bearingarms--2020-12-30--Portland PD Begs Community For Help Fighting Violence Surge

The city of Portland is not a great place to be unless you ’ re a radical left-wing activist these days .
That or a violent criminal .
While protest after protest has left many shaking their head at the very idea of setting foot in Portland–not a great advertisement for tourism , that ’ s for sure–the city has also bowed to the will of many of these activists and continued to treat their police department with scorn .
In fact , the department was one of the first in the nation to be defunded .
Now , this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in violent crime in the city .
The Portland Police Bureau is asking for the community ’ s help in ending a spike in violence across the city .
According to Fox News , at least 850 shootings have been reported in Portland as of Dec. 24 .
The outlet noted that there were at least 59 reported shootings in December alone .
“ As of Christmas Eve , this year ’ s shootings had surpassed last year ’ s by more than 116 % , with 393 shootings reported in all of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pointed out .
“ At least 53 murders have been reported in Portland as of Dec. 24 — the highest yearly total the city has seen in nearly 30 years.
” Portland Police Bureau Chief Chuck Lovell in a Dec. 16 video appealed to the public and insisted that the public needed to lock arms and “ do everything we can together to break the cycle of violence.
” “ Gun violence has plagued our city at twice the rate of last year , ” he said .
“ On average , someone @ @ @ @ @ @ @ days.
” “ We ’ ve come together to mask up , to stay home to keep others safe .
We have come together to do our best to stop the spread of a deadly disease , ” he continued .
“ Violence is also a disease that kills and our community is suffering the consequences.
” “ We can not lose sight of the fact these are human beings who have died , ” Lovell added .
While it ’ s the police asking for help , the truth is that there @ @ @ @ @ @ @ plea doing much beyond falling on deaf ears .
After all , the people who know who is doing what were notorious for not talking to the police even before the Portland Police Department was decimated by the defund fairy known as the city council .
Meanwhile , earlier today , Cam noted that the city of Green Bay took a completely different approach , and guess what ?
It actually worked !
It ’ s like , if you have police out on the streets trying to address the problem , they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s a Christmas miracle !
Honestly , as I ’ ve said repeatedly , the idea of using funds to try and address some of the causes of violence is a worthy goal , but those efforts take years to start to really make a difference .
If you defund the police at the start of the effort , though , you ’ re going to simply see more problems .
You need a two-prong approach and right now , they ’ re using the wrong prong .

The city of Portland is not a great place to be unless you’re a radical left-wing activist these days. That or a violent criminal.
While protest after protest has left many shaking their head at the very idea of setting foot in Portland–not a great advertisement for tourism, that’s for sure–the city has also bowed to the will of many of these activists and continued to treat their police department with scorn. In fact, the department was one of the first in the nation to be defunded.
Now, this defunded department needs help with the increase in violent crime in the city.
The Portland Police Bureau is asking for the community’s help in ending a spike in violence across the city. What’s a brief history here? According to Fox News, at least 850 shootings have been reported in Portland as of Dec. 24. The outlet noted that there were at least 59 reported shootings in December alone. “As of Christmas Eve, this year’s shootings had surpassed last year’s by more than 116%, with 393 shootings reported in all of 2019, statistics show,” Fox pointed out. “At least 53 murders have been reported in Portland as of Dec. 24 — the highest yearly total the city has seen in nearly 30 years.” What’s happening now? Portland Police Bureau Chief Chuck Lovell in a Dec. 16 video appealed to the public and insisted that the public needed to lock arms and “do everything we can together to break the cycle of violence.” “Gun violence has plagued our city at twice the rate of last year,” he said. “On average, someone is shot in Portland roughly every two days.” “We’ve come together to mask up, to stay home to keep others safe. We have come together to do our best to stop the spread of a deadly disease,” he continued. “Violence is also a disease that kills and our community is suffering the consequences.” “We cannot lose sight of the fact these are human beings who have died,” Lovell added.
While it’s the police asking for help, the truth is that there’s not much chance of this plea doing much beyond falling on deaf ears. After all, the people who know who is doing what were notorious for not talking to the police even before the Portland Police Department was decimated by the defund fairy known as the city council.
Meanwhile, earlier today, Cam noted that the city of Green Bay took a completely different approach, and guess what? It actually worked! It’s like, if you have police out on the streets trying to address the problem, they actually can address the problem. It’s a Christmas miracle!
Honestly, as I’ve said repeatedly, the idea of using funds to try and address some of the causes of violence is a worthy goal, but those efforts take years to start to really make a difference. If you defund the police at the start of the effort, though, you’re going to simply see more problems. You need a two-prong approach and right now, they’re using the wrong prong.


bearingarms--2020-12-30--Alyssa Milano Says Something Even Dumber About Guns

Alyssa Milano isn ’ t the kind of person any of us should look to for guidance on pretty much anything .
I mean , she ’ s an actress , someone who makes a living playing pretend for a living .
She has no appreciable expertise in much of anything .
Based on her body of work , that includes no appreciable expertise in acting .
Anyway , Milano had to pontificate on guns again on Tuesday , this time comparing them to masks of all things .
Now , I ’ m not going to get into the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
For the sake of argument , I ’ m going to simply argue as if they are effective .
Whether that ’ s true or not is a completely different discussion .
That said , let ’ s assume masks are as effective as claimed , that they ’ re absolutely essential to stop the spread of COVID-19 .
Masks are designed to stop one particular threat .
AR-15s are designed to stop a completely different threat .
It ’ s like comparing a seatbelt to a nuclear deterent .
Further , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this could be turned against her and her fellow anti-gunners .
After all , COVID is pretty survivable for most people , but violent crime ?
Well , let ’ s just say the ramifications of not having a firearm could have longer-lasting consequences than getting COVID , so why wear a mask if you ’ re also going to try and squash people ’ s right to defend themselves .
See , for Milano , this represents deep thinking , her pathetic attempt at some kind of a gotcha moment .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have the capacity to really “ get ” anyone with this .
After all , much as she doesn ’ t understand guns or gun owners , she also doesn ’ t understand the anti-mask people .
For many , the issue isn ’ t whether they should wear a mask or not .
No , the issue is that they ’ re being required to wear a mask , often without any consideration with regard to individual circumstances .
Take a rape victim who had her mouth covered during her assault–and actual @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , wearing a mask triggers her PTSD and makes breathing impossible .
You ’ re telling me she should endure this just because it might make someone a little safer ?
Another place where many have an issue with isn ’ t the guidance we should wear masks , but the inconsistency .
Many of us remember being told that masks weren ’ t effective and we shouldn ’ t bother with them .
Now they ’ re the only thing keeping the human race alive ?
Meanwhile , I can also show @ @ @ @ @ @ @ likely have been dead without their AR-15s .
I can present concrete examples of people whose lives were saved explicitly because they had that particular weapon at hand when the moment arised .
The truth is that many of the “ anti-maskers ” are actually being consistent with regard to their rights .
They want their guns and their freedom to choose their own paths .
That includes whether they wear a mask or not .
That ’ s something Alyssa Milano will never understand .
She ’ s used to playing pretend @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that real people have real issues and like to make decisions for themselves , not just do what a director tells them to do .

Alyssa Milano isn’t the kind of person any of us should look to for guidance on pretty much anything. I mean, she’s an actress, someone who makes a living playing pretend for a living. She has no appreciable expertise in much of anything. Based on her body of work, that includes no appreciable expertise in acting.
I’m just saying.
Anyway, Milano had to pontificate on guns again on Tuesday, this time comparing them to masks of all things.
Anti-maskers are the same people who think they need an AR-15 for “protection”. LOUDER FOR THE PEOPLE IN THE BACK: A MASK WILL PROTECT YOU *MORE* THAN AN AR-15 WILL. — Alyssa Milano (@Alyssa_Milano) December 29, 2020
Now, I’m not going to get into the usefulness of masks one way or another. For the sake of argument, I’m going to simply argue as if they are effective. Whether that’s true or not is a completely different discussion.
That said, let’s assume masks are as effective as claimed, that they’re absolutely essential to stop the spread of COVID-19.
So what?
Masks are designed to stop one particular threat. AR-15s are designed to stop a completely different threat. It’s like comparing a seatbelt to a nuclear deterent.
Further, Milano didn’t think about how this could be turned against her and her fellow anti-gunners. After all, COVID is pretty survivable for most people, but violent crime? Well, let’s just say the ramifications of not having a firearm could have longer-lasting consequences than getting COVID, so why wear a mask if you’re also going to try and squash people’s right to defend themselves.
See, for Milano, this represents deep thinking, her pathetic attempt at some kind of a gotcha moment.
The problem is, she doesn’t have the capacity to really “get” anyone with this. After all, much as she doesn’t understand guns or gun owners, she also doesn’t understand the anti-mask people.
For many, the issue isn’t whether they should wear a mask or not. No, the issue is that they’re being required to wear a mask, often without any consideration with regard to individual circumstances. Take a rape victim who had her mouth covered during her assault–and actual example presented to me before. Now, wearing a mask triggers her PTSD and makes breathing impossible. You’re telling me she should endure this just because it might make someone a little safer?
Another place where many have an issue with isn’t the guidance we should wear masks, but the inconsistency. Many of us remember being told that masks weren’t effective and we shouldn’t bother with them. Now they’re the only thing keeping the human race alive?
Meanwhile, I can also show you a number of people who would likely have been dead without their AR-15s. I can present concrete examples of people whose lives were saved explicitly because they had that particular weapon at hand when the moment arised.
The truth is that many of the “anti-maskers” are actually being consistent with regard to their rights. They want their guns and their freedom to choose their own paths. That includes whether they wear a mask or not. That’s something Alyssa Milano will never understand. She’s used to playing pretend to such a degree that she forgets that real people have real issues and like to make decisions for themselves, not just do what a director tells them to do.


bearingarms--2020-12-30--This City Is Bucking The Trend And Reducing Violent Crime

We ’ re going to have more on the incredible increase in violent crime across the nation coming up on today ’ s Bearing Arms ’ Cam & Co , but it ’ s worth noting that the increase itself isn ’ t being seen in every U.S. city .
A few locales have actually seen their crime rates drop over the course of 2020 , while other cities have put new strategies in place that seem to be curbing the rise in violence .
In Green Bay , Wisconsin , for example , there ’ ve been more than @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , which is an all-time record according to local police .
The number of shooting calls has been dramatically lower over the past few months , however , and the city says much of the success can be credited to the formation of a new Violent Crime Suppression Unit within the Green Bay PD .
“ Our main goal has just been to identify the players involved in these shootings , ” said Officer Kyle Harnish .
Harnish , who is one officer on the five-person unit , recently drove us through the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ short months , the group has already left its mark .
“ We put a very good dent into what ’ s been going on here , ” said Harnish , as we drove to one area of the city ’ s west side .
A nuisance abatement truck now sits there , near Ricky and Vine Streets , where the sound of gunfire had been growing common .
Reestablishing peace there and elsewhere in the city required patience and persistence .
“ A real big part of this is intelligence gathering , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ finding out where they ’ re going , where they ’ re coming from , ” explained Harnish .
Harnish says that as officers began to develop intelligence , they quickly realized that gangs weren ’ t the driving factor in the increased violence .
“ There ’ s a lot of family ties , whether it be close relatives or distant , ” explained Harnish as we drove .
“ There ’ s a lot of… this person shares a child with this person who ’ s feuding with the other person @ @ @ @ @ @ @ person.
” He described it as a ‘ convoluted , intertwined web ’ of people who ’ ve lived in the area a long time but just don ’ t like each other .
“ I equivocate it to high school drama and people don ’ t like what other people are saying about them , ” said Harnish .
“ It ’ s just high school immaturity from adults , and people are getting shot over it.
” Since the formation of the Violent Crime Suppression Unit in October , the city @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Some of that can likely be attributed to the seasonal drop in crime that typically arrives with colder weather , but Harnish is convinced that the new policing tactic is having an impact .
“ The word is out there that this unit formed and is being very successful , ” said Harnish .
“ It ’ s about building relationships in the community , and it ’ s been huge , ” says Green Bay Police Capt .
Ben Allen , who ’ s leading the unit .
“ Building that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ piece is giving those neighborhoods back to the people that live in them , so they ’ re a bit more willing to talk about the small things that are happening now so we don ’ t lead up to that big rash of shootings or violent crime that we saw.
” Green Bay didn ’ t try to pass any new local gun control laws in order to “ do something ” about the violence .
Instead , they actually did something that works ; focusing on the neighborhoods plagued by crime @ @ @ @ @ @ @ offenders who live there .
Not only is that a much more effective way of making the city a safer place , it ’ s actually constitutional as well .

We’re going to have more on the incredible increase in violent crime across the nation coming up on today’s Bearing Arms’ Cam & Co, but it’s worth noting that the increase itself isn’t being seen in every U.S. city. A few locales have actually seen their crime rates drop over the course of 2020, while other cities have put new strategies in place that seem to be curbing the rise in violence.
In Green Bay, Wisconsin, for example, there’ve been more than 60 shooting calls so far this year, which is an all-time record according to local police. The number of shooting calls has been dramatically lower over the past few months, however, and the city says much of the success can be credited to the formation of a new Violent Crime Suppression Unit within the Green Bay PD.
“Our main goal has just been to identify the players involved in these shootings,” said Officer Kyle Harnish. Harnish, who is one officer on the five-person unit, recently drove us through the city to neighborhoods where, in two short months, the group has already left its mark. “We put a very good dent into what’s been going on here,” said Harnish, as we drove to one area of the city’s west side. A nuisance abatement truck now sits there, near Ricky and Vine Streets, where the sound of gunfire had been growing common. Reestablishing peace there and elsewhere in the city required patience and persistence. “A real big part of this is intelligence gathering, surveillance, building cases on people, finding out where they’re going, where they’re coming from,” explained Harnish.
Harnish says that as officers began to develop intelligence, they quickly realized that gangs weren’t the driving factor in the increased violence.
“There’s a lot of family ties, whether it be close relatives or distant,” explained Harnish as we drove. “There’s a lot of… this person shares a child with this person who’s feuding with the other person who’s currently dating that third person.” He described it as a ‘convoluted, intertwined web’ of people who’ve lived in the area a long time but just don’t like each other. “I equivocate it to high school drama and people don’t like what other people are saying about them,” said Harnish. “It’s just high school immaturity from adults, and people are getting shot over it.”
Since the formation of the Violent Crime Suppression Unit in October, the city has seen just five reports of shootings. Some of that can likely be attributed to the seasonal drop in crime that typically arrives with colder weather, but Harnish is convinced that the new policing tactic is having an impact.
“The word is out there that this unit formed and is being very successful,” said Harnish. “It’s about building relationships in the community, and it’s been huge,” says Green Bay Police Capt. Ben Allen, who’s leading the unit. “Building that trust, and I think the big piece is giving those neighborhoods back to the people that live in them, so they’re a bit more willing to talk about the small things that are happening now so we don’t lead up to that big rash of shootings or violent crime that we saw.”
Green Bay didn’t try to pass any new local gun control laws in order to “do something” about the violence. Instead, they actually did something that works; focusing on the neighborhoods plagued by crime and targeting the most violent and prolific offenders who live there. Not only is that a much more effective way of making the city a safer place, it’s actually constitutional as well.


bearingarms--2020-12-30--Louisville SWAT Critical Of Breonna Taylor Raid

A lot of us give the New York Times a lot of grief , and for good reason .
The Old Gray Lady ain ’ t what she used to be .
Instead , she ’ s a horribly biased institution generally still trading on the greatness of decades long gone by .
However , from time to time , there are flashes of journalistic brilliance , such as the minute-by-minute recounting of Kyle Rittenhouse ’ s actions in Kenosha .
It seems they cracked down and did it again , this time creating a video that outlines just what @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
It ’ s a long video , to be sure , and not everyone will have time to delve into it .
Over at Tactical Life Magazine , they summed up some key parts of it .
After the shootings , SWAT arrived on the scene .
It ’ s clear the veteran SWAT commander saw an operation he found littered with problems .
“ We just got the feeling that night that something really bad happened , ” Louisville SWAT Commander Dale Massey told The New York Times .
“ We @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be at that apartment that night .
… I would have advised them 100-percent not to do it.
” Massey questioned the intelligence and the presumed lack of vetting .
He criticized the execution , including officers inserting themselves into the “ fatal funnel , ” compromising the mission .
But his greatest disdain came from Detective Hankison ’ s blind shooting through curtain-drawn windows .
“ You have to know A , what you ’ re shooting at , B , what ’ s in front of it , and B , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Massey said .
“ There ’ s no other way you can operate .
It was just an egregious act.
” Why was SWAT not in charge of the raid to begin with ?
It seems there were other raids going on that night , raids where SWAT was utilized .
In other words , the most highly trained officers were simply stretched too thin .
Instead , the Taylor raid was conducted by officers who were less well-trained in this time of situation , which created all sorts of problems and resulted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The guys generally trained for this sort of thing were busy and the guys who didn ’ t were spearheading the raid .
As a result , people died .
None of this was helped , of course , by the officers not wearing body cams , which would have given us a view of what they were doing and seeing .
It also made it very difficult to either prosecute or vindicate the officers involved .
The truth is that regardless of what the courts may have ruled , this was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Departments need to study this so they can learn how to prevent this sort of thing from ever happening again .
While I still think heads should have rolled , I ’ m not in any position to make that happen .
However , I can suggest that departments tighten up on this .
Don ’ t send officers to do raids unless they ’ re fully trained .
Use SWAT when possible and create teams who can handle the duty when SWAT is stretched too thin .
Don ’ t let @ @ @ @

A lot of us give the New York Times a lot of grief, and for good reason. The Old Gray Lady ain’t what she used to be. Instead, she’s a horribly biased institution generally still trading on the greatness of decades long gone by.
However, from time to time, there are flashes of journalistic brilliance, such as the minute-by-minute recounting of Kyle Rittenhouse’s actions in Kenosha.
It seems they cracked down and did it again, this time creating a video that outlines just what happened the night Breonna Taylor was killed.
It’s a long video, to be sure, and not everyone will have time to delve into it.
Over at Tactical Life Magazine, they summed up some key parts of it.
After the shootings, SWAT arrived on the scene. It’s clear the veteran SWAT commander saw an operation he found littered with problems. “We just got the feeling that night that something really bad happened,” Louisville SWAT Commander Dale Massey told The New York Times. “We had no idea they were going to be at that apartment that night. … I would have advised them 100-percent not to do it.” Massey questioned the intelligence and the presumed lack of vetting. He criticized the execution, including officers inserting themselves into the “fatal funnel,” compromising the mission. But his greatest disdain came from Detective Hankison’s blind shooting through curtain-drawn windows. “You have to know A, what you’re shooting at, B, what’s in front of it, and B, what’s behind it,” Massey said. “There’s no other way you can operate. It was just an egregious act.”
Why was SWAT not in charge of the raid to begin with? It seems there were other raids going on that night, raids where SWAT was utilized. In other words, the most highly trained officers were simply stretched too thin.
Instead, the Taylor raid was conducted by officers who were less well-trained in this time of situation, which created all sorts of problems and resulted in what we see in the video. The guys generally trained for this sort of thing were busy and the guys who didn’t were spearheading the raid. As a result, people died.
None of this was helped, of course, by the officers not wearing body cams, which would have given us a view of what they were doing and seeing. It also made it very difficult to either prosecute or vindicate the officers involved.
The truth is that regardless of what the courts may have ruled, this was a screwed up raid from the start. Departments need to study this so they can learn how to prevent this sort of thing from ever happening again. While I still think heads should have rolled, I’m not in any position to make that happen. However, I can suggest that departments tighten up on this.
Don’t send officers to do raids unless they’re fully trained. Use SWAT when possible and create teams who can handle the duty when SWAT is stretched too thin. Don’t let this happen again.


bearingarms--2020-12-30--Defense Of "21 To Buy" Raises Questions

Defense Of "21 To Buy" Raises Questions

Following Parkland , the state of Florida–a fairly pro-gun state most of the time–enacted a handful of gun control items that infuriated Second Amendment advocates .
One of those was raising the age to buy a long gun to 21 .
Since federal law already bars sales of handguns to those over the age of 21 , this effectively cut off legal adults from exercising their Second Amendment rights .
Unsurprisingly , a lawsuit was filed .
Now , the defense of that law is going in some very interesting directions , directions that raise some questions that others might @ @ @ @ @ @ @ battle over a Florida law that raised from 18 to 21 the age to purchase rifles and other long guns has ramped up this month , with attorneys for the National Rifle Association and state officials trying to discredit each others ’ expert witnesses .
One of the legal quarrels involves Pradeep Bhide , a Florida State University College of Medicine professor who has spent nearly four decades as a developmental neuroscientist .
The state is paying Bhide $ 500 per hour to testify as an expert on adolescent brain development .
In @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Bhide said the Florida law makes sense because “ different parts of the brain mature at different times.
” “ Brain regions that exercise voluntary control over our actions develop at a slower pace compared to brain regions associated with emotional and impulsive actions , ” Bhide wrote in the 12-page report .
“ Thus , a developmental ‘ mismatch ’ emerges within the brain during development , ” The “ mismatch ” is “ particularly pronounced in adolescence … and it fades away in adults , by 21 years of age , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ words , certain human behaviors that we perceive as the actions of a ‘ mature ’ or ‘ adult ’ individual emerge , on average , at 21 years of age , ” he wrote .
“ Delaying gun purchase until 21 years of age can offer the cognitive brain the ‘ extra ’ time needed to be able to exert adequate control over emotional and impulsive behaviors.
” Now , Bhide is an expert .
Even if I disagree with his statements , his credentials are clear .
And yet , what @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people under the age of 21 are impulsive and rash , that they may not be able to discern the long-term impact of their actions .
So , why do we let them vote , again ?
I ’ m serious .
Voting is one of the more important duties we have as Americans and it creates a massive impact on not just Americans in the present but future generations as well .
Yet Dr. Bhide makes it clear that their brains aren ’ t fully developed enough to control emotional and impulsive @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vote for , creating potential problems for decades after an election is over .
In other words , this exact same argument can be used to take away the right to vote from people ages 18-20 .
Funny how that works , ain ’ t it ?
Now , do I think we need to do any such thing ?
Well , yes and no .
I do think that if someone is old enough to exercise their rights , they ’ re old enough to exercise all of their rights .
Not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
If you ’ re going to preserve the right to vote , then you need to preserve the right to keep and bear arms .
It should be noted , however , that the bulk of the military is made up of people within this same age range and we don ’ t have any massive problems there , even while deployed and required to carry a firearm with them everywhere they go , even to the bathroom .
This suggests Dr. Bhide ’ s evaluation , while perhaps technically accurate , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ aged 18 and up are going to be considered adults , then treat them like adults .
It ’ s just that simple .

Following Parkland, the state of Florida–a fairly pro-gun state most of the time–enacted a handful of gun control items that infuriated Second Amendment advocates. One of those was raising the age to buy a long gun to 21.
Since federal law already bars sales of handguns to those over the age of 21, this effectively cut off legal adults from exercising their Second Amendment rights.
Unsurprisingly, a lawsuit was filed. Now, the defense of that law is going in some very interesting directions, directions that raise some questions that others might prefer to remain unasked.
A legal battle over a Florida law that raised from 18 to 21 the age to purchase rifles and other long guns has ramped up this month, with attorneys for the National Rifle Association and state officials trying to discredit each others’ expert witnesses. … One of the legal quarrels involves Pradeep Bhide, a Florida State University College of Medicine professor who has spent nearly four decades as a developmental neuroscientist. The state is paying Bhide $500 per hour to testify as an expert on adolescent brain development. In a report filed with the court, Bhide said the Florida law makes sense because “different parts of the brain mature at different times.” “Brain regions that exercise voluntary control over our actions develop at a slower pace compared to brain regions associated with emotional and impulsive actions,” Bhide wrote in the 12-page report. “Thus, a developmental ‘mismatch’ emerges within the brain during development,” The “mismatch” is “particularly pronounced in adolescence … and it fades away in adults, by 21 years of age,” he wrote. “In other words, certain human behaviors that we perceive as the actions of a ‘mature’ or ‘adult’ individual emerge, on average, at 21 years of age,” he wrote. “Delaying gun purchase until 21 years of age can offer the cognitive brain the ‘extra’ time needed to be able to exert adequate control over emotional and impulsive behaviors.”
Now, Bhide is an expert. Even if I disagree with his statements, his credentials are clear.
And yet, what we see with his report is that people under the age of 21 are impulsive and rash, that they may not be able to discern the long-term impact of their actions.
So, why do we let them vote, again?
I’m serious. Voting is one of the more important duties we have as Americans and it creates a massive impact on not just Americans in the present but future generations as well. Yet Dr. Bhide makes it clear that their brains aren’t fully developed enough to control emotional and impulsive behaviors and that impacts just who they vote for, creating potential problems for decades after an election is over.
In other words, this exact same argument can be used to take away the right to vote from people ages 18-20.
Funny how that works, ain’t it?
Now, do I think we need to do any such thing? Well, yes and no. I do think that if someone is old enough to exercise their rights, they’re old enough to exercise all of their rights. Not just the ones certain people approve of. If you’re going to preserve the right to vote, then you need to preserve the right to keep and bear arms.
It should be noted, however, that the bulk of the military is made up of people within this same age range and we don’t have any massive problems there, even while deployed and required to carry a firearm with them everywhere they go, even to the bathroom. This suggests Dr. Bhide’s evaluation, while perhaps technically accurate, is incomplete at best.
If people aged 18 and up are going to be considered adults, then treat them like adults. It’s just that simple.


bearingarms--2020-12-30--NYPD Commish: "You'd Be Shocked" At Number Of Guns On NYC Streets

It looks like 2020 is going to be the most violent year in almost two decades for New York City , with shootings up by almost 100 % and homicides 40 % higher than 2019 .
There ’ s a growing sense of lawlessness throughout the city , even in the heart of Manhattan , where scenes like the one captured below are becoming increasingly common .
Speaking to reporters on Tuesday , NYPD Commissioner Dermot Shea made an interesting declaration ; the police will be putting their “ resources against attacking people , not necessarily the guns , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ facing “ almost an endless supply of guns.
” “ We are making gun arrests at a breakneck pace and one could argue it is not having a significant impact on the level of violence , ” Shea said .
“ I am going to go after [ those ] who are the people pulling the trigger on the streets of New York City , that is a much more manageable number and controllable number.
” The commissioner went on to say that people “ would be shocked how many guns are on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ question ; given the ease with which people are carrying illegally , why can ’ t the average New Yorker legally carry a gun ?
Why subject them to hundreds of dollars in fees and a byzantine licensing system that ’ s far more likely to deny them a permit to carry than to grant them permission to exercise their Second Amendment rights ?
I ’ m not shocked at all at the number of illicit guns in New York City , because I know how illicit markets work .
Frankly , I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ idea for the NYPD to focus on those pulling the trigger rather than trying to arrest everyone carrying a gun without a license , but the NYPD should also be putting pressure on city officials to revise the city ’ s carry laws .
Now , I know that ’ s not likely to happen , but it ’ s still the logical next step if the NYPD is trying to focus on the most violent offenders in the city .
You can actually cut down on the illegal carrying of firearms by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ City does all that it can to discourage residents from even applying for a concealed carry license through invasive questioning , costly non-refundable fees , and a discretionary issuing process that allows the police to deny a license to someone based on subjective standards of “ suitability.
” New York City ’ s gun laws are clearly doing more to prevent law-abiding residents from exercising their Second Amendment rights than preventing criminals from accessing or using guns in the commission of violent crimes .
Dermot Shea basically admitted as much in his most @ @ @ @ @ @ @ time to go one step further ; acknowledge that the city ’ s gun laws have created a situation where the city ’ s criminals are better armed than the general public and work to change that .
To do anything less is simply unconscionable , and I believe unconstitutional as well

It looks like 2020 is going to be the most violent year in almost two decades for New York City, with shootings up by almost 100% and homicides 40% higher than 2019. There’s a growing sense of lawlessness throughout the city, even in the heart of Manhattan, where scenes like the one captured below are becoming increasingly common.
Witnessed a disturbing incident in broad daylight on 5th ave / 21st St in NYC today. About 50 young boys on bikes blocked 5th ave traffic & trashed an SUV, riders inside, jumping on the windshield. Car had medical license plates & a man & older woman inside. pic.twitter.com/33QeQc4ObC — Maria Petrova (@_MariaPetrova) December 30, 2020
Speaking to reporters on Tuesday, NYPD Commissioner Dermot Shea made an interesting declaration; the police will be putting their “resources against attacking people, not necessarily the guns,” because Shea says the city’s facing “almost an endless supply of guns.”
“We are making gun arrests at a breakneck pace and one could argue it is not having a significant impact on the level of violence,” Shea said. “I am going to go after [those] who are the people pulling the trigger on the streets of New York City, that is a much more manageable number and controllable number.”
The commissioner went on to say that people “would be shocked how many guns are on the streets,” which begs the question; given the ease with which people are carrying illegally, why can’t the average New Yorker legally carry a gun? Why subject them to hundreds of dollars in fees and a byzantine licensing system that’s far more likely to deny them a permit to carry than to grant them permission to exercise their Second Amendment rights?
I’m not shocked at all at the number of illicit guns in New York City, because I know how illicit markets work. Frankly, I think it’s a very good idea for the NYPD to focus on those pulling the trigger rather than trying to arrest everyone carrying a gun without a license, but the NYPD should also be putting pressure on city officials to revise the city’s carry laws.
Now, I know that’s not likely to happen, but it’s still the logical next step if the NYPD is trying to focus on the most violent offenders in the city. You can actually cut down on the illegal carrying of firearms by encouraging legal carry. Unfortunately New York City does all that it can to discourage residents from even applying for a concealed carry license through invasive questioning, costly non-refundable fees, and a discretionary issuing process that allows the police to deny a license to someone based on subjective standards of “suitability.”
New York City’s gun laws are clearly doing more to prevent law-abiding residents from exercising their Second Amendment rights than preventing criminals from accessing or using guns in the commission of violent crimes. Dermot Shea basically admitted as much in his most recent press conference. It’s time to go one step further; acknowledge that the city’s gun laws have created a situation where the city’s criminals are better armed than the general public and work to change that. To do anything less is simply unconscionable, and I believe unconstitutional as well


bearingarms--2020-12-30--Bill To Disarm Congressmen About Grandstanding, Nothing Else

There ’ s something inherently wrong about a different set of rules existing for a particular group versus another .
Saying that a certain , privileged group can exercise their rights in ways the rest of us mere peons can not goes against everything this nation was founded on .
While those Founding Fathers often failed to live up to some of their own principles , it ’ s because they founded a nation on that principle , then denied others their rights .
Yet there are still examples of a different set of rules for certain people .
I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ when you address those imbalances , one ’ s motivations for doing so actually matters .
Are you worried about an imbalance of rights , or is it something else ?
When it comes to an effort to bar members of Congress from carrying a firearm in the Capitol , it ’ s clearly something else .
On Monday , the North Coast ’ s own U.S .
Congressman , Rep. Jared Huffman , introduced a bill with Rep. Jackie Speier ( D- Hillsborough ) that would prevent members of Congress from bringing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been sounding off on social media about this issue in recent weeks , calling attention to the incendiary rhetoric of a few gun-loving colleagues on the other side of the aisle .
For example , he recently retweeted a message from Louisiana Rep. Clay Higgins that referred to Joe Biden ’ s election as the culmination of a “ conspiracy to dismantle America.
” “ Folks , ” Huffman wrote above the retweet , “ under current House rules , this guy is allowed to have assault weapons in the United States Capitol @ @ @ @ @ @ @ security and do whatever he wants with his guns , unlike everyone else in the Capitol.
” Today , the Capitol is one of the most fortified and secure places on Earth , including heavily armed , specially trained Capitol Police all over the place .
Even the most paranoid member of Congress could not justify why they need guns at work .
Yet some members insist on it .
And the ones who are loudest about it always seem to be the most brazen and reckless — the ones most likely to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Now think about everyone who is gathered in the House Chamber during a State of the Union Address or a speech by a foreign leader to a joint session of Congress .
Imagine your favorite unhinged members of Congress sitting there with guns .
Maybe one of the new GOP members who subscribes to the Q-Anon conspiracy theory and believes Trump ’ s lies about election fraud .
Maybe one of the members who talks rapturously about carrying out violent biblical prophecies .
This isn ’ t the plot of a Tom Clancy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ real security problem and a ticking bomb that nobody wants to think or talk about .
… Huffman said he has been quietly pushing the Capitol Police Board to close the loophole for the past two years , with no real progress .
“ It is just a matter of time before an unspeakable tragedy happens , and I prefer to prevent it , ” he wrote .
However , Huffman knows damn good and well that believing there was fraud during the election is a far cry from someone representing an actual @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s doing is trying to paint a picture of a congressman or woman going on a shooting spree in the midst of a congressional session .
Yet he does this with absolutely no corroborating evidence that anyone in Congress would do any such thing .
What Huffman is trying to do with this ?
What ’ s the real reason ?
The answer is simple .
He ’ s trying to sew distrust of the right .
He knows that if he talks about it in this manner , people will start @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are “ unhinged ” and if it ’ s a real problem .
If it is , then just how many ?
Should any Republican hold office anywhere ?
Huffman isn ’ t concerned about violence , he ’ s concerned about discrediting his political rivals .
Had he simply taken the stand that the American people can not be armed in the Capitol–something that the Capitol Police are unlikely to every budge on–then he and his colleagues should be equally disarmed , I suspect he ’ d have a much less difficult @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at least respect what he ’ s saying .
“ Rules for thee but not for me ” isn ’ t exactly the basis of a free society , now is it ?
But he didn ’ t , and now Huffman is laying all his cards on the table .
Frankly , if anyone here is unhinged , it ’ s Huffman for thinking any of his colleagues represent an actual physical threat to him or anyone else .
Now , are they a threat to our bank accounts ?
Absolutely , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ another time .

There’s something inherently wrong about a different set of rules existing for a particular group versus another. Saying that a certain, privileged group can exercise their rights in ways the rest of us mere peons cannot goes against everything this nation was founded on. While those Founding Fathers often failed to live up to some of their own principles, it’s because they founded a nation on that principle, then denied others their rights.
We fixed that mistake, thankfully.
Yet there are still examples of a different set of rules for certain people. I suspect there always will be. Yet when you address those imbalances, one’s motivations for doing so actually matters. Are you worried about an imbalance of rights, or is it something else?
When it comes to an effort to bar members of Congress from carrying a firearm in the Capitol, it’s clearly something else.
On Monday, the North Coast’s own U.S. Congressman, Rep. Jared Huffman, introduced a bill with Rep. Jackie Speier (D- Hillsborough) that would prevent members of Congress from bringing firearms onto Capitol grounds. Huffman has been sounding off on social media about this issue in recent weeks, calling attention to the incendiary rhetoric of a few gun-loving colleagues on the other side of the aisle. For example, he recently retweeted a message from Louisiana Rep. Clay Higgins that referred to Joe Biden’s election as the culmination of a “conspiracy to dismantle America.” “Folks,” Huffman wrote above the retweet, “under current House rules, this guy is allowed to have assault weapons in the United States Capitol. He’s allowed to bypass security and do whatever he wants with his guns, unlike everyone else in the Capitol.” … His post continued: Today, the Capitol is one of the most fortified and secure places on Earth, including heavily armed, specially trained Capitol Police all over the place. Even the most paranoid member of Congress could not justify why they need guns at work. Yet some members insist on it. And the ones who are loudest about it always seem to be the most brazen and reckless — the ones most likely to cause an accident or something worse. Now think about everyone who is gathered in the House Chamber during a State of the Union Address or a speech by a foreign leader to a joint session of Congress. Imagine your favorite unhinged members of Congress sitting there with guns. Maybe one of the new GOP members who subscribes to the Q-Anon conspiracy theory and believes Trump’s lies about election fraud. Maybe one of the members who talks rapturously about carrying out violent biblical prophecies. This isn’t the plot of a Tom Clancy novel; it’s a very real security problem and a ticking bomb that nobody wants to think or talk about. … Huffman said he has been quietly pushing the Capitol Police Board to close the loophole for the past two years, with no real progress. “It is just a matter of time before an unspeakable tragedy happens, and I prefer to prevent it,” he wrote.
However, Huffman knows damn good and well that believing there was fraud during the election is a far cry from someone representing an actual threat to their colleagues.
What he’s doing is trying to paint a picture of a congressman or woman going on a shooting spree in the midst of a congressional session. Yet he does this with absolutely no corroborating evidence that anyone in Congress would do any such thing.
What Huffman is trying to do with this? What’s the real reason?
The answer is simple. He’s trying to sew distrust of the right. He knows that if he talks about it in this manner, people will start to wonder just how many Republican legislators are “unhinged” and if it’s a real problem. If it is, then just how many? Should any Republican hold office anywhere?
Huffman isn’t concerned about violence, he’s concerned about discrediting his political rivals.
Had he simply taken the stand that the American people cannot be armed in the Capitol–something that the Capitol Police are unlikely to every budge on–then he and his colleagues should be equally disarmed, I suspect he’d have a much less difficult time with the measure. I could at least respect what he’s saying. “Rules for thee but not for me” isn’t exactly the basis of a free society, now is it?
But he didn’t, and now Huffman is laying all his cards on the table.
Frankly, if anyone here is unhinged, it’s Huffman for thinking any of his colleagues represent an actual physical threat to him or anyone else. Now, are they a threat to our bank accounts? Absolutely, but that’s a topic for another time.


bearingarms--2020-12-31--Oklahoma Sheriff: Residents Should Use Their 2A Rights

In the face of rising violent crime in his local area , one sheriff in Oklahoma has a message for residents of his county : get a gun and know how to use it .
Sheriff Terry Park recently won re-election as the top cop in Choctaw County , but he knows that law enforcement alone can ’ t stop every crime in the area .
That ’ s why he took to Facebook just a few days ago with advice for residents in the area .
The sheriff ’ s post generated quite a response , and virtually all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Parks ’ advice .
In fact , I was surprised not to see at least one gun control advocate trying to shame the sheriff for his recommendations , but I guess there ’ s a reason why Moms Demand Action doesn ’ t have a southeastern Oklahoma chapter .
Of course Parks ’ advice isn ’ t just applicable for Okies .
Whether you live in a rural setting like Choctaw County , Oklahoma ; a quiet suburb ; or the big city , the sheriff ’ s advice is solid .
Crime @ @ @ @ @ @ @ steps that we can take to mitigate the risk of being a victim as well as increase our odds of surviving an encounter with a dangerous criminal in our home or out in public , and that includes exercising your Second Amendment rights .
I applaud the sheriff for his public stance , and if more Americans follow his advice I have a feeling that the crime rate in the new year will look a lot better than what 2020 delivered .
Cam Edwards has covered the 2nd Amendment for more than 15 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , as well as the co-author of `` Heavy Lifting : Grow Up , Get a Job , Start a Family , and Other Manly Advice '' with Jim Geraghty .
He lives outside of Farmville , Virginia with his family .

In the face of rising violent crime in his local area, one sheriff in Oklahoma has a message for residents of his county: get a gun and know how to use it.
Sheriff Terry Park recently won re-election as the top cop in Choctaw County, but he knows that law enforcement alone can’t stop every crime in the area. That’s why he took to Facebook just a few days ago with advice for residents in the area.
IN SOUTHEAST OKLAHOMA THERE SEEMS TO BE A SLIGHT INCREASE IN HOMICIDES AN A HOME INVASION SOUTH OF HUGO. I ENCOURAGE ONE TO USE THEIR SECOND AMENDMENT. KNOW HOW TO USE YOUR FIREARM. MY INTENTION IS NOT TO CAUSE ONE TO PANIC BUT PAY ATTENTION AT HOME AND ALWAYS KNOW YOUR SURROUNDINGS OUT AND ABOUT. PUT UP SURVEILLANCE CAMERAS, EXTRA LIGHTING OUTSIDE, INSTALL SECURITY SYSTEMS IN YOUR HOMES.
Park went on to encourage residents to pick up a concealed carry application from the local courthouse in Hugo, Oklahoma, but since the state adopted constitutional carry in 2020, no license is needed in order for legal gun owners to carry openly or concealed.
The sheriff’s post generated quite a response, and virtually all of the comments have been supportive of Parks’ advice. In fact, I was surprised not to see at least one gun control advocate trying to shame the sheriff for his recommendations, but I guess there’s a reason why Moms Demand Action doesn’t have a southeastern Oklahoma chapter.
Of course Parks’ advice isn’t just applicable for Okies. Whether you live in a rural setting like Choctaw County, Oklahoma; a quiet suburb; or the big city, the sheriff’s advice is solid. Crime can strike anywhere, but there are steps that we can take to mitigate the risk of being a victim as well as increase our odds of surviving an encounter with a dangerous criminal in our home or out in public, and that includes exercising your Second Amendment rights. I applaud the sheriff for his public stance, and if more Americans follow his advice I have a feeling that the crime rate in the new year will look a lot better than what 2020 delivered.


bearingarms--2020-12-31--LA County Prosecutors Sue DA Over Not Enforcing Law

Laws exist for a reason .
Sometimes those reasons are dumb and incomprehensible , but they ’ re still there for a reason .
While some will refuse to comply with the law for whatever reason , including the belief that the law is unjust , no one is above the law .
That ’ s what we mean when we claim the United States is a nation of laws , not a nation of men .
However , Los Angeles County District Attorney George Gascon apparently thinks he is , and now his prosecutors are taking him to court @ @ @ @ @ @ @ our sister site , Hot Air : Los Angeles County District Attorney George Gascon hasn ’ t even been in office for a month yet but he ’ s been making more headlines than the pandemic .
Unfortunately for Gascon ( and the citizens of his county ) , few of those breaking news items have been of the good variety .
The wildly liberal , anti-cop DA has been working overtime to empty the jails and prevent the prosecution of criminals , even as crime rates have been surging in the City @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of his office won ’ t be changing that pattern at all .
His own prosecutors are going to court to ask a judge to block their new boss ’ s orders and prevent them from having to break the law themselves by carrying out his directives .
And it looks like they have a pretty solid case .
( Fox News ) The union representing Los Angeles County deputy district attorneys is expected to ask a judge to block their new boss George Gascon from easing up on sentences ; William La @ @ @ @ @ @ @ County are asking a judge for an order that would keep them from enforcing new directives from District Attorney George Gascón that would require them to be lenient in their sentencing recommendations for specified types of offenders .
The Association of Deputy District Attorney ’ s for Los Angeles County ( ADDA ) claimed in a lawsuit filed that the directives would mean violating state laws that require enhanced sentences in certain cases .
While the prosecutors have plenty to complain about regarding their new boss , this specific suit is once again @ @ @ @ @ @ @ which are mandated by law for particularly heinous crimes and repeat offenders .
Gascon has tried to forbid the use of enhanced sentences , but that order flies in the face of existing state laws .
The Deputy Prosecutors are left in the position of either defying the DA ’ s instructions or becoming lawbreakers themselves , hence the lawsuit .
While prosecutors often have discretion as to who they prosecute for what crimes , there are times they don ’ t have a lot of say .
That includes these sentencing enhancements @ @ @ @ @ @ @ really up to the prosecutors but are mandated by state law .
I get that Gascon doesn ’ t like them or agree with them , but if they ’ re mandated , he doesn ’ t get a say in whether his prosecutors use them or not .
It ’ s simply not his call .
If it ’ s that big of an issue , the place to address it is in the legislature or by challenging those enhancements in court .
Gascon , as a free citizen , is certainly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ both of those .
Rather than that , though , he wants to grandstand about how he ’ ll do no such thing , all while his city is burning down around him as violent crime surgest all throughout the city .
What Gascon wants to do is get these same violent felons back out on the street as soon as possible , which is unlikely to yield anything good for the law-abiding citizens of L.A. County .
Of course , Gascon doesn ’ t really care about them .
He just wants @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he can seek higher office soon enough .
In the meantime , though , he needs to deal with a lawsuit from his own prosecutors .
Frankly , I think Gascon is going to get slapped down and slapped down hard on this one .
He ’ s out of line and I hope the courts tell him that in no uncertain terms .

Laws exist for a reason. Sometimes those reasons are dumb and incomprehensible, but they’re still there for a reason. While some will refuse to comply with the law for whatever reason, including the belief that the law is unjust, no one is above the law. That’s what we mean when we claim the United States is a nation of laws, not a nation of men.
However, Los Angeles County District Attorney George Gascon apparently thinks he is, and now his prosecutors are taking him to court.
As Jazz Shaw writes over at our sister site, Hot Air:
Los Angeles County District Attorney George Gascon hasn’t even been in office for a month yet but he’s been making more headlines than the pandemic. Unfortunately for Gascon (and the citizens of his county), few of those breaking news items have been of the good variety. The wildly liberal, anti-cop DA has been working overtime to empty the jails and prevent the prosecution of criminals, even as crime rates have been surging in the City of Angels. The latest news out of his office won’t be changing that pattern at all. His own prosecutors are going to court to ask a judge to block their new boss’s orders and prevent them from having to break the law themselves by carrying out his directives. And it looks like they have a pretty solid case. (Fox News) The union representing Los Angeles County deputy district attorneys is expected to ask a judge to block their new boss George Gascon from easing up on sentences; William La Jeunesse reports. Prosecutors in Los Angeles County are asking a judge for an order that would keep them from enforcing new directives from District Attorney George Gascón that would require them to be lenient in their sentencing recommendations for specified types of offenders. The Association of Deputy District Attorney’s for Los Angeles County (ADDA) claimed in a lawsuit filed that the directives would mean violating state laws that require enhanced sentences in certain cases. While the prosecutors have plenty to complain about regarding their new boss, this specific suit is once again focusing on special circumstances and sentencing enhancements which are mandated by law for particularly heinous crimes and repeat offenders. Gascon has tried to forbid the use of enhanced sentences, but that order flies in the face of existing state laws. The Deputy Prosecutors are left in the position of either defying the DA’s instructions or becoming lawbreakers themselves, hence the lawsuit.
While prosecutors often have discretion as to who they prosecute for what crimes, there are times they don’t have a lot of say. That includes these sentencing enhancements, apparently. These aren’t really up to the prosecutors but are mandated by state law.
I get that Gascon doesn’t like them or agree with them, but if they’re mandated, he doesn’t get a say in whether his prosecutors use them or not. It’s simply not his call.
If it’s that big of an issue, the place to address it is in the legislature or by challenging those enhancements in court. Gascon, as a free citizen, is certainly in a position to try and do both of those.
Rather than that, though, he wants to grandstand about how he’ll do no such thing, all while his city is burning down around him as violent crime surgest all throughout the city. What Gascon wants to do is get these same violent felons back out on the street as soon as possible, which is unlikely to yield anything good for the law-abiding citizens of L.A. County.
Of course, Gascon doesn’t really care about them. He just wants to check off his liberal credentials so he can seek higher office soon enough.
In the meantime, though, he needs to deal with a lawsuit from his own prosecutors. Frankly, I think Gascon is going to get slapped down and slapped down hard on this one. He’s out of line and I hope the courts tell him that in no uncertain terms.


bearingarms--2020-12-31--Philly DA Offers Excuses, Not Evidence For Lack Of Gun Prosecutions

2020 has been a brutal year for the crime rate in Philadelphia .
The city will end the year with close to 500 homicides , which would be the most since 1990 , and Philadelphia D.A .
Larry Krasner is getting a lot of criticism for his light-on-crime approach to prosecutions , including a growing number of dismissals of cases dealing with illegal possession of a firearm .
On Wednesday , Krasner offered up an excuse for the increase in dismissed charges ; a lack of witness cooperation .
The only problem is that Krasner doesn ’ t have much @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Still , in written testimony submitted to members of City Council , Krasner said that staffers who studied about 400 such cases found that those issues had been generally steady since at least 2016 — leaving them unable to say why more gun-related prosecutions were being withdrawn or dismissed during Krasner ’ s administration than during his predecessors ’ .
“ We continue to analyze what drove a higher dismissal and withdrawal rate in 2018-2019 , ” says the testimony , a copy of which Krasner ’ s office shared with The Inquirer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 48 % of gun possession cases have been dropped by Krasner ’ s office this year .
Before the far-left attorney took over the office in 2017 , the “ share of illegal gun-possession cases withdrawn or dismissed never topped 29 % .
” Clearly something ’ s going on here , and I suspect that Krasner knows exactly what ’ s taking place even as he tries to shield himself from criticism .
After all , non-violent possessory gun offenses aren ’ t the only crimes that Krasner ’ s office is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Philadelphia Citizen reported on details of a new report by the Law Enforcement Legal Defense Fund that highlighted the widespread reduction in felony prosecutions coming from the Philly D.A.
’ s office .
The report makes the case that , in his ideological zeal , Krasner is failing to prosecute felony offenses .
Compared to his predecessor Seth Williams ’ average conviction rates , Krasner has dropped or lost 26 percent more felony cases .
He has dismissed or lost 14 percent more robbery cases , 37 percent more car theft cases @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cases .
( Krasner has dismissed or lost an eye-opening 55 percent of drug sales cases , which backs up the anecdotal evidence offered by those in law enforcement who claim that street corner drug dealers joke that “ Uncle Larry ” has their back when cops take them in . )
Here ’ s the data point that jumped out at me : In his first two years in office , Krasner dropped or lost 47 percent of all illegal firearms cases—a rate 42 percent higher than under Williams .
And Krasner @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is 21 percent lower than his predecessor .
As someone who believes that the right to keep and bear arms is fundamental , I ’ m not really concerned with Krasner ’ s lack of enforcement when it comes to prosecuting those caught carrying without a license , because I don ’ t believe that a license should be required to bear arms in the first place .
Krasner , however , isn ’ t making some pro-2A stand by dropping gun possession cases .
Instead , it ’ s part of a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ populations for all felony offenses , even violent ones , and even at the expense of public safety .
That ’ s the real issue with Krasner ’ s ideology , and unfortunately he ’ s far from the only prosecutor around the country with the same myopic mindset .
From Philly to L.A. there are a growing number of district attorneys who , like Krasner , see the prosecution of violent offenders are more problematic than the crimes they ’ ve committed , and you just have to look at the skyrocketing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that ideology will take us .

2020 has been a brutal year for the crime rate in Philadelphia. The city will end the year with close to 500 homicides, which would be the most since 1990, and Philadelphia D.A. Larry Krasner is getting a lot of criticism for his light-on-crime approach to prosecutions, including a growing number of dismissals of cases dealing with illegal possession of a firearm.
On Wednesday, Krasner offered up an excuse for the increase in dismissed charges; a lack of witness cooperation. The only problem is that Krasner doesn’t have much evidence to back up his assertion.
Still, in written testimony submitted to members of City Council, Krasner said that staffers who studied about 400 such cases found that those issues had been generally steady since at least 2016 — leaving them unable to say why more gun-related prosecutions were being withdrawn or dismissed during Krasner’s administration than during his predecessors’. “We continue to analyze what drove a higher dismissal and withdrawal rate in 2018-2019,” says the testimony, a copy of which Krasner’s office shared with The Inquirer.
According to the Philadelphia Inquirer, 48% of gun possession cases have been dropped by Krasner’s office this year. Before the far-left attorney took over the office in 2017, the “share of illegal gun-possession cases withdrawn or dismissed never topped 29%.”
Clearly something’s going on here, and I suspect that Krasner knows exactly what’s taking place even as he tries to shield himself from criticism. After all, non-violent possessory gun offenses aren’t the only crimes that Krasner’s office is failing to prosecute. Earlier this year the Philadelphia Citizen reported on details of a new report by the Law Enforcement Legal Defense Fund that highlighted the widespread reduction in felony prosecutions coming from the Philly D.A.’s office.
The report makes the case that, in his ideological zeal, Krasner is failing to prosecute felony offenses. Compared to his predecessor Seth Williams’ average conviction rates, Krasner has dropped or lost 26 percent more felony cases. He has dismissed or lost 14 percent more robbery cases, 37 percent more car theft cases, and 21 percent more drug sales cases. (Krasner has dismissed or lost an eye-opening 55 percent of drug sales cases, which backs up the anecdotal evidence offered by those in law enforcement who claim that street corner drug dealers joke that “Uncle Larry” has their back when cops take them in.) Here’s the data point that jumped out at me: In his first two years in office, Krasner dropped or lost 47 percent of all illegal firearms cases—a rate 42 percent higher than under Williams. And Krasner’s rate of gun violence convictions is 21 percent lower than his predecessor.
As someone who believes that the right to keep and bear arms is fundamental, I’m not really concerned with Krasner’s lack of enforcement when it comes to prosecuting those caught carrying without a license, because I don’t believe that a license should be required to bear arms in the first place. Krasner, however, isn’t making some pro-2A stand by dropping gun possession cases. Instead, it’s part of a broader effort to reduce jail and prison populations for all felony offenses, even violent ones, and even at the expense of public safety.
That’s the real issue with Krasner’s ideology, and unfortunately he’s far from the only prosecutor around the country with the same myopic mindset. From Philly to L.A. there are a growing number of district attorneys who, like Krasner, see the prosecution of violent offenders are more problematic than the crimes they’ve committed, and you just have to look at the skyrocketing crime rate in Philadelphia to see where that ideology will take us.


bearingarms--2020-12-31--Recent Arrest Proves Canadian Gun Laws A Bust

Anti-gunners continually claim that gun laws like those in Canada work wonderfully well .
All of our issues with crime here would be solved if we just adopted laws like our neighbors north of the border .
Nevermind that while there are close similarities between the two nations , there are also profound cultural differences .
For one , Canadians are stereotypically nice , for example , while Americans…aren ’ t .
I ’ m OK with that , but that “ nice ” factor means Canadians are more likely to go along to get along , which means they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in violent crime .
But even then , there are those who will ignore the laws of the land and do their own thing , and do gun laws stop them ?
Not so much , really .
For the most part , this bust is…well…a bust .
A whopping $ 250 in cash ?
I ’ ve walked around with more than that in my wallet .
And don ’ t get me started on the ammo .
Honestly , while there ’ s an ammo shortage , 29 rounds of 7.62×39 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ grand total of two 9mm rounds aren ’ t even enough for a modest range trip .
Yet it ’ s the “ automatic rifle ” that tickles me .
See , I have to believe in this day and age , if it were semi-auto , they ’ d say semi-auto .
That means there ’ s a good chance the rifle is full-auto , a vz 58 by the looks of it .
That ’ s something most of us here in the U.S. can ’ t get our hands on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at us for this one .
More importantly , though , is the fact that all the gun laws in Canada were insufficient to prevent these people from getting this weapon , even if it turns out to be semi-auto .
None of them did a damn thing to prevent this .
That ’ s the problem with gun laws in general .
While they restrict the actions of the law-abiding , they do absolutely nothing to stop the criminals .
They get the guns , then the law-abiding have no means to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ammunition did more to protect the law-abiding than the gun laws themselves .
With so few rounds , there is only so much a bad guy can do under the circumstances .
Meanwhile , there aren ’ t piles of laws blocking the purchasing of ammunition in Canada .
That didn ’ t really make much of a play here , so far as I can tell .
Look , I get that people who believe gun laws are the answer will look at Canada ’ s crime rate and their gun laws @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ re not seeing is that one of those 2s is really a 3 .
The two don ’ t have as much to do with one another as people would like to believe .
Of course , convincing anti-gunners of that would probably be harder than teaching my cat to act as my butler .

Anti-gunners continually claim that gun laws like those in Canada work wonderfully well. All of our issues with crime here would be solved if we just adopted laws like our neighbors north of the border. Nevermind that while there are close similarities between the two nations, there are also profound cultural differences.
For one, Canadians are stereotypically nice, for example, while Americans…aren’t.
I’m OK with that, but that “nice” factor means Canadians are more likely to go along to get along, which means they’re less likely to be involved in violent crime.
But even then, there are those who will ignore the laws of the land and do their own thing, and do gun laws stop them? Not so much, really.
A weekend search of a London residence has prompted weapons and drug charges for four people. … Among the items seized were: 15 grams of suspected fentanyl valued at $6,000
automatic rifle and a magazine
loaded 12-gauge shotgun
eight 12-gauge shotgun rounds
29 rounds of 7.62 x 39 mm ammunition
two 9mm rounds
cellular phone
$250 in cash
digital scale
For the most part, this bust is…well…a bust. A whopping $250 in cash? I’ve walked around with more than that in my wallet. And don’t get me started on the ammo. Honestly, while there’s an ammo shortage, 29 rounds of 7.62×39, 8 12-gauge shells, and a grand total of two 9mm rounds aren’t even enough for a modest range trip.
Yet it’s the “automatic rifle” that tickles me.
See, I have to believe in this day and age, if it were semi-auto, they’d say semi-auto. That means there’s a good chance the rifle is full-auto, a vz 58 by the looks of it. That’s something most of us here in the U.S. can’t get our hands on legally, so don’t look at us for this one.
More importantly, though, is the fact that all the gun laws in Canada were insufficient to prevent these people from getting this weapon, even if it turns out to be semi-auto. None of them did a damn thing to prevent this.
That’s the problem with gun laws in general. While they restrict the actions of the law-abiding, they do absolutely nothing to stop the criminals. They get the guns, then the law-abiding have no means to resist.
In this case, limited ammunition did more to protect the law-abiding than the gun laws themselves. With so few rounds, there is only so much a bad guy can do under the circumstances.
Meanwhile, there aren’t piles of laws blocking the purchasing of ammunition in Canada. That didn’t really make much of a play here, so far as I can tell.
Look, I get that people who believe gun laws are the answer will look at Canada’s crime rate and their gun laws and figure 2+2=4, but what they’re not seeing is that one of those 2s is really a 3. The two don’t have as much to do with one another as people would like to believe.
Of course, convincing anti-gunners of that would probably be harder than teaching my cat to act as my butler.


bearingarms--2020-12-31--One Year After Attack, Jewish Community Embraces Self-Defense

It was December 28th , 2019 when a disturbed man entered a home in Monsey , New York where folks were gathering for a Hanukkah celebration and used a knife to stab five attendees .
In the months since , one of the victims died from his injuries , the attacker has managed to avoid federal charges on the basis of his mental condition , and many members of the Jewish community in Monsey have embraced their Second Amendment rights .
According to Forward , a number of Monsey residents have applied for a gun license in the wake of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ old named Abe , who says there ’ s been a sea change in attitudes towards armed self-defense among his friends and neighbors .
Abe , a soon-to-be father of three , started the process to get his firearm license before the attack , but didn ’ t follow up at first .
“ It wasn ’ t something that was ever a priority , ” he said .
But after the tragedy , “ everybody woke up and started their filing process , ” he told Haaretz .
“ There are quite @ @ @ @ @ @ @ might be surprised , ” he added .
“ In my shul , on a regular Shabbes it ’ s a shul of 40 to 50 people – six of us carry guns , and these are all recent certifications.
” On the night of the attack , Yanky Fligman , 29 , who was born and raised in Monsey , was at his father ’ s Hanukkah party when his phone rang and he heard the shocking news .
As a volunteer first-responder in his community , people often turn to him @ @ @ @ @ @ @ out to the car , turned on my radio , started driving in that direction and I didn ’ t understand what is happening , I just heard full chaos on the radio , ” he recalls .
“ I was kind of confused until I arrived at the scene and started asking ‘ what ’ s going on ?
’ And it kind of hit me.
” Fligman , a father of three young children , couldn ’ t help but wonder : “ Is this going to start happening every few @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that “ being a minority group that might be targeted , you should have a gun , ” the attack last year finally pushed him to take action .
The next day , Fligman and three of his friends began filling their application paperwork for a firearms license .
In the two weeks after the stabbing attack , 31 Monsey residents applied for a gun license , and many others have submitted their applications in recent months , though some of them are still stuck in a legal limbo waiting to be approved @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about moving away from Monsey , where he was born and raised , after the attack .
Ultimately , however , he decided to stay , and filed paperwork for a gun license a few months ago .
He is still waiting for it to be processed .
“ You face reality , ” the father of two girls said .
“ It ’ s happening right in your backyard and it ’ s real and it ’ s not going to go anywhere.
” Even after the year-old attack , he had @ @ @ @ @ @ @ strict gun laws , his license will still be restricted and he won ’ t be able to take his firearm to New York City or beyond state lines .
If he ever uses it , he will have to answer to the courts and explain his action .
“ It ’ s not like you can just walk around with it.
” he said .
Yet another example of why New York ’ s gun control laws are an unconstitutional infringement on the right to keep and bear arms .
Is Yaakov @ @ @ @ @ @ @ carries his legally-owned firearm in Manhattan instead of Monsey ?
Of course not , but New York City ’ s draconian gun laws prevent him ( and everyone else without a rarely-granted NYC carry permit ) from protecting themselves in the city where anti-semitic attacks have been on the rise .
Self-defense is a human right , and I ’ m glad to see so many men and women in the Jewish community taking steps to be able to protect themselves from an attack .
I just hope that in 2021 we ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on the right to carry so that anti-gun jurisdictions like New York City can no longer infringe on our rights to keep and bear arms in defense of ourselves and our loved ones .

It was December 28th, 2019 when a disturbed man entered a home in Monsey, New York where folks were gathering for a Hanukkah celebration and used a knife to stab five attendees. In the months since, one of the victims died from his injuries, the attacker has managed to avoid federal charges on the basis of his mental condition, and many members of the Jewish community in Monsey have embraced their Second Amendment rights.
According to Forward, a number of Monsey residents have applied for a gun license in the wake of the stabbing attack, including a 28-year old named Abe, who says there’s been a sea change in attitudes towards armed self-defense among his friends and neighbors.
Abe, a soon-to-be father of three, started the process to get his firearm license before the attack, but didn’t follow up at first. “It wasn’t something that was ever a priority,” he said. But after the tragedy, “everybody woke up and started their filing process,” he told Haaretz. “There are quite a few of us – some people might be surprised,” he added. “In my shul, on a regular Shabbes it’s a shul of 40 to 50 people – six of us carry guns, and these are all recent certifications.” On the night of the attack, Yanky Fligman, 29, who was born and raised in Monsey, was at his father’s Hanukkah party when his phone rang and he heard the shocking news. As a volunteer first-responder in his community, people often turn to him for information. “I immediately ran out to the car, turned on my radio, started driving in that direction and I didn’t understand what is happening, I just heard full chaos on the radio,” he recalls. “I was kind of confused until I arrived at the scene and started asking ‘what’s going on?’ And it kind of hit me.” Fligman, a father of three young children, couldn’t help but wonder: “Is this going to start happening every few weeks?” Although he always felt that “being a minority group that might be targeted, you should have a gun,” the attack last year finally pushed him to take action. The next day, Fligman and three of his friends began filling their application paperwork for a firearms license.
In the two weeks after the stabbing attack, 31 Monsey residents applied for a gun license, and many others have submitted their applications in recent months, though some of them are still stuck in a legal limbo waiting to be approved.
Yaakov Rosenberg, 30, thought about moving away from Monsey, where he was born and raised, after the attack. Ultimately, however, he decided to stay, and filed paperwork for a gun license a few months ago. He is still waiting for it to be processed. “You face reality,” the father of two girls said. “It’s happening right in your backyard and it’s real and it’s not going to go anywhere.” Even after the year-old attack, he had reservations. With New York’s strict gun laws, his license will still be restricted and he won’t be able to take his firearm to New York City or beyond state lines. If he ever uses it, he will have to answer to the courts and explain his action. “It’s not like you can just walk around with it.” he said.
Yet another example of why New York’s gun control laws are an unconstitutional infringement on the right to keep and bear arms. Is Yaakov Rosenberg a more dangerous person if he carries his legally-owned firearm in Manhattan instead of Monsey? Of course not, but New York City’s draconian gun laws prevent him (and everyone else without a rarely-granted NYC carry permit) from protecting themselves in the city where anti-semitic attacks have been on the rise.
Self-defense is a human right, and I’m glad to see so many men and women in the Jewish community taking steps to be able to protect themselves from an attack. I just hope that in 2021 we’ll see the Supreme Court weigh in on the right to carry so that anti-gun jurisdictions like New York City can no longer infringe on our rights to keep and bear arms in defense of ourselves and our loved ones.


bearingarms--2020-12-31--Felon Caught With Gun Says He Needs It For Self-Defense

In the United States , convicted felons can ’ t have a firearm unless their rights have been restored .
Whether this is a good thing in general or not is a topic for another time .
For right now , let ’ s suffice it to say that they can ’ t have guns .
Yet felons keep getting guns .
For many of us , myself included , the only reason we see them doing so is that they want to continue committing crimes .
The thing is , it seems that felons aren ’ t that different @ @ @ @ @ @ @ want a gun to defend themselves .
Reports said an Austintown man caught with a gun the day after Christmas told police he needed it because he has been shot 15 times .
Kadeem Gilmore , 31 , was arraigned Monday in municipal court before Magistrate Anthony Sertick on charges of improper handling of a firearm in a motor vehicle and being a felon in possession of a firearm .
Police pulled Gilmore over for excessive window tint .
The car reportedly smelled of marijuana , though Gilmore denied having anything illegal in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
But the story gets better .
When police found a records check , they found Gilmore has a suspended license and searched the car before it was towed .
Inside the center console , they found a loaded 9mm semiautomatic pistol in the center console .
Reports said Gilmore told police he needed the gun for protection because he has been shot 15 times .
Gilmore was quoted as telling police : “ People carry guns when they have been shot and I ’ ve been shot 15 times.
” Now , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ case back in 2007 , so he can ’ t legally own a firearm .
His gun rights are stripped and it ’ s unlikely he ’ ll get them back .
Not after this .
Of course , this makes you wonder just what he ’ s been up to where he ’ s been shot 15 times .
I can ’ t think of many places where law-abiding citizens get shot that much outside of serving in a warzone .
Even then , such an extensive set of wounds is rare @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to ?
Somehow , I suspect Gilmore ’ s career choice has more to do with why he got shot so often than anything else .
Just because it had been 13 years since his conviction , it doesn ’ t mean he ever left the drug gang .
But that ’ s mostly just speculation .
In truth , it doesn ’ t really matter all that much .
Undoubtedly , the police are going to want to know where Gilmore got the first , which we all know wasn ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ perform background checks .
Most likely , he bought it from someone on the streets .
It ’ s likely a stolen firearm which was then illegally sold to Gilmore .
It ’ s also possible he purchased it from someone who was unaware of his criminal history , but that seems unlikely .
We know where felons tend to get their guns and it ’ s not from sales with the law-abiding , as a general rule .
Still , if nothing else , this story should at least provide a bit @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the year .

In the United States, convicted felons can’t have a firearm unless their rights have been restored. Whether this is a good thing in general or not is a topic for another time. For right now, let’s suffice it to say that they can’t have guns.
Yet felons keep getting guns.
For many of us, myself included, the only reason we see them doing so is that they want to continue committing crimes. The thing is, it seems that felons aren’t that different from you or me. Some just want a gun to defend themselves.
Reports said an Austintown man caught with a gun the day after Christmas told police he needed it because he has been shot 15 times. Kadeem Gilmore, 31, was arraigned Monday in municipal court before Magistrate Anthony Sertick on charges of improper handling of a firearm in a motor vehicle and being a felon in possession of a firearm.
Police pulled Gilmore over for excessive window tint. The car reportedly smelled of marijuana, though Gilmore denied having anything illegal in the car.
Shocking, I know. But the story gets better.
When police found a records check, they found Gilmore has a suspended license and searched the car before it was towed. Inside the center console, they found a loaded 9mm semiautomatic pistol in the center console. Reports said Gilmore told police he needed the gun for protection because he has been shot 15 times. Gilmore was quoted as telling police: “People carry guns when they have been shot and I’ve been shot 15 times.”
Now, Gilmore was convicted on a felony drug case back in 2007, so he can’t legally own a firearm. His gun rights are stripped and it’s unlikely he’ll get them back. Not after this.
Of course, this makes you wonder just what he’s been up to where he’s been shot 15 times. I can’t think of many places where law-abiding citizens get shot that much outside of serving in a warzone. Even then, such an extensive set of wounds is rare, so what has Gilmore been up to?
Somehow, I suspect Gilmore’s career choice has more to do with why he got shot so often than anything else. Just because it had been 13 years since his conviction, it doesn’t mean he ever left the drug gang.
But that’s mostly just speculation. In truth, it doesn’t really matter all that much.
Undoubtedly, the police are going to want to know where Gilmore got the first, which we all know wasn’t from a law-abiding gun dealer. They perform background checks. Most likely, he bought it from someone on the streets. It’s likely a stolen firearm which was then illegally sold to Gilmore. It’s also possible he purchased it from someone who was unaware of his criminal history, but that seems unlikely. We know where felons tend to get their guns and it’s not from sales with the law-abiding, as a general rule.
Still, if nothing else, this story should at least provide a bit of entertainment here at the end of the year.


bearingarms--2020-12-31--2A Activist Stalked By Her Husband's Killer From Behind Bars

I can ’ t imagine the pain that comes from seeing the love of your life murdered right in front of you , but it ’ s an anguish that Nikki Goeser sadly knows all too well .
Goeser ’ s beloved husband Ben was killed in April of 2009 by a man who ’ d been stalking Goeser , and since then she ’ s been a fierce and tireless advocate for the right of self-defense .
Nikki had her concealed carry license on the night her husband was murdered , but thanks to the Tennessee law at the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to bring her gun into the bar where she and her husband were running their mobile karaoke business that evening .
Hank Wise , the man who ’ d been stalking Goeser , didn ’ t care about the gun-free zone and brought a pistol into the bar that night .
Ben Goeser was murdered , and Wise ended up receiving a 23-year prison sentence a couple of years later .
Even behind bars , however , Wise has continued to torment Goeser by sending her a flood of letters from his prison @ @ @ @ @ @ @ story of being harassed by her husband ’ s killer back in July , and this week she learned that Wise is now facing federal charges for stalking Goeser through the postal system .
“ We owe a duty to victims of crime to ensure that they will not continue to be subjected to cruel acts which cause emotional distress as alleged here , ” said U.S. Attorney [ Don ] Cochran .
“ We simply will not stand for this.
” While in prison , beginning in approximately 2011 , Wise began @ @ @ @ @ @ @ widow , through her attorney , which lasted until 2017 .
The communications were also in the form of holiday cards such as Christmas and Valentine ’ s Day and contained romantic overtures , professing his love for her and telling her that he thinks about her every day .
Wise continued to send letters and cards intended for the woman through her attorney until 2017 .
Although initially aware of the communications , the woman asked her attorney not to notify her of any subsequent letters after 2012 .
After 2012 , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Wise , intended for the woman , but in keeping with his client ’ s wishes , he did not share the communications with her until sometime in 2019 .
The woman was highly distressed when she learned of the continued attempts by Wise to communicate with her .
Since her husband ’ s death and the beginning of her Second Amendment activism , I ’ ve gotten a chance to know Nikki Goeser as a friend , and I am continually amazed and inspired by her inner strength and dedication to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Crime Prevention Research Center Nikki has helped to advance Second Amendment scholarship and research , but her mission has always been based on helping real people exercise their fundamental right to bear arms .
It ’ s shameful that her husband ’ s killer has been allowed to stalk her from behind bars for years , and while I ’ m extremely glad that the U.S. Attorney ’ s office is now pursuing federal charges against the man , I can ’ t help but wonder why nothing happened until Goeser told @ @ @ @ @ @ @ attempts to contact her .
Goeser says that a preliminary hearing in the case is scheduled for next Tuesday , and hopefully the judge won ’ t have any trouble finding probable cause to charge Wise with mail stalking .
If convicted , Wise could face up to five years in a federal prison .
Frankly , I wish the potential sentence was a lot longer , because I don ’ t want to see this man ever set free from prison , but at least the federal sentence doesn ’ t come @ @ @ @ @ @ @ We ’ ll keep an eye on next week ’ s hearing , and I hope and pray that it will allow Nikki Goeser to get some semblance of justice from the courts .

I can’t imagine the pain that comes from seeing the love of your life murdered right in front of you, but it’s an anguish that Nikki Goeser sadly knows all too well. Goeser’s beloved husband Ben was killed in April of 2009 by a man who’d been stalking Goeser, and since then she’s been a fierce and tireless advocate for the right of self-defense.
Nikki had her concealed carry license on the night her husband was murdered, but thanks to the Tennessee law at the time, she wasn’t permitted to bring her gun into the bar where she and her husband were running their mobile karaoke business that evening. Hank Wise, the man who’d been stalking Goeser, didn’t care about the gun-free zone and brought a pistol into the bar that night. Ben Goeser was murdered, and Wise ended up receiving a 23-year prison sentence a couple of years later.
Even behind bars, however, Wise has continued to torment Goeser by sending her a flood of letters from his prison cell. Nikki went public with her story of being harassed by her husband’s killer back in July, and this week she learned that Wise is now facing federal charges for stalking Goeser through the postal system.
“We owe a duty to victims of crime to ensure that they will not continue to be subjected to cruel acts which cause emotional distress as alleged here,” said U.S. Attorney [Don] Cochran. “We simply will not stand for this.” While in prison, beginning in approximately 2011, Wise began sending letters to the victim’s widow, through her attorney, which lasted until 2017. The communications were also in the form of holiday cards such as Christmas and Valentine’s Day and contained romantic overtures, professing his love for her and telling her that he thinks about her every day. Wise continued to send letters and cards intended for the woman through her attorney until 2017. Although initially aware of the communications, the woman asked her attorney not to notify her of any subsequent letters after 2012. After 2012, the attorney continued to receive letters from Wise, intended for the woman, but in keeping with his client’s wishes, he did not share the communications with her until sometime in 2019. The woman was highly distressed when she learned of the continued attempts by Wise to communicate with her.
Since her husband’s death and the beginning of her Second Amendment activism, I’ve gotten a chance to know Nikki Goeser as a friend, and I am continually amazed and inspired by her inner strength and dedication to the cause. As the executive director of the Crime Prevention Research Center Nikki has helped to advance Second Amendment scholarship and research, but her mission has always been based on helping real people exercise their fundamental right to bear arms.
It’s shameful that her husband’s killer has been allowed to stalk her from behind bars for years, and while I’m extremely glad that the U.S. Attorney’s office is now pursuing federal charges against the man, I can’t help but wonder why nothing happened until Goeser told the media about Wise’s continued attempts to contact her.
Goeser says that a preliminary hearing in the case is scheduled for next Tuesday, and hopefully the judge won’t have any trouble finding probable cause to charge Wise with mail stalking. If convicted, Wise could face up to five years in a federal prison. Frankly, I wish the potential sentence was a lot longer, because I don’t want to see this man ever set free from prison, but at least the federal sentence doesn’t come with the possibility of early release. We’ll keep an eye on next week’s hearing, and I hope and pray that it will allow Nikki Goeser to get some semblance of justice from the courts.


bearingarms--2020-02-03--Anti-Gun Activists Fail To Get Gun Ban On Florida's 2020 Ballot

Despite national media attention and the deep pockets of a handful of donors , anti-gun groups like March For Our Lives and Ban Assault Weapons Now have failed in their efforts to get a so-called “ assault weapons ban ” referendum on the 2020 ballot in Florida .
The Sun-Sentinel newspaper in south Florida reports that the activists needed to collect about 766,000 valid signatures to place the referendum on the ballot , but came up hundreds of thousands of signatures short .
Supporters say they are now focusing on getting the question before voters in 2022 .
The group @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Now — collected 145,000 verified signatures this past year .
The deadline to meet the signature requirement for this year ’ s election was Feb. 1 .
“ Despite the best efforts of the NRA and politicians in Tallahassee to place obstacles in our path , we will continue our fight to save lives by working hard to ensure voters have the final say over their safety in 2022 , ” Gail Schwartz , Ban Assault Weapons Now ’ s chairwoman , said in a prepared statement .
No offense , Gail , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the final say , and they rejected your gun ban by not signing your petitions .
After all , it ’ s not like every proposed referendum failed .
There will actually be a couple of non-gun-related ballot measures going before Florida voters this fall .
The biggest obstacle in the path of Ban Assault Weapons Now is the voting public in Florida , which has squarely rejected the attempt to ban the most commonly produced rifle platform in the country .
That ’ s great news for gun owners and Second Amendment @ @ @ @ @ @ @ gun control movement , which has used the referendum process in recent years to expand gun control laws in states like California , Washington , and Nevada .
While the ballot initiative has failed this year , a lawsuit filed by the NRA to toss out the initiative based on misleading language continues , according to the Miami Herald .
Although it won ’ t be on the ballot this fall , lawyers for the amendment still plan on arguing the case before the Florida Supreme Court on Tuesday .
The justices have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the ballot .
[ Florida Attorney General Ashley ] Moody ’ s office is expected to argue the amendment is too broad and vague to go before voters .
That court case could make it impossible for gun control activists to use any of the signatures they ’ ve gathered so far in an attempt to put the gun ban before voters in 2022 , though I suspect even if the language is allowed to stand organizers are going to face long odds in their quest .
The voters have spoken this year @ @ @ @ @ @ @ clear and resounding “ No thanks ” to those seeking to impose a draconian ban on their right to keep and bear arms .

Despite national media attention and the deep pockets of a handful of donors, anti-gun groups like March For Our Lives and Ban Assault Weapons Now have failed in their efforts to get a so-called “assault weapons ban” referendum on the 2020 ballot in Florida. The Sun-Sentinel newspaper in south Florida reports that the activists needed to collect about 766,000 valid signatures to place the referendum on the ballot, but came up hundreds of thousands of signatures short.
Supporters say they are now focusing on getting the question before voters in 2022. The group pushing the petition — Ban Assault Weapons Now — collected 145,000 verified signatures this past year. The deadline to meet the signature requirement for this year’s election was Feb. 1. “Despite the best efforts of the NRA and politicians in Tallahassee to place obstacles in our path, we will continue our fight to save lives by working hard to ensure voters have the final say over their safety in 2022,” Gail Schwartz, Ban Assault Weapons Now’s chairwoman, said in a prepared statement.
No offense, Gail, but it sounds like voters did have the final say, and they rejected your gun ban by not signing your petitions. After all, it’s not like every proposed referendum failed. There will actually be a couple of non-gun-related ballot measures going before Florida voters this fall.
Two items have been approved to be placed on Florida’s ballot. One would raise Florida’s minimum wage to $15. The other would stipulate only a citizen can vote in the state’s elections. Two proposals have gathered the required signatures but are pending a reviewing from the Florida Supreme Court. One would require a constitutional amendment be approved twice by voters instead of just once, making it harder to pass future citizen initiatives. The other would overhaul Florida’s primary election system and open it to all voters regardless of party affiliation.
The biggest obstacle in the path of Ban Assault Weapons Now is the voting public in Florida, which has squarely rejected the attempt to ban the most commonly produced rifle platform in the country. That’s great news for gun owners and Second Amendment supporters, and not-so-great news for the gun control movement, which has used the referendum process in recent years to expand gun control laws in states like California, Washington, and Nevada.
While the ballot initiative has failed this year, a lawsuit filed by the NRA to toss out the initiative based on misleading language continues, according to the Miami Herald.
Although it won’t be on the ballot this fall, lawyers for the amendment still plan on arguing the case before the Florida Supreme Court on Tuesday. The justices have to approve amendments before they go on the ballot. [Florida Attorney General Ashley] Moody’s office is expected to argue the amendment is too broad and vague to go before voters.
That court case could make it impossible for gun control activists to use any of the signatures they’ve gathered so far in an attempt to put the gun ban before voters in 2022, though I suspect even if the language is allowed to stand organizers are going to face long odds in their quest. The voters have spoken this year, and they’ve sent a clear and resounding “No thanks” to those seeking to impose a draconian ban on their right to keep and bear arms.