Dean Weingarten has a good find at Ammoland.
Judge Eduardo Ramos, the U.S. District Judge for the Southern District of New York, has issued an Opinion & Order that a ban on stun guns is constitutional. A New York State law prohibits the private possession of stun guns and tasers; a New York City law prohibits the possession and selling of stun guns. Judge Ramos has ruled these laws do not infringe on rights protected by the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution.
Let's briefly…… [read more]
The Council on American-Islamic Relations (“CAIR”)—also known as an “unindicted co-conspirator” in the largest terrorist funding case in U.S. history and a designated “terrorist organization” for nations allied to America—is again vehemently protesting my forthcoming appearance at the U.S. Army War College, urging the latter to “reconsider its decision and disinvite Ibrahim,” since my lecture will no doubt be “hypocritical, ahistorical and hateful.”
[ … ]
For the record, my lecture will revolve around my book, per the War College’s request—hence why CAIR regularly targets it. As such, here one must ask: if the book’s findings are so “unsubstantiated,” why does CAIR fear it so much? Does CAIR have such a low opinion of the intellectual capacity of the U.S. Army War College and its students, as to expect them to believe anything they are told, without adequate evidence?
[ … ]
… to reiterate my supposedly self-incriminating words—Islamic terrorism and extremism are intrinsic to Islam, and have been from its first contact with Western civilization in the seventh century.
This is of course a true statement. CAIR fears the truth, or a better way of saying it is that the only thing Muslims consider truth is what promulgates and benefits Sharia. Raymond’s lectures won’t do that, despite being true. Do you see the distinction?
This is a good time for readers to recall my run-in with Professor Steve Metz at the U.S. Army War College. He is blithely indifferent to any of this except to call truth-tellers full of hate, and he compares Sharia with “Boy Scout law.” We should be worried about “creeping Boy Scout law.”
As for the intelligence level of most U.S. military officers today, I wouldn’t be so sanguine as Raymond. They’ve been trained their whole lives to listen to their Marxist professors and to hate America. Raymond may have a big job on his hands and get some pushback. I hope he expects it and is prepared for it.
COLUMBUS, Ohio (AP) — Having a few too many at home shouldn’t make handling one’s own firearm illegal, according to an Ohio man challenging his arrest on a charge of possessing a weapon while intoxicated.
The Ohio Supreme Court plans to hear arguments in his case Tuesday, with a decision not expected for several weeks.
Attorneys for defendant Fred Weber say the 2018 arrest was unconstitutional because he was in his own home and the weapon was unloaded. Weber was arrested in southwestern Ohio by sheriff’s deputies after Weber’s wife placed a 4 a.m. 911 call saying her husband had a gun and was drunk.
Inside Weber’s house, deputies saw Weber holding an unloaded shotgun in his hand with the barrel pointed down, according to court records. Weber told officers he was drunk, and officers described him as “highly intoxicated,” the records show.
Weber’s attorneys argue that Weber never should have been charged or convicted under current law, since there was no evidence the shotgun was being carried with an intent to use it.
Furthermore, the law itself is flawed because it means nearly anyone with a gun at home who also consumes alcohol is breaking the law, Weber’s attorneys argued in a filing with the Ohio Supreme Court last year.
“Whether one is drunk or sober should have nothing to do with the right to possess a firearm in the hearth and home,” said attorney Gary Rosenhoffer in an Aug. 20, 2019, filing. As a result, the law is a violation of the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms, Rosenhoffer argued.
Prosecutors disagree with Weber’s argument and say the law was constitutional as applied to his situation.
By handling his weapon while he was drunk, Weber scared his wife enough that she felt compelled to call police, Nick Horton, a Clermont County assistant prosecutor, said in a Sept. 18 filing.
Weber, “by holding his firearm while intoxicated, was not exercising his right to bear arms in a virtuous manner,” the prosecutor said.
Not only do we have a police/prosecutor state that can predict the future with red flag laws, but they can also decide what’s virtuous and what’s not.
For a while now Herschel has been letting me know that “anytime you feel like posting you still have access” and “if you feel like posting something, just go ahead because you still have posting privileges.” OK. I’ll admit I’m slow on the uptake. Maybe, just maybe, these were hints… So here we go.
As is our habit, we begin with a quiet recitation of A. Shepard’s Prayer.
In John Gierach’s book “Sex, Death, and Fly Fishing” he uses the term “expertizing.” He defines expertizing thus: “Expertizing means acting like an expert. Not necessarily being an expert, mind you, but acting like one.”
In the book he tells several tales that involve him expertizing. The one that strikes me as most applicable to my point is the one in which he is invited to speak to a group of people involved with fly fishing. As he looks out at the audience, he notes several attendees that are much better at fly fishing than he is. All are looking at him with rapt attention in anticipation of his great words. They are better, but due to his platform, he is viewed as the expert.
We are living in interesting times (like that has never happened before) and the local, nationwide, and worldwide status is in a state of constant change. In a search for information on the what, where and how of the goings on we can cast a fairly wide net in search of information. Some of what we catch is good eatin’ for the mind. Some of what we catch isn’t. And there also is that occasional boot that doesn’t even fit on the menu. While it is easy to judge good fish/bad fish/boot, information from a website can ofttimes be more difficult to discern.
There are those out there that have given themselves a platform from which to expertize. Others, having come across that platform, then share it on their own platform which can very much increase the size of the original platform. This then leads to more expertizing, and so on.
None of you are stupid. At the least you took a break from watching cat videos to come here for the Captain’s insight. (Unfortunately, you found me here today. Xin Loi). Each of you is capable of looking at the information presented and determining good fish/bad fish/boot. Use that capability when reading what the expertizers are placing on your plate.
An Alabama state lawmaker has introduced legislation that would create a statewide database for Alabamians with concealed carry permits.
The process that the state implements currently isn’t secure enough, according to state Rep. Proncey Robertson (R). Currently, the application process for a concealed carry permit is overseen by each county’s sheriff’s office.
“When you go in there and you give them your personal information, addresses, Social Security numbers, date of birth, all this sort of stuff to put on that, it’s sitting there in a very nonsecure location,” Robertson told an Alabama Fox affiliate.
The bill would also allow Alabama residents to be issued lifetime concealed carry permits.
BamaCarry, a pro-gun group in the state, is against the proposed bill.
“They need to back off of trying to regulate people who lawfully carry weapons,” Eddie Fulmer, a member of BamaCarry, told the network.
He couches it in such protectionist terms, doesn’t he? Lifetime permits. Nonsecure. All an excuse for more regulation.
Sometimes I seriously wonder what’s wrong with Alabama. I know Mike Vanderboegh had problems with Boss Hogg, and even more problems. But there’s more you should know from David Codrea.
So your NRA supported this? You don’t say? Some astute reader should make a list of the gun control the NRA has supported, for example, AWB, the NFA, the Hughes Amendment, the GCA, the bump stock ban, red flag laws, UBCs, etc., etc., with URLs to prove it all.
Any takers? Fill up the comments with URLs of NRA gun control. Have at it. Let’s have the full list of crap they have supported.
A group of seven measures to restrict gun rights in Virginia was advanced by a state Senate committee on Monday.
The Democratic-led Senate Judiciary Committee voted to pass legislation ranging from a measure that would provide for expanded background checks on any gun sales or purchases to one that would create an order allowing for the temporary removal of guns from a legal owner if a court determines that the person poses a threat of harm to themselves or others.
According to Tanya Schardt, a senior counsel for the gun-control group Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, the bills passed in a near party-line vote, with Democrats in favor and Republicans against.
Not the kind parents will teach their children in home schooling (not necessarily so, but maybe, I certainly would), but with a different emphasis.
Following the same procedure, we can see that even over an 18-year span we have a 10% chance of violent revolution, which is an interesting thought experiment to entertain before you have kids. It’s also important to note that a violent nation-state transition doesn’t just affect people who live in a floodplain. It affects everyone stuck in the middle. Especially the poor and defenseless.
The authors try to do some PRA (Probabilistic Risk Assessment) with a limited failure data set. After all, violent revolutions in North America is a limited data set. A better statement follows. “The tech preppers do not necessarily think a collapse is likely. They consider it a remote event, but one with a very severe downside, so, given how much money they have, spending a fraction of their net worth to hedge against this . . . is a logical thing to do.”
This is better because it boils it down to its essential elements. We’ve discussed this many times before in the context of concealed or open carry. The minimization of risk means understanding high risk scenarios, and risk = probability X consequences. So for example, if something is low probability and the consequence of the event is low (for example, a spoon breaking when you eat your morning cereal), you don’t invest in a new set of expensive china.
If on the other hand an event has high probability or high consequence, that can drive the risk high, meaning it’s something you need to plan for. Preppers see the event for which they are planning to be a high consequence event. They are right.
So, how might one engage the entire school system; the years of indoctrination; the daily drumbeat of socialist dogma? The only route is through the brain and the quickest avenue to the brain is through literature, not television. Television does not have to engage the brain, but literature does.
[ … ]
Let’s not forget what this is all about. We are engaged in a cultural war, but our side is silent. They are silenced, because there is no media outlet out there that has not been compromised, but I have found a few like-minded producers who are willing to engage it as I am and as we are. It must be fought over on every front, with everything we have and it very easily might turn into something more serious that demands all of our action, but even then, we will need viable media to counter the lies told about us. That is something we will need no matter what else happens.
Here is his latest (Newsletter 025), and he has some ideas. I agree with his sentiments. I was listening to a lecture at a Christian Reconstruction conference in Chicago some years ago, and one astute lecturer pointed out that the American church has almost uniformly rejected symbolism, and thus literature and art have suffered and we have had difficulty reaching the people, especially the young.
The media, from movies to magazines to stories and novels, has been turned over to the forces of darkness, and those forces have used it to their greatest advantage.
“People openly carried guns, even assault rifles, to the recent gun rally at the Capitol,” a Friday opinion piece titled “Gun Rally Smacked of Fascism” in The Salt Lake Tribune whines. “The reason for brandishing guns is hard to fathom.”
If they were actually brandishing them, it would be. Except Utah criminal code is quite clear that:
“‘Threatening manner’ does not include: the possession of a dangerous weapon, whether visible or concealed, without additional behavior which is threatening…”
Not only does Utah suffer from the progs who have relocated there to the large cities such as Salt Lake, but you need to remember that both the Jehovah’s Witnesses and the LDS church are viscerally and irrationally opposed to gun rights. Utah isn’t as friendly a state for gun owners as you might think they would be because of the strength of the LDS.
Oh, both of those groups allow for LEOs to have weapons, but as for people who aren’t “the only ones,” they are deeply opposed to firearms ownership or use. I recall asking an LDS friend once about guns in his church and what would happen if an armed intruder came in and started shooting families.
His response centered around off-duty LEOs who were members of the congregation. No one else carries. The church leadership is deeply opposed to it. I’ve also had this conversation with a JW, insofar as it was possible. He was much more emotional about it, but in line with his church’s beliefs, which means deeply opposed.
I pity the gun owners in Utah, but their pleas might fall on deaf ears, not just with the pols, but with most of the people too, at least as many who identify as LDS.
This comes to us via Ammoland. The actual link to Pete’s web site is here.
Close the “boyfriend loophole” in federal law to help prevent domestic abuse, including within the LGBTQ community. Federal law prohibits anyone convicted of a misdemeanor domestic violence crime from buying a firearm. The law as currently written, however, only protects those who are married to, live with or have lived with, or have children with their abuser. Pete supports federal legislation requiring that state or local law enforcement be notified whenever anyone, including a domestic abuser or convicted stalker, tries to buy a gun and fails a required background check.
Repeal PLCAA to stop shielding the gun industry from liability for negligent practices that lead to gun violence. The Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA) shields the gun industry from civil liability for business practices that directly threaten public safety. Civil liability, which is used as a critical check for nearly every American industry and product, must also extend to the gun industry.
In other words, he supports bankrupting Remington (and other manufacturers) when their products are used in the commission of a crime. I don’t suspect he also supports bankrupting Ford.
Ban the sale of assault weapons and high-capacity magazines. As a veteran, Pete knows that military-grade weapons have no place being sold to civilians. The same is true for high-capacity magazines. We’ve already decided that certain weaponry—like tanks and rockets—are unacceptable in civilian hands. Congress should similarly reinstitute a ban on selling federal assault weapons and magazines that hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition.
This is a remarkable video. It comes from reader Joe. I don’t know when this incident occurred, but the video was recently released. Watch it all.
The officer repeatedly states that he is entitled to know the person’s identity for a lawful activity because he is “investigating” something or other, while also not making clear that the person has been detained or arrested.
He then goes inside and reads the statute aloud, while also reading the words detained or arrested on suspicion of a crime.
He’s conflicted. The statute cited by the photographer, Texas Penal Code 38.02, says this.
(a) A person commits an offense if he intentionally refuses to give his name, residence address, or date of birth to a peace officer who has lawfully arrested the person and requested the information. (b) A person commits an offense if he intentionally gives a false or fictitious name, residence address, or date of birth to a peace officer who has: (1) lawfully arrested the person; (2) lawfully detained the person; or (3) requested the information from a person that the peace officer has good cause to believe is a witness to a criminal offense.
The photographer was not under arrest. He was also not being detained according to the officer, but the officer wouldn’t let him leave. So the officer lied about it, and clearly doesn’t understand what it means to detain someone. The officer merely repeated the point that he was conducting an investigation.
We’ve seen this before with the Prince William County PD, where they repeatedly claimed that the mere act of conducting an investigation was adequate cause for demanding identification.
Here’s the fact. It’s not. That couldn’t be clearer. This wasn’t a so-called “Terry Stop.” There was no suspicion of a crime (photography isn’t illegal), and the conduct of an investigation isn’t justification for violation of rights.
The police academy is lying to their students, or else, the officer is ignorant and unteachable. There is another possibility – he just doesn’t care. Their contact information can be found here.
Beware, dear readers. The 2A sanctuary movement, bringing Sheriffs and local PDs on board with your 2A rights, may not be be all it’s cracked up to be. For your AO, you need to ensure that it means what it means and your local LEOs are truly on board, not just saying things for the purpose of reelection.
If they’ll violate your first amendment rights with careless impunity, they’ll do it with the second amendment too.
