Articles by Herschel Smith

David asks if anyone has seen anything on Snope. I haven’t, except that it was distributed for conference for the 13th time.

Outdoor Life.

When I was younger, I prided myself on always being prepared in the outdoors. Whether it was a backcountry hunting trip or just a casual hike, I always brought everything I could possibly need in case something went wrong. I carried a fire starter, extra clothes, and high-calorie snacks in my kit. I would always charge my phone, and I’d usually throw a satellite device and signal flares into my pack if I was heading into any serious wilderness. Yet, over the years, my preparations began to lapse.

[ … ]

That’s how it all starts. Becoming lackadaisical.

Knowing I’d hit him, I pulled out my phone to text Hayden, only to see that my battery was dead. Cursing myself for not charging it, I shrugged off my mistake and went to recover the buck at the bottom of the canyon.

Dead phone.

I dropped my pack on the ground and looked for my heavy coat before remembering I’d taken it out the day before to help pack out Andrew’s deer. With the cold wind biting into me, I knew that If I didn’t get back to the safety of our tent, I was going to be in trouble.

Improper cold weather survival apparel.

I re-shouldered the pack and dug into my pockets for my headlamp. It, too, was out of batteries.

Dead batteries for your only real source of light.

Looking up toward the rim, I suddenly sank knee-deep into a gap in the rocks and pitched forward, hyperextending my leg. In a panic, I pushed myself to the left and the weight of the buck on my back shifted down, twisting my leg even further. I felt and heard a loud snap as I was pulled from the hole, and I slid through the mud back down to the bottom of the canyon.

Injury in the darkness because of no light and no gear for emergency cover and bedding.

“Dude,” Hayden shook his head. “The tent’s gone!”

We got to camp and saw that the wind had blown our tent completely over, exposing everything inside to sleet and snow. Hayden unearthed a couple damp sleeping bags from the soaking mess, and then we climbed into my truck and flooded the cab with heat. This relief would be short-lived, too, as the truck was low on gas and we still needed to drive back to town. Shivering in our seats with the knowledge that morning was only a few hours off, we both fell into a restless sleep.

Failure to fuel your transportation.

The list of failures is long, and this guy is blessed to be alive.

Learn from his mistakes.

Source.

If enacted, the cuts would force the agency to slash hundreds or more jobs, two of the sources said, in addition to the nearly 600 people who have already accepted the government’s deferred resignation option.

The agency employs about 5,300, about half of whom are special agents, according to public records. It has been unable to fill about 150 slots for special agents due to budget cuts in 2024, forcing it to cancel its incoming agent classes, two of the sources said.

Well, it’s a start. Why don’t we send the federal Marshals over to their officers and find and destroy the illegal firearms registration lists they have? And then terminate the bureau completely?

We’ve covered this before.

I don’t think it needs an upgrade. I think it needs program cancellation. Can you imagine a branch spending more on toys than the Air Force?

The total cost for all of this is $2 trillion. Trillion, with a ‘t’.

Source.

This is how a Coyote becomes when he’s hungry. This is perhaps a stupid move but also notice the teamwork.

Source.

The gun industry could face civil damages for the misuse of firearms in limited  circumstances in Connecticut under product liability legislation passed by the House and sent to the Senate on Wednesday.

Passage of House Bill 7042 came on a largely party-line vote of 100 to 46 in the House, where Democrats have a 102-49 majority. Five Democrats were opposed and five Republicans in favor.

Republican opponents decried the bill as unfairly holding gun makers and sellers responsible for the actions of purchasers, while the Democratic sponsor described it as a reasonable effort to make an industry be more attentive to public safety.

The state legislation follows a narrow path left open by a federal law that generally protects the gun industry from damages resulting from the criminal or unlawful misuse of firearms or ammunition.

Exceptions to the federal Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act include cases where harms occurred after a manufacturer or seller knowingly violated a law applicable to the sale or marketing of guns.

Nine states have passed similar laws, said Rep. Steve Stafstrom, D-Bridgeport, the lead sponsor of the bill.

He said the same exception was used by families of nine Sandy Hook Elementary School families to sue Remington over its marketing of the AR-15 style rifle used to kill 20 students and six educators in 2012. They agreed to a $73 million settlement in 2022.

The U.S. Supreme Court had refused to hear an appeal of a Connecticut’s court decision that allowed the families to pursue the case.

Yep, they invoked Sandy Hook as I figured they would. They got what they wanted. They bankrupted Remington and sent chills through the gun manufacturing industry (although Remington didn’t exactly help their case by producing crap). That there is such a thing as the protection of lawful commerce in firearms act doesn’t matter to legislators in Connecticut. Nor does it matter to the SCOTUS, apparently, who doesn’t care enough about the U.S. Congress to honor laws that have been made.

By the way, if you’re a gun manufacturer who still calls Connecticut home, I have one question. Why?

"Exposing the agents to potential lines of fire." Good Lord. That's their job. If they don't want to do it they can find another. So the argument goes that any danger justifies wrong-home raids. This is odious and repugnant.https://t.co/731qpAEaLP

— CaptainsJournal (@BrutusMaximus50) April 30, 2025

That means be wary when you go on walkabouts. This includes wearing snake boots during hunting season.

Video.

📍Red Sea | Interception by a 🇫🇷 frigate of an aerial drone coming from Yemen, threatening maritime traffic.

➡️ Constant vigilance to ensure freedom of navigation and maritime security from Suez to Hormuz. pic.twitter.com/ARGCV6X3JL

— The 🇫🇷 Joint Staff – Military operations (@FrenchForces) April 18, 2025

ABC News.

ATLANTA — Before dawn on Oct. 18, 2017, FBI agents broke down the front door of Trina Martin’s Atlanta home, stormed into her bedroom and pointed guns at her and her then-boyfriend as her 7-year-old son screamed for his mom from another room.

Martin, blocked from comforting her son, cowered in disbelief for what she said felt like an eternity. But within minutes, the ordeal was over. The agents realized they had the wrong house.

On Tuesday, an attorney for Martin will go before the U.S. Supreme Court to ask the justices to reinstate her 2019 lawsuit against the U.S. government accusing the agents of assault and battery, false arrest and other violations.

A federal judge in Atlanta dismissed the suit in 2022 and the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld that decision last year. The Supreme Court agreed in January to take up the matter.

The key issue before the justices is under what circumstances people can sue the federal government in an effort to hold law enforcement accountable. Martin’s attorneys say Congress clearly allowed for those lawsuits in 1974, after a pair of law enforcement raids on wrong houses made headlines, and blocking them would leave little recourse for families like her.

FBI Atlanta spokesperson Tony Thomas said in an email the agency can’t comment on pending litigation. But lawyers for the government argued in Martin’s case that courts shouldn’t be “second-guessing” law enforcement decisions. The FBI agents did advance work and tried to find the right house, making this raid fundamentally different from the no-knock, warrantless raids that led Congress to act in the 1970s, the Justice Department said in court filings starting under the Biden administration.

In dismissing Martin’s case, the 11th Circuit largely agreed with that argument, saying courts can’t second-guess police officers who make “honest mistakes” in searches. The agent who led the raid said his personal GPS led him to the wrong place. The FBI was looking for a suspected gang member a few houses away.

Martin, 46, said she, her then-boyfriend, Toi Cliatt, and her son were left traumatized.

“We’ll never be the same, mentally, emotionally, psychologically,” she said Friday at the neat, stucco home that was raided. “Mentally, you can suppress it, but you can’t really get over it.”

She and Cliatt pointed out where they were sleeping when the agents broke in and the master bathroom closet where they hid.

Martin stopped coaching track because the starting pistol reminded her of the flashbang grenade the agents set off. Cliatt, 54, said he couldn’t sleep, forcing him to leave his truck driving job.

“The road is hypnotizing,” he said of driving tired. “I became a liability to my company.”

Martin said her son became extremely anxious, pulling threads out of his clothes and peeling paint off walls.

Cliatt initially thought the raid was a burglary attempt, so he ran toward the closet, where he kept a shotgun. Martin said her son still expresses fear that she could have died had she confronted the agents while armed.

“If the Federal Tort Claims Act provides a cause of action for anything, it’s a wrong-house raid like the one the FBI conducted here,” Martin’s lawyers wrote in a brief to the Supreme Court.

Other U.S. appeals courts have interpreted the law more favorably for victims of mistaken law enforcement raids, creating conflicting legal standards that only the nation’s highest court can resolve, they say. Public-interest groups across the ideological spectrum have urged the Supreme Court to overturn the 11th Circuit ruling.

After breaking down the door to the house, a member of the FBI SWAT team dragged Cliatt out of the closet and put him in handcuffs.

But one of the agents noticed he did not have the suspect’s tattoos, according to court documents. He asked for Cliatt’s name and address. Neither matched those of the suspect. The room went quiet as agents realized they had raided the wrong house.

They uncuffed Cliatt and left for the correct house, where they executed the warrant and arrested the man they were after.

The agent leading the raid returned later to apologize and leave a business card with a supervisor’s name. But the family received no compensation from the government, not even for the damage to the house, Cliatt said.

Martin said the most harrowing part of the raid was her son’s cries.

“When you’re not able to protect your child or at least fight to protect your child, that’s a feeling that no parent ever wants to feel,” she said.

First, he’d better be glad he never reached for that shotgun. He’d be dead now. Second, if they had a dog in the house, the dog would be dead too. Third, notice what the attorneys for the FedGov said: “Courts shouldn’t be second guessing law enforcement decisions.”

In other words, the constitution doesn’t apply to them. They call it “second guessing.” The arrogance of this statement is remarkable.

The bill of rights is precisely for protecting citizens from actions by the government, and all legal cases involve second guessing. It’s what happens in court when a jury decides whether rights have been violated (or in this case, the courts). That courts are making the determination is obscene because officers of the court are deciding whether other officers of the court have violated constitutionally protected rights.

Remember why raids like this are terrible, horrible, no-good and very bad. First, they violate God given rights. A man’s home is his castle and he has the right to protect it from all home invaders. Second, innocent men, women and children get injured and in some cases killed. Third, even if police need evidence, they can always get that evidence the old fashioned way – by detective work and investigation. There is nothing stopping them from entering the premises when people are not home.

Fourth, if they need to apprehend an Indvidual, the same rule applies. They can do it safely rather than causing risk to the home owners. I have no interest in minimizing risk to cops. I have every interest in minimizing risk to others. Fifth, sometimes they get the addresses wrong, and sometimes they listen to very unreliable people as CIs and do things they shouldn’t be doing based on bad information. Sixth, criminals have begun to mimic police SWAT teams in home invasion tactics. If a man and his family must lay on the floor and beg for mercy against home invaders, then that’s the end of the second amendment as it concerns protection of family, hearth and home.

None of this is good or righteous. Any man who engages in these acts is engaging in an unrighteous action. But it actually concerns me that the supreme court will hear the case. I expect the “law and order” types to side with the cops. Nothing could be worse than for the SCOTUS to justify bad law and make this precedent-setting.