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]
Last week’s shooting at the Fort Lauderdale airport hasn’t put a dent in Sen. Greg Steube’s plan to allow concealed weapons permit holders to carry their firearms in airports. In fact, it’s only strengthened his resolve to pass the legislation, which he says is desperately needed to prevent future mass shootings in the Sunshine State.
“The situation at the airport further puts a big spotlight on the fact that gun free zones and laws that prevent law abiding citizens to carry.. the only person that protects is the criminal,” Steube told Sunshine State News Wednesday.
Steube’s proposal, SB 140, would lift some “gun free” zones in Florida where carrying firearms is prohibited, even for concealed carry permit holders.
If passed, the bill would allow Florida’s 1.7 million CCW permit holders to openly carry their firearms. The more sweeping part of the measure, however, would eliminate gun-free zones in places like secondary schools, local centers and government meeting areas.
Airports are also included.
Since last week’s shooting which left five dead and six wounded, Steube’s phone has been ringing off the hook. On Tuesday, the day the bill was supposed to be heard in the Senate Judiciary Committee, his district office received 120 calls alone.
He doesn’t understand why there’s such a resistance to CCW permit holders carrying their firearms around since they have to undergo background checks. Statistically speaking, permit holders follow the letter of the law.
A 2015 report found CCW permit holders committed crimes at a much lower rate than police officers did. A Police Quarterly study from 2005 to 2007 saw an average of 103 crimes by police per 100,000 officers.
Well, all of that is true, but notice that the argument he uses to persuade others is based on data rather than fundamental and properly basic rights. Very well. Remember what we’ve discussed – incrementalism. A bill doesn’t have to be perfect to get my support. We can go for constitutional carry later. One step at a time.
As for the airport shooting, someone remarked to me that things like this make our argument harder. I disagree. It makes our argument crystal clear. As to how the shooter got a gun in the airport, he did so legally, just like a perpetrator can do it on virtually any street corner or grocery store in America.
Imagine this being on a street corner and someone asking, “just exactly how did this person come to have a gun to begin with?” This is a stupid question, of course. It’s likely he bought it. If not, he stole it. What does it matter? Criminals intent on crime don’t care how they prepare for perpetration of their crime.
The only defense against this is to allow others (law abiding men and women) to carry weapons, openly and concealed. Make your choice. Don’t dictate how a man carries his weapon. People who do that piss me off. Word. They should drop their pink panties and put on big boy shorts. Grow up and leave everyone alone instead of trying to be mommy.
How a man carries his weapon is analogous to what color he paints his car. It’s his business, not yours.
Greetings Herschel, I have been fascinated by the Garand rifle for sixty years, ever since I was handed one in ROTC and taught its operation and care. I have since been able to acquire two of them, a 1942 Springfield Armory one I am in the process of back-dating to its original form, and Korean War era rifle from International Harvester. Sixty years ago we were told that Mr. Garand was an employee of the United States Government, and that he developed his rifle “on the clock.” The patents, and any royalties, were not his to assign. I don’t know where Click magazine got its information, but I tend to believe the story as I heard it. I get nervous about disagreeing with Sgt. Emery, who has “been there and done that,” but in what you quoted, I think he is wrong. Let me explain. The U.S. Rifle, caliber .30, M1 was designed to fire a specific cartridge (Ball M2 or AP M2), which used a powder of medium burning rate, usually IMR4895 or IMR4064. Slower powders will get much more performance out of the .30-06 cartridge, but the higher pressure at the M1’s gas port will quickly beat the operating rod out of spec. The rifle won’t “blow up,” but it will quickly become a manually operated bolt action, and eventually become useless, if fed improperly. People like Hornady sell ammunition loaded to Ball M2 spec specifically for use in Garand rifles. The newer cartridge used in the M14 rifle fired the same bullet (150 grains) at the same velocity (2750 ft/s), and did so by using different powder and pressure. The round of the M14 is smaller than that of the M1, but the punch is identical. Even in civilian use, the .30-06 (7.62×63) surpasses the .308 Winchester (7.62×51) only slightly until bullets heavier than 180 bullets are used, after which the difference becomes noticeable. But in military usage, the M14 is the equal ballistically of the M1, because of the latter’s need to limit pressure at its gas port. Although I disagree with Sgt. Emery on this one point, I would still consider it an honor to buy him a beer. Thanks for your blog, Herschel, and best wishes for a Happy New Year,
[Name redacted because I never know if readers are okay with me publishing names]
David Seaman does something very simple in this video, something I should have thought about doing long ago. He issues a challenge. I’ll repeat that challenge.
To any FBI or CIA agent or analyst who is willing to contact me and supply proof of employment and station, I’ll publish your information on John Podesta proving that he isn’t a child molester, isn’t involved in human trafficking, and isn’t involved in Brownstone operations of any kind, and never has been. As for that matter, I’ll offer up the same challenge regarding James Alefantis. Tell us if we’re all wrong on #Pizzagate.
You have my contact information on the contact page. I’m waiting.
How would you like to see Trey Gowdy cross examine the actors in the drug, money, oil, weapons and child trafficking scandal? I would actually pay good money to watch that. A lot of it. The Congress could sell tickets for a hefty sum of money, and use that to pay the federal marshals to go arrest the bad actors who are currently hidden from view. As for my take, I’ll wait and see. Perhaps George knows something I don’t about all of this. Chaffetz always seem to step right up to the river, but then refuses to get his feet wet. Fast and Furious is but one example.
I do want to address one thing. You’re going to notice George triangulating on the question “Did Neil Brown and Eric Braverman know about the human trafficking part of these operations?” He has mentioned that in the past several videos.
Now to be sure, the human trafficking part of this is obscene, awful, hideous and repugnant. But let me be clear about this. The Scriptural stipulations for the crimes of rape, kidnapping and murder are all the same: the death penalty. It makes it no less obscene and criminal if Neil Brown and Eric Braverman knew only about the oil, wars, killings, drug running, and weapons trafficking but didn’t know about the human trafficking.
Men, women and children died as a result of their quest for power and money. The guilty must be punished. The American people will demand nothing less. Oh, and by the way, as for that argument that George is sure will come that we, the CIA, only wanted to get the evidence and shut these rings down, that’s rather like finding your kid in the cookie jar only to hear him say that he was going to turn in his brother. He’s really on your side.
The gun lobby certainly is adept at promoting counterintuitive (and probably counterproductive) policy positions, such as that the answer to gun violence in America is more guns. Politicians certainly are adept at giving their bills titles that conceal their purpose, like calling a bill that narrows privacy rights and constrains civil liberties the “Patriot Act.”
Put these proclivities together, and you get the “Hearing Protection Act,” introduced Monday by Reps. Jeff Duncan (R-S.C.) and John Carter (R-Texas). From the title alone, you’d have no idea that it’s about deregulating the sale of gun silencers.
Stiff federal regulations on silencers date back to 1934, when they were enacted as part of a crackdown on machine guns and other instruments of mobster violence. (Thanks to the Washington Post’s Michael Rosenwald for some of this history.) In recent years, they’ve stuck in the gun lobby’s craw, as do most restrictions on the sale of firearms and related equipment.
But treating the use of silencers as a public health issue is a relatively new twist. It was first tried in connection with a precursor bill to the Duncan-Carter measure that was introduced in 2015 and died in committee.
[ … ]
Gun control advocates don’t buy these pro-silencer arguments and neither should you. The argument that silencer sales promote public health by protecting hearing is a smokescreen, they say, for a deregulatory initiative that would largely benefit the firearms industry while increasing the dangers of firearm violence.
“There’s no evidence of a public health issue associated with hearing loss from gunfire,” says Kristin Brown of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence. “There is evidence of a public health crisis from gun violence, and we think that’s where legislative efforts should be directed.”
[ … ]
The real flaw in the silencer lobby’s efforts, however, may be the patent obviousness of their fakery. Calling the Duncan-Carter bill the “Hearing Protection Act” is so absurdly transparent an effort to deceive that voters may be prompted to ask an obvious question: “What are they hiding?”
Okay. Your insightful analysis has got me. I have to admit it. I have to confess, and I expect it will be good for the soul.
No, I don’t want to be a mobster. I’m just fed up as hell with having to take off my ear muffs when I need to communicate something to a fellow shooter, only to have to sustain damage to my hearing if I don’t move back while I’m at a range. I’m just fed up as hell with having ear muffs interfere with my cheek weld when I’m shooting a rifle.
As for the notion that you won’t be able to hear gunfire if people actually purchase suppressors, I wouldn’t worry about that too much. I think you’ll still have time to “run, hide and fight” in the case of an attacker. I don’t really take you for the kind of guy who would run to the sound of gunfire to assist others anyway. And I’m sure you wouldn’t have the means to stop a shooter if you did do so.
You can just wait that precious 12 -15 minutes for the LEOs to get there and another 30 for them to assess the situation and send in a SWAT team. Whether you or your loved ones perish will be a function of a number of things, but hey, take heart! California has that awesome law that limits the number of folks he can kill to ten at a time until he slaps the next magazine in (about a second or so). I’m sure a criminal won’t have access to those terrible 30 round mags.
Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick said Monday he was uncertain whether support exists in the Legislature for so-called “constitutional carry,” which would give all Texans the right to openly carry a firearm — with or without a permit.
In a radio interview, Patrick noted that last session lawmakers passed legislation allowing the open carry of handguns, a proposal whose support he had also questioned at the start of the session.
“On constitutional carry, I’ll say the same thing: I don’t know if the votes are there,” Patrick told San Antonio host Trey Ware.
Patrick did express some wariness about constitutional carry, citing law enforcement concerns. Patrick has made championing police a priority, especially after a shooting last year in Dallas that killed five officers and wounded seven others.
Let’s deal with the second issue first. I would lay good money down that Dan Patrick has been listening to communist Art Acevedo, who is leaving Austin and going to Houston, who opposed open carry, and who enabled the federal government to come into his county and take forced blood draws during random traffic stops in violation of the constitution.
Or he has been talking to someone equally as communist as Art. So the strategy he has chosen is a common one and is designed to protect his boys in the Texas Senate and House from exposure.
He simply says that he doesn’t know if there are enough votes. That way, it gets killed in committee and the anti-gun politicians never out themselves with a formal vote on a bill.
I hate the idea of committees anyway because they are a good way to formulate compromise legislation that ends up bilking people for money, sending that money to constituents and then ultimately doing no good with meaningless legislation.
The solution for this is to call out his strategy as the ruse and lie that it is, bring a bill to a vote, and then use that information to destroy the political careers of the gun controllers. It’s what Dan doesn’t want to happen, but it must happen.
George Webb has been prolific lately communicating many important things, and also providing groundbreaking analysis of the information he presents. You can visit his YouTube channel for yourself, and you should, every day. I want to link only two of his videos here, but in my opinion they are the most important videos he has done. Seriously, if you do nothing else today, you need to watch these two videos entirely.
Before I embed them below, I want to offer up a number of comments. I have a lot to communicate and I don’t know of another way to do it except to go in no particular sequential order. It’s my fervent hope that George reads this post and that you regularly watch George’s videos. If I can’t do anything else, I certainly can connect my readers to good men like George.
In the first video I link, George clearly says that he is receiving FBI help. I had suspected so from the outset. This lends credence to the idea that there are some patriots left inside the U.S. government, and that there is a war going on within the intelligence community.
George clearly believes, after cataloging the recent deaths associated with investigators of The Clinton Foundation, deaths I didn’t know about until watching the first video, that he will end up like those who have been killed. In other words, he is predicting his own death at the hands of the deep state. Watch the video and see for yourself.
Now, I don’t know about that, as neither I nor George is a “prophet or son of a prophet.” We don’t know the future. But what we do know is that these things are happening, and The Clinton Foundation and associated deep state actors should know too that we’re watching them. We’re watching their every move, at least those we can see.
If anything happens to George, we know where to look. If anything happens to me, you’ll know where to look. Like George, I don’t hide behind a nom de guerre. I’m not anonymous – I write under my own name. My son Joseph and I have discussed this before. Rehearsing the danger I believe it is for me to write about these issues, after learning about the issues surrounding #Pizzagate, the deep state, the rogue generals and The Clinton Foundation, I said that I simply cannot turn away. Joseph encouraged me that I cannot, and reminded me of Psalm 1:1. “Blessed is the man that walketh not in the counsel of the ungodly, nor standeth in the way of sinners, nor sitteth in the seat of the scornful.”
But I have counsel for George. He also clearly said that he isn’t a “gun person” and never has been. He seems almost resigned to death at the hands of the deep state. As I said, neither of us knows the future, but it’s our responsibility to act on our own behalf and engage in meaningful self defense.
All human institutions and interactions are couched and framed in terms of covenant. All of them, whether we choose them to be or not. Marriage isn’t a chance to do your own thing regardless of promises you’ve made to your spouse. There are promises and penalties associated with the vows you made. Families are framed as a covenant. A man cannot simply do to his children as he sees fit, even if that means abusing them. There are penalties associated with that, as there should be.
Your job is a covenant, where you promise to provide work in payment for a wage. The state is also a covenant, whether the government wants it to be or not. Our particular covenant is the U.S. constitution. The government must abide by it just as we must. On too many occasions to catalog, the government has broken covenant with the American people. The things George is discussing all constitute breakage of the covenant. The guilty must be punished. There are consequences along with promises in the covenant.
As for George, listen to me very carefully. You are in covenant with God as well. He expects you, no, He demands that you protect your own life to the extent you can. He has made you in His own image, and He doesn’t take its careless loss lightly. As for those FBI agents who are helping you with the information and analysis, if they have turned you loose with information and analysis but with no means to effect or training in self defense, they have done you an injustice.
Contact them and tell them I told you so. If they cannot or will not assist you in learning self defense, contact me and I will assist you. You must do this. It is your solemn obligation. Hear me, George. It is appointed to man once to die, and then the judgment (Hebrews 9:27). That time has been ordained by God from before the foundation of the world and cannot be changed. In the mean time, those who threaten should be wary of Herschel’s Dictum.
As for George’s assessment of what it will take to root out the problems, he is correct in all of his metrics. There are more, and I’m sure commenters can add to the list. I certainly could. Leaving this deep state in place is intolerable. But I have more confidence than George seems to have, whether this all gets done by Mr. Trump or not.
He mentions a lot of constitutional amendments, but skips over the second. The reason for the importance of the second amendment is that it retains our ability to hold our government accountable. George mentions a lot of threats, from Rogue generals such as David Petraeus (who is neck deep in all of this) – and he should have thrown in the murderer Stanley McChrystal too (see my posts on Ganjgal)- to La Raza, to DynCorp.
But as I said in an earlier post related to this, any army that tries to occupy or subjugate suburbia and rural America would get cut to pieces. You can throw drones, AI, and caches of weapons out the window. They are no good if there is no electricity to run them. They are all no good if the men to effect that subjugation all get shot. They are no good when the bread basket of America stops the food logistics to the inner cities of America. They are all no good when you realize that New York is a second away from disaster. All of the best laid plans fall when a hunter in the mountains of North Carolina wearing a ghillie suit uses a scoped, bolt action rifle, manifests his dislike for subjugation and them melts away into the landscape never to be seen again – until the next time.
I believe it won’t get to this point. For all his distasteful haughtiness, the adulterer Petraeus knows the carnage 20,000 AQI fighters can cause to the stability of a country. With tens of millions of AR-15 owners, It would be ten orders of magnitude worse in America and he knows it.
I have confidence that in some form or fashion, and at some point, righteousness will prevail.
Criminal justice reform has been a focus of my entire career — even since before my time at the Harvard Law Review. As a community organizer, I saw firsthand how our criminal justice system exacerbates inequality. It takes young people who made mistakes no worse than my own and traps them in an endless cycle of marginalization and punishment. More than twenty years ago, I wrote about my experience in neighborhoods where “prison records had been passed down from father to son for more than a generation.”
Well, this is a mouthful, and he’s said too much, enough to indict his own argument. First of all, I agree that we have criminalized far too many thing, with petty drug offenders sent to prison to be hardened by real criminals, turned into real killers and street thugs, and maybe converted to Islam in the prisons. I have advocated against such things, and in fact I don’t believe in prisons at all because they are unbiblical. The Scriptural prescription for wrongdoing is retribution and restitution.
Retribution is the death penalty for high crimes such as rape, kidnapping and murder, and restitution means that the perpetrator becomes the slave of the wronged until the debt is paid. There is no biblical concept of a “debt to society.” No one has a debt to society. There is no biblical notion of the collective.
But by invoking fatherhood he has damned his own argument. The absence of fathers, undergirded by the absence of true religion and public giveaway programs to hold the inner city black man in slavery, has led to the situation Obama laments. He won’t admit it because he is of those who enslave. He believes in the enslavement he laments.
We have a responsibility to act. And like the vast majority of Americans — including the vast majority of gun owners — I believe we can take commonsense steps to reduce gun violence that are consistent with the Second Amendment.
As an Administration, we’ve made some meaningful progress on keeping guns out of the wrong hands through background checks — whether it’s making clear that anyone in the business of selling firearms must get a license and conduct background checks, or dedicating more resources to ensuring those background checks are conducted on time. We’ve also jumpstarted the development of smart gun technology. As long as we’ve got technology to prevent a criminal from stealing and using your smartphone, then we should be able to prevent the wrong person — including kids — from pulling the trigger on a gun.
But there’s a great deal of work left to be done. Congress should pass the kinds of commonsense reforms supported by most of the American people — from investing in access to mental health care, to expanding background checks, to making it possible to keep guns out of the hands of suspected terrorists. The actions we take won’t prevent every act of violence — but if even one life is spared, they will have been well worth it.
He’s lying and he knows it. The vast majority of gun owners do not in fact believe in his proposals. His inability to enact further gun control is all the proof you need.
We’ve dealt with smart guns before, and it’s an idea that will never obtain for reasons Obama himself understands. His “investment” in mental health care is the same thing as his notion of keeping guns out of the hands of terrorists. It’s all a red herring.
It’s a way to prevent people from having access to means of self defense by circumventing the constitution with so-called “health care professionals” and secret lists made by government employees who are accountable to no one and unreviewable even by courts. It’s all a method to avoid due process. He should be asked “why are there known terrorists in America at all?” To which he can only answer that he’s referring to Americans who haven’t been convicted of any crime at all.
But even deeper than that, this is a great kabuki dance. The constitution says “shall not be infringed.” There is no point in having this conversation. We will not submit by having our rights removed by statists. On too many issues to catalog, Obama and his ilk broke covenant with the American people, from confiscating huge swaths of land (under the purview of the federal government) that wasn’t his, to taxing people for failing to purchase a product on the open market (Obamacare), to sending weapons South of the border to arm the drug cartels.
We can only hope and pray that the awful man’s legacy turns to dust and disappears from the earth. He is a usurper and deceiver of the highest order. Good riddance to the ass clown. I wish I had never known him.
BALLSTON SPA, NY (WRGB)–“I don’t have the capability, manpower to enforce it. I’m not going to enforce it.”
Sheriff Michael Zurlo stuck to his guns about a new mandate taking affect statewide.
State Police want anyone with a pistol permit issued more than four years ago to re-certify, a SAFE Act requirement that could lead to authorities seizing your guns if you don’t comply.
Zurlo, says his deputies won’t be taking part.
“I’m pro 2nd Amendment, against the Safe Act, and I’ll continue to fight for the rights of residents of Saratoga County. ”
[ … ]
The governor’s office referred us to state police..who argued, “through re-certification, state records on active pistol/revolver licenses will be accurate and up to date.”
Some gun owners actually agree.
“I could see where it could be not a bad thing to re-certify, to keep pistol permits up to date for a lot of people,” said Joe Welch, Jr.
Say, what’s in the water up there is New York anyway? You have a Sheriff who says he’s not going to enforce collectivism on his gun owners, and the press is actually able to find a gun owner who differs with the Sheriff.
I guess that some dogs … er, peasants, are just happy to feed from the crumbs that fall from the master’s table.
