Oregon, and the Right to Keep and Bear Knobkerries

Oregon bans weapons in state workplaces:

Oregon officials have banned state employees from carrying weapons in the workplace unless they're needed for their jobs. The move caused consternation Thursday among Republican leaders in the Legislature. The Oregon Department of Administrative Services said it imposed the ban, which became effective on Jan. 6, in hopes of "providing a safe and secure environment for employees and visitors." Banned are firearms, daggers, slingshots, and a host of other specified weapons. Oddly, even knobkerries were mentioned. Knobkerries are clubs used by indigenous people like the Zulus in southern Africa, and are probably unknown to most Oregonians.

You realize that this would not make for a "safe and secure environment", right?

But if I was still working for The State, I would be a criminal.   Because what I did legally last month, would be illegal today.

For almost 20 years I carried a concealed Knobkerry at work, in a State Office, every day.  Nobody knew because it was ... well ... concealed.  
And I certainly wasn't going to mention it.

It was legal, because of state laws in effect in Oregon at the time, and I had a "CKL" (Concealed Knobkerry License".  But the place where I worked had an administrative rule disallowing the possession of knobkerries ... either open or concealed carry.    They could have fired me for wanting to exercise my God Given Right to Keep and Bear Knobkerries  (RKBK).  

But I would not have been subject to legal action;   I was not breaking any laws.

My thinking was that Knobkerry Free Zones (such as schools) were a prime target of 'mischief makers', and if  'mischief' were to occur at my work place,  I wanted to have options.  

I always felt much more "safe and secure" knowing that I could pull out my trusty knobkerry and pound the living crap out of anyone who decided to use an illegal knobkerry to attack my workplace.

Well, that has all changed now.   Because we are defenseless ... by legal fiat.

I am disgusted ... California Politics are creeping into Oregon.

Lest We Forget: The Obama Girl

Crush On Obama - YouTube




But wait!

Hillary Boyz?

"I got a crush on Hillary!




(I'm so ... GAG ME!)

Is it possible that the "Grown-Ups" actually decided that Hillary Tits were not the best criteria for a presidential election?

["My Mom Is A Republican!"]

Finally, it sinks in

The Virality Of Gun Violence | The Huffington Post:

Incidentally, for all the hullabaloo about the lack of government funding for gun research, I note that part of the funding for this substantial project came from the National Science Foundation, which also happens to be a government agency.
Obviously, the lack of CDC support for gun research has created real gaps in the evidence about gun violence; perhaps there are other ways to skin the proverbial research cat.

Yes, there are 'other ways'.  The CDC was busted *(lost its Federal funding for "Gun Violence" research) because it pursued an obvious bias in reporting on firearms injuries.  It focused on the availability of guns with little or no information about how some societies suffered more (gun) violence than other societies. Its reporting was generally not balanced by providing information on how firearms ownership provided a benefit to private citizens in violent demographics. It may be that NSF has found a way to provide a more 'balanced' reportage.

The JAMA report focused on the societal causes of violence, focusing on gun violence, and concluded that demographic signifiers were one method of predicting victims of violence.

If the CDC had made the effort, perhaps they would still receive federal funding for firearms research.  I note, however, that the CDC can still report anything they wish to about firearms injuries; they just don't get to use your federal tax dollars to tout their political bias.

Leave it to the Limeys ...

... to adore The HillaryBeast:

Hillary Clinton: The Guardian person of the year 2016 — News — The Guardian Nigeria:

Cerebral, hardworking and hugely versed in the workings of government, not many people were as prepared to lead America as she was. Dignified in carriage, humble in spite of her great guts, thoughtful and very wise, she was the inevitable philosopher-queen. Her tenacity in public and in private lives is the stuff of legends. She withstood haranguing by the leading lights of the opposition party who did their best to cast her as corrupt and dishonest. She endured the humiliation of a troubled marriage and steeled her heart to save it. In the campaigns, she was held to standards sometimes humanly, but certainly manly impossible to meet. She not only discharged herself creditably, she captured the imagination of the world. That she lost to a man who is as comprehensive in his ignorance as he is relentless in his arrogance to put it on display underlines a certain rot in the heart of their society.

Funny, that's not the Hillary that I voted against.

Donald Trump owes her a great debt, however, for she's the only American who would have won him the Presidency by simply being the most despicable America candidate.

Money for Nothin'; Chicks For Free!

Universal Basic Income Is Our Best Weapon Against The Rising Far Right | The Huffington Post:

LONDON ― A groundbreaking pilot project launched this week in Finland. The government is going to give a randomly selected group of 2,000 unemployed citizens a monthly income of $587 with no strings attached and no need to report how they spend it. The project aims to test the feasibility of a program ― called basic income ― that’s worked in earlier pilot projects elsewhere in the world.

Um ... unemployed?  And there is no "Societal Safety Net" already in place in Socialist Finland?

Well, that's really going to encourage the beneficiaries to go out and find a job.

Interesting, the comment that it has "... worked ... elsewhere...".
More interesting, there is no definition of the term "worked".

The bad thing about this kind of program is that it may constitute a "disincentive" to active job-seeking.  No word on how the recipients of this milk from the societal teat were selected, but one hopes that priority is given to those who are unable to find work because of age or infirmity or lack of training in marketable skills, rather than a disinclination to get up in the morning and earn their daily bread.

And if lack of marketable skills, wouldn't it be useful to use this funding to support unemployed persons while they are actively engaged in training which might lead to employment?   As in ... an incentive to learn to work?

That whole "no strings attached" thing stinks of Leftest Fantasies.

But then, this IS the Huffington Post, and that IS what they do best.

(Hat Tip: Codrea)

How Will We Survive (Another Liar) In The White House?

I don't know about you, but I grow tired of reading comments like this about President-Elect Trump:

How Will 'We' Survive A President Trump?:

“There’s a whole generation of dead queer men and dead poor women of color who didn’t survive Reagan. There’s over a million dead Iraqis who didn’t survive Bush. There’s millions upon millions whose lives were destroyed by the muscular policing policies of Bill Clinton, Margaret Thatcher and Obama. Stop saying ‘we’ survived them. Stop ignoring all those dead, incarcerated and disenfranchised people.” — Dr. Shant Paradigm Smalls

Frankly, I would be surprised to have elected a president who isn't a liar; we haven't elected one recently (with the possible exception of Eisenhower ... but I can't prove that) and we certainly managed to "survive" some proven liars.

 (*cough* Bill "I Did Not Have Sexual Relations With That Woman" Clinton *cough*)

Ronald Reagan (for example) may have been one of the most effective leaders of the Modern Era, but I was embarrassed for him when he repeatedly fell back on the "I must have mis-spoken" mantra when he was cross-examined under sworn testimony during congressional hearings on the Iran/Contra controversy.

Obama?

A Short History of Phenomenal Presidential "Mis-Speaking":



The question is not whether we will ever elect a president who is not willing to lie with a straight face, but rather whether we would WANT to elect a president who cannot lie convincingly.

They're all Politicians, and by definition they are all not only liars, but CONSUMMATE liars!


In future years, when I rant about the lies told by President Trump (and I'm sure that I will), you need not remind me that the alternative would have been to to place a second lying-Clinton in the White House.

He was elected President over the Hillary-Beast because he was a better liar.

He couldn't  have done it without her.   And he knows it.

Are public libraries obsolete?

John Lott asks the question, and my answer is a resounding NO!

I'm a voracious reader of books, and I have 30 Banker Boxes (plus five book-cases more) of books by my favorite authors that I own.   But I can't afford to buy as many books as I want to read, so I have formed the habit of requesting new books from my local (county) library which they do not have in stock.

They buy the books, notify me when they arrive, and I check them out to read.   I'm often the First reader of these books; and I'm careful to only request books by "popular authors", so the county is not stocking books which are unlikely to be checked out by other readers.

And their accounting system keeps track of these requests, so they are aware of books which are likely to be checked out by other readers.

It's a good system for me; the library is publically funded (by my taxes) and I like that I encourage them to continue stocking new books as they become available.

But if new books are not ordered, the library is likely to be defunded over the years.  It's important that libraries receive this kind of positive feedback, so they know they are actively serving an active readership.

I do not always read all of the books that I receive from my library.

For example, Vince Flynn died in 2013 and his series of books has been assumed by a new author.  I do not like this author's style, so I will not be borrowing new Vince Flynn books from my library.  Chances are that they will eventually discontinue the practice of automatically buying these books (and certainly I will not be requesting them), and that's A Good Thing.

When I stop checking out new Vince Flynn books, the library will eventually discover that the popularity has decreased, and they will stop buying these books because ... nobody wants to read them.

This has a positive feed-back effect, if on a small scale, and in my mind it's a good way for me to reflect the public opinion on which books my library should spend its funding on.

In the meantime, the article mentions that librarians are personally building the 'popularity' of Classic Books in order to provide statistics to keep them on the shelves.   I think that's A Good Thing.  I haven't yet read many recent classics but i will want to do so some day.

I've read some classic children's books on tape for my grandchildren, and even encourage family members to contribute to the project by asking them to read the parts of 'other characters' in the book.  my children, and their children, enjoyed this "Books On Tape" project, especially because they begin to associate the readers' voices with the characters.    (I recently read a short segment of an OZ book to my grandchildren, when my daughter brought them to visit me, and my daugher interrupted me to say that I "read the wrong characters' voice".  I had read Brer Rabbit with a different dialect/ she later informed me that she and her brother (living with my divorced wife) use to go to sleep listening to the tapes that I had made for them.)

When Libraries budgets are cut, when they stop stocking classic books because nobody checks them out any more ... children lose the encouragement to READ, and appreciate, books which are older than they are.

What will our nation  become when the libraries no longer stock Brer Rabbit books?

We'll soon find out, because my library has no copies of any "Uncle Remus" books by Joel Chandler Harris.

Is this anti-racist protest?  If so, it's a sad commentary on America, because if we no longer make Historic Black Culture to be stocked, it's a loss to American Culture.

"... situations like this are at least somewhat avoided ... "

.243 KABOOM due to Left Over Cleaning Patch - The Firearm Blog:
" ...So situations like this are at least somewhat avoided."

I should think so.

"Debunked"? Why?

I'm reading this news release from the NRA, and I don't know why the NRA is taking this approach:

NRA-ILA | 40 Percent Myth Further Debunked by Suspiciously-timed Harvard Report:

This week saw the publication of survey data compiled by Harvard Injury Control Research Center’s Deborah Azrael, Matthew Miller, and Lisa Hepburn, that should finally lay to rest the long-debunked factoid that 40 percent of firearms sales occur without a background check.

Who keeps track of how many firearms sales are conducted without a Background Check?  And how do they do that?  Wow, that's impressive: intuitive databases abound!

But that assumed factoid ignored:
Frankly, I'm resentful of the Federal Government's intrusion into the private sale of firearms.   Why is the NRA so particular about reassuring folks that "ALL" firearms transactions are registered and monitored?   Isn't the right to keep and bear arms guaranteed by the Constitution?

(Yes, I am ignoring the part about criminals and madmen, temporarily, for the purpose of discussion; where does it say "except for ...." in the Constitution?  Some states are currently toying with the concept of restoring Second Amendment Rights to convicted felons; is this A Good idea, or not?   How about restoring "Voting Rights" for convicted felons, which seem to be part of the same package deal?   Isn't "suppression of civil liberties" part of penal retribution?  Should it be?)

What purpose does it serve, to require Universal Background Checks?

The stated goal is to prevent sales to criminals.  How would that work?  Do thieves and murderers obey the law?  I'm imagining a potential mass murderer agreeing to a background check during the purchase of a firearm, and ... uh, no.  It's just not working for me.  I figure that they just steal the guns.  After all, they're criminals.

On the other hand, I can think of at least one good reason why universal background checks are "Not A Good Idea":

Registration.

I don't so much care about the added expense and inconvenience which Universal Background Checks imply (although that is a factor, at least), but why do these background checks require that the serial number of the firearm be part of the process?

The only reason I can think of is that this allows somebody to track the serial number of the gun; and the name (and other biographic information) of both the buyer and seller will be entered into a database somewhere.

Which is, of course, against the law unless deleted within a 'reasonable time period' (typically, one week if I'm not mistaken).  And of course I believe that the information will be permanently deleted.

If that is true, why?

Why enter the information into a database if it's due to be deleted in a week?  What's so magic about a 7-day time period?  Who gets that information, and what do they do with it? Impermanent data has no value.  I've been in the Data Processing business for most of my adult life, and I never saw any organization go to the bother of designing, building, maintaining and updating a database unless there is a reason for keeping a history into perpetuity.

 (Oh, sure: "backup"; it's a standard DB feature.  Right!  And I'll still respect you in the morning!)

This makes no sense at all!

Of course, we are assured (by the federal government ... oh, THAT'S a reliable source!) that the data is deleted "Real Soon Now".

So why is it entered in the first place?   They tell us that the information is only used to confirm that the buyer is not a felon, or a registered madman is trying to purchase a firearm.

 (Is there a "MadMen Database" somewhere, and who maintains it or vets the data input to make sure than any 'non-madmen' are not erroneously included? What ... the "No-Fly List?"  No, The Government would have no reason to conflate "Suspected, but not confirmed, terrorist" with "don't let this guy buy a gun".)

I thought it over, turned it around in my mind, and I still can't figure out why a private transaction should be entered in a database.

Sure, 'they' tell us that the transaction is not actually recorded; it's just input so they can check it against their 'people who we don't think should have a gun' list.

But why do all the assurances mention that the transaction will be deleted in seven days?
Why delete it if it isn't entered?  Can't they just check the buyer against the MadMen Database, without recording it?

Is it possible that "They" are lying to us??

"Just because I'm paranoid, that doesn't mean that 'they' aren't out to get me."

(also:  The check is in the mail", and "of COURSE I'll still respect you in the morning!")

I am reassured.  What possible reason can 'they' have to lie to me?

A Culture of Violences

Yesterday I talked about a White Plains (NY) County Board which decided not to allow a Gun Show at a county property.

The original news source had this to say:
Democratic Lawmakers Send Gun Show Ban Bill to Full Board | The Examiner News:

The lawmakers argued that hosting the show would promote a culture of violence and the glorification of firearms on taxpayer-financed property. 

Having had some time to think about this statement, I decided that I was personally offended by the opinions of the "New York Lawmakers".

They are a small coterie of professional politicians who are sufficiently glib to be elected to public office.

I am a a man who was drafted to go to Viet Nam and serve my country, at the very real risk of my life ... because I was drafted.   I did not volunteer to serve, but I was threatened with prison judicial penalties if I refused to meet the requirements of the politicians who ran my country.

Politicians Just Like Them ... who likely never served (like Bill Clinton, who dodged the draft due to Political Influence).

I, and many others like me, were obligated to kill people whom we had never met, and against whom we had no personal grudge.  The reason?  THEY were officially designated as "The Enemy".

Who so designated them?

The politicians who rule our country, seem to have the judicial permission to determine which violence is appropriate, and Just..   And many others; those who advised our rulers.   The Quiet Men, who made our decisions for us, and sent too many of us into our own private Hell of Conscience.

That's who.

Now these same Lawmakers (or their descendents) are again identifying your enemies, and asking telling us who we should hate, and how to deal with them.

It probably seems like "A Small Thing" to those who have not found themselves obligated  to obey the dictums of "our betters"; but to those of us who served, albeit unwillingly, it's not a small thing at all.

At all.

First they tell us to kill, in service to our country; then they tell us not to kill, in service to our own lives and that of our families ... when we are attacked.

I don't know about you, but I am confused.

What is "A Culture of Violence"?

Is it that which we are trained, by governmental mandate, to perform in service to our country?

Is it that which we are inculcated to perform, in service to our family?

When Elected Officials say that Americans who are trained to kill, cannot kill someone who threatens our family, I wonder how I can trust their judgement?

Or whether I should trust them.

Is it possible that they do not have a sense of proportion?

Or do I no longer have a sense of proportion?

...

I have no inclination to harm anyone.
I've done it, it is distasteful, and I don't want to feel that way again.


But at the same time, I know that I would protect my loved ones.
It's not a matter of "Right" or "Wrong"; it's just a matter of that they are my family, and I have an obligation to protect them ... because I can.  And would.

Whoops!

Daughter repeatedly slips on ice as she struggles to get into her car in Canada | Daily Mail Online:

This is the gleeful moment a woman repeatedly slipped over on ice as she tried to get into her car while her unsympathetic mother laughed hysterically. The daughter was having difficulty on the drive of her parents' house in Canada as she prepared to head off on Boxing Day. She kept slipping on the ice and had to grab hold of her father to stop herself falling head over heels. 

NY Dems Oppose Gun Show; claim it "...would promote a culture of violence..."

Democratic Lawmakers Send Gun Show Ban Bill to Full Board | The Examiner News:

The Northeast Gun Show would take place on Jan. 21-22 at the White Plains venue but the Legislation, Labor/ Parks/Planning/Housing and Public Safety & Social Services committees are sending a measure to the full board for its next meeting this Monday, Jan. 9 that would prohibit gun shows at all county-owned property, including the County Center. The lawmakers argued that hosting the show would promote a culture of violence and the glorification of firearms on taxpayer-financed property. “I, as one legislator, recognize the right to the Second Amendment,” said Board Chairman Michael Kaplowitz (D-Somers). “I don’t read in there the right to have a gun show at the County Center.”

The Distinguished Board Chairman, Michael Kaplowitz (Democrat, as noted) is is full fig at the outrage of renting out a building which would bring additional funding into the county.

He would much rather the structure remain empty and useless, than to host a (gasp!) "Gun Show at the County Center"!

!!!!

Horror of horrors, he can't have that!
'Chairman Kaplowitz' (Democrat) has designated himself the keeper of morals for his County.

Which is apparently in the Great State of New York.

Near White Plains.

(No, I never heard of the county either, but I have heard of White Plains, NY.)

Better that all County Properties remain empty and unused than host a GUN SHOW! (which, even if his constituents choose not to attend, would still provide a rental profit on an otherwise empty structure on County Property)


Failing a degenerate Gun Show, here is a list of things to do while visiting Sunny White Plains, New York!

• You can go see a Stage Show at the Westchester Broadway Theater
• And ... um ... here are another 365 things to do in Westchester County
• Or you can go to the trial of a man who tried to stab a Westchester County Police Officer

Or you can go to a Gun Show.

Oh ... wait.  That's completely Off The Books now, isn't it.

Well, I heard a rumor that the Westchester Theater is running a series of movies starring Paul Newman  and Robert Redford.  I  think I've see that movie.   Twice.

Apparently, White Plains isn't "That Toddling Town"  As long as it has Board Chairman Michael Kaplowitz (D-Somers)  taking care of the moral character of HIS county, White Plains will always have something to talk about while they're plucking chickens, (Or having a quilting bee.)

Both of which are probably activities which Kaplowitz approves of.

PS:   Here's a picture of a gun.  Don't let Michael know you have it!

The NRA Admits: "Water is Wet"

Guess what?

One of the most murderous cities in America is Chicago.

And the reason?

Chicago has more than it's fair share of young black men who are disadvantaged.
(Translation:  they can't find a job, so they turn to crime.  DUH!)


America's 1st Freedom | Who Can—And Who Can’t—Solve Chicago’s Murder Problem:

 The bonds of trust between law enforcement and high-crime communities in Chicago have been battered, and in some cases shattered, over the last few years. These are two groups that must work together in order to drive down the shootings, robberies and assaults that plague Chicago’s most violent neighborhoods.

Chicago has a lot of problems, not the least is a high volume of criminal actions.

The answer is simple: find jobs for young men who have "successful criminals" as their role models:

Unfortunately, it's not as simple as it sounds.  These young men have no skills, little education (many of them drop out of school in their teens

I've written about "The Gun Problem In Chicago" so many times, it's not worth working my way through it again.  But the good thing is, this article is paying attention to the REAL PROBLEM in Ciraq.

It's not the guns.

It's the society.

Poverty, unstable home life, promiscuity, single-parent families, welfare, and children raised with no hope for a better future than the drug-runner on the corner with the nice car and 15-year-old hookers.

Why can't we all just get along? This is why.

'F**K YOU': Georgetown Prof Loses It On Muslim Trump Voter | The Daily Caller:

 A Georgetown University associate professor had a month-long meltdown after a Muslim woman explained why she voted for President-elect Donald Trump.

I'm guessing that he was an associate professor of "Liberal Arts", and this was "a teaching moment".

It kind of reminds me of this:

The American Civil Liberties Union apparently hates guns more than it hates arbitrary government-enforced discrimination. Even though the ACLU opposes the no-fly list—and is suing the federal government for violating the due process rights of several people on it—the civil liberties advocacy group is theoretically okay with depriving people on the list of their gun rights.

... and this;

The video itself lasts for 30 minutes, during which the victim—who is tied up, with his mouth taped shut—is abused in numerous ways. The perpetrators cut his hair with a knife until his head bleeds, flick cigarette ashes on him, and threaten him. They occasionally utter things like, "Fuck Donald Trump, fuck white people." At one point, the video recorder—a black woman whose name is easily identifiable—suggests putting the victim out of his misery.

(You can probably see the video here;  I haven't watched it, so I don't know what's really at that link.  The text, and this still photo, were about all I cared to learn about this.)

Americans ... you gotta love us.

Or we'll kick your ass.

I guess it's a Good Thing that all these people encountered 'liberals' instead of those hateful 'conservative' people.

You know, the people who believe in the Constitution?

Locked In A Cell Without Charges

Hit & Run : Reason.com:
(12.30.16}

 Imagine being treated the same way a person arrested for a felony is treated—brought into jail, strip searched, imprisoned—even though you aren't arrested. Worse yet, imagine being treated that way because you might have been a witness to a crime and police wanted to interview you.

That's exactly what had been happening down in Louisiana in Evangeline Parrish (population 33,500) and its town of Ville Platte (population 7,300). According a long-term Department of Justice investigation that was just released in December, police and sheriff's offices there had a long-established practice of jailing people for days without charges or warrants as "investigative holds." The practice is extremely unconstitutional but apparently had been policy.

If the words BOSS HOGG popped into your mind, you're not the only one.

Read the whole thing.

Trump's Right Hand

Apparently I'm not the only one who finds Donald J. Trump's "hand gestures" irritating!



Geez ... if someone would replace that hand with ,,, with a ... A HOOK!

No Man Dare Call It Infringement

California gun owners stock up on ammunition ahead of new regulations | The Sacramento Bee:

(Below are direct quotes from the link shown above.)

DATES CALIFORNIA GUN LAWS TAKE EFFECT 

Between state legislation and voter-approved ballot initiatives, 2016 saw passage of sweeping new gun regulations in California. Some of the new rules take effect in 2017. Others are staggered over the next two years. Here’s your guide to California’s new era of gun ownership. 

 Theft/loss reporting 

When it becomes a crime to falsely report a firearm has been lost or stolen Jan. 1 

Start date for requirement that theft or loss of a firearm must be reported to law enforcement within five days July 1 

Lending firearms 

When it becomes illegal, with limited exceptions, to loan guns to anyone outside of immediate family members Jan. 1 

Large-capacity magazine restrictions 

When it becomes illegal, with limited exceptions, to possess magazines capable of holding more than 10 rounds July 1 

Assault weapon restrictions 

Start date for the new definition of “assault weapon” Jan. 1 

Deadline to register a newly designated assault weapon with the state Dec. 31, 2017 

Restrictions on home-built “ghost guns” and guns without serial numbers 

Start date for requirement that you get state permission before manufacturing or assembling a firearm July 1, 2018 

Deadline to place a serial number on any unmarked firearm possessed after July 1, 2018 Dec. 31, 2018 

Ammunition restrictions

 Start date for requirement that ammunition sales or transfers be conducted through a licensed ammunition vendor Jan. 1, 2018  

When you no longer can import ammunition bought outside the state without first shipping it to a licensed vendor Jan. 1, 2018   

Start date for requirement that Californians undergo background checks to buy ammunition July 1, 2019 

Handgun storage law 

Start date for requirement that handguns be stored in a locked container or locked trunk when left in an unattended vehicle Jan. 1 

Sources: Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, Legislative Analyst’s Office, California legal codes.


[NOTE: due-dates which are not followed by the year are assumed to be 2017.   That means that they are immediately applicable.  Ignorance Is No Excuse.   Resistance is Futile.]

California IMPORTS Democrat Lawyers?

California Hires Eric Holder as Legal Bulwark Against Donald Trump - The New York Times:

 LOS ANGELES — Girding for four years of potential battles with President-elect Donald J. Trump, Democratic leaders of the California Legislature announced Wednesday that they had hired Eric H. Holder Jr., who was attorney general under President Obama, to represent them in any legal fights against the new Republican White House. The decision by the Legislature to retain Mr. Holder, who is now a prominent Washington lawyer, is the latest sign of the ideological battle that may play out over the next four years between this predominantly Democratic state and Washington. Hillary Clinton, the Democratic candidate for president, defeated Mr. Trump by more than four million votes here.

Stick a fork in 'em, fellas .... they're done!

Don't take advice from Joe Biden

Oh, this is wrong in so many ways!

Man fires gun to scare off suspects in attempted Antioch carjacking | WKRN News 2:
(December 29, 2016)

 ANTIOCH, Tenn. (WKRN) – An attempted carjacking victim scared off a group of people who tried to steal his car in Antioch early Thursday morning. It happened on Lori Drive around 1 a.m. Metro police told News 2 the man said he was in his car when three white men with bandanas over their faces approached him and attempted to open the car door. The man fired his legally-owned weapon in self-defense and the three men ran away, according to police. One of the suspects fired a shot as the group was fleeing the scene.

[emphasis added]

Note that the news article reports that the driver 'received' return fire;  the "suspects" were obviously armed.    If you're assaulted by armed hooligans, and you are in fear for your life, trying to scare them away by 'firing a shot' only warns them that you are armed.  They could as easily have shot the man.

In 2013, Dumb Joe suggested last year that people fire a gun "into the air" to frighten away attackers.

Bad idea.
It could get you arrested for 'firing a gun inside city limits'.  And you need to be aware of where that bullet is going to end up.

(Even the Huff 'n Puff Post knows better!)

Isn't it Ironic?

Amazing.

... Over 100 people killed or injured by one person at a New Years Eve Party in Turkey, and there was nobody there able to stop the attack.

Don't you just hate it when Terrorists don't obey Gun Control Laws?

It isn't as if they didn't see this coming ...