The Effectiveness Of Gun Control….

So Nancy Pelosi’s husband was attacked by an intruder armed with a hammer, apparently as a result of his relationship to the speaker.  

Such attacks in ANY context are reprehensible beyond words.

Nevertheless, how proud Nancy must be that her lifetime of fighting for increased gun control has been so effective.

While she enjoys round the clock armed security, her 80-something husband was left to fend for himself against a much younger armed intruder, relying only on a phone and coded messages to law enforcement, HOPING they would be able to determine that an emergency situation existed (and not just hang up on him as a crank call or inadvertent pocket dial), wasting precious time in the meantime as they made that determination.

Well done, madame speaker, well done.  The results of your work came home to roost.

Now let’s see if they get a waiver for him to have a gun in the house, or it they determine that this billionaire is entitled to taxpayer funded armed security as a result of his relationship to Speaker Pelosi.

But He’s A GOOD Boy….

Excuse me, by Hunter’s OWN WRITTEN, PUBLISHED CONFESSION, he is guilty of lying on a NICS background check regarding his illicit drug use.  That is a federal felony carrying a 10 year sentence; being a user of illegal drugs while in possession of a firearm is a five year felony, and being a felon in possession of a firearm is a ten year federal felony.

Pres. Biden has made a career pushing for gun control and gun bans, but now he wants his son exempted from the results of those laws.  Other people who have started new lives have still had to face the consequences of their previous choices; the fact that Hunter is the president’s son shouldn’t change that.  

Since his confession is published, this is as close to a slam dunk case as cases come.

We’ll deal with Hunter’s collusion with the Chinese another time….

The Hypocrisy Of DACA….

An editorial pushing for the codification of DACA made the following observation as its rationale: “[A]n adult who illegally comes across the border is making a calculated decision, while a child brought across by their parents had no choice in the matter.”

And therein lies the basic problem. ANY crime committed by parents effects the children.

There are NO exceptions.

And yet, the only children for whom I see these activists expressing ANY concern are so-called “dreamers”.

Kids suffer when their parents commit crimes every day in this country, and yet, I don’t see anyone calling for them to receive preferential treatment.  The fact that they suffer as a result of the crimes of their parents is accepted as a matter of fact.  

It’s no more than they deserve.

So if suffering is no more than the children of citizens deserve, why do the children of illegals deserve preferential treatment?

The Omnibus Strikes Again….

The omnibus budget bill strikes once again.

Yesterday, September 26, 2022, A new gun control law went into affect. It was a law nobody, myself included, knew had been passed.  Known as the NICS Denial Notification Act, gun grabbers attempted to pass it as a standalone bill in 2021. They weren’t successful. Never made it out of committee.

So instead, they did what they have done in the past: attached it as an amendment to a massive budget bill. The budget bill was passed.

This new bill, which went into affect yesterday, requires firearms dealers to supply law enforcement with the names and addresses of individuals who are denied on firearms background checks. This is actually done automatically via the NICS background check system.

On the surface, this appears to be a logical system. After all, you wouldn’t be denied on a background check unless you had something criminal in your history. Someone like that shouldn’t be allowed to own guns. 

But here’s the rub: speaking from experience, I can tell you with assurance that the background check system is riddled with an accuracy. 98% of denials are overturned on appeal, meaning that the individual who received the denial was NEVER GUILTY OF ANYTHING in the first place. You may be denied if your name is similar or identical to that of a criminal.  This is especially concerning in a day and age in which identity theft is out of control. You may never have done anything criminal in your life, yet on the basis of this background check you can be denied you’re right to purchase a firearm, and once more, the moment you are denied YOU BECOME LEGALLY INELIGIBLE TO OWN OR POSSESS FIREARMS - period.  In point of fact, at this moment, law enforcement can come to your home and confiscate all of your firearms – even though you personally have done nothing wrong. It is now up to you to prove that you are innocent; there is no presumption of innocence, no innocent until proven guilty.  You are presumed to be guilty until you prove otherwise.

Yes, there is a process to appeal a denial, one that generally takes months to work through, and if law enforcement confiscated your firearms(I fully expect that a number of more “progressive” jurisdictions to take full advantage of this law to do just that), you will, in many instances, have to sue to get them back.

Mr. President, Reinstate The Fairness Doctrine….

Mr. President:

Reinstate the fairness doctrine.  

If you are truly as concerned with the polarization of this country as you claim to be, then one of the best steps you can take is to reinstate the fairness doctrine.

The fairness doctrine required media outlets to present BOTH SIDES of controversial issues.  Since the final demise of the doctrine in 2011, media outlets have been free to promote pet agendas, singular points of view.  The elimination of this rule has been cited in research as a major contributing factor in the rise of polarization we witness today.

IF you are as concerned with the polarization of the country as you claim to be, it is within your authority to issue an executive order requiring the FCC, as a federal agency under your immediate authority, to reinstate and enforce the fairness doctrine.

If we are going to address extremism in all of its forms, it begins with ensuring that people have access to UNBIASED INFORMATION REGARDING BOTH SIDES of controversial issues.  The media play a major role in that endeavor.

Please take a moment to sign my petition:

https://chng.it/q4nkq8B5bq

Turn About Is Fair Play….?

Mr. President, Madam Vice-President, Gov. Newsom, et al:

I guess no one in the general public has stopped to think that all the Republicans did was turn the Democrats’ playbook against them.  

For over 50 years the Democrats have used busing to solve problems. They bused inner-city kids to surrounding white school districts where the kids weren’t wanted, causing chaos in those school systems. And oh yeah, no one stopped to ask those inner-city kids if they wanted to be shipped out to those surrounding school districts, you just did it. 

During the Obama administration unaccompanied alien children and illegal aliens were bused from detention and processing centers in the border states to cities in the north, where they were dropped off without asking them if that’s where they wanted to go, and without asking the cities if they wanted them in the first place. It caused chaos. 

Now the Republicans have found a way to raise awareness of an issue by using the Democrats own playbook against them: busing illegal aliens to the cities and states where legislators are shouting the loudest to throw the borders open. They’re not asking the aliens if they want to go, they’re not asking the receiving cities whether they want them, they’re just doing what the Democrats did: shipping them. 

Predictably, it’s doing what it did when the democrats did it: causing chaos.

So it was OK for the democrats to do it, but not the republicans.

9/11: NEVER Forget….

I was at home when the 911 attacks occurred.  I received a call from my wife, who was at work and, as was her custom at the time, had a television going in her classroom with the news. She called to tell me to turn on the TV: “A plane just flew into one of the twin towers of the world trade center. They don’t know if it was an accident or if it was on purpose.“ I turned on the TV just in time to see the second jet fly into the second tower.

Kinda removed all the questions about whether it was an accident…

As was the case with many people across the country, I spent the next several hours watching the coverage of the events as they unfolded that day.

We live right around the corner from one of the mosques  in Grand Rapids, about 500 feet away as the crow flies. They called an emergency meeting in response to the attacks, and while most of the congregants were crammed inside their little building, there was a group of young men who gathered in the intersection seventy five feet from my front yard, and they were whooping it up in celebration. I don’t care what the news says, I know what I saw that day. 

There were people celebrating the attacks.  

In my home town.

In my neighborhood.

On my street.

I saw it with my own eyes.

That scene is burned into my memory.

More misinformation from Shannon Watts, founder of Everytown for Gun Safety, Moms Demand Action, and Bloomberg shill.

This is in reference to the heroic action taken by Elisjsha Dicken to stop a mass shooting:

“I don’t know who needs to hear this, but when a 22-year-old illegally brings a loaded gun into a mall and kills a mass shooter armed with an AR-15 after he already killed three people and wounded others is not a ringing endorsement of our implementation of the Second Amendment,”

First, think about that statement.  Gun controller Watts would rather have seen the mass shooter given free rein to kill more people rather than be stopped by a good guy with a gun.  How messed up is that?!

But here is the misinformation that so many will unquestioningly accept as fact: she states that Dicken “illegally” brought a loaded gun into the mall.  To say this is a massive lie is an understatement.  Unless the law designates a location as a “gun free” zone, IT ISN’T ILLEGAL TO CARRY A FIREARM THERE.

Some locations have declared themselves “gun free”; they have posted signs indicating this.  But in Indiana, as is true for the vast majority of states, such signs DO NOT HAVE THE FORCE IF LAW; they are essentially house rules.  The same is true of Michigan.  Now, if you happen to get caught carrying your firearm in these places, you can be trespassed, asked to leave the premises and not return.  If you refuse to leave, police can be called and you can be charged with misdemeanor trespassing.  If you return after being asked to leave you can be charged.   But carrying a firearm  in violation of what is essentially a house rule IS NOT ILLEGAL.

Shannon Watts is hoping that people won’t question her, will take her at face value when she says Dicken committed a crime when he stopped the mass shooter.

But her accusation actually goes farther than that.

You see, a claim of self defense under a stand your ground defense assumes that the defender isn’t committing a crime himself when he uses deadly force.  While Watts doesn’t actually say the words, that is the true gist of her statement: she wants him to be prosecuted for stopping a mass shooting, for saving lives.  Watts would rather see innocent people die while waiting for police to respond than to see an obviously prepared and well-trained lawful firearms carrier come to the rescue.Just how messed up is THAT?!

Now That The Forensic Results Are In….

Now that the FBI has stated categorically that Alec Baldwin's gun could not have fired if he hadn't squeezed the trigger, he's getting desperate to prove others are to blame - based (selectively) on Hollywood filming rules.

Fine.  Let's see what the Actors' Equity Association rules say:

Rule 1: "* Use simulated or dummy weapons whenever possible." Oh, big no no there.

Rule 2: "* TREAT ALL GUNS AS IF THEY ARE LOADED AND DEADLY."  

Rule 4: "* The property master or armorer should carefully train you in the safe use of any firearm you must handle. BE HONEST IF YOU HAVE NO KNOWLEDGE OF GUNS. Do not overstate your qualifications." 

Rule 8: "* NEVER POINT A FIREARM AT ANYONE INCLUDING YOURSELF. Always cheat the shot by aiming to the right or left of the target character. IF ASKED TO POINT AND SHOOT DIRECTLY AT A LIVING TARGET, CONSULT WITH THE PROPERTY MASTER OR ARMORER for the prescribed safety procedures."  He had an obligation TO SEEK OUT HELP AND GUIDANCE.

Rule 11: "* Use protective shields for all off stage cast within close proximity to any shots fired."  Not done.

Lucky rule 13: "* CHECK THE FIREARM EVERY TIME YOU TAKE POSSESSION OF IT. Before each use, make sure the gun has been test-fired off stage and THEN ASK TO TEST FIRE IT YOURSELF. Watch the prop master check the cylinders and barrel to be sure no foreign object or dummy bullet has become lodged inside."  “But I didn’t have an obligation to check the firearm, that’s the prop master’s job.”  WRONG!  Even Hollywood recognizes the individual’s obligation to check the gun.

Bolding/all caps added for emphasis.

BTW, Baldwin can’t claim ignorance of proper firearms handling.  He has been coached on safe firearms use over the more than 30 years he has been handling them in movies by some of the best armorers in the industry.  He got full of himself and lazy.

Baldwin violated each and every one of these rules.  Even Hollywood rules say he has a PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY to practice certain safe handling rules.

Baldwin is guilty as sin, and he knows it.

One Can’t Prevent What One Isn’t Present To Prevent….

I recently responded to an editorial in which the author, a psychiatrist, argued that very few good guys with guns have stopped mass shootings.

He made the following statement: “Which brings me to the spate of mass shootings. If those numbers are right, it’s extremely likely that there were at least some “good guys (or women)” with guns at most of the mass shootings we’ve heard about over the past few years.”

This is an assumption, an assumption with absolutely no basis in fact.  He assumes that there MUST have been firearms carriers at the sites of many mass shootings, but they were too cowardly to intervene.  He conveniently ignores that most mass shootings take place at sites designated “weapons free”.  

Lawful firearms carriers are scrupulous about observing conditions of entry; they aren’t going to do anything that would jeopardize their right to carry.  

The result?  

Whether the “weapons free” designation carries the force of law (applicable in only a few states) or not (as is the case in the majority of states, Michigan being one of them), the majority of firearms carriers will either 1) secure their firearms in a lockbox in their vehicle or 2) find someplace else to shop.  

The end result?  

At the vast majority of mass shootings, there were no lawful carriers present.  Good guys with guns can’t prevent what they aren’t present to prevent.

So what this gun control advocate is really arguing, while being too ignorant to realize it, is that “gun free” zones HAVE been effective in stopping firearms carry.  The problem is, they are stopping the WRONG PEOPLE from carrying.