VEGAS! (The Conspiracy!)

The imaginative Conspiracy Theory about the Vegas shootings.

This is the first theory I've found:

(Natural News) It’s all hogwash. The “official” narrative of how things went down in the Las Vegas massacre is so full of holes that it begs the question of just how deep the truth about this attack really goes.

Details and quotes:

MISSION IMPOSSIBLE: Official story of Las Vegas shooting unravels; physical impossibility of lone gunman senior citizen makes narrative ludicrous – NaturalNews.com:

People who aren’t familiar with firearms have no idea how difficult it is to conduct sustained fire with an automatic weapon. It requires tremendous strength, endurance and training — something that Stephen Paddock had none of. Military special forces operatives train for years to be able to manage such weapons and handle all the problems they pose (barrel overheating, ammo jams, double feeds, recoil management, etc.). The idea that some senior citizen accountant can just pick up a machine gun and lay down thousands of rounds of effective fire in a sustained, 10-minute assault even though he had no experience with such weapons is completely ludicrous.

Apparently the author of this article takes exception to the reportage.  I have no reason to suspect that there was a conspiracy among two or more murderers.   Still, the article was written within hours (not days) after the shooting, and before more detailed reports were available.   I have no idea how the author knew whether the shooter had formal weapons training.

I have a few rejoinders to offer (you may have your own):

• It's not difficult to conduct sustained fire with a fully automatic weapon.  It's just difficult to HIT anything when you go "full-auto", except when your target is massed shoulder-to-shoulder, filling a city block.
• Barrel overheating: while it is/can be an issue, one way to avoid that is to have SEVERAL rifles (he had 23?) so one rifle can cool off while he used the next one.  (Note that news reports mention an AR15 with a reddish-tinged barrel, indicating that it had overheated; perhaps had even begun to cook off.)
• Ammo jams, double feeds: see above.   That is probably why he had so many rifles.
• "Effective fire": when you are shooting at thousands of people, packed into a city block, at distances of a few hundred yards, you're not aiming.  You're "Flock Shooting".
• "Special Training": the guy had ... what, 23 rifles with him?  Lived alone on a ranch?  He didn't need Special Training, just practice.  He had solitude to practice and time to plan; all news reports indicate that he had the opportunity to acquire "experience" with every weapon, in both calibers.
• "Recoil Management":  he was shooting at a compacted mass of people, and had the advantage of height.   He didn't even have to aim.  He could have shot from the hip (and probably did, toward the end).  Besides, the .223/5.56  cartridge is low recoil.   Physical endurance was probably not an issue.  No special expertise was required.
• "Senior Citizen Accountant":   What, do men automatically become physically infirm when they hit 65 years of age?   Senile, perhaps.   "Physical impossibility"? 
• Conspiracy Theory:  There's no reason to assume that there was more than one shooter; remember the JFK Assassination, and the Texas Tower Sniper.   Both men deliberately sought the high-ground, although those murders were shooting at individuals.   
• This one obviously planned his attack, deliberately chose a venue with many "targets" in a large area which could be engaged without a special set of skills by using fully automatic rifles to murder the most people in the shortest time.   He used the lessons provided by his hideous predecessors.

OTHER ERRORS IN REPORTING: The Author's Full Report

Diane Feinstein feels a little tingle running up her leg

The Vulpine character of American Liberal Politicians has once again revealed their disdain for the freedoms acknowledged by the Constitution of America.

Most particularly, the Second Amendment.

As the Democratic U.S. Senator for California said in this 1995 interview:
"Mister and Mrs. America ... turn them in!



Now?

Diane Feinstein may have just got her wish:

In the wake of the Las Vegas massacre, Diane may be feeling as excited as the Democratic politician who learned that Barack Obama was nominated for President.

She's not the only Liberal politician who has spotted her "Window of Opportunity": House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi shares her views:

Pelosi calls on Ryan to form select committee to curb gun violence - POLITICO:

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi on Monday urged Speaker Paul Ryan to create a Select Committee on Gun Violence that would craft "common sense legislation" in the wake of a Las Vegas shooting that has left at least 59 people dead and injured more than 500. Pelosi wrote to Ryan as Democrats began edging back toward calls for gun control measures that they had largely avoided after the June shooting of House Majority Whip Steve Scalise (R-La.). Following the mass fatalities in Las Vegas, however, Pelosi called for "a day for action" as well as remembrance of those lost.

The "day of action" is, presumably,  a drive to castrate the American Constitution by enacting "local laws" (at a state level?) which obviate the Second Amendment.

It may be appropriate to notice that the drive for "common sense legislation" is trotted out by Liberals every time some whack-job opts for "Suicide By Cop" and performs the obligatory happy-dance with a rifle.   Fortunately for the Liberals, who love to portray those suicidal efforts as typical of 2nd Amendment supporters, there is no limit to the number of Insane Clowns who volunteer for the job.

Still, one wonders what legislation the Dems can envision, which would provide a means of making Insanity Illegal.  God knows that universal confiscation of firearms ... which is Number One With A Bullet on the Liberal agenda ... might lead to.

It would be as reasonable, and as effective, to make Insanity illegal.

Dems on Vegas: "Never let a serious crisis go to waste"

Las Vegas Shooter Stephen Paddock Had Recent Large Gambling Transactions - NBC News:

Hillary Clinton also expressed her grief in a tweet: "The crowd fled at the sound of gunshots. Imagine the deaths if the shooter had a silencer, which the NRA wants to make easier to get." She added: "Our grief isn't enough. We can and must put politics aside, stand up to the NRA, and work together to try to stop this from happening again."

This is what Hillary says in expression of her grief: a political statement saying "we must put politics aside" ... and then using a massacre to make a political point.

Expect more quotes from Democrats, saying (in effect) "... this would never have happened on OUR watch..."   and blaming President Trump for a situation which nobody could have foreseen nor prevented.

Mass Murderers are cowards; they're not afraid to die, they're just afraid to live out their angst without making a public statement.  Everyone else has to pay for their misery.

Hillary is making her own public statement, and considering the political flack which is sure to follow this tragedy, it's difficult to find the fine line between this particular mass murderer and her own willingness to throw half a nation under the bus (by imposing draconian "gun safety" rules) which would infringe upon the Constitutional Rights of law-abiding citizens.

And she didn't even have to pay this madman to provide the crisis which she is so eager to exploit.

You never let a serious crisis go to waste. And what I mean by that it's an opportunity to do things you think you could not do before. Rahm Emanuel

UPDATE:  10/02/2017 ! 1900 PST

As of this moment, this is the most comprehensive reporting I've found on the internet about the Vegas Massacre.

CDC and WHO: They're At It Again

Should Gun Violence Be Considered a Public Health Issue? 
[newsy.com]

Gun violence kills and injures tens of thousands of people every year, and some doctors and health professionals say that's enough to consider it a public health issue. There's just one small hurdle: politics.

Actually, the "problem" described here is not politics.   The problem is "The Inconvenient Second Amendment".

Uber Liberal Alan Derschowitz recently wrote about the Second Amendment, saying that if he was rewriting the Constitution, he would omit the second Amendment:

“If I could write the Bill of Rights over again, I would skip amendment number two. We’re the only country in the world that puts in our Constitution the right to bear arms. It’s an absurd thing to be in our Constitution, but it’s in our Constitution,” said Dershowitz. “We have to live with it.”
Invoking the text of the Second Amendment, Dershowitz suggested that guns should be more heavily restricted.
“Guns have to be well regulated and they are not well regulated in this country. We’re going to have these kinds of massacres over and over and over again until we change the gun culture and the National Rifle Association is part of the problem, not part of the solution,” he said.

THAT  is the real "problem" with the Second Amendment; too many Americans are willing to throw one of our Constitutional Rights "under the bus" because it's inconvenient.   Derschowitz is entirely too eager to throw out the baby with the bath-water.   His "solution" is to penalize the law abiding.

(Curiously, Derschowitz once wrote an article about "The Inconvenient Second Amendment", which is no long available on the Internet. IIRC, his point then was that the Second Amendment was in the Constitution and carried the weight of law.  Apparently, he found this opinion piece ... inconvenient.   However, his point ... that if we start trashing the Second Amendment, that opens the door to amendment or trashing of other Constitutional Rights, which he likes 'better' ... is well taken..  Well, thank you for that much, sir.   Even if you don't like it; even if you disagree with it; you recognize the danger of trying to rewrite the Constitution.)

Cully Stimson wrote about this in 2016 in reference to the shadow "no-fly list":

But so many liberals would like to write the inconvenient Second Amendment out of the Bill of Rights, that they see no problem with treating it as simply a privilege that the government can take away at will.

Let us be clear about this:   the Second Amendment protects the right of any sane, law-abiding mature citizen of the United States to keep and bear arms ... including firearms.  It is not a right which is PROTECTED by the Constitution; it is a right which is RECOGNIZED in the Constitution.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the World Health Organization already consider violence a public health threat, whether it involves a firearm or another tool. Some physicians argue approaching gun violence as a public health issue might help curb the number of gun-related deaths and injuries in the United States each year.

Their logic if flawed.  Violence is not contagious, except that societal aberrations in our culture allow people to violate the laws which protect the innocent.

Why should we accept laws which penalize the law-abiding?  We already have laws forbidding firearms possession by criminals; these laws aren't achieving the desired result.    The argument is not that we should obviate the laws because they are ineffective; we have laws against speeding, too, but people still break these laws ... and the violators pay the price when they're caught.

We cannot make a law which will prevent criminals, terrorists, madmen from acquiring weapons; the only laws we can create are whose which will restrict "The Good Guys".

Violence ... including violence with a firearm ... is not a legal problem; it's a societal problem

US aircraft carrier & bomber ‘under attack’ in doctored N. Korea footage (VIDEO)

US aircraft carrier & bomber ‘under attack’ in doctored N. Korea footage (VIDEO) — RT News:
(click link to see videos)

North Korea’s state media has released a doctored video worthy of a Hollywood blockbuster, in which a North Korean missile "destroys" US B-1B and F-35 jets, while a submarine targets America’s state-of-the-art carrier USS Carl Vinson. The video, released by DPRK Today, also features US President Donald Trump, seen speaking at the celebration of the US Air Force’s 70th Anniversary at Joint Base Andrews, portrayed as “a mad man,” South Korean news agency Yonhap reported. Also in the footage, a North Korean submarine-launched missile strikes the USS Carl Vinson, a Nimitz-class nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, with the caption reportedly saying: “Should F-35, B-1B and the Carl Vinson lead the US attack, they will head to the grave in that order.”

Sixty rounds in your Glock?

9mm Extreme Extension Glock – Taccom3g:

(a) TACCOM 9mm Extension for the 33 round 9mm Glock magazine.

The manufacturer claims:

We’ve come up with an extension and spring that will feed your PCC efficiently. Made from 6061 aluminum, it will take the abuse of competition and keep on running. The internals of the extension are smooth to allow for both the follower and the rounds to flow effortlessly thru for thousands of cycles. Easy to assemble too!! 

Manufacturer also offers some supplementary advice:

Note: Keep in mind that the end user must chamfer the inside of their magazine as well as their follower so that you get a smooth transition when the follower re-enters the magazine.

An idea whose time has not come?

The curmudgeon in me refers back to Viet Nam where we couldn't get the 30-round "banana" magazines for M16's (apparently those of us 'in the field' had second or third call on equipment, including magazines, boots and replacement arms ... right after the Officers and the REMFs stole the good stuff) and in fact we used the straight 20-round magazines but downloaded them to 18 rounds, because the springs lost their resiliency when kept fully loaded for days at a time.

So I'm historically dubious about claims exceeding my experiences. These magazines are obviously not intended for the kind of abuse and poor maintenance suffered during a combat tour.

My experience competing in IPSC matches / "Open Division" was that the 25-round magazines had to be treated with kid gloves.  We removed the springs (or at least the end caps) from the magazines so the springs were not under any tension between usages ... which is to say, right up to Match Day.    That kept their 'strength' up so there were more or less reliable, but we still tended to down-load the magazines by a round or two.

But that was way-back-then, and the manufacturers claim here that:

We’ve come up with an extension and spring that will feed your PCC efficiently. 

By that I presume that advances in metallurgy have resulted in springs which WILL perform reliably under the most grueling of conditions.

Actually, I doubt that.

On the other hand, I recall a couple of very smart fellows who once said: "640 kilobytes of memory should be enough for anyone", so I suppose it's possible that I've misjudged modern technology.

The Bag Trick

The Bag Trick…How to easily conceal a weapon in public | Active Response Training:

Not for everyday carry, but this  ad hoc technique allows ready access to a defensive weapon in "unusual circumstances".

Originally posted on May 27, 2014 by Greg Ellifritz in Articles, News and Tactical Advice

Trump Angst

During the Election Season last year, I admitted online that I was conflicted about my presidential vote.  Should I give my vote to "The Donald", who knows how to make money but is relatively clueless about how to be a president?

Or should I give my vote to "The Hillary Beast", who knows how to run a country but would run it in a direction I could not accept?

Ultimately, I voted for "Not Hillary".   And now I ... and the rest of America who faced the same difficult choice ... are paying the price.

Judge Andrew Napolitano: Trump's frightening and tightening legal noose | Fox News:

The Donald Trump I know is a smart guy who often thinks a few steps ahead of those whose will he is trying to bend. But I lately wonder whether he grasps the gravity of the legal peril that is beginning to show up around him. In the past week, we learned of an unfiltered public confession of frustration and weakness among his lawyers and we learned that his former chief confidant and campaign manager is about to be indicted. This is very bad news for President Trump.

I'm disappointed in President Trump, and I'm angry when people criticize him for his (so far) poor performance as a president.   I agree, though, that this is one of the most inept presidents we've been saddled with since ... oh, I don't know ... the Peanut Farmer?
(Jimmy Carter)

Considering the alternative, though, I continue to believe that Trumps failures to live up to his promises is the less painful outcome, compared with a potential Hillary-beast presidency.

Trump fails to live up to his promise; if Hillary had lived up to HER promise, it would be an even more grim America.

There's an old mantra about the balance between competence vs intelligence, and the mantrix I found was in reference to military officers. Generally, it looks like this:

 In self-help books I have repeatedly seen a two-by-two matrix used to evaluate individuals. The four elements in the matrix were labeled: Brilliant & Lazy, Brilliant & Energetic, Dumb & Lazy, and Dumb & Energetic. Curiously, the brilliant and lazy were extolled above all others.

Politically speaking, you can substitute "Industrious" with "Ambitious", and "Stupid" with

Generally speaking:

Any officer who is clever and industrious is destined to positions of great responsibility, while an officer who is clever but lazy will do no great harm because he won't seek a position of responsibility.

An officer who is stupid but lazy will not have the desire (or energy) to do harm.  (In the political field, they will not run for high public office ... nor be elected; usually.)

But an officer who is stupid but Industrious will have the will to make changes, but lack the wit to avoid endangering his men.

Trump, I believe, falls under the "Smart and Industrious".   He chose to make money, and used his fiscal position to achieve positions of great power.

Hillary falls under "Stupid and Industrious".  

She chose to make her mark in the political scene, which gave her a similar position of great power. But as much as people tend to consider her 'smart' ... she took the easy route to power; she chose to seek popularity rather than industriousness.

She did not create wealth; it was donated to her.

Hillary did not create wealth for herself or others (except for the wealth she acquired which came from political contributions)

Politics is a Funny Game:

You can win it in one of two ways:
1: you can win it with Money, which Trump did;
2: or you can win it with the cult of your personality, which Hillary almost did.

But the difference is ... the Thinking Voters have to TRUST the candidate.

Nobody trusted Hillary.

Nobody trusted Trump, either,  but Hillary's history of lies and deceits worked against her so strongly that she could not escape her own past actions.

Ultimately, Donald Trump is President of the United States not because he was trusted, but because he was Not Hillary!

Personally, I would have voted for The Man In The Moon before I voted for Hillary, because she had no political or moral compass, and her past actions proved that she was not the right person to lead our country in the coming years.

Does Trump have the moral values to deserve this high office?  I don't know.

But I do know who does NOT have sufficient moral values to represent my birth nation; and she lost.

"Apply background checks for gun purchases to voting"

John Lott's Website: In the Chicago Tribune: "Apply background checks for gun purchases to voting":

Dr. John Lott has another op-ed in the Chicago Tribune based on part of the testimony that he will be giving on Tuesday morning to President's Commission on Voter Integrity in New Hampshire.  

Essentially: since Liberals believe personal background checks do not infringe on the civil rights of citizens who wish to purchase a firearms ... why not use the same mechanism to validate the civil rights of citizens who wish to vote?

Interesting concept, worth reading a short article.

Just ... go read the whole thing.

The Death of "Everyman"

Character actor Harry Dean Stanton dies at age 91: LOS ANGELES (AP) —

"Dead ... of Natural Causes".

An odd soliloquy for an actor who portrayed so many "un-natural" men for so many years.

 Never mistaken for a leading man, Stanton was an unforgettable presence to moviegoers, fellow actors and directors, who recognized that his quirky characterizations could lift even the most ordinary script. Roger Ebert once observed that no movie with Stanton in a supporting role "can be altogether bad."

Harry Dean Stanton, a man who refused the usual one- or two-name labels, was one of the most versatile and appealing character actors in Hollywood history.  He never turned in a bad performance.

Correction: he was almost always "bad", but in a 'good' way.

I don't know about you, but I refuse to believe that HDS died of "Natural Causes".

He never played a "natural" role in his life.  Every part he played, every scene he played, he stole from the lead actors.   He was so "natural" in his career, he added verisimilitude to the most bizarre scenes.

He was so eerie, he made you believe the most unlikely scripts; any movie which "co-starred" HDS had a certain something special that you knew you just had to watch it, just to see how he would transform the most mundane character to the one you had to pay attention.

Scenes, entire scripts, were transformed from the mundane to the sublime.  If the director hired Harry, we knew there was something "special" about the movie.  And we were never disappointed.

He was weird, he was bizarre ... his character never was a "minor part" no matter what the script and the casting said.

For those of us who consider ourselves 'average', he elevated the role of the 'average man' to our entire satisfaction.  He developed the role of "every man" beyond the vision of writers, directors, and co-workers.

"I worked with the best directors," Stanton told the AP in a 2013 interview, given while chain-smoking in pajamas and a robe. "Martin Scorsese, John Huston, David Lynch, Alfred Hitchcock. Alfred Hitchcock was great."
He said he could have been a director himself but "it was too much work."

That's the image I'll always hold of Harry Dean Stanton.

He was a natural.  The rest of us don't know how that feels, except when we watched him work.

Arrogance Repaid

SOUR GRAPES: Hillary Clinton Trashes Trump as a 'Deplorable' 'Reality TV Star': “

Well, I thought Trump was behaving in a deplorable manner. I thought a lot of his appeals to voters were deplorable. I thought his behavior as we saw on the ‘Access Hollywood’ tape was deplorable,” Clinton told CBS’s “Sunday Morning.” “And there were a large number of people who didn’t care. It did not matter to them. And he turned out to be a very effective reality TV star,” she added. Clinton referred to her previous statements trashing Trump and his supporters on the 2016 campaign trail, doubling down on her claims that Trump voters are a “basket of deplorables” who are “irredeemable.”

During the latest Presidential campaign, I blogged that I was truly torn about which candidate to vote against;   I was not impressed by either Trump or Clinton.

The bottom line for me was their contrasting views on the Second Amendment;  Trump vowed to honor the Constitution, while Clinton considered the Supreme Court's support of the RKBA to be "wrong".

What is it about Liberal Democrats, who are their own worst enemies?

The arrogance of Clinton was enough to make a lot of people choose Trump, who might never have been elected had he been opposed by any other American than Hillary Clinton.

(Well ... or Bill Clinton, who can't keep his zipper up.   Or Al Gore, an idiot who couldn't even carry his own home state.  Or George Clooney, who can at least look pretty in front of the camera.  Or Barbra Streisand, who at least can sing.   Or ... never mind.)

The Best Decision Hillary Ever Made

Hillary Says She’ll Never Run for Office Again  - Breitbart:

 Sunday on “CBS This Morning,” former presidential candidate Hillary Clinton said she would never run for office again. Clinton said, “I am done with being a candidate but I am not done with politics because I literally believe that our country’s future is at stake”

Hallelujah!    Our country's future is brighter for that decision.

(Is it too much to ask her to move to Tanzania?)

Grandparents Day

Every day can be Grandparents Day. The official commemorative day is the Sunday after Labor Day. If you’re celebrating Grandparents Day throughout the year, these resources can help with ideas on how to Do Something Grand.

I expect my children and my grandchildren to hold this day in special reverence.


Hah!

Ann Coulter on "Amnesty"

We were told that these were simple, hard-working people who just wanted their chance to earn an honest living.

As it turns out  ...

We Made Donald Trump PRESIDENT -- What Else Can We Do? | Frontpage Mag:

How many different ways can Americans say they want illegal immigration dealt with seriously?

 It's as if, night after night, Paul Ryan knocked on our door and asked us to take in one helpless orphan and, night after night, we crack open our door, only to be set upon by 30 armed felons with tire chains and brass knuckles.

Ann Coulter NAILED IT!

Congress has passed laws requiring that immigrants pay back taxes, learn English, not collect welfare and have good moral character. That's not too onerous, right? It's not like we're requiring them to have any skills or talents that would be valuable to America. 
Every single one of these requirements has been scuttled by immigration bureaucrats, federal judges and Democratic presidents. All of 'em. Our immigration bureaucracy is so dedicated to destroying America that it's made citizens of thousands of convicted felons. 

What we Expected ==>       <=== What we got

 At a certain point, Ryan might actually produce a sad orphan. Who knows? It’s theoretically possible. But we could not be faulted for not opening the door.

No one injured when S. Carolina deputy shoots at man 5 times

No one injured when S. Carolina deputy shoots at man 5 times | WCBD News 2: BLUFFTON, S.C. (AP)

The sheriff of a South Carolina county is defending the deputy who shot at a man five times after authorities say the man pointed a pistol at the law enforcement officer. No one was injured. 

Is it just me, or does anyone else see a problem when a L.E.O. shoots at someone who is pointing a gun at him ... and misses?

 Beaufort County Sheriff P.J. Tanner tells The Island Packet the initial investigation shows the deputy did nothing wrong during the shooting early Saturday at the Vista View Apartments in Bluffton. 

Well ... the deputy missed his target.   Considering that he was engaging in return fire directed at someone who was shooting at him, there are people who would consider "failure to successfully elimate an active threat" to be the "wrong" response.

( So much for the "The Only Ones Qualified" argument. )

 Tanner says the deputy was not put on leave and remains active. 

That doesn't speak well for a Department which apparently considers "the deputy who can't shoot straight" to be a valuable member of the department.  The article does not suggest that the deputy was required to receive remedial training in firearms accuracy.

A news release says the unnamed deputy investigated when he saw two men sitting in a vehicle in a parking lot. The release says one man fled, and the deputy chased him and found the man lying on the ground, pointing his pistol. The 18-year-old faces several charges, including fleeing to evade arrest.

Assuming that "... (t)he 18-year-old ... " refers to the felon who was arrested for 'pointing his pistol' (presumably at the officer), it seems reasonable that "fleeing to evade arrest" would be the least of the charges; how about "attempted murder of a police officer"?

The duty of a sworn police officer is to uphold the law and go home to his family at the end of his shift.   The Liberal Media may applaud the officer for his humanity in sparing the felon the violent end which he had earned, but the officer failed in his duty; anyone who points a gun at a police officer will shoot a police officer; if not this one, then the next.

And to shoot at a man with a gun five times, and to miss, is to allow that felon to learn to be more heartless the next time he has an officer in his sights.

Who says no one was injured by an officer who failed in his duty?
Ask the next cop who meets that felon over a gunsite.

Barber Blues

I went to the barber today ... I had tried to get in on Wednesday but he was so busy I got tired of waiting and left.  Besides, I had left my reading glasses at home and the American Rifleman magazine issue on his coffee table was printed in a smaller font than usual and I couldn't read it.

It was a much shorter wait today, and I enjoyed the magazine more with my glasses on.

When it was my turn, I hopped into the chair and started chatting with Takaa, my Chinese barber.   Glancing down at the dropcloth I saw a lock falling into my lap.  I blurted out:  "Where the hell did that grey hair come from!?"

Takaa looked down at the lock in my lap, shrugged, and said "It's okay, I'm only cutting grey hairs today" and went back to his clipping.

When I got out of the chair I tipped the barber an extra five bucks for getting rid of the grey hairs.

I swear, when I shaved this morning, I only saw brown hair in the mirror.   I guess I should have stuck around longer on Wednesday; I'm pretty sure I didn't have any gray locks than.

Darwinian Solution

Ouch: Gun goes off, man shoots self in groin on Madison-bound bus, police say | Crime | host.madison.com:

A 21-year-old Chicago man shot himself in the groin early Wednesday morning, while on a commuter bus .... The unidentified victim apparently had a loaded handgun in the waistband of his pants, and the gun fired, sending a bullet through his penis and one testicle, said police spokesman Howard Payne.

Pretty sure his children won't follow in his footsteps.

And yeah, "the gun fired".  Is this what they mean when they talk about "Smart Guns"?

Tomorrow ...

I had it in mind to post "The Day Of The Triffids" on Tuesday, but today I think I'll post this:

                                                             Tomorrow

Grasping At Straws: Baltimore Gerrymanders Gun Rights.

Baltimore gives initial nod to proposed mandatory minimums for illegal guns:

The measure originally aimed to criminalize the carry or transport of a handgun, either openly or concealed, within 100 yards of a public building, park, church, school, or “other place of public assembly” with a mandatory penalty of one-year imprisonment and a $1,000 fine.

A flawed bill, for two reasons:

First, assuming the phrase "other place of public assembly" is not explicitly defined in the actual bill, that could mean a movie theater ... or almost any place where the public assembles.   Example: A Shopping Mall.

Second, assuming the phrase "transport of a handgun" means having a handgun in your car as you drive through town, it's almost impossible to chart a "safe" route through town on your way to or from (for example) a Shooting Range.

To illustrate the complexity of this problem, you should avail yourself of a map of a city, municipality, etc. and identify and mark the locations of every " public building, park, church, school, or “other place of public assembly”.

I couldn't do that with 100% confidence in my home town, or even a small town.
Hell, I live within 100 yards of both a church and a park.   I couldn't even leave my driveway without violating such a law.

It is idiosyncratic of politicians (not just Liberals, but all of them) to resolve every problem by throwing a law at it.  Plan "B" is to throw money at it.   That's their entire toolbox.   It is reasonable to expect no more effective plans from a group of people who are elected by popular votes.

I would give Baltimore politicians credit for at least trying to resolve their high-mortality rate of Gangsters with Guns, but passing new laws like this one only serves to criminalize law-abiding citizens.

The gun delusion

The Concord Monitor has offers an interesting opinion piece from Debra Marshall, who cautions us that:

"I’m not safe, and you’re not safe, if either of us is armed; and you’re deluding yourself if you think you’re well-trained in firearms."

Debra Marshall: The gun delusion:

A weapon [emphasis added] has just one purpose – to kill another human being. We all need to assume, very seriously, that anyone who possesses a weapon has every intention of pointing it at another human and attempting to kill them. Not maybe, not only if they have to – but absolutely. And that any person who carries their weapon around with them intends to do so at any moment, without warning. We would be fools to think otherwise, and fools to think that we won’t be their target.

AND ...

Specialized training doesn’t consist of taking pot-shots at a human-outline target in an indoor target shooting range. I don’t care what the range instructor told you – he lied. If you aren’t a member of a police force, military unit or related government agency with specialized weapons training, you have NOT received the training you need to be armed with a weapon and for me to be safe anywhere near you.

I agree with some of her arguments ... and disagree with others .... in whole or in part.

Which isn't really important.  It's still a fascinating screed, written by someone with experience and judgement.   That she evinces an inordinate amount of faith in the skills and training of Law Enforcement personnel only demonstrates that she believes a regular regimen of training is better than none at all.

Some people really SHOULD NOT be trusted with guns.

Most of them already know that.

But some of those who do not know that, are employed by municipal police departments.

Dems Deny Concealed Carry By Charging Preposterous Permit Prices

John Lott details the obstructions anti-gun states use to deny Concealed Carry by "Undesirables".

How Democrats keep guns in the hands of the rich - Chicago Tribune: A new report from the Crime Prevention Research Center shows that the average fee for a concealed handgun permit is $67, but it is much higher in the most Democratic states. Each 10-percentage-point increase in a state's presidential vote for Hillary Clinton was associated with an additional $30 in the concealed handgun permit fee. In California, where Clinton won by about 30 points, fees can be as high as $385 for just two years. In New York City, where she won by 60 points, a three-year permit costs $430.

 In addition to prohibitive fees, some blue states — California, Illinois — require four times as many training hours as the national average, adding hundreds of dollars to the cost of obtaining a concealed-carry license. In California counties, the mandated cost of training can run from $250 to more than $1,000. Compare heavily Democratic Illinois, where the cost of permit and training runs over $450, with neighboring Republican Indiana where the total cost for everything is $50.

I'm on the side of encouraging firearms training ... I teach it at my local gun club.   But there is no 'certification' awarded in my class;  it only serves to familiarize students in safe gun handling, with an emphasis on competition. So I can attest that It Ain't Rocket Science; what you PAY for is the certificate, which some states/localities require before a Concealed Carry License will be issued.

The states which mandate "certification" aren't using this requirement to "ensure proficiency"; they're using it as a club to beat the shit out of anyone who has the gall to demand that their Constitutional Rights will be honored.   Then after the expensive training, they add on this absurd fee for the permit itself.

Dr. Lott is, as always, absolutely correct.   This is all a great scheme on the part of the so-called "Liberals" (who are anything but liberal) to obstruct the American Citizen's access to firearms as noted in the Constitution.

This is why we can't have any fun any more.    The Democrats are, literally, doing everything they can to discourage law-abiding private citizens from exercising their rights.   Why are they doing that?

There are two reasons why Democrats are against the Second Amendment.

The first reason is that they are, as a class, a bunch of narrow-minded fuss-budgets who pretend to believe the Government can solve all your problems for you ... and if you aren't the government, you're not competent to run your own life.

The second reason why Democrats are against the Second Amendment is that Conservatives (not all of them Republicans) are FOR it.   Anything Republicans like, Democrats instinctively denounce.

Yes, many Democrats are nice people; many of my best friends are  ... uh ... no, not really.   A couple, at best.   But I'm sure there are a lot of nice Democrats out there, that I just haven't met yet.

Having said all that, the Democrats in "Blue State" of Oregon are among the "Nice Democrats".    For example, the cost for a CHL (Concealed Handgun License) is in the $50 - $65 range.    You can actually take an online course for about that same amount, and apparently their certification of completion is acceptable in Oregon.   (Also, it seems that most County Sheriff offices will accept USPSA membership as certification of handgun competence.  Go figure.)

(The same website offers a neat summary of Oregon Gun Laws)

In Chicago; Just Because you're Paranoiac ...

... that doesn't mean that nobody's out to "get you".


Inside the gun violence epidemic on Chicago's South Side - CBS News:

 "We felons. You know what I'm saying? Ain't nobody gonna give us no jobs. The cops don't give a f*** about us." But when asked if innocent people dying by those bullets is worth it, they both said, "No."

Lances at Dawn

The Brits can't own guns any more.  Or knives, or spears, or lances, or ...

Wait a minute!  Lances?  They can do LANCES!


Extreme jousting: Knights in armor clash on horseback in VR:

It’s knight time: go lance-to-lance on horseback in a modern jousting match. 

USA TODAY NETWORK



Damn this looks like fun!  Can we do this 'here'?

NEVER denigrate the ability of Englishmen to Find A Way to practice Extreme Sports.

Is a Lance designated as an Assault Weapon?

This is the COOLEST THING EVER!

*It makes IPSC look like a Child's Game*

Another "Mike The Gun Guy" pack of lies and misdirection

Want To Be A Gun Nut? Move To Kansas | HuffPost:

Now the last time I looked at my trusty Road Atlas, Kansas City straddles the Kansas border, and the rate of gun violence in that city increased by 64 percent from 2014 to 2016 and is on track this year to set a new record by at least 50 percent more shootings over the total from last year. Of course the number of shootings in KC and throughout the state would probably be much higher if the law-abiding state residents weren’t all walking around with their guns. Remember a little story called The Wizard of Oz? There’s a reason Dorothy lived in Kansas.

Very colorful ... especially if you remember the scene in the Wizard of Oz when the movie changed from Black&White to Color.

The famously fraudulent Gun Guy is conflating Campus Carry with the increase of gun violence in Kansas.

By suggestion and innuendo only.

Nowhere in his citations does he present any factual or even incidental link between gun violence and Campus Carry.  He fails to provide any incident of the horrible massacres he implies will inevitably occur on Kansas University property:

The evidence that a gun represents a threat to public safety is overwhelming, 

... and he cites The Brady Campaign as his authority source.   In a contribution to the Huffington Post.   At least he's not shy about proving that he's nothing better than a shill for the Anti-Gun fanatics who will stop at nothing to protest their discomfort with the Constitutional rights of American citizens.

Some people need to learn not to see the world in sepia only.

"Gun Safety" vs "Gun Control"

When Liberals get all worked up about guns, they don't focus on the gangsters; they focus on the law-abiding firearms owners.  Why?  Because they know we're safe ... and we can be identified because the liberal Gun Registration Laws are focusing on US!

Wisc. Democrats: Gun Safety Course 'Inappropriate' for High Schoolers - Breitbart:

Rep. Sondy Pope (D-Dist. 80) opposes the gun safety courses for high schoolers. She says the bill to create the course is bad because nothing in it “prohibits students from hiding ammunition in their bags and loading their guns in the school.” 

Liberals (Democrats, almost universally ) claim that when they espouse "Common Sense Gun Control", they are concerned about safety.  They seem to believe that when a "normal person" is presented with a firearm, something goes sick in their heads.   (See the movie "Blue Steel".)

But when presented by a plan to teach firearms safety to teenagers ... something goes sick in their heads.    They can't get past the awful images of Things Which May Go Terribly Wrong, and they focus on the worst possible consequences of allowing the Stupid American Electorate ("after all .. they voted for me; how smart can they be?")  to exercise their Constitutional Rights*.

Thus we come to the irrationality of Rep. Sondy Pope (D-DIST. 80) who worries that, if high schoolers are 'allowed' to take a firearms safety course, they may go stark raving mad and shoot up their school.   She apparently thinks there should be something in the bill to make it illegal to shoot up a school.  "There, that's fixed!"

(Note to Rep. Pope:  and this would be different from the alternatives .. how?    I note that in that list of 101 school shootings, only 35 of them occurred in American schools.  Which is too many, granted.  But considering that America has the most guns per population, you would think that such a Wild West culture would dominate the list more definitively.)

*(Yes, it's in the Constitution.  But those old guys ... what did they know about how America would look in 200 years?   They knew enough to foretell that idiots may would be elected to Congress.)\

Shall Not Comply

"I Will Not Comply" isn't a catch-phrase.  It's a warning.

The Bloviating Fat Men from Seattle got their come-upence this week, and all True Citizens of the Constitution are laughing at their Hubris.

Seattle Spent More Defending Gun-Tax Lawsuit Than It Collected in Revenue From Tax, Gun Group Claims - Washington Free Beacon:

The city of Seattle spent more to defend a lawsuit against its gun tax than it gathered in revenue from the tax, a gun-rights group claimed on Friday. King County Superior Court Judge Lori K. Smith ruled in favor of the Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) on Friday in a Public Records Act suit over Seattle's refusal to disclose the exact amount of revenue collected through their "gun violence tax." The gun-rights group filed suit after the city refused to fulfill a public record request from Dave Workman, editor of SAF-owned TheGunMag.com. The group said the real revenue numbers revealed in court documents appear to fall short of the city's projections.

Apparently, Seattle thought that "I Will Not Comply" was nothing more than a threat of passive resistance.

The "City Fathers" (and a more mordant bunch of Maroons have not recently been found) thought that they could arbitrarily tax a Constitutional Right to death, and their citizens would roll over, uttering only meek objections.

They didn't expect that a citizens' group would actual sue their arrogant asses into infinity.

Thanks to Dave Workman and his Second Amendment Foundation crew, there was no need for a Malheur-Crew of protesters to endure prison and risk death in the process; a simple legal requirement seemed adequate to prove that the anti-gun politicians were just blowing smoke.

Politicians have no sand.

What they DO have is monumental egos, which allows them to convince themselves that they can make any laws which catch their fancy, and their subjects constituents have no alternative but to roll over and say "Thank You Sir, May I Have Another?"

We can only hope that this serves notice to other unscrupulous politicians (are there any other kinds?) that Americans are serious about this whole "Shall Not Be Abridged" thingie.

Oh, yeah, almost forgot this archaic warning:

What a bunch of maroons.

Oh .. and Thanks, Dave and Crew; from all of us to all of you.

Don't Mess With Kroger!

Police: Armed Citizen Takes Down Alleged Attacker at Kroger - Breitbart:

Sheriff’s deputies in Shelby County, Tennessee, say an armed citizen at Kroger shot and critically wounded a suspect who allegedly attacked using a metal bar and a pair of pliers. According to News Channel 3, the armed citizen was sitting in his car at the Kroger gas pump when the unidentified 32-year-old suspect charged him. The armed citizen “shot the [suspect] in the face and abdomen.”

Sheriff’s deputies in Shelby County, Tennessee, say an armed citizen at Kroger shot and critically wounded a suspect who allegedly attacked using a metal bar and a pair of pliers.

There's a Kroger store in my town.  In fact, it's 3 blocks away from my home, and I do all my shopping there.   Groceries, mostly, but also hardware, clothing, lawn and garden, cigarettes, books and music and movies, and even  Crossword Puzzle books!   I fuel my car at their gas pumps.  (They have the lowest price in town.)

Last year, when their "No No Guns Signs" policy was announced publicly, I wrote a letter in appreciation to their Corporate Headquarters.   I said I don't shop at any business which is posted; if crooks know nobody has a gun, they will be emboldened to attack the store and the customers.

I feel safer in a store that isn't posted.   Besides that: if they don't trust me, why should I trust them?

Anything I need to buy, I go to Krogers first.   They don't have uniformed, armed security guards on site; they don't need them.They have hundreds of stores in their chain and as far as I know NONE of their stores are posted.   I feel safer in any Kroger store, because I'm pretty sure that someone is watching my back for me.   I'm not the only CHL in town.

The neat thing is, no other stores in this little college town are posted, either.  Since Krogers is the biggest store with the most customers, all the others are just picking up "neighborhood" shoppers.  I like to think that they're afraid of losing the few customers they have if they posted.

Kroger markets provide a standard for all their competitors, so everyone benefits from their public policy.

The moral to the story is; don't bring a pair of pliers and a stick to stick up a Kroger market.

You never know who you will run into.

The Great Aurora, Colorado Gun Debate

Recently, the Arapahoe County (Colorado) District Attorney George Brauchler and the Aurora Sentinel editor Dave Perry found the time to write opposing Editorials in Dave's Newspaper (in George's county).    Their subject was the 2012 Theater shooting in Aurora, Colorado.

I've decided to post large quotes from both public figures, if only to illustrate the margin of difference between the Liberal Editor and the Conservative D.A.

(Note: The quotes have been edited slightly to improve readability; no part of either statement has been edited in content.)

Due to the length of the comments, I've inserted a page break between the quotes for those who don't want to read a LONG post.

PERRY: Common sense, facts and hope refute DA Brauchler's gun-law claim and Nugent's nuttery - Aurora Sentinel:  BY DAVE PERRY, editor, Updated: July 26, 2017 7:05 am

Arapahoe County District Attorney George Brauchler is the smart and affable Aurora DA who helped convict James Holmes for the Aurora theater shooting murders and assaults. Brauchler is now running for governor.

He nearly won a death sentence against the sadistic and hopelessly mentally ill Holmes for murdering 12 people five years ago on July 20.  ...  The anniversary of the grisly massacre coincided with the regular meeting last week of the politically rightest of the right, the Western Conservative Summit in Denver. In a straw poll, Brauchler won the group’s endorsement for governor in 2018. He came out on top among other conservative hopefuls in part because of his remarks about gun laws.  

Brauchler said — in the shadow of the anniversary of one of the worst gun-massacres in the history of the United States — that there is no gun law he’s heard of that could have prevented the Aurora theater shooting.   

 Now I know full well that Brauchler is just pandering to the gun set when he says things like that, even if he means it. It’s no different than Democrat gubernatorial candidates telling teachers they’ll help keep the union strong — except teachers don’t kill nearly as many people as do guns.

See Brauchler Quote Below:

Gun Violence Archive

(In case you missed it:)

Lexington-based website counts gun-related deaths in the US - Washington Times:
 LEXINGTON, Ky. (AP) - When gunshots make national news, Mark Bryant’s phone rings in Lexington. 

 Bryant, 62, is neither a law enforcement officer nor a trauma specialist. He runs a private website, Gun Violence Archive, that updates on an hourly basis, with street-level details, most of the gun-related incidents that have occurred in the United States since 2013.  Want to know how many people have been killed by guns so far this year nationally? In your state? In your city? Last year? The year before that? The number of people wounded? How many shooting victims were children? How many mass shootings there were? Police-related shootings? How many times guns were used in self-defense? How many shootings were unintentional? 

Operated out of a small home just off Richmond Road, Bryant’s GVA answers such questions for journalists, policymakers, even law enforcement. And despite the public-safety menace of gun violence in this country, few others do this kind of work.

See: Gun Violence Archive

Folding Glock

Full Conceal's Folding Glock Akin To Magpul's FMG9 - The Firearm BlogThe Firearm Blog:

 Full Conceal had a prototype of their concept back at SHOT Show 2017. Pete posted about it here. Their original concept was a cut down Glock frame and the remaining grip/magazine would lock onto the frame making the pistol a rectangular brick. You would have to remove the grip/magazine and insert it into the gun to make it into a complete pistol.

You'll have to visit The Firearm Blog to see the pictures (and also a very short video) demonstrating the concept.   Personally, I'm a 1911 Slob  Snob  so I try not to show Glock pictures here .... even when they look like a Klein bottle as an Embryo, or something that came out WRONG in the Starship Enterprise Transport Bay 3.

Or ... like this:

Society's Child in ToonTown

We didn't have enough Psychopaths in America, so we decided to import them.

20-Time Deportee Moves to Sanctuary City, Allegedly Rapes 65-Year-Old Woman: Police officers in the sanctuary city of Portland [Oregon] arrested Sergio Jose Martinez, 31, after he allegedly broke into the home of a 65-year-old woman, tied her up, held her at knifepoint and raped her, KOIN CBS6 reported. Court records revealed Martinez has a long criminal history that includes burglary, battery, and multiple deportations.

It's not "Sanctuary", it's a Hunting Ground

Following his alleged attack on the 65-year-old woman in her home where she gave him her Prius to get him to leave, police responded to a call about a man attacking a woman in the basement of a parking garage below a building. There, police discovered Martinez allegedly sexually assaulting another woman and holding her at knifepoint. Martinez fled on foot and officers chased him through a neighborhood, capturing him in a nearby apartment, KOINS reported.

Sanctuary Cities need to take responsibility for encouraging these maniacs, who migrate to places like Portland which encourage rapine and murder by their permissive social policies.

Martinez had been deported at least TWENTY TIMES, and he kept coming back because he (like all of his perverted kind) knew that the worst he could expect was a slap on the wrist, and a plethora of Social Justice Warriors who will weep for his poor degenerate self.

What kind of community allows encourages feral creatures to predate its citizens?

A Credit To His Profession?

Secret Service special officer accidentally shoots himself while on duty:

A Secret Service special officer on Tuesday afternoon accidentally shot himself and is hospitalized with non-life threatening injuries, according to the agency. A news release from the Secret Service said a special officer assigned to the Washington field office accidentally discharged his weapon while on duty.

I hope the Secret Service "special officer" (what does this mean?) recovers completely.

I see that the article published in the Washington Examiner includes the following note:

Editor's note: An earlier version of this story incorrectly identified the special officer involved in the incident as a "Secret Service agent," which is a different position. We regret the error and have pasted the full statement from the Secret Service below.

Weasel Words; I'll assume that "Special Officer" isn't a member of the Presidential Protection Team.
It's just that, we don't know what is the difference between a "Special Officer" and a "Secret Service Agent".   Don't we need to know?

If I Were A Conspiracy Theorist ...

I would wonder about the Rafael Prieto factor.

And,  I would suspect there's a Back Story which will never be told.    I doubt that this happened "Accidentally".

Inadvertently, perhaps, but it's been a long time since I saw a firearm discharge occur "accidentally".

The proper adverb might be "Negligently".  That makes me more comfortable, assuming "bad gun-handling expertise" rather than some Conspiracy Theory balderdash.

   Best guess ... holstering a pistol without ensuring that his finger was off the trigger.   Which is an "Amateur's "Accident".

Still ... we always have the example of (federal employee) ATF/DEA Agent Lee Paige:


Thanks, Lee; you make your fellow Federal Officer look good by comparison.

(He's still an idiot.)

Australian Girl's Anti-2nd Amendment Rant Online

Breitbart posts an article on 2nd Amendment rights, and (in the COMMENTS section) almost casually includes a link to a video which is .... very confrontational about Gun Control.  (view the video below, or go directly to the YouTube link here.)

The link to this article is in the Comments Section of the Breitbart Article link, in the sentence:

Here's an Australian who just doesn't get it. That wouldn't bother me but for the fact that she starts preaching to us Yanks about our guns and blames the guns rather than the fact that we don't keep hardened criminals in prison throughout much of the nation. There is a lot of misinformation, stupidity and sleight of hand in this 6 minute video.

(I think she makes some very good points, and that we should listen to what she says; many other anti-2nd people will be quoting her in the very new future!)

The Gun Control Debate

I assume that the young lady who narrates is the author, but I have no way to confirm that at this time.   Certainly she seems sincere in her beliefs.

(See Below For More Content)

Chicago is a One-line Joke, and it ain't funny

This one line says all there is to say about Chicago:

 It had been about nine hours since the last fatal shooting in the city.

Back in the day, Chicago was best known for it's meat-packing industry.   Now the whole place sounds like a slaughter-house.

New Questions arise in Justine Damond death

Justine Damond: Killer cop Mohamed Noor ‘didn’t respect women’ | Daily Telegraph:

On Thursday, Officer Harrity’s lawyer described their fear of being attacked as “reasonable” given a spate of recent cop killings. Mr Noor’s gun was on his lap — and not in his holster — at the time on the incident.

What?  
This adds a whole new perspective to the situation.  It strongly suggests that Noor was not only anticipating, but EXPECTING that he would be attacked.   And it makes one wonder why his partner didn't object to his unprofessional behavior at the time.  Note that the press still refers to "Officer Harrity", but "Mr Noor".

Just one more reason to question why there was no more experienced officer in the patrol car; someone who possessed the experience and judgment ... and seniority ... to suggest that Noor was over-reacting.   As in: Stand Down!

 But claims of an ambush yesterday infuriated Ms Damond’s family, whose newly hired high-profile lawyer told US television they “have no basis in fact” and were “ludicrous”. Lawyer Robert Bennett told CBS that Ms Damond’s family does not want Officer Noor to stay in the force and they are considering a civil lawsuit over her death. “This is an unbelievable situation,” Mr Bennett told CBS yesterday.

On the Other Hand: What?
"claims of an ambush" had "no basis in fact" and were "ludicrous"?

Ms. Damond called TWICE to the police emergency phone number  ... once to report a possible felony assault, and again to make sure the police were on the way.   That sounds to me as if the 911 call suggested that an ambush was possible.   (Which does not excuse Officer Noor's over-reaction .. he obviously did not see a gun ... were there not enough lights in that alley?   Of course, a Policeman's Lot is Not A Happy One.  They are sometimes required to enter dark alleys; that's why they are issued flashlights.)

In the first call at 11.27pm Saturday, she said she feared someone was being raped behind her house in south Minneapolis. Eight minutes later she called again to make sure police were coming.
“Hi, I can hear someone out the back and I’m not sure she’s having sex or being raped,” Ms Damond said at the start of the call, at 11.35pm.

I can understand how the Damond Family would wish "Officer Noor" to be removed from the police force, but I don't understand how the Daily Telegraph can believe two impossible things before breakfast.

“This is an unbelievable situation,” Mr Bennett told CBS yesterday.

And that is the first believable thing I can understand about this entire tragedy.


I think there are three, perhaps four, lessons we can all take from this:

1. Ms Damond, out of a keen sense of social responsibility, made the fatal mistake of entering a possible crime scene which SHE reported; she paid for that mistake (she thought someone was being raped, yet she ran into the alley while wearing her pajamas?) with her life;
2. Officer Noor should never have been allowed out  of the station house without an experienced (read: not gullible) keeper;
3. Officers in a patrol car do not typically carry their duty weapons in their hands; unless they are being fired upon, they usually wait until they exit the patrol vehicle before drawing their duty weapon.  This is called "Don't Shoot Your Buddy", aka "Rule One".   Had Officer Harrity been more experienced, and/or clearly Senior, he might have tool Officer Noor to "Keep Your Pecker In Your Pants, Dude!"  (Or words to that effect.)    This is another of the unfortunate side-effects of the recent spate of patrol officers being murdered
4. The press will print what they have, and if they have nothing to print, they will make it up.  If it bleeds, it leads.   The truth doesn't matter.  Accuracy doesn't matter.   Appropriateness doesn't matter.  The only thing that matters is selling newspapers (or hits on a website, or readership, or viewer count ... it's about the numbers, Baby!)

Senior officers need to take command of their individual units; it's not enough to hold the command office, they need to actually command their subordinate officers.   When a patrol officer rides with his gun in his hand, that's something that his superiors need to know about ... and stop!

Do Guns Kill People? – See the exciting Video for PROOF!!

2ndVote GunCam – Do Guns Kill People? – 2ndvote:
Do Guns Kill People? Watch this LIVE feed for yourself…

I think every Brady Campaigner and Moms Demanding activist should monitor this website; preferably, recording the live feed as proof of their claims that firearms are the root of all evil.

Go, do it now!

[Hat Tip: Arms and The Law]

Responsible Concealed Carry Drivers who are pulled over for a traffic stop

Posted as in informational text for those who carry a concealed weapon.
[H/T: thegunfeed]

If you haven't already seen this article, check it out; it may save you some embarrassment in the future. Even if you think you already know what is 'the right thing to do' if you're stopped by the police while you're legally carrying a firearm on your person, it should reinforce the message:

why be confrontational?

(Introduction from the video:)

"If you conceal-carry, and if you drive and  you're pulled over by a Law Enforcement Officer, what do you do?  What do you do, what are the things you DON'T do, that are going to keep you safe and are going to keep the Law Enforcement Officer safe?"

CPSO: How should you react when pulled over with a firearm in yo - KPLC 7 News, Lake Charles, Louisiana:

The Calcasieu Parish Sheriff's Office has teamed up with Legally Armed America to create an instructional video on how you should act if you get pulled over and have a firearm. The video demonstrates the difference between a compliant and non-compliant driver. It also explains some dos and don'ts if you have a weapon on you when you get pulled over.

I won't steal the traffic from the original article, so go to the above CPSO link to find the video.

"When you have nothing to gain by being non-compliant ... why be non-compliant?"

The ultimate message, of course, is: "don't be THAT GUY!"

San Francisco - sanctuary for everyone but legal residents?

Folks in the San Francisco Bay Area are complaining about "youth" attacks on defenseless citizens.

Man beaten by 5-6 youths outside Richmond BART Station - SFGate:

A man was beaten and kicked in the head Thursday by a group of a half-dozen youths just outside the Richmond BART Station, police said. The man, who was not identified, was expected to survive, said Lt. Felix Tan, a spokesman for the Richmond Police Department. BART police initially responded to the scene around 11:30 a.m. — at the transit terminal frequented by buses directly outside the station — because they thought the incident was under their jurisdiction. Five to six juveniles assaulted the man, according to BART police. Officers said they could not locate the attackers, who escaped in the surrounding neighborhood.

(emphasis added)

Curiously, either the newspaper or spokesmen for the Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) authority, or the Richmond Police department refuse to identify the "demographics" of the "youths".   The claim is that revelation of their race might lead to racial violence, or something.

As if they don't already have that, in the Bay Area.    Remember Katherine Steinle?

Whether the attackers were blacks, or Mexican "immigrants", or a group of fun-loving Nob Hill teenagers on a lark from across the bay is left for the reader to imagine, based on one's own personal racial bias.   The only thing that seems certain is that if the attacking "youths" were caucasian, it would have been printed in the paper ... if only to prove that the attackers were not minorities, or were not illegal aliens  undocumented immigrants.


Personal Note: I lived and worked in the East Bay area (Oakland) for several years, back in the '80s, where I got my first job in the Data Processing business.   My wife and I decided to move elsewhere after the lady who lived in the next-door apartment was mugged by three  black adolescent girls in the parking lot of the grocery store in the next block.  They beat the shit out of her, stole her purse and scattered the groceries all over sidewalk, so I guess they weren't trying to feed their families.

That attack, too, happened during the middle of the day.

SEE ALSO:

Group Stabs Man In Broad Daylight In San Francisco’s Dolores Park

May 17, 2017 9:30 PM

... and SF WEEKLY even has a round up of bizarre crimes of the week.

Chicago ... eat your heart out.  You have the body count, but you don't have the Fruits-N-Nuts contingent to provide violence with a kink.

Brits Outlaw More Weapons

Street weapons like 'zombie knives' are to be outlawed under a dramatic crackdown:

SICKENING street weapons such as zombie knives and knuckledusters are to face a complete ban, under a dramatic new crackdown. Home Secretary Amber Rudd will today propose to make possessing them illegal everywhere, whether in public or at home.

H/T: The Captain

No, they're not outlawing ALL knives ... just "bad knives".

Judging from the photo accompanying the original article, it appears that the Brits don't like serrated blades, curved blades, long blades, thin blades with sharp pointy ends, and anything else that looks "sickening".

The article doesn't provide much details ... well, they're Brits and not as good at details as they are at sensationalism.

Not that "The Amis" (we Americans) are much better at defining the things we choose to ban; look at our government's attempt to define "Assault Weapons" so they could keep said weapons out of our irresponsible civilian hands.

It seems to me that there is no difference between governments in "The Free World" and "The Tyrant Countries", except that we here are suppose to be the masters and the government our servant.

Yes, we are just that gullible.

(BTW ... Note to Mark:  I'll have the deed to that bridge in the mail to you as soon as your check clears.)

(See Below The Fold for references)