The Left Strives to Ban All Guns

"If a broad ban on firearms can be upheld based on conjecture that the public might feel safer (while being no safer at all), then the Second Amendment guarantees nothing." Justice Clarence Thomas

Although the rhetoric has died down gun violence has not. Shootings in the inner city haven't been reduced. Bump stocks, as far as I know are still legal in nearly all states while Democratic politicians are gearing up for the midterms using gun control as a rallying cry.

One thing that changed for me is the realization that a modern army can effectively be stopped by goat herders with small arms. Furthermore, the 2nd amendment is 2nd for a reason. Never thought about the order before. The 1st spells out our five freedoms and most would argue itsi the most important amendment while thd 2nd is just one sentence but clearly intended to protect the first.

Think about that the next time someone argues guns are for hunting and a well regulated militia is so 17th century.

The "Asault Weapons" Ban is Back?

When someone says let's ban "Assault Weapons" you know they are jumping the shark on so many levels and not serious about actually reducing crime or death by gun.

Recently some localities have passed laws banning "Assault Weapons" and reducing magazine size to 10 rounds...

Conduct a little research and it's clear the term Assault Weapon is a made up word. The inner workings of these type of weapons are the same as semiautomatic hunting rifles... Actually exactly the same to the extent of being interchangeable.

Furthermore, reducing magazine size to 10 rounds puts the defender at a disadvantage because planning and changing out mags is easy and fast but having extra mags on your person or for example in your purse is a hassle that few put up with. By the way criminals don't give a crap about laws so they are going to have the 40 round clip anyways.

One idea I could live with is adding 5 years to any "gun related crime" committed with a magazine greater than 10 rounds. Considering most crime is committed by known criminals this would probably save lives by keeping criminals in jail longer.

If handguns are by far the number one murder weapon why do so many well meaning politicians say they believe outlawing military "looking" semi-automatic rifles and high capacity magazines will reduce gun deaths? Futhermore, don't forget the most used gun in shootings are the cheap handguns that fit in your pocket.

How about makeing it harder to own hand guns? Maybe raise the age to 21 and require anyone who carries a handgun to get a carry permit. If you have a handgun on your person without a permit you're subject to arrest.

For the record I'm not a gun fan.

Although I was trained and carried a gun in the military I didn't own a handgun until 2007 and I've shot a lot of clay pigeons but never hunted.

The 2nd Amendment is NOT about home defense or hunting. It's about tyranny and keeping the government in check. Getting rid of the 2nd amendment would eventually end up being a very bad idea. Not right away mind you but when things go bad millions will die. It's happened in the past and it will happen again.

Fascism, communism, socialism, etc... These forms of government require revolution and then the real killing happens to consolidate power. Having an armed population provides a meaningful bulwark against these and other forms of tyrannical government.

Unarmed Black Men are Being Killed by Police, BUT...

Are unarmed blacks being killed by police?

Absolutely but so are whites and Hispanics.

If you're talking pure ratios such as the percentage of people in the US being black to the percentage of those being killed then unarmed blacks are infact being killed at a higher rate than unarmed whites.

However, this simplistic view isn't statistically accurate. For better or worse young black men commit more crime than whites and Hispanics combined.

A recent analysis by the Washington Post found 987 people were killed by police last year of which 68 were unarmed. Of those unarmed victims, 30 were white, 20 were black and 13 were Hispanic and 5 were of unknown or other race.

According to the US Census website whites, Hispanics and blacks make up 61.3, 17.8 and 13.3 of the US population. So the first clue the common narritive isn't correct is Hispanics are shot fewer times than blacks per capita.

Incarceration rates also fill in some blanks and yes I acknowledge and reject the notion that blacks get locked up at a higher rate. They are still committing crimes to end up in court. According to prison/jail data 4.7%, 1.8% and .7% of black, Hispanic and white males are incarcerated. FYI those numbers are scary high and clearly something isn't right.

This results in a prison population of roughly 40% white, 34% black and 20% Hispanic. Based on these numbers it would seem unarmed Hispanics are killed at a rate commiserate with the crimes they commit while whites are killed at a slightly higher rate and blacks are killed at a statistically measurable lower rate.

Regardless of what you are being feed by the media, it's clear to me the US doesn't have a problem with cops killing unarmed black men. Furthermore, I think it's important to note none of the major media outlets mentioned one of the cops in the recent shooting of Stephon Clark in Sacramento California was himself black.

Why wasn't this widely known? Because a black cop killing a unarmed young black man doesn't fit the racist profile being levied against police officers.

Police have a tough job and I would venture to say police working in crime-ridden inner-city areas are experiencing stress at the level experienced by a combat soldier.

ln 2016 state, local, university, college, etc... law enforcement agencies reported 57,180 officers were assaulted while performing their duties resulting in 66 police killed and 16,535 non-fatal injuries in the line of duty during felonious incidents.

Data from the 2016 FBI UCR LEOKA

So before you buy into the narrative that unarmed blacks are routinely being guned down by racist cops take a moment and ponder the statistics. A population of 326 million is being policed by roughly 1.1 million cops in uniform with so few incidents that when one unfortunately happens it's major news and more than likely will result in social unrest if not riots.

Latin America Democracy Crumbling

Latin American democracy is crumbling under corruption

I just read this story and Ed nailed it. A new book by Peter Schweizer "Secret Empires: How the American Political Class Hides Corruption and Enriches Family and Friends" looks at corruption in those who serve the federal government. Seems we are modeled after China which is modeled after the middle ages... History repeats.

The model is using your connections and power to benefit your children, spouses and in-laws that and $500,000 paid speaches. If you or anyone wants to understand who is corrupt in our government just follow the money.

That goes for politicians, their families as well as senior governmental officials. The Clinton's in total are now worth over a quarter billion after leaving the White House "basically" broke?

Most in the media seem angry that Andrew MaCabe lost part of his pension for being fired before retiring but don't feel sorry for him he's worth over ten million at the ripe old age of 50.

From Speaker Pelosi to Speaker Boehner... Many political insiders become rich beyond anything one would expect after decades of government salaries. Clearly corruption isn't solely limited to Latin America.

During my research it has become clear to me that Politics is corrupt beyond belief  presenting a clear and present danger to our democracy. It's also clear the Democrats are the worst abusers of the current system.

2020 Census

One of the few things that citizens of the United States are required to do, as per the constitution, is to cooperate with the census.

I was shocked to hear multiple TV cable news shows saying the census hasn't asked about citizenship since 1950.

That's just not correct. The long form (15-20% of responses) for 1990 and 2000 asked this question and the outrage that the federal government would have the gall to ask a question that is fundamentally the reason for the census is beyond me.

Constitutionally the census is required to determine congressional representation.

"Assault Weapons"

When there's a mass shooting anywhere in the world I initially show interest and concern for a few days. Sometimes I think about what happened and try to come up with ideas to prevent something like it happening again. This lastest shooting in a Florida high school has been different. The march on Tallahassee, Washington DC and other cities throughout the world caused me reflect about guns for the first time in years and then I realized I was being manipulated.

The narrative after semmingly every mass shootings inevitably turns to gun control with the left bringing up "assault weapons" and magazine size, etc... encapsulated in the phrase "common sense gun control."

The narrative of each shooting is eventually distorted or cherry picked. Facts inevitably come out that show the government or some agency missed something. Very rarely does the lead up to a mass shooting happen in a vacuum. Regardless of the situation, many bright people end up being manuplated by the anti gun left.

For starters, there really is no such thing as an "assault weapon." By definition all guns are "assault" weapons. The term has been used extensively since the 1980s but confuses semi-automatic guns with military assault rifles. I suggest you Google "what is an assault weapon" or watch this retired cop explain the difference.

Essentially, since the National Firearms Act of 1934 everday American's lost the right to legally own fully automatic weapons. This law was modified in 1968 and again in 1986. Today these laws and hundreds more including state laws confuse nearly everyone but basically the law is easy to understand in that one trigger pull = one bullet.

Propaganda Redflags:

Assault Weapons - the Assault Weapons Ban (AWB) of 1994 signed into law by President Clinton might be the best example of bad legislation in the history of Congress. Yet another example that the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

Hunting - The 2nd amendment has nothing to do with hunting. Those who mention hunting are at best clueless. The 2nd amendment is frankly about the citizens right, maybe obligation to stand up against governmental tyranny.

Magazine Capacity - Capacity is a non-issue in planned shootings. However, it's very much an issue in your defense. A shooter comes prepared and can easily swap out magazines while victims typically only have what's in the gun.

Gun Show Loopholes - If your in the business of selling guns you're required to conduct a background check before the sale regardless of where the sale happens. Furthermore, 19 states currently require checks for private sales between individuals using the services of a licensed gun dealer.

Univesal Background Checks - No part of the United States Constitution empowers the federal government to regulate non-commercial, intrastate transfers of legal firearms between private citizens. Thus any federally mandated universal background check would violate the 10th Amendment.

AR - As in AR-15 does not stand for automatic rifle. It's short for ArmaLite an American Weapons manufacture founded in 1952.

The pen is powerful and if American's allow the narrative and facts to be manuplated we could one day find ourselves living in a police state. "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." Ben Franklin

- Mass Shooting Survivor Testimony

- Mass Shooting Survivor Interview

PS One trigger pull one bullet is essentially correct. There are exceptions for collectors, guns covered under the 1968 amnesty and those individuals who have the resources to buy and license a fully automatic weapon under the 1934 NFA.

Postage Rates as of 01/21/2018

Postage Rates

1st Class Letters (postcards 35)
1 ounce    $0.50           
2 ounces  $0.71
3 ounces  $0.92
3.5 oz      $1.13         

1st Class Large Envelopes               
1 ounce     $1.00               
2 ounces   $1.21
3 ounces   $1.42       
4 ounces   $1.63
5 ounces   $1.84
6 ounces   $2.05
7 ounces   $2.26       
8 ounces   $2.47
9 ounces   $2.68
10 ounces $2.89
11 ounces $3.10
12 ounces $3.31
13 ounces $3.52

Small Packages
1 ounce     $3.50
2 ounces   $3.50
3 ounces   $3.50   
4 ounces   $3.50 
5 ounces   $3.75
6 ounces   $3.75
7 ounces   $3.75
8 ounces   $3.75
9 ounces   $4.10
10 ounces $4.45
11 ounces $4.80
12 ounces $5.15
13 ounces $5.50

Ice Free Planet

The other day I watched Noble Prize wining physicist Dr. Ivar Giaever give a talk on why he doesn't agree with the "97% of scientists" who believe that man is responsible for warming planet and I'm thinking this guys knows what he's talking about.

A few days later I checked out the Skeptical Science website which poked fun at him using two Noble Prize winning scientists agreeing with the IPCC projections and conclusion. The sad thing is both of the Skeptical Science's Noble Prize scientists bashing Dr. Ivar Giaever could barely talk or maintain their argument.

The media loves to talk about consensus but the truth is consensus has little to do with scientific truth. Throughout history wildly accepted scientific theories have been begrudgingly proven false after some unheard of scientist typically spends his life trying to convince the scientific community they are wrong.

Getting ready for a three hour flight I downloaded a bunch of TED talks. One of them had a very educated lady explaining how we were heading towards an Ice Free Planet and action must be taken before it's too late. To say this passionate plea is deceptive is being nice. To give the impression that Greenland and Antarctica could be ice free anytime soon (a few hundred years verses 5,000+) is beyond total BS!

Turns out there are dozens of talks on TED dealing with global warming/climate change. I haven't watched them all but it's interesting to note there isn't a single talk that even mentions the dozens of climate drivers that we know about and new ones that are just now being discovered. Some how CO2 owns the discussion which for me signals a political agenda NOT the search for scientific truth.

Even under the warmest projections Greenland needs thousands of years to melt. For starters the melting season is never going to be more then a few months and we are talking about one huge chunk of ice pretty much the size of Europe.

Don't get me started about Antarctica which NASA has concluded is actually gaining ice. Of course there are still highly respected IPCC members like Jim Hansen saying just the opposite using NASA's old studies.

Yes huge chunks of ice, some the size of Delaware, have broken off the Western ice shelf in recent years but any high school graduate is supposed to know this ice shelf breakup, while indicative of a warming planet will not directly raise sea levels... The ice melting in your drink doesn't raise the level in your glass. So the next time someone talks about an Ice Free Planet raise your hand and ask "when?". If they don't confess they are talking 3,000+ years I suggest you get up an silently walk towards an exit.

PS The UN's IPCC doesn't acknowledge that billions of people are living in conditions that actually pollute the environment to a degree that we all suffer. If we help the developing world develop it would actually reduce suffering and everyday pollution benefiting us all.

School Shootings?

Philip Bump of the Washington Post estimates there have been more than 188 shootings at schools and universities in the United States with more than 200 killed since the turn of the century.

*** Correction *** There have been 20 mass (3+ killed) "School Shootings" since the turn of the century. Seems that Mr. Bump included drive by shootings, single discharges, suicides, etc... pretty much anything to increase the numbers. Sorry I didn't expect such data manipulation from my once favorite paper in the age of Google?

My research indicates that knives, bombs and fires have also been used in mass school killings. One very sad example of a bomb and subsequent fire occurred 90 years ago in Michigan when a bomb and subsequent fire killed 44. Sadly 38 were elementary schoolchildren.

I know it's not popular to point out the obvious but school shootings are exceedingly rare. The U.S. has 139,126 educational institutions and gun violence deaths have averaged 12 per year since 2000. That seems like a lot but keep in mind there are roughly 50,700,000 students.

Putting things into perspective is important. For example thousands of kids die choking every year. Kids are much more likely to die riding the bus. National data show school bus-related accidents send 17,000 children to emergency rooms each year!

Statistically our nations young people are exceedingly safe at school but that's not the drum the ratings hungry media or pandering leftist politicians beat.

Nonstop coverage for weeks after school shootings is about ratings (what ever happened to not showing the shooters picture?) and it's likely this coverage has resulted in more copycat school shootings. Regardless, something need to change.

Some schools in Texas and Ohio are trying something different with positive results thus far but this narrative, no matter how successful, is blasphemy to the left.

Some states pass laws that don't make "sense" but clearly reduce gun violance yet many on the Left seek repeal because those laws don't fit their "common sense" narrative. Sometimes laws are shown ineffective and repealed but the Left continues pushing them because they align with their world views.

Something new should be tried. Maybe it's time we as a nation revisit gun free zones? Maybe apply the "air marshal" concept to schools? A few trained and certified concealed carry teachers or staff would at the very least reduce the impression schools are soft targets.

Raise the age to buy guns to 21?

Raise the age to buy ammo to 21?

Limit magazine size to initial design?

Allow licensed health care professionals to anonymously red flag a patient?

Allow school principals to anonymously red flag a student?

Bumpstocks? The ban is proceeding though the administrative rule process which takes longer than most realize.

Some argue guns at school in the hands of someone even with training could be as dangerous as a shooter. I happen to agree with this and suggest an effective non-lethal alternative using the high-tech Swedish pepper spray gun?

However non-lethal ideas will not work in five extremely liberal states. Why? Because they are illegal. Guns don't kill people, people kill people and don't forget to teach your kids to chew their food and all kidding aside maybe safety belts should be required on school buses.

White Privilege is Raciest

Professor Jordan Peterson Debunks White Privilege

Ben Shapiro Dismantles White Privilege

There are MORE poor whites, whites on food stamps, whites with bad teeth, whites without health care, etc... in America than ANY other group.

Being born white or black isn't "the" key. Being born in the US (or coming here early in your life) to loving parents  who sacrifice to give you advantages who are willing to provide structure and demand some form of excellence, etc... That's much more powerful than skin color.

For example there is the story of a poor Asian kid growing up in the ghetto, hiding in his closet to study because he was fearful of getting shot not getting into MIT, Havard, Princeton, etc... With 1530 SAT scores because he's Asian... That's racism but somehow accepted in our society.

Until recently The United States Coast Guard Academy was 100% merit-based and diversity was achieved through diversity of interests and abilities but there has been massive pressure to increase the number of black cadets.

And now it has become clear the Coast Guard Academy has changed it's 100% merit-based system by adding racial weight to ultimately increase blacks in the officer ranks of the Coast Guard. Unfortunately this hasn't dramatically increased the number of blacks attending the Coast Guard Academy.

I would rather a government supported school admit the best best candidates as possible regardless of color. Does that make me a racist?

I would argue that height has more to do with a man's success than skin color.

I would argue growing up in a wealthy family has more to do with success than skin color.

I would argue growing up on the coasts rather than the heart land has more to do with success than skin color.

If the Coast Guard has a goal to increase blacks in it's officer ranks to more closely match society as a whole they should step up recruitment of outstanding African Americans not change standards. 

Changing standards or creating limiting quotas is inherently racist and it blows me away that the left doesn't see this.