bearingarms--2020-07-27--Do Americans Need A "Gun Rights Champion?"

Were I not so invested in the outcome of the 2020 elections , I ’ d still pay very close attention to them .
After all , it should be a very interesting campaign season .
After all , we ’ ve gone from every poll showing overwhelming support for gun control to millions upon millions of Americans buying guns and finding out it ’ s not as easy as they were led to believe .
Like I said , it ’ s an interesting campaign season .
However , when it comes to gun rights , political campaigns are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , campaigns rarely change people ’ s minds .
They ’ re a reflection of what the public thinks , not a director of public opinion .
What we need , according to some , is a gun rights champion .
The Second Amendment is a centerpiece of American life .
Every political party in the United States has a position on the constitutionally-protected right to bear arms .
The firearm , like the free exercise of religion or the ability of Congress to levy taxes , is specifically mentioned in the Constitution @ @ @ @ @ @ @ however , the Second Amendment doesn ’ t have a vigorous champion in Congress .
The dominant political parties support an increasingly narrow reading of the Second Amendment , either demanding more government restrictions or meekly coming to its defense in only the least controversial scenarios .
Recent mob violence throughout the country only reinforces how important the Second Amendment can be for the protection of life and liberty .
There are congressmen and senators who will dutifully come to the defense of the Second Amendment in cases of emergency , but that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to preserve the Second Amendment requires two components : first , proactive engagement ; second , a systematic repeal of state and federal control .
This is no different than the approach to other political issues , like the right to life , taxes and education .
Members of Congress should not wait to defend the Second Amendment until a live event draws the media spotlight .
Congress has the time and bandwidth to debate Second Amendment issues , but chooses not to .
For more than a year , Congress spent precious @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Public Law No : 116-105 – Change the way harassing robocalls are reported and fined ; • Public Law No : 116-112 – Minting of a special coin in memory of former President George H.W .
Bush and former first lady Barbara Bush ; and There was one relatively pro-firearm bill , which allows states to use more federal money to build public target ranges .
Unfortunately , many “ sportsman bills ” tend to gather bipartisan support in spite of their pro-Second Amendment effects , serving as stalking horses for federal land @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , argues that despite pro-gun positions among many lawmakers , none seem willing to embrace the mantle and will allow anti-gun forces to score victory after victory .
The problem with this lack of a champion , as Reboli describes them , isn ’ t that we have no one to push bills in Congress .
The problem is that we don ’ t have people who can effectively push public opinion on guns and gun rights .
While much of that is because the mainstream media isn ’ t likely to do @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to promote such a person , we live in a world where the mainstream media no longer holds a monopoly on the news .
What we need is someone who can speak persuasively and smoothly and point out the fallacies inherent in pro-gun control arguments .
They can then present the facts as they are .
You ’ ll never convince the die-hard anti-gunners of much of anything pro-gun .
The Shannon Watts , Michael Bloombergs , and David Hoggs of the world would rather stay in their echo chambers rather than admit @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ re not the target .
No , the target are all of those who are willing to listen , but haven ’ t had anyone to listen to .
Here at Bearing Arms , we preach to the choir .
We give you news and information you can use or may find of interest .
We ’ re not going to be listened to by those who disagree with us , even if they might otherwise be open to it .
In other words , we ’ re probably not the champions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The real question is , does such a person exist ?
At this point , who knows ?

Were I not so invested in the outcome of the 2020 elections, I’d still pay very close attention to them. After all, it should be a very interesting campaign season. After all, we’ve gone from every poll showing overwhelming support for gun control to millions upon millions of Americans buying guns and finding out it’s not as easy as they were led to believe.
Like I said, it’s an interesting campaign season.
However, when it comes to gun rights, political campaigns are only part of the issue. See, campaigns rarely change people’s minds. They’re a reflection of what the public thinks, not a director of public opinion.
What we need, according to some, is a gun rights champion.
The Second Amendment is a centerpiece of American life. Every political party in the United States has a position on the constitutionally-protected right to bear arms. The firearm, like the free exercise of religion or the ability of Congress to levy taxes, is specifically mentioned in the Constitution. Unlike religious liberty or taxes, however, the Second Amendment doesn’t have a vigorous champion in Congress. The dominant political parties support an increasingly narrow reading of the Second Amendment, either demanding more government restrictions or meekly coming to its defense in only the least controversial scenarios. Recent mob violence throughout the country only reinforces how important the Second Amendment can be for the protection of life and liberty. There are congressmen and senators who will dutifully come to the defense of the Second Amendment in cases of emergency, but that is not enough. A serious approach to preserve the Second Amendment requires two components: first, proactive engagement; second, a systematic repeal of state and federal control. This is no different than the approach to other political issues, like the right to life, taxes and education. Members of Congress should not wait to defend the Second Amendment until a live event draws the media spotlight. Congress has the time and bandwidth to debate Second Amendment issues, but chooses not to. For more than a year, Congress spent precious legislative time and energy on: Public Law No: 116-109 – Enhance penalties for pirate radio stations;
Public Law No: 116-105 – Change the way harassing robocalls are reported and fined;
Public Law No: 116-112 – Minting of a special coin in memory of former President George H.W. Bush and former first lady Barbara Bush; and
Post office naming – Lots and lots of post offices There was one relatively pro-firearm bill, which allows states to use more federal money to build public target ranges. Unfortunately, many “sportsman bills” tend to gather bipartisan support in spite of their pro-Second Amendment effects, serving as stalking horses for federal land grabs.
The writer, Phil Reboli, argues that despite pro-gun positions among many lawmakers, none seem willing to embrace the mantle and will allow anti-gun forces to score victory after victory.
He’s not wrong.
The problem with this lack of a champion, as Reboli describes them, isn’t that we have no one to push bills in Congress. The problem is that we don’t have people who can effectively push public opinion on guns and gun rights. While much of that is because the mainstream media isn’t likely to do anything that could be seen as helping to promote such a person, we live in a world where the mainstream media no longer holds a monopoly on the news.
What we need is someone who can speak persuasively and smoothly and point out the fallacies inherent in pro-gun control arguments. They can then present the facts as they are.
You’ll never convince the die-hard anti-gunners of much of anything pro-gun. The Shannon Watts, Michael Bloombergs, and David Hoggs of the world would rather stay in their echo chambers rather than admit they might have been wrong. They’re not the target.
No, the target are all of those who are willing to listen, but haven’t had anyone to listen to.
Here at Bearing Arms, we preach to the choir. We give you news and information you can use or may find of interest. We’re not going to be listened to by those who disagree with us, even if they might otherwise be open to it. In other words, we’re probably not the champions I’m talking about here.
The real question is, does such a person exist?
At this point, who knows?


bearingarms--2020-07-27--Seattle Pushes To "Abolish Prisons"

Seattle Pushes To "Abolish Prisons"

The move to defund law enforcement has been one of the dumbest pushes in American history .
Even those who claim the term just means to repurpose funds so there ’ s less need for law enforcement–a goal that I could potentially get behind–fail to explain just how their plans will produce immediate results so we won ’ t need that law enforcement .
And those are the more sane members of the movement .
Others just want the outright anarchy we saw in the CHAZ before it was dismantled .
Now , though , it seems the woke of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ regular stupidity of talking about defunding police .
Oh no , now they want to take it a step further .
You would think after the insanity that was CHAZ/CHOP , Seattle might have taken a hard look at their relationship with law and order .
You would be wrong .
Seattle is in King County , and the County Executive ’ s Office is moving ahead with plans to “ abolish prisons.
” A leaked email published by Christopher F. Rufo , contributing editor at City Journal , shows active plans to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ close the county jail in Seattle .
The juvenile detention center would be converted to house other programs by 2025 .
According to Rufo , this plan will eliminate 60 % of the county ’ s jail capacity .
Meanwhile , Seattle ’ s City Council has majority support—at least seven of the nine members—to slash the police department budget by 50 % .
Mayor Jenny Durkan has said she would veto this drastic cut , supporting Police Chief Carmen Best .
Durkan has committed to cutting $ 76 million of the $ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Oddly , the “ Summer of Love ” mayor may be the only bulwark against complete insanity .
Rolfe has posted more documents from the County Executive ’ s office .
They appear to be for training or other meetings to discuss dismantling the criminal justice system .
The woke county leaders would probably call it “ reimagining ” criminal justice .
Others may call it managing a descent into chaos .
Now , not everyone who is arrested really needs to go to jail .
I think that ’ s something we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the problem is that some people will only learn after they ’ ve spent some time on the inside .
This is especially true of juveniles .
After all , their records are sealed when they reach adulthood so they start with a clean slate .
Many juvenile offenders clean up their acts and live productive lives , but how many wouldn ’ t if there hadn ’ t been significant repercussions for their actions ?
Dismantling prisons sounds good to the average leftist , but the truth is that the ramifications of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ horrific than defunding the police .
We ’ ve seen numerous inmates released due to COVID-19 carry out horrendous crimes .
Imagine what it would be like in there were no or minimal prisons for these people ?
Honestly , the “ woke ” just get dumber and dumber as the days march on .
And yet , they still get support from places like Seattle .
No , I don ’ t understand it either , but this is how it goes .
Unfortunately , Seattle ’ s stupidity might well have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as their failure to punish criminals may well allow those criminals to commit crimes elsewhere .
Not that Seattle officials give a damn .
They ’ re too busy making sure they ’ re seen with the correct opinions to worry about stuff like that .

The move to defund law enforcement has been one of the dumbest pushes in American history. Even those who claim the term just means to repurpose funds so there’s less need for law enforcement–a goal that I could potentially get behind–fail to explain just how their plans will produce immediate results so we won’t need that law enforcement. And those are the more sane members of the movement. Others just want the outright anarchy we saw in the CHAZ before it was dismantled.
Now, though, it seems the woke of Seattle aren’t content with the regular stupidity of talking about defunding police. Oh no, now they want to take it a step further.
You would think after the insanity that was CHAZ/CHOP, Seattle might have taken a hard look at their relationship with law and order. You would be wrong. Seattle is in King County, and the County Executive’s Office is moving ahead with plans to “abolish prisons.” A leaked email published by Christopher F. Rufo, contributing editor at City Journal, shows active plans to reduce both adult and juvenile detention and close the county jail in Seattle. The juvenile detention center would be converted to house other programs by 2025. According to Rufo, this plan will eliminate 60% of the county’s jail capacity. Meanwhile, Seattle’s City Council has majority support—at least seven of the nine members—to slash the police department budget by 50%. Mayor Jenny Durkan has said she would veto this drastic cut, supporting Police Chief Carmen Best. Durkan has committed to cutting $76 million of the $400 million budget,” however. Oddly, the “Summer of Love” mayor may be the only bulwark against complete insanity. Rolfe has posted more documents from the County Executive’s office. They appear to be for training or other meetings to discuss dismantling the criminal justice system. The woke county leaders would probably call it “reimagining” criminal justice. Others may call it managing a descent into chaos.
Now, not everyone who is arrested really needs to go to jail. I think that’s something we can all agree on.
However, the problem is that some people will only learn after they’ve spent some time on the inside. This is especially true of juveniles. After all, their records are sealed when they reach adulthood so they start with a clean slate. Many juvenile offenders clean up their acts and live productive lives, but how many wouldn’t if there hadn’t been significant repercussions for their actions?
Dismantling prisons sounds good to the average leftist, but the truth is that the ramifications of such an act may well be more horrific than defunding the police. We’ve seen numerous inmates released due to COVID-19 carry out horrendous crimes. Imagine what it would be like in there were no or minimal prisons for these people?
Honestly, the “woke” just get dumber and dumber as the days march on. And yet, they still get support from places like Seattle. No, I don’t understand it either, but this is how it goes.
Unfortunately, Seattle’s stupidity might well have an impact on others throughout the country as their failure to punish criminals may well allow those criminals to commit crimes elsewhere.
Not that Seattle officials give a damn. They’re too busy making sure they’re seen with the correct opinions to worry about stuff like that.


bearingarms--2020-07-27--The Unraveling States of America: Violence At Protests Up Sharply

After a weekend that saw shootings at protests in Austin , Texas and Aurora , Colorado , as well as a resurgence of violence in places like Richmond , Virginia , Oakland , California , and Seattle , Washington , I can ’ t help but wonder if we ’ ve turned a new corner in the civil unrest that began nearly two months ago in the wake of the death of George Floyd in Minneapolis .
What we ’ re seeing now aren ’ t largely spontaneous demonstrations , protests , or incidents of looting and rioting , but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , attacking law enforcement , and even attempts to spark a revolution .
There are competing , and sometimes contradictory goals among the groups gathering in the streets , and while the number of demonstrators may have dramatically declined compared to protests in early June , those that are still taking to the streets weeks later appear to be far more militant in both their demands and their actions .
On today ’ s Bearing Arms ’ Cam & Co , Stephen Gutowski of the Washington Free Beacon sits down with me to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ normal , ” as well as what can be done to return some calm to American cities .
I don ’ t think either Stephen or myself are particularly optimistic about a return to normalcy anytime soon , unfortunately , but for me anyway , I believe that there are things that local officials could do to tamp down the violence without infringing on anyone ’ s right to peaceably protest or keep and bear arms .
As a Second Amendment supporter , Gutowski says that he ’ s glad to see more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he doesn ’ t always agree with the ideology of the guy or gal carrying the gun .
He ’ s also growing more concerned , however , with calls for a violent revolution , whether from Boogaloo boys ready to kick off a civil war or guys like John Johsnon , aka “ Grand Master Jay ” with the Not F*cking Around Coalition , who vowed on Saturday to burn down the city of Louisville if officers are not arrested in the death of Breonna Taylor .
“ You all look like @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Not the kind of help that you could sing about .
The kind of help that puts people in the hospital .
That put people in the ground .
Like they ’ ve been doing us , ” Johnson told the crowd .
Earlier in the day Saturday , the NFAC gathered in Baxter Park to prepare for the march .
While there , one member accidentally discharged a firearm , injuring three people .
An estimated 50 right-wing , mostly white , militia members also appeared downtown Saturday , separated on the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ barriers .
Later , downtown , Johnson explicitly threatened violence if officials fail to provide answers within four weeks in the Taylor investigation .
He recommended Louisvillians arm themselves and organize .
Then , in call and response , he asked the crowd to repeat after him : “ I need y ’ all to repeat after me : if we don ’ t get the truth , the whole truth , and the mother****ing truth , we are going to burn this mother****er down , ” he said .
Empty rhetoric ?
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Johnson was advocating violence , not in self-defense , but as retaliation for what he sees as the slow-walking of the investigation into the raid on Taylor ’ s home that led to her killing by Louisville police .
I ’ ll leave it up to a prosecutor to decide if Johnson ’ s comment constituted a “ true threat ” that would not be protected by the First Amendment or an example of political rhetoric , which would be protected speech , but at the very least it ’ s another @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t going away anytime soon .
So what can be done to keep the peace , or at least attempt to restore some calm ?
The most important thing that cities can do is to both explain the law and enforce it .
It ’ s time to put an end to protests that shut down city streets and interstates , and if that requires making a large number of arrests , so be it .
The incidents in Aurora , Colorado and Austin , Texas both involved protests that had blocked traffic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ told police that they were in fear for their lives and trying to escape .
In Austin , that led to the driver of the vehicle firing five shots , killing a protester .
In Aurora , it led to a protester firing shots at the driver , but hitting two other protesters instead .
It ’ s up to officials in these cities to not only protect the First Amendment rights of peaceful protesters , but to protect the community at large as well .
Even the ACLU acknowledges that demonstrators don @ @ @ @ @ @ @ traffic , so why can ’ t officials like Mayor Steve Adler in Austin do the same ?
Want to protest ?
Go for it , but you ’ re not taking over any more intersections or interstates .
Instead , Adler ’ s complaining that there are too many guns .
Rather than embracing gun control , Adler should be thinking about crowd control .
After all , there are far more legally owned guns in Austin than there are protesters shutting down traffic and surrounding cars .
It ’ s also @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Texas .
It ’ s illegal to flood the streets with protesters and prevent people from leaving the area .
Adler doesn ’ t need to get “ guns off the streets , ” he needs to get people illegally protesting off of the streets instead .
Protest at City Hall or outside of the Austin police headquarters all you want , but keep the streets clear .
That may not solve every problem , but it would be a start , and it would definitely help to keep the peace .

After a weekend that saw shootings at protests in Austin, Texas and Aurora, Colorado, as well as a resurgence of violence in places like Richmond, Virginia, Oakland, California, and Seattle, Washington, I can’t help but wonder if we’ve turned a new corner in the civil unrest that began nearly two months ago in the wake of the death of George Floyd in Minneapolis. What we’re seeing now aren’t largely spontaneous demonstrations, protests, or incidents of looting and rioting, but more organized efforts aimed at disrupting cities, attacking law enforcement, and even attempts to spark a revolution. There are competing, and sometimes contradictory goals among the groups gathering in the streets, and while the number of demonstrators may have dramatically declined compared to protests in early June, those that are still taking to the streets weeks later appear to be far more militant in both their demands and their actions.
On today’s Bearing Arms’ Cam & Co, Stephen Gutowski of the Washington Free Beacon sits down with me to discuss whether this is the “new normal,” as well as what can be done to return some calm to American cities. I don’t think either Stephen or myself are particularly optimistic about a return to normalcy anytime soon, unfortunately, but for me anyway, I believe that there are things that local officials could do to tamp down the violence without infringing on anyone’s right to peaceably protest or keep and bear arms.
As a Second Amendment supporter, Gutowski says that he’s glad to see more Americans exercising their rights, even if he doesn’t always agree with the ideology of the guy or gal carrying the gun. He’s also growing more concerned, however, with calls for a violent revolution, whether from Boogaloo boys ready to kick off a civil war or guys like John Johsnon, aka “Grand Master Jay” with the Not F*cking Around Coalition, who vowed on Saturday to burn down the city of Louisville if officers are not arrested in the death of Breonna Taylor.
“You all look like you all need a little help. Not the kind of help that you could sing about. The kind of help that puts people in the hospital. That put people in the ground. Like they’ve been doing us,” Johnson told the crowd. Earlier in the day Saturday, the NFAC gathered in Baxter Park to prepare for the march. While there, one member accidentally discharged a firearm, injuring three people. An estimated 50 right-wing, mostly white, militia members also appeared downtown Saturday, separated on the east side of Fifth Street by police barriers. Later, downtown, Johnson explicitly threatened violence if officials fail to provide answers within four weeks in the Taylor investigation. He recommended Louisvillians arm themselves and organize. Then, in call and response, he asked the crowd to repeat after him: “I need y’all to repeat after me: if we don’t get the truth, the whole truth, and the mother****ing truth, we are going to burn this mother****er down,” he said.
Empty rhetoric? Maybe, maybe not. Clearly though, Johnson was advocating violence, not in self-defense, but as retaliation for what he sees as the slow-walking of the investigation into the raid on Taylor’s home that led to her killing by Louisville police. I’ll leave it up to a prosecutor to decide if Johnson’s comment constituted a “true threat” that would not be protected by the First Amendment or an example of political rhetoric, which would be protected speech, but at the very least it’s another troubling sign that the unrest isn’t going away anytime soon.
So what can be done to keep the peace, or at least attempt to restore some calm? The most important thing that cities can do is to both explain the law and enforce it. It’s time to put an end to protests that shut down city streets and interstates, and if that requires making a large number of arrests, so be it. The incidents in Aurora, Colorado and Austin, Texas both involved protests that had blocked traffic, and both drivers in the incidents told police that they were in fear for their lives and trying to escape. In Austin, that led to the driver of the vehicle firing five shots, killing a protester. In Aurora, it led to a protester firing shots at the driver, but hitting two other protesters instead.
It’s up to officials in these cities to not only protect the First Amendment rights of peaceful protesters, but to protect the community at large as well. Even the ACLU acknowledges that demonstrators don’t have the right to impede traffic, so why can’t officials like Mayor Steve Adler in Austin do the same? Want to protest? Go for it, but you’re not taking over any more intersections or interstates.
Instead, Adler’s complaining that there are too many guns.
“You know, we have a protester that ended up getting killed, and that’s horrific. I am taken by the fact that in that split moment, in that second, we had three different guns that were at play,” the mayor explained. “We had eight shots, and, my, we have too many guns and we have to do better. I think just generally speaking, as a society and taking guns off the streets like this.
Rather than embracing gun control, Adler should be thinking about crowd control. After all, there are far more legally owned guns in Austin than there are protesters shutting down traffic and surrounding cars. It’s also legal to own a firearm in Austin, Texas. It’s illegal to flood the streets with protesters and prevent people from leaving the area. Adler doesn’t need to get “guns off the streets,” he needs to get people illegally protesting off of the streets instead. Protest at City Hall or outside of the Austin police headquarters all you want, but keep the streets clear. That may not solve every problem, but it would be a start, and it would definitely help to keep the peace.


bearingarms--2020-07-27--Police Investigate Political Motive Behind Murder Of Black Trump Backer

Many in this country would like for you to believe that politics cuts along color lines…at least , it does if you ’ re not white .
Minorities are supposed to keep themselves on the Democratic plantation .
They ’ re damn sure not supposed to support Donald Trump for president .
And yet , a surprising number actually do .
One , an African-American business owner in Milwaukee , Wisconsin was murdered recently .
Police are looking into a political motivation behind the attack .
Bernell Trammell , 60 , was shot in front of his business , Expression @ @ @ @ @ @ @ neighborhood on Thursday afternoon .
Along with Bible verses , there were handmade signs on the building like “ Vote Donald Trump 2020 , ” and “ Re-Elect Trump 2020 , ” reported WISN ‘ s Dan O ’ Donnell .
Sources said cops aren ’ t sure of the motive at this time – but investigators are probing whether Trammell was gunned down in the Wisconsin city over his GOP beliefs .
Law enforcement said the suspect drove up in front of Expression Publications where Trammell sat outside , shot him , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the shooting at around 12:30pm .
A well-known businessman and Trump fanatic , Trammell had regularly campaigned for the President and chatted to locals in front of City Hall in downtown Milwaukee .
Now , we don ’ t know for a fact that this is politically motivated , but it comes at the same time as a number of other politically-motivated attacks seem to have swept across the nation .
Given that Trammell was such a vocal Trump supporter and finding him at given times wasn ’ t exactly difficult , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that this was an assassination rather than a random crime .
If it is , that ’ s a problem .
You see , most of the violence we ’ ve seen in recent days is what we consider pretty low-level stuff .
While the riots are destructive , they ’ re still low-level violence .
It generally targets businesses and buildings , not people .
It ’ s still bad–don ’ t get me wrong on that , it ’ s uncalled for by any measure–but it ’ s still not murder @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ re seeing might well be politically-motivated , but it ’ s also fairly impersonal .
It ’ s opportunistic , something one can avoid to some degree .
Targeted violence like this , though , is even worse .
It ’ s another measure meant to explicitly discourage political discourse , same as much of the other violence we ’ ve seen , only it now makes it so even speaking out can make you a target .
Of course , police aren ’ t really sure it ’ s politically motivated @ @ @ @ @ @ @ something far more personal .
I actually hope so .
Once assassinations start , it won ’ t be long before both sides are targeting people for their opinions .
It doesn ’ t take a genius to figure out how bad things can go from there .
In the meantime , I ’ ll be praying for Trammell ’ s family and for police to find his killer or killers as quickly as possible .
Regardless of the motive , no one likes the idea of killers walking free on our city @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , convict them , and lock them away for the rest of their days so they never breathe free air again .

Many in this country would like for you to believe that politics cuts along color lines…at least, it does if you’re not white. Minorities are supposed to keep themselves on the Democratic plantation. They’re damn sure not supposed to support Donald Trump for president.
And yet, a surprising number actually do.
One, an African-American business owner in Milwaukee, Wisconsin was murdered recently. Police are looking into a political motivation behind the attack.
Bernell Trammell, 60, was shot in front of his business, Expression Publications, in Milwaukee’s Riverwest neighborhood on Thursday afternoon. Along with Bible verses, there were handmade signs on the building like “Vote Donald Trump 2020,” and “Re-Elect Trump 2020,” reported WISN‘s Dan O’Donnell. Sources said cops aren’t sure of the motive at this time – but investigators are probing whether Trammell was gunned down in the Wisconsin city over his GOP beliefs. Law enforcement said the suspect drove up in front of Expression Publications where Trammell sat outside, shot him, and drove off yesterday. Cops responded to the shooting at around 12:30pm. A well-known businessman and Trump fanatic, Trammell had regularly campaigned for the President and chatted to locals in front of City Hall in downtown Milwaukee.
Now, we don’t know for a fact that this is politically motivated, but it comes at the same time as a number of other politically-motivated attacks seem to have swept across the nation. Given that Trammell was such a vocal Trump supporter and finding him at given times wasn’t exactly difficult, it’s hard not to think that this was an assassination rather than a random crime.
If it is, that’s a problem.
You see, most of the violence we’ve seen in recent days is what we consider pretty low-level stuff. While the riots are destructive, they’re still low-level violence. It generally targets businesses and buildings, not people. It’s still bad–don’t get me wrong on that, it’s uncalled for by any measure–but it’s still not murder.
Much of the other violence we’re seeing might well be politically-motivated, but it’s also fairly impersonal. It’s opportunistic, something one can avoid to some degree.
Targeted violence like this, though, is even worse. It’s another measure meant to explicitly discourage political discourse, same as much of the other violence we’ve seen, only it now makes it so even speaking out can make you a target.
Of course, police aren’t really sure it’s politically motivated. It may be something else, something far more personal. I actually hope so. Once assassinations start, it won’t be long before both sides are targeting people for their opinions. It doesn’t take a genius to figure out how bad things can go from there.
In the meantime, I’ll be praying for Trammell’s family and for police to find his killer or killers as quickly as possible. Regardless of the motive, no one likes the idea of killers walking free on our city streets. Find them, try them, convict them, and lock them away for the rest of their days so they never breathe free air again.


bearingarms--2020-07-27--Virginia "Red Flag" Law Invoked For The First Time

A northern Virginia man accused of stabbing two people at a church in Fairfax County has had his firearms removed from his home after officials applied for and received an “ emergency substantial risk order , ” apparently marking the first time that the law has been used since it went into effect on July 1st .
Ironically , the use of the law actually highlights the failure of the ESRO ’ s in actually dealing with someone who poses a threat to themselves or others , as we ’ ll explain .
First , a little background .
According @ @ @ @ @ @ @ old Chance Harrison is being held without bond on two counts of aggravated malicious wounding , one count of felony assault on a police officer , and one count of misdemeanor assault after he attacked two members of the Grace Covenant Church during an event back on July 18th .
Fairfax County Chief of Police Edwin Roessler was in attendance at the event , and helped subdue the suspect .
“ Harrison entered [ the church ] and stabbed a staff member without provocation , ” FCPD explained in a July 19 report @ @ @ @ @ @ @ also stabbed by Harrison .
[ He ] was subsequently confronted and subdued by Chief Roessler and several others.
” The report by the FCPD Sully Police District said officers arrived on the scene as Harrison was being restrained by several members of the congregation , including Roessler .
“ [ He ] was taken taken into custody without further incident ; he was not injured , ” FCPD said .
A knife was recovered at the scene .
The two stabbing victims were taken to a hospital with non-life threatening injuries and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Was the emergency substantial risk order even necessary ?
Harrison is being held without bond , which means he likely won ’ t be released from custody before his trial .
If he ’ s convicted of any of the felony charges , he ’ ll lose his right to keep and bear arms , making the red flag petition a moot point .
Let ’ s say , however , that Harrison convinces a judge to release him on bond .
Now his legally-owned firearms have been taken from him , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that the alleged stabber owns .
Even though a judge has determined that Harrison might pose a threat to himself or others ( a reasonable determination , given the fact that he ’ s accused of stabbing two people ) , if Harrison is released from custody he ’ ll still have access to knives , gasoline , matches , or anything else that he might use to hurt people .
Chance Harrison may indeed pose a threat to the public , but if that ’ s the case then he should remain @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Applying Virginia ’ s “ red flag ” law to his case doesn ’ t actually do anything to make the public any safer , and in fact it may actually make things worse if Harrison were to be released before his trial takes place .
Authorities could have taken Harrison to a mental health facility for a 72-hour evaluation instead of transporting him to the Fairfax County jail , and if mental health professionals that Harrison needed to be admitted , he would also have been barred from possessing firearms , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ treatment .
Instead , Fairfax County police decided to criminally charge Harrison and pursue the red flag petition , setting up the possibility that Harrison could be released to the streets , where he could arm himself with knives once again .
For months now I ’ ve argued that red flag laws don ’ t actually do anything to address the individual subjected to them , instead focusing exclusively on any guns that they might own , and with the very first invocation of the state ’ s new red flag law @ @ @ @ @ @ @ failures of the red flag process .

A northern Virginia man accused of stabbing two people at a church in Fairfax County has had his firearms removed from his home after officials applied for and received an “emergency substantial risk order,” apparently marking the first time that the law has been used since it went into effect on July 1st. Ironically, the use of the law actually highlights the failure of the ESRO’s in actually dealing with someone who poses a threat to themselves or others, as we’ll explain.
First, a little background. According to the Fort Hunt Herald, 32-year old Chance Harrison is being held without bond on two counts of aggravated malicious wounding, one count of felony assault on a police officer, and one count of misdemeanor assault after he attacked two members of the Grace Covenant Church during an event back on July 18th. Fairfax County Chief of Police Edwin Roessler was in attendance at the event, and helped subdue the suspect.
“Harrison entered [the church] and stabbed a staff member without provocation,” FCPD explained in a July 19 report. “A man intervened and was also stabbed by Harrison. [He] was subsequently confronted and subdued by Chief Roessler and several others.” The report by the FCPD Sully Police District said officers arrived on the scene as Harrison was being restrained by several members of the congregation, including Roessler. “[He] was taken taken into custody without further incident; he was not injured,” FCPD said. A knife was recovered at the scene. The two stabbing victims were taken to a hospital with non-life threatening injuries and Roessler received medical attention for minor injuries.
Was the emergency substantial risk order even necessary? Harrison is being held without bond, which means he likely won’t be released from custody before his trial. If he’s convicted of any of the felony charges, he’ll lose his right to keep and bear arms, making the red flag petition a moot point.
Let’s say, however, that Harrison convinces a judge to release him on bond. Now his legally-owned firearms have been taken from him, but authorities left behind every single knife that the alleged stabber owns. Even though a judge has determined that Harrison might pose a threat to himself or others (a reasonable determination, given the fact that he’s accused of stabbing two people), if Harrison is released from custody he’ll still have access to knives, gasoline, matches, or anything else that he might use to hurt people.
Chance Harrison may indeed pose a threat to the public, but if that’s the case then he should remain behind bars while he awaits his trial. Applying Virginia’s “red flag” law to his case doesn’t actually do anything to make the public any safer, and in fact it may actually make things worse if Harrison were to be released before his trial takes place. Authorities could have taken Harrison to a mental health facility for a 72-hour evaluation instead of transporting him to the Fairfax County jail, and if mental health professionals that Harrison needed to be admitted, he would also have been barred from possessing firearms, but he would also have actually received treatment.
Instead, Fairfax County police decided to criminally charge Harrison and pursue the red flag petition, setting up the possibility that Harrison could be released to the streets, where he could arm himself with knives once again. For months now I’ve argued that red flag laws don’t actually do anything to address the individual subjected to them, instead focusing exclusively on any guns that they might own, and with the very first invocation of the state’s new red flag law, authorities have demonstrated those flaws and failures of the red flag process.


bearingarms--2020-07-27--UN Issues Warning Over Law Enforcement Response To Riots

Here in the United States , we ’ ve seen law enforcement get a lot of flak from the left .
While rioter have destroyed communities , businesses , and lives , we have had the left put all of the blame squarely on law enforcement .
It seems that police in New York City are to blame for the death of George Floyd , the same as police in every other major city in the nation .
Police have had to respond to the riots with some degree of force .
Riots are violent and people are demanding an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , however , continues to ignore the reality and blame police over them doing their jobs .
Now , someone else has had to open their pie-hole and express their opinion .
So , what ?
They ’ re supposed to use “ proportional force ” ?
What does that even mean , anyway ?
I guess police are supposed to skip the tear gas and use bricks instead .
The UN called on authorities to specifically ensure federal and local police were clearly identifiable , after images emerged of officers hiding their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ There have been reports that peaceful protesters have been detained by unidentified police officers , ” said Liz Throssell , UN human rights spokesperson .
“ That is a worry because it may place those detained outside the protection of the law and may give rise to arbitrary detention and other human rights violations.
” The Black Lives Matter movement , rekindled in May after the murder of unarmed black man George Floyd by Minneapolis police , saw protests against systemic racism held across the world .
Police used riot dispersion @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , including in Australia .
Let ’ s not forget about the riots .
Nor should we forget about the threats many of these protests represented .
I ’ m not saying police were automatically right to disperse these protests , but let ’ s not pretend there isn ’ t a reason many reacted the way they did .
However , I don ’ t think the United Nations has any room to talk .
While potentially poor responses to protests may be a problem , we in the United States are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ own house .
Outside pressure won ’ t really do much except piss us off .
Well , that and rally Americans to a unifying cause , namely defiance of that outside influence .
That ’ s especially true of an organization known for pedophiles and rapists among their “ peacekeepers ” .
Besides , it ’ s not like the UN will roll in to try and restore order .
If they do , that would trigger an escalation in violence no one should want to see .
There are a lot @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that would be even more down on UN troops on American soil .
Regardless , this is nothing but the UN virtue-signaling as per usual .
As an organization , it hasn ’ t actually accomplished anything it was supposed to except , maybe , preventing World War III .
I give them a maybe on that only because it ’ s impossible to know what the world would be like without the U.N. ’ s existence during the Cold War .
That said , it ’ s not like it matters one @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is over and we won .
Now , the U.N. allows third world hellholes to pretend they have a voice in American politics and little else .
This is yet another reason to not take them seriously .

Here in the United States, we’ve seen law enforcement get a lot of flak from the left. While rioter have destroyed communities, businesses, and lives, we have had the left put all of the blame squarely on law enforcement. It seems that police in New York City are to blame for the death of George Floyd, the same as police in every other major city in the nation.
Police have had to respond to the riots with some degree of force. Riots are violent and people are demanding an end to the lawlessness. The left, however, continues to ignore the reality and blame police over them doing their jobs.
Now, someone else has had to open their pie-hole and express their opinion.
The United Nations human rights office has issued a stark warning to authorities in the US against using disproportional force against protesters and journalists involved in anti-systemic racism protests across the country.
So, what? They’re supposed to use “proportional force”? What does that even mean, anyway? I guess police are supposed to skip the tear gas and use bricks instead.
Anyway, moving on…
The UN called on authorities to specifically ensure federal and local police were clearly identifiable, after images emerged of officers hiding their badge numbers when using force against protesters. “There have been reports that peaceful protesters have been detained by unidentified police officers,” said Liz Throssell, UN human rights spokesperson. “That is a worry because it may place those detained outside the protection of the law and may give rise to arbitrary detention and other human rights violations.” The Black Lives Matter movement, rekindled in May after the murder of unarmed black man George Floyd by Minneapolis police, saw protests against systemic racism held across the world. Police used riot dispersion techniques to disperse the largely peaceful protests, including in Australia.
And riots.
Let’s not forget about the riots.
Nor should we forget about the threats many of these protests represented. I’m not saying police were automatically right to disperse these protests, but let’s not pretend there isn’t a reason many reacted the way they did.
However, I don’t think the United Nations has any room to talk.
While potentially poor responses to protests may be a problem, we in the United States are usually pretty good about dealing with our own house. Outside pressure won’t really do much except piss us off. Well, that and rally Americans to a unifying cause, namely defiance of that outside influence.
That’s especially true of an organization known for pedophiles and rapists among their “peacekeepers”.
Besides, it’s not like the UN will roll in to try and restore order. If they do, that would trigger an escalation in violence no one should want to see. There are a lot of people who are down on police that would be even more down on UN troops on American soil.
Regardless, this is nothing but the UN virtue-signaling as per usual. As an organization, it hasn’t actually accomplished anything it was supposed to except, maybe, preventing World War III. I give them a maybe on that only because it’s impossible to know what the world would be like without the U.N.’s existence during the Cold War.
And I’m feeling generous.
That said, it’s not like it matters one way or another. The Cold War is over and we won. Now, the U.N. allows third world hellholes to pretend they have a voice in American politics and little else.
This is yet another reason to not take them seriously.


bearingarms--2020-07-27--Austin, TX Mayor Decries "Too Many Guns" After Protest Shooting

Police are still investigating what led to a shooting in downtown Austin on Saturday night that resulted in the death of a 28-year old Black Lives Matter supporter , but Austin Mayor Steve Adler said on Sunday evening that one thing is clear ; there are too many guns around .
In a Twitter post , Adler proclaimed that “ in a split moment , three guns were drawn , eight shots were fired , and a protester was tragically killed .
This is horrible as is all gun violence .
There are too many guns .
Our City is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ our community , I ’ m heartbroken and stunned.
” According to Austin Police Chief Brian Manley , the incident unfolded just before 10 p.m. as protests in the downtown area were ramping up .
The driver of a vehicle turned onto Congress Avenue , where a large number of protesters were blocking the street .
The driver began honking his horn , and in turn protesters “ descended on the vehicle.
” One of them was 28-year old Garrett Foster , who was carrying an AK-47 .
Foster also approached the car @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said .
Another person at the protest fired at the vehicle as the driver fled the scene , the chief added .
Manley said both firearms used in the shooting , along with the vehicle involved , have been secured as evidence .
He noted both of the people who fired their weapons possess concealed handgun licenses .
Manley said the driver of the vehicle was among those calling police to report the shooting .
He said the driver was asked to pull over and await arrival of officers before he was detained @ @ @ @ @ @ @ police investigation , the driver and the other shooter have since been released after consultation with the district attorney , pending the outcome of the investigation , Manley said .
Protesters say that Foster was a regular presence at the demonstrations in downtown Austin along with his fiancee Whitney Mitchell , a quadruple amputee who uses a wheelchair .
Only recently , however , did Foster begin carrying a gun , according to the Washington Post .
In an interview earlier on Saturday with Hiram Gilberto Garcia , an independent journalist who was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said he started to bring the weapon after his roommate was arrested for protesting .
“ They don ’ t let us march in the streets anymore , so I got to practice some of our rights , ” he said .
But Foster said he understood the limitations of having a weapon in these circumstances .
“ If I use it against the cops , I ’ m dead , ” he added .
Foster was pushing Mitchell ’ s wheelchair on Saturday night when the driver turned into the crowd of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ conflicting reports of what happened next , Manley told reporters on Sunday .
“ His account is that Mr. Foster pointed the weapon directly at him and he fired his handgun at Mr. Foster , ” Manley said of the driver .
But other witnesses told police that Foster didn ’ t threaten the driver with his weapon .
Witnesses told the Austin American-Statesman Foster had his weapon pointed down .
“ He was not aiming the gun or doing anything aggressive with the gun , ” Michael Capochiano , a witness , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I ’ m not sure if there was much of an exchange of words .
It wasn ’ t like there was any sort of verbal altercations .
He wasn ’ t charging at the car.
” During that interview with Hiram Gilberto Garcia , Foster also said that “ all of the people that hate us and want to say sh*t to us are too big of p*ssies to actually stop and and do anything about it , ” but didn ’ t articulate any threats towards counter-demonstrators or opponents of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the moment whether or not Foster was pointing his gun at the car , as the driver claims , or if protesters are right that Foster had his gun in a low-ready position .
That will likely be a key factor in determining whether or not the driver and the concealed carry holder who shot at the vehicle as it was driving away will face charges .
As for Mayor Adler ’ s assertion that there are “ too many guns , ” I think the real issue is that there is too @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , but since Adler can ’ t or won ’ t do anything to bring peace to the city , and he ’ s certainly not going to say anything about protesters shutting down traffic , he ’ s left with blaming the inanimate object rather than the rising tensions caused in part by his failed leadership .
Protesters have already been calling for Adler ’ s resignation , but expect those demands to grow even louder in the wake of Saturday night ’ s shooting .

Police are still investigating what led to a shooting in downtown Austin on Saturday night that resulted in the death of a 28-year old Black Lives Matter supporter, but Austin Mayor Steve Adler said on Sunday evening that one thing is clear; there are too many guns around. In a Twitter post, Adler proclaimed that “in a split moment, three guns were drawn, eight shots were fired, and a protester was tragically killed. This is horrible as is all gun violence. There are too many guns. Our City is shaken and, like so many in our community, I’m heartbroken and stunned.”
According to Austin Police Chief Brian Manley, the incident unfolded just before 10 p.m. as protests in the downtown area were ramping up. The driver of a vehicle turned onto Congress Avenue, where a large number of protesters were blocking the street. The driver began honking his horn, and in turn protesters “descended on the vehicle.” One of them was 28-year old Garrett Foster, who was carrying an AK-47.
Foster also approached the car before being shot multiple times, Manley said. Another person at the protest fired at the vehicle as the driver fled the scene, the chief added. Manley said both firearms used in the shooting, along with the vehicle involved, have been secured as evidence. He noted both of the people who fired their weapons possess concealed handgun licenses. Manley said the driver of the vehicle was among those calling police to report the shooting. He said the driver was asked to pull over and await arrival of officers before he was detained for questioning. Having cooperated with the police investigation, the driver and the other shooter have since been released after consultation with the district attorney, pending the outcome of the investigation, Manley said.
Protesters say that Foster was a regular presence at the demonstrations in downtown Austin along with his fiancee Whitney Mitchell, a quadruple amputee who uses a wheelchair. Only recently, however, did Foster begin carrying a gun, according to the Washington Post.
In an interview earlier on Saturday with Hiram Gilberto Garcia, an independent journalist who was streaming the protest on Periscope, Foster said he started to bring the weapon after his roommate was arrested for protesting. “They don’t let us march in the streets anymore, so I got to practice some of our rights,” he said. But Foster said he understood the limitations of having a weapon in these circumstances. “If I use it against the cops, I’m dead,” he added. Foster was pushing Mitchell’s wheelchair on Saturday night when the driver turned into the crowd of protesters just before 10 p.m. Investigators heard conflicting reports of what happened next, Manley told reporters on Sunday. “His account is that Mr. Foster pointed the weapon directly at him and he fired his handgun at Mr. Foster,” Manley said of the driver. But other witnesses told police that Foster didn’t threaten the driver with his weapon. Witnesses told the Austin American-Statesman Foster had his weapon pointed down. “He was not aiming the gun or doing anything aggressive with the gun,” Michael Capochiano, a witness, told the New York Times. “I’m not sure if there was much of an exchange of words. It wasn’t like there was any sort of verbal altercations. He wasn’t charging at the car.”
During that interview with Hiram Gilberto Garcia, Foster also said that “all of the people that hate us and want to say sh*t to us are too big of p*ssies to actually stop and and do anything about it,” but didn’t articulate any threats towards counter-demonstrators or opponents of the protest.
It’s unclear at the moment whether or not Foster was pointing his gun at the car, as the driver claims, or if protesters are right that Foster had his gun in a low-ready position. That will likely be a key factor in determining whether or not the driver and the concealed carry holder who shot at the vehicle as it was driving away will face charges.
As for Mayor Adler’s assertion that there are “too many guns,” I think the real issue is that there is too much unrest on the streets of Austin, but since Adler can’t or won’t do anything to bring peace to the city, and he’s certainly not going to say anything about protesters shutting down traffic, he’s left with blaming the inanimate object rather than the rising tensions caused in part by his failed leadership. Protesters have already been calling for Adler’s resignation, but expect those demands to grow even louder in the wake of Saturday night’s shooting.


bearingarms--2020-07-27--Chicago Mayor Blames Everyone Else For Her Violent Crime Problem

Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot has a bit of a history .
Then again , all of the recent Chicago mayors share that history .
In particular , they all have a history of blaming everyone else for their problems with violent crime .
You see , the state of Illinois has a lot of gun control on the books .
It ’ s not easy to buy a gun there , at least not when compared to the rest of the nation .
You have to approach the state , hat in hand , and get a FOID just to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t deny these except for prohibited people , they don ’ t trip over themselves to issue them either .
It also drives the cost up , making it harder to poor people in the state to protect themselves .
But criminals have no trouble getting guns .
No trouble at all .
For Lightfoot , she ’ s ready to blame others for her problems .
Lightfoot pointed toward the presence of illegal guns in the city as one of the reasons behind the increase in violent crime .
“ We @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that have virtually no gun control , no background checks , no ban on assault weapons , ” she said .
“ That is hurting cities like Chicago .
That is the thing that , if the president really wanted to help , that and the other things I identified in my letter , he could do today , tomorrow .
Except , that is a lie .
First , there are no states in the country with “ virtually no gun control , no background checks ” or anything of the type @ @ @ @ @ @ @ gun control than Illinois , including perennial Lightfoot target Indiana , but no gun control ?
Not even close to true .
After all , they ’ re all subject to federal gun control measures if nothing else .
It ’ s those same federal laws that dictate that any firearm sold in a gun store must undergo a background check .
Further , any firearms shipped across state lines has to go through that same process .
Contrary to what many on the left claim , this is how most law-abiding gun @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , even in states without universal background checks .
So it ’ s literally impossible for a state to have “ no background checks.
” Even if she meant for that “ virtually ” to apply to background checks as well , she ’ s still lying .
What she means is that people don ’ t have to go through multiple background checks just to purchase a single firearm , which is ridiculous .
Further , Lightfoot goes on to talk about assault weapons .
Yet , historically , so-called assault weapons @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the weapons used in crimes .
They ’ re larger weapons that don ’ t conceal well , making them unsuited for many criminal activities .
In other words , it ’ s highly unlikely that so-called assault weapons represent any kind of an issue in Chicago .
The truth of the matter is that Lightfoot ’ s problem is with guns obtained illegally in the first place .
The weapons from other states that end up in Chicago do so in one of several ways .
They ’ re either stolen , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or obtained with the intention of being sold to criminals .
None of those are currently legal and additional gun control won ’ t stop any of them .
All but a small handful of those weapons were originally purchased by people who underwent NICS checks and passed .
They ’ d pass a FOID background check too .
You see , she ’ s trying to blame others so she doesn ’ t have to try and justify any of her actions that might have contributed to the influx of violence in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from the city , she ’ s less likely to have to answer for her own failures .
It ’ s also why she ’ s trying to guilt-trip President Trump into supporting gun control .
That isn ’ t likely to work–the president isn ’ t well known for responding to shaming tactics–but she ’ s going to try .
As a result , Chicago won ’ t get any better .
If there ’ s any improvement , it ’ ll be because those most likely to engage in violence are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it .
All because Lightfoot won ’ t try to address the heart of the problem and instead wants to blame the universe for her own problems .

Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot has a bit of a history. Then again, all of the recent Chicago mayors share that history. In particular, they all have a history of blaming everyone else for their problems with violent crime.
You see, the state of Illinois has a lot of gun control on the books. It’s not easy to buy a gun there, at least not when compared to the rest of the nation. You have to approach the state, hat in hand, and get a FOID just to buy a gun. While they don’t deny these except for prohibited people, they don’t trip over themselves to issue them either. It also drives the cost up, making it harder to poor people in the state to protect themselves.
But criminals have no trouble getting guns. No trouble at all.
For Lightfoot, she’s ready to blame others for her problems.
Lightfoot pointed toward the presence of illegal guns in the city as one of the reasons behind the increase in violent crime. “We are being inundated with guns from states that have virtually no gun control, no background checks, no ban on assault weapons,” she said. “That is hurting cities like Chicago. That is the thing that, if the president really wanted to help, that and the other things I identified in my letter, he could do today, tomorrow.
Except, that is a lie.
First, there are no states in the country with “virtually no gun control, no background checks” or anything of the type. Sure, some states have less gun control than Illinois, including perennial Lightfoot target Indiana, but no gun control? Not even close to true. After all, they’re all subject to federal gun control measures if nothing else.
It’s those same federal laws that dictate that any firearm sold in a gun store must undergo a background check. Further, any firearms shipped across state lines has to go through that same process. Contrary to what many on the left claim, this is how most law-abiding gun owners obtain the majority of their guns, even in states without universal background checks.
So it’s literally impossible for a state to have “no background checks.” Even if she meant for that “virtually” to apply to background checks as well, she’s still lying.
What she means is that people don’t have to go through multiple background checks just to purchase a single firearm, which is ridiculous.
Further, Lightfoot goes on to talk about assault weapons. Yet, historically, so-called assault weapons account for only a tiny fraction of the weapons used in crimes. They’re larger weapons that don’t conceal well, making them unsuited for many criminal activities. In other words, it’s highly unlikely that so-called assault weapons represent any kind of an issue in Chicago.
The truth of the matter is that Lightfoot’s problem is with guns obtained illegally in the first place. The weapons from other states that end up in Chicago do so in one of several ways. They’re either stolen, the result of a straw buy, or obtained with the intention of being sold to criminals. None of those are currently legal and additional gun control won’t stop any of them. All but a small handful of those weapons were originally purchased by people who underwent NICS checks and passed. They’d pass a FOID background check too.
Not that Lightfoot cares.
You see, she’s trying to blame others so she doesn’t have to try and justify any of her actions that might have contributed to the influx of violence in her city. If she points away from the city, she’s less likely to have to answer for her own failures. It’s also why she’s trying to guilt-trip President Trump into supporting gun control. That isn’t likely to work–the president isn’t well known for responding to shaming tactics–but she’s going to try.
As a result, Chicago won’t get any better. If there’s any improvement, it’ll be because those most likely to engage in violence are already dead and that’s about it.
All because Lightfoot won’t try to address the heart of the problem and instead wants to blame the universe for her own problems.


bearingarms--2020-07-27--Shooting At Dallas Bar Stopped By Armed Patrons

Three people were shot and a fourth was injured by flying glass when a man who was angry at being turned away from a crowded sports bar went to his car and returned with a gun , firing multiple shots into the windows of the establishment near downtown Dallas late Saturday night .
Police say the man was part of a larger group who tried to gain access to the bar but were turned away due to COVID-19 restrictions .
A spokesperson for the sports bar , located in the 500 block of Riverfront Boulevard , said they were doing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ opening night and making sure they were in line with state guidelines .
Witnesses said it was a laid-back environment , and security was counting those going into the establishment and checking their temperatures at the door .
But when a group of three men weren ’ t allowed in for capacity reasons , a scuffle ensued .
“ And so they pushed him out of the restaurant and locked the doors and he went into his car and he just started spraying the place , ” Micaela Dartson recalled .
Authorities say @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the bar , he then walked to the rear of the building , where several armed citizens confronted him and exchanged fire .
None of the armed citizens were injured in that volley , and the suspect and his two friends fled the area after being met with the armed response .
One victim was taken to a local hospital in critical condition , while the other injuries are considered to be non-life threatening .
The attack could have been far worse , of course , had armed citizens not been there @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
There ’ s no word on whether any of those armed citizens might be facing charges , but Texas law prohibits anyone but licensed peace officers from carrying in establishments that make more than half of their revenue from alcohol sales , and according to Fox 4 in Dallas , the owners of the sports bar have been in a dispute with the city over whether one of their other locations should be classified as a bar or a restaurant .
I have a hard time imagining prosecutors actually pursuing any charges @ @ @ @ @ @ @ if in fact , it ’ s determined that the sports bar is a bar and not a restaurant ) , given the fact that the armed citizens stopped the suspect from continuing his attack .
We have no idea how many lives were saved thanks to the fact that the suspect wasn ’ t the only one armed late Saturday night , but odds are this incident would have turned out much differently if those armed citizens weren ’ t around .
Police haven ’ t made any arrests in the case @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hopefully authorities have enough information to go on that a suspect will soon be in custody .

Three people were shot and a fourth was injured by flying glass when a man who was angry at being turned away from a crowded sports bar went to his car and returned with a gun, firing multiple shots into the windows of the establishment near downtown Dallas late Saturday night.
Police say the man was part of a larger group who tried to gain access to the bar but were turned away due to COVID-19 restrictions.
A spokesperson for the sports bar, located in the 500 block of Riverfront Boulevard, said they were doing temperatures checks at the entrance on its opening night and making sure they were in line with state guidelines. Witnesses said it was a laid-back environment, and security was counting those going into the establishment and checking their temperatures at the door. But when a group of three men weren’t allowed in for capacity reasons, a scuffle ensued. “And so they pushed him out of the restaurant and locked the doors and he went into his car and he just started spraying the place,” Micaela Dartson recalled.
Authorities say after the suspect fired into the front of the bar, he then walked to the rear of the building, where several armed citizens confronted him and exchanged fire. None of the armed citizens were injured in that volley, and the suspect and his two friends fled the area after being met with the armed response.
One victim was taken to a local hospital in critical condition, while the other injuries are considered to be non-life threatening. The attack could have been far worse, of course, had armed citizens not been there to prevent the attacker from getting inside.
There’s no word on whether any of those armed citizens might be facing charges, but Texas law prohibits anyone but licensed peace officers from carrying in establishments that make more than half of their revenue from alcohol sales, and according to Fox 4 in Dallas, the owners of the sports bar have been in a dispute with the city over whether one of their other locations should be classified as a bar or a restaurant.
I have a hard time imagining prosecutors actually pursuing any charges for carrying in a gun-free zone (if in fact, it’s determined that the sports bar is a bar and not a restaurant), given the fact that the armed citizens stopped the suspect from continuing his attack. We have no idea how many lives were saved thanks to the fact that the suspect wasn’t the only one armed late Saturday night, but odds are this incident would have turned out much differently if those armed citizens weren’t around.
Police haven’t made any arrests in the case yet, but with dozens of eyewitnesses hopefully authorities have enough information to go on that a suspect will soon be in custody.


bearingarms--2020-07-27--Armed "Protestor" Killed During Austin Protest

2020 has been a year for the ages and we ’ re not even close to finished with it yet .
First , there was talk of World War III , then Australia burned , then we all had to be stuck inside because some dude in China supposedly ate the wrong bat , and then we have riots engulfing all of our major cities .
All because of the ( alleged ) actions of a couple of cops in Minneapolis .
Apparently , police in New York , Chicago , Los Angeles , and everywhere else are responsible for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to day basis .
Anyway , the protests have continued .
Now , people on both sides are arming up and going to protests .
Sure enough , now someone is dead .
A Texas protester was shot dead Saturday night after a car drove into the crowd and the driver apparently opened fire on him , the Austin American-Statesman reports .
Garrett Foster , 28 , was approaching the stopped vehicle with other Black Lives Matter activists when he was killed .
Foster was also armed—with an AK-47 , per the New @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at the ground .
The driver sped away and may have been shot at by someone in the crowd .
Police soon tracked down the vehicle and arrested the suspect , who is cooperating .
“ I mean if I used it against the cops , I ’ m dead , ” Foster said of his gun before the shooting .
“ And I think all of the people that hate us and want to say [ expletive ] to us are too big of a p*ssies [ sic ] to stop and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ story is presented , this is a bad situation and Foster shouldn ’ t have been shot .
Someone was out of line and would definitely need to stand trial and be convicted of Foster ’ s death .
Except , it isn ’ t that simple .
The victim , identified by police on July 26 as 28-year-old Garrett Foster , was taken to Dell Seton Medical Center , where he later died .
Police said the incident was a homicide .
In an update on July 26 , Austin Police Chief @ @ @ @ @ @ @ carrying a rifle when he approached the suspect ’ s vehicle .
The suspect then shot out of their car at Foster , according to APD .
Manley said that the person who shot Foster called 911 to report that someone had pointed a gun at his vehicle and that he fired at the person pointing the gun .
That suspect was detained and cooperating with officers , police said Sunday morning .
The first person , according to Manley , to have fired a weapon in the incident appears to have been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ those shots came after the driver said Foster pointed weapon at him .
The fact that the driver was the first person to call 911 lends him a bit of credence in his claims .
Sure , it ’ s not a slam dunk , but if he was trying to get away with murder , it ’ s unlikely he ’ d have called the police and said he just shot someone .
Additionally , there ’ s evidence that someone fired shots before the driver did .
It doesn ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , but ample reason for the driver to fear for his life .
Unfortunately for the driver , unless he has video backing up his story , he ’ s likely to get hammered regardless of whether Foster pointed a gun at him or not .
After all , I don ’ t see the crowd siding with him regardless of the facts .
This comes just a day after several protestors were shot in Louisville , KY due to an armed leftist protester having a negligent discharge , injuring three of his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ F-ing Around Coalition was f-ing around .
Regardless , while I defend the right of any law-abiding citizen to carry a gun in this country , let ’ s also admit that right now , things aren ’ t shaping up well for armed leftists based on this past weekend ’ s actions .
If these are the first shots of the Boogaloo , then the other side is going to have a very bad time .

2020 has been a year for the ages and we’re not even close to finished with it yet. First, there was talk of World War III, then Australia burned, then we all had to be stuck inside because some dude in China supposedly ate the wrong bat, and then we have riots engulfing all of our major cities. All because of the (alleged) actions of a couple of cops in Minneapolis.
Apparently, police in New York, Chicago, Los Angeles, and everywhere else are responsible for what Minneapolis police do on a day to day basis.
Anyway, the protests have continued. Now, people on both sides are arming up and going to protests.
Sure enough, now someone is dead.
A Texas protester was shot dead Saturday night after a car drove into the crowd and the driver apparently opened fire on him, the Austin American-Statesman reports. Garrett Foster, 28, was approaching the stopped vehicle with other Black Lives Matter activists when he was killed. Foster was also armed—with an AK-47, per the New York Times—which witnesses said he had pointed at the ground. The driver sped away and may have been shot at by someone in the crowd. Police soon tracked down the vehicle and arrested the suspect, who is cooperating. “I mean if I used it against the cops, I’m dead,” Foster said of his gun before the shooting. “And I think all of the people that hate us and want to say [expletive] to us are too big of a p*ssies [sic] to stop and do anything about it.”
Well…that comment aged well, didn’t it?
As the story is presented, this is a bad situation and Foster shouldn’t have been shot. Someone was out of line and would definitely need to stand trial and be convicted of Foster’s death.
Except, it isn’t that simple.
The victim, identified by police on July 26 as 28-year-old Garrett Foster, was taken to Dell Seton Medical Center, where he later died. Police said the incident was a homicide. In an update on July 26, Austin Police Chief Brian Manley said reports indicated Foster was carrying a rifle when he approached the suspect’s vehicle. The suspect then shot out of their car at Foster, according to APD. Manley said that the person who shot Foster called 911 to report that someone had pointed a gun at his vehicle and that he fired at the person pointing the gun. That suspect was detained and cooperating with officers, police said Sunday morning. The first person, according to Manley, to have fired a weapon in the incident appears to have been driver in the car. Manley said those shots came after the driver said Foster pointed weapon at him.
The fact that the driver was the first person to call 911 lends him a bit of credence in his claims. Sure, it’s not a slam dunk, but if he was trying to get away with murder, it’s unlikely he’d have called the police and said he just shot someone.
Additionally, there’s evidence that someone fired shots before the driver did. It doesn’t look like it was Foster, though, but ample reason for the driver to fear for his life.
Unfortunately for the driver, unless he has video backing up his story, he’s likely to get hammered regardless of whether Foster pointed a gun at him or not. After all, I don’t see the crowd siding with him regardless of the facts.
This comes just a day after several protestors were shot in Louisville, KY due to an armed leftist protester having a negligent discharge, injuring three of his fellow travelers. Apparently, the Not F-ing Around Coalition was f-ing around.
Regardless, while I defend the right of any law-abiding citizen to carry a gun in this country, let’s also admit that right now, things aren’t shaping up well for armed leftists based on this past weekend’s actions. If these are the first shots of the Boogaloo, then the other side is going to have a very bad time.


bearingarms--2020-07-26--Media, "Experts" Act Like Only Gun People Kill Themselves

It ’ s an awful subject and one I wish we never had to talk about again .
The idea of someone taking their own life is tragic , as we at Bearing Arms know all too well .
However , it seems that the supposed experts and the media themselves seem to think that suicide isn ’ t a mental health issue , but a gun issue .
Why else title a story , “ As Isolation and Gun Sales Both Grow , Experts Urge Gun Owners to Plan to Prevent Suicides.
” anyway ?
Bass said the ongoing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ almost unavoidable .
“ There has been months of just talking about human death on a pervasive basis , ” Bass said .
And concerns about how access to a gun can enable suicide is on the minds of some who otherwise advocate for their value .
“ The risk with a firearm is it ’ s effective , ” said Robin Ball , owner of Sharp Shooting Indoor Range and Gun Shop in Spokane .
“ That person doesn ’ t have the opportunity to change their mind and so , while @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we want the tool for legitimately , that has to be a consideration for people.
” In March , among the run on toilet paper and hand sanitizer there was also a massive increase in gun and ammunition sales in the Spokane area .
“ We ’ ve had a historic increase in firearms sales , ” Bass said .
Yet much of the story itself does talk about mental health .
It talks about a lot of psychological factors that people are experiencing right now that may play a factor in committing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the guns ?
Oh , I get that Ball says it ’ s effective , and that ’ s not untrue .
However , it ’ s also not the only effective way to take your own life , just the most effective .
After all , where are the warnings for owners of razor blades ?
What about rope , cars , people with medications , and a host of other factors one could use to kill themselves ?
I ’ m sick and damn tired of the focus on suicides seeming @ @ @ @ @ @ @ if we ’ re somehow the most likely to take our own lives ; as if we ’ re a group that ’ s particularly susceptible to depression and suicidal thoughts .
We ’ re not .
Suicide is a mental health issue .
It ’ s time the experts and the media start acting like it for a damn change .
Recommendations to hand off your firearms if you ’ re depressed are fine so long as there are also recommendations for other instruments that can be used to take one ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s not what we ’ re seeing .
Instead , we get articles like this that seem to foster the idea that we ’ re mentally unbalanced , just on the edge of taking our own lives at any time .
These are the people who think buying a first gun is a sign that someone might be a danger to themselves or someone else , for crying out loud , so why does anyone take them seriously ?
Mostly because so few people even know that part .
Meanwhile , we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” to stories that paint us as the ones most likely to end our own lives while millions of others kill themselves with a wide assortment of other methods .

Suicide.
It’s an awful subject and one I wish we never had to talk about again. The idea of someone taking their own life is tragic, as we at Bearing Arms know all too well.
However, it seems that the supposed experts and the media themselves seem to think that suicide isn’t a mental health issue, but a gun issue. Why else title a story, “As Isolation and Gun Sales Both Grow, Experts Urge Gun Owners to Plan to Prevent Suicides.” anyway?
Bass said the ongoing pandemic has made that kind of reasoning almost unavoidable. “There has been months of just talking about human death on a pervasive basis,” Bass said. And concerns about how access to a gun can enable suicide is on the minds of some who otherwise advocate for their value. “The risk with a firearm is it’s effective,” said Robin Ball, owner of Sharp Shooting Indoor Range and Gun Shop in Spokane. “That person doesn’t have the opportunity to change their mind and so, while we want an effective tool for what we want the tool for legitimately, that has to be a consideration for people.” In March, among the run on toilet paper and hand sanitizer there was also a massive increase in gun and ammunition sales in the Spokane area. “We’ve had a historic increase in firearms sales,” Bass said.
Yet much of the story itself does talk about mental health. It talks about a lot of psychological factors that people are experiencing right now that may play a factor in committing suicide.
So why really focus on the guns? Oh, I get that Ball says it’s effective, and that’s not untrue.
However, it’s also not the only effective way to take your own life, just the most effective. After all, where are the warnings for owners of razor blades? What about rope, cars, people with medications, and a host of other factors one could use to kill themselves?
Frankly, I’m sick of it.
I’m sick and damn tired of the focus on suicides seeming to be targeting of gun owners as if we’re somehow the most likely to take our own lives; as if we’re a group that’s particularly susceptible to depression and suicidal thoughts. We’re not.
Suicide is a mental health issue. It’s time the experts and the media start acting like it for a damn change. Recommendations to hand off your firearms if you’re depressed are fine so long as there are also recommendations for other instruments that can be used to take one’s own life as well. That’s not what we’re seeing.
Instead, we get articles like this that seem to foster the idea that we’re mentally unbalanced, just on the edge of taking our own lives at any time. These are the people who think buying a first gun is a sign that someone might be a danger to themselves or someone else, for crying out loud, so why does anyone take them seriously?
Mostly because so few people even know that part.
Meanwhile, we’ll continue to be “treated” to stories that paint us as the ones most likely to end our own lives while millions of others kill themselves with a wide assortment of other methods.


bearingarms--2020-07-25--Chicago Men Face Charges In Operation LeGend Busts

The DOJ ’ s “ Operation LeGend ” program is now officially underway in Chicago , Illinois , and we ’ re already seeing the first charges as a result of the surge in federal law enforcement on the crime-plagued streets of the city .
The U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Illinois announced on Friday evening that a trio of Chicago residents have the “ honor ” of being the first arrested under the auspices of the multi-agency operation .
Darryl Collins , 30 , of Dolton , is charged with one count of illegal possession of ammunition @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , 21 , of Chicago , is charged with one count of illegal possession of a firearm by a convicted felon .
Collins and Holloway were previously convicted of criminal felonies and were not lawfully allowed to possess a firearm or ammunition .
Darryl Phillips , 22 , of Chicago , is charged with one count of illegal possession of a machine gun .
The three are being held in federal custody .
As we reported on Friday , gun control groups have been criticizing the deployment of federal agents to cities like @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and other metropolitan areas that have seen a sharp increase in violent crime over the past couple of months .
According to anti-gun activists like Kris Brown of Brady , what ’ s really needed are more gun control laws aimed at legal gun owners , not more prosecutions of individuals who are illegally in possession of a firearm .
With gun control activists like Brown slamming the Trump administration for their crime-fighting initiative , they ’ re also getting crosswise with Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot , who ’ s actually backing Operation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for the surge , gun control groups were so eager to prove their progressive bona fides that they went ahead and attacked the DOJ operation anyway .
Do they really believe that turning legal gun owners into criminals will reduce violent crime in the city ?
Of course not .
Still , they ’ d rather you and I be arrested for possession of a 20-round magazine or a legally purchased AR-15 instead of watching criminals get hit with federal felonies for illegal gun possession .
It ’ s clear that activists like @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ re anti-gun .
Their main concern with Chicago ’ s crime rate is whether or not they can use it to push for more gun control laws , not whether the violence in the city can be addressed without putting more gun laws on the books .
If Operation LeGend is a success it will be a disaster for Brady and groups like Moms Demand Action , because it completely obliterates their argument .
Their objective isn ’ t safer streets , it ’ s putting more laws on the books .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ achieving that objective has to go , and the more effective the operation , the more hysterical the anti-gun activists will become .
Operation LeGend is off to a good start in Chicago , and that ’ s bad news for anti-gunners everywhere .

The DOJ’s “Operation LeGend” program is now officially underway in Chicago, Illinois, and we’re already seeing the first charges as a result of the surge in federal law enforcement on the crime-plagued streets of the city. The U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Illinois announced on Friday evening that a trio of Chicago residents have the “honor” of being the first arrested under the auspices of the multi-agency operation.
Darryl Collins, 30, of Dolton, is charged with one count of illegal possession of ammunition by a convicted felon. Romeo Holloway, 21, of Chicago, is charged with one count of illegal possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. Collins and Holloway were previously convicted of criminal felonies and were not lawfully allowed to possess a firearm or ammunition. Darryl Phillips, 22, of Chicago, is charged with one count of illegal possession of a machine gun. The three are being held in federal custody.
As we reported on Friday, gun control groups have been criticizing the deployment of federal agents to cities like Chicago, Kansas City, Albuquerque, and other metropolitan areas that have seen a sharp increase in violent crime over the past couple of months. According to anti-gun activists like Kris Brown of Brady, what’s really needed are more gun control laws aimed at legal gun owners, not more prosecutions of individuals who are illegally in possession of a firearm.
Let’s be clear, unleashing federal troops into our cities will not solve gun violence. The solutions — stronger federal gun laws, lifesaving funding for violence interruption programs — are sitting on Mitch McConnell’s desk. We’re not falling for this desperate show of dominance. https://t.co/N7uT7ITVza — Kris Brown (@KrisB_Brown) July 22, 2020
With gun control activists like Brown slamming the Trump administration for their crime-fighting initiative, they’re also getting crosswise with Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot, who’s actually backing Operation LeGend.
Mayor Lori Lightfoot, who earlier had threatened to go to court to block President Trump from deploying unnamed federal agents in Chicago without her permission, said she supports the expansion of Operation Legend, noting the additional agents coming to Chicago will be overseen by Lausch, a friend of Lightfoot’s for more than 20 years.
Despite Lightfoot’s support for the surge, gun control groups were so eager to prove their progressive bona fides that they went ahead and attacked the DOJ operation anyway. Do they really believe that turning legal gun owners into criminals will reduce violent crime in the city? Of course not. Still, they’d rather you and I be arrested for possession of a 20-round magazine or a legally purchased AR-15 instead of watching criminals get hit with federal felonies for illegal gun possession.
It’s clear that activists like Brown aren’t anti-crime, they’re anti-gun. Their main concern with Chicago’s crime rate is whether or not they can use it to push for more gun control laws, not whether the violence in the city can be addressed without putting more gun laws on the books.
If Operation LeGend is a success it will be a disaster for Brady and groups like Moms Demand Action, because it completely obliterates their argument. Their objective isn’t safer streets, it’s putting more laws on the books. Anything that gets in the way of achieving that objective has to go, and the more effective the operation, the more hysterical the anti-gun activists will become. Operation LeGend is off to a good start in Chicago, and that’s bad news for anti-gunners everywhere.


bearingarms--2020-07-25--Big City Exodus: What That May Mean For Gun Rights

As things currently stand , there are assumptions you can make about people ’ s gun politics based on where they live .
For example , if they live in a large city , they ’ re more likely to be anti-gun .
By contrast , those in rural American tend to support the Second Amendment .
This is a generalization , of course .
There are pro-gun folks in big cities and anti-gun folks in small communities .
However , for the most part , these generalizations are accurate based on how people tend to vote in these places @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
It seems many in our large cities are bailing for the country life .
A combination of the coronavirus pandemic , economic uncertainty , and social unrest is prompting waves of Americans to move from large cities and permanently relocate to more sparsely populated areas .
The trend has been accelerated by technology and shifting attitudes that make it easier than ever to work remotely .
Residents of all ages and incomes are moving in record numbers to suburban areas and small towns .
A perfect storm of factors makes the decision @ @ @ @ @ @ @ very obvious .
The dense nature of urban living and the lack of proper local government planning led to the coronavirus spreading five times faster in New York than the rest of the country .
The city that never sleeps now resembles a ghost town in many areas after thousands of its wealthy and middle-class residents fled early in the pandemic .
Many are moving to small towns north of the five boroughs .
Four upstate counties have seen an incredible surge in real estate demand , while the rest of the New @ @ @ @ @ @ @ County , the number of homes now under contract nearly doubles the 2016 figures .
It saw steady sales in March and April while the overall New York market fell by nearly 30 percent .
Some people are staying at their vacation homes , but the data suggest there are many permanent moves in the works .
And it ’ s not just people fleeing the Big Apple , either .
The Hill reports this is happening in a number of other places as well .
So just what is happening ?
While @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it ’ s not the only factor .
Migration from Chicago to Texas , for example , has been pretty well documented already .
Many have left due to the liberal politics , but most have left because of the high taxes .
While that sounds like the same reason , it ’ s not .
Some don ’ t like the gun control , pro-illegal immigration , and other political factors that have made California so distinct .
Those leaving due to high taxes , though , often start demanding the exact @ @ @ @ @ @ @ seems they don ’ t seem to understand the link between taxes and government programs .
Yet this is proceeding and it ’ s bound to have an impact on the gun rights discussion .
While those leaving New York City for more rural parts of the state won ’ t likely have a huge impact on state politics–the city already has a firm control over state politics as it is–that may not be true in other places .
Urbanites fleeing to the country are likely to bring their anti-gun ideas with them @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for gun control in their new locales .
However , there ’ s a flip side that should be considered as well .
You see , many in the rural parts of the country are pro-gun for a reason .
It ’ s not just they believe it ’ s our sacred and protected right .
They have practical reasons for supporting gun rights .
How many people will change their anti-gun tunes when they call the police over a prowler or something and then have to wait two hours for law enforcement @ @ @ @ @ @ @ one deputy on duty and he was clean across the county ?
That ’ s like to make some people rethink their anti-gun opinions , much like COVI-19 and the recent riots did .
Meanwhile , the cities would become less populated , reducing their impact on state politics , thus flipping some states from anti-gun to potentially pro-gun .
I ’ m not saying it will happen , only that it might .
Regardless , this is something that bears watching .

As things currently stand, there are assumptions you can make about people’s gun politics based on where they live. For example, if they live in a large city, they’re more likely to be anti-gun. By contrast, those in rural American tend to support the Second Amendment.
This is a generalization, of course. There are pro-gun folks in big cities and anti-gun folks in small communities. However, for the most part, these generalizations are accurate based on how people tend to vote in these places.
Yet something odd is taking place. It seems many in our large cities are bailing for the country life.
A combination of the coronavirus pandemic, economic uncertainty, and social unrest is prompting waves of Americans to move from large cities and permanently relocate to more sparsely populated areas. The trend has been accelerated by technology and shifting attitudes that make it easier than ever to work remotely. Residents of all ages and incomes are moving in record numbers to suburban areas and small towns. A perfect storm of factors makes the decision to leave major cities like New York very obvious. The dense nature of urban living and the lack of proper local government planning led to the coronavirus spreading five times faster in New York than the rest of the country. The city that never sleeps now resembles a ghost town in many areas after thousands of its wealthy and middle-class residents fled early in the pandemic. Many are moving to small towns north of the five boroughs. Four upstate counties have seen an incredible surge in real estate demand, while the rest of the New York market is cratering. In Ulster County, the number of homes now under contract nearly doubles the 2016 figures. It saw steady sales in March and April while the overall New York market fell by nearly 30 percent. Some people are staying at their vacation homes, but the data suggest there are many permanent moves in the works.
And it’s not just people fleeing the Big Apple, either. The Hill reports this is happening in a number of other places as well.
So just what is happening?
While COVID-19 may be playing some factor, it’s not the only factor. Migration from Chicago to Texas, for example, has been pretty well documented already. Many have left due to the liberal politics, but most have left because of the high taxes. While that sounds like the same reason, it’s not. Some don’t like the gun control, pro-illegal immigration, and other political factors that have made California so distinct. Those leaving due to high taxes, though, often start demanding the exact same programs they left behind.
It seems they don’t seem to understand the link between taxes and government programs.
Yet this is proceeding and it’s bound to have an impact on the gun rights discussion.
While those leaving New York City for more rural parts of the state won’t likely have a huge impact on state politics–the city already has a firm control over state politics as it is–that may not be true in other places. Urbanites fleeing to the country are likely to bring their anti-gun ideas with them. That means many will start pushing for gun control in their new locales.
That’s the downside.
However, there’s a flip side that should be considered as well.
You see, many in the rural parts of the country are pro-gun for a reason. It’s not just they believe it’s our sacred and protected right. They have practical reasons for supporting gun rights. How many people will change their anti-gun tunes when they call the police over a prowler or something and then have to wait two hours for law enforcement to arrive because there’s only one deputy on duty and he was clean across the county?
That’s like to make some people rethink their anti-gun opinions, much like COVI-19 and the recent riots did.
Meanwhile, the cities would become less populated, reducing their impact on state politics, thus flipping some states from anti-gun to potentially pro-gun.
I’m not saying it will happen, only that it might.
Regardless, this is something that bears watching.