all individuals, then I'm anti-government.

Can't say it plainer than that.

*

NFA Firearms Ads

I have no idea; this is listed merely as a curiosity

NFA Firearms Ads: Listed for sale is one (1) John Benjamin, JCB M16 Autosear, commonly known as a DIAS. As you are aware these come up for sale only very rarely as they allow you to legally convert nearly any AR15 lower to include Colt LE901's into a select fire machine gun. Any SP1 spec/low shelf receiver this is installed into can be configured into any multitude of configurations imaginable. It truly is the ultimate for any shooter in today's market. John Benjamin/JCB DIAS's are considered amongst the most desirable as they are nearly indestructible being made from heat treated oil quenched tool steel. This example has had untold 10's of thousands of rounds and is still using the original trip. Truly drop-in and ready to go. References available upon request. $40,000 upfront funding gets the paperwork processing, on Form 4 in Oregon.

The 'good thing' about driving a Skoda is ... you get to go out in style

Terrified driver decapitated in 119mph horror crash moments after telling police car was 'stuck in cruise control' - Mirror Online:

The modern car's engine screaming at high revs as Mr Gandhi frantically pushed the engine ignition button during the ride of terror in the minutes before his death, the inquest heard. The coroner heard the car was finally brought to a sickening halt when it slewed off the motorway and into the lay-by where the flat-bed lorry was parked. Emergency services who arrived at the scene soon after the crash found Mr Gandhi's headless body in the wreckage. Almost the whole car was embedded under the lorry, with only its back wheels emerging and its roof torn off. The white Skoda hit the huge three-axle HGV with such force that its rear axle was pushed to the front of the trailer.

... but up until then, he looked really good!

(Am I the only one who is unconvinced that the driver couldn't have stalled the car by shifting into neutral, stepping on the brake, or shutting off the ignition?)

Docs hate Glocks

Once again, a physician with an affiliation to Doctors for Responsible Gun Ownership (DRGO) speaks truth to the AMA.

You can read down to find the links and the details, but what this doctor is saying to guys who are shooting each other in drug and turf wars,  is:

"You're a bunch of gun-crazy drug czars and you'll be shooting each others for the next millennium.
You'll never change.  No matter what WE do to keep you alive, you've probably going to shoot each other again and again and again ... and it's our job to clean up the mess.

* Interpretation:  Frankly, we're getting tired of this shit!  So since there's nothing we can do to resolve the societal issues which keep you assholes shooting each other, would you please stop it?  You're beginning to piss us off!  (And you don't want your Doctors to "Not Care" when you get shot!) *

*(Not a direct quote ... more of an .... interpretation!)

Can ‘Gun Violence’ Be Addressed as a Public Health Issue? – Doctors for Responsible Gun Ownership:

Violence done with guns is constantly in the headlines. Gun control advocates, health care sophists, and President Obama assert that ‘gun violence’ is a public health problem.

The latest volley, “Firearm-Related Injury and Death in the United States: A Call to Action” in the Annals of Internal Medicine February 24, comes from 8 medical specialty organizations plus the American Bar Association.
In the same edition is another meaningless exercise in pointless ‘research’: “Firearm-Related Hospitalization and Risk for Subsequent Violent Injury, Death, or Crime Perpetration”.
What an unexpected conclusion: “Hospitalization for a firearm-related injury is associated with a heightened risk for subsequent violent victimization or crime perpetration.” People at risk remain people at risk, until their risks change. Is it really valid to address gunshot injury and death as matters for public health intervention?
The short answer is that this is a smokescreen. The commission of gunshot injuries and deaths (‘gun violence’) cannot be fairly addressed as a ‘public health issue’, as that phrase has become used in its case.

(If anyone has a different interpretation, please phone me at 1-800-GangBangers because personally I don't much give a shit about gang boys shooting each other except they make the legitimate law-abiding gun owners look bad by comparison

And when the last gang-banger kills the next-to-last gang-banger, it still looks bad for honest firearms owners because the Liberals don't know the difference between us!

Fisking the NY Daily News ... it's too much fun

The New York Daily News has its panties in a bind, and the resultant whining BEGS to be made fun of.  Why?  Because they're idiots, devoid of sense, and SCREAMING to be spanked on their naked butt-cheeks!

Not for nothing did the National Rifle Association pump $38 million into electing Donald Trump President and another $24 million to secure the grip of Republicans in the Senate.  Within grasp now looms a trophy long sought: federal legislation that would, if passed by Congress, extend the right to carry a concealed firearm in any one state, no matter how minimal the licensing standards, to all 50.

Here's the original article.   It's a rare screed which takes too much space to display the ignorance of the author:

But I'll do it anyway: one of my favorite things (besides kittens and mittens) is disemboweling New York Editorials.    It's a cheap shot but I don't feel guilty about pointing out the logical fallacies of East Coast Liberals.

Let us proceed with the evisceration:

The statements of the author of the NYDN article are identified by color;

My statements are embedded in indented paragraphs and black bold.

The point is, the NRA calls for identical concealed-carry laws in all states, so that a person who can legally carry a concealed firearm in his/her home state is not subject to arrest or harassment in a neighboring (or any other) state.   The author objects on the grounds that state laws are, and should be, more stringent than federal laws.

Here is the screed, with my embedded arguments.


The NRA’s dead aim - NY Daily News:

No matter how readily another state arms individuals already known to law enforcement as prone to violence, New York would have to allow its permit holders to carry a hidden pistol in public, overriding state law allowing gun permits only to those with the temperament and need for a firearm.

The Second Amendment applies to all peoples, all states, and carries the same weight as the right to have an abortion: whether you agree with it or not, it is the National Creed and it trumps (excuse the pun) State Laws.   If you're an adult, not a felon, and you are in control of your emotions (not a lunatic), your constitutional right to possess and carry a firearm is guaranteed.

 How the NRA's grades for pols shape U.S. gun policy So it would go for New Jersey, and Connecticut, and other states with stringent safety-focused prerequisites for carrying guns. Trump promised “national right to carry” as part of an absolutist Second Amendment agenda that would leave in place gargantuan loopholes in existing background checks for gun buyers, which allow anyone — convicted felons and the mentally ill among them — to purchase firearms on the internet or at gun shows without interference. 

This is a lie.
There are no "loopholes" in the Second Amendment.
 Convicted felons MAY have their 2nd Amendment rights reinstated after release, if they have not been convicted of violent felonies ... "Forgers" are not considered violent felons, for example.  Their 2nd Amendment rights MAY be reinstated upon application and case-by-case approval, but this is a federal issue and not affected by any National Rifle Association influence.

 Even someone on the FBI’s terrorist watch list can stroll into a gun store without impediment if his or her criminal and mental health records are clean. That’s a rare, perhaps the only, loophole Trump has hinted at a willingness to close.

You may have overlooked that constitutional thingie called "Due Process".
That means that nobody is subject to arbitrary evisceration of their Constitutional Rights.
So you may not agree with my politics, but you can't deprive me of my liberties without taking me to court and proving (to the satisfaction of a judge or jury, and while I'm protected by legal counsel) that I have forfeited my rights by my illegal actions.
People get on the FBI's Terrorist Watch List because of suspicion.   They are there because a governmental agency has deemed them worth of special attention.  If they were found to be guilty of  a crime, they would be arrested.  And Prosecuted.  

Short of that level of confidence, nobody loses their Constitutional Rights. 

Suspicion is an heinious thing, and if you use that as your guide to abbrogating the rights of others ... I think you are a stinker and should not be allowed to exercise your First Amendment Right to Free Speech.
How do you like them apples?

 Atop that tinderbox the President-elect girds to pile what amounts to carte blanche for gun owners registered in states with barely-there licensing hurdles to traipse armed through states with much stricter conditions for carrying firearms in public. Every now and then, a poor, well-meaning tourist gets arrested at an airport for violating the law; pleas for leniency follow. The possibility of armed tourists and other visitors roaming streets where open- and concealed-carry is now heavily restricted is problematic enough, making cops’ jobs that much harder

Now you're just ranting ... and doing a darned poor job of it, too!
You talk about 'barely-there licensing hurdles', which I assume refers to the criteria to qualify for Concealed Handgun License (CHL) in the individual states.

I agree that we need to define reasonable criteria, but the national trend is that if you're not a convicted felon you haven't lost your Constitutional "Right To Keep And Bear Arms", so most states would issue a permit to a non-felon.   The local laws vary: as an example, some states restrict CHL owners from bearing arms in an environment where liquors are served as their primary income (bars, rather than restaurants)  But other states do not have this restriction, assuming that anyone who is sufficiently responsible to carry a handgun is sufficiently responsible to remain sober while doing so.
But your comments about a " .., a poor, well-meaning tourist gets arrested at an airport for violating the law ..." is very much to the point!
Why should that passerby (someone who has a ticket on a plane from Maine to Texas, but the plane is rerouted through New Jersey and the cops arrest the flier because he has a firearm in his checked luggage) be persecuted because his firearms are legal in Maine and Texas, but not in New Jersey

But that’s not even the main threat national right-to-carry reciprocity, as it’s called, would unleash. Because many states with especially lenient laws, such as Florida and Utah, invite outsiders to obtain their firearms permits, the federal law would as much as demolish New York’s common-sense limits. Live in New York, get a Florida permit — and, via the internet, a gun. 

And now, besides being ill-informed, you're just wrong.
 Buying a gun over the internet is illegal.  just as having a handgun in certain areas is illegal.   You can make contact with someone who owns a gun and wants to sell it over the internet, but the actual transaction must be made through a licensed dealer, who is required to perform a  background check through the National Instant Check System before completing the transfer.  I know, because I sold a pistol to an internet contact last year and it was a legal transfer; like all responsible gun owners, I was aware of the legal requirements and abided by them.

And oh .. by the way?  New York's "Common-sense limits" are neither common nor sensible.  They are anti-constitutional, onerous, disruptive, and contrary to the interests of your average citizen.  You don't agree?  How many OTHER states impose those illegal infringements on their citizens?  How's that "No Guns" thingie working for your citizens who have no defense against the thugs who don't obey the laws?   And don't get me started talking about Chicago, and Maryland, with some of the most restrictive laws and the most unrestricted thugs!

Needless, heartless, pointless: Blood would spill, because the gun manufacturers bought friends in Congress and now in the White House, because no one had the spine to take a stand. 

The Senate must. 

You know, they said the same thing when Florida opened their doors to legal, responsible gun owners to carry a concealed weapon.
What really happened was ... nothing.  Except crime went down, because muggers were aware that their victims might be prepared to defend themselves.
Blood will run?
Hasn't happened yet.    Well, except for the blood of bandits who run unchecked when robbing businesses, and the mild-mannered customer in the corner blows their brains out before they can kill the clerk.  That happens.
It's the new Cost of Doing Business for Bad Guys.
I call that a good thing.

Oh, NO!

It's not yet Thanksgiving, but my local radio station is already playing Christmas Carols in their ads!

("We Wish You A Merry Christmas ...")

I think it's very unfair that the Season of Political Posturing is immediately followed by the Season of Christmas Cheer!

Sometimes, growing old only means I must endure Unendurable Seasons of Public Broadcasting.

Can Trump Rob Peter To Pay Paul?

 Is our new president making promises he can't keep?

Oh, HELL yes!

Can Trump Deliver More Water to California's Farmers? - Breitbart:

President-elect Donald Trump has stated his commitment to helping California’s farmers attain more water, as the Golden State prepares to enter its historic sixth year of a crippling drought, with a federal water policy in place that favors fish over agriculture.

Where is he planning to get more water for California?

A large  (YUGE!) part of the water that soothes California Drinkin' comes from the Pacific North West ... parts of which have their own irrigation problem.

What's more important?  Salmon or Lettuce?

One of those problems is that the Pacific Salmon fishing industry (not so much the fish, as the people) depends on Salmon returning to spawn in their 'home waters.   Most of those waters are not located in California, but in Oregon and Washington.  And small farmers in Southern Oregon could produce bigger crops, if they could get more water.

When California draws irrigation water from other states, Pacific Salmon mortality rate soars.
The facts are, Oregon/Washington/Idaho/Colorado are already suffering from threats to harvests because they are sharing their water with California.

Not only are the Northern California farmers "part of the problem", but mega-cities such as San Francisco and Las Angeles are unable to provide sufficient water to service their rapidly growing population without "stolen water":

Colorado River Supply

A California Plumbing Supply industry (link at paragraph heading) provides the answer:
The Colorado River provides water usage to seven states, parts of Mexico, and several Native American tribes. Naturally, all parties are looking out for their own interests first. Many people in other states upriver resent having to let water they want to use flow by them and go to California.The Hetch Hetchy Aqueduct provides more than three-quarters of the water for urban San Francisco. It draws primarily from the area encompassing Yosemite National Park. The East Bay also gets most of its water from the high Sierra, via the Mokelumne Aqueduct. 

We're All "JOADS" Now:

These problems were not created by Donald Trump.  They were created by the mass immigration into California since the Dust Bowl brought failed farmers from Oklahoma to California back in the 1930's.

(See: Grapes of Wrath by John Steinbeck)

No American president has been able to find a better solution to California droughts than "Redistribution" ... which was Obama's solution to the flow of money; and we all know how well that worked out.

We will be treated to the drama of a billionaire who cannot buy himself out of a problem.  This is the immovable object being faced by the unstoppable force.

I can't wait to see how the Trump Administration handles itself.

Eliminating Liberal Reproduction?

The National Institutes of Health is spending roughly a quarter of a million dollars to create a video game about reproductive health. The University of Chicago and a video game developer were awarded a joint project this summer to develop a STEM game for teenagers called “Caduceus Quest,” named after a mythological symbol popularly (and incorrectly) associated with medicine.

I wonder ... is there a GoFundMe website where I can pay Liberals to NOT have children?

Liberals Are The party Of Peaceful Weasels .. what?

Oh, go read it. Or not. I'm tired of trying to keep track of liberal crap dumbfucks idiots academics

  Rutgers University Lecturer Visited By NYPD After Threatening To Kill All White People With A Gun…UPDATE: Threatened Trump Supporters As Well, Blames Trump For Being Questioned… | Weasel Zippers

*It's a Good Thing that Liberals are The Party of Peace.  it would be really gnarly if they were, like, emotional dunderheads with no shut-the-fuck-up valve or anything!)

Naturally some media on left picked this up, hysterically trumpeting, ‘It begins!’.
What begins? An idiot who has issues with white people who shouldn’t be teaching students made threatening remarks that police felt duty bound to check out?
Trump of course is only the president-elect and has no power to change anything or go after anyone.
By the way, Allred who refers to himself as a ‘Beyonce professor'(gee that’s a title, my degree is in Beyonce) isn’t actually a professor. Professor is a title that you earn through teaching and scholarship. He is a just a lecturer.
Allred got some media attention last year for saying there were ‘no good white people’.

NPR elucidates on NRA gun-control laws (what do THEY know?)

Following Election, NRA Goes On 'Offense'; Here's What It Could Aim To Do : The Two-Way : NPR:

 There are a number of laws that the NRA and gun enthusiasts would like to see change under the Trump administration. 

That's fair, and we are happy to discuss the issues.   But National Public Radio is a Liberal organization, and as such they have some concerns ... which may not be publicly acknowledged in every article they write or air.

I have my own issues.  Here are what NPR identifies, and what MY issues are:

ISSUE NUMBER 1!:

1. National reciprocity for concealed-carry permits 

This is the biggest-ticket item for the NRA and it's the most likely to happen. Trump, a concealed-carry-permit holder, has said that concealed carry "is a right, not a privilege," and that a permit should be valid in all 50 states, similar to a driver's license.

Simple:  If your state considers you sufficiently responsible to carry a concealed handgun in YOUR state all other states should recognize  your right to carry.

* Just now, that's difficult because each state has its own criteria.  For example, Oregon only requires you to pass background checks and pass a raining course; but the neighboring state Washington has slightly more stringent requirements, so Washington may not recognize an Oregon CHL even though Oregon recognizes (and respects) a Washington CHL.

*not a quote

Or word to that effect .. the details are a little more complicated, but that's a fair representation of the issues.

(TERMINOLOGY NOTE "CHL" = Concealed handgun Licence for the purpose of this discussion.)

The reference to "driver's license" rights is dismissive of the 2nd Amendment Constitutional Rights, but gun owners are willing to put this issue aside for the moment.

It gets complicated when CHL applicants complain that the 2nd amendment recognizes this right without the need to 'take a test', which many states require (as well as 'special training'),  It's a legitimate issue, but most folks are willing to allow this "misinterpretation" to be accepted as an administrative glitch;   for now.

(And Anti-Gun protesters claim that gun owners are not willing to compromise!)

ISSUE NUMBER 2!:

2: An end to gun-free military zones.

We've seen several instances where serving military have been assaulted by illegally armed individuals  in a military base.  The soldiers were not allowed to carry a weapon, although they were, arguably, the most qualified individuals in the nation to carry a weapon.

This administrative change would recognize the competence and good judgement of serving military personnel (because packing a gun is their job!_, acknowledge that they are in a "at risk" environment, and provide them the ability to defend themselves in what is, after all, 'their home'  (the base where they are assigned, and required to either live or at least be present during the normal performance of their duties.)

You trust police with guns, and they get lest initial training, and less annual "hands on" training than most Military personnel.  Y'all might want to step back and ... thank about thiat.

the official announcement:

At a rally in January, Trump said, "My first day, there's no more gun-free zones." He was talking about schools and military bases. He later clarified his position on schools, saying that school resource officers or teachers should be allowed to carry them. He has not publicly changed his opinion on military bases.Currently, most gun owners on military bases must register their firearm and store it in an armory while on base. The only people who can carry guns while on a military base are on-duty military, state or local police.

ISSUE NUMBER 3!:

3. Removing suppressors from the National Firearms Act

This is  a slightly more controversial subject.

"Suppressors" are commonly known a "Silencers"   These devices attach to the the forward end of the barrel of a firearm (either as a permanent or a temporary attachment) and serve the purpose of attenuating the  NOISE which issues through the barrel when a firearm is discharged.

The reason why this adjustment to Federal Firearms' Regulation is requested is that the detonation of a rifle, or many pistols, exceeds the safe level of noise to the ear.

I can personally attest to the effects of long-term exposure to loud unattenuated reverberation from both pistol and rifle. 

I'm 71 years old, and I've been shooting rifles and handguns in testing  and hunting environments, and most especially in competition environments for the past 30 years.  My hearing has degrade to the point that as a consequence my most common response to a question is "HUH?" because I can't hear it.

Yes, I wear 'ear muffs' almost every time people are shooting firearms in my presence, but this is an insufficient measure of protection .. as my personal deafness stands in silent protest.

This situation could have easily been prevented if the federal regulations on the use of "silencers" had been made available to the common citizen during the past 50 years. 

 But the Federal government sees no better justification for restriction of a "Silencer" than that it covers the activities of a felon during the commission of a crime.

In my personal and professional opinion, this is one of most inane, deft, unreasonable and downright STUPID laws that the Federal Government has enacted in the past hundred years.

ISSUE NUMBER 4!:

4. Revamping federal background check process

Nobody is entirely happy with the federal government's current background check process or its database, the National Instant Criminal Background Check System. Gun control groups argue that there are too many loopholes in it, and many gun rights groups concur — a rare show of agreement — though not in the details.

Actually, that's not the reason why firearms owners are so resistant to  .. let's call it "Universal Background Check" system.

Yeah, we get it.  Sometimes the dude we're selling a firearm (which is no longer a necessary part of our personal weapons locker) to is not the really nice guy he seems to be.

And  we kind of appreciate that we have an options, where we can check him out before we hand over a firearm to him.

BUT WHY DO THE FEDS HAVE TO ADD ON ALL THIS CRAP!

We GET it; we should check the guy out, and it's a convenience that we have to make one phone call to determine if the buyer is a felon, or otherwise  not an appropriate owner of a firearm.

The National Instant Check System folks can tell you in a minute whether they're comfortable with you selling this guy a firearm

But they don't just want to vet the buyer; they want to know about the seller.  And most important:  They want to know the gun.  Make, model, and SERIAL NUMBER!  All of this information is loaded into NICS, and it's suppose to disappear after x-number of days.

Right.

(_And I will respect you in the morning, Darling._)

The identification of the firearms is not suppose to be maintained in the data base, but why do they need it to verify the legitimacy of the purchaser?

They don't.  But they still require that you (the seller) provide the information in order to verify the buyer.  Does that make sense to you?

Me either.

And that's why I don't trust the NICS, the ATF, and in this case the NPR folks because they don't understand the issues.

Ain't it FUNNY ...

.. how simple little things which are just kind of 'filler articles' for NPR turn out to be emotion-laden issues for people who have to deal with the 'assumptions' that make an ass out of you?

And the people regulating and reporting are all

THREE LETTER INITIAL ORGANIZATIONS!

ATF

NPR

NICS (THEY'RE A LITTLE SLOW)

Baltimore Bans Toy Guns

Baltimore OKs ban of replica guns - Baltimore Sun:

The Baltimore City Council gave preliminary approval Monday to a citywide ban on toy guns that look like working handguns and rifles. Council members introduced the legislation after a 14-year-old East Baltimore boy holding a BB gun was shot by a city police detective in April. 

 City Council President Bernard C. "Jack" Young said replica guns are contributing to violence on Baltimore's streets. He said people are using the fake weapons in robberies, and children who carry them are put in harm's way. There have been more than 800 shootings this year in Baltimore, which is on pace to pass 300 homicides for a second consecutive year.

To my own surprise, I agree with the Baltimore City Council.

Put yourself in the place of a Baltimore cop, when you see this pointed at you: (actual cost: $9.99)

or maybe you're looking at this?

 What do you do?

I wouldn't want to be that cop, faced with two choices (shoot, or don't shoot), which are neither appealing:

(1) Treat it as a threat, and shoot an innocent child;
(2) Treat it as a toy, and get shot for your bad judgement.

In today's American Society, either is a viable alternative.  And you're going to be wrong, regardless of your in-the-moment decision.

LIBERALS ... you gotta love 'em

NOT!





(Hat Tip: Paterico's Pontifications) via Firehand)

I've said before, and I'll say it again: I hate politics.

It makes people crazy, and damages the innocent.

Sheriff David Clarke called a Terrorist? *NSFW*

I knew they were nasty, but I had no idea that they considered ANYTHING they might say was "okay by me!"

Here's how Liberals confront their political opposition .. not with a word, but with the T-Bomb!

* Turn your computer volume UP ... this is a badly edited film clip *( foul language alert!) *

CNN Angela Rye Calls Sheriff David Clarke a Terrorist on Live TV and Don Lemon says nothing - YouTube

Published on Nov 12, 2016 I can't help it think how Don would have reacted if it was a republican saying that about a prominent Democrat. He would have cut off the mic and that person would have their contract with CNN ripped up. But on CNN it's just another day at the office.Un fuckin believable

I don't agree with all the opinions voiced by the spokesperson, but I do agree that a "counter" opinion should accompany Ms. Rye's comments.

Up next: Angela Rye cries on CNN about Donald Trump as president !

How the NRA Stoked the Populist Rage That Gave America President Trump

How the NRA Stoked the Populist Rage That Gave America President Trump:

On May 2016, the National Rifle Association endorsed Donald Trump for president earlier in the campaign cycle than any candidate in the group’s history. The anointment came during the group’s annual meeting in Louisville, Kentucky, where top NRA lobbyist Chris Cox declared that the “the choice for gun owners in this election is clear. And that choice is Donald Trump.”

 The move puzzled observers who understood the NRA to be a doctrinaire single issue interest group, and even its own members, who didn’t quite share their leaders’ ardor for the Manhattan businessman.

Here is how it worked out:

Trump bore little resemblance to the lifelong heartland conservatives whom the NRA typically backed. He was an Ivy League-educated real estate heir with a gold-plated private jet and a foreign, former-model third wife. Trump and Melania had wed at a glamorous ceremony where Bill and Hillary Clinton had been among the guests. A proud New York City resident, Trump didn’t seem to have much regard for the attachments many Americans felt towards guns, never mind the policy purity the NRA demands of other candidates. In a 2000 book, he’d even written, “I support the ban on assault weapons and I also support a slightly longer waiting period to purchase a gun.”

But here's how it REALLY worked out:

Stairs Are not The Best Friends Of The Hobo Brasser Family!

My friend, "The Hobo Brasser", is in the hospital this week due to his propensity to not use the rails in the stairwell to the basement in his home.

In short, he tripped, fell, and broke some body parts which are important only if you want to stand, walk or run.

None of these options are currently available to him.

Having just spent a few hours chatting with his charming LifePartner (AKA: WIFE) Sharon, I did make only a casual attempt to phone said Hobo at his hospital room.  In the very short conversation, he revealed that he was (this is a direct quote) "Pretty F*cked Up" but expects to be released for home recovery in a matter of days ... not weeks.  Yes, another hour on the phone with The Brasser.  he's in good spirits, but won't be hobbling his way through any IPSC matches for a while.

Friend can expect him to be "En Hibile" soon.

It's good to know that although your friends have suffered a "minor injury"; ... they are recovering!

Not than any injury is unimportant.  But that the injury could very well have been MUCH WORSE .. but has not turned out to be ... is  good news to those of us who have been exposed to the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune!

I spent some time on the phone, talking to Mrs. Hobo Brasser.  It appears that The Evil Stairs have claimed her as well; she broke both ankles going down those stairs in recent years.

The conversation is "we need to move to a house without stairs!"

Good choice.

Y'all need not to be breaking legs, knees and ankles.

NRA Mocks Kim Kardashian - YouTube

The Huffington Post is the entry point for a series of videos which constitute an attack on the NRA:

The trail of posts is difficult to follow because the series of links from one article to the next are so convoluted that you really need to WANT to follow the subtle attack on the Second Amendment rights, as supported by the National Rifle Association, before you find yourself at the most nefarious attacks on the NRA.

I think you need to see the video to get the points which were actually made.

I would prefer to present a chart of the links,  but frankly I'm too old and the trail from the original Huffington Post) is too complex to be easy to define.  Perhaps it would be best to start with the original article (see link above) and see where the various embedded links take you.

The political positions of the National Rifle Association were not specifically presented during this sequence..

The Huffington Post viewpoint, however, was prominently presented.  Without a timely response from the NRA.

(The philosophy of the NRA, incidentally, is this:

The National Rifle Association of America (NRA) is an American nonprofit organization which advocates for gun rights. Founded in 1871, the group has informed its members about firearm-related bills since 1934, and it has directly lobbied for and against legislation since 1975. It is also the oldest continuously operating civil rights organization in the United States. 

Founded to advance rifle marksmanship, the modern NRA continues to teach firearm competency and safety. It instructs civilians and law enforcement, youths and adults, in various programs. The organization also publishes several magazines and sponsors competitive marksmanship events.

 Membership surpassed 5 million in May 2013,
Observers and lawmakers see the NRA as one of the top three most influential lobbying groups in Washington.  Over its history the organization has influenced legislation, participated in or initiated lawsuits, and endorsed or opposed various candidates.

Compare that with this video:

NRA Mocks Kim Kardashian - YouTube:

Published on Oct 4, 2016:

 The NRA wants to make a political point to Kim Kardashian, when she was just the victim of armed robbery. Cenk Uygur and Ana Kasparian, hosts of The Young Turks, break it down. ( deleted links; go to the video) 

“The National Rifle Association decided it was appropriate to needle Kim Kardashian West about her position on gun control after the reality TV star was robbed at gunpoint in Paris. Kardashian West was robbed early Monday morning by armed thieves dressed as police officers. Her representatives said she was “badly shaken but physically unharmed” during the incident, which took place at a private apartment she was staying at during Paris Fashion Week. As many public figures offered support for the celebrity on Monday morning, the NRA instead seized the chance to argue against the efficacy of background checks.”Read more here:Hosts: Cenk Uygur, Ana Kasparian Cast: Cenk Uygur, Ana Kasparian

actually, this plethora of links is not necessary.  Going back to THE ORIGINAL VIDEO you will find sufficient comments to describe the commentators' dislike of the NRA:

THE BOTTOM LINE:

The NRA is The Bad Guy ...

... not the egotistical celebrity who publicized that she traveled with millions of dollars of jewelry and made a target of herself:

... not the criminals who assaulted her, terrorized her, gagged her, and stole her millions of ... (yadda yadda yadda) ...
... and certainly not the very pricey security dudes who were curiously absent when she really needed them.

No .. according to the EuroCentrals (who were responsible for her security) .. it was the National Rifle Association of America  who is The Bad Guy.

( Need we point out that the NRA is located on a different continent from which the robbery was perpetrated?) ... who is responsible for this heinous action upon a do-nothing celebrity who can restore her jewel box in the next month?  Could it be .. herself???)

And the NRA is currently being chided for asking if the thieves passed a background check.

Funny, when Liberals make a joke, everybody 'gets it';  but when a conservative organization makes a joke, every liberal in the world laughs at the NRA, not at the joke.

Have liberals no sense of humor?

Sorry ... I got so wrapped up in the story, I forgot that Liberals have no sense of humor for a joke which is not pointed at a Conservative!