bearingarms--2020-09-22--Louisville Preps For Riots In Advance Of Breonna Taylor Decision

While authorities say they don ’ t know when Kentucky Attorney General Daniel Cameron will announce his findings in the Breonna Taylor case , Louisville ’ s mayor and the Louisville Metro Police Department both declared a state of emergency early Tuesday , shutting off access to the city ’ s downtown in preparation for riots and violence that may take place once the grand jury ’ s findings are released .
Cameron ’ s office has been investigating Taylor ’ s death for several months , but the process has been shrouded in secrecy , and there are a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ come from his office .
Some sources have stated anonymously that Cameron has already presented his findings to a grand jury , so the AG could release any indictments handed down , but it ’ s also possible that Cameron could come out and announce that his office will present their case to a grand jury in the future .
There ’ s also the chance that Cameron could have determined that there ’ s no need for a grand jury to investigate Taylor ’ s death , which took place on March @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on her apartment opened fire after Taylor ’ s boyfriend Kenneth Walker fired a shot .
Walker claims he never heard police announce themselves , and that he believed he was firing at home invaders .
The city of Louisville itself just agreed to a $ 12-million settlement with Taylor ’ s family , but activists have been demanding the arrest of the officers involved , claiming that the officers should face second degree manslaughter charges at a minimum .
In a statement on Tuesday afternoon , Mayor Greg Fischer called for calm @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
As city officials lock down the downtown area in anticipation of violence , some Louisville residents are seeking peace of mind by purchasing a firearm .
On Tuesday afternoon I spoke with Derrick Meyers , the owner of River City Firearms in Louisville , who said his phone has been “ ringing off the hook ” from residents anxious to get ahold of a gun for self-defense .
Meyers added that like virtually every other gun store in the country , his supply of firearms has been greatly reduced because of months @ @ @ @ @ @ @ d normally have about 1,000 guns here , ” he told me during a conversation Tuesday afternoon , “ but right now I ’ m down to about 100.
” I truly hope that whatever Daniel Cameron announces , cooler heads will prevail .
Louisville has already been rocked by violence during the past few months of protest , with at least one death and several individuals shot in separate incidents this summer .
The violence has spread far beyond the site of the protests , riots , and looting in downtown .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ been murdered this year , a record high homicide rate for the city , and we still have three more months to go .
I hope that cooler heads will prevail , but I ’ m not confident that ’ s going to be the case .
Since the barricades are already going up across the downtown area , I ’ m guessing that city officials aren ’ t too confident that any protests will remain peaceful either .
In my earlier piece about the agitators in Portland who ’ ve begun moving @ @ @ @ @ @ @ city ’ s downtown hasn ’ t brought about their desired results , I quoted a guy named Stephen Green , who says it ’ s time for accomplices , not allies .
Have Louisville officials have considered the possibility that with access to downtown shut off , those would-be revolutionaries might find it easier to engage in their acts of destruction in the city ’ s residential neighborhoods instead ?
Things could get really squirrelly if the mob decides to vent its collective anger on occupied homes rather than deserted businesses .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ for a violent overthrow of the existing order , at some point the adherents of that ideology aren ’ t going to be satisfied with busting up a Starbucks .
Breonna Taylor ’ s death was a tragedy , and I have many questions about how and even why the raid on her home happened in the first place , given that the subject of the warrant ( Taylor wasn ’ t mentioned in the document ) had already been located elsewhere before the raid took place .
I believe Kenneth Walker when @ @ @ @ @ @ @ home invaders were coming through the door of the apartment , and that he didn ’ t hear police announce themselves .
Why would a guy with no criminal record and no reason to suspect that police were bursting through the door of his girlfriend ’ s home make the spur-of-the-moment decision to blindly engage in a shootout with cops ?
That makes no sense to me .
It ’ s pretty clear , though , this wasn ’ t a premeditated killing on the part of the Louisville police officers conducting the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ upon , and to me the most likely explanation is that Taylor didn ’ t hear police announce themselves and believed he was acting in self-defense and defense of his girlfriend .
This can be a tragedy without being an injustice , and those voices who are calling for the city to burn if the officers aren ’ t charged with murder aren ’ t seeking justice for Breonna Taylor .
They ’ re hoping to commit a few injustices of their own .
Kentucky ’ s governor , Democrat Andy Beshear , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to call out the National Guard , and given that Democrats have been increasingly trying to pose as the real law-and-order party , he ’ s going to be under a good deal of political pressure within his own party to stop any violence before it begins .
At the same time , a good chunk of the Left has yet to realize how toxic their ideology has become to the average American , and they ’ ll view sending out the Guard as a provocation .
I ’ d like to think @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cracks down on any violence in Louisville , but given what we ’ ve seen from virtually every elected Democrat in a position to stop the violent mobs , that ’ s probably just the small bit of the eternal optimist left in me talking .

While authorities say they don’t know when Kentucky Attorney General Daniel Cameron will announce his findings in the Breonna Taylor case, Louisville’s mayor and the Louisville Metro Police Department both declared a state of emergency early Tuesday, shutting off access to the city’s downtown in preparation for riots and violence that may take place once the grand jury’s findings are released.
Cameron’s office has been investigating Taylor’s death for several months, but the process has been shrouded in secrecy, and there are a wide range of potential announcements that could come from his office. Some sources have stated anonymously that Cameron has already presented his findings to a grand jury, so the AG could release any indictments handed down, but it’s also possible that Cameron could come out and announce that his office will present their case to a grand jury in the future. There’s also the chance that Cameron could have determined that there’s no need for a grand jury to investigate Taylor’s death, which took place on March 13th when police conducting a drug raid on her apartment opened fire after Taylor’s boyfriend Kenneth Walker fired a shot. Walker claims he never heard police announce themselves, and that he believed he was firing at home invaders.
The city of Louisville itself just agreed to a $12-million settlement with Taylor’s family, but activists have been demanding the arrest of the officers involved, claiming that the officers should face second degree manslaughter charges at a minimum.
In a statement on Tuesday afternoon, Mayor Greg Fischer called for calm in advance of any announcement by Cameron.
“Again, we do not know when the announcement will come, but we must prepare for it. Our goal is ensuring space and opportunity for potential protesters to gather and express their First Amendment rights after the announcement,” Fischer’s statement, sent at 12:47 p.m., said. “At the same time, we are preparing for any eventuality to keep everyone safe.”
As city officials lock down the downtown area in anticipation of violence, some Louisville residents are seeking peace of mind by purchasing a firearm.
On Tuesday afternoon I spoke with Derrick Meyers, the owner of River City Firearms in Louisville, who said his phone has been “ringing off the hook” from residents anxious to get ahold of a gun for self-defense. Meyers added that like virtually every other gun store in the country, his supply of firearms has been greatly reduced because of months of high demand. “I’d normally have about 1,000 guns here,” he told me during a conversation Tuesday afternoon, “but right now I’m down to about 100.”
I truly hope that whatever Daniel Cameron announces, cooler heads will prevail. Louisville has already been rocked by violence during the past few months of protest, with at least one death and several individuals shot in separate incidents this summer. The violence has spread far beyond the site of the protests, riots, and looting in downtown. Across Louisville more than 120 people have been murdered this year, a record high homicide rate for the city, and we still have three more months to go.
I hope that cooler heads will prevail, but I’m not confident that’s going to be the case. Since the barricades are already going up across the downtown area, I’m guessing that city officials aren’t too confident that any protests will remain peaceful either.
In my earlier piece about the agitators in Portland who’ve begun moving into neighborhoods since their destruction of the city’s downtown hasn’t brought about their desired results, I quoted a guy named Stephen Green, who says it’s time for accomplices, not allies.
Mr. Green said that he opposed the destruction of property, but that he also understood it. And he believes, generally, that the more direct protest tactics in residential areas are working because they make the movement more personal, and reveal who truly supports change.If someone is against the movement, they keep their lights off or refuse to raise their fist, he said, adding that taking the debate into homes and to families is essential.
Have Louisville officials have considered the possibility that with access to downtown shut off, those would-be revolutionaries might find it easier to engage in their acts of destruction in the city’s residential neighborhoods instead? Things could get really squirrelly if the mob decides to vent its collective anger on occupied homes rather than deserted businesses. When you have a movement that calls for a violent overthrow of the existing order, at some point the adherents of that ideology aren’t going to be satisfied with busting up a Starbucks.
Breonna Taylor’s death was a tragedy, and I have many questions about how and even why the raid on her home happened in the first place, given that the subject of the warrant (Taylor wasn’t mentioned in the document) had already been located elsewhere before the raid took place. I believe Kenneth Walker when he says that he and Taylor thought home invaders were coming through the door of the apartment, and that he didn’t hear police announce themselves. Why would a guy with no criminal record and no reason to suspect that police were bursting through the door of his girlfriend’s home make the spur-of-the-moment decision to blindly engage in a shootout with cops? That makes no sense to me.
It’s pretty clear, though, this wasn’t a premeditated killing on the part of the Louisville police officers conducting the raid. Officers responded to being fired upon, and to me the most likely explanation is that Taylor didn’t hear police announce themselves and believed he was acting in self-defense and defense of his girlfriend. This can be a tragedy without being an injustice, and those voices who are calling for the city to burn if the officers aren’t charged with murder aren’t seeking justice for Breonna Taylor. They’re hoping to commit a few injustices of their own.
Kentucky’s governor, Democrat Andy Beshear, has already said he’s ready to call out the National Guard, and given that Democrats have been increasingly trying to pose as the real law-and-order party, he’s going to be under a good deal of political pressure within his own party to stop any violence before it begins. At the same time, a good chunk of the Left has yet to realize how toxic their ideology has become to the average American, and they’ll view sending out the Guard as a provocation. I’d like to think that Beshear follows his political instincts and cracks down on any violence in Louisville, but given what we’ve seen from virtually every elected Democrat in a position to stop the violent mobs, that’s probably just the small bit of the eternal optimist left in me talking.


bearingarms--2020-09-22--Gun Rights Go Virtual With This Year's GRPC

It ’ s one of the biggest gatherings of Second Amendment advocates and activists , and this year ’ s Gun Rights Policy Conference was larger than ever before , despite all of the speakers and attendees taking part online instead of in person .
On today ’ s Bearing Arms ’ Cam & Co , Alan Gottlieb of the Second Amendment Foundation joins me to talk about the success of the virtual conference , which brought in more than 120 speakers from around the globe for the two-day event held this past weekend .
Gottlieb was so pleased by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the all-online conference that he told me it ’ s going to be difficult to go back to the traditional model that , while allowing activists to get some face-time with one another , also limited the number of people who could attend .
This year ’ s event featured speakers from not only the United States , but New Zealand , Canada , Italy , and several other foreign nations , and it would be difficult if not impossible for all of those attendees to travel halfway across the globe to be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to miss any or all of the Gun Rights Policy Conference , you can watch all 14+ hours of speakers on YouTube .
I was honored to appear on a panel discussing the media and the Second Amendment with my friends AWR Hawkins of Breitbart and Stephen Gutowski of the Washington Free Beacon , but I ’ d encourage you to take the time to check out all of the panel discussions and speeches , because there ’ s some great content available online .
I also had the opportunity to talk with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ battle .
With the news that Mitt Romney ’ s come out in favor of moving forward with a floor vote to confirm whoever Trump picks to fill the seat left vacant by the death of Ruth Bader Ginsburg , Gottlieb says he ’ s feeling more confident that the seat will be filled before Inauguration Day , if not Election Day itself .
Be sure to check out the entire interview with Gottlieb above , and stick around for more news like the armed pharmacist in Oklahoma who thwarted an armed robbery @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was in the right place at the right time to save a toddler who was choking to death on a piece of hard candy .

It’s one of the biggest gatherings of Second Amendment advocates and activists, and this year’s Gun Rights Policy Conference was larger than ever before, despite all of the speakers and attendees taking part online instead of in person. On today’s Bearing Arms’ Cam & Co, Alan Gottlieb of the Second Amendment Foundation joins me to talk about the success of the virtual conference, which brought in more than 120 speakers from around the globe for the two-day event held this past weekend.
Gottlieb was so pleased by both the scope and the reach of the all-online conference that he told me it’s going to be difficult to go back to the traditional model that, while allowing activists to get some face-time with one another, also limited the number of people who could attend. This year’s event featured speakers from not only the United States, but New Zealand, Canada, Italy, and several other foreign nations, and it would be difficult if not impossible for all of those attendees to travel halfway across the globe to be there in person.
If you happened to miss any or all of the Gun Rights Policy Conference, you can watch all 14+ hours of speakers on YouTube. I was honored to appear on a panel discussing the media and the Second Amendment with my friends AWR Hawkins of Breitbart and Stephen Gutowski of the Washington Free Beacon, but I’d encourage you to take the time to check out all of the panel discussions and speeches, because there’s some great content available online.
I also had the opportunity to talk with Gottlieb about the upcoming Supreme Court confirmation battle. With the news that Mitt Romney’s come out in favor of moving forward with a floor vote to confirm whoever Trump picks to fill the seat left vacant by the death of Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Gottlieb says he’s feeling more confident that the seat will be filled before Inauguration Day, if not Election Day itself.
Be sure to check out the entire interview with Gottlieb above, and stick around for more news like the armed pharmacist in Oklahoma who thwarted an armed robbery and a Little Rock police officer who was in the right place at the right time to save a toddler who was choking to death on a piece of hard candy.


bearingarms--2020-09-22--Appeal Issued Over Stolen Bond Guns

Appeal Issued Over Stolen Bond Guns

People have all kinds of hobbies .
Some of them I understand , many of them I don ’ t , which is fine .
They ’ re not my hobbies , after all .
One that I ’ ve always thought of as kind of cool are people who collect props from movies .
Not replica props , mind you , but the real deals .
As a movie lover , that ’ s a real thrill .
And , to be fair , one can get involved in such a hobby with relatively little cost , surprisingly .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the money , you can spend millions on props just as easily .
That means some of those props make attractive targets for bad guys .
That happened earlier this year when several guns used in James Bond movies were stolen .
Since then , there ’ s been no news .
Now , the authorities are issuing an appeal for information .
Police launched a fresh appeal Monday for witnesses after five guns used as props in James Bond films were stolen during a burglary in a London suburb .
One of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pistol featured in 007 movie “ Die Another Day ” — was recovered in a field in the days after the March 23 theft from a house in Enfield .
But the other four remain missing , including the Walther PPK used by Roger Moore in a “ View to a Kill ” as he pursues Grace Jones up the Eiffel Tower , before she jumps off with a parachute .
London ’ s Metropolitan Police issued new security camera footage showing a vehicle parked near the scene of the crime , apparently @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to come forward .
Now , my understanding is that these firearms were rendered inoperable , thus making them legal under British law .
That would mean whoever stole these guns weren ’ t looking for weapons for selling to the local drug dealers or anything .
No , this is likely the kind of theft where the thieves knew what they were after and precisely what it was .
That ’ s also supported by the evidence of the car surveilling the home prior to the break-in .
Of course , that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ left the Llama in a field .
Now , the weapon is rusted , by the way .
I mean , I don ’ t know that I ’ d go out of my way to buy a Llama , but one used in a Bond movie still likely had some value .
As things stand , no one is in danger because these guns are on the streets .
Again , they were reportedly rendered inoperable .
While someone could probably change that–they convert replica guns to firing weapons all the time @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fit with this kind of crime .
High-end collectors like this tend to be a fairly small community , so people would know who had guns like this .
Unfortunately , it ’ s unlikely that any American readers have any information on the crime , but if you do , please let someone know .
This is just a crappy thing to do to someone over what are nothing more than collectors ’ pieces .
Yes , they ’ re valuable , but there ’ s just no legitimate way to spin @ @ @ @ @ @ @ evil act .
I hope they ’ re caught and arrested and the victim gets the rest of his property back .

People have all kinds of hobbies. Some of them I understand, many of them I don’t, which is fine. They’re not my hobbies, after all.
One that I’ve always thought of as kind of cool are people who collect props from movies. Not replica props, mind you, but the real deals. As a movie lover, that’s a real thrill.
And, to be fair, one can get involved in such a hobby with relatively little cost, surprisingly. Yet, if you’ve got the money, you can spend millions on props just as easily.
That means some of those props make attractive targets for bad guys. That happened earlier this year when several guns used in James Bond movies were stolen.
Since then, there’s been no news. Now, the authorities are issuing an appeal for information.
Police launched a fresh appeal Monday for witnesses after five guns used as props in James Bond films were stolen during a burglary in a London suburb. One of the deactivated firearms — a yellow-handed Llama pistol featured in 007 movie “Die Another Day” — was recovered in a field in the days after the March 23 theft from a house in Enfield. But the other four remain missing, including the Walther PPK used by Roger Moore in a “View to a Kill” as he pursues Grace Jones up the Eiffel Tower, before she jumps off with a parachute. London’s Metropolitan Police issued new security camera footage showing a vehicle parked near the scene of the crime, apparently on reconnaissance, and urged any witnesses to come forward.
Now, my understanding is that these firearms were rendered inoperable, thus making them legal under British law. That would mean whoever stole these guns weren’t looking for weapons for selling to the local drug dealers or anything.
No, this is likely the kind of theft where the thieves knew what they were after and precisely what it was. That’s also supported by the evidence of the car surveilling the home prior to the break-in.
Of course, that doesn’t tell us why they left the Llama in a field. Now, the weapon is rusted, by the way. I mean, I don’t know that I’d go out of my way to buy a Llama, but one used in a Bond movie still likely had some value.
As things stand, no one is in danger because these guns are on the streets. Again, they were reportedly rendered inoperable. While someone could probably change that–they convert replica guns to firing weapons all the time, after all–it just doesn’t fit with this kind of crime. High-end collectors like this tend to be a fairly small community, so people would know who had guns like this.
Unfortunately, it’s unlikely that any American readers have any information on the crime, but if you do, please let someone know. This is just a crappy thing to do to someone over what are nothing more than collectors’ pieces. Yes, they’re valuable, but there’s just no legitimate way to spin this so it’s not an evil act.
I hope they’re caught and arrested and the victim gets the rest of his property back.


bearingarms--2020-09-22--OR Man Learns Basic Gun Safety The Hard Way

One of the most basic rules of gun safety is to treat every firearm you handle as if it ’ s loaded .
That means you keep the muzzle pointed in a safe direction , you don ’ t point your gun at anything you ’ re not willing to shoot , and you don ’ t play around or fondle the hardware .
Those are pretty simple rules to follow , but one Oregon man blatantly ignored all of the rules and nearly lost his life as a result of his idiocy when he ended up shooting himself while @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Sunday evening .
Investigators said the 29-year-old man was waiting in the checkout line , when he unholstered his Glock 9mm semi-automatic pistol from his waistband “ so that he could show it off to a friend.
” As the man put the gun back in the front of his pants , he accidentally pulled the trigger , according to police .
Police said the bullet narrowly missed his femoral artery .
Officers immediately provided first aid before medics arrived to take over treatment .
There ’ s a lot of idiocy to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ want to show your firearm to your friend , would you take your gun out in line at a grocery store ?
I live in rural Virginia , and it ’ s a very 2A-friendly place , but I guarantee that if I was chatting with a friend at the local market and pulled out my pistol so he could get a better look at it , I ’ d either be mistaken for an armed robber or presumed to be a moron without a lick of common sense .
Then there ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t keep his finger off the trigger when he put his gun back in his holster .
I ’ m not one who believes that appendix carry is inherently unsafe , but no matter how you carry , you need to practice taking your gun out of the holster as well as putting it back .
I can ’ t help but wonder just how much practice Ellingford had in re-holstering his handgun before he decided to whip it out to show his buddy at the grocery store .
Ellingford is likely @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a little while , but that ’ s just the start of his trouble .
As it turns out , he doesn ’ t have a concealed carry license , and police say they ’ re treating the negligent discharge as a criminal matter , since he “ placed several people in danger ” with his dumb decisions .
Nicholas Ellingford learned the hard way that the rules of gun safety aren ’ t optional , and ignoring them doesn ’ t make you more manly .
In fact , Ellingford is lucky @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by shooting himself in the family jewels when he tried to put his gun back in his pants .
I doubt it ’ s a mistake that he ’ ll make twice , but it ’ s one he never should have made in the first place .

One of the most basic rules of gun safety is to treat every firearm you handle as if it’s loaded. That means you keep the muzzle pointed in a safe direction, you don’t point your gun at anything you’re not willing to shoot, and you don’t play around or fondle the hardware. Those are pretty simple rules to follow, but one Oregon man blatantly ignored all of the rules and nearly lost his life as a result of his idiocy when he ended up shooting himself while standing in line at a grocery store Sunday evening.
Investigators said the 29-year-old man was waiting in the checkout line, when he unholstered his Glock 9mm semi-automatic pistol from his waistband “so that he could show it off to a friend.” As the man put the gun back in the front of his pants, he accidentally pulled the trigger, according to police. Police said the bullet narrowly missed his femoral artery. Officers immediately provided first aid before medics arrived to take over treatment.
There’s a lot of idiocy to unpack here. Why, if you want to show your firearm to your friend, would you take your gun out in line at a grocery store? I live in rural Virginia, and it’s a very 2A-friendly place, but I guarantee that if I was chatting with a friend at the local market and pulled out my pistol so he could get a better look at it, I’d either be mistaken for an armed robber or presumed to be a moron without a lick of common sense.
Then there’s the fact that Nicholas Ellingford couldn’t keep his finger off the trigger when he put his gun back in his holster. I’m not one who believes that appendix carry is inherently unsafe, but no matter how you carry, you need to practice taking your gun out of the holster as well as putting it back. I can’t help but wonder just how much practice Ellingford had in re-holstering his handgun before he decided to whip it out to show his buddy at the grocery store.
Ellingford is likely going to be in the hospital for a little while, but that’s just the start of his trouble. As it turns out, he doesn’t have a concealed carry license, and police say they’re treating the negligent discharge as a criminal matter, since he “placed several people in danger” with his dumb decisions.
Nicholas Ellingford learned the hard way that the rules of gun safety aren’t optional, and ignoring them doesn’t make you more manly. In fact, Ellingford is lucky that he didn’t emasculate himself by shooting himself in the family jewels when he tried to put his gun back in his pants. I doubt it’s a mistake that he’ll make twice, but it’s one he never should have made in the first place.


bearingarms--2020-09-22--Wrongful Death Suit Betrays Public's Ignorance Of Guns

Sometimes , good people get shot and killed .
It ’ s awful when it happens , but sometimes it ’ s understandable .
It ’ s never easy to hear , but a lot of people really don ’ t know what the hell they ’ re doing when it comes to firearms .
That ’ s never a good thing , but it ’ s especially problematic when someone acts according to what the public thinks someone with a gun should do rather than what they should actually be doing .
That can turn deadly .
In fact @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wrongful death lawsuit .
The family of David McAtee , who was killed by a National Guard member on June 1 , is suing Louisville Metro police officers and Kentucky National Guard members who were on the scene that night .
A complaint filed Monday in Jefferson County Circuit Court alleges wrongful death and excessive force and seeks unspecified monetary damages as well as a jury trial .
Shortly after arriving at the intersection of 26th Street and Broadway shortly after midnight on June 1 , police , supported by Guard members , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ crowd , then switched to firing live rounds .
This was the fourth consecutive night of protests over the police killing of Breonna Taylor , and the city was under a curfew .
Officials said police and Guard members fired gunshots in response to a shot fired by McAtee from the doorway of his restaurant , Yaya ’ s BBQ , where he also lived .
But attorney Steve Romines , who is representing McAtee ’ s mother Odessa Riley and cousin Machelle McAtee in the wrongful death suit , said McAtee would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he considered many of them to be friends .
In the complaint , Romines wrote police encouraged McAtee to obtain a pistol for self-defense .
Romines said McAtee may have fired his gun as a warning .
In the complaint , he said that just before McAtee “ looked out his restaurant door and raised his arm in the air , ” defendants fired pepper balls toward the door , several of which struck his niece .
Now , I get that this is just speculation by Romines , but it seems reasonable @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with the police , gets shot after supposedly firing at police ?
Yeah , the idea of firing a warning shot isn ’ t implausible .
See , there ’ s this public perception that warning shots are something people should do .
They ’ re not .
By and large , if you ’ re justified in firing your weapon at all , you ’ re justified in shooting the person you would be trying to warn .
“ Warning shots ” in any other circumstance tends to be called “ aggravated @ @ @ @ @ @ @ shot , at that point he became a hostile target .
If someone ’ s firing in my general direction , I ’ m not going to calculated their point of aim before returning fire .
I ’ m going to consider them a threat to my life and limb .
The problem , though , is that people still believe this is something that should be done .
Hell , even presidential candidates have advocated for this nonsense .
Look , let me tell you here and now .
If you think @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t do it .
Just don ’ t .

Sometimes, good people get shot and killed. It’s awful when it happens, but sometimes it’s understandable.
It’s never easy to hear, but a lot of people really don’t know what the hell they’re doing when it comes to firearms. That’s never a good thing, but it’s especially problematic when someone acts according to what the public thinks someone with a gun should do rather than what they should actually be doing.
That can turn deadly. In fact, one case has led to a wrongful death lawsuit.
The family of David McAtee, who was killed by a National Guard member on June 1, is suing Louisville Metro police officers and Kentucky National Guard members who were on the scene that night. A complaint filed Monday in Jefferson County Circuit Court alleges wrongful death and excessive force and seeks unspecified monetary damages as well as a jury trial. Shortly after arriving at the intersection of 26th Street and Broadway shortly after midnight on June 1, police, supported by Guard members, fired pepper balls to disperse a peaceful crowd, then switched to firing live rounds. This was the fourth consecutive night of protests over the police killing of Breonna Taylor, and the city was under a curfew. Officials said police and Guard members fired gunshots in response to a shot fired by McAtee from the doorway of his restaurant, Yaya’s BBQ, where he also lived. But attorney Steve Romines, who is representing McAtee’s mother Odessa Riley and cousin Machelle McAtee in the wrongful death suit, said McAtee would not have knowingly shot at police because he considered many of them to be friends. In the complaint, Romines wrote police encouraged McAtee to obtain a pistol for self-defense. Romines said McAtee may have fired his gun as a warning. In the complaint, he said that just before McAtee “looked out his restaurant door and raised his arm in the air,” defendants fired pepper balls toward the door, several of which struck his niece.
And there’s the problem.
Now, I get that this is just speculation by Romines, but it seems reasonable. A reportedly good man, friendly with the police, gets shot after supposedly firing at police? Yeah, the idea of firing a warning shot isn’t implausible.
It doesn’t matter, though.
See, there’s this public perception that warning shots are something people should do. They’re not. By and large, if you’re justified in firing your weapon at all, you’re justified in shooting the person you would be trying to warn. “Warning shots” in any other circumstance tends to be called “aggravated assault.”
If McAtee fired a warning shot, at that point he became a hostile target. If someone’s firing in my general direction, I’m not going to calculated their point of aim before returning fire. I’m going to consider them a threat to my life and limb.
The problem, though, is that people still believe this is something that should be done. Hell, even presidential candidates have advocated for this nonsense.
Look, let me tell you here and now. If you think warning shots are a thing, don’t do it. Just don’t.


bearingarms--2020-09-22--Albuquerque City Council Shoots Down Gun Control Bills

In a somewhat surprising move , the Albuquerque City Council did the right thing on Monday night by rejecting a pair of local gun control bills that would have violated the state ’ s firearm preemption law , despite pressure from anti-gun activists and Mayor Tim Keller to adopt the local ordinances in the name of public safety .
One measure would have required legal gun owners to keep their firearms under lock and key unless it was under the direct control of the gun owner .
City Council President Pat Davis said the measure was designed to prevent guns @ @ @ @ @ @ @ KRQE-TV , several council members objected to the language and wondered why the city would try to impose restrictions on legal gun owners instead of focusing efforts on stopping people from breaking into homes and cars in the first place .
“ It seems strange we would put requirements on law-abiding citizens and yet we have criminals who have guns , ” Councilor Trudy Jones said .
“ We , the honest law-abiding citizens , would be in the same category if we would not comply.
” The last bill , which makes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ any city property , was also shot down as councilors said responsible gun owners have the right to defend themselves .
“ I don ’ t feel safe , ” Councilor Brook Bassan said .
“ I want to be sure when we are in council chambers , if somebody comes in to attack us , I hope the good guys are there to protect us.
” I honestly didn ’ t expect either of these proposals to be rejected by the city council , but grassroots activism on the part of local @ @ @ @ @ @ @ role in stiffening the spines of some city council members .
Several of them reported that they ’ d received as many as 600 emails in opposition to the proposed ordinances , while only two residents sent in emails in support of the measures .
Gun control advocates , including Mayor Tim Keller , have been working hard over the past few months to curtail the Second Amendment rights of residents .
Keller signed an executive order back in June that banned firearms from city parks , claiming that any public space that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ groups ( no matter how infrequently ) is tantamount to an educational facility where guns are banned under state law .
The move quickly drew criticism from 2A groups and Black Lives Matter protesters , and even the local district attorney has so far refused to prosecute those arrested for violating the ban .
Cam Edwards has covered the 2nd Amendment for more than 15 years as a broadcast and online journalist , as well as the co-author of `` Heavy Lifting : Grow Up , Get a Job , Start a Family @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Jim Geraghty .
He lives outside of Farmville , Virginia with his family .
https : //bearingarms.com/author/camedwards/

In a somewhat surprising move, the Albuquerque City Council did the right thing on Monday night by rejecting a pair of local gun control bills that would have violated the state’s firearm preemption law, despite pressure from anti-gun activists and Mayor Tim Keller to adopt the local ordinances in the name of public safety.
One measure would have required legal gun owners to keep their firearms under lock and key unless it was under the direct control of the gun owner. City Council President Pat Davis said the measure was designed to prevent guns from being stolen, but according to KRQE-TV, several council members objected to the language and wondered why the city would try to impose restrictions on legal gun owners instead of focusing efforts on stopping people from breaking into homes and cars in the first place.
“It seems strange we would put requirements on law-abiding citizens and yet we have criminals who have guns,” Councilor Trudy Jones said. “We, the honest law-abiding citizens, would be in the same category if we would not comply.” The last bill, which makes it illegal to bring a gun onto any city property, was also shot down as councilors said responsible gun owners have the right to defend themselves. “I don’t feel safe,” Councilor Brook Bassan said. “I want to be sure when we are in council chambers, if somebody comes in to attack us, I hope the good guys are there to protect us.”
I honestly didn’t expect either of these proposals to be rejected by the city council, but grassroots activism on the part of local gun owners may have played a key role in stiffening the spines of some city council members. Several of them reported that they’d received as many as 600 emails in opposition to the proposed ordinances, while only two residents sent in emails in support of the measures.
Gun control advocates, including Mayor Tim Keller, have been working hard over the past few months to curtail the Second Amendment rights of residents. Keller signed an executive order back in June that banned firearms from city parks, claiming that any public space that’s used by students or school groups (no matter how infrequently) is tantamount to an educational facility where guns are banned under state law. The move quickly drew criticism from 2A groups and Black Lives Matter protesters, and even the local district attorney has so far refused to prosecute those arrested for violating the ban.
Questions were raised about the ordinance after Black Lives Matter protester Frankie Grady was arrested for having a gun on Civic Plaza during a demonstration last month, but police charged him with carrying a firearm on school grounds. On Sunday, those charges were dismissed. “I think the city is taking a position that they can apply this law to any public ground, and city property, where a school event may have once taken place or has once taken place, but obviously the district attorney’s office and I don’t agree,” said Ryan Villa, Grady’s attorney. Court documents for Grady reveal that the district attorney’s office dropped the charges because they were concerned about the “constitutionality and the legal basis for the charge.” District Attorney Raul Torrez reached out to the attorney general for guidance. A spokesperson from Torrez’s office sent KOB 4 the following statement: “Before pursuing any criminal prosecution under the City’s recent administrative order banning firearms on Civic Plaza, we have asked the attorney general for a formal opinion on the constitutionality of that measure. As we await the attorney general’s opinion, we will continue to work with our public safety partners to ensure the proper balance between the right to peaceful assembly and the right to keep and bear arms.”


bearingarms--2020-09-22--Dem Lawmaker Smears Bar Owner Who Committed Suicide

Jake Gardner was just trying to run his bar .
Unfortunately for him , he was attacked during one of the many riots that plague this nation .
Gardner , however , wasn ’ t inclined to just be a victim .
Instead of potentially being killed , he used his lawfully carried weapon and shot his attacker .
In the initial aftermath , his actions were ruled as self-defense .
Unfortunately , we live in a hysterical time and the mob pressured officials to appoint a special prosecutor to “ re-examine ” the case .
They filed for an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , you can get a ham sandwich indicted , but for many people , that was just the tip of the iceberg of what they wanted .
They wanted Gardner strung up .
Gardner probably knew this .
He probably doubted he ’ d get a fair trial .
Regardless of what he knew , he took is own life .
Now , though , we ’ ve got a Democratic state senator smearing the deceased veteran .
Without offering any evidence , Nebraska state Sen. Megan Hunt accused an Omaha man who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ties because he shot a black man who had been allegedly involved in attacking his business .
Jake Gardner , a white Omaha bar owner and former U.S. Marine , committed suicide on Sunday after he was indicted by a grand jury last week with “ manslaughter , attempted first-degree assault , terroristic threats , and weapon use ” for shooting a black man , James Scurlock , on May 30 .
At the time , Gardner was defending his bar , The Gatsby , against protestors and rioters who threw objects at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Jake Gardner would never have happened without the community , the people , who stood up for justice and demanded action from city officials .
Jake Gardner is gone , but the white supremacist attitudes that emboldened him are still with us today , ” Hunt wrote .
The indictment of Jake Gardner would never have happened without the community , the people , who stood up for justice and demanded action from city officials .
Jake Gardner is gone , but the white supremacist attitudes that emboldened him are still with us @ @ @ @ @ @ @ incident involving Gardner and Scurlock was originally ruled self-defense by Douglas County Attorney Don Kleine , a special prosecutor was assigned to the case to appease the public after social media outcry .
“ Cases should be decided in the courtroom — and not on social media , ” Stu Dornan , one of Gardner ’ s lawyers , said , noting that Gardner had received death threats over social media .
Gardner , a veteran , suffered traumatic brain injuries during his time in military service .
According to his lawyers , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tours in Iraq that Gardner “ felt like he was in a warlike environment during the chaos that engulfed downtown Omaha that night.
” Despite the circumstances and evidence about the deaths of both Scurlock and Gardner , Hunt continued her Twitter thread to claim that white supremacy motivated Gardner to shoot Scurlock , and that this racial angst requires more government action .
Honestly , this is the thing that makes it almost impossible to talk to the left anymore .
It ’ s not good faith disagreements on what ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s all about their view that anyone who disagrees with them is somehow racist .
Hunt has decided to label Gardner a white supremacist despite zero evidence supporting that claim .
The thing is , she doesn ’ t need to .
Absolutely no one except we on the right-leaning media will question her about it .
Jake Gardner was in a tough situation .
While there ’ s always the possibility that he fired when he didn ’ t have to ( I don ’ t think he did , but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that ) , but that doesn ’ t make him a racist .
It never did .
But Hunt will make her claims and go relatively unchallenged .
She won ’ t have to answer for her defamation .
Yet this will also loom over others who may think to act in self-defense , but might pause just a moment too long out of fear that they ’ ll be the next to be vilified .
Frankly , it ’ s my hope that the people of Nebraska remove Hunt from office so @ @ @ @ @ @ @ anything to anyone ever again .
She deserves to be bounced from office for this if nothing else .

Jake Gardner was just trying to run his bar. Unfortunately for him, he was attacked during one of the many riots that plague this nation. Gardner, however, wasn’t inclined to just be a victim. Instead of potentially being killed, he used his lawfully carried weapon and shot his attacker.
In the initial aftermath, his actions were ruled as self-defense.
Unfortunately, we live in a hysterical time and the mob pressured officials to appoint a special prosecutor to “re-examine” the case. They filed for an indictment and got it. Of course, you can get a ham sandwich indicted, but for many people, that was just the tip of the iceberg of what they wanted. They wanted Gardner strung up.
Gardner probably knew this. He probably doubted he’d get a fair trial. Regardless of what he knew, he took is own life.
Now, though, we’ve got a Democratic state senator smearing the deceased veteran.
Without offering any evidence, Nebraska state Sen. Megan Hunt accused an Omaha man who committed suicide Sunday of maintaining white supremacist ties because he shot a black man who had been allegedly involved in attacking his business. Jake Gardner, a white Omaha bar owner and former U.S. Marine, committed suicide on Sunday after he was indicted by a grand jury last week with “manslaughter, attempted first-degree assault, terroristic threats, and weapon use” for shooting a black man, James Scurlock, on May 30. At the time, Gardner was defending his bar, The Gatsby, against protestors and rioters who threw objects at the windows. “The indictment of Jake Gardner would never have happened without the community, the people, who stood up for justice and demanded action from city officials. Jake Gardner is gone, but the white supremacist attitudes that emboldened him are still with us today,” Hunt wrote. The indictment of Jake Gardner would never have happened without the community, the people, who stood up for justice and demanded action from city officials. Jake Gardner is gone, but the white supremacist attitudes that emboldened him are still with us today. https://t.co/IFw5ZXepAz — Senator Megan Hunt 😷 (@NebraskaMegan) September 21, 2020 While the incident involving Gardner and Scurlock was originally ruled self-defense by Douglas County Attorney Don Kleine, a special prosecutor was assigned to the case to appease the public after social media outcry. “Cases should be decided in the courtroom — and not on social media,” Stu Dornan, one of Gardner’s lawyers, said, noting that Gardner had received death threats over social media. Gardner, a veteran, suffered traumatic brain injuries during his time in military service. According to his lawyers, it was due to experience on his tours in Iraq that Gardner “felt like he was in a warlike environment during the chaos that engulfed downtown Omaha that night.” Despite the circumstances and evidence about the deaths of both Scurlock and Gardner, Hunt continued her Twitter thread to claim that white supremacy motivated Gardner to shoot Scurlock, and that this racial angst requires more government action.
Honestly, this is the thing that makes it almost impossible to talk to the left anymore.
It’s not good faith disagreements on what’s best for the country anymore. It’s all about their view that anyone who disagrees with them is somehow racist. Hunt has decided to label Gardner a white supremacist despite zero evidence supporting that claim. The thing is, she doesn’t need to. Absolutely no one except we on the right-leaning media will question her about it.
Jake Gardner was in a tough situation. While there’s always the possibility that he fired when he didn’t have to (I don’t think he did, but for the sake of argument and all that), but that doesn’t make him a racist. It never did.
But Hunt will make her claims and go relatively unchallenged. She won’t have to answer for her defamation.
Yet this will also loom over others who may think to act in self-defense, but might pause just a moment too long out of fear that they’ll be the next to be vilified.
Frankly, it’s my hope that the people of Nebraska remove Hunt from office so her vile rhetoric won’t mean anything to anyone ever again. She deserves to be bounced from office for this if nothing else.


bearingarms--2020-09-22--The Amateur Authoritarians Of Portland

The Amateur Authoritarians Of Portland

The protests , demonstrations , and civil unrest that have rocked downtown Portland for more than three months have been steadily moving out of the city center and into residential neighborhoods throughout the city , and on Monday the New York Times released a new report on what it describes as “ a more confrontational approach ” to the movement .
This being the New York Times , the reporting by Nellie Bowles is definitely slanted in its approach to the story , but it ’ s still worth a read to see how downright delusional some of Portland ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ demonstrations .
The piece begins with the story of Terrance Moses , whose own residential neighborhood was the site of demonstrations not long ago .
As Moses tells it , the march was mostly peaceful , at least until the protesters became enraged at the sight of an American flag .
“ It went from a peaceful march , calling out the names , to all of a sudden , bang , ‘ How dare you fly the American flag ?
’ ” said Mr. Moses , who is Black and runs a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , area .
“ They said take it down .
They wouldn ’ t leave .
They said they ’ re going to come back and burn the house down.
” Mr. Moses and others blocked the demonstrators and told them to leave .
“ We don ’ t go around terrorizing folks to try and force them to do something they don ’ t want to do , ” said Mr. Moses , whose nonprofit group provides support for local homeless people .
“ I ’ m a veteran .
I ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this story ’ s Everyman ; the guy who supports the right to peacefully protest , but can ’ t see how threatening to burn down someone ’ s home for flying the stars and stripes is going to advance the cause of equality or justice .
On the other side of the issue are guys like Stephen Green , who says that the downtown demonstrations aren ’ t enough , and that agitators need to confront residents where they live because “ we don ’ t need allies anymore .
We need @ @ @ @ @ @ @ thing if you can see something on TV , but if you can hear it and you can smell it in your house , that brings it home , ” said Mr. Green , who grew up in Portland .
“ We need people willing to say , ‘ I ’ m down to lose this friend because stuff needs to change .
I ’ m down to make my neighbor uncomfortable.
’ Being nice wasn ’ t changing anything.
” The American flag that generated controversy is displayed in Kenton , a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lush front gardens and ripe fruit trees .
Weeks after the confrontation , the husband and wife who fly the flag said they were fearful of retaliation from the roving protesters , who had found their phone number .
But they say they will not be intimidated into removing the flag .
“ I will not take my flag down , ” said the husband , who declined to provide his name in a brief interview .
The same night the protesters came to the couple ’ s door last month , they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and used restaurant picnic tables as fuel for fires .
They collected the colorful wooden dividers the neighbors had recently built for outdoor dining and set those ablaze as well .
Mr. Moses and others in the community ran into the protests with fire extinguishers .
Protesters that night broke into the Portland Police Association building and set it on fire .
A man was later seen scrubbing the sidewalk graffiti — a popular message was “ PPB = KKK , ” meaning that the Portland Police Bureau is the Ku Klux Klan @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the destruction of property , but that he also understood it .
And he believes , generally , that the more direct protest tactics in residential areas are working because they make the movement more personal , and reveal who truly supports change.If someone is against the movement , they keep their lights off or refuse to raise their fist , he said , adding that taking the debate into homes and to families is essential .
Working to do what , exactly ?
Create accomplices ?
It ’ s not like the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more residents to take to the streets .
We ’ re still talking about a fairly small group of several hundred individuals who are responsible for the protests , and the numbers don ’ t appear to be growing .
What really struck me was Green ’ s belief that the response ( or lack thereof ) from residents reveals to these demonstrators who “ truly supports change.
” If you don ’ t join the march or raise your fist in solidarity , you ’ re automatically on the wrong side of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ comes your way is justified in the minds of the would-be revolutionaries .
The Times describes a recent evening where black-masked antifa-types gathered at a local park to plan their direct action for the evening .
Pamphlets and fliers with topics like “ I Want To Kill Cops Until I ’ m Dead ” , “ Piece Now , Peace Later : An Anarchist Introduction to Firearms ” , and “ Three-Way Fight : Revolutionary Anti-Fascism and Armed Self Defense ” are handed out to the small crowd , who eventually decide that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ diverse a location for a protest .
Instead , the crowd commutes in cars to a neighborhood about 20 minutes away where they reassemble and begin their late night demonstrations .
Neighbors in impressive Craftsman-style homes pulled down their shades and turned off their lights , though many could be seen peering out of dark windows .
One woman stepped out of an expansive home looking angry ; upon seeing the crowd , she quickly retreated indoors .
A few young couples stood in their doorways .
A Black woman driving past honked @ @ @ @ @ @ @ onto his patio clapping and hollering in support of the passing march .
The group called for him to join .
He smiled and waved them on , still clapping .
They began to chant that he was spineless .
He looked worried .
But the march moved along , and he went back into his house .
“ You ’ ll never sleep tight , we do this every night , ” the protesters chanted .
Every night .
And so far , at least in Portland , the amateur authoritarians have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ intimidate residents into compliance .
No arrests , but instead the tacit approval of feckless city leaders like Mayor Ted Wheeler .
It ’ s easy to imagine what the reaction from the Times and the Left would be if the politics were reversed and a couple hundred Trump supporters were loudly and proudly marching through these neighborhoods every evening , threatening to burn down the homes of people displaying Biden/Harris signs .
They ’ d be called Nazis and brownshirts , and the press would be full of think pieces decrying the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Marxists , anarchists , and self-proclaimed Communists do it , on the other hand , it ’ s a “ carnival.
” What happens when the wannabe revolutionaries realize that these marches aren ’ t garnering the support that they want ?
Do they escalate even further , or do the demonstrations fizzle out ?
At this point , I wouldn ’ t bet on the demonstrators disappearing .
An increasing conflict appears to be what these people want , and if you ’ re not raising your fist in solidarity , they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the people .
It ’ s a recipe for disaster , aided and abetted by the inaction and cowardice of those who are supposedly in charge of the city .

The protests, demonstrations, and civil unrest that have rocked downtown Portland for more than three months have been steadily moving out of the city center and into residential neighborhoods throughout the city, and on Monday the New York Times released a new report on what it describes as “a more confrontational approach” to the movement. This being the New York Times, the reporting by Nellie Bowles is definitely slanted in its approach to the story, but it’s still worth a read to see how downright delusional some of Portland’s agitators have become in their nightly demonstrations.
The piece begins with the story of Terrance Moses, whose own residential neighborhood was the site of demonstrations not long ago. As Moses tells it, the march was mostly peaceful, at least until the protesters became enraged at the sight of an American flag.
“It went from a peaceful march, calling out the names, to all of a sudden, bang, ‘How dare you fly the American flag?’” said Mr. Moses, who is Black and runs a nonprofit group in the Portland, Ore., area. “They said take it down. They wouldn’t leave. They said they’re going to come back and burn the house down.” Mr. Moses and others blocked the demonstrators and told them to leave. “We don’t go around terrorizing folks to try and force them to do something they don’t want to do,” said Mr. Moses, whose nonprofit group provides support for local homeless people. “I’m a veteran. I’m for these liberties.”
Moses is this story’s Everyman; the guy who supports the right to peacefully protest, but can’t see how threatening to burn down someone’s home for flying the stars and stripes is going to advance the cause of equality or justice. On the other side of the issue are guys like Stephen Green, who says that the downtown demonstrations aren’t enough, and that agitators need to confront residents where they live because “we don’t need allies anymore. We need accomplices.”
“It’s one thing if you can see something on TV, but if you can hear it and you can smell it in your house, that brings it home,” said Mr. Green, who grew up in Portland. “We need people willing to say, ‘I’m down to lose this friend because stuff needs to change. I’m down to make my neighbor uncomfortable.’ Being nice wasn’t changing anything.” The American flag that generated controversy is displayed in Kenton, a neighborhood of Portland with small bungalows, lush front gardens and ripe fruit trees. Weeks after the confrontation, the husband and wife who fly the flag said they were fearful of retaliation from the roving protesters, who had found their phone number. But they say they will not be intimidated into removing the flag. “I will not take my flag down,” said the husband, who declined to provide his name in a brief interview. The same night the protesters came to the couple’s door last month, they marched into Kenton’s commercial district and used restaurant picnic tables as fuel for fires. They collected the colorful wooden dividers the neighbors had recently built for outdoor dining and set those ablaze as well. Mr. Moses and others in the community ran into the protests with fire extinguishers. Protesters that night broke into the Portland Police Association building and set it on fire. A man was later seen scrubbing the sidewalk graffiti — a popular message was “PPB = KKK,” meaning that the Portland Police Bureau is the Ku Klux Klan. Mr. Green said that he opposed the destruction of property, but that he also understood it. And he believes, generally, that the more direct protest tactics in residential areas are working because they make the movement more personal, and reveal who truly supports change.If someone is against the movement, they keep their lights off or refuse to raise their fist, he said, adding that taking the debate into homes and to families is essential.
Working to do what, exactly? Create accomplices? It’s not like the nightly excursions into residential neighborhoods have caused more residents to take to the streets. We’re still talking about a fairly small group of several hundred individuals who are responsible for the protests, and the numbers don’t appear to be growing.
What really struck me was Green’s belief that the response (or lack thereof) from residents reveals to these demonstrators who “truly supports change.” If you don’t join the march or raise your fist in solidarity, you’re automatically on the wrong side of history and any damage or destruction that comes your way is justified in the minds of the would-be revolutionaries.
The Times describes a recent evening where black-masked antifa-types gathered at a local park to plan their direct action for the evening. Pamphlets and fliers with topics like “I Want To Kill Cops Until I’m Dead”, “Piece Now, Peace Later: An Anarchist Introduction to Firearms”, and “Three-Way Fight: Revolutionary Anti-Fascism and Armed Self Defense” are handed out to the small crowd, who eventually decide that the neighborhood around the park is too diverse a location for a protest.
Instead, the crowd commutes in cars to a neighborhood about 20 minutes away where they reassemble and begin their late night demonstrations.
Neighbors in impressive Craftsman-style homes pulled down their shades and turned off their lights, though many could be seen peering out of dark windows. One woman stepped out of an expansive home looking angry; upon seeing the crowd, she quickly retreated indoors. A few young couples stood in their doorways. A Black woman driving past honked and cheered. One white man stepped onto his patio clapping and hollering in support of the passing march. The group called for him to join. He smiled and waved them on, still clapping. They began to chant that he was spineless. He looked worried. But the march moved along, and he went back into his house. “You’ll never sleep tight, we do this every night,” the protesters chanted.
Every night. And so far, at least in Portland, the amateur authoritarians have faced zero consequences for their attempts to intimidate residents into compliance. No arrests, but instead the tacit approval of feckless city leaders like Mayor Ted Wheeler.
It’s easy to imagine what the reaction from the Times and the Left would be if the politics were reversed and a couple hundred Trump supporters were loudly and proudly marching through these neighborhoods every evening, threatening to burn down the homes of people displaying Biden/Harris signs. They’d be called Nazis and brownshirts, and the press would be full of think pieces decrying the incipient fascism on display. When the Marxists, anarchists, and self-proclaimed Communists do it, on the other hand, it’s a “carnival.”
What happens when the wannabe revolutionaries realize that these marches aren’t garnering the support that they want? Do they escalate even further, or do the demonstrations fizzle out? At this point, I wouldn’t bet on the demonstrators disappearing. An increasing conflict appears to be what these people want, and if you’re not raising your fist in solidarity, they consider you to be an enemy of the people. It’s a recipe for disaster, aided and abetted by the inaction and cowardice of those who are supposedly in charge of the city.


bearingarms--2020-09-22--Why Biden Can't Be Trusted To Stop At "Assault Rifles"

Former Vice President Joe Biden has a long history in politics .
Through most of that time , he ’ s been pretty anti-gun .
In fact , one of his legislative “ accomplishments ” has been the passage of the 1994 Assault Weapon Ban .
He ’ s pretty proud of that .
As president , he says he ’ ll resurrect the ban .
That would be the same ban that has been shown to have had zero impact on crime , for the record .
That ban is a problem for most of us in the gun @ @ @ @ @ @ @ m of the opinion that following the Heller decision , it wouldn ’ t even be constitutional .
Yet he ’ s still going to push for it .
When gun rights people claim that Biden is going to take our guns , though , fact-checkers love step in and claim he ’ s said no such thing .
Sure…but there ’ s a problem .
See , there ’ s no reason to believe he ’ d stop at assault weapons , even if we didn ’ t care about those guns @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Second Amendment as an individual right .
During a September 2019 “ townhall ” hosted by New Hampshire ABC affiliate WMUR , Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden made clear that he does not believe the Second Amendment protects an individual right to keep and bear arms and that the U.S. Supreme Court decision in District of Columbia v. Heller was incorrect .
During the event , Biden was asked , “ Do you agree with the D.C. v. Heller decision in regards to protecting the individual right to bear arms that are in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lawful purposes ?
” Biden responded in part , “ If I were on the court I wouldn ’ t have made the same ruling .
OK , that ’ s number one.
” Later , the noted resume padder and law school plagiarist boasted , And I taught for years Constitutional law and separation of powers , I taught the Second Amendment .
And the Second Amendment is not absolute .
And we can argue , the fundamental argument is well regulated militia and all those things , I won ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the fundamental argument is the reason that was given as a right because we needed to be able to muster people to deal with an enemy called Great Britain we were fighting in a war .
Aside from his denunciation of Heller and denial that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to keep and bear arms , Biden also displayed a fundamental misunderstanding of the Bill of Rights .
The Second Amendment was not “ given as a right ” by the U.S. Constitution .
Rather , as the U.S. Supreme Court @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Amendment protects a right that pre-existed the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights .
In other words , he doesn ’ t believe that you , as an individual , has a right to keep and bear arms .
That tells us he thinks the Second Amendment prevents the government from barring states from having guns .
He doesn ’ t think there ’ s anything wrong with completely disarming you or me .
Now , with that view firmly in mind , I ’ d love for someone to tell me how @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at assault weapons ?
Don ’ t get me wrong , his position on any gun control firmly rules him unfit for public office , but the fact that he rejects the idea that the Second Amendment protects an individual right is especially problematic .
If the right to keep and bear arms isn ’ t an individual one , then what ’ s to stop him from next coming after bolt-action rifles that he ’ d likely deem “ sniper rifles ” or something similar ?
What about him coming after handguns @ @ @ @ @ @ @ weapon of choice for most criminals .
If you think gun control will stop criminals , you ’ re going to have to come to the conclusion that handguns are a problem sooner or later .
The truth of the matter is that the moment Biden would take office , all of our Second Amendment rights are up for grabs .
He won ’ t stop at assault weapons .

Former Vice President Joe Biden has a long history in politics. Through most of that time, he’s been pretty anti-gun. In fact, one of his legislative “accomplishments” has been the passage of the 1994 Assault Weapon Ban. He’s pretty proud of that.
As president, he says he’ll resurrect the ban. That would be the same ban that has been shown to have had zero impact on crime, for the record.
That ban is a problem for most of us in the gun rights community. Further, I’m of the opinion that following the Heller decision, it wouldn’t even be constitutional. Yet he’s still going to push for it.
When gun rights people claim that Biden is going to take our guns, though, fact-checkers love step in and claim he’s said no such thing.
Sure…but there’s a problem. See, there’s no reason to believe he’d stop at assault weapons, even if we didn’t care about those guns. He doesn’t see the Second Amendment as an individual right.
During a September 2019 “townhall” hosted by New Hampshire ABC affiliate WMUR, Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden made clear that he does not believe the Second Amendment protects an individual right to keep and bear arms and that the U.S. Supreme Court decision in District of Columbia v. Heller was incorrect. During the event, Biden was asked, “Do you agree with the D.C. v. Heller decision in regards to protecting the individual right to bear arms that are in common use and which are utilized for lawful purposes?” Biden responded in part, “If I were on the court I wouldn’t have made the same ruling. OK, that’s number one.” Later, the noted resume padder and law school plagiarist boasted, And I taught for years Constitutional law and separation of powers, I taught the Second Amendment. And the Second Amendment is not absolute. And we can argue, the fundamental argument is well regulated militia and all those things, I won’t get into that. I think that the fundamental argument is the reason that was given as a right because we needed to be able to muster people to deal with an enemy called Great Britain we were fighting in a war. Aside from his denunciation of Heller and denial that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to keep and bear arms, Biden also displayed a fundamental misunderstanding of the Bill of Rights. The Second Amendment was not “given as a right”by the U.S. Constitution. Rather, as the U.S. Supreme Court made clear in Heller, the Second Amendment protects a right that pre-existed the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights.
In other words, he doesn’t believe that you, as an individual, has a right to keep and bear arms. That tells us he thinks the Second Amendment prevents the government from barring states from having guns. He doesn’t think there’s anything wrong with completely disarming you or me.
Now, with that view firmly in mind, I’d love for someone to tell me how anyone could trust Biden to just stop at assault weapons? Don’t get me wrong, his position on any gun control firmly rules him unfit for public office, but the fact that he rejects the idea that the Second Amendment protects an individual right is especially problematic.
If the right to keep and bear arms isn’t an individual one, then what’s to stop him from next coming after bolt-action rifles that he’d likely deem “sniper rifles” or something similar? What about him coming after handguns? After all, handguns are the weapon of choice for most criminals. If you think gun control will stop criminals, you’re going to have to come to the conclusion that handguns are a problem sooner or later.
The truth of the matter is that the moment Biden would take office, all of our Second Amendment rights are up for grabs. He won’t stop at assault weapons.
That’s just his starting position.


bearingarms--2020-09-23--Bloomberg Bets On Felons To Deliver Florida To Biden

Gun control sugar daddy Michael Bloomberg is already spending $ 100-million on ads supporting Joe Biden in the state of Florida between now and November 3rd , but the anti-gun billionaire has ponied up tens of millions of additional dollars in order to put tens of thousands of convicted felons back on the voting rolls in time for Election Day .
Under Florida law , convicted felons can not have their voting rights restored until all outstanding court fines and fees have been paid , so Bloomberg and his allies have decided to do just that and pay off any @ @ @ @ @ @ @ convicted felons .
While Team Bloomberg is proclaiming that the move is simply about ending “ disenfranchisement and the discrimination that has always driven it , ” it turns out that not all felons are created equal in Bloomberg ’ s eyes , and some are far more valuable than others .
Bloomberg , who has committed at least $ 100 million to electing Biden in the state , raised the money from individuals and foundations over the past week , his advisers said .
He saw the donations as a more cost-effective @ @ @ @ @ @ @ column than investing money to persuade voters who already have the right to vote , a Bloomberg memo said .
“ We have identified a significant vote share that requires a nominal investment , ” the memo read .
“ The data shows that in Florida , Black voters are a unique universe unlike any other voting bloc , where the Democratic support rate tends to be 90 % -95 % .
” The memo noted that Biden was polling worse among Cuban American voters than Hillary Clinton , the 2016 nominee , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ margin of 3 to 1 .
Bloomberg ’ s associates are claiming that the billionaire ’ s move is primarily about bringing justice to disenfranchised felons , but as it turns out , his team has been pretty picky about who will benefit from his largesse .
This is pretty shameless on the part of Bloomberg , who , by the way , is perfectly content for all of these felons to still be disenfranchised when it comes to the restoration of their right to keep and bear arms .
He ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lifetime prohibition on ever exercising their Second Amendment rights again .
This isn ’ t about doing what ’ s right for democracy , it ’ s about getting Joe Biden elected .
Florida Rep. Matt Gaetz is already calling on the state ’ s Attorney General to open an investigation into Bloomberg ’ s spending , which could run afoul of a state law that makes it a third degree felony to “ directly or indirectly give or promise anything of value to another intending thereby to buy that person ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ corruptly influence that person or another in casting his or her vote.
” Team Bloomberg ’ s already admitted in its memo that the felons who are having their debts paid off have been targeted because of their likely votes for Biden .
Does that amount to an indirect gift intended to corruptly influence these individuals to vote Democrat ?
Bloomberg ’ s attorneys would likely argue that no , these individuals were already likely to vote for Biden .
Bloomberg ’ s just giving them the chance to do so by paying @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their right to vote .
That ’ s the defense , but a prosecutor could argue that Bloomberg ’ s payments are in effect an attempt at buying votes , though in this case it ’ s the state that ’ s being paid off , not the felons themselves .
I don ’ t know what Attorney General Ashley Moody will decide to do with Bloomberg ’ s vote-buying operation , but it ’ s clear that Bloomberg ’ s move is based on partisan politics , not kind-hearted philanthropy .

Gun control sugar daddy Michael Bloomberg is already spending $100-million on ads supporting Joe Biden in the state of Florida between now and November 3rd, but the anti-gun billionaire has ponied up tens of millions of additional dollars in order to put tens of thousands of convicted felons back on the voting rolls in time for Election Day. Under Florida law, convicted felons cannot have their voting rights restored until all outstanding court fines and fees have been paid, so Bloomberg and his allies have decided to do just that and pay off any debts to the state owed by some convicted felons.
While Team Bloomberg is proclaiming that the move is simply about ending “disenfranchisement and the discrimination that has always driven it,” it turns out that not all felons are created equal in Bloomberg’s eyes, and some are far more valuable than others.
Bloomberg, who has committed at least $100 million to electing Biden in the state, raised the money from individuals and foundations over the past week, his advisers said. He saw the donations as a more cost-effective way of adding votes to the Democratic column than investing money to persuade voters who already have the right to vote, a Bloomberg memo said. “We have identified a significant vote share that requires a nominal investment,” the memo read. “The data shows that in Florida, Black voters are a unique universe unlike any other voting bloc, where the Democratic support rate tends to be 90%-95%.” The memo noted that Biden was polling worse among Cuban American voters than Hillary Clinton, the 2016 nominee, while winning other Hispanic groups by a margin of 3 to 1.
Bloomberg’s associates are claiming that the billionaire’s move is primarily about bringing justice to disenfranchised felons, but as it turns out, his team has been pretty picky about who will benefit from his largesse.
“Mike wanted to get this done for two reasons,” said a Bloomberg adviser, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss private conversations. “One, because it’s the right thing to do for the democracy. And two, because it immediately activates tens of thousands of voters who are predisposed to vote for Joe Biden.”
This is pretty shameless on the part of Bloomberg, who, by the way, is perfectly content for all of these felons to still be disenfranchised when it comes to the restoration of their right to keep and bear arms. He’s fine with their crimes amounting to a lifetime prohibition on ever exercising their Second Amendment rights again. This isn’t about doing what’s right for democracy, it’s about getting Joe Biden elected.
Florida Rep. Matt Gaetz is already calling on the state’s Attorney General to open an investigation into Bloomberg’s spending, which could run afoul of a state law that makes it a third degree felony to “directly or indirectly give or promise anything of value to another intending thereby to buy that person’s or another’s vote or to corruptly influence that person or another in casting his or her vote.”
Team Bloomberg’s already admitted in its memo that the felons who are having their debts paid off have been targeted because of their likely votes for Biden. Does that amount to an indirect gift intended to corruptly influence these individuals to vote Democrat? Bloomberg’s attorneys would likely argue that no, these individuals were already likely to vote for Biden. Bloomberg’s just giving them the chance to do so by paying off their fines and fees and restoring their right to vote.
That’s the defense, but a prosecutor could argue that Bloomberg’s payments are in effect an attempt at buying votes, though in this case it’s the state that’s being paid off, not the felons themselves. I don’t know what Attorney General Ashley Moody will decide to do with Bloomberg’s vote-buying operation, but it’s clear that Bloomberg’s move is based on partisan politics, not kind-hearted philanthropy.


bearingarms--2020-09-23--Rage In Louisville After Breonna Taylor Grand Jury Announcement

I had just started my VIP Gold live chat with HotAir ’ s Ed Morrissey when the news broke about a Kentucky grand jury indicting Louisville police officer Brett Hankinson on three charges of wanton endangerment in the raid on Breonna Taylor ’ s apartment that led to her being killed by police back in March , and my immediate reaction upon hearing the news was “ uh oh.
” Taylor ’ s family and attorney Benjamin Crump had said before the grand jury ’ s decision was released that anything less than a second-degree manslaughter charge would be considered @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the demonstrators who ’ ve taken to the streets of Louisville in recent months had been demanding the arrest of the officers who conducted the raid on murder charges .
Given the circumstances that led to Taylor ’ s death , neither of those were realistic possibilities , but the wanton endangerment charge isn ’ t likely to please anyone either , and the demonstrations have already begun in Louisville , where police say the National Guard will be out to try to ensure that protests over the decision remain peaceful .
Kentucky @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he said on Tuesday afternoon that Taylor ’ s death was and is a tragedy , but given the fact that the Louisville police officers who fired into Taylor ’ s apartment were actually returning fire , a murder or even manslaughter charge was going to be a stretch .
Breonna Taylor ’ s boyfriend Kenneth Walker has said that he didn ’ t hear police announce themselves , and believed that Taylor ’ s home was being broken into when he fired a shot as the front door burst open .
I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ case , but Cameron noted in his comments on Tuesday afternoon that an eyewitness who lives in the apartment complex did confirm that police had announced themselves before breaching the apartment door .
The most likely explanation as to how the events unfolded on March 13th is that both sides thought they were acting in self-defense .
Kenneth Walker believed he was protecting himself and his girlfriend from home invaders , and police opened fire after Walker fired a shot .
Walker was originally charged with attempted murder , but prosecutors dropped the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ did say that they could file additional charges once the investigation had concluded .
How strong is the case against Hankinson ?
Prosecutors will have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the officer “ under circumstances manifesting extreme indifference to the value of human life ” wantonly engaged “ in conduct which creates a substantial danger of death or serious physical injury to another person.
” Hankinson fired ten shots that night , but not into Taylor ’ s apartment .
Instead , his shots entered an adjacent unit .
Hankinson ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ far from exhibiting extreme indifference to the value of human life , he was acting to protect his fellow officers after one of them was wounded by Kenneth Walker as they breached the door .
Wanton endangerment is probably the most appropriate charge for the grand jury to bring , but I still think prosecutors are going to have their work cut out for them in order to obtain a conviction .
In the meantime , the streets of Louisville are already filling up with people , and it looks like things are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ m glad to see that the National Guard is already on its way to Louisville , and my fervent hope is that the tragic death of Breonna Taylor isn ’ t compounded by further tragedies when the sun sets on the city tonight .

I had just started my VIP Gold live chat with HotAir’s Ed Morrissey when the news broke about a Kentucky grand jury indicting Louisville police officer Brett Hankinson on three charges of wanton endangerment in the raid on Breonna Taylor’s apartment that led to her being killed by police back in March, and my immediate reaction upon hearing the news was “uh oh.”
Taylor’s family and attorney Benjamin Crump had said before the grand jury’s decision was released that anything less than a second-degree manslaughter charge would be considered “unacceptable,” and many of the demonstrators who’ve taken to the streets of Louisville in recent months had been demanding the arrest of the officers who conducted the raid on murder charges. Given the circumstances that led to Taylor’s death, neither of those were realistic possibilities, but the wanton endangerment charge isn’t likely to please anyone either, and the demonstrations have already begun in Louisville, where police say the National Guard will be out to try to ensure that protests over the decision remain peaceful.
Kentucky Attorney General Daniel Cameron was right when he said on Tuesday afternoon that Taylor’s death was and is a tragedy, but given the fact that the Louisville police officers who fired into Taylor’s apartment were actually returning fire, a murder or even manslaughter charge was going to be a stretch. Breonna Taylor’s boyfriend Kenneth Walker has said that he didn’t hear police announce themselves, and believed that Taylor’s home was being broken into when he fired a shot as the front door burst open. I still think that’s likely the case, but Cameron noted in his comments on Tuesday afternoon that an eyewitness who lives in the apartment complex did confirm that police had announced themselves before breaching the apartment door.
The most likely explanation as to how the events unfolded on March 13th is that both sides thought they were acting in self-defense. Kenneth Walker believed he was protecting himself and his girlfriend from home invaders, and police opened fire after Walker fired a shot. Walker was originally charged with attempted murder, but prosecutors dropped the charge back in May, though they did say that they could file additional charges once the investigation had concluded.
How strong is the case against Hankinson? Prosecutors will have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the officer “under circumstances manifesting extreme indifference to the value of human life” wantonly engaged “in conduct which creates a substantial danger of death or serious physical injury to another person.” Hankinson fired ten shots that night, but not into Taylor’s apartment. Instead, his shots entered an adjacent unit.
Hankinson’s attorneys will likely claim that, far from exhibiting extreme indifference to the value of human life, he was acting to protect his fellow officers after one of them was wounded by Kenneth Walker as they breached the door. Wanton endangerment is probably the most appropriate charge for the grand jury to bring, but I still think prosecutors are going to have their work cut out for them in order to obtain a conviction.
In the meantime, the streets of Louisville are already filling up with people, and it looks like things are already starting to go sideways.
The BLM crowd was marching in the street until they were stopped by Louisville police in riot gear. The police moved in and rioters started to fight with the police and arrests have been made. pic.twitter.com/Y9lAV76SJP — Julio Rosas (@Julio_Rosas11) September 23, 2020
I’m glad to see that the National Guard is already on its way to Louisville, and my fervent hope is that the tragic death of Breonna Taylor isn’t compounded by further tragedies when the sun sets on the city tonight.


bearingarms--2020-09-23--Second Amendment Support Shouldn't Be Partisan, But It Is

The Bill of Rights shouldn ’ t really leave a lot of room for debate .
People have a right to assemble , to voice their opinions , to be protected from search without reason , and to keep and bear arms , among other things .
This is quite plainly spelled out in the first ten amendments .
Yet , it ’ s often a topic of debate regardless .
More of then than not , especially with regard to guns , that debate tends to fall along partisan lines .
Respect for the Second Amendment should not be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Americans understand this fact .
After all , the Constitution is not a partisan document .
Before the U.S. Supreme Court recognized that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to keep and bear arms in District of Columbia v. Heller , a February 2008 Gallup poll found that 73 percent of Americans possessed this understanding of the Constitution while a mere 20 percent had the incorrect collective-right interpretation .
This wide-ranging respect for the Second Amendment holds .
According to a November 2019 Rasmussen poll , a mere 24 percent support @ @ @ @ @ @ @ broad bipartisan majority in favor of preserving the Second Amendment , support for the right to keep and bear arms need not break down along party lines .
However , the leaders and donor class of the national Democratic Party are intent on making it that way .
Consider the Draft 2020 Democratic Party Platform .
The document contains a gun-control plank that is replete with many of the worst gun controls put forward by the party ’ s most anti-gun politicians .
The platform declares that the party will criminalize the private @ @ @ @ @ @ @ transaction to take place pursuant to a government background check .
The platform expresses support for the elimination of the National Instant Criminal Background Check System ’ s three-day safety-valve provision , which permits a firearm transfer to proceed three days after a NICS check has been initiated if the FBI has not determined the transferee to be prohibited from possessing firearms .
This vital provision ensures that the federal government can not delay lawful gun transfers indefinitely and ensures that firearms transfers can take place even if the NICS system is overwhelmed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ gun owner licensing .
Taken together , these measures would undo the Second Amendment right by turning it into a privilege bestowed by government—something on which no one attempting to exercise a Constitutional right should be forced to rely .
What ’ s more , though , are that these very same people despise President Donald Trump and the police .
They don ’ t trust either and outright vilify both .
Yet they ’ d leave control of America ’ s weapons in these very same hands .
They want to severely @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and yet they want to make sure the people they despise are the ones with the easiest access to firearms .
It ’ s baffling .
At the end of the day , no one should completely trust any governmental entity ever .
Especially when it comes to something so fundamental as our right to keep and bear arms .
For almost 250 years , the Second Amendment has been there as a warning for any potential tyrant .
They ’ ve all known that if they push it too far , there @ @ @ @ @ @ @ back .
Frankly , there are times in the past when that probably should have been triggered , but times were different then .
People weren ’ t that upset about what happened , which is a shame .
But today , I ’ m not ready to trust any government with my rights .
No one should , especially when you think the sitting president is a tyrant and that law enforcement are borderline criminals .
If you hold those positions , you should probably also hold on tightly to your guns @ @ @ @ @ @

The Bill of Rights shouldn’t really leave a lot of room for debate. People have a right to assemble, to voice their opinions, to be protected from search without reason, and to keep and bear arms, among other things. This is quite plainly spelled out in the first ten amendments. Yet, it’s often a topic of debate regardless.
More of then than not, especially with regard to guns, that debate tends to fall along partisan lines.
It really shouldn’t.
Respect for the Second Amendment should not be a partisan issue. The vast majority of Americans understand this fact. After all, the Constitution is not a partisan document. Before the U.S. Supreme Court recognized that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to keep and bear arms in District of Columbia v. Heller, a February 2008 Gallup poll found that 73 percent of Americans possessed this understanding of the Constitution while a mere 20 percent had the incorrect collective-right interpretation. This wide-ranging respect for the Second Amendment holds. According to a November 2019 Rasmussen poll, a mere 24 percent support repealing the Second Amendment. With a broad bipartisan majority in favor of preserving the Second Amendment, support for the right to keep and bear arms need not break down along party lines. However, the leaders and donor class of the national Democratic Party are intent on making it that way. Consider the Draft 2020 Democratic Party Platform. The document contains a gun-control plank that is replete with many of the worst gun controls put forward by the party’s most anti-gun politicians. The platform declares that the party will criminalize the private transfer of firearms by requiring every firearm transaction to take place pursuant to a government background check. The platform expresses support for the elimination of the National Instant Criminal Background Check System’s three-day safety-valve provision, which permits a firearm transfer to proceed three days after a NICS check has been initiated if the FBI has not determined the transferee to be prohibited from possessing firearms. This vital provision ensures that the federal government cannot delay lawful gun transfers indefinitely and ensures that firearms transfers can take place even if the NICS system is overwhelmed. Further, the platform calls for gun owner licensing. Taken together, these measures would undo the Second Amendment right by turning it into a privilege bestowed by government—something on which no one attempting to exercise a Constitutional right should be forced to rely.
That’s true, it does.
What’s more, though, are that these very same people despise President Donald Trump and the police. They don’t trust either and outright vilify both. Yet they’d leave control of America’s weapons in these very same hands.
Honestly, it doesn’t make any sense.
They want to severely curtail the private ownership of firearms, and yet they want to make sure the people they despise are the ones with the easiest access to firearms. It’s baffling.
At the end of the day, no one should completely trust any governmental entity ever. Especially when it comes to something so fundamental as our right to keep and bear arms.
For almost 250 years, the Second Amendment has been there as a warning for any potential tyrant. They’ve all known that if they push it too far, there will be armed citizens ready to fight back. Frankly, there are times in the past when that probably should have been triggered, but times were different then. People weren’t that upset about what happened, which is a shame.
But today, I’m not ready to trust any government with my rights. No one should, especially when you think the sitting president is a tyrant and that law enforcement are borderline criminals. If you hold those positions, you should probably also hold on tightly to your guns, just like we do.