NBC News:

In his small Silicon Valley office, Salem Khan covered his face with his hands and sobbed deeply.

He was crying about his 24-year-old son, Jaffrey, a troubled young man who had struggled in school and in life. Khan long feared his child would one day do something terrible — and now he had.

He had joined ISIS.

With his wife and 18-year-old brother-in-law in tow, Jaffrey left behind the moneyed, manicured precincts of the Bay Area and offered his services to one of the most savage terrorist organizations in the world.

The father tried to suggest his son was impressionable, a lost soul, an easy mark for bloodthirsty fanatics selling the fantasy of an Islamic caliphate.

“He was gullible,” Salem Khan said. “You know the people looking to scam you out of money or something? They’re looking for people like him.”

Khan lives in a $2 million house and runs a medical marketing company in Palo Alto, in the shadow of elite Stanford University — 7,000 miles and a world away from where this story began, in southern Turkey.

That’s where, in March, we met a man who claimed to be an ISIS defector. He called himself Abu Mohammed and gave NBC News a thumb drive that he said he stole from an ISIS commander and smuggled out in a baby’s diaper.

Such cloak and dagger stuff.  But when viewed objectively, he didn’t join ISIS.  For him to have joined ISIS he would have had to fly to Syria, join up with criminals and Islamists within ISIS, be approved by the leadership of ISIS, and then fight in Syria, Iraq or Libya.  He is a criminal in America, not a member of ISIS, any more than I’m a member of Delta Force.

And there is a solution to such criminality in America.  First of all, close the borders, once and for all, painful or not.  Second, stop the practice of Islamists in America.  Japan does it, so can we.  Finally, carry guns of all sorts, all of the time.  Terror cannot become ensconced when terrorists are immediately shot.

In the U.K., they are worried about the police in light of Islamic terrorism.

Officers are not volunteering to carry guns because they fear being “hung out to dry” and treated like a suspect if they discharge their weapon, the federation claimed.

Its chairman, Steve White, warned Government plans to train another 1,500 firearms officers to deal with the terror threat looked doubtful.

The warning comes as a survey of 16,800 officers shows that while 40% fear they will be attacked at work, just half this number (20%) have or want personal firearms.

Pitiful Britain.  The cops are worried, but if you return the rightful liberty to the citizens, I’m willing to bet that they would carry weapons.  As it is, Britain is poorly equipped, poorly positioned, and poorly prepared for what’s coming its way.

Don’t be like Britain.

Texas Observer:

The arms race is escalating again. Despite historically low crime rates and an improving national economy, more and more Texans are arming themselves. Applications for gun licenses have surged in the last few months, bringing the total number of Texans with handgun permits to just under 1 million. In 1996, just 1 in 168 Texans had a concealed handgun license, according to the Dallas Morning News. In 2015, about 1 in 30 did. And not just any piece will do any more. We want more firepower; we want it to be “tactical”; and we want to ash it. (Thanks to the open carry law that went into effect on January 1, you can now wear your gun, as the Townes Van Zandt lyric goes, outside your pants for all the honest world to feel.)

Former land commissioner and author of Texas’ concealed carry law Jerry Patterson captured the current mood nicely: “I used to carry a .380. Now I carry a 9 millimeter,” he said. “I’m just like every other idiot. I don’t think my .380 is big enough.” Big enough for what? Did I somehow miss the impending ISIS invasion or the stampeding of angry water buffalo down I-35?

At some level, I understand the impulse to take up arms. One Halloween night, some years ago, a man came into the bedroom where my girlfriend and I were sleeping. He fled as soon as she began screaming. We never got a good look at him, though the police were able to pull fingerprints and arrest the intruder, a homeless man with a criminal record. It was a terrifying experience — the kind that makes you think long and hard about how to protect yourself.

Rather, it’s an abdication of your responsibility.  He thinks he can outwit everyone.  Well, let’s try this one on.  Lewisville dam breaks and buries Dallas, Texas under a wall of water 50 feet deep.  The writer, Forrest Wilder, survives.  Mr. Wilder now has to fend for himself when everyone is starving.  What does Forrest do?

We’re waiting, Forest.  Tell us.  Tell us how you comically enthrall those hordes of hungry peasants who would kill for their next morsel of edible stuff – since you’re so much smarter than the peasants.  Or you’ll love them to death.  Or something.  Tell us, Forrest.

Now beyond the silly know-nothing content of the article (the .38 Special is 0.357 inches, or 9.1 mm in diameter, while the 9mm is .355 inches, or 9.01 mm in diameter), and besides the laughable moralistic preening by someone who has likely never fended for himself in his life (but who probably has soft pajamas and drinks lattes), what do you notice about this commentary?

I’ll mention one thing, and readers can fill in the other details in comments.  It used to be that guns caused violence.  We’ve heard it so much that we’re virtually numb too it, and while we could ruin that argument with facts and statistics, we don’t even bother any more.

Now Forrest tries to turn the table with statistics.  Despite the virtually ubiquitous presence of guns in America, violence is decreasing.  (1) You aren’t supposed to have guns because they cause violence.  Opps.  Wrong argument.  (2) Everyone has guns and violence is still decreasing.  In fact, violence is decreasing to the point that’s it’s unnecessary to have guns any more.

You’ll be the subject of ridicule whether violence is increasing or decreasing.  It’s your liberty they hate.  Don’t ever relinquish it.

KSN.com:

TOPEKA, Kan. (KSNW/AP) – State agencies, cities and counties in Kansas will not be allowed to bar workers from carrying concealed guns while performing duties outside their offices, starting in July.

Republican Gov. Sam Brownback signed a gun-rights bill this week that includes the provision affecting government workers. Agencies still could limit the carrying of concealed weapons in public buildings.

The measure also creates an exception to a state law requiring students to be expelled if they bring weapons to public schools so that school groups can have organized activities involving air guns, such as BB rifles.

So, how is the new law being received in Sedgwick County?

“There have been employees who have requested an opportunity to defend themselves,” said Sedgwick County Commission Chairman Jim Howell.  “On July 1st our policies will be reflected of this new law.”

Meanwhile, Wichita City Council Member James Clendenin says policies at city hall will change.

“On July 1st our policies will be reflected of this new law,” said Clendenin.  “Our city attorney’s are going over the law now that it’s signed and their going through it point by point and looking at what ordinance changes need to be made.  I think our community is much safer as a result of these laws that allow this to happen.”

But County Commissioner Howell says with the increased responsibility comes increased risk.

“Should they have a need to use that firearm, or should they have an accident or incident with that firearm, whatever happens is going to fall on the shoulders of that person,” Howell said.

The Kansas State Rifle Association said the new law recognizes workers’ rights to defend themselves and allows schools to instruct students in handling firearms safely.

Well, not exactly.  The law only applies to government workers.  I get it.  The Governor can’t infringe on private property rights.  But I have a dream.  I have a dream that one day we won’t be judged by the presence of weapons on our person, but by the God-given right to bear arms in self defense.

Twitchy:

• Texans for Abbott ‏@AbbottCampaign May 12

  “I set a record that will never be matched… I filed 31 lawsuits against the Obama Administration.” – @GregAbbott_TX #UniteToWin2016

   

  Texans for Abbott ‏@AbbottCampaign May 12

  “Those who fought on the front lines should go to the front of the line for access healthcare at the VA.” – @GregAbbott_TX #UniteToWin2016

   

  Texans for Abbott ‏@AbbottCampaign May 12

  “I authorized our National Guard to be armed while on base in the state of Texas.” – @GregAbbott_TX #UniteToWin2016

   

  Texans for Abbott ‏@AbbottCampaign May 12

  “I’m working with the Governor of North Carolina and we are going to fight back.” – @GregAbbott_TX #UniteToWin2016

   

  Texans for Abbott ‏@AbbottCampaign May 12

  “Obama is turning bathrooms into courtroom issues.” – @GregAbbott_TX #UniteToWin2016

   

  Texans for Abbott ‏@AbbottCampaign May 12

  “Our Constitution is being re-written by liberal Justices.” – @GregAbbott_TX #UniteToWin2016

   

  Texans for Abbott ‏@AbbottCampaign May 12

  “We will enforce the rule of law in Texas by banning sanctuary cities.” – @GregAbbott_TX #UniteToWin2016

   

  Texans for Abbott ‏@AbbottCampaign May 12

  We need to expand School Choice in TX. It’s your tax money. They are your children. It should be your choice. @GregAbbott_TX #UniteToWin2016

   

  Texans for Abbott ‏@AbbottCampaign May 12

  “The sale or transfer of fetal tissue by an abortion clinic must be criminalized in the state of Texas.” – @GregAbbott_TX #UniteToWin2016

   

  Texans for Abbott ‏@AbbottCampaign May 12

  “We need real ethics reform that prevents elected officials from profiting off of their position.” – @GregAbbott_TX #UniteToWin2016

   

  Texans for Abbott ‏@AbbottCampaign May 12

  “Texas is now an open carry state.” – @GregAbbott_TX #UniteToWin2016

   

  Texans for Abbott ‏@AbbottCampaign May 12

  “Texas also protected life itself by defunding Planned Parenthood.” – @GregAbbott_TX #UniteToWin2016

   

  Texans for Abbott ‏@AbbottCampaign May 12

  “Texas passed the toughest border security law of any state ever.” – @GregAbbott_TX #UniteToWin2016

   

  Texans for Abbott ‏@AbbottCampaign May 12

  “We’re building more roads without raising taxes, fees, tolls, or debt.” – @GregAbbott_TX #UniteToWin2016

   

  Texans for Abbott ‏@AbbottCampaign May 12

  “Texas led the nation in cutting taxes.” – @GregAbbott_TX #UniteToWin2016

   

  Texans for Abbott ‏@AbbottCampaign May 12

  “We passed the fewest laws in 20 years. Proving that better Government doesn’t have to be more Government.” – @GregAbbott_TX #UniteToWin2016

Not everyone in politics has to be a worm.  Perhaps Governor Abbot can help lead the Southern states in secession?

David Codrea:

That’s inexcusable, but certainly revealing of the mindset ruling those locales. It figures Opposite Day “progressives” who exploit the term “inclusive” would put up barriers against the most vulnerable of their constituents.  Gun-grabbers would evidently rather see a disabled person physically abused and even beaten to death than “allowed” to possess an effective means of self-defense.

God tests men in various and sundry ways.  Our commitment to the elderly is one such test, and I’ve upbraided little turd Hamilton Nolan before over his mockery of the elderly and the right to self defense.  The disabled and infirmed are one other such test.  It’s not over for these states.  Those responsible will answer to God one day.

Matthew Vanderboegh gives us a primer on defensive operations in urban areas.

Drunk man discharges rifle to see if it will work.  That’s not a good enough reason, not when you’re drunk.

They’re crossing forty at a time.

NRO:

WBUR:

Here’s a conversation I was in on recently between a pediatric intern and the parents of a healthy, 1-day-old baby. It occurred in the Yale-New Haven Hospital well baby nursery.

“Your daughter’s physical exam is perfect,” the intern said. “She’s eating well, peeing and pooping well. I want to talk to you a little about how to help you keep her safe and healthy.”

Next came a standard discussion about the baby’s sleeping position and whether she’s got a car seat. Then, the next question:

“Do you have any guns in the home?”

Suddenly, the genial tone changed.

“I don’t think you should ask that question,” said the child’s father.

“Should I take that as a ‘yes’?” the intern pressed.

“I just don’t think you should ask.”

“Sir, we ask because we want to make sure that your baby is as safe as she can be, making sure you keep any guns locked up and away from her.”

“It’s none of your business.”

What started out as a lovely interaction between two new parents and the pediatric intern, with me observing, suddenly turned into the reprimands of an angry father. No matter how the pediatric resident and I tried to explain that we were asking for the safety of his newborn daughter, he persisted in telling us it was none of our business and not relevant for the child’s health. The mother sat silent in her hospital bed.

This really shouldn’t be controversial.

Since 1992, the American Academy of Pediatrics has encouraged primary care providers to discuss firearm safety with families. This reflects the influential group’s acknowledgment that keeping a gun locked and unloaded dramatically reduces the risk of firearms accidents, and the belief that brief counseling by physicians promotes safer storage of guns in homes with children.

Still, sadly, some controversy remains.

[ … ]

This means if you’re a Florida pediatrician, no asking about guns in the home or documenting them in the chart of a baby or young child …

This commentary was written by Marjorie S. Rosenthal, assistant director of the Yale Robert Wood Johnson Clinical Scholars Program and associate research scientist in the Department of Pediatrics at the Yale University School of Medicine.

You see Marjorie, the fallen nature of mankind is wicked.  That means that totalitarians of all stripes want to exercise control over others.  The desire to exercise control over other people is often sinful.  Every genocide in modern history was preceded by gun confiscations.  As you know, the government has exceptions to medical privacy laws, and with the stroke of a pen (followed on by thousands of pages of federal register notice that explains how the executive intends to carry out his nefarious plans), those laws can be expanded.  The last little bit … “or documenting them in the chart of a baby or young child,” is a big part of the problem.

We know that you would willingly turn in records of gun owners to the government, enabling confiscatory measures and schemes.  Furthermore, we really don’t want your counsel on how we handle our guns.   We would prefer that you spend your time and focus on medicine.  For instance, the human error rate in medicine is still much higher than the commercial nuclear power industry, commercial airlines and pharmaceutical industries (all of which practice and focus on human error reduction tools and techniques).  We would prefer that you study disease, diagnosis, pathologies, biology and pharmacology as opposed to trying to understand the mechanics of machinery or fix the error rate for anyone else.  Tend to your own house and get it in order.  It’s a mess.

So to summarize, the gentleman you cited in the initial example was kind to you, kinder that I will be.  As for whether this has to be controversial, you’re right.  It certainly doesn’t have to be.  Mind your own damn business.  Now I have a few questions for you, beginning with this one.  What is your favorite position for sex?

Fred:

My nephew is in tech school (navy) and I told him before he went in to seek a deep understanding of illegal orders and to make sure they trained him on it. I also told him that if he took his training and turned it on his fellow citizens I would hunt and kill him, this child that I love and helped to raise up. He understood that this is no small matter.

And thus it will necessarily be like it was in the days of the war of independence, with family turning against family over the king.  Dark days may lie ahead.

From PJ Media:

I don’t frequent bars, and in fact I try to stay away from crowded areas and venues (I’m not always successful).  But I’ll defend your right to do so.  So you think Islam is at peace with the West?  Do you think that they won’t attempt to enforce sharia on infidels like you?  Do you think president Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton will protect you?  Hillary will be more concerned with being queen, and Trump will be more concerned with what it does to international business and his hair farm where he gets his wigs.

It’s coming our way, folks.  Get guns and ammunition ready.  Today it might be drinking beer.  Tomorrow it will be the fact that your wife or daughter walks around without a hijab or burqa, or deigns to put on a swimsuit and go swimming, or that your family eats pork.

Be prepared to shoot.  I can’t say it any other way or with any more sincerity.  If you don’t want to have your family taken into slavery and lose your own life, kill the bastards who try to do this to you.  Remember Herschel’s Dictum: “There aren’t too many human interaction problems that can’t be fixed with a .45 ACP 230-grain fat-boy.”

David Codrea:

I just ran across a post from two months back on the CDR Salamander blog, “The Sad Truth About Illegal Orders.” I can’t really claim to know much about the blog or this blogger, but I cite it here because he raises a question that seems particularly suited for Oath Keepers. He recounts  an exchange between presumptive GOP presidential nominee Donald Trump and Bret Baier of Fox News, specifically on Trump’s endorsement of waterboarding, going “stronger” on terrorists, and targeting their families.

Baier referred to an open letter signed by “almost 100 foreign policy experts,” saying “the military will refuse because they’ve been trained to turn down and refuse illegal orders. So what would you do, as commander-in-chief, if the U.S. military refused to carry out those orders?”

“They won’t refuse,” Trump replied. “They’re not going to refuse me. Believe me.”

“Citizens of a free republic are applauding a man who is telling everyone two things that should disgust anyone who took an oath to ‘support and defend the Constitution of the United States,’” the blogger notes. “1. The CINC will issue illegal orders. 2. His military will gladly follow those illegal orders. 3. Citizens applaud 1 & 2.”

As for members of the military who might refuse?

“The more I’ve thought about it, the more I think my initial instinct is wrong,” CDR Salamander admits. “That might be an internal dialog, but once a senior officer looks you in the eye, and even if you make a protest says, ‘The JAG stated,’ or ‘The Justice Department ruled that,’ there are very few who will resist.”

That goes to the crux of what Oath Keepers is about, noting the oath is to the Constitution and the applicability of the Uniform Code of Military Justice as binding law prohibiting a Nuremberg-style “I was only following orders” defense. That’s the legal basis for “Orders we will not obey.”

And that, of course, is used by subversive “progressives” to label Oath Keepers “anti-government extremists” (and worse). That’s part of the Orwellian “War is peace; Freedom is slavery; Ignorance is strength” contradictions employed by the evil to influence and exploit the ignorant and advance the totalitarian agenda.

But here’s the thing …

Well, this is a heavy issue.  See also Son, Will You Fire On American Citizens?  My son won’t, and I know that for an absolute fact.  But he is no longer in the Marine Corps.  LEOs are something different altogether.  I’ll leave it to another time to explore the many facets of differences between the two, but for now suffice it to say that I’m not too worried about the military.

LEOs  – perhaps.  Let LEOs have children, get their medical care and family support dependent on the government, and my bet is that they will just about to a man say, “Well, if you don’t like the laws elect men who will change them.  In the mean time, I’ll enforce the laws on the books that the courts have found constitutional.”  They will defer to the black robed tyrants for their moral framework, and they’ll do it because of the pressure from their spouses to provide for the family.

That’s just what I think.  If you disagree, then name me a single time in history – anywhere, anytime – where law enforcement has refused to obey orders?