bearingarms--2020-09-01--Armed Neighborhood Watch Forms In Wake Of Kenosha Riots

I don ’ t know what President Trump ’ s itinerary looks like when he visits Kenosha , Wisconsin today , but maybe he can carve out a few minutes to stop by a neighborhood about ten miles from downtown .
There hasn ’ t been any violence there , and residents would like to keep it that way , which is why many of them have formed a neighborhood watch that ’ s now standing guard over the community each night .
About ten residents are taking part in the nightly watch , including Jason Ottum and Gilbert Rosales @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the pair say that they ’ re not looking to start trouble .
They ’ re simply hoping to keep any trouble away from their quiet streets .
“ All we ’ re doing is making sure the community here is able to go asleep , sleep fine and are not worried about anything , ” said Rosales .
Rosales , who said he has lived in the area for 18 years , got involved after seeing other members of the neighborhood guard assembling Tuesday .
The effort was launched after a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of violence that ensued largely in the city ’ s Downtown and Uptown districts after the police shooting Aug. 23 of Jacob Blake .
“ We had a neighborhood Watch meeting , about 20 of us assembled and talked about what we should do , ” said Ottum , who has lived in the neighborhood about 20 years .
Anyone trying to enter the subdivision in the evening hours are typically met by a couple of armed homeowners .
Rosales says the intent is not to intimidate or harass anyone , but simply @ @ @ @ @ @ @ residents there are wide awake and watching for any trouble .
“ The cops have been very supportive , ” Ottum said of the guard ’ s initiative .
“ They said ‘ guys , just be careful.
’ And they actually suggested to use our cars to block a bit ( of the street ) .
” Kenosha Police did not respond to a request to comment about the watch group ’ s efforts .
While the circumstances that led to the guard ’ s formation were unfortunate , a benefit that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , is they have become better acquainted with their neighbors .
“ That ’ s probably the silver lining in all of this .
I ’ ve met other neighbors and we ’ re all talking , ” Ottum said .
All things considered , I ’ m sure residents would rather get to know each other better over a Labor Day cookout , but given the circumstances in Kenosha at the moment , this seems like a fairly prudent step to take .
We saw something similar take place in Minneapolis earlier @ @ @ @ @ @ @ riots and looting that spread across the city in the wake of the death of George Floyd .
As for Trump ’ s visit to Kenosha , Democrats from Joe Biden to Wisconsin Governor Tony Evers are claiming that Trump ’ s visit to the city is just campaign fodder for his re-election bid .
I ’ m sure there are plenty of residents in Kenosha who wish all the outsiders that come into their community over the past week would just stay away , President Trump included .
After all , over @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ve arrested nearly 200 people over the past week , with more than half of those having addresses from 44 different cities not named Kenosha .
On the other hand , the president has the moral authority to visit any community torn apart by riots and looting .
There ’ s also a strong case that the president should be on the ground , not only to reassure residents that his administration is concerned about their well-being , but to send a message that the left-wing agitators and wannabe revolutionaries who ’ ve @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ones in charge .
Frankly , it ’ s a message that should be delivered by Gov .
Evers himself , but the last time the governor visited Kenosha , he said little about those who burned down businesses and looted the downtown area .
Instead , his focus was on Kyle Rittenhouse , the 17-year old from Illinois who ’ s been charged with two counts of murder in a shooting that his attorneys say was self-defense .
People with guns , like the neighborhood watch I mentioned at the beginning of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ when they believe law and order is breaking down .
If Evers wants to protect freedom of speech , he should ensure that the peaceable assemblies don ’ t turn into unlawful riots .
For days the governor failed to do so , which led directly to both President Trump visiting the town , as well as the armed neighbors looking out for each other in a quiet subdivision not far from the burned-out buildings now dotting downtown .

I don’t know what President Trump’s itinerary looks like when he visits Kenosha, Wisconsin today, but maybe he can carve out a few minutes to stop by a neighborhood about ten miles from downtown. There hasn’t been any violence there, and residents would like to keep it that way, which is why many of them have formed a neighborhood watch that’s now standing guard over the community each night.
About ten residents are taking part in the nightly watch, including Jason Ottum and Gilbert Rosales. Both long-time residents of the neighborhood, the pair say that they’re not looking to start trouble. They’re simply hoping to keep any trouble away from their quiet streets.
“All we’re doing is making sure the community here is able to go asleep, sleep fine and are not worried about anything,” said Rosales. Rosales, who said he has lived in the area for 18 years, got involved after seeing other members of the neighborhood guard assembling Tuesday. The effort was launched after a Neighborhood Watch meeting held in the wake of violence that ensued largely in the city’s Downtown and Uptown districts after the police shooting Aug. 23 of Jacob Blake. “We had a neighborhood Watch meeting, about 20 of us assembled and talked about what we should do,” said Ottum, who has lived in the neighborhood about 20 years.
Anyone trying to enter the subdivision in the evening hours are typically met by a couple of armed homeowners. Rosales says the intent is not to intimidate or harass anyone, but simply to let any uninvited guests know that residents there are wide awake and watching for any trouble.
“The cops have been very supportive,” Ottum said of the guard’s initiative. “They said ‘guys, just be careful.’ And they actually suggested to use our cars to block a bit (of the street).” Kenosha Police did not respond to a request to comment about the watch group’s efforts. While the circumstances that led to the guard’s formation were unfortunate, a benefit that has emerged, the guard members say, is they have become better acquainted with their neighbors. “That’s probably the silver lining in all of this. I’ve met other neighbors and we’re all talking,” Ottum said.
All things considered, I’m sure residents would rather get to know each other better over a Labor Day cookout, but given the circumstances in Kenosha at the moment, this seems like a fairly prudent step to take. We saw something similar take place in Minneapolis earlier this summer during the apex of the riots and looting that spread across the city in the wake of the death of George Floyd.
As for Trump’s visit to Kenosha, Democrats from Joe Biden to Wisconsin Governor Tony Evers are claiming that Trump’s visit to the city is just campaign fodder for his re-election bid.
“Fires are burning, and we have a president who fans the flames rather than fighting the flames,” Biden said Monday in Pittsburgh. “Donald Trump looks at this violence, and he sees a political lifeline.” Democratic state and local leaders urged Trump not to come to Kenosha. In a letter to the president, Wisconsin Gov. Tony Evers said, “I am concerned your presence will only hinder our healing.”
I’m sure there are plenty of residents in Kenosha who wish all the outsiders that come into their community over the past week would just stay away, President Trump included. After all, over the past week authorities say they’ve arrested nearly 200 people over the past week, with more than half of those having addresses from 44 different cities not named Kenosha.
On the other hand, the president has the moral authority to visit any community torn apart by riots and looting. There’s also a strong case that the president should be on the ground, not only to reassure residents that his administration is concerned about their well-being, but to send a message that the left-wing agitators and wannabe revolutionaries who’ve taken to the streets are not the ones in charge.
Frankly, it’s a message that should be delivered by Gov. Evers himself, but the last time the governor visited Kenosha, he said little about those who burned down businesses and looted the downtown area. Instead, his focus was on Kyle Rittenhouse, the 17-year old from Illinois who’s been charged with two counts of murder in a shooting that his attorneys say was self-defense.
“It’s so important to have freedom of speech,” said Gov. Evers. “When you have people running around with long guns, some of them want to be policemen…it’s a threat to marginalize that freedom of speech that we value so much.”
People with guns, like the neighborhood watch I mentioned at the beginning of this story, tend to show up when they believe law and order is breaking down. If Evers wants to protect freedom of speech, he should ensure that the peaceable assemblies don’t turn into unlawful riots. For days the governor failed to do so, which led directly to both President Trump visiting the town, as well as the armed neighbors looking out for each other in a quiet subdivision not far from the burned-out buildings now dotting downtown.


bearingarms--2020-09-01--Governor Says More Cops Coming To Portland, But There's A Problem.

Portland , Oregon is starting to get out of hand .
Especially now that someone has died .
Regardless of your political ideology , we should be able to agree that things are getting ridiculous at that point .
While Mayor Ted Wheeler was busy blaming Trump for one of the president ’ s supporters being killed by someone the Portland government had apparently released back into the wild despite a previous arrest , others throughout the nation were getting kind of sick of it .
Oregon Governor Kate Brown was apparently among them .
She decided to step in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ squat .
Oregon state police will patrol Portland ’ s nightly protests with help from officers from neighboring communities , seeking to tamp down on vandalism and violence following the fatal shooting of a right-wing Trump supporter as the city approaches 100 consecutive nights of Black Lives Matter demonstrations .
The plan , announced late Sunday by Democratic Gov .
Kate Brown , also creates a group including Mayor Ted Wheeler and local Black leaders to help chart the path forward for Portland , a liberal city struggling to regain its footing under @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has made Portland and its Democratic leadership a frequent target and the centerpiece of his “ law and order ” re-election campaign theme .
He demanded that local and state leaders call in the National Guard after Saturday ’ s fatal shooting .
However , Brown , a Democrat , still managed to screw the pooch .
How ?
Well , she forgot to bother asking some of those neighboring communities if they were interested in helping .
While the governor has the authority to direct the state police , she can ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and take care of Portland ’ s mess , so they have to agree to help .
It seems that , well , they ’ re not interested .
The sheriffs of Clackamas and Washington County say they will not send staff to help with protests in Portland after Oregon Governor Kate Brown unveiled a plan to address the violence at protests .
The plan called on several local law enforcement agencies to help , including the sheriff ’ s offices of Washington and Clackamas counties .
Clackamas Co. Sheriff Craig Roberts said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ office before rolling out the plan , intended to address the violence and arson while also protecting free speech .
“ Increasing law enforcement resources in Portland will not solve the nightly violence and now , murder , ” the sheriff said .
“ The only way to make Portland safe again , is to support a policy that holds offenders accountable for their destruction and violence.
” And the Portland DA has made it clear he ’ s not interested in doing any of that .
At least one local department was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ send officers to help , but that doesn ’ t mean they ’ re going to or not .
For what it ’ s worth , I don ’ t think Brown ’ s plan was completely half-baked .
Pulling in help from neighboring communities is probably a good thing considering the scope of what ’ s been going on in Portland .
However , she apparently forgot that the emergency powers that pretty much every governor assumed in during the pandemic still only went so far .
She can not compel a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ communities in order to help Portland take care of its mess .
At a minimum , she should have contacted these departments beforehand and made sure they were on board .
If not , she could have reached out to other departments that might have been a bit further away , but might have been willing to send officers .
The fact that she didn ’ t doesn ’ t instill confidence that she ’ ll do any better than Wheeler has .

Portland, Oregon is starting to get out of hand. Especially now that someone has died. Regardless of your political ideology, we should be able to agree that things are getting ridiculous at that point.
While Mayor Ted Wheeler was busy blaming Trump for one of the president’s supporters being killed by someone the Portland government had apparently released back into the wild despite a previous arrest, others throughout the nation were getting kind of sick of it. Oregon Governor Kate Brown was apparently among them.
She decided to step in where Wheeler apparently couldn’t do squat.
Oregon state police will patrol Portland’s nightly protests with help from officers from neighboring communities, seeking to tamp down on vandalism and violence following the fatal shooting of a right-wing Trump supporter as the city approaches 100 consecutive nights of Black Lives Matter demonstrations. The plan, announced late Sunday by Democratic Gov. Kate Brown, also creates a group including Mayor Ted Wheeler and local Black leaders to help chart the path forward for Portland, a liberal city struggling to regain its footing under a national spotlight. President Donald Trump has made Portland and its Democratic leadership a frequent target and the centerpiece of his “law and order” re-election campaign theme. He demanded that local and state leaders call in the National Guard after Saturday’s fatal shooting.
However, Brown, a Democrat, still managed to screw the pooch.
How? Well, she forgot to bother asking some of those neighboring communities if they were interested in helping. While the governor has the authority to direct the state police, she can’t actually make local departments step in and take care of Portland’s mess, so they have to agree to help.
It seems that, well, they’re not interested.
The sheriffs of Clackamas and Washington County say they will not send staff to help with after to address the violence at protests. The plan called on several local law enforcement agencies to help, including the sheriff’s offices of Washington and Clackamas counties. Clackamas Co. Sheriff Craig Roberts said the governor didn’t approach his office before rolling out , intended to address the violence and arson while also protecting free speech. “Increasing law enforcement resources in Portland will not solve the nightly violence and now, murder,” the sheriff said. “The only way to make Portland safe again, is to support a policy that holds offenders accountable for their destruction and violence.”
And the Portland DA has made it clear he’s not interested in doing any of that.
At least one local department was in discussions about whether they’d send officers to help, but that doesn’t mean they’re going to or not.
For what it’s worth, I don’t think Brown’s plan was completely half-baked. Pulling in help from neighboring communities is probably a good thing considering the scope of what’s been going on in Portland. However, she apparently forgot that the emergency powers that pretty much every governor assumed in during the pandemic still only went so far.
She cannot compel a department to abandon their responsibilities to their communities in order to help Portland take care of its mess. At a minimum, she should have contacted these departments beforehand and made sure they were on board. If not, she could have reached out to other departments that might have been a bit further away, but might have been willing to send officers.
The fact that she didn’t doesn’t instill confidence that she’ll do any better than Wheeler has.


bearingarms--2020-09-02--California Scrambling To Salvage Mag Ban

When the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals declared the California magazine ban unconstitutional , it had to come as quite a shock to lawmakers in the Golden State .
They ’ re used to being able to do whatever they wanted when it came to guns and the courts simply rubber-stamping their approval .
Then , all of a sudden , the courts are turning against them .
It ’ s almost as if rights actually matter to some jurists .
Who knew ?
Now , those lawmakers are scrambling to try and salvage their magazine ban .
California Democrats @ @ @ @ @ @ @ protect a gun-control law that a federal appeals court declared unconstitutional .
Attorney General Xavier Becerra ( D. ) requested an “ en banc ” review of a three-judge panel that ruled the state ’ s ban on the possession of any magazine holding more than 10 rounds , even those Californians previously bought legally , ran afoul of the Second Amendment .
Such a review would convene every judge in the Ninth Circuit .
Chuck Michel , president of the California Rifle & Pistol Association , said gun-rights advocates are willing to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Supreme Court if Becerra succeeds in his appeal .
“ This case may present the opportunity to set things straight on the broader issue of what the standard of review test should be when considering any Second Amendment challenge , ” he told the Washington Free Beacon .
“ The Supreme Court seems inclined to do away with the complicated subjective tests that many courts have wrongly applied in Second Amendment cases , in favor of a clearer , more objective ‘ originalist ’ approach that considers the text , history , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ what infringements might be tolerated.
” However , don ’ t think of this as some kind of Hail Mary play .
A similar attempt in 2016 worked , so an en banc review may well fall against gun rights activists .
The truth is that the ruling is one of only a handful that clearly communicate the reality of what the Heller ruling laid out .
You see , these magazines are in common use and aren ’ t particularly dangerous .
I mean , they ’ re magazines .
In and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dangerous at all .
Yet the problem is that an en banc review by the Ninth Circuit may not look at it that way , and that ’ s a big problem .
Until then , though , we ’ ve got this ruling and there ’ s no guarantee that an en banc ruling will go California ’ s way , either .
In fact , if they don ’ t , things might get even more interesting for the most gun controlled state in the nation .
That could have some @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rather gun controlled West Coast , to be clear about it .
Becerra ’ s gambit probably isn ’ t a gamble , but it ’ s about what we should have all expected coming down the pike .
Well , it ’ s now here and we ’ ll have to sit and wait to find out what if it ’ ll be the Ninth Circus of old or the new court we ’ ve seen level several other good rulings in recent years .
Here ’ s hoping that the Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .

When the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals declared the California magazine ban unconstitutional, it had to come as quite a shock to lawmakers in the Golden State. They’re used to being able to do whatever they wanted when it came to guns and the courts simply rubber-stamping their approval. Then, all of a sudden, the courts are turning against them.
It’s almost as if rights actually matter to some jurists. Who knew?
Now, those lawmakers are scrambling to try and salvage their magazine ban.
California Democrats are launching a longshot legal maneuver to protect a gun-control law that a federal appeals court declared unconstitutional. Attorney General Xavier Becerra (D.) requested an “en banc” review of a three-judge panel that ruled the state’s ban on the possession of any magazine holding more than 10 rounds, even those Californians previously bought legally, ran afoul of the Second Amendment. Such a review would convene every judge in the Ninth Circuit. Chuck Michel, president of the California Rifle & Pistol Association, said gun-rights advocates are willing to take the case all the way to the Supreme Court if Becerra succeeds in his appeal. “This case may present the opportunity to set things straight on the broader issue of what the standard of review test should be when considering any Second Amendment challenge,” he told the Washington Free Beacon. “The Supreme Court seems inclined to do away with the complicated subjective tests that many courts have wrongly applied in Second Amendment cases, in favor of a clearer, more objective ‘originalist’ approach that considers the text, history, and tradition of a law to determine what infringements might be tolerated.”
However, don’t think of this as some kind of Hail Mary play. A similar attempt in 2016 worked, so an en banc review may well fall against gun rights activists.
But it shouldn’t.
The truth is that the ruling is one of only a handful that clearly communicate the reality of what the Heller ruling laid out. You see, these magazines are in common use and aren’t particularly dangerous. I mean, they’re magazines. In and of themselves, they’re not dangerous at all.
Yet the problem is that an en banc review by the Ninth Circuit may not look at it that way, and that’s a big problem.
Until then, though, we’ve got this ruling and there’s no guarantee that an en banc ruling will go California’s way, either. In fact, if they don’t, things might get even more interesting for the most gun controlled state in the nation. That could have some interesting ramifications throughout the entire West Coast–a rather gun controlled West Coast, to be clear about it.
Becerra’s gambit probably isn’t a gamble, but it’s about what we should have all expected coming down the pike. Well, it’s now here and we’ll have to sit and wait to find out what if it’ll be the Ninth Circus of old or the new court we’ve seen level several other good rulings in recent years. Here’s hoping that the Trump judicial picks have made a real difference.


bearingarms--2020-09-02--Flint, MI Deludes Itself Into Believing They're Safer

Police departments all over the nation routinely encounter firearms in the hands of people who shouldn ’ t have them .
They ’ re sometimes good guns , but sometimes they aren ’ t .
It doesn ’ t matter , though , because they ’ re treated the same .
The departments seize the guns .
They take them away .
That , of course , leads to the thorny issue of disposal .
Many departments sell the guns to local licensed gun dealers .
This allowed the firearms to get sold to people who pass the relevant background @ @ @ @ @ @ @ such city is Flint , Michigan .
The city has delivered a load of 384 guns to an incineration facility , following up on an initiative announced in late July by Mayor Sheldon Neeley .
The city announced the disposal delivery in a news release Tuesday , Sept. 1 , diverting the weapons from auctions where they had been sold previously .
“ I am proud of our city for taking this strong stance as part of our overall fight to reduce gun violence , ” Police Chief Terence Green said in a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ It ’ s good to be home and doing police work in the city I know and love.
” “ But how ?
Now those icky guns aren ’ t on the streets where they can be used for further criminal activity , ” someone might argue , and they ’ re sorta kinda right .
Those guns aren ’ t on the streets .
However , they weren ’ t going to go back to criminals .
They were going to be sold to law-abiding citizens .
Since they would be used @ @ @ @ @ @ @ d likely be guns sold at a deep discount , thus making them more affordable to the economically challenged .
Those would be the same economically challenged individuals that are often forced to live in high-crime neighborhoods and are far more likely to be the victim of a violent crime than most other members of society .
By making it more expensive for them to arm themselves–decreasing the supply of inexpensive guns isn ’ t going to make it easier for them to buy firearms , after all–you ’ ve now empowered criminals @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
See , measures like this don ’ t actually accomplish anything except allowing those involved in the decision to pat themselves on the back and pretend they ’ ve actually accomplished something good .
It ’ s not really a virtue signal , mostly because I think they actually believe this will do some good , but it is the sad result of what happens when politicians and officials don ’ t actually understand the subject at hand .
Now , the people of Flint , MI will have fewer low-cost firearms @ @ @ @ @ @ @ time when guns are a bit harder to come by in some places .
These good and decent folks will be left defenseless against the criminal element that seeks to exploit them , and people like Chief Green are applauding themselves for putting these folks in this position .
Needless to say , it makes me sick .
Honestly , these people will have blood on their hands because they ’ re quick to make it harder on those poor , decent folks who just want to live their lives .
Yet this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Flint .
Is it any wonder their water system got jacked up ?

Police departments all over the nation routinely encounter firearms in the hands of people who shouldn’t have them. They’re sometimes good guns, but sometimes they aren’t. It doesn’t matter, though, because they’re treated the same. The departments seize the guns. They take them away.
That, of course, leads to the thorny issue of disposal.
Many departments sell the guns to local licensed gun dealers. This allowed the firearms to get sold to people who pass the relevant background checks.
Others…don’t. One such city is Flint, Michigan.
The city has delivered a load of 384 guns to an incineration facility, following up on an initiative announced in late July by Mayor Sheldon Neeley. The city announced the disposal delivery in a news release Tuesday, Sept. 1, diverting the weapons from auctions where they had been sold previously. “I am proud of our city for taking this strong stance as part of our overall fight to reduce gun violence,” Police Chief Terence Green said in a statement issued by the city. “It’s good to be home and doing police work in the city I know and love.”
Congratulations, Chief Green. You’ve successfully made your city less safe.
“But how? Now those icky guns aren’t on the streets where they can be used for further criminal activity,” someone might argue, and they’re sorta kinda right. Those guns aren’t on the streets.
However, they weren’t going to go back to criminals. They were going to be sold to law-abiding citizens. Since they would be used firearms bought at auction, they’d likely be guns sold at a deep discount, thus making them more affordable to the economically challenged.
Those would be the same economically challenged individuals that are often forced to live in high-crime neighborhoods and are far more likely to be the victim of a violent crime than most other members of society. By making it more expensive for them to arm themselves–decreasing the supply of inexpensive guns isn’t going to make it easier for them to buy firearms, after all–you’ve now empowered criminals to worry less about their likely prey.
Good job, dipsticks.
See, measures like this don’t actually accomplish anything except allowing those involved in the decision to pat themselves on the back and pretend they’ve actually accomplished something good. It’s not really a virtue signal, mostly because I think they actually believe this will do some good, but it is the sad result of what happens when politicians and officials don’t actually understand the subject at hand.
Now, the people of Flint, MI will have fewer low-cost firearms available to them, especially at a time when guns are a bit harder to come by in some places. These good and decent folks will be left defenseless against the criminal element that seeks to exploit them, and people like Chief Green are applauding themselves for putting these folks in this position.
Needless to say, it makes me sick. Honestly, these people will have blood on their hands because they’re quick to make it harder on those poor, decent folks who just want to live their lives.
Yet this is what you see in cities like Flint. Is it any wonder their water system got jacked up?


bearingarms--2020-09-02--The Great Gun Run Of 2020 Continues

The Great Gun Run Of 2020 Continues

Earlier today we took a look at how gun control advocates are responding to another record-setting month for gun sales , but it ’ s worth digging deeper into the numbers themselves .
According to the National Shooting Sports Foundation , last month there were 1,684,083 background checks conducted on firearm sales , which is an increase of 51.2 percent compared to sales in August of 2019 .
It ’ s also , however , a slight decline from July ’ s NSSF-adjusted NICS figure of 1,848,307 .
I think this is an indication of problems in the supply pipeline @ @ @ @ @ @ @ demand for firearms .
When I spoke a couple of weeks ago to Larry Keane , senior vice president and general counsel for the NSSF , he had just returned from a field trip of sorts to a major firearms distributor .
He reported that the warehouse shelves are just as bare as the display cases of your local gun store , and that both manufacturers and distributors are producing and delivering as much product as they can by adding shifts and employees .
It ’ s starting to look like the ceiling @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is roughly around 2,000,000 per month , at least for the time being .
Obviously manufacturers want to increase their production as long as there ’ s a market for it , but I ’ d say it ’ s highly unlikely that we ’ ll see a huge addition of manufacturing space until after the election and the industry has a better idea of what to plan for in the coming months and years .
Jurgen Brauer of Small Arms Analytics estimates that the number of gun sales was actually closer to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ saw a slight decline in sales compared to July , when he estimates there were 2-million gun sales .
“ August ’ s year-over-year increase of 57.8 % is the lowest year-over increase seen in the past six months .
At nearly 15 million units sold , the sales pace thus far this year now exceeds the total 12-months sales of 2019 by just over one million firearms .
With the hunting season about to begin in earnest and the presidential election season about to start in earnest as well , 2020 will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 16.6 million units sold in 2016.
” So , we ’ ve already seen more firearms sold than in all of last year , and we still have four more months to go .
Not only that , but the next four months typically are the busiest months of the year for the firearms industry under normal circumstances .
This year is anything but normal , in so many ways .
Hunting licences have increased in several states , and given the economic uncertainty for so many Americans , deer season might be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in a decade or more as people take to the field to put food in the freezer .
On top of that we have the elections , which tend to lead to a bump in sales , especially during presidential election years .
On today ’ s VIP Gold live chat , Ed Morrissey of Hot Air told me that he wouldn ’ t be surprised if the Biden/Harris campaign plays down the gun control issue over the next couple of months , in large part because “ we want to make it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t really go well with “ we want to take money from police departments ” at a time when violent crime is rising in many cities across the country .
It ’ s not that they ’ ve changed their mind , but they may well change their tune ( or at least hum it quietly instead of belting it out towards the balcony ) .
In other words , don ’ t expect the Great Gun and Ammo Run of 2020 to subside anytime soon .
Any decline in numbers over the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to be the result of supply issues and not a lack of demand .

Earlier today we took a look at how gun control advocates are responding to another record-setting month for gun sales, but it’s worth digging deeper into the numbers themselves. According to the National Shooting Sports Foundation, last month there were 1,684,083 background checks conducted on firearm sales, which is an increase of 51.2 percent compared to sales in August of 2019. It’s also, however, a slight decline from July’s NSSF-adjusted NICS figure of 1,848,307.
I think this is an indication of problems in the supply pipeline, rather than a slackening in the demand for firearms. When I spoke a couple of weeks ago to Larry Keane, senior vice president and general counsel for the NSSF, he had just returned from a field trip of sorts to a major firearms distributor. He reported that the warehouse shelves are just as bare as the display cases of your local gun store, and that both manufacturers and distributors are producing and delivering as much product as they can by adding shifts and employees.
It’s starting to look like the ceiling for firearms production in the United States is roughly around 2,000,000 per month, at least for the time being. Obviously manufacturers want to increase their production as long as there’s a market for it, but I’d say it’s highly unlikely that we’ll see a huge addition of manufacturing space until after the election and the industry has a better idea of what to plan for in the coming months and years.
Jurgen Brauer of Small Arms Analytics estimates that the number of gun sales was actually closer to 1.8-million in August, though he also saw a slight decline in sales compared to July, when he estimates there were 2-million gun sales.
“August’s year-over-year increase of 57.8% is the lowest year-over increase seen in the past six months. At nearly 15 million units sold, the sales pace thus far this year now exceeds the total 12-months sales of 2019 by just over one million firearms. With the hunting season about to begin in earnest and the presidential election season about to start in earnest as well, 2020 will without doubt exceed the previous high of 16.6 million units sold in 2016.”
So, we’ve already seen more firearms sold than in all of last year, and we still have four more months to go. Not only that, but the next four months typically are the busiest months of the year for the firearms industry under normal circumstances.
This year is anything but normal, in so many ways. Hunting licences have increased in several states, and given the economic uncertainty for so many Americans, deer season might be more popular than it’s been in a decade or more as people take to the field to put food in the freezer.
On top of that we have the elections, which tend to lead to a bump in sales, especially during presidential election years. On today’s VIP Gold live chat, Ed Morrissey of Hot Air told me that he wouldn’t be surprised if the Biden/Harris campaign plays down the gun control issue over the next couple of months, in large part because “we want to make it harder to protect yourself” doesn’t really go well with “we want to take money from police departments” at a time when violent crime is rising in many cities across the country. It’s not that they’ve changed their mind, but they may well change their tune (or at least hum it quietly instead of belting it out towards the balcony).
In other words, don’t expect the Great Gun and Ammo Run of 2020 to subside anytime soon. Any decline in numbers over the next few months are far more likely to be the result of supply issues and not a lack of demand.


bearingarms--2020-09-02--"Defunding Police" Leads Places Some Don't Want Us Going

Proponents of “ defunding the police ” arguing that money should be taken from police budgets and funneled into programs that may , in theory , reduce violence and thus reduce the need for police seem to think they ’ ve hit on a brilliant idea .
In and of itself , I don ’ t have an issue with trying to reduce violence at the source .
In fact , I ’ ve been a proponent of that for some time .
The problem is , it takes time for such programs to actually yield results .
It ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ quick fix ” legislation instead of programs that may not produce any real outcomes until after the next election .
The idea of defunding the police to funds these other programs creates a bit of a problem .
In particular , because these programs take time to yield any results , you ’ re still going to have violent crime , but you ’ re also going to have fewer police resources in place to deal with them .
Now , people are taking steps to maintain their own safety , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
When the uprisings against police-perpetrated violence first hit Chicago in late May , the phone lines of AGB Investigative Services started ringing off the hook .
The private security firm employs more than 750 security guards throughout 12 states and the District of Columbia .
Its clients typically include government agencies , businesses and individuals seeking security and concealed carry training .
Since May , though , the firm has been deluged with requests from business owners worried that uprisings will target their store windows and merchandise ; wealthy residents on the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their gated communities ; and the city itself , seeking to supplement its own police force .
During a weekend in June , Chicago spent up to $ 1.2 million to hire AGB and two other private security firms to supply more than 100 unarmed guards “ to protect the local retail shops , grocery stores and pharmacies , ” on the city ’ s South and West sides , according to Mayor Lori Lightfoot ’ s office .
The contract was temporary , but Tifair Hamed , AGB ’ s vice president @ @ @ @ @ @ @ city can tap the firm ’ s services on an ongoing basis .
Overall , Hamed says , business has increased by about 25 percent for both the firm ’ s retail sector and concealed carry training services since May .
Hours for guards stationed at retail shops , utility substations and commercial real estate have increased , and the firm ’ s clientele has expanded to include hotels .
The company is looking to hire as many guards as possible , she says .
Now , Lightfoot is catching flak for having @ @ @ @ @ @ @ well , what did they think was going to happen ?
Let ’ s remember the wanton destruction and theft just a couple of weeks ago in Chicago as looters besieged the Magnificent Mile .
This was in response to the shooting of a man who shot at police first .
There ’ s literally no case where police can do their jobs and not face the possibility of looting , yet they ’ re also operating at a reduced capacity .
Guess what that means ?
It means someone has to step @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Along similar lines , this is why gun control proposals amid the defunding conversations are incredibly stupid .
We ’ re seeing massive surges of violent crime in so many cities , and yet we ’ re supposed to hand over our guns ?
I don ’ t think so .
A lot of people will be willing to stop worrying about having a gun when the violence isn ’ t an issue .
That ’ s not the case , nor will it be anytime soon , so gun control becomes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ How can we call the police instead if the police are defunded ?

Proponents of “defunding the police” arguing that money should be taken from police budgets and funneled into programs that may, in theory, reduce violence and thus reduce the need for police seem to think they’ve hit on a brilliant idea. In and of itself, I don’t have an issue with trying to reduce violence at the source. In fact, I’ve been a proponent of that for some time.
The problem is, it takes time for such programs to actually yield results. It’s why politicians tend to jump on “quick fix” legislation instead of programs that may not produce any real outcomes until after the next election.
The idea of defunding the police to funds these other programs creates a bit of a problem. In particular, because these programs take time to yield any results, you’re still going to have violent crime, but you’re also going to have fewer police resources in place to deal with them.
Now, people are taking steps to maintain their own safety, and some aren’t happy about that.
When the uprisings against police-perpetrated violence first hit Chicago in late May, the phone lines of AGB Investigative Services started ringing off the hook. The private security firm employs more than 750 security guards throughout 12 states and the District of Columbia. Its clients typically include government agencies, businesses and individuals seeking security and concealed carry training. Since May, though, the firm has been deluged with requests from business owners worried that uprisings will target their store windows and merchandise; wealthy residents on the city’s North side fearing for their gated communities; and the city itself, seeking to supplement its own police force. During a weekend in June, Chicago spent up to $1.2 million to hire AGB and two other private security firms to supply more than 100 unarmed guards “to protect the local retail shops, grocery stores and pharmacies,” on the city’s South and West sides, according to Mayor Lori Lightfoot’s office. The contract was temporary, but Tifair Hamed, AGB’s vice president of marketing and communications, says the city can tap the firm’s services on an ongoing basis. Overall, Hamed says, business has increased by about 25 percent for both the firm’s retail sector and concealed carry training services since May. Hours for guards stationed at retail shops, utility substations and commercial real estate have increased, and the firm’s clientele has expanded to include hotels. The company is looking to hire as many guards as possible, she says.
Now, Lightfoot is catching flak for having hired private armed security, but, well, what did they think was going to happen?
Let’s remember the wanton destruction and theft just a couple of weeks ago in Chicago as looters besieged the Magnificent Mile. This was in response to the shooting of a man who shot at police first. There’s literally no case where police can do their jobs and not face the possibility of looting, yet they’re also operating at a reduced capacity.
Guess what that means? It means someone has to step in, and that means armed security.
Along similar lines, this is why gun control proposals amid the defunding conversations are incredibly stupid. We’re seeing massive surges of violent crime in so many cities, and yet we’re supposed to hand over our guns? I don’t think so.
A lot of people will be willing to stop worrying about having a gun when the violence isn’t an issue. That’s not the case, nor will it be anytime soon, so gun control becomes a nonstarter for millions of Americans.
How can we call the police instead if the police are defunded?


bearingarms--2020-09-02--Rioting Isn't Helping Black Lives Matter Or Anyone Else

Over the last few months , we ’ ve seen nightly riots .
Most of them have been in Portland , but we ’ ve seen them in plenty of other places .
For something like a week after the death of George Floyd , it seemed there were riots in every major city in the nation .
Since then , we ’ ve seen plenty of people trying to justify those riots .
They ’ ve argued that such a thing is reasonable , somehow .
Yet , the problem is , while business owners are taking the brunt @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ re not the only ones being hurt .
But , unfortunately , a small subset of these protestors has committed themselves to wanton violence and property destruction .
Some have disturbingly attempted to justify this reckless behavior , claiming that “ property is replaceable ” and insurance will protect store owners from the destruction of their livelihoods .
In reality , store owners , entrepreneurs , and taxpayers across the country bear the brunt of these costs .
And far from defunding the police , rioting and looting acts as a stimulus @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the sake of countless struggling people , communities , and the economy , the riots must end .
By now , most Americans have likely heard the horrific stories of the violence gripping America ’ s cities .
During a recent spate of riots in Minneapolis , looters broke into a Vietnamese family owned restaurant and promptly tore down a picture of the family “ that was on the wall that represented generations of work ” before ransacking the establishment .
Owned by African American entrepreneur Leon Scott , Philadelphia-based Silver Legends had @ @ @ @ @ @ @ register and merchandise stolen .
And there are many more examples of minority-owned businesses that have fallen victim to rioting and looting .
Some insist that this destruction is manageable because of well-heeled insurers ready to promptly pay out claims to store owners with policies .
Yet among those being hurt is actually those who believe that George Floyd ’ s death should result in police reform , ostensibly the goal of Black Lives Matter itself .
See , immediately after George Floyd ’ s death during an arrest by Minneapolis police officers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the idea that maybe we should talk realistically about police reform .
What happened probably shouldn ’ t have , but it did and we all recognized that it was a great time to have this discussion , with that conversation being primarily about what shape such reform would take , not so much about whether it was needed or not .
Now , let ’ s see the conversation .
Where is it ?
We could have already passed legislation , but nothing is actually happening .
Why ?
Because of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a lot of people , myself included , who were open to police reform but now have backed off on that support because we don ’ t want to empower the mob .
We don ’ t want to have this conversation now because the riots made it impossible for some not to believe that rioting was responsible for the change .
Once you pay the Danegeld , you never get rid of the Dane .
That ’ s just as true if you did what you were going to do anyway and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Danegeld .
So yeah , Black Lives Matter gets hurt by the riots .
Unless , of course , police reform isn ’ t what they really want .
Nah , that couldn ’ t be it .

Over the last few months, we’ve seen nightly riots. Most of them have been in Portland, but we’ve seen them in plenty of other places. For something like a week after the death of George Floyd, it seemed there were riots in every major city in the nation.
Since then, we’ve seen plenty of people trying to justify those riots. They’ve argued that such a thing is reasonable, somehow.
Yet, the problem is, while business owners are taking the brunt of the impact from rioting, they’re not the only ones being hurt.
But, unfortunately, a small subset of these protestors has committed themselves to wanton violence and property destruction. Some have disturbingly attempted to justify this reckless behavior, claiming that “property is replaceable” and insurance will protect store owners from the destruction of their livelihoods. In reality, store owners, entrepreneurs, and taxpayers across the country bear the brunt of these costs. And far from defunding the police, rioting and looting acts as a stimulus for the folks in blue. For the sake of countless struggling people, communities, and the economy, the riots must end. By now, most Americans have likely heard the horrific stories of the violence gripping America’s cities. During a recent spate of riots in Minneapolis, looters broke into a Vietnamese family owned restaurant and promptly tore down a picture of the family “that was on the wall that represented generations of work” before ransacking the establishment. Owned by African American entrepreneur Leon Scott, Philadelphia-based Silver Legends had their windows broken in and their cash register and merchandise stolen. And there are many more examples of minority-owned businesses that have fallen victim to rioting and looting. Some insist that this destruction is manageable because of well-heeled insurers ready to promptly pay out claims to store owners with policies.
Yet among those being hurt is actually those who believe that George Floyd’s death should result in police reform, ostensibly the goal of Black Lives Matter itself.
See, immediately after George Floyd’s death during an arrest by Minneapolis police officers, the country was fairly united behind the idea that maybe we should talk realistically about police reform. What happened probably shouldn’t have, but it did and we all recognized that it was a great time to have this discussion, with that conversation being primarily about what shape such reform would take, not so much about whether it was needed or not.
Then riots broke out.
Now, let’s see the conversation. Where is it? We could have already passed legislation, but nothing is actually happening. Why? Because of the riots.
You see, there are a lot of people, myself included, who were open to police reform but now have backed off on that support because we don’t want to empower the mob. We don’t want to have this conversation now because the riots made it impossible for some not to believe that rioting was responsible for the change.
Once you pay the Danegeld, you never get rid of the Dane. That’s just as true if you did what you were going to do anyway and the Dane thinks you’re paying the Danegeld.
So yeah, Black Lives Matter gets hurt by the riots. Unless, of course, police reform isn’t what they really want.
Nah, that couldn’t be it.


bearingarms--2020-09-02--How Trump's Lasting Legacy May Hurt Gun Control Efforts

Currently , all the polls are showing President Donald Trump trailing .
I ’ m not putting too much stock into that since the polls said about the same thing four years ago and we all remember how that worked out .
But , hypothetically speaking , what if they ’ re right this time ?
We already know that Joe Biden wants to enact a massive number of new gun control laws .
If he and the Democrats take the White House and Senate while holding onto the House , they ’ ll have the means to do pretty @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has a legacy which may hurt a President Biden ’ s efforts for a long time to come .
Joe Biden will need more than a win in November and a Democratic takeover of the Senate if he wants to rival President Donald Trump when it comes to shaping the makeup of the federal courts .
He might also need lots of judges to retire .
While plenty of attention has been paid to possible openings on the Supreme Court , only a tiny fraction of legal cases ever make it to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ there are no vacancies on the nation ’ s powerful federal appeals courts .
“ He has no opportunity when he first comes in to fill any appellate vacancies because there won ’ t be any , ” said Carl Tobias , a law professor at the University of Richmond School of Law who researches federal judicial selection .
No president going back at least as far as Ronald Reagan has been inaugurated without any spots to fill on federal appeals courts .
When Trump took office , 17 such vacancies existed , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ GOP-controlled Senate under Majority Leader Mitch McConnell stonewalled nominations made by former President Barack Obama .
Over the nearly four years of Trump ’ s first term , the Senate has confirmed more than 50 of his appointees to appeals courts .
Those appointees now make up more than 1 in every 4 judges on the federal appellate bench .
The administration ’ s focus on confirming appeals court judges , even at the expense of district court judges and other priorities , was “ ruthless , mercenary and single-minded , ” Tobias @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Biden pushes gun control , there ’ s a decent chance the courts will crush it before it can really have any kind of an impact .
While one in four is only 25 percent of the judges , let ’ s also remember that many were appointed by Republicans as well , meaning the number is actually much higher .
While the Clinton-era judges still exist , they ’ re retiring or dying off , having left vacancies to be filled .
Obama had difficulting getting judges confirmed , which minimized his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , while Democrats are hopeful for a win in November , the truth is that even if they do win , gun control won ’ t be the slam dunk they like to believe it to be .
They ’ ll still have to contend with the courts and that will require far more than just appointing a handful of judges and calling it a day .
It doesn ’ t mean they can ’ t .
After all , expansion of the lower courts is always possible , which becomes their only @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ ll be time to use every trick in the book to make sure the legislation pushing that doesn ’ t see the light of day .
Regardless , there ’ s a real chance that despite the left ’ s potential efforts , they still wouldn ’ t be able to get the dystopian nightmare they call gun control .

Currently, all the polls are showing President Donald Trump trailing. I’m not putting too much stock into that since the polls said about the same thing four years ago and we all remember how that worked out.
But, hypothetically speaking, what if they’re right this time? We already know that Joe Biden wants to enact a massive number of new gun control laws. If he and the Democrats take the White House and Senate while holding onto the House, they’ll have the means to do pretty much whatever they want.
Yet Trump has a legacy which may hurt a President Biden’s efforts for a long time to come.
Joe Biden will need more than a win in November and a Democratic takeover of the Senate if he wants to rival President Donald Trump when it comes to shaping the makeup of the federal courts. He might also need lots of judges to retire. While plenty of attention has been paid to possible openings on the Supreme Court, only a tiny fraction of legal cases ever make it to the highest court in the land. And there are no vacancies on the nation’s powerful federal appeals courts. “He has no opportunity when he first comes in to fill any appellate vacancies because there won’t be any,” said Carl Tobias, a law professor at the University of Richmond School of Law who researches federal judicial selection. No president going back at least as far as Ronald Reagan has been inaugurated without any spots to fill on federal appeals courts. When Trump took office, 17 such vacancies existed, largely thanks to the fact that the GOP-controlled Senate under Majority Leader Mitch McConnell stonewalled nominations made by former President Barack Obama. Over the nearly four years of Trump’s first term, the Senate has confirmed more than 50 of his appointees to appeals courts. Those appointees now make up more than 1 in every 4 judges on the federal appellate bench. The administration’s focus on confirming appeals court judges, even at the expense of district court judges and other priorities, was “ruthless, mercenary and single-minded,” Tobias said.
In other words, if Biden pushes gun control, there’s a decent chance the courts will crush it before it can really have any kind of an impact.
While one in four is only 25 percent of the judges, let’s also remember that many were appointed by Republicans as well, meaning the number is actually much higher. While the Clinton-era judges still exist, they’re retiring or dying off, having left vacancies to be filled. Obama had difficulting getting judges confirmed, which minimized his overall impact in filling vacancies.
So, while Democrats are hopeful for a win in November, the truth is that even if they do win, gun control won’t be the slam dunk they like to believe it to be. They’ll still have to contend with the courts and that will require far more than just appointing a handful of judges and calling it a day.
It doesn’t mean they can’t. After all, expansion of the lower courts is always possible, which becomes their only hope.
It also means that it’ll be time to use every trick in the book to make sure the legislation pushing that doesn’t see the light of day.
Regardless, there’s a real chance that despite the left’s potential efforts, they still wouldn’t be able to get the dystopian nightmare they call gun control.


bearingarms--2020-09-02--Rittenhouse Speaks To Supporters From Behind Bars

17-year old Kyle Rittenhouse addressed supporters via a phone call from behind bars on Tuesday night , after his attorney John Pierce tweeted out video of a phone call with his client .
The Illinois teenager , who ’ s facing two homicide charges in the shootings of three demonstrators in Kenosha , Wisconsin , thanked “ every single one of you from the bottom of my heart for the underlying support , ” acknowledging “ all the mail ” that ’ s come his way and calling it “ really helpful.
” I ’ m not sure this phone @ @ @ @ @ @ @ case , however .
As I ’ ve written before , the self-defense claim by Rittenhouse seems very strong .
Even the prosecutor ’ s own charging documents don ’ t portray the teen as the initial aggressor , yet he ’ s still facing charges of intentionally killing Anthony Huber and Joseph Rosenbaum .
It ’ s likely that prosecutors will try to make the case that Rittenhouse made the short drive from his home in northern Illinois to southern Wisconsin with the intent of finding trouble , rather than firing the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ self-defense .
Rittenhouse ’ s comments themselves aren ’ t particularly bad , but there is a jarring moment early in the video released by Rittenhouse ’ s attorney John Pierce .
“ What do you want to say to the fans ?
” The fans ?
Not a good choice of words there .
“ Supporters ” would have been fine .
“ Those backing you ” would have worked .
“ Fans , ” though ?
Really ?
Regardless of how strong Rittenhouse ’ s claims of self-defense may be ( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ strong ) , these are incredibly serious charges that he ’ s facing .
If convicted , Rittenhouse could be sentenced to life in prison , and prosecutors will use everything they can to try to portray Rittenhouse as a murderer and an awful person .
A jailhouse phone call between an attorney and his client ordinarily wouldn ’ t be something that prosecutors could bring up in court .
A phone call shared on social media , on the other hand , will absolutely be used by those trying to put Rittenhouse @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of public opinion ?
Rittenhouse has been called a “ white supremacist ” by folks like Connecticut Sen. Chris Murphy and Massachusetts Rep. Ayanna Pressley , and his character has been attacked by countless others on the Left , who even circulated a photo of an armed woman at a protest and claimed it was Rittenhouse ’ s mother , even after the photographer publicly spoke out and said the picture was of another woman taken in another city on another day .
Isn ’ t it important to fight back against these @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it is , but not to the detriment of the actual legal defense , and I ’ m not convinced that Pierce ’ s tweet is going to do anything to help Rittenhouse in a court of law .
It may not have any impact at all , but on balance , I think it ’ s far more likely to hurt his case than to aid in his defense .
This was a message to Rittenhouse ’ s base of support , but his focus at the moment needs to be laser-focused @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
There ’ s a reason why you haven ’ t heard any public statements from Stephen Baca , who ’ s accused of aggravated battery for shooting a demonstrator who attacked him in Albuquerque earlier this summer .
You haven ’ t seen any social media featuring phone calls between Daniel Perry and his attorney since Perry shot and killed a protester in Austin , Texas , though Perry ’ s attorney has spoken to the press about his client and offered up details bolstering his case for self-defense .
A defendant @ @ @ @ @ @ @ gain by talking before a trial , and the best advice their attorney can offer is “ Shut up and let me do the talking.
” But what about the McCloskeys ?
After all , they ’ re facing felony charges for allegedly pointing guns at protesters outside of their St. Louis home , and they ’ ve not only spoken out publicly about their case , they gave a speech at the RNC !
That ’ s true , but there are a couple of big differences between the McCloskey case and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Mark and Patricia McCloskey are trial attorneys themselves , not a 17-year old with no legal experience .
More importantly , the McCloskey ’ s have a safety net ; Governor Brad Parsons has already said that he ’ ll pardon the couple if they ultimately are convicted , and Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt is trying to get the case thrown out .
Rittenhouse won ’ t have the backing of Wisconsin Governor Tony Evers , nor can he expect Wisconsin AG Josh Kaul to try to intervene to have the charges @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and the charges he faces are also far more serious than those leveled against the McCloskeys .
As much as he might want to thank his supporters , Rittenhouse would be much better off keeping quiet and letting the lawyers do the talking .

17-year old Kyle Rittenhouse addressed supporters via a phone call from behind bars on Tuesday night, after his attorney John Pierce tweeted out video of a phone call with his client. The Illinois teenager, who’s facing two homicide charges in the shootings of three demonstrators in Kenosha, Wisconsin, thanked “every single one of you from the bottom of my heart for the underlying support,” acknowledging “all the mail” that’s come his way and calling it “really helpful.”
I’m not sure this phone call was all that helpful to his case, however. As I’ve written before, the self-defense claim by Rittenhouse seems very strong. Even the prosecutor’s own charging documents don’t portray the teen as the initial aggressor, yet he’s still facing charges of intentionally killing Anthony Huber and Joseph Rosenbaum. It’s likely that prosecutors will try to make the case that Rittenhouse made the short drive from his home in northern Illinois to southern Wisconsin with the intent of finding trouble, rather than firing the fatal shots as a last-resort means of self-defense.
Rittenhouse’s comments themselves aren’t particularly bad, but there is a jarring moment early in the video released by Rittenhouse’s attorney John Pierce.
“What do you want to say to the fans?”
The fans? Not a good choice of words there. “Supporters” would have been fine. “Those backing you” would have worked. “Fans,” though? Really?
Regardless of how strong Rittenhouse’s claims of self-defense may be (and I think they’re pretty strong), these are incredibly serious charges that he’s facing. If convicted, Rittenhouse could be sentenced to life in prison, and prosecutors will use everything they can to try to portray Rittenhouse as a murderer and an awful person. A jailhouse phone call between an attorney and his client ordinarily wouldn’t be something that prosecutors could bring up in court. A phone call shared on social media, on the other hand, will absolutely be used by those trying to put Rittenhouse in prison.
What about the court of public opinion? Rittenhouse has been called a “white supremacist” by folks like Connecticut Sen. Chris Murphy and Massachusetts Rep. Ayanna Pressley, and his character has been attacked by countless others on the Left, who even circulated a photo of an armed woman at a protest and claimed it was Rittenhouse’s mother, even after the photographer publicly spoke out and said the picture was of another woman taken in another city on another day. Isn’t it important to fight back against these attempts at character assassination?
Of course it is, but not to the detriment of the actual legal defense, and I’m not convinced that Pierce’s tweet is going to do anything to help Rittenhouse in a court of law. It may not have any impact at all, but on balance, I think it’s far more likely to hurt his case than to aid in his defense. This was a message to Rittenhouse’s base of support, but his focus at the moment needs to be laser-focused on prosecutors and a potential jury pool.
There’s a reason why you haven’t heard any public statements from Stephen Baca, who’s accused of aggravated battery for shooting a demonstrator who attacked him in Albuquerque earlier this summer. You haven’t seen any social media featuring phone calls between Daniel Perry and his attorney since Perry shot and killed a protester in Austin, Texas, though Perry’s attorney has spoken to the press about his client and offered up details bolstering his case for self-defense. A defendant typically has far more to lose than gain by talking before a trial, and the best advice their attorney can offer is “Shut up and let me do the talking.”
But what about the McCloskeys? After all, they’re facing felony charges for allegedly pointing guns at protesters outside of their St. Louis home, and they’ve not only spoken out publicly about their case, they gave a speech at the RNC! That’s true, but there are a couple of big differences between the McCloskey case and Rittenhouse’s. First, both Mark and Patricia McCloskey are trial attorneys themselves, not a 17-year old with no legal experience. More importantly, the McCloskey’s have a safety net; Governor Brad Parsons has already said that he’ll pardon the couple if they ultimately are convicted, and Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt is trying to get the case thrown out.
Rittenhouse won’t have the backing of Wisconsin Governor Tony Evers, nor can he expect Wisconsin AG Josh Kaul to try to intervene to have the charges dismissed. Rittenhouse has no safety net, and the charges he faces are also far more serious than those leveled against the McCloskeys. As much as he might want to thank his supporters, Rittenhouse would be much better off keeping quiet and letting the lawyers do the talking.


bearingarms--2020-09-02--Gun Control Activists Try To Spin August's Record High Gun Sales

Since March , we ’ ve seen a new monthly record for NICS checks set every four weeks or so , and on Monday , when the FBI released its background check numbers for August , the trend continued .
The 3.1 million checks performed by the FBI in August was down from July ’ s total of 3.6 million , but still set a new record for the month .
If you ’ re a gun control activist , how on earth do you spin these numbers ?
The National Shooting Sports Foundation estimates that more than 5-million Americans @ @ @ @ @ @ @ demand is sky high , and there are also hundreds of thousands of Americans who ’ d like to join in the gun-buying frenzy but can ’ t because of long delays with gun licensing in several anti-gun states .
Everytown for Gun Safety tried their best to put a doom-and-gloom spin on the background check numbers , claiming that the polls are still on their side .
“ With protestors being shot in the streets and gun violence on the rise , more guns is not the recipe for public safety , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of law and policy at Everytown for Gun Safety .
“ Fortunately , polls show this jump in sales leads more Americans to support common sense gun safety laws , which is bad news for every 2020 candidate who is still taking orders from the gun lobby , starting with President Trump.
” Polls show more Americans support gun control than they did a few months ago ?
Not according to this Rasmussen Poll from mid-August , which shows support for new gun laws cratering .
Last August , Rasmussen found nearly 2/3rds @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that more gun laws are needed .
This August it had dropped 12 points to 54 % .
Still a majority , but a bare one , and the numbers are falling fast .
“ Gun sales have been surging since the pandemic began , so it ’ s impossible to identify the exact reason for this month ’ s sales , ” said Rob Wilcox , deputy director of policy and strategy at Everytown .
“ But it is clear that President Trump and gun companies are recklessly fear mongering every day @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a time when the threat of gun violence is on the rise and hospitals are overflowing with patients.
” Oh , I think we know why gun sales are still at record highs .
Increasing amounts of political violence for one .
When you ’ ve got mobs destroying businesses and threatening people ’ s lives , it tends to make folks think a little more about their own personal safety .
Then there ’ s the rise in violent crime in cities across the country , with shootings and homicides soaring in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Chicago , Portland , and many others .
It ’ s not fear mongering to point that out , and it ’ s deliciously ironic that Everytown ’ s Wilcox engages in some fear mongering of his own by claiming that hospitals are “ overflowing with patients.
” Where exactly is that happening at the moment ?
We ’ re actually seeing the opposite right now , with hospitals reporting improved capacity compared to the past few months .
For an organization that claims to have no issue with the Second Amendment , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with Americans exercising their right to keep and bear arms .
Though the group is supposedly all about “ gun safety ” instead of gun control , Everytown ’ s press release on the August NICS numbers doesn ’ t even mention firearms training , just hand-wringing over the idea that millions of new gun owners have embraced their Second Amendment rights .

Since March, we’ve seen a new monthly record for NICS checks set every four weeks or so, and on Monday, when the FBI released its background check numbers for August, the trend continued. The 3.1 million checks performed by the FBI in August was down from July’s total of 3.6 million, but still set a new record for the month.
If you’re a gun control activist, how on earth do you spin these numbers? The National Shooting Sports Foundation estimates that more than 5-million Americans have become gun owners this year, demand is sky high, and there are also hundreds of thousands of Americans who’d like to join in the gun-buying frenzy but can’t because of long delays with gun licensing in several anti-gun states.
Everytown for Gun Safety tried their best to put a doom-and-gloom spin on the background check numbers, claiming that the polls are still on their side.
“With protestors being shot in the streets and gun violence on the rise, more guns is not the recipe for public safety,” said Nick Suplina, managing director of law and policy at Everytown for Gun Safety. “Fortunately, polls show this jump in sales leads more Americans to support common sense gun safety laws, which is bad news for every 2020 candidate who is still taking orders from the gun lobby, starting with President Trump.”
Polls show more Americans support gun control than they did a few months ago? Not according to this Rasmussen Poll from mid-August, which shows support for new gun laws cratering. Last August, Rasmussen found nearly 2/3rds of poll respondents agreed with the idea that more gun laws are needed. This August it had dropped 12 points to 54%. Still a majority, but a bare one, and the numbers are falling fast.
“Gun sales have been surging since the pandemic began, so it’s impossible to identify the exact reason for this month’s sales,” said Rob Wilcox, deputy director of policy and strategy at Everytown. “But it is clear that President Trump and gun companies are recklessly fear mongering every day, which is dangerous and wrong at a time when the threat of gun violence is on the rise and hospitals are overflowing with patients.”
Oh, I think we know why gun sales are still at record highs. Increasing amounts of political violence for one. When you’ve got mobs destroying businesses and threatening people’s lives, it tends to make folks think a little more about their own personal safety.
Then there’s the rise in violent crime in cities across the country, with shootings and homicides soaring in cities like New York, Philadelphia, Chicago, Portland, and many others. It’s not fear mongering to point that out, and it’s deliciously ironic that Everytown’s Wilcox engages in some fear mongering of his own by claiming that hospitals are “overflowing with patients.” Where exactly is that happening at the moment? We’re actually seeing the opposite right now, with hospitals reporting improved capacity compared to the past few months.
For an organization that claims to have no issue with the Second Amendment, Everytown really seems to have a problem with Americans exercising their right to keep and bear arms. Though the group is supposedly all about “gun safety” instead of gun control, Everytown’s press release on the August NICS numbers doesn’t even mention firearms training, just hand-wringing over the idea that millions of new gun owners have embraced their Second Amendment rights.


bearingarms--2020-09-03--Charlotte, NC Police Department Misrepresents Black Market Guns

One of the greatest threats to law and order in this country is pineapple on pizza .
Another arguably is black market guns .
These firearms exist outside of the current legal framework and they ’ re pretty much exclusively going to criminal hands .
I mean , it ’ s not like law-abiding citizens are tripping over themselves to buy illegal guns .
Granted , it happens , but usually because someone is offered a gun at a good price and assume it ’ s a good-faith offer rather than someone trying to unload stolen goods .
If there @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be united behind , it ’ s trying to stop the flow of guns onto the black market .
Yet that becomes far more difficult when a police department spokesman of one of our larger cities blatantly misrepresents the black market itself .
Now , I support his efforts to keep firearms properly secured .
I agree that gun thefts are a big problem and they should be addressed .
However , I don ’ t see how he figures that the black market for firearms is somehow separate from guns stolen from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ how does he think guns get onto the black market in the first place ?
No , not all stolen guns are sold to other people .
Many who steal a gun will then turn around and use that gun for some other crime like armed robbery .
However , many others have no interest in that .
They don ’ t want to point a gun at someone and possibly have to pull the trigger , so they stick to property crime .
They steal stuff then sell it to someone else @ @ @ @ @ @ @ does include them , that becomes part of the black market .
That allows those who don ’ t otherwise have a place to secure a gun and no interest in checking dozens of cars for one that is both unlocked and contains a firearm .
Why do that when someone who is willing to do that will just sell them the gun ?
Trufano ’ s description of how the black market works when it comes to guns is downright baffling .
It sounds like he either believes no one sells stolen @ @ @ @ @ @ @ consists of guns obtained in some other manner .
If that ’ s the belief of the Charlotte Police Department as a whole , then folks in Charlotte have got potentially bigger problems than stolen guns .
After all , if the department seems to think that stolen guns are neither bought nor sold , then why would they bother actually trying to look into that aspect of it ?

One of the greatest threats to law and order in this country is pineapple on pizza.
Another arguably is black market guns. These firearms exist outside of the current legal framework and they’re pretty much exclusively going to criminal hands. I mean, it’s not like law-abiding citizens are tripping over themselves to buy illegal guns. Granted, it happens, but usually because someone is offered a gun at a good price and assume it’s a good-faith offer rather than someone trying to unload stolen goods.
If there’s one thing we should all be united behind, it’s trying to stop the flow of guns onto the black market. Yet that becomes far more difficult when a police department spokesman of one of our larger cities blatantly misrepresents the black market itself.
As the number of stolen guns continue to climb in Charlotte, police are looking to curb those numbers by relaunching the “Lock It or Lose It” campaign. The campaign will educate the community and bring awareness about keeping guns properly secured, police announced Wednesday during a morning press conference. “Despite popular belief, it’s not this underground current or black market where these guns are being purchased and sold,” said Charlotte-Mecklenburg PD spokesman Rob Tufano. “Far too frequently it’s often lawful gun owners who have their cars broken into.”
Now, I support his efforts to keep firearms properly secured. I agree that gun thefts are a big problem and they should be addressed.
However, I don’t see how he figures that the black market for firearms is somehow separate from guns stolen from lawful gun owners. I mean, how does he think guns get onto the black market in the first place?
No, not all stolen guns are sold to other people. Many who steal a gun will then turn around and use that gun for some other crime like armed robbery. However, many others have no interest in that. They don’t want to point a gun at someone and possibly have to pull the trigger, so they stick to property crime. They steal stuff then sell it to someone else.
That includes guns.
The thing is, when it does include them, that becomes part of the black market. That allows those who don’t otherwise have a place to secure a gun and no interest in checking dozens of cars for one that is both unlocked and contains a firearm. Why do that when someone who is willing to do that will just sell them the gun?
Trufano’s description of how the black market works when it comes to guns is downright baffling. It sounds like he either believes no one sells stolen guns or that the black market only consists of guns obtained in some other manner. If that’s the belief of the Charlotte Police Department as a whole, then folks in Charlotte have got potentially bigger problems than stolen guns.
After all, if the department seems to think that stolen guns are neither bought nor sold, then why would they bother actually trying to look into that aspect of it?


bearingarms--2020-09-03--Is "I Support The Second Amendment" The Most Meaningless Phrase In Politics?

The question popped into my mind as I was reading this puff piece on a Moms Demand Action chapter in Missouri and stumbled across this quote .
Ever notice how when gun control activists say they support the Second Amendment , there ’ s always a “ but ” afterwards ?
For all of their professed support , I ’ ve never actually seen or heard a member of Moms Demand Action oppose a gun control bill because it violates the Second Amendment rights of Americans .
If Catey Terry believes that she ’ s only in favor of “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ she have provided the reporter who interviewed her with any examples of gun control laws that she believes aren ’ t common sense ?
Joe Biden ’ s another one of those anti-gun activists who says he supports the Second Amendment too , yet I can ’ t find any examples of Biden opposing any gun control measure because it goes too far .
Banning the most commonly sold rifle in the United States apparently doesn ’ t violate the Second Amendment in Biden ’ s eyes , nor does banning the most @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Requiring gun owners to be licensed by the state , confiscating firearms without a court hearing or criminal charges , rationing gun purchases , and banning private transfers of firearms are all Second Amendment-compliant according to Joe Biden .
I realize that Joe Biden takes questions from the press about as frequently as Portland goes a night without a riot , but the next time a reporter does get a chance to ask an unscripted question to the Democratic presidential nominee , I wish they ’ d give Biden a pop quiz @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , as a self-proclaimed Second Amendment supporter , of a gun control bill that you would consider a violation of the Second Amendment ?
I don ’ t think Biden could come up with a good answer .
Support for the Second Amendment is something that gun control advocates and activists constantly claim , but never actually demonstrate .
So why bother even pretending that they believe that the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed ?
Why not just come out and say , “ Actually @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Second Amendment ” ?
For Biden , the reason is that he wants to win in November , and that means pretending to support the right to keep and bear arms even though his own plan would turn the right of the people into a privilege of the few .
For gun control advocates like Catey Terry , the lie allows them to claim to be “ moderate ” on the issue of gun ownership .
There ’ s also little risk of being called out or asked a question about what that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ majority of the media are either too clueless to push back or too invested in the idea of gun control to ever think about asking a tough question of a gun control activist or anti-gun politician .
If Joe Biden ’ s support for voting rights looked like his supposed support for the Second Amendment , he ’ d be backing poll taxes and voting tests .
If his support for the First Amendment resembled his so-called support for the right to keep and bear arms , he ’ d be vowing to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Facebook , Instagram , and Twitter .
The media would howl in both cases , but when it comes to calling out or questioning his professed support for the Second Amendment , reporters , anchors , and likely even debate moderators will give him a pass .

The question popped into my mind as I was reading this puff piece on a Moms Demand Action chapter in Missouri and stumbled across this quote.
“We support the Second Amendment, and we support the culture in Missouri,” Columbia group spokesperson Catey Terry said. “But there just are some common-sense gun laws that can make us all safer, and that’s what Moms is fighting for.”
Ever notice how when gun control activists say they support the Second Amendment, there’s always a “but” afterwards? For all of their professed support, I’ve never actually seen or heard a member of Moms Demand Action oppose a gun control bill because it violates the Second Amendment rights of Americans. If Catey Terry believes that she’s only in favor of “some common-sense gun laws,” could she have provided the reporter who interviewed her with any examples of gun control laws that she believes aren’t common sense?
Joe Biden’s another one of those anti-gun activists who says he supports the Second Amendment too, yet I can’t find any examples of Biden opposing any gun control measure because it goes too far. Banning the most commonly sold rifle in the United States apparently doesn’t violate the Second Amendment in Biden’s eyes, nor does banning the most commonly possessed ammunition magazines in the country. Requiring gun owners to be licensed by the state, confiscating firearms without a court hearing or criminal charges, rationing gun purchases, and banning private transfers of firearms are all Second Amendment-compliant according to Joe Biden.
I realize that Joe Biden takes questions from the press about as frequently as Portland goes a night without a riot, but the next time a reporter does get a chance to ask an unscripted question to the Democratic presidential nominee, I wish they’d give Biden a pop quiz: Can you give me an example, as a self-proclaimed Second Amendment supporter, of a gun control bill that you would consider a violation of the Second Amendment?
I don’t think Biden could come up with a good answer. Support for the Second Amendment is something that gun control advocates and activists constantly claim, but never actually demonstrate. So why bother even pretending that they believe that the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed? Why not just come out and say, “Actually, I don’t support the Second Amendment”?
For Biden, the reason is that he wants to win in November, and that means pretending to support the right to keep and bear arms even though his own plan would turn the right of the people into a privilege of the few. For gun control advocates like Catey Terry, the lie allows them to claim to be “moderate” on the issue of gun ownership. There’s also little risk of being called out or asked a question about what that support actually means, because the vast majority of the media are either too clueless to push back or too invested in the idea of gun control to ever think about asking a tough question of a gun control activist or anti-gun politician.
If Joe Biden’s support for voting rights looked like his supposed support for the Second Amendment, he’d be backing poll taxes and voting tests. If his support for the First Amendment resembled his so-called support for the right to keep and bear arms, he’d be vowing to ban “rapid-fire messaging systems” like Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter. The media would howl in both cases, but when it comes to calling out or questioning his professed support for the Second Amendment, reporters, anchors, and likely even debate moderators will give him a pass.


bearingarms--2020-09-03--Media Now Blaming Record Gun Sales On "Trump's Scare Tactics"

In what may very well be the dumbest editorial of 2020 , the Charlotte News & Observer is claiming that Donald Trump ’ s “ fake fear ” is what ’ s caused gun sales to soar to record highs .
No , seriously .
Firearm sales surged when the pandemic forced a shutdown in March .
Now sales are rising again as President Trump warns of U.S. cities being overrun by looting mobs while police are left helpless to respond for lack of funding and respect .
Trump ’ s appeal to fear is a desperate fiction peddled by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the subject from his abject failure to respond to the pandemic .
But it ’ s having an effect that ’ s as real as a bullet .
On today ’ s Bearing Arms ’ Cam & Co , we pick apart the wild accusations on the part of the News & Observer editorial board , starting with their absurd assertion that gun sales have ever gone back to “ normal ” ( or at least what they were in 2019 ) since the first COVID-19 shutdown orders sent sales spiraling upwards back @ @ @ @ @ @ @ yourself at the NICS background check numbers for 2020 in the graph below .
Every month since March has seen much higher numbers than what we saw in 2019 .
We ’ ve had four straight months of more than 3-million background checks going back to May , even before the riots in Minneapolis in early June spread across the nation .
In other words , the surge that started back in March never did truly subside , and the second wave of the Great Gun Run of 2020 kicked off before Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and looting .
The News & Observer editorial board seems desperate to try to blame the president for the record number of gun sales and new gun owners this year , because if they can pin it on Trump , they can ignore the fact that it ’ s the riots and looting itself that ’ s actually driven Americans to embrace their Second Amendment rights like never before .
This is another bad turn in a terrible year .
More guns won ’ t make people safer .
It will put them @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , a child finding a gun , a suicide or a family fight ending in gunfire .
And the risk is especially great for new gun owners unfamiliar with how to handle or store a gun .
Trump should be discouraging people from putting themselves and their loved ones at risk .
Instead , he ’ s defending a 17-year-old with a military-style rifle who went to Kenosha , Wis. , to defend property against vandalism by protesters .
He ended up shooting three people , killing two .
He faces multiple homicide @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the one incident specifically mentioned by the News & Observer .
They don ’ t mention the man charged with assault and battery for firing shots at Trump supporters in the Charlotte suburb of Fort Mill , South Carolina a few weeks ago .
Nothing about the riots in Raleigh , North Carolina in June that “ decimated ” the city ’ s downtown , in the words of a local real estate developer .
They don ’ t even mention the fact that homicides are soaring in Charlotte itself .
Then again @ @ @ @ @ @ @ those incidents help the narrative that the News & Observer ‘ s editorial board is trying to craft here .
They ’ d rather ignore the facts in favor of fiction , so long as they believe it hurts Trump ’ s chances of reelection in November , as the editors make clear in the conclusion of their pathetic screed .
Speaking of polls , the latest polling out of North Carolina has Joe Biden up by only two points , well within the margin of error .
Something tells me that ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s editorial board launched this desperate broadside against the president .
These so-called journalists don ’ t seem to be nearly as concerned about the safety of North Carolinians as they do about the possibility of Joe Biden going down to defeat .

In what may very well be the dumbest editorial of 2020, the Charlotte News & Observer is claiming that Donald Trump’s “fake fear” is what’s caused gun sales to soar to record highs. No, seriously.
Firearm sales surged when the pandemic forced a shutdown in March. Now sales are rising again as President Trump warns of U.S. cities being overrun by looting mobs while police are left helpless to respond for lack of funding and respect. Trump’s appeal to fear is a desperate fiction peddled by a trailing candidate who wants to shift the subject from his abject failure to respond to the pandemic. But it’s having an effect that’s as real as a bullet.
On today’s Bearing Arms’ Cam & Co, we pick apart the wild accusations on the part of the News & Observer editorial board, starting with their absurd assertion that gun sales have ever gone back to “normal” (or at least what they were in 2019) since the first COVID-19 shutdown orders sent sales spiraling upwards back in March. Take a look for yourself at the NICS background check numbers for 2020 in the graph below.
Every month since March has seen much higher numbers than what we saw in 2019. We’ve had four straight months of more than 3-million background checks going back to May, even before the riots in Minneapolis in early June spread across the nation.
In other words, the surge that started back in March never did truly subside, and the second wave of the Great Gun Run of 2020 kicked off before Trump ever said a word about the riots and looting. The News & Observer editorial board seems desperate to try to blame the president for the record number of gun sales and new gun owners this year, because if they can pin it on Trump, they can ignore the fact that it’s the riots and looting itself that’s actually driven Americans to embrace their Second Amendment rights like never before.
This is another bad turn in a terrible year. More guns won’t make people safer. It will put them at greater risk of an accidental shooting, a child finding a gun, a suicide or a family fight ending in gunfire. And the risk is especially great for new gun owners unfamiliar with how to handle or store a gun. Trump should be discouraging people from putting themselves and their loved ones at risk. Instead, he’s defending a 17-year-old with a military-style rifle who went to Kenosha, Wis., to defend property against vandalism by protesters. He ended up shooting three people, killing two. He faces multiple homicide charges.
The Kyle Rittenhouse case is the one incident specifically mentioned by the News & Observer. They don’t mention the man charged with assault and battery for firing shots at Trump supporters in the Charlotte suburb of Fort Mill, South Carolina a few weeks ago. Nothing about the riots in Raleigh, North Carolina in June that “decimated” the city’s downtown, in the words of a local real estate developer. They don’t even mention the fact that homicides are soaring in Charlotte itself.
Then again, why would they? None of those incidents help the narrative that the News & Observer‘s editorial board is trying to craft here. They’d rather ignore the facts in favor of fiction , so long as they believe it hurts Trump’s chances of reelection in November, as the editors make clear in the conclusion of their pathetic screed.
The best response to the state of Trump’s America – a land disrupted by his bungling response to the pandemic and divided by his exploitation of racial and political differences – isn’t to go to a gun store. It’s to go to the polls and convert retreat into advance.
Speaking of polls, the latest polling out of North Carolina has Joe Biden up by only two points, well within the margin of error. Something tells me that’s why the News & Observer‘s editorial board launched this desperate broadside against the president. These so-called journalists don’t seem to be nearly as concerned about the safety of North Carolinians as they do about the possibility of Joe Biden going down to defeat.


bearingarms--2020-09-03--Americans, Canadian Busted For Gun Running Scheme

Many Americans point to the north and say that we should emulate Canada ’ s gun control .
They ’ ve got quite a bit of it , to be sure .
It ’ s also a sure thing that they don ’ t have quite as much violent crime as the United States .
What ’ s not such a sure thing is that these two facts are remotely related .
Especially since we know guns are smuggled into Canada all the time .
The Nova Scotia shooter , for example , smuggled his guns into the country from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ both nations designed to prevent that kind of thing .
Now , a group of men have been arrested for trying to do the same thing .
Federal agents arrested seven men Wednesday in connection with a conspiracy to illegally traffic firearms to Canada .
A federal grand jury charged the co-conspirators in an indictment returned on Aug. 19 and unsealed Wednesday afternoon .
In total , it is believed that the defendants conspired to smuggle more than 30 guns from Ohio to Canada from approximately July of 2018 through about the middle @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the defendants acquired firearms both legally and illegally , stockpiled the firearms , and smuggled them to Canada in order to resell them for a profit .
It is alleged the group bought guns both through private sales and through straw purchases at gun shows .
And that ’ s what happens when gun laws tighten up in one country .
Someone somewhere else will figure out how to funnel guns into that country for fun and profit .
Well , mostly profit .
Of course , some will try to claim @ @ @ @ @ @ @ laws , people wouldn ’ t be trying to smuggle guns from the U.S. into Canada .
However , note that they used straw purchases as well .
That means they were prepared to buy guns from lawful gun sellers and smuggle them north .
Unless you created a total gun ban , no law would actually stop those guns from flowing .
So what if there was a total gun ban ?
That would stop Americans from buying guns here and smuggling them north , right ?
Maybe .
But then guns @ @ @ @ @ @ @ much like drugs are .
Let ’ s be clear , though .
Those smuggled guns wouldn ’ t be going to the collectors .
They wouldn ’ t be funneled to the guy who simply loves guns for the mechanical marvels that they are .
Oh no .
Those firearms would be going to the worst society has to offer .
They ’ ll go to the criminals who seek to prey upon our society .
They ’ ll go to the scum of the Earth .
( No , not Twilight @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Earth . )
Meanwhile , we , the good people of this country , would be rendered powerless .
They ’ d be completely unable to defend themselves from the bigger , stronger , and/or better armed criminals .
So long as there is a demand for something that actually exists , there will be people who will meet that demand .
It doesn ’ t matter whether it ’ s lawful or not , someone will find a way to make a buck off that demand .
Kinda like the people smuggling @ @ @ @

Many Americans point to the north and say that we should emulate Canada’s gun control. They’ve got quite a bit of it, to be sure. It’s also a sure thing that they don’t have quite as much violent crime as the United States. What’s not such a sure thing is that these two facts are remotely related.
Especially since we know guns are smuggled into Canada all the time.
The Nova Scotia shooter, for example, smuggled his guns into the country from the U.S. despite laws in place in both nations designed to prevent that kind of thing.
Now, a group of men have been arrested for trying to do the same thing.
Federal agents arrested seven men Wednesday in connection with a conspiracy to illegally traffic firearms to Canada. A federal grand jury charged the co-conspirators in an indictment returned on Aug. 19 and unsealed Wednesday afternoon. In total, it is believed that the defendants conspired to smuggle more than 30 guns from Ohio to Canada from approximately July of 2018 through about the middle of 2019. According to the indictment, the defendants acquired firearms both legally and illegally, stockpiled the firearms, and smuggled them to Canada in order to resell them for a profit. It is alleged the group bought guns both through private sales and through straw purchases at gun shows.
And that’s what happens when gun laws tighten up in one country. Someone somewhere else will figure out how to funnel guns into that country for fun and profit. Well, mostly profit.
Of course, some will try to claim that if we tightened our own gun laws, people wouldn’t be trying to smuggle guns from the U.S. into Canada. However, note that they used straw purchases as well. That means they were prepared to buy guns from lawful gun sellers and smuggle them north. Unless you created a total gun ban, no law would actually stop those guns from flowing.
So what if there was a total gun ban? That would stop Americans from buying guns here and smuggling them north, right?
Maybe. But then guns would just be smuggled into the U.S. much like drugs are.
Let’s be clear, though. Those smuggled guns wouldn’t be going to the collectors. They wouldn’t be funneled to the guy who simply loves guns for the mechanical marvels that they are.
Oh no. Those firearms would be going to the worst society has to offer. They’ll go to the criminals who seek to prey upon our society. They’ll go to the scum of the Earth. (No, not Twilight fans. The other scum of the Earth.)
Meanwhile, we, the good people of this country, would be rendered powerless. They’d be completely unable to defend themselves from the bigger, stronger, and/or better armed criminals.
So long as there is a demand for something that actually exists, there will be people who will meet that demand. It doesn’t matter whether it’s lawful or not, someone will find a way to make a buck off that demand.
Kinda like the people smuggling guns to Canada.