bearingarms--2020-07-18--KC Gun Range Accused Of Discrimination For Turning Away Muslim Woman

Many gun ranges have various safety rules that go beyond your typical Four Rules we all know and love .
To be fair , ranges often create those rules because of various factors up to and including an attempt to address specific issues they ’ ve seen either on their range or elsewhere .
While they don ’ t always make sense to folks , it ’ s their range .
They can enact whatever rules they want .
Don ’ t like it ?
Well , you know where the door is .
However , a Muslim woman is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ religious discrimination .
A Lee ’ s Summit gun range discriminated against a Muslim woman by denying her access to their facility , according to a Washington , D.C.-based civil rights organization that demanded an immediate federal probe on Thursday .
Rania Barakat said staff at Frontier Justice denied her access to the gun range after she refused to remove her hijab , a religious head covering worn by Muslim women .
“ I ’ ve encountered racism before , but it was never to the point that someone has told me to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a facility to do any type of activity like this , ” she said .
After all , the Second Amendment applies to all of us .
While private businesses can do what they wish , discrimination is always wrong , even if it was somehow legal , and should be called out .
Yet the problem is , was Barakat really the target of discrimination , either religious or racial ?
Well , it sure doesn ’ t look like it .
The couple enjoys going to gun ranges and had visited @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
But when Barakat and her husband approached the cashier , she was told that she must remove her hijab to go into the gun range .
“ We were kinda both confused and honestly really shocked to hear this , ” Barakat said .
Barakat told the employee that she couldn ’ t remove her scarf because of her religion .
The employee pulled up the dress code policy on a computer and said , “ hats , caps , bandanna , or any other head covering will be removed in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” The employee had the gun range manager come over , who said the dress code was for her safety and that gun particles could come back and burn her and her scarf .
In other words , it was an all-encompassing rule that just happened to also include hijabs .
While that may suck for Muslim women who wish to use the range–and an exception should be considered for them , in my humble opinion–it ’ s hardly an act of racial or religious discrimination .
After all , there are a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fall under that category as well .
Now , does that make the range all copacetic ?
Not really .
While Barakat is screaming about discrimination when I don ’ t think that ’ s really the case , the range should have also understood that Muslim women can not remove their head covering in public .
It ’ s simply not an option .
It ’ s probably good policy to at least consider that .
That said , the range didn ’ t just make up this rule for no reason @ @ @ @ @ @ @ her race or religion as the reason for her being turned away .
During Barakat ’ s visit , no one cited religion or any of her personal attributes as a barrier to access to the range , according to the statement from Frontier Justice .
She was invited to stay in the store and shop , but would not be allowed on the range unless she complied with the safety rules .
“ We can not have a head covering on the range that could potentially catch brass and cause an adverse @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a firearm , ” the company said .
“ There are hundreds of videos of persons on a range that have brass hit their skin , who then flinch and have killed bystanders because of the uncontrolled action in response to the hot brass .
“ It doesn ’ t matter if it ’ s a hoodie or a head scarf , potential hazard is there and as a business catering to the public , we can not assume this risk.
” I think Barakat is probably going to have a hard time @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , there ’ s a part of me help that wonders if , as with so many “ hate crimes ” that turn out to be hoaxes , how much of this might have been in hopes of being turned away and hoping to cash in on that policy , even if it wasn ’ t really about her faith ?
I hope that ’ s not the case , just like I hope she can find another range to shoot at , but you can ’ t discount the possibility either .

Many gun ranges have various safety rules that go beyond your typical Four Rules we all know and love. To be fair, ranges often create those rules because of various factors up to and including an attempt to address specific issues they’ve seen either on their range or elsewhere. While they don’t always make sense to folks, it’s their range. They can enact whatever rules they want.
Don’t like it? Well, you know where the door is.
However, a Muslim woman is calling one such rule an act of religious discrimination.
A Lee’s Summit gun range discriminated against a Muslim woman by denying her access to their facility, according to a Washington, D.C.-based civil rights organization that demanded an immediate federal probe on Thursday. Rania Barakat said staff at Frontier Justice denied her access to the gun range after she refused to remove her hijab, a religious head covering worn by Muslim women. “I’ve encountered racism before, but it was never to the point that someone has told me to remove my scarf in order to enter a facility to do any type of activity like this,” she said.
Now, if that’s true, that’s awful.
After all, the Second Amendment applies to all of us. While private businesses can do what they wish, discrimination is always wrong, even if it was somehow legal, and should be called out.
Yet the problem is, was Barakat really the target of discrimination, either religious or racial?
Well, it sure doesn’t look like it.
The couple enjoys going to gun ranges and had visited others without any issues with her hijab. But when Barakat and her husband approached the cashier, she was told that she must remove her hijab to go into the gun range. “We were kinda both confused and honestly really shocked to hear this,” Barakat said. Barakat told the employee that she couldn’t remove her scarf because of her religion. The employee pulled up the dress code policy on a computer and said, “hats, caps, bandanna, or any other head covering will be removed in the facility, except baseball caps facing forward.” The employee had the gun range manager come over, who said the dress code was for her safety and that gun particles could come back and burn her and her scarf.
In other words, it was an all-encompassing rule that just happened to also include hijabs. While that may suck for Muslim women who wish to use the range–and an exception should be considered for them, in my humble opinion–it’s hardly an act of racial or religious discrimination. After all, there are a lot of other kinds of headwear that fall under that category as well.
Now, does that make the range all copacetic? Not really. While Barakat is screaming about discrimination when I don’t think that’s really the case, the range should have also understood that Muslim women cannot remove their head covering in public. It’s simply not an option. It’s probably good policy to at least consider that.
That said, the range didn’t just make up this rule for no reason, either. Nor did anyone cite her race or religion as the reason for her being turned away.
During Barakat’s visit, no one cited religion or any of her personal attributes as a barrier to access to the range, according to the statement from Frontier Justice. She was invited to stay in the store and shop, but would not be allowed on the range unless she complied with the safety rules. “We cannot have a head covering on the range that could potentially catch brass and cause an adverse and unsafe movement of a person holding a firearm,” the company said. “There are hundreds of videos of persons on a range that have brass hit their skin, who then flinch and have killed bystanders because of the uncontrolled action in response to the hot brass. “It doesn’t matter if it’s a hoodie or a head scarf, potential hazard is there and as a business catering to the public, we cannot assume this risk.”
I think Barakat is probably going to have a hard time proving her discrimination claim, and honestly, there’s a part of me help that wonders if, as with so many “hate crimes” that turn out to be hoaxes, how much of this might have been in hopes of being turned away and hoping to cash in on that policy, even if it wasn’t really about her faith? I hope that’s not the case, just like I hope she can find another range to shoot at, but you can’t discount the possibility either.


bearingarms--2020-07-18--McCloskeys Guest Star At Trump Campaign Virtual Event

If at this point you don ’ t know who Mark and Patricia McCloskey are , you probably aren ’ t reading this website ( or any other ) on a regular basis .
On Friday night , the St. Louis couple now under investigation for wielding their guns as hundreds of demonstrators paraded through their private neighborhood on their way to protest outside of Mayor Lyda Krewson ’ s home joined Donald Trump , Jr. and several other high-profile backers of the president in a virtual campaign event , in the process giving a virtual middle finger to St. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s complained that the vocal support for the couple from the president , Missouri Governor Brad Parson , and Senator Josh Hawley amount to interference in her investigation .
From The Hill : Mark and Patricia McCloskey of St. Louis , Mo.
, appeared on a program with campaign staffer Kimberley Guilfoyle as the two face an avalanche of criticism for threatening Black Lives Matter protesters at gunpoint .
“ I thought we were going to die ” Mark McCloskey said of the incident earlier this month .
“ We have nothing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wrong , and we ’ re not going to back down.
” The McCloskeys have become another political Rorschach Test ; if you ’ re on the Left you likely see a pair of white millionaires brandishing guns at peaceful protesters because they were angry that the sanctity of their gated community had been violated , and if you ’ re on the Right you likely see them as a couple of homeowners who defended their property with their legally-owned firearms and may have even protected their lives from an amped-up and angry @ @ @ @ @ @ @ campaign appearance does nothing to change either side ’ s narrative of the pair , it ’ s pretty smart of the McCloskeys to link up with the Trump campaign , at least from their perspective .
If ( and likely when ) Gardner does file charges against the couple , they can argue that their prosecution is a politically motivated decision being brought by Gardner to raise her profile and help her get elected in the liberal city .
Mark McCloskey in particular hasn ’ t exactly laid low while the storm @ @ @ @ @ @ @ appearing on Fox News for a couple of high-profile prime-time interviews where he ’ s laid out the couple ’ s side of the story as he did during Friday ’ s campaign event .
Stephen Gutowski of the Washington Free Beacon was the first to report that the couple would be joining the campaign ’ s Second Amendment-themed event , which also featured Utah Attorney General Sean Reyes and Rep. Matt Gaetz of Florida .
The McCloskey ’ s , however , were the stars of the show , telling Guilfoyle that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ smashed through the gate into my neighborhood and poured into my front yard.
” “ I think the estimates were as much as 500 people , ” McCloskey told the former Fox News host during the livestream , “ all rushing at us , coming towards us while we were just out on our patio trying to barbeque dinner .
I thought within seconds we would be overrun , they ’ d be in the house setting fires , they ’ d be killing us , and that would be the end of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the end of the McCloskeys , and by embracing the support of Team Trump , the couple have pretty much guaranteed they ’ re going to remain alive and well and a part of the news cycle for some time to come .
You can check out the entire event , including Kimberly Guilfoyle ’ s interview with the McCloskeys , in the video window below .

If at this point you don’t know who Mark and Patricia McCloskey are, you probably aren’t reading this website (or any other) on a regular basis. On Friday night, the St. Louis couple now under investigation for wielding their guns as hundreds of demonstrators paraded through their private neighborhood on their way to protest outside of Mayor Lyda Krewson’s home joined Donald Trump, Jr. and several other high-profile backers of the president in a virtual campaign event, in the process giving a virtual middle finger to St. Louis Circuit Attorney Kim Gardner, who’s complained that the vocal support for the couple from the president, Missouri Governor Brad Parson, and Senator Josh Hawley amount to interference in her investigation. From The Hill:
Mark and Patricia McCloskey of St. Louis, Mo., appeared on a program with campaign staffer Kimberley Guilfoyle as the two face an avalanche of criticism for threatening Black Lives Matter protesters at gunpoint. “I thought we were going to die” Mark McCloskey said of the incident earlier this month. “We have nothing to apologize for. We did nothing wrong, and we’re not going to back down.”
The McCloskeys have become another political Rorschach Test; if you’re on the Left you likely see a pair of white millionaires brandishing guns at peaceful protesters because they were angry that the sanctity of their gated community had been violated, and if you’re on the Right you likely see them as a couple of homeowners who defended their property with their legally-owned firearms and may have even protected their lives from an amped-up and angry mob.
While Friday night’s campaign appearance does nothing to change either side’s narrative of the pair, it’s pretty smart of the McCloskeys to link up with the Trump campaign, at least from their perspective. If (and likely when) Gardner does file charges against the couple, they can argue that their prosecution is a politically motivated decision being brought by Gardner to raise her profile and help her get elected in the liberal city.
Mark McCloskey in particular hasn’t exactly laid low while the storm of controversy surrounding him rages on, appearing on Fox News for a couple of high-profile prime-time interviews where he’s laid out the couple’s side of the story as he did during Friday’s campaign event.
Stephen Gutowski of the Washington Free Beacon was the first to report that the couple would be joining the campaign’s Second Amendment-themed event, which also featured Utah Attorney General Sean Reyes and Rep. Matt Gaetz of Florida. The McCloskey’s, however, were the stars of the show, telling Guilfoyle that the “peaceful protests ended when the smashed through the gate into my neighborhood and poured into my front yard.”
“I think the estimates were as much as 500 people,” McCloskey told the former Fox News host during the livestream, “all rushing at us, coming towards us while we were just out on our patio trying to barbeque dinner. I thought within seconds we would be overrun, they’d be in the house setting fires, they’d be killing us, and that would be the end of us.”
That was most certainly not the end of the McCloskeys, and by embracing the support of Team Trump, the couple have pretty much guaranteed they’re going to remain alive and well and a part of the news cycle for some time to come.
You can check out the entire event, including Kimberly Guilfoyle’s interview with the McCloskeys, in the video window below.


bearingarms--2020-07-19--Media Ignores Reality Over McCloskeys

Media Ignores Reality Over McCloskeys

The McCloskeys aren ’ t likely to be your typical Bearing Arms readers .
From what I ’ ve seen , they lean heavily to the left in their politics and would probably just as soon see many of us disarmed as talk to us .
However , regardless of their opinions about anything , there ’ s right and there ’ s wrong .
Neither of those things hinges on the St. Louis couple ’ s personal politics .
Nor does my view of the abominable treatment they ’ ve received not just from their local government , but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from the Saint Louis Post-Dispatch .
This , of course , ignores the reality on the ground that prompted the McCloskeys to get those firearms in the first place .
To start with , they were on private property .
A gate was destroyed to allow these individuals to gain access to that private property .
It was a private street , even , meaning they were trespassing from the start .
Further , when the McCloskeys came out , they claim they were threatened by some of the first few to step @ @ @ @ @ @ @ don ’ t know how true that is or not , but that claim is completely missing from the Post-Dispatch ‘ s editorial .
That ’ s an important bit of context that should have been included , but it ’ s not .
Sure , the McCloskeys were apparently not in any actual danger except for their poor weapons handling , but did they know that at the time ?
Would a reasonable person who knew of violent protests all over the country faced with a trespassing mob who already committed acts @ @ @ @ @ @ @ property and threats from members of that mob feel like their life was endangered ?
Oh , you ’ d better believe it .
Yet many in the media simply don ’ t want you to have that all-important context because then , you might not view the McCloskeys in the right light .
They simply must advance the narrative and damn anything that gets in the way , even facts .
You see , while I may determine right and wrong on an objective basis , it seems folks at the Post-Dispatch @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as “ right ” and anything working against that narrative as “ wrong.
” And that , ladies and gentlemen , is the state of American journalism .

The McCloskeys aren’t likely to be your typical Bearing Arms readers. From what I’ve seen, they lean heavily to the left in their politics and would probably just as soon see many of us disarmed as talk to us.
However, regardless of their opinions about anything, there’s right and there’s wrong. Neither of those things hinges on the St. Louis couple’s personal politics.
Nor does my view of the abominable treatment they’ve received not just from their local government, but from the media. Take this editorial from the Saint Louis Post-Dispatch.
The McCloskey Barefoot Armed Porch Gang is expanding into a national political movement now that President Donald Trump, Missouri Sen. Josh Hawley and Gov. Mike Parson have joined this circus of absurdity and insanity. A simple navigational mistake by protesters targeting the nearby house of St. Louis Mayor Lyda Krewson on June 28 escalated into a major issue of gun rights versus free speech after the group spilled onto a private Central West End street and were confronted by gun-waving mansion owners Mark and Patricia McCloskey. The greatest danger the McCloskeys faced during the brief encounter was from each other as they wildly aimed their firearms and exercised minimal trigger-finger discipline . At one point, pistol-wielding Patricia McCloskey walked right in front of her husband’s assault-rifle muzzle. At various other points, he aimed his rifle directly at her upper torso and head. At no point in video footage did protesters appear to step on the McCloskeys’ property, keeping a distance of 25 to 30 feet from the mansion.
This, of course, ignores the reality on the ground that prompted the McCloskeys to get those firearms in the first place.
To start with, they were on private property. A gate was destroyed to allow these individuals to gain access to that private property. It was a private street, even, meaning they were trespassing from the start.
Further, when the McCloskeys came out, they claim they were threatened by some of the first few to step onto their property.
Now, we don’t know how true that is or not, but that claim is completely missing from the Post-Dispatch‘s editorial. That’s an important bit of context that should have been included, but it’s not.
Sure, the McCloskeys were apparently not in any actual danger except for their poor weapons handling, but did they know that at the time? Would a reasonable person who knew of violent protests all over the country faced with a trespassing mob who already committed acts of vandalism to gain access to the property and threats from members of that mob feel like their life was endangered?
Oh, you’d better believe it.
Yet many in the media simply don’t want you to have that all-important context because then, you might not view the McCloskeys in the right light. They simply must advance the narrative and damn anything that gets in the way, even facts.
You see, while I may determine right and wrong on an objective basis, it seems folks at the Post-Dispatch only view what can help the narrative as “right” and anything working against that narrative as “wrong.”
And that, ladies and gentlemen, is the state of American journalism.


bearingarms--2020-07-19--NSSF: Time To Throw Out Stereotypes Of Gun Owners

Amidst the historic surge in gun purchases , can the media finally let go of their false narrative that only old white guys , most of them living in rural areas , are embracing their Second Amendment rights ?
Larry Keane of the National Shooting Sports Foundation says it ’ s long past time for reporters and anti-gun politicians to recognize that there really is no such thing as a stereotypical gun owner these days .
Americans of all walks of life are exercising their right to keep and bear arms , many of them for the first time in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ broad diversity of the Second Amendment community in his latest column at the NSSF ’ s website .
Maj Toure , founder of Black Guns Matter , promotes African American gun ownership and spends his time advocating firearm ownership and teaching gun safety in urban and minority communities .
He spoke to Business Insider about the growth and success of his efforts .
“ People somehow forget that we have the right to defend our lives with firearms , ” Toure said .
The National African American Gun Association boasts membership growth of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ A lot of times in our community , we hear a lot of our politicians , unfortunately say , don ’ t have a gun .
You don ’ t need a gun , ” explained NAAGA founder Philip Smith .
“ Well , I pushed back on that and say , that ’ s the very thing that we do need.
” As crime has exploded in many cities , Americans of all races , colors , and creeds have turned to the Second Amendment and the ability to keep @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their loved ones .
That includes a growing number of women .
Anecdotally , my local gun store owner says he ’ s seen a number of women , from young moms to older widows , come in looking for a gun for the very first time .
Keane says it ’ s a nationwide phenomenon .
After seeing a man outside her window while alone one night , 59-year old Terry Marsh said she would not be in that position again unarmed .
“ It ’ s a very helpless feeling knowing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ your family , ” Marsh said .
“ If I had a gun or a way to protect myself it would have given me a little bit of power and I ’ d have felt secure.
” Women are taking those priorities into their own hands , with home and family safety at the top of Americans ’ minds during the current unsettling times .
That makes sense and is a welcomed development .
What impact will these new gun owners have on the 2020 elections ?
Keane believes that new gun owners @ @ @ @ @ @ @ protecting our Second Amendment rights .
As gun control groups like billionaire Michael Bloomberg-funded Everytown for Gun Safety and Moms Demand Action clamor for more gun control , increasingly more voices of a diverse American gun owner are responding .
The impacts will be significant on the future of Second Amendment rights in America .
NSSF launched the # GUNVOTE® online resource to help gunowners to register to vote and provide voters election updates and candidate information in order to be more educated about the Second Amendment positions of political candidates .
As @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to be informed in the ballot box so they don ’ t risk their rights .
If these new gun owners aren ’ t just exercising their rights , but are prepared to protect them on Election Day , Keane is absolutely correct that they could have an outsize impact , particularly in battleground states .
The key is making sure that they are engaged , and the best way to do that is to educate them on what ’ s at stake in this election .
If Joe Biden wins in November @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will be the ones paying the price , while the country ’ s criminals will be further emboldened by the Democrats ’ focus on turning the Second Amendment right of the People into a privilege of the few .

Amidst the historic surge in gun purchases, can the media finally let go of their false narrative that only old white guys, most of them living in rural areas, are embracing their Second Amendment rights? Larry Keane of the National Shooting Sports Foundation says it’s long past time for reporters and anti-gun politicians to recognize that there really is no such thing as a stereotypical gun owner these days.
Americans of all walks of life are exercising their right to keep and bear arms, many of them for the first time in their lives, and Keane highlights the broad diversity of the Second Amendment community in his latest column at the NSSF’s website.
Maj Toure, founder of Black Guns Matter, promotes African American gun ownership and spends his time advocating firearm ownership and teaching gun safety in urban and minority communities. He spoke to Business Insider about the growth and success of his efforts. “People somehow forget that we have the right to defend our lives with firearms,” Toure said. The National African American Gun Association boasts membership growth of 15,000 new members in 2020 so far. “A lot of times in our community, we hear a lot of our politicians, unfortunately say, don’t have a gun. You don’t need a gun,” explained NAAGA founder Philip Smith. “Well, I pushed back on that and say, that’s the very thing that we do need.”
As crime has exploded in many cities, Americans of all races, colors, and creeds have turned to the Second Amendment and the ability to keep and bear arms to protect themselves and their loved ones. That includes a growing number of women. Anecdotally, my local gun store owner says he’s seen a number of women, from young moms to older widows, come in looking for a gun for the very first time. Keane says it’s a nationwide phenomenon.
After seeing a man outside her window while alone one night, 59-year old Terry Marsh said she would not be in that position again unarmed. “It’s a very helpless feeling knowing you can’t protect yourself or your family,” Marsh said. “If I had a gun or a way to protect myself it would have given me a little bit of power and I’d have felt secure.” Women are taking those priorities into their own hands, with home and family safety at the top of Americans’ minds during the current unsettling times. That makes sense and is a welcomed development.
What impact will these new gun owners have on the 2020 elections? Keane believes that new gun owners could be a key voting bloc in protecting our Second Amendment rights.
As gun control groups like billionaire Michael Bloomberg-funded Everytown for Gun Safety and Moms Demand Action clamor for more gun control, increasingly more voices of a diverse American gun owner are responding. The impacts will be significant on the future of Second Amendment rights in America. NSSF launched the #GUNVOTE® online resource to help gunowners to register to vote and provide voters election updates and candidate information in order to be more educated about the Second Amendment positions of political candidates. As these positive trends continue, voters need to be informed in the ballot box so they don’t risk their rights.
If these new gun owners aren’t just exercising their rights, but are prepared to protect them on Election Day, Keane is absolutely correct that they could have an outsize impact, particularly in battleground states. The key is making sure that they are engaged, and the best way to do that is to educate them on what’s at stake in this election. If Joe Biden wins in November, legal gun owners new and old will be the ones paying the price, while the country’s criminals will be further emboldened by the Democrats’ focus on turning the Second Amendment right of the People into a privilege of the few.


bearingarms--2020-07-20--Among Other Crimes, Gun Store Robberies Spike

Over the last few months , it ’ s seemed that everyone wants a gun .
That ’ s why gun sales are so ridiculously high at the moment .
It ’ s kind of insane , really , but at least the so-called “ Trump Slump ” appears to be over .
For now , anyway .
However , it ’ s not just the law-abiding that are looking to get their hands on firearms .
As per usual , criminals want guns as well .
They never stopped , to be fair , but it seems even their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it ’ s difficult to tell for certain since they don ’ t undergo NICS checks to buy their guns , but there is a bit of information that suggests someone on that side of the law wants guns pretty bad .
Thieves stole more than 1,000 firearms from gun stores across the country in just over one week this spring , according to the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco Firearms and Explosives .
The ATF says thefts of gun stores are on the rise .
To put that in perspective , that haul @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for nearly one-fifth of the roughly 5,600 guns reported stolen in all of 2019 .
Thomas Chittum , ATF deputy director for field operations , says a lot of that appears to be tied to unrest around the country in the wake of the police killing of George Floyd .
“ The spike was marked , ” he said .
“ It was the most gun store burglaries in a short period of time that I have ever seen , that ATF has ever seen.
” Chittum ’ s agents are investigating more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ May 28-June 5 alone .
While it ’ s obvious that there ’ s a link , no one really knows just what that link actually is .
For example , it could be a case of opportunistic thieves recognizing that the police were otherwise occupied and deciding they would make a good score with a much-reduced chance of getting caught .
It could also be people who opted to steal guns for the “ revolution ” they so desperately want .
Most likely , it ’ s the former rather than the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ think for a minute that any of the so-called revolutionaries running around our American cities over the last couple of months are incapable of considering something like this , I think they ’ re incapable of actually doing it successfully .
Criminals , however , have been doing this kind of thing for years , so we know they can pull it off .
To be sure , there have been some arrests along the way , but not nearly enough .
This is the flip side of what happens when the entire @ @ @ @ @ @ @ talk about wanting to keep guns out of the wrong hands join up and make it just that much easier for criminals to get guns .
Nicely done , you jackwagons .
Nicely done , indeed .
And make no mistake , those protesting and their allies elsewhere are among the very people who push for gun control .
Yet , as we ’ ve noted , they ’ ve been pretty silent about much of this .
Not that we should be surprised .
Still , a bunch of guns out on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ all of us .
Here ’ s hoping a lot more arrests are made and very soon .

Over the last few months, it’s seemed that everyone wants a gun. That’s why gun sales are so ridiculously high at the moment. It’s kind of insane, really, but at least the so-called “Trump Slump” appears to be over. For now, anyway.
However, it’s not just the law-abiding that are looking to get their hands on firearms.
As per usual, criminals want guns as well. They never stopped, to be fair, but it seems even their demands are increasing. Of course, it’s difficult to tell for certain since they don’t undergo NICS checks to buy their guns, but there is a bit of information that suggests someone on that side of the law wants guns pretty bad.
Thieves stole more than 1,000 firearms from gun stores across the country in just over one week this spring, according to the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco Firearms and Explosives. The ATF says thefts of gun stores are on the rise. To put that in perspective, that haul between May 28-June 5 would have accounted for nearly one-fifth of the roughly 5,600 guns reported stolen in all of 2019. Thomas Chittum, ATF deputy director for field operations, says a lot of that appears to be tied to unrest around the country in the wake of the police killing of George Floyd. “The spike was marked,” he said. “It was the most gun store burglaries in a short period of time that I have ever seen, that ATF has ever seen.” Chittum’s agents are investigating more than 90 thefts or attempted thefts from May 28-June 5 alone.
While it’s obvious that there’s a link, no one really knows just what that link actually is.
For example, it could be a case of opportunistic thieves recognizing that the police were otherwise occupied and deciding they would make a good score with a much-reduced chance of getting caught. It could also be people who opted to steal guns for the “revolution” they so desperately want.
Most likely, it’s the former rather than the latter. While I don’t think for a minute that any of the so-called revolutionaries running around our American cities over the last couple of months are incapable of considering something like this, I think they’re incapable of actually doing it successfully.
Criminals, however, have been doing this kind of thing for years, so we know they can pull it off.
To be sure, there have been some arrests along the way, but not nearly enough. This is the flip side of what happens when the entire country is burning. The people who talk about wanting to keep guns out of the wrong hands join up and make it just that much easier for criminals to get guns. Nicely done, you jackwagons. Nicely done, indeed.
And make no mistake, those protesting and their allies elsewhere are among the very people who push for gun control. Yet, as we’ve noted, they’ve been pretty silent about much of this.
Not that we should be surprised.
Still, a bunch of guns out on the black market is a problem for all of us. Here’s hoping a lot more arrests are made and very soon.


bearingarms--2020-07-20--Breaking: McCloskeys Charged With Felony Weapons Violations

Mark and Patricia McCloskey are now facing felony unlawful use of a weapon charges for displaying a rifle and handgun and pointing them at protesters who had entered their private neighborhood , ending weeks of speculation that the pair would be charged by St. Louis Circuit Attorney Kim Gardner .
The Washington Post reports that while Gardner is charging the couple with both a felony and misdemeanor count , she ’ s recommending no prison time for the pair .
Will the Left be angry that the McCloskeys aren ’ t going to be nailed to the wall and sent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of class or race privilege ?
Could Gardner , who ’ s accused President Trump and Governor Brad Parson of political interference in the case , now draw the ire of Democrats for going easy on the McCloskeys ?
I wouldn ’ t be surprised to see it , but I don ’ t think the objections will be all that loud or long-lived .
The idea here is to get the McCloskeys to plead guilty and avoid a trial where the outcome is uncertain for both parties .
Gardner ’ s already @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Would she be willing to settle for a guilty plea to a misdemeanor , with community service instead of jail time ?
No loss of a law license or right to keep and bear arms , just a few hours a week volunteering at a soup kitchen or picking up trash along the roadside .
The other option would be going all out at trial and pushing for prison time along with a conviction .
Do the McCloskeys really want to take that risk ?
Both Mark and Patricia McCloskey are personal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not be as well versed in the art of the plea deal as a veteran criminal defense attorney , they know how the system works .
I ’ m very curious to see if they ’ ll play along and take a misdemeanor plea somewhere down the line , or if they ’ ll fight for a full acquittal .
In the meantime , Gardner ’ s decision not only ensured the prosecution of the McCloskeys will be a campaign issue in her own re-election bid , but given the embrace of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and their criminal case will be a recurring national news story between now and Election Day .
Trump will undoubtably use the couple in his push to be seen as the law-and-order president , which means Joe Biden and Democrats will now officially do everything they can to demonize and destroy the couple ’ s credibility , livelihood , and reputation in the name of “ justice.
” With Missouri Gov .
Brad Parson already talking up a pardon for the McCloskeys before they were even charged , does an eventual plea bargain @ @ @ @ @ @ @ allure that Gardner hopes it will have ?
If the McCloskeys choose to fight and lose , they can almost certainly count on the governor ’ s pardon .
Why not go to trial ?
The risk seems to be relatively low with the governor in their corner , and the potential reward of acquittal is a distinct possibility , given that the McCloskeys never left their property and under Missouri law had a right to display their firearms if their were in fear for their lives .
Given the rampant violence in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ protesters entering the McCloskeys neighborhood , I think there ’ s a good chance at least one juror would feel that the McCloskeys actions were legal , even if they could use a training class or two ( I wouldn ’ t be surprised , by the way , if they ’ ve actually had a couple of those over the past few weeks ) .
Ordinarily , a plea bargain like the one I outlined above would be a pretty decent deal if the McCloskeys wanted to avoid the risk of a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a trial itself has been largely avoided , Kim Gardner might be arguing her case before a jury after all .

Mark and Patricia McCloskey are now facing felony unlawful use of a weapon charges for displaying a rifle and handgun and pointing them at protesters who had entered their private neighborhood, ending weeks of speculation that the pair would be charged by St. Louis Circuit Attorney Kim Gardner. The Washington Post reports that while Gardner is charging the couple with both a felony and misdemeanor count, she’s recommending no prison time for the pair.
Gardner said in an interview with the AP ahead of more broadly announcing the charges that the McCloskeys’ actions risked creating a violent situation during an otherwise nonviolent protest. “It is illegal to wave weapons in a threatening manner — that is unlawful in the city of St. Louis,” Gardner said. Gardner is recommending a diversion program such as community service rather than jail time if the McCloskeys are convicted. Typically, class E felonies could result in up to four years in prison.
Will the Left be angry that the McCloskeys aren’t going to be nailed to the wall and sent to prison? Is this an example of class or race privilege? Could Gardner, who’s accused President Trump and Governor Brad Parson of political interference in the case, now draw the ire of Democrats for going easy on the McCloskeys? I wouldn’t be surprised to see it, but I don’t think the objections will be all that loud or long-lived. The idea here is to get the McCloskeys to plead guilty and avoid a trial where the outcome is uncertain for both parties.
Gardner’s already dangling the prospect of no jail time. Would she be willing to settle for a guilty plea to a misdemeanor, with community service instead of jail time? No loss of a law license or right to keep and bear arms, just a few hours a week volunteering at a soup kitchen or picking up trash along the roadside. The other option would be going all out at trial and pushing for prison time along with a conviction. Do the McCloskeys really want to take that risk?
Both Mark and Patricia McCloskey are personal injury attorneys, so while they may not be as well versed in the art of the plea deal as a veteran criminal defense attorney, they know how the system works. I’m very curious to see if they’ll play along and take a misdemeanor plea somewhere down the line, or if they’ll fight for a full acquittal.
In the meantime, Gardner’s decision not only ensured the prosecution of the McCloskeys will be a campaign issue in her own re-election bid, but given the embrace of the McCloskeys by the Trump campaign, they and their criminal case will be a recurring national news story between now and Election Day. Trump will undoubtably use the couple in his push to be seen as the law-and-order president, which means Joe Biden and Democrats will now officially do everything they can to demonize and destroy the couple’s credibility, livelihood, and reputation in the name of “justice.”
**Update**
With Missouri Gov. Brad Parson already talking up a pardon for the McCloskeys before they were even charged, does an eventual plea bargain offer to a misdemeanor really have the allure that Gardner hopes it will have? If the McCloskeys choose to fight and lose, they can almost certainly count on the governor’s pardon. Why not go to trial? The risk seems to be relatively low with the governor in their corner, and the potential reward of acquittal is a distinct possibility, given that the McCloskeys never left their property and under Missouri law had a right to display their firearms if their were in fear for their lives.
Given the rampant violence in St. Louis in the weeks proceeding the protesters entering the McCloskeys neighborhood, I think there’s a good chance at least one juror would feel that the McCloskeys actions were legal, even if they could use a training class or two (I wouldn’t be surprised, by the way, if they’ve actually had a couple of those over the past few weeks). Ordinarily, a plea bargain like the one I outlined above would be a pretty decent deal if the McCloskeys wanted to avoid the risk of a trial, but if the risk of a trial itself has been largely avoided, Kim Gardner might be arguing her case before a jury after all.


bearingarms--2020-07-20--Kanye West: "Guns Don't Kill People, People Kill People"

While most of the press coverage of Kanye West ’ s first campaign event has focused on his condemnation of abortion and critique of Harriet Tubman ( who West says “ never actually freed the slaves ” but “ just had the slaves go work for other white people ” ) * , 2020 ’ s newest presidential candidate also spoke about the Second Amendment in his stream-of-consciousness rally in South Carolina on Sunday evening .
West offered up some red meat for gun owners when he said “ guns don ’ t kill people , people kill people , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ American gun owners were disarmed .
When asked about his stance on gun violence in the U.S. , West described how he lives “ on a 4,000-acre ranch [ in Wyoming ] and I can shoot AR-15s all day without going to jail.
” “ Shooting guns are fun … The thing is if you guys put down all your weapons … When other countries come in and you have no weapons , what do you think is going to happen ?
You will be enslaved .
Guns don ’ t kill people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his wife Kim Kardashian West were eventually on the same page when it came to the birth of their first child , North , but the couple may not see eye to eye when it comes to the right to keep and bear arms .
Kardashian West has been an outspoken supporter of more gun control laws , and in 2017 penned a letter in support of making it harder for Americans to exercise their right to keep and bear arms .
Interestingly enough , it looks like Kardashian West ’ s original @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for some reason , though it ’ s not clear when it came down .
Instead of getting to read all about how her armed guards support more gun control , it now reverts to a 404 error message .
Kardashian West ’ s stance has earned her praise from gun control activist Shannon Watts and Moms Demand Action in the past , but would appear to put her at odds with her husband ’ s position on the Second Amendment , given his apparent support for AR-15 ownership and opposition to gun @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pair ’ s relationship is strong enough to survive a disagreement or two , and who knows , maybe Kardashian West ’ s position has shifted a bit since her open letter was published a few years ago .
Of course , even if she ’ s on board with his 2A talk , there may still be some trouble brewing on the home front .
A source tells ET that the Keeping Up With the Kardashians star is “ upset ” following some of the comments the rapper made during his presidential @ @ @ @ @ @ @ weekend .
During the event , Kanye tearfully said that he and Kim discussed the possibility of her having an abortion while she was pregnant with their first child , daughter North .
He also said shared his fear that Kim might divorce him following the emotional speech he gave on Sunday .
A source tells ET that “ Kim , the family and Kanye ’ s friends are worried about him.
” Wyoming doesn ’ t have a red flag law , so at least Kanye doesn ’ t have to worry @ @ @ @ @ @ @ without being accused of a crime .
As for his mental state , I can only go off of what I ’ ve seen , but West doesn ’ t seem crazy or out-of-control to me , though some of his ideas were a bit unconventional , to say the least .
When I watched his campaign event in Charleston , South Carolina , I saw someone who seemed less like a politician and more of an evangelist , frankly .
I view West ’ s new crusade is more as a testament @ @ @ @ @ @ @ campaign , but I suppose that might not make it any better for those who are worried about him .
*For what it ’ s worth , I don ’ t think West was criticizing Harriet Tubman specifically .
If you listen to his comments , he went on to say that “ The National Basketball Association is not owned by any blacks .
Universal Music is not owned by any blacks.
” I think his point was that even when slavery ended , black Americans did not find themselves on equal footing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ white Americans .

While most of the press coverage of Kanye West’s first campaign event has focused on his condemnation of abortion and critique of Harriet Tubman (who West says “never actually freed the slaves” but “just had the slaves go work for other white people”)*, 2020’s newest presidential candidate also spoke about the Second Amendment in his stream-of-consciousness rally in South Carolina on Sunday evening.
West offered up some red meat for gun owners when he said “guns don’t kill people, people kill people,” and wondered what might happen if American gun owners were disarmed.
When asked about his stance on gun violence in the U.S., West described how he lives “on a 4,000-acre ranch [in Wyoming] and I can shoot AR-15s all day without going to jail.” “Shooting guns are fun … The thing is if you guys put down all your weapons … When other countries come in and you have no weapons, what do you think is going to happen? You will be enslaved. Guns don’t kill people. People kill people.”
West and his wife Kim Kardashian West were eventually on the same page when it came to the birth of their first child, North, but the couple may not see eye to eye when it comes to the right to keep and bear arms. Kardashian West has been an outspoken supporter of more gun control laws, and in 2017 penned a letter in support of making it harder for Americans to exercise their right to keep and bear arms.
“I’ll be wearing orange to show my support for stricter gun control laws in the United States,” Kardashian West writes. “In almost 20 years, our country has made very little progress in enacting laws that would help protect innocent Americans from people who should not have access to firearms. Right now, there are more guns owned by civilians in this country than in any other country in the world.”
Interestingly enough, it looks like Kardashian West’s original letter has been removed from her website for some reason, though it’s not clear when it came down. Instead of getting to read all about how her armed guards support more gun control, it now reverts to a 404 error message.
Kardashian West’s stance has earned her praise from gun control activist Shannon Watts and Moms Demand Action in the past, but would appear to put her at odds with her husband’s position on the Second Amendment, given his apparent support for AR-15 ownership and opposition to gun bans. I’m sure the pair’s relationship is strong enough to survive a disagreement or two, and who knows, maybe Kardashian West’s position has shifted a bit since her open letter was published a few years ago.
Of course, even if she’s on board with his 2A talk, there may still be some trouble brewing on the home front.
A source tells ET that the Keeping Up With the Kardashians star is “upset” following some of the comments the rapper made during his presidential campaign rally in South Carolina over the weekend. During the event, Kanye tearfully said that he and Kim discussed the possibility of her having an abortion while she was pregnant with their first child, daughter North. He also said shared his fear that Kim might divorce him following the emotional speech he gave on Sunday. A source tells ET that “Kim, the family and Kanye’s friends are worried about him.”
Wyoming doesn’t have a red flag law, so at least Kanye doesn’t have to worry about the government coming for his guns without being accused of a crime. As for his mental state, I can only go off of what I’ve seen, but West doesn’t seem crazy or out-of-control to me, though some of his ideas were a bit unconventional, to say the least. When I watched his campaign event in Charleston, South Carolina, I saw someone who seemed less like a politician and more of an evangelist, frankly. I view West’s new crusade is more as a testament of his faith than an actual presidential campaign, but I suppose that might not make it any better for those who are worried about him.
*For what it’s worth, I don’t think West was criticizing Harriet Tubman specifically. If you listen to his comments, he went on to say that “The National Basketball Association is not owned by any blacks. Universal Music is not owned by any blacks.” I think his point was that even when slavery ended, black Americans did not find themselves on equal footing, either socially or economically, with white Americans.


bearingarms--2020-07-20--Media Talk of "Boogaloo" A Distraction

Media Talk of "Boogaloo" A Distraction

For a while now , the media has gotten riled up over the “ Boogaloo movement.
” They missed the fact that it ’ s a meme , a joke among those who fear a civil war is coming and deal with those concerns by making light of it .
Why else would the Hawaiian shirt become such a symbol ?
I mean , it ’ s not like it ’ s really camouflage or something .
Now , the media is really ramping up the fearmongering .
According to a recent report , deaths attributable to so-called “ right-wing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than 300 % since President Donald Trump took office in 2017 .
A database compiled by the Type Media Center ’ s David Neiwert and based on government interpretations of ideological motivations showed that at least 87 people were “ killed by far-right terrorists ” during Trump ’ s first three years in office .
That number swells to 145 dead in three years if the 58 people killed by [ Vegas Killer ’ s Name Redacted ] during the Las Vegas massacre in October 2017 are added in .
Except we don @ @ @ @ @ @ @ shooting had anything to do with politics .
Especially since the targeted festival was country music , which is far more likely to be listened to by Trump supporters than their opponents .
Of course , the Type Media Center isn ’ t exactly a non-biased source .
The Type Media Center was formerly known as The Nation Institute and was previously attached to The Nation magazine .
From 2013 through 2016 , “ right-wing ” terrorists in the United States killed some 46 people .
Conversely , Neiwert notes , only 17 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ terrorism over the past three years .
Left-wing domestic terrorism barely registered during the time span ; only four such deaths occurred in the past three years .
Of course , I have to question their methodology here .
For one , if Las Vegas is potentially lumped in with “ right-wing ” terrorism , how many other BS acts fall into place .
Let ’ s also note that 46 people killed over four years is about 11 people per year , so pretty low .
The total of 87 over the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to 28 per year ( rounded , of course , since you can ’ t kill a fraction of a person ) .
That ’ s not a 300 percent increase .
Math Lives Matter and all that .
Now , is that still a significant increase ?
Sure .
However , a fair portion of that total likely comes from racially-motivated killings .
For example , 11 were killed at the Tree of Life Synagogue shooting .
Yet , while many like to classify anti-Semitism as a right-wing cause , it has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ President Trump has said .
Further , the report using a big , scary number–300 percent–to grab attention , yet let ’ s also acknowledge that when we look at the total number of supposed homicides we ’ re talking about here , it ’ s statistical noise at most .
In a nation of almost 330 million people , fewer than 30 people per year–while tragic–isn ’ t a pressing problem .
Unfortunately , some people seem to think otherwise .
Authorities who study extremism told Congress Thursday that far-right groups , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pose the most serious threat of political violence in America — including attacks on the police .
“ The facts are right now that right-wing extremism is the bigger problem .
That ’ s where the violence is coming from , ” said Heidi Beirich , the recent co-founder of the Global Project Against Hate and Extremism and former director of the Southern Poverty Law Center ’ s Intelligence Project , where she spent the past two decades tracking and reporting on far-right extremist activity in the U.S. Beirich was called to testify @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the House Homeland Security Subcommittee on Intelligence & Counterterrorism , along with JJ MacNab , a fellow at George Washington University ’ s Program on Extremism , and John Donohue , the former chief of strategic initiatives for the New York City Police Department and a fellow at Rutgers University ’ s Miller Center for Community Protection and Resilience .
Now , the hearing was prompted by events that actually happened where those who have identified with the “ Boogaloo movement ” were arrested for allegedly planning attacks during the Black Lives @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not completely because of fear-mongering .
Still , though , where are the hearings on the riots that ravaged pretty much every major city in this country ?
Where are the hearings on the coordinated nature of how these protests were hijacked into outright riots ?
My days of taking Congress seriously are certainly coming to a middle , let me tell you .

For a while now, the media has gotten riled up over the “Boogaloo movement.” They missed the fact that it’s a meme, a joke among those who fear a civil war is coming and deal with those concerns by making light of it. Why else would the Hawaiian shirt become such a symbol? I mean, it’s not like it’s really camouflage or something.
Now, the media is really ramping up the fearmongering.
According to a recent report, deaths attributable to so-called “right-wing domestic terrorists” have increased by more than 300% since President Donald Trump took office in 2017. A database compiled by the Type Media Center’s David Neiwert and based on government interpretations of ideological motivations showed that at least 87 people were “killed by far-right terrorists” during Trump’s first three years in office. That number swells to 145 dead in three years if the 58 people killed by [Vegas Killer’s Name Redacted] during the Las Vegas massacre in October 2017 are added in.
Except we don’t know that the Las Vegas shooting had anything to do with politics. Especially since the targeted festival was country music, which is far more likely to be listened to by Trump supporters than their opponents.
Of course, the Type Media Center isn’t exactly a non-biased source.
The Type Media Center was formerly known as The Nation Institute and was previously attached to The Nation magazine. From 2013 through 2016, “right-wing” terrorists in the United States killed some 46 people. Conversely, Neiwert notes, only 17 people have died due to domestic Islamic terrorism over the past three years. Left-wing domestic terrorism barely registered during the time span; only four such deaths occurred in the past three years.
Of course, I have to question their methodology here.
For one, if Las Vegas is potentially lumped in with “right-wing” terrorism, how many other BS acts fall into place.
Let’s also note that 46 people killed over four years is about 11 people per year, so pretty low. The total of 87 over the last three years or so works out to 28 per year (rounded, of course, since you can’t kill a fraction of a person). That’s not a 300 percent increase. Math Lives Matter and all that.
Now, is that still a significant increase? Sure. However, a fair portion of that total likely comes from racially-motivated killings. For example, 11 were killed at the Tree of Life Synagogue shooting. Yet, while many like to classify anti-Semitism as a right-wing cause, it has nothing at all to do with anything President Trump has said.
Further, the report using a big, scary number–300 percent–to grab attention, yet let’s also acknowledge that when we look at the total number of supposed homicides we’re talking about here, it’s statistical noise at most. In a nation of almost 330 million people, fewer than 30 people per year–while tragic–isn’t a pressing problem.
Unfortunately, some people seem to think otherwise.
Authorities who study extremism told Congress Thursday that far-right groups, not the radicals of antifa, currently pose the most serious threat of political violence in America — including attacks on the police. “The facts are right now that right-wing extremism is the bigger problem. That’s where the violence is coming from,” said Heidi Beirich, the recent co-founder of the Global Project Against Hate and Extremism and former director of the Southern Poverty Law Center’s Intelligence Project, where she spent the past two decades tracking and reporting on far-right extremist activity in the U.S. Beirich was called to testify Thursday as part of a virtual hearing of the House Homeland Security Subcommittee on Intelligence & Counterterrorism, along with JJ MacNab, a fellow at George Washington University’s Program on Extremism, and John Donohue, the former chief of strategic initiatives for the New York City Police Department and a fellow at Rutgers University’s Miller Center for Community Protection and Resilience.
Now, the hearing was prompted by events that actually happened where those who have identified with the “Boogaloo movement” were arrested for allegedly planning attacks during the Black Lives Matter protests, so it’s not completely because of fear-mongering.
Still, though, where are the hearings on the riots that ravaged pretty much every major city in this country? Where are the hearings on the coordinated nature of how these protests were hijacked into outright riots?
My days of taking Congress seriously are certainly coming to a middle, let me tell you.


bearingarms--2020-07-20--Defund School Police? Not If This Dad Has Anything To Say About It.

Ever since his daughter Alaina was murdered at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland , Florida in 2018 , Ryan Petty has been a man on a mission : to prevent other families from having to go through the same pain and heartache that his family has lived with since the shooting that took Alaina ’ s life and the lives of 16 others .
To do that , Petty hasn ’ t advocated for gun bans or a repeal of the Second Amendment , but has instead focused most of his efforts on improving school safety , including @ @ @ @ @ @ @ trained and vetted armed staff .
At the moment , however , Petty is having to fight against a nationwide narrative that says police in schools cause more problems than they solve , contributing to a “ school-to-prison pipeline ” that sends kids to jail when they should be receiving counseling and support .
On today ’ s Bearing Arms ’ Cam and Co , Ryan Petty joins me for a frank discussion about what the statistics really show , and why facts shouldn ’ t be trumped by anti-gun or anti-police feelings @ @ @ @ @ @ @ resource officers actually lead to fewer referrals to the criminal justice system than bringing outside law enforcement into schools , citing a 2018 study in Criminal Justice Policy Review .
That study , conducted by researchers at Mississippi State and the University of Alabama , found SRO ’ s accounted for just a small fraction of referrals over a three year period in one state .
First , and perhaps most importantly , SROs were responsible for approximately 3 % of all referrals over a 3-year period ( 1,776 out of 57,005 total @ @ @ @ @ @ @ referrals were law violations that we categorized as minor offenses .
Thus , assuming there had not been any police stationed in schools during the 3-year period and the schools would not have referred the juveniles themselves if law enforcement were not present ( an improbable assumption , as discussed below ) , then the total number of referrals would have been reduced by about 600 total referrals per year ( 1,776 referrals for the 3-year period/3 years = 592 referrals per year ) and approximately 32 referrals per year ( 95 / @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ( where SROs typically receive the most criticism ) .
Removing police from schools would thus have a minimal impact in reducing referrals for minor offenses .
Petty believes that the advocates of ending the practice of having SROs on campus are also getting an outsized amount of attention from the press , which has focused on student activists demanding the defunding of campus police .
Petty points out that a new survey of students in the state of Virginia conducted by the University of Virginia ’ s Curry School of Education and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ COVID-19 coronavirus shut down schools across the state reveals that the vast majority of students who were surveyed believe that SRO ’ s make schools safer .
Less likely , yes , but overall , non-white students were still overwhelmingly supportive of the idea of having SRO ’ s in place .
You would think new research like this might get at least a little attention while we ’ re talking about the idea of defunding school police , but I haven ’ t been able to find a single example of this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ despite the fact that UVA even sent out a press release highlighting the survey results earlier this month .
So what do supporters of SRO ’ s and armed school staff do to push back against the dominant media narrative when it seems to bear little resemblance to how students , faculty , and parents feel ?
Ryan Petty says the most important thing is to not be silent .
Speak to your local school board , talk to your local superintendent , and if there is a move in your school district @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , use this data to show that dumping SROs will likely lead to more students in the criminal justice system , as well as an increase in students who feel unsafe in their school environment .
Stay silent , and you may soon find your child ’ s school has been cleared of cops , while student violence increases .

Ever since his daughter Alaina was murdered at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida in 2018, Ryan Petty has been a man on a mission: to prevent other families from having to go through the same pain and heartache that his family has lived with since the shooting that took Alaina’s life and the lives of 16 others. To do that, Petty hasn’t advocated for gun bans or a repeal of the Second Amendment, but has instead focused most of his efforts on improving school safety, including the addition of school resource officers and trained and vetted armed staff.
At the moment, however, Petty is having to fight against a nationwide narrative that says police in schools cause more problems than they solve, contributing to a “school-to-prison pipeline” that sends kids to jail when they should be receiving counseling and support. On today’s Bearing Arms’ Cam and Co, Ryan Petty joins me for a frank discussion about what the statistics really show, and why facts shouldn’t be trumped by anti-gun or anti-police feelings.
Petty says research shows that school resource officers actually lead to fewer referrals to the criminal justice system than bringing outside law enforcement into schools, citing a 2018 study in Criminal Justice Policy Review. That study, conducted by researchers at Mississippi State and the University of Alabama, found SRO’s accounted for just a small fraction of referrals over a three year period in one state.
First, and perhaps most importantly, SROs were responsible for approximately 3% of all referrals over a 3-year period (1,776 out of 57,005 total referrals)… only 95 of those referrals were law violations that we categorized as minor offenses. Thus, assuming there had not been any police stationed in schools during the 3-year period and the schools would not have referred the juveniles themselves if law enforcement were not present (an improbable assumption, as discussed below), then the total number of referrals would have been reduced by about 600 total referrals per year (1,776 referrals for the 3-year period/3 years = 592 referrals per year) and approximately 32 referrals per year (95 / 3 = 31.67) for minor offenses (where SROs typically receive the most criticism). Removing police from schools would thus have a minimal impact in reducing referrals for minor offenses.
Petty believes that the advocates of ending the practice of having SROs on campus are also getting an outsized amount of attention from the press, which has focused on student activists demanding the defunding of campus police. Petty points out that a new survey of students in the state of Virginia conducted by the University of Virginia’s Curry School of Education and Human Development in the months before the COVID-19 coronavirus shut down schools across the state reveals that the vast majority of students who were surveyed believe that SRO’s make schools safer.
Nearly three-fourths (73%) of students agreed (agree or strongly agree) that the SRO makes them feel safer at school. This generally positive perception differed across racial/ethnic groups: Black (67.5%), Hispanic (73%), White (75.5%), and Other (72%). On average, Black, Hispanic, and Other race students were less likely than White students to report that the SRO makes them feel safer at school.
Less likely, yes, but overall, non-white students were still overwhelmingly supportive of the idea of having SRO’s in place. You would think new research like this might get at least a little attention while we’re talking about the idea of defunding school police, but I haven’t been able to find a single example of this study being cited in the media, despite the fact that UVA even sent out a press release highlighting the survey results earlier this month.
So what do supporters of SRO’s and armed school staff do to push back against the dominant media narrative when it seems to bear little resemblance to how students, faculty, and parents feel? Ryan Petty says the most important thing is to not be silent. Speak to your local school board, talk to your local superintendent, and if there is a move in your school district to get rid of school resource officers, use this data to show that dumping SROs will likely lead to more students in the criminal justice system, as well as an increase in students who feel unsafe in their school environment. Stay silent, and you may soon find your child’s school has been cleared of cops, while student violence increases.


bearingarms--2020-07-20--Oregon Officials Threaten Lawsuit Over Federal Officers' Arrests

The city of Portland , Oregon is a complete and total trainwreck .
The well-known Antifa stronghold has played host to protests and/or riots every night for over six weeks now .
Numerous acts of violence have been committed , including attacks on federal buildings within the city .
As a result , the federal government has opted to step in and take care of business when it applies , up to and including arresting those involved in criminal activities .
After all , it doesn ’ t seem that Portland is interested in stopping much of anything .
Now @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lawsuits against the federal government .
Protests in Portland , Ore. , continued through early Sunday morning , following the Oregon Department of Justice ’ s announcement it would be suing several federal agencies for civil rights abuses in the state .
Demonstrations have taken place in the city for weeks following the police killing of George Floyd in May .
Protesters dismantled fences in front of the Multnomah County Justice Center and Hatfield Federal Courthouse .
The U.S. Attorney ’ s Office in Oregon had previously said the fences were in place @ @ @ @ @ @ @ federal law enforcement officers ” and allow repairs on the buildings to begin .
Demonstrators also set fire to the Portland Police Association building , according to Portland police .
The fire was put out later in the evening , and police declared a riot in the area .
Tear gas and flash bangs were used on protesters and arrests were made , according to videos and photos from the scene posted on social media .
The Oregon Department of Justice announced Saturday it would be suing several federal agencies for civil rights @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pursue criminal charges against a federal officer who seriously injured a protester .
From what that linked news report claims , that is a problem .
I don ’ t necessarily believe it , of course , because we know how the media likes to lie , but if this one is accurate , that suggests an inquiry into the officer ’ s actions is warranted .
However , let ’ s not forget the role Portland has played in this .
Federal law enforcement is only there because government officials in Portland @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to control their city .
These officers are there to protect buildings that have been targeted over and over again with vandalism going well beyond graffiti spray pained on the walls .
While this one officer might have acted out of line , the truth is that tensions have ramped up to such a degree because the local government on the ground there let it get that way .
If Portland wants to end the presence of federal law enforcement officers , then perhaps their police department should step in and keep things @ @ @ @ @ @ @ won ’ t , though , because the Antifa thugs involved in these protests are a key part of Mayor Ted Wheeler ’ s support base , apparently , so he ’ s got to kiss the proverbial ring .
I have a feeling that lawsuits against the feds , at least for the most part , aren ’ t going to work out well for Oregon .
Then again , it ’ s not about that .
The threats are about signaling that officials hold the right opinions , all in hopes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for them next .

The city of Portland, Oregon is a complete and total trainwreck. The well-known Antifa stronghold has played host to protests and/or riots every night for over six weeks now. Numerous acts of violence have been committed, including attacks on federal buildings within the city.
As a result, the federal government has opted to step in and take care of business when it applies, up to and including arresting those involved in criminal activities. After all, it doesn’t seem that Portland is interested in stopping much of anything.
Now, Oregon officials are threatening civil rights lawsuits against the federal government.
Protests in Portland, Ore., continued through early Sunday morning, following the Oregon Department of Justice’s announcement it would be suing several federal agencies for civil rights abuses in the state. Demonstrations have taken place in the city for weeks following the police killing of George Floyd in May. Protesters dismantled fences in front of the Multnomah County Justice Center and Hatfield Federal Courthouse. The U.S. Attorney’s Office in Oregon had previously said the fences were in place to “de-escalate tensions between protesters and federal law enforcement officers” and allow repairs on the buildings to begin. Demonstrators also set fire to the Portland Police Association building, according to Portland police. The fire was put out later in the evening, and police declared a riot in the area. Tear gas and flash bangs were used on protesters and arrests were made, according to videos and photos from the scene posted on social media. The Oregon Department of Justice announced Saturday it would be suing several federal agencies for civil rights abuses, and state prosecutors will potentially pursue criminal charges against a federal officer who seriously injured a protester.
From what that linked news report claims, that is a problem. I don’t necessarily believe it, of course, because we know how the media likes to lie, but if this one is accurate, that suggests an inquiry into the officer’s actions is warranted.
However, let’s not forget the role Portland has played in this.
Federal law enforcement is only there because government officials in Portland are completely and totally unable or unwilling to control their city. These officers are there to protect buildings that have been targeted over and over again with vandalism going well beyond graffiti spray pained on the walls.
While this one officer might have acted out of line, the truth is that tensions have ramped up to such a degree because the local government on the ground there let it get that way.
If Portland wants to end the presence of federal law enforcement officers, then perhaps their police department should step in and keep things from getting out of hand. They won’t, though, because the Antifa thugs involved in these protests are a key part of Mayor Ted Wheeler’s support base, apparently, so he’s got to kiss the proverbial ring.
I have a feeling that lawsuits against the feds, at least for the most part, aren’t going to work out well for Oregon. Then again, it’s not about that. The threats are about signaling that officials hold the right opinions, all in hopes that the mob won’t come for them next.


bearingarms--2020-07-20--Gun Store Owner: Shortages The Fault Of "Multi-Headed Monster"

As Americans flock to gun stores in record numbers to purchase firearms and ammunition to protect themselves and their families , they ’ re likely finding shelves that are almost picked clean of ammunition and a limited supply of handguns , rifles , and shotguns for sale at their local gun shop .
Phillip Kastner , materials manager at Trader Bill ’ s gun shop in Arkansas , tells the Hot Springs Sentinel-Record that a “ multi-headed monster ” is to blame for the current shortages .
“ As far as the ammo is concerned , the number one thing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ make ammunition is raw materials , being lead and copper , ” Kastner said .
“ So all of the lead mines in the United States are in the state of Missouri ; Missouri shut them down the first of March .
All of the copper mines are in South America ; South America shut them down in April .
… The lead mines are now open in Missouri , but getting copper for the casings is one of the choking points.
” Just a couple of weeks ago news agency Reuters reported @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was at a tipping point , thanks to a surge in coronavirus cases among mine workers .
At the moment , production is actually up over 2019 levels , but that could soon change .
Patricio Elgueta , president of Chile ’ s Federation of Copper Workers ( FTC ) , an umbrella group for Codelco ’ s unions , said miners are exhausted and scared of falling ill but keep working to make ends meet .
Elgueta said unions were weighing a proposal from a regional roundtable of healthworkers , politicians and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a “ minimum ” at all of the mines around the hard-hit city of Calama in order to sanitize them .
The Antofagasta region , where Calama is located , accounts for more than half of Chile ’ s mine production , according to state copper agency statistics .
Meanwhile , Elgueta said emphasis at the major mines had necessarily shifted to processing ore as companies have scaled back staffing by around 40 % .
Contract work has already largely been slashed .
“ You focus on production and neglect maintenance… it ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in a phone interview .
“ First you exhaust the workers , then you cause damage to the equipment , then come delays.
” Workers at two mines in Chile have voted to strike over current working conditions , though the Chilean government is hoping to avoid a walkout through mediation .
The government ’ s deadline of July 22nd is quickly approaching , however , and by the end of this week it ’ s possible we could see the country ’ s two largest copper mines shut down completely .
So @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is definitely having some issues , as Kastner noted , but those problems are exacerbated by the surge in demand .
“ The other problem is what happened a month ago with the riots , ” Kastner said .
“ COVID hurt the production side of the equation , but the riots spiked the demand side of the equation .
So not only are you getting few products into the system , you have a huge demand on the retail side of the equation of people wanting to buy guns and ammunition to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Even though we don ’ t have that problem in the state of Arkansas , you do have that problem everywhere else .
And it has exhausted the pipeline of materials that is coming through.
” June ’ s NICS background check numbers reached record highs , but I ’ m very curious to see what July ’ s numbers look like .
At some point , it seems likely that the background check numbers will see a noticeable decline ; not because the demand has ceased but because there simply aren @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that demand .
I ’ m not sure we ’ ve reached that particular tipping point yet , but as long as the “ multi-headed monster ” is still around , it ’ s a distinct possibility .

As Americans flock to gun stores in record numbers to purchase firearms and ammunition to protect themselves and their families, they’re likely finding shelves that are almost picked clean of ammunition and a limited supply of handguns, rifles, and shotguns for sale at their local gun shop. Phillip Kastner, materials manager at Trader Bill’s gun shop in Arkansas, tells the Hot Springs Sentinel-Record that a “multi-headed monster” is to blame for the current shortages.
“As far as the ammo is concerned, the number one thing you have to have in order to make ammunition is raw materials, being lead and copper,” Kastner said. “So all of the lead mines in the United States are in the state of Missouri; Missouri shut them down the first of March. All of the copper mines are in South America; South America shut them down in April. … The lead mines are now open in Missouri, but getting copper for the casings is one of the choking points.”
Just a couple of weeks ago news agency Reuters reported that Chile’s copper mining industry was at a tipping point, thanks to a surge in coronavirus cases among mine workers. At the moment, production is actually up over 2019 levels, but that could soon change.
Patricio Elgueta, president of Chile’s Federation of Copper Workers (FTC), an umbrella group for Codelco’s unions, said miners are exhausted and scared of falling ill but keep working to make ends meet. Elgueta said unions were weighing a proposal from a regional roundtable of healthworkers, politicians and social groups to draw down production to a “minimum” at all of the mines around the hard-hit city of Calama in order to sanitize them. The Antofagasta region, where Calama is located, accounts for more than half of Chile’s mine production, according to state copper agency statistics. Meanwhile, Elgueta said emphasis at the major mines had necessarily shifted to processing ore as companies have scaled back staffing by around 40%. Contract work has already largely been slashed. “You focus on production and neglect maintenance… it’s not sustainable,” Elgueta said in a phone interview. “First you exhaust the workers, then you cause damage to the equipment, then come delays.”
Workers at two mines in Chile have voted to strike over current working conditions, though the Chilean government is hoping to avoid a walkout through mediation. The government’s deadline of July 22nd is quickly approaching, however, and by the end of this week it’s possible we could see the country’s two largest copper mines shut down completely.
So yes, he supply side of production is definitely having some issues, as Kastner noted, but those problems are exacerbated by the surge in demand.
“The other problem is what happened a month ago with the riots,” Kastner said. “COVID hurt the production side of the equation, but the riots spiked the demand side of the equation. So not only are you getting few products into the system, you have a huge demand on the retail side of the equation of people wanting to buy guns and ammunition to protect their houses and homes from rioting. Even though we don’t have that problem in the state of Arkansas, you do have that problem everywhere else. And it has exhausted the pipeline of materials that is coming through.”
June’s NICS background check numbers reached record highs, but I’m very curious to see what July’s numbers look like. At some point, it seems likely that the background check numbers will see a noticeable decline; not because the demand has ceased but because there simply aren’t enough guns available to satisfy that demand. I’m not sure we’ve reached that particular tipping point yet, but as long as the “multi-headed monster” is still around, it’s a distinct possibility.


bearingarms--2020-07-20--Media FINALLY Willing To Fact Check Biden's Gun Claim

Presidential candidate and former Vice President Joe Biden has made some ridiculous claims .
Then again , there are questions about his mental state , so that ’ s not too surprising .
Biden was gaffe-prone back in his prime , after all .
However , during this campaign season , the media has been reticent to take issue with many of Biden ’ s gaffes .
While they ’ ll fact-check every joke made by a conservative , they really don ’ t seem all that interested in Biden ’ s comments .
Why else would they wait until @ @ @ @ @ @ @ February ?
Probably because someone on the right brought it up .
Biden made the gun violence claim in the final Democratic primary debate Feb. 25 in South Carolina , where he said that 150 million Americans had died since 2007 from gun violence .
“ In addition to that , I passed the Brady bill with waiting periods .
I led that fight .
But my friend on my right , ” Biden said , gesturing to Sen. Bernie Sanders , “ and others have in fact also gave in to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ if I stood here and said we give immunity to drug companies .
We give immunity to tobacco companies .
That has caused carnage on our streets ; 150 million people have been killed since 2007 , when Bernie voted to exempt gun manufacturers from liability .
More than all the wars , including Vietnam , from that point on.
” In both cases , Biden or his staff acknowledged he intended to say thousands , not millions .
Look , that ’ s a pretty basic mistake .
The problem is that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on it then .
Not really .
They let the comment stand , addressing any criticism of it well down in articles on the debate after they figured most people had clicked away from the story .
They ’ re only addressing the claim well afterward .
A president who can ’ t seem to grasp the difference between “ thousand ” and “ million ” is kind of problematic .
The fact that it took four months for USA Today to really address them is , perhaps , more problematic .
After @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , but USA Today will still be around afterward .
The media continues to give cover to Biden , covering his gaffes and pretending that they ’ d give President Trump the same treatment .
Yet how many times have they attacked his off-the-cuff tweets over minor mistakes , or even claimed there were mistakes when there weren ’ t ?
The media isn ’ t playing fairly , especially on the topic of guns .
At the end of the day , Joe Biden may well not have the mental faculties to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who says 150 million people have been killed on American streets since 2007 and doesn ’ t immediately catch that it doesn ’ t sound quite right is probably not someone I want having access to nuclear launch codes .
Especially when the population of the United States is around 330 million right now .
He argued that a number amounting to about half of our population had been gunned down , and it never occurred to him that it might be wrong .
Meanwhile , the so-called fact-checkers barely even noticed .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ needed to address it now .
Not if they ’ d addressed it then .
Does anyone think Trump would get that kind of treatment ?

Presidential candidate and former Vice President Joe Biden has made some ridiculous claims. Then again, there are questions about his mental state, so that’s not too surprising. Biden was gaffe-prone back in his prime, after all.
However, during this campaign season, the media has been reticent to take issue with many of Biden’s gaffes. While they’ll fact-check every joke made by a conservative, they really don’t seem all that interested in Biden’s comments.
Why else would they wait until July to address comments made back in February? Probably because someone on the right brought it up.
Biden made the gun violence claim in the final Democratic primary debate Feb. 25 in South Carolina, where he said that 150 million Americans had died since 2007 from gun violence. “In addition to that, I passed the Brady bill with waiting periods. I led that fight. But my friend on my right,” Biden said, gesturing to Sen. Bernie Sanders, “and others have in fact also gave in to the gun manufacturers’ absolute immunity. Imagine if I stood here and said we give immunity to drug companies. We give immunity to tobacco companies. That has caused carnage on our streets; 150 million people have been killed since 2007, when Bernie voted to exempt gun manufacturers from liability. More than all the wars, including Vietnam, from that point on.” … In both cases, Biden or his staff acknowledged he intended to say thousands, not millions.
Look, that’s a pretty basic mistake. The problem is that no one in the media called him on it then. Not really. They let the comment stand, addressing any criticism of it well down in articles on the debate after they figured most people had clicked away from the story.
They’re only addressing the claim well afterward.
A president who can’t seem to grasp the difference between “thousand” and “million” is kind of problematic. The fact that it took four months for USA Today to really address them is, perhaps, more problematic. After all, Biden might lose the election, but USA Today will still be around afterward.
The media continues to give cover to Biden, covering his gaffes and pretending that they’d give President Trump the same treatment. Yet how many times have they attacked his off-the-cuff tweets over minor mistakes, or even claimed there were mistakes when there weren’t? The media isn’t playing fairly, especially on the topic of guns.
At the end of the day, Joe Biden may well not have the mental faculties to be president. After all, anyone who says 150 million people have been killed on American streets since 2007 and doesn’t immediately catch that it doesn’t sound quite right is probably not someone I want having access to nuclear launch codes. Especially when the population of the United States is around 330 million right now. He argued that a number amounting to about half of our population had been gunned down, and it never occurred to him that it might be wrong.
Meanwhile, the so-called fact-checkers barely even noticed. Otherwise, they wouldn’t have needed to address it now. Not if they’d addressed it then.
Does anyone think Trump would get that kind of treatment?


bearingarms--2020-07-20--"Delivery Driver" Kills Federal Judge's Son, Shoots Husband

Violent crime is on the rise all across the nation in the aftermath of weeks of violent protests ( read : riots ) throughout the country .
The police aren ’ t really sure how to do their job in a lot of places and they don ’ t trust the local officials to have their back if they ’ re forced to use lethal force .
It ’ s not a good look for anyone , anywhere .
And yet , here we are .
If that wasn ’ t enough , a recent attack may represent something even @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pedestrian violent crimes .
A federal judge ’ s family may have been targeted .
A gunman shot and killed the 20-year-old son of a federal judge in New Jersey and shot and injured her husband Sunday at the family home , the state ’ s chief district judge said .
The shootings occurred at the North Brunswick home of U.S. District Judge Esther Salas , and killed her son , Daniel , Chief District Judge Freda Wolfson told The Associated Press .
Her husband , defense lawyer Mark Anderl , was injured @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as a delivery driver , according to a judiciary official who wasn ’ t authorized to comment and spoke anonymously to the AP .
They said Salas was in the basement at the time and wasn ’ t injured and her husband is recovering from surgery .
The perpetrator , believed to be a lone gunman , was not in custody , the official said .
The FBI tweeted Sunday night that it ’ s looking for one suspect in the shootings .
Salas , seated in Newark , was nominated by President @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Prior to that she served as a U.S. Magistrate Judge in New Jersey , after working as an assistant public defender for several years .
As a federal judge , Salas presided over a number of high-profile cases , but also many others that never made the national news .
As a result , any number of people may have had a grudge against her .
Of course , that doesn ’ t rule out the target being someone else .
After all , defense attorneys get hate as well .
Further , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ if they ’ re the ones with the power , meaning the son may well have made his own enemies .
Right now , though , we don ’ t really know too much about just what transpired .
More importantly , we don ’ t know why it happened .
Federal judges are important figures , regardless of who appointed them .
This isn ’ t a good thing , regardless of reasons .
Plus , this isn ’ t just some random act of violence where the judge ’ s family @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the house was targeted .
There ’ s no information claiming it was a robbery or anything .
Instead , a “ delivery driver ” showed up , shot two people , then left .
That ’ s it .
I ’ m sorry , but that ’ s not random no matter how you slice it .
I offer my own condolences to Judge Salas today .
No one should have to lose their child .
Her husband is recovering , at least , which means she didn ’ t lose @ @ @ @ @ @ @ enough .
In such a time when we ’ re so divided over politics , can ’ t we agree that something like this just shouldn ’ t happen ?

Violent crime is on the rise all across the nation in the aftermath of weeks of violent protests (read: riots) throughout the country. The police aren’t really sure how to do their job in a lot of places and they don’t trust the local officials to have their back if they’re forced to use lethal force. It’s not a good look for anyone, anywhere.
And yet, here we are.
If that wasn’t enough, a recent attack may represent something even worse than just a spike in more pedestrian violent crimes. A federal judge’s family may have been targeted.
A gunman shot and killed the 20-year-old son of a federal judge in New Jersey and shot and injured her husband Sunday at the family home, the state’s chief district judge said. The shootings occurred at the North Brunswick home of U.S. District Judge Esther Salas, and killed her son, Daniel, Chief District Judge Freda Wolfson told The Associated Press. Her husband, defense lawyer Mark Anderl, was injured, Wolfson said. The gunman posed as a delivery driver, according to a judiciary official who wasn’t authorized to comment and spoke anonymously to the AP. They said Salas was in the basement at the time and wasn’t injured and her husband is recovering from surgery. The perpetrator, believed to be a lone gunman, was not in custody, the official said. The FBI tweeted Sunday night that it’s looking for one suspect in the shootings. Salas, seated in Newark, was nominated by President Barack Obama and confirmed in 2011. Prior to that she served as a U.S. Magistrate Judge in New Jersey, after working as an assistant public defender for several years.
As a federal judge, Salas presided over a number of high-profile cases, but also many others that never made the national news. As a result, any number of people may have had a grudge against her.
Of course, that doesn’t rule out the target being someone else. After all, defense attorneys get hate as well. Further, children of powerful people often act as if they’re the ones with the power, meaning the son may well have made his own enemies.
Right now, though, we don’t really know too much about just what transpired. More importantly, we don’t know why it happened. Federal judges are important figures, regardless of who appointed them. This isn’t a good thing, regardless of reasons.
Plus, this isn’t just some random act of violence where the judge’s family was caught in the crossfire. No, the house was targeted. There’s no information claiming it was a robbery or anything. Instead, a “delivery driver” showed up, shot two people, then left. That’s it. I’m sorry, but that’s not random no matter how you slice it.
I offer my own condolences to Judge Salas today. No one should have to lose their child. Her husband is recovering, at least, which means she didn’t lose everything, but she lost more than enough.
In such a time when we’re so divided over politics, can’t we agree that something like this just shouldn’t happen?