bearingarms--2020-07-31--Feds In Chicago Bust 23 In Gun-Running Operation

Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot delights in telling the whole world that Chicago ’ s violent crime problem is because of nearby states not having sufficient gun control .
In other words , these states lack violent crime on par with a wet sock are supposed to clamp down on their citizens ’ civil liberties because of what ’ s happening in one particular city in a completely different state .
Lightfoot is like that mother of juvenile delinquents who constantly argues that her babies are good kids that are just being led astray , despite the fact that they ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and everyone knows it .
Yet , those guns are still getting into Chicago somehow .
Now , with the feds involved in dealing with Chicago ’ s mess , they ’ re starting to see some result apparently .
Federal agents made a major breakthrough in tackling gang-related drug- and gun-trafficking operations in Chicago , arresting 23 individuals on Tuesday , including the reputed head of the Chicago Black Disciples gang , in connection with an alleged criminal enterprise that , authorities say , heavily impacted the crime rates on the city @ @ @ @ @ @ @ arrests on Tuesday came after a multiyear law enforcement investigation focused on the distribution of narcotics and guns in the Englewood neighborhood on the South Side and other parts of the city , c said in a statement , ” CNN reports .
“ Court documents describe more than 50 transactions in which the alleged gang members sold guns or drugs to people cooperating with law enforcement , according to the statement .
Many of the transactions were captured on video.
” “ Among those arrested is Darnell McMiller , 34 , of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ McMiller is described in the charges as the current leader of the Black Disciples street gang in Chicago , ” according to Chicago ’ s ABC affiliate .
A statement from the office of the U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Illinois also notes that authorities arrested several other high-ranking members of the Black Disciples , as well as members of the Gangster Disciples , two of Chicago ’ s oldest street gangs .
Charges range from “ drug and firearm offenses to — in one case — bank fraud , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s unlikely these gangs were the sole source of illegal guns in the city , they were likely a big chunk of it .
Of course , there will likely be others to step in and fill the gap left–the Law of Supply and Demand is a thing , even in black markets–this does disrupt the flow of guns into criminal hands to some degree .
In fairness to Lightfoot and the city of Chicago , this wasn ’ t part of Operation Legend .
These arrests were going to happen anyway , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ had agreed to cooperate or not , so it ’ s not related to that operation .
Still , it ’ s a Chicago mess that the feds are having to clean up .
The question is , will we see a resulting change in Chicago ’ s violent crime rate ?
My money says we won ’ t .
At least , not for a long while .
Not because this won ’ t have an impact to any degree , only that enough criminals have guns already that we ’ re @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or months to come , if at all .
The report makes no mention of how the gangs got their firearms in the first place , but rest assured that they all involve some degree of lawbreaking to begin with so Lightfoot ’ s calls for other states to enact Illinois-style draconian gun control measures won ’ t have had any kind of a real impact .

Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot delights in telling the whole world that Chicago’s violent crime problem is because of nearby states not having sufficient gun control. In other words, these states lack violent crime on par with a wet sock are supposed to clamp down on their citizens’ civil liberties because of what’s happening in one particular city in a completely different state.
Lightfoot is like that mother of juvenile delinquents who constantly argues that her babies are good kids that are just being led astray, despite the fact that they’re the ringleaders in the first place and everyone knows it.
Yet, those guns are still getting into Chicago somehow.
Now, with the feds involved in dealing with Chicago’s mess, they’re starting to see some result apparently.
Federal agents made a major breakthrough in tackling gang-related drug- and gun-trafficking operations in Chicago, arresting 23 individuals on Tuesday, including the reputed head of the Chicago Black Disciples gang, in connection with an alleged criminal enterprise that, authorities say, heavily impacted the crime rates on the city’s south side. “The arrests on Tuesday came after a multiyear law enforcement investigation focused on the distribution of narcotics and guns in the Englewood neighborhood on the South Side and other parts of the city, c said in a statement,” CNN reports. “Court documents describe more than 50 transactions in which the alleged gang members sold guns or drugs to people cooperating with law enforcement, according to the statement. Many of the transactions were captured on video.” “Among those arrested is Darnell McMiller, 34, of Chicago, also known as ‘Murder.’ McMiller is described in the charges as the current leader of the Black Disciples street gang in Chicago,” according to Chicago’s ABC affiliate. A statement from the office of the U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Illinois also notes that authorities arrested several other high-ranking members of the Black Disciples, as well as members of the Gangster Disciples, two of Chicago’s oldest street gangs. Charges range from “drug and firearm offenses to — in one case — bank fraud,” per CNN.
While it’s unlikely these gangs were the sole source of illegal guns in the city, they were likely a big chunk of it. Of course, there will likely be others to step in and fill the gap left–the Law of Supply and Demand is a thing, even in black markets–this does disrupt the flow of guns into criminal hands to some degree.
In fairness to Lightfoot and the city of Chicago, this wasn’t part of Operation Legend. These arrests were going to happen anyway, regardless of whether President Trump and Lightfoot had agreed to cooperate or not, so it’s not related to that operation. Still, it’s a Chicago mess that the feds are having to clean up.
The question is, will we see a resulting change in Chicago’s violent crime rate?
My money says we won’t. At least, not for a long while. Not because this won’t have an impact to any degree, only that enough criminals have guns already that we’re unlikely to see anything correlate for weeks or months to come, if at all.
The report makes no mention of how the gangs got their firearms in the first place, but rest assured that they all involve some degree of lawbreaking to begin with so Lightfoot’s calls for other states to enact Illinois-style draconian gun control measures won’t have had any kind of a real impact.


bearingarms--2020-08-01--Armed Robbery Suspects Caught, Had Stolen Police Gun

“ If people couldn ’ t buy guns , criminals wouldn ’ t be able to get their hands on them !
” How many times have you heard that kind of thing ?
I don ’ t know about you , but if I had a penny for every time I ’ d heard such nonsense , I ’ d be the guy Jeff Bezos looked at to pick up the lunch tab .
And , in fairness , I see the reasoning .
Such as it is , anyway .
The concept is that if law-abiding citizens can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ couldn ’ t steal those guns , thus eliminating many sources for bad guys to get guns as things currently stand .
It wouldn ’ t work , of course , because water always finds the low spot .
However , even without that , the thinking is faulty .
Why ?
Because law-abiding citizens aren ’ t the only ones who can be the victim of gun theft .
Someone stole a gun from the police .
Yet is there any set of circumstances where you can imagine the police actually being @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for it , to be sure .
They ’ re often the same people calling for defunding the police by illustrating the need for the police with rioting , but they exist .
Because of their actions , they ’ re not likely to see a disarmed police force .
With regard to this case , the takeaway here is that there will always be a source for guns .
So long as there is a source for guns , there will be a threat to law-abiding citizens .
That threat is why @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Second Amendment rights .
The bad guys will always be armed , either with guns or some other weapon .
I ’ m too old to try and get into a knife fight with a 22-year-old career criminal and my wife isn ’ t physically strong enough .
Couple that with criminals getting guns no matter what and our right to defend ourselves makes the right to keep and bear arms absolutely essential .
Oh , some might argue that this is an isolated incident , that there ’ s nothing in here @ @ @ @ @ @ @ re wrong .
Over the years , I ’ ve written a number of stories about police guns being stolen by criminals .
I ’ ve seen a greater number that I haven ’ t had a chance to write about .
While it may not be common , it ’ s far from unheard of .
So please tell me what good the most draconian gun control measures possible would do if criminals can still get guns but we ’ re unable to defend ourselves from those criminals ?
No , seriously @ @ @ @ @ @ @ truth is , though , even if it would eliminate all so-called gun crime , I would still oppose it .
The bad guys aren ’ t playing by special rules , so I refuse to be further hindered in my ability to protect my family .

“If people couldn’t buy guns, criminals wouldn’t be able to get their hands on them!”
How many times have you heard that kind of thing? I don’t know about you, but if I had a penny for every time I’d heard such nonsense, I’d be the guy Jeff Bezos looked at to pick up the lunch tab.
And, in fairness, I see the reasoning. Such as it is, anyway.
The concept is that if law-abiding citizens can’t get guns, then criminals couldn’t steal those guns, thus eliminating many sources for bad guys to get guns as things currently stand. It wouldn’t work, of course, because water always finds the low spot.
However, even without that, the thinking is faulty. Why? Because law-abiding citizens aren’t the only ones who can be the victim of gun theft.
According to the Calera Police Department, four male suspects were arrested after an armed robbery in the Oliver Court community on Wednesday night. … A total of five guns were recovered, one of which was stolen from a police department, according to police.
Someone stole a gun from the police.
Shocking, I know.
Yet is there any set of circumstances where you can imagine the police actually being disarmed? Oh, some are pushing for it, to be sure. They’re often the same people calling for defunding the police by illustrating the need for the police with rioting, but they exist. Because of their actions, they’re not likely to see a disarmed police force.
I’m thankful for that.
With regard to this case, the takeaway here is that there will always be a source for guns. So long as there is a source for guns, there will be a threat to law-abiding citizens.
That threat is why I refuse to give ground on my Second Amendment rights. The bad guys will always be armed, either with guns or some other weapon. I’m too old to try and get into a knife fight with a 22-year-old career criminal and my wife isn’t physically strong enough. Couple that with criminals getting guns no matter what and our right to defend ourselves makes the right to keep and bear arms absolutely essential.
Oh, some might argue that this is an isolated incident, that there’s nothing in here that should alarm us. They’re wrong.
Over the years, I’ve written a number of stories about police guns being stolen by criminals. I’ve seen a greater number that I haven’t had a chance to write about. While it may not be common, it’s far from unheard of.
So please tell me what good the most draconian gun control measures possible would do if criminals can still get guns but we’re unable to defend ourselves from those criminals? No, seriously, I want to know.
The truth is, though, even if it would eliminate all so-called gun crime, I would still oppose it. The bad guys aren’t playing by special rules, so I refuse to be further hindered in my ability to protect my family.


bearingarms--2020-08-01--Staten Island DA Blames Guns As One Cause For Violence There

It seems that every major city is experiencing a massive surge in violent crime .
A lot of the smaller cities are seeing the same thing , to be fair , but the larger cities get the headlines .
In Staten Island , NY , the DA has some thoughts about what is causing the violence .
They ’ re…interesting .
Angst and anger over monthslong coronavirus ( COVID-19 ) lockdowns and restrictions .
Social unrest and protests sparked by George Floyd ’ s death at the hands of the police in Minneapolis .
A lack of education and job @ @ @ @ @ @ @ guns on the street and settling old scores .
Changes in bail laws and police tactics .
Those are just some of the factors that have ignited a recent spate of gun violence in the borough , which in a matter of days snuffed out three men ’ s lives , said District Attorney Michael E. McMahon .
“ There no question we ’ re in a sort of perfect storm , if you will , when it comes to the alarming increase in gun violence on Staten Island , ” McMahon said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are just too many guns out there in the open and being used in a way we haven ’ t seen in a long time .
It ’ s all coming to a head .
It is very concerning , and we ’ ve got a lot of work to do.
” I ’ m going to give McMahon credit for one thing .
He seems to get that there ’ s no one simple cause for the upsurge in violence or in violent crime .
That means he may well recognize that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a complex issue that likely lacks a single root cause .
Yet claiming the availability of guns as a cause is something I ( unsurprisingly ) have to take issue with .
You see , there ’ s not really any evidence that the availability of firearms has actually increased .
Yes , we ’ ve seen a surge in gun sales , but those are primarily going to law-abiding citizens .
Despite the doom and gloom in the news , we ’ ve seen that the percentages of criminals trying to skirt @ @ @ @ @ @ @ significantly .
All that comes as a time when more people are still stuck at home due to COVID-19 .
That ’ s resulted in less property crime since the outbreak began , meaning fewer new guns are stolen and funneled to the black market .
Even if there is an increase in straw buys , that ’ s unlikely to lead to an increase in gun crime itself .
So no , I don ’ t buy that there ’ s some increased availability of guns .
Especially since there have been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The problem is that people in roles like McMahon ’ s have a tendency to blame guns because it ’ s easy .
Many of their constituents already blame the availability of guns , so it makes guns an easy scapegoat .
Yet , as noted already , there ’ s no reason to believe there ’ s been an increase in the availability of guns for criminals .
That tells us that the availability of guns is actually playing little to no role in violent crime increases in Staten Island .
All @ @ @ @ @ @ @ muddy the already complicated waters about gun crime .

It seems that every major city is experiencing a massive surge in violent crime. A lot of the smaller cities are seeing the same thing, to be fair, but the larger cities get the headlines.
In Staten Island, NY, the DA has some thoughts about what is causing the violence. They’re…interesting.
Summer heat and temper flare-ups. Angst and anger over monthslong coronavirus (COVID-19) lockdowns and restrictions. Social unrest and protests sparked by George Floyd’s death at the hands of the police in Minneapolis. A lack of education and job programs for youths. The availability of guns on the street and settling old scores. Changes in bail laws and police tactics. Those are just some of the factors that have ignited a recent spate of gun violence in the borough, which in a matter of days snuffed out three men’s lives, said District Attorney Michael E. McMahon. “There no question we’re in a sort of perfect storm, if you will, when it comes to the alarming increase in gun violence on Staten Island,” McMahon said in a recent interview. “There are just too many guns out there in the open and being used in a way we haven’t seen in a long time. It’s all coming to a head. It is very concerning, and we’ve got a lot of work to do.”
I’m going to give McMahon credit for one thing. He seems to get that there’s no one simple cause for the upsurge in violence or in violent crime. That means he may well recognize that violent crime, in general, is a complex issue that likely lacks a single root cause.
Good for him.
Yet claiming the availability of guns as a cause is something I (unsurprisingly) have to take issue with.
You see, there’s not really any evidence that the availability of firearms has actually increased. Yes, we’ve seen a surge in gun sales, but those are primarily going to law-abiding citizens. Despite the doom and gloom in the news, we’ve seen that the percentages of criminals trying to skirt the system haven’t really increased significantly.
All that comes as a time when more people are still stuck at home due to COVID-19. That’s resulted in less property crime since the outbreak began, meaning fewer new guns are stolen and funneled to the black market. Even if there is an increase in straw buys, that’s unlikely to lead to an increase in gun crime itself.
So no, I don’t buy that there’s some increased availability of guns. Especially since there have been no laws liberalizing gun laws there.
The problem is that people in roles like McMahon’s have a tendency to blame guns because it’s easy. Many of their constituents already blame the availability of guns, so it makes guns an easy scapegoat.
Yet, as noted already, there’s no reason to believe there’s been an increase in the availability of guns for criminals. That tells us that the availability of guns is actually playing little to no role in violent crime increases in Staten Island.
All such claims do, though, is muddy the already complicated waters about gun crime.


bearingarms--2020-08-02--Louisiana Teacher Who Brandished Gun In Viral Video Fired

All law-abiding citizens have a right to keep and bear arms .
I happen to think that everyone who can own and carry a gun should own and carry a gun .
I want to put that out there here at the beginning .
You see , I need to do that because there are also some people who show themselves to be the kind of people who probably shouldn ’ t have guns , even though they ’ ve been pretty law-abiding .
That includes a Louisiana teacher who famously wielded a bat and draw a gun at someone @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of falls into that camp .
Now , though , calling her a “ Louisiana teacher ” isn ’ t particularly accurate .
The WBRZ Investigative Unit has confirmed the East Baton Rouge Parish School System has fired P.E .
teacher Bridgette Digerolamo following a video that went viral this month .
The video shows a family driving home in Shenandoah , and Digerolamo brandishing a handgun and a baseball bat trying to get people not to drive down her flooded street .
Following the public outcry , neighbors told WBRZ the Digerolamos @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a flood last year .
They did not condone her actions that were captured on video .
Demetra Turner-Louis and her family were making their way home when Digerolamo became irate and hit their vehicle with a baseball bat before going into her house to retrieve a handgun .
“ You don ’ t play with guns and threaten people , ” Turner-Louis said following the incident .
“ If we had a gun it could have been a different outcome .
To witness my child screaming and seeing this , and I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ don ’ t know her state of mind .
She could have shot me.
” Digerolamo is facing criminal charges for her actions , but now she ’ s also out of work .
Missing from the above-linked news reports is the context of the incident .
As some of you may recall , the incident in question stems from when a Louisiana neighborhood flooded .
Apparently , when people drove down the flooded street , the wake sent water into Digerolamo ’ s home .
Now , I get being angry .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ s problem , not Turner-Louis ’ s .
It was on her to take steps to protect her home , not threaten the lives of people who didn ’ t bend to her will .
At every level , what we ’ ve seen tells us that Digerolamo was completely and totally out of line .
She needs to be called on it and the charges pending in her case are a prime example of being called on her actions .
That ’ s a good thing and I ’ m damn glad @ @ @ @ @ @ @ also imperative that the gun community call people like this out .
We need to make it very clear that we don ’ t approve of this .
We also need to call out people who talk crap about doing stuff like this .
I ’ ve seen too many comments about doing similarly met with , at most , eye rolls .
There are people who actually think stuff like this is acceptable .
It ’ s not .
Threats to your property that don ’ t jeopardize human life aren ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ someone .
Had Turner-Louis been trying to firebomb the house , then it would have been different .
She wasn ’ t .
People need to get a damn grip .

All law-abiding citizens have a right to keep and bear arms. I happen to think that everyone who can own and carry a gun should own and carry a gun. I want to put that out there here at the beginning.
You see, I need to do that because there are also some people who show themselves to be the kind of people who probably shouldn’t have guns, even though they’ve been pretty law-abiding.
That includes a Louisiana teacher who famously wielded a bat and draw a gun at someone for driving through her flooded neighborhood kind of falls into that camp.
Now, though, calling her a “Louisiana teacher” isn’t particularly accurate.
The WBRZ Investigative Unit has confirmed the East Baton Rouge Parish School System has fired P.E. teacher Bridgette Digerolamo following a video that went viral this month. The video shows a family driving home in Shenandoah, and Digerolamo brandishing a handgun and a baseball bat trying to get people not to drive down her flooded street. Following the public outcry, neighbors told WBRZ the Digerolamos had just finished repairing their house from a flood last year. They did not condone her actions that were captured on video. Demetra Turner-Louis and her family were making their way home when Digerolamo became irate and hit their vehicle with a baseball bat before going into her house to retrieve a handgun. “You don’t play with guns and threaten people,” Turner-Louis said following the incident. “If we had a gun it could have been a different outcome. To witness my child screaming and seeing this, and I’m outside the car, I don’t know her state of mind. She could have shot me.”
Digerolamo is facing criminal charges for her actions, but now she’s also out of work.
Missing from the above-linked news reports is the context of the incident. As some of you may recall, the incident in question stems from when a Louisiana neighborhood flooded. Apparently, when people drove down the flooded street, the wake sent water into Digerolamo’s home.
Now, I get being angry. However, that made it Digerolamo’s problem, not Turner-Louis’s. It was on her to take steps to protect her home, not threaten the lives of people who didn’t bend to her will.
At every level, what we’ve seen tells us that Digerolamo was completely and totally out of line. She needs to be called on it and the charges pending in her case are a prime example of being called on her actions. That’s a good thing and I’m damn glad to see it.
It’s also imperative that the gun community call people like this out. We need to make it very clear that we don’t approve of this.
We also need to call out people who talk crap about doing stuff like this. I’ve seen too many comments about doing similarly met with, at most, eye rolls. There are people who actually think stuff like this is acceptable. It’s not.
Threats to your property that don’t jeopardize human life aren’t grounds for pulling a gun on someone. Had Turner-Louis been trying to firebomb the house, then it would have been different. She wasn’t.
People need to get a damn grip.


bearingarms--2020-08-03--How The Media Lies About Guns

How The Media Lies About Guns

The fact that the media is biased against guns isn ’ t really a surprising fact .
Anyone who watches the news in the aftermath of a mass shooting should be able to see it for themselves .
Anti-gun voices are interviewed frequently and without any pushback .
Pro-gun voices are interviewed either with an anti-gunner or the host themself pushes back .
There ’ s very little effort to appear unbiased .
Yet there are far more ways in which the media lies about guns .
In particular , they push a number of myths about guns that people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Real Clear Politics , John Lott takes aim at several of these .
Myth 1 : Los Angeles Times : “ Why the U.S. is No .
1 — in mass shootings ” This claim is based on one study by Adam Lankford at the University of Alabama .
Lankford asserted that the U.S. accounted for 31 % of mass public shooters from 1966 to 2012 , despite having less than 5 % of the world population .
But for over four years , he refused requests from both academics and media outlets @ @ @ @ @ @ @ News , and the Washington Post , to release his data .
When he finally released his list of cases after I had published an academic paper going through the data , it was clear why he had waited so long .
He had over-counted cases in the U.S. and missed thousands of others in the rest of the world .
The United States accounted for just 1 % of the shooters — far less than its share of the world population .
France , Switzerland , Russia , Finland , and Norway @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rates than does the U.S .
Indeed , France ’ s rate is 111 % higher than ours .
By far , the worst mass public shootings have occurred in Europe .
Americans may be surprised by these numbers , because they hear so little about mass shootings in other countries .
The dozens of times in recent years that such shootings are stopped by concealed handgun permit holders is also ignored .
Something else the news media won ’ t tell you : Since 1950 , 94 % of the mass public @ @ @ @ @ @ @ places where citizens are banned from having guns .
Of course , this is true .
I don ’ t even hear all that much about many of them and I ’ m someone who makes a living writing about these kinds of things .
I want to know about these shootings .
The problem is that unless they make the news in the English-speaking world , I generally don ’ t come across them .
Then , of course , we have one of my favorite myths , one I ’ ve @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Myth 3 : Guns allow people to kill themselves much more easily .
Vox explains : “ Perhaps the reason access to guns so strongly contributes to suicides is that guns are much deadlier than alternatives like cutting and poisons.
” But this gives a very misleading impression of the effectiveness of different suicide methods .
A 1995 study looked at 4,117 suicide cases in Los Angeles County and found very high “ success ” rates for many methods .
Taking cyanide , jumping from a height , being hit by a train @ @ @ @ @ @ @ same likelihoods of success as a gunshot to the head or shotgun blast to the chest .
There are lots of effective ways for people to commit suicide , and that ’ s why suicides haven ’ t decreased when gun bans have been enacted .
And yet , let ’ s also remember that we ’ ve seen a massive surge in stories about increased suicides due to the influx of new gun owners .
Those stories almost always are predicated on the idea that attempting suicide with a gun is more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with other methods .
Yet , as Lott points out , many of those other methods are actually pretty likely to be “ successful ” as well .
I ’ ve been saying that just because using a gun is the most effective way to end your own life , that doesn ’ t mean other methods won ’ t accomplish the same task .
Turns out , I was right .
There are others addressed by Lott , but you can go read them for yourself .
Addressing these myths is vitally @ @ @ @ @ @ @ made it into the public ’ s mind .
People hear them and accept them at face value and they shouldn ’ t .
For the media , though , they don ’ t care about reality , just the narrative .

The fact that the media is biased against guns isn’t really a surprising fact. Anyone who watches the news in the aftermath of a mass shooting should be able to see it for themselves. Anti-gun voices are interviewed frequently and without any pushback. Pro-gun voices are interviewed either with an anti-gunner or the host themself pushes back. There’s very little effort to appear unbiased.
Yet there are far more ways in which the media lies about guns. In particular, they push a number of myths about guns that people take at face value.
Over at Real Clear Politics, John Lott takes aim at several of these.
Myth 1: Los Angeles Times: “Why the U.S. is No. 1 — in mass shootings” This claim is based on one study by Adam Lankford at the University of Alabama. Lankford asserted that the U.S. accounted for 31% of mass public shooters from 1966 to 2012, despite having less than 5% of the world population. But for over four years, he refused requests from both academics and media outlets, including Real Clear Politics, Fox News, and the Washington Post, to release his data. When he finally released his list of cases after I had published an academic paper going through the data, it was clear why he had waited so long. He had over-counted cases in the U.S. and missed thousands of others in the rest of the world. The United States accounted for just 1% of the shooters — far less than its share of the world population. France, Switzerland, Russia, Finland, and Norway all have substantially higher per capita fatality rates than does the U.S. Indeed, France’s rate is 111% higher than ours. By far, the worst mass public shootings have occurred in Europe. Americans may be surprised by these numbers, because they hear so little about mass shootings in other countries. The dozens of times in recent years that such shootings are stopped by concealed handgun permit holders is also ignored. Something else the news media won’t tell you: Since 1950, 94% of the mass public shootings have occurred in gun-free zones, places where citizens are banned from having guns.
Of course, this is true. I don’t even hear all that much about many of them and I’m someone who makes a living writing about these kinds of things. I want to know about these shootings. The problem is that unless they make the news in the English-speaking world, I generally don’t come across them.
Then, of course, we have one of my favorite myths, one I’ve been battling against for some time.
Myth 3: Guns allow people to kill themselves much more easily. Vox explains: “Perhaps the reason access to guns so strongly contributes to suicides is that guns are much deadlier than alternatives like cutting and poisons.” But this gives a very misleading impression of the effectiveness of different suicide methods. A 1995 study looked at 4,117 suicide cases in Los Angeles County and found very high “success” rates for many methods. Taking cyanide, jumping from a height, being hit by a train, or hanging oneself had virtually the same likelihoods of success as a gunshot to the head or shotgun blast to the chest. There are lots of effective ways for people to commit suicide, and that’s why suicides haven’t decreased when gun bans have been enacted.
And yet, let’s also remember that we’ve seen a massive surge in stories about increased suicides due to the influx of new gun owners. Those stories almost always are predicated on the idea that attempting suicide with a gun is more likely to be “successful” than with other methods. Yet, as Lott points out, many of those other methods are actually pretty likely to be “successful” as well.
I’ve been saying that just because using a gun is the most effective way to end your own life, that doesn’t mean other methods won’t accomplish the same task. Turns out, I was right.
There are others addressed by Lott, but you can go read them for yourself. Addressing these myths is vitally important because so many of them have made it into the public’s mind. People hear them and accept them at face value and they shouldn’t.
For the media, though, they don’t care about reality, just the narrative.


bearingarms--2020-08-03--Indiana Sheriff Won't Enforce Gun Control

Sometimes , there ’ s just not much folks in rural communities can do .
If you ’ ve got large urban centers dominating the political landscape of your state , you may not be able to stop the enactment of draconian gun control laws .
You ’ re just too outnumbered to stop it .
Legal challenges become an option , to be sure , but if those urban centers dominate the state , they probably dominate the court system as well .
Challenges may not go the way you hope .
So what do those rural and suburban @ @ @ @ @ @ @ do what many other communities have done .
They can do pretty much what an Indiana sheriff has said he plans to do .
The county commissioners and Sheriff Duane Burgess stopped short of declaring Johnson County a Second Amendment sanctuary , but declared that county resources would not be used to enforce laws that infringe on gun rights .
Burgess was asked by residents to clarify his stance on the issue , so he put his thoughts to paper in a legal document as a promise to county residents , he said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ must be protected , and people must know where their elected sheriff and officials stand , ” Burgess said .
“ People have the right to protect themselves and their property .
They have the right to keep and bear arms.
” Locally , the ordinance declares , “ Johnson County shall be a county in which the Constitutional right to keep and bear arms is deeply honored and protected against unlawful infringement ; and that the Johnson County Commissioners and Johnson County Sheriff hereby declare their opposition to any law or regulation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ keep and bear arms , and it shall , therefore , be the policy of the Johnson County commissioners and the Johnson County sheriff not to utilize county resources in a manner that unlawfully infringes upon the right to keep and bear arms.
” Burgess and Johnson County commissioner Brian Baird said county officials are of the opinion that additional gun rights should not be taken away , but existing gun laws will continue to be enforced .
For example , Baird said the sheriff ’ s office would respond to and take @ @ @ @ @ @ @ such as automatic weapons or those who carry a gun in public without a license .
While I ’ d prefer that no gun control be enforced , the truth of the matter is that most people are fine with what ’ s already on the books .
Enforcing those laws make sense from a political standpoint , so sure .
I can roll with that .
All over the nation , ordinances similar to the one above are being passed by various communities .
Most of them are rural or suburban , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ touch many politicians are with the rural parts of our nation .
They can ’ t fathom a world where the police aren ’ t just a few minutes away , where there aren ’ t hundreds of police officers on duty at any given time just waiting for you to call .
Many people don ’ t have that option and their county lawmakers and sheriffs know that .
That is a big chunk of why you ’ re seeing a Second Amendment sanctuary movement .

Sometimes, there’s just not much folks in rural communities can do. If you’ve got large urban centers dominating the political landscape of your state, you may not be able to stop the enactment of draconian gun control laws. You’re just too outnumbered to stop it. Legal challenges become an option, to be sure, but if those urban centers dominate the state, they probably dominate the court system as well. Challenges may not go the way you hope.
So what do those rural and suburban communities do?
Well, they can do what many other communities have done. They can do pretty much what an Indiana sheriff has said he plans to do.
The county commissioners and Sheriff Duane Burgess stopped short of declaring Johnson County a Second Amendment sanctuary, but declared that county resources would not be used to enforce laws that infringe on gun rights. Burgess was asked by residents to clarify his stance on the issue, so he put his thoughts to paper in a legal document as a promise to county residents, he said. “The people have rights and must be protected, and people must know where their elected sheriff and officials stand,” Burgess said. “People have the right to protect themselves and their property. They have the right to keep and bear arms.” Locally, the ordinance declares, “Johnson County shall be a county in which the Constitutional right to keep and bear arms is deeply honored and protected against unlawful infringement; and that the Johnson County Commissioners and Johnson County Sheriff hereby declare their opposition to any law or regulation that unlawfully infringes upon the right to keep and bear arms, and it shall, therefore, be the policy of the Johnson County commissioners and the Johnson County sheriff not to utilize county resources in a manner that unlawfully infringes upon the right to keep and bear arms.” … Burgess and Johnson County commissioner Brian Baird said county officials are of the opinion that additional gun rights should not be taken away, but existing gun laws will continue to be enforced. For example, Baird said the sheriff’s office would respond to and take action against individuals who possess illegal guns such as automatic weapons or those who carry a gun in public without a license.
While I’d prefer that no gun control be enforced, the truth of the matter is that most people are fine with what’s already on the books. Enforcing those laws make sense from a political standpoint, so sure. I can roll with that.
All over the nation, ordinances similar to the one above are being passed by various communities. Most of them are rural or suburban, but it highlights just how out of touch many politicians are with the rural parts of our nation. They can’t fathom a world where the police aren’t just a few minutes away, where there aren’t hundreds of police officers on duty at any given time just waiting for you to call.
Many people don’t have that option and their county lawmakers and sheriffs know that. That is a big chunk of why you’re seeing a Second Amendment sanctuary movement.


bearingarms--2020-08-03--Latest Data Shows Continued Surge In Gun Sales In July

Everywhere you look in the gun community , there ’ s plenty of evidence that gun sales are surging .
Many shoppers are reporting a complete lack of guns at their local stores .
Others report a lack of ammunition .
Many of those stores are reporting increased sales as well .
The National Shooting Sports Foundation released their data on adjusted gun sales earlier today : As you can see , we ’ re looking at more than twice as many guns sold in July 2020 compared to one year earlier .
Specifically , we ’ re seeing a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ That represents an increase of 122.5 percent when compared to the “ July 2019 NSSF-adjusted NICS figure of 830,579.
” That ’ s nothing to sneeze at , to be sure .
The question many will ask is just why ?
NSSF ’ s Mark Oliva said , “ These are historic figures for firearm sales that have outpaced last year ’ s figures each month and have set monthly records since March .
July ’ s background checks for the sale of a firearm were more than one million higher than the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of sustained firearm purchases clearly shows that Americans continue to take responsibility for their personal safety , especially during times of uncertainty.
” Olivia chalked that uncertainty up to a combination of factors .
“ The confluence of COVID-19 restrictions , civil unrest , calls to defund law enforcement and political figures and courts that are unwilling to hold criminals accountable for their actions are undeniable factors causing Americans to assess their own personal safety and choose to exercise their right of personal protection.
” Yet , Olivia didn ’ t credit just @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Additionally , talk by political figures in a presidential election cycle of instituting strict gun control , banning entire classes of firearms , and severely restricting the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding Americans are being seen , ” he added .
He ’ s not wrong .
Things rarely have a simplistic cause .
While COVID-19 has been part of the increase , many are losing the fear of the disease .
Yet civil unrest , up to and including riots , has played a significant role in making many Americans aware of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Couple that with people wanting to defund the very same police they claim you can call if your life is in danger and you get the kind of situation that sends millions looking for guns .
And it should be noted that all indications are that most of these are new gun owners .
These aren ’ t your long-time gun collector .
These aren ’ t your rednecks with arsenals that rival some third-world nations .
These are your ordinary , everyday folks who have just decided that it ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their families .
These are also people who likely found out that a lot of what ’ s been pushed by the media and anti-gunners ( but I repeat myself ) has been a complete line of BS .
That should make November look quite interesting , to say the least .
Anti-gun lawmakers may want to take a step back and ponder whether they really want to keep going down that particular road .
Especially since there ’ s no indication that this surge is going to end any time soon .

Everywhere you look in the gun community, there’s plenty of evidence that gun sales are surging. Many shoppers are reporting a complete lack of guns at their local stores. Others report a lack of ammunition. Many of those stores are reporting increased sales as well.
But, anecdotal evidence isn’t hard data.
The NICS background check data, however, isn’t anecdotal data.
The National Shooting Sports Foundation released their data on adjusted gun sales earlier today:
As you can see, we’re looking at more than twice as many guns sold in July 2020 compared to one year earlier. Specifically, we’re seeing a total of 1,848,307 in total sales. That represents an increase of 122.5 percent when compared to the “July 2019 NSSF-adjusted NICS figure of 830,579.”
That’s nothing to sneeze at, to be sure. The question many will ask is just why?
NSSF’s Mark Oliva said, “These are historic figures for firearm sales that have outpaced last year’s figures each month and have set monthly records since March. July’s background checks for the sale of a firearm were more than one million higher than the same period last year. This period of sustained firearm purchases clearly shows that Americans continue to take responsibility for their personal safety, especially during times of uncertainty.”
Olivia chalked that uncertainty up to a combination of factors. “The confluence of COVID-19 restrictions, civil unrest, calls to defund law enforcement and political figures and courts that are unwilling to hold criminals accountable for their actions are undeniable factors causing Americans to assess their own personal safety and choose to exercise their right of personal protection.”
Yet, Olivia didn’t credit just current events for the increase. “Additionally, talk by political figures in a presidential election cycle of instituting strict gun control, banning entire classes of firearms, and severely restricting the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding Americans are being seen,” he added.
He’s not wrong. Things rarely have a simplistic cause. While COVID-19 has been part of the increase, many are losing the fear of the disease. Yet civil unrest, up to and including riots, has played a significant role in making many Americans aware of just how fragile our society can be. Couple that with people wanting to defund the very same police they claim you can call if your life is in danger and you get the kind of situation that sends millions looking for guns.
And it should be noted that all indications are that most of these are new gun owners. These aren’t your long-time gun collector. These aren’t your rednecks with arsenals that rival some third-world nations. These are your ordinary, everyday folks who have just decided that it’s time to be more proactive about defending their families.
These are also people who likely found out that a lot of what’s been pushed by the media and anti-gunners (but I repeat myself) has been a complete line of BS. That should make November look quite interesting, to say the least. Anti-gun lawmakers may want to take a step back and ponder whether they really want to keep going down that particular road.
Especially since there’s no indication that this surge is going to end any time soon.


bearingarms--2020-08-03--As Dayton Anniversary Approaches, Some Upset At Lack Of Action

The mass shooting in Dayton , Ohio was part of a particularly violent weekend in the United States .
On top of the usual mess in places like Chicago , we had the El Paso shooting as well , all right on top of one another .
It was not a good time to be defending gun rights .
The outrage , still strong following Parkland , ramped into high gear .
In Ohio , a fairly gun-loving state , people were clamoring for gun control .
Now , as the anniversary of that deadly night approaches , people are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ over and just let it happen .
The day after a gunman killed nine people and injured 27 more , Ohio Gov .
Mike DeWine stood on the brick-lined streets of the Oregon District in Dayton and started to speak .
The former prosecutor turned Republican governor remarked about the crowd size and then a voice cried out : “ Do something !
” The tightly packed crowd responded , and the chants to “ do something !
” grew louder and louder until they drowned out DeWine ’ s words .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ indeed rolled out a comprehensive package within days .
But as the one-year anniversary of that awful night approaches , Ohio ’ s Republican-controlled legislature hasn ’ t voted on a single piece of legislation .
Guns will be just as accessible to people experiencing mental health crises on Aug. 4 , 2020 , as they were on Aug. 4 , 2019 .
No law has been passed to encourage or require background checks for the private sale of firearms .
Punishments for certain violent crimes remain the same .
And , it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ all of those efforts had been put in place before the shooting , nothing would have changed .
Nothing at all .
Whoops .
I guess the journalists forgot to mention that part .
You see , the Dayton killer had issues , sure , but none of the laws proposed would have had any impact on his ability to purchase a firearm .
Besides which , he was apparently using drugs , which makes it illegal to own a firearm anyway–yet another law he broke .
For all the handwringing going around @ @ @ @ @ @ @ what happened in Dayton wasn ’ t something that could easily have been prevented .
Laws wouldn ’ t have stopped it , especially those particular bits of law .
Yet for the gun grabbers out there , none of that matters .
They ’ re not upset with the fact that their proposals wouldn ’ t have stopped the killing .
The mass shooting was nothing more than a pretext to them .
They wanted to push gun control and the massacre gave them an excuse .
Now , they ’ re @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t take the bait .
Mass shootings are complicated and we don ’ t understand why they happen .
Perhaps its time to unite behind the idea of delving deeply into that so we can do better than using horrible incidents as pretexts for bad law and actually put an end to these things once and for all .
Of course , if we do that , then gun grabbers won ’ t have their favorite means of justifying gun control .
For us , that ’ s a feature but for them @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
I wonder if that ’ s why they don ’ t want to look elsewhere .

The mass shooting in Dayton, Ohio was part of a particularly violent weekend in the United States. On top of the usual mess in places like Chicago, we had the El Paso shooting as well, all right on top of one another. It was not a good time to be defending gun rights. The outrage, still strong following Parkland, ramped into high gear.
In Ohio, a fairly gun-loving state, people were clamoring for gun control.
Now, as the anniversary of that deadly night approaches, people are furious that we didn’t bend over and just let it happen.
The day after a gunman killed nine people and injured 27 more, Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine stood on the brick-lined streets of the Oregon District in Dayton and started to speak. The former prosecutor turned Republican governor remarked about the crowd size and then a voice cried out: “Do something!” The tightly packed crowd responded, and the chants to “do something!” grew louder and louder until they drowned out DeWine’s words. The governor promised he would act, and indeed rolled out a comprehensive package within days. But as the one-year anniversary of that awful night approaches, Ohio’s Republican-controlled legislature hasn’t voted on a single piece of legislation. Guns will be just as accessible to people experiencing mental health crises on Aug. 4, 2020, as they were on Aug. 4, 2019. No law has been passed to encourage or require background checks for the private sale of firearms. Punishments for certain violent crimes remain the same.
And, it should be noted, that even if all of those efforts had been put in place before the shooting, nothing would have changed. Nothing at all.
Whoops. I guess the journalists forgot to mention that part.
You see, the Dayton killer had issues, sure, but none of the laws proposed would have had any impact on his ability to purchase a firearm. Besides which, he was apparently using drugs, which makes it illegal to own a firearm anyway–yet another law he broke.
For all the handwringing going around, no one seems to acknowledge that what happened in Dayton wasn’t something that could easily have been prevented. Laws wouldn’t have stopped it, especially those particular bits of law.
Yet for the gun grabbers out there, none of that matters. They’re not upset with the fact that their proposals wouldn’t have stopped the killing. The mass shooting was nothing more than a pretext to them. They wanted to push gun control and the massacre gave them an excuse. Now, they’re upset that the Ohio legislature didn’t take the bait.
Mass shootings are complicated and we don’t understand why they happen. Perhaps its time to unite behind the idea of delving deeply into that so we can do better than using horrible incidents as pretexts for bad law and actually put an end to these things once and for all.
Of course, if we do that, then gun grabbers won’t have their favorite means of justifying gun control. For us, that’s a feature but for them, it’s a huge bug.
I wonder if that’s why they don’t want to look elsewhere.


bearingarms--2020-08-03--Latinos Among Those Buying Guns

Latinos Among Those Buying Guns

Anyone who can legally purchase a firearm should have a firearm if they want one .
I really think everyone should have a gun , to be fair , but some people don ’ t want one for some reason and I respect their right to make that decision for themself .
It ’ s not my place to infringe on someone ’ s right to make their own decisions , after all .
Since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic , millions of people have changed their minds about owning guns .
This is , ultimately , a good @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in law-abiding citizens ’ hands translate to less crime .
It also makes it a bit less likely that anti-gunners will ultimately get their way on guns .
This is especially true when some of those buying guns are among a key demographic for Democrats .
After overhearing constant racist and anti-immigrant comments made by his neighbors , Tony Martinez said he knew he needed to find a way to feel safer .
He bought his first rifle last month , joined a gun club and has been visiting shooting ranges in Southern @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s more for me to be safe from them , ” Martinez , 31 , told CNN , referring to his neighbors in his Orange County community .
“ What if one day something happens , someone gets some idea ?
” Martinez is not the only Latino immigrant in the U.S. who has recently felt more concerned for his safety — last year ’ s shooting at the Cielo Vista Walmart store in El Paso jolted Latinos and immigrants across the United States .
Twenty three people died and nearly two @ @ @ @ @ @ @ considered one of the nation ’ s deadliest shootings and the deadliest attack on Latinos in modern U.S. history .
Authorities said the suspected shooter drove to El Paso with the sole intent of killing immigrants and Mexicans in the West Texas border city .
In February , he was indicted on 90 federal charges , including hate crimes , according to court documents .
Even before the mass shooting , the number of hate crimes targeting Latino or Hispanic people increased in 2018 and the previous four years , according to data @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Crime Statistics report .
And there ’ s no excuse for that kind of crap .
None .
The truth of the matter is that if you believe you may be targeted by people for any reason , it just makes sense to arm yourself and try to protect you and your family from such an attack .
It ’ s not rocket science .
The worst-case scenario is really that it doesn ’ t dissuade anyone from anything and you have to actually pull the trigger .
A lot .
While I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I ’ d really much rather head into the afterlife with a pile of spent brass at my feet and some company rather than just passively wait to be murdered .
The Hispanic community getting armed actually makes a great deal of sense .
As we saw in El Paso , there are those who are taking what originally was anti-illegal immigrant rhetoric and applying it to everyone who comes from another country .
Most people have no issue with legal immigrants–I welcome them with open arms , actually .
One of my @ @ @ @ @ @ @ all–some have gone off the deep end .
If you ’ re worried about being targeted then get armed , get trained , and be prepared .

Anyone who can legally purchase a firearm should have a firearm if they want one. I really think everyone should have a gun, to be fair, but some people don’t want one for some reason and I respect their right to make that decision for themself. It’s not my place to infringe on someone’s right to make their own decisions, after all.
Since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, millions of people have changed their minds about owning guns. This is, ultimately, a good thing. More guns on the streets in law-abiding citizens’ hands translate to less crime. It also makes it a bit less likely that anti-gunners will ultimately get their way on guns.
This is especially true when some of those buying guns are among a key demographic for Democrats.
After overhearing constant racist and anti-immigrant comments made by his neighbors, Tony Martinez said he knew he needed to find a way to feel safer. He bought his first rifle last month, joined a gun club and has been visiting shooting ranges in Southern California on the weekends. “It’s more for me to be safe from them,” Martinez, 31, told CNN, referring to his neighbors in his Orange County community. “What if one day something happens, someone gets some idea?” Martinez is not the only Latino immigrant in the U.S. who has recently felt more concerned for his safety — last year’s shooting at the Cielo Vista Walmart store in El Paso jolted Latinos and immigrants across the United States. Twenty three people died and nearly two dozen more were injured in what is considered one of the nation’s deadliest shootings and the deadliest attack on Latinos in modern U.S. history. Authorities said the suspected shooter drove to El Paso with the sole intent of killing immigrants and Mexicans in the West Texas border city. In February, he was indicted on 90 federal charges, including hate crimes, according to court documents. Even before the mass shooting, the number of hate crimes targeting Latino or Hispanic people increased in 2018 and the previous four years, according to data from the FBI’s annual Hate Crime Statistics report.
And there’s no excuse for that kind of crap. None.
The truth of the matter is that if you believe you may be targeted by people for any reason, it just makes sense to arm yourself and try to protect you and your family from such an attack. It’s not rocket science. The worst-case scenario is really that it doesn’t dissuade anyone from anything and you have to actually pull the trigger. A lot.
While I can’t speak for everyone, I’d really much rather head into the afterlife with a pile of spent brass at my feet and some company rather than just passively wait to be murdered.
The Hispanic community getting armed actually makes a great deal of sense. As we saw in El Paso, there are those who are taking what originally was anti-illegal immigrant rhetoric and applying it to everyone who comes from another country. Most people have no issue with legal immigrants–I welcome them with open arms, actually. One of my closest friends is an immigrant, after all–some have gone off the deep end.
If you’re worried about being targeted then get armed, get trained, and be prepared.


bearingarms--2020-08-03--Chicago Mayor Continues Blaming Everyone Else After 9-Year-Old Killed

We are a pretty divided nation .
Right now , the divisions are deep and it ’ s difficult to see any path forward where they don ’ t get deeper and deeper .
However , despite those deep divisions , there are some things that are universal .
One of those is how we all acknowledge the tragedy of a child losing his or her life , especially to something as senseless as violent crime .
We can unite in our grief over something like that , something like what happened in Chicago over the weekend .
A 9-year-old @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as he played outside , generating outrage throughout the city at a time when the number of murders has nearly tripled from the previous year .
Janari Ricks was playing about 6 p.m. on Friday ( July 31 ) at the Cabrini-Green public housing development when a gunman opened fire on a group of people behind the townhomes , CNN reports .
“ He says , ‘ Mom , can I come outside and play ?
’ and I said , ‘ Sure , ’ ” his mother , Jalisa Ford , tells @ @ @ @ @ @ @ went out , he never came back home.
” My daughter is about that age , so I don ’ t even want to imagine what Ford is dealing with right now .
I can ’ t imagine her pain and suffering .
What happened is a tragedy by any measure you want to make .
A nine-year-old being killed is just awful .
Sure , the Cabrini-Green development has a notorious history of violence in a city that ’ s already violent , but that doesn ’ t change a damn thing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ incident is , though , Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot ’ s political narcissism may actually be just as bad .
Lightfoot , of course , is pushing her idea that gun violence in Chicago is somehow the fault of the rest of the nation .
She believes that states that don ’ t have her city ’ s violence issues should enact similar laws to those in Illinois just so she doesn ’ t have to try and address the root causes of violent crime in her city .
To be fair , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and it could take years before anyone sees any results .
That kind of delay could be the death of a political career , which is what this is all really about at the end of the day .
The murder of Janari Ricks is an absolute tragedy .
However , if Lightfoot wants to use this as a motivating factor , she should probably focus on the things she can do .
Especially since , if gun access alone were the cause of violence , we ’ d see much , much @ @ @ @ @ @ @ see in Chicago itself .
I mean , hell , even the rest of Illinois isn ’ t as violent per capita as Chicago , all with pretty much the same gun laws in place .
It ’ s enough to make you scratch your head if you think about it…or you already know that guns aren ’ t responsible for violence any more than spoons are responsible for obesity .
What ’ s more , I think Lightfoot knows this on some level .
Oh , I don ’ t doubt she @ @ @ @ @ @ @ city better .
I just think she also knows that gun control isn ’ t the totality of her city ’ s problems , she just doesn ’ t want to have to step up and do the things within her power because they might not be politically popular .
Instead , it ’ s just easier to blame everyone else for the death of a nine-year-old boy .

We are a pretty divided nation. Right now, the divisions are deep and it’s difficult to see any path forward where they don’t get deeper and deeper.
However, despite those deep divisions, there are some things that are universal. One of those is how we all acknowledge the tragedy of a child losing his or her life, especially to something as senseless as violent crime. We can unite in our grief over something like that, something like what happened in Chicago over the weekend.
A 9-year-old Chicago boy was shot and killed Friday as he played outside, generating outrage throughout the city at a time when the number of murders has nearly tripled from the previous year. Janari Ricks was playing about 6 p.m. on Friday (July 31) at the Cabrini-Green public housing development when a gunman opened fire on a group of people behind the townhomes, CNN reports. “He says, ‘Mom, can I come outside and play?’ and I said, ‘Sure,’” his mother, Jalisa Ford, tells CBS-Channel 2. “And when he went out, he never came back home.”
My daughter is about that age, so I don’t even want to imagine what Ford is dealing with right now. I can’t imagine her pain and suffering.
What happened is a tragedy by any measure you want to make. A nine-year-old being killed is just awful. Sure, the Cabrini-Green development has a notorious history of violence in a city that’s already violent, but that doesn’t change a damn thing about what happened.
Bad as the incident is, though, Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot’s political narcissism may actually be just as bad.
When a 9 year old’s life is ended by a bullet, we must all be outraged. These deaths are not mere statistics. And prayers alone will not sooth a broken heart. — Mayor Lori Lightfoot (@chicagosmayor) August 1, 2020
Gun violence is every bit a public health crisis as COVID-19. — Mayor Lori Lightfoot (@chicagosmayor) August 1, 2020
Lightfoot, of course, is pushing her idea that gun violence in Chicago is somehow the fault of the rest of the nation. She believes that states that don’t have her city’s violence issues should enact similar laws to those in Illinois just so she doesn’t have to try and address the root causes of violent crime in her city.
To be fair, finding those root causes can be challenging and it could take years before anyone sees any results. That kind of delay could be the death of a political career, which is what this is all really about at the end of the day.
The murder of Janari Ricks is an absolute tragedy. However, if Lightfoot wants to use this as a motivating factor, she should probably focus on the things she can do. Especially since, if gun access alone were the cause of violence, we’d see much, much higher crime in neighboring Indiana than we see in Chicago itself.
I mean, hell, even the rest of Illinois isn’t as violent per capita as Chicago, all with pretty much the same gun laws in place. It’s enough to make you scratch your head if you think about it…or you already know that guns aren’t responsible for violence any more than spoons are responsible for obesity.
What’s more, I think Lightfoot knows this on some level. Oh, I don’t doubt she really believes gun control will make her city better. I just think she also knows that gun control isn’t the totality of her city’s problems, she just doesn’t want to have to step up and do the things within her power because they might not be politically popular.
Instead, it’s just easier to blame everyone else for the death of a nine-year-old boy.


bearingarms--2020-08-03--Minneapolis Police Advise Citizens To Roll Over For Crooks

There are some serious problems with the Minneapolis Police Department .
The untimely death of George Floyd was really just one in a series of incidents in which police officers horribly overreacted and ordinary citizens paid the price .
From an outsider ’ s perspective , it appears clear that the Minneapolis Police Department needs some attention .
Yet since George Floyd ’ s death , many have been attacking law enforcement in general .
They ’ ve also demanded the Minneapolis Police Department be completely defunded .
That isn ’ t exactly helping the problem .
Then again , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : Now with crime spiraling out of control , the Minneapolis Police has issued advice to residents on how to deal when facing a robbery or a carjacking .
The Daily Caller ’ s Kyle Hooten tweeted a copy of their advice .
Here ’ s the not cropped , unmarked version of that message pic.twitter.com/Dpf1nqRknc The letter includes the information that in addition to the increased robberies and carjackings , that some robbery victims have been “ maced , dragged , assaulted ” or threatened with a gun .
So they counsel @ @ @ @ @ @ @ your cell phone and purse/wallet ” and “ do as they [ the criminals ] say.
” What ’ s odd about that is that it ’ s under “ robbery prevention.
” Doesn ’ t sound much like “ prevention.
” Now , don ’ t misunderstand me .
If you ’ re unarmed , much of this is actually good advice .
Even if you are armed , it may still make more tactical sense to just give up your wallet or cell phone .
But it ain ’ t “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ imagination .
Robbery prevention tips might well have been things like being alert as you walk around .
Criminals tend to prefer people who are looking at the ground or won ’ t meet them in the eye .
They like their victims passive .
That might have been a good tip to include .
Instead , the Minneapolis PD ’ s version of “ prevention ” is to just roll over and let the criminals who are already running rampant over the city win .
My own advice ?
Do this if @ @ @ @ @ @ @ need to get a firearm because sometimes , that might not be enough .
Be prepared to defend yourself and others .
Train with that firearm so you know how to use it correctly and efficiently .
Learn when to use it and when not to .
Then follow through should that time come when you ’ ll need to use all that learning .
The truth of the matter is that while there are times when compliance actually does make the most sense , it doesn ’ t always .
Further , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ finding another line of work .
People who are going to steal from others typically aren ’ t all that worked up about the look of fear in someone else ’ s eyes .
Hell , they may well get off on it .
No one gets off on staring down the barrel of a firearm when they thought they were the ones with the power , though .
That ’ s the wakeup call that many of these criminals need .
And that , ladies and gentlemen , will work as a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t just prevent you from being robbed , but it may prevent legions of others from being robbed…or worse , if we ’ re completely honest .
Unfortunately , the Minneapolis Police Department isn ’ t about to acknowledge that fact .

There are some serious problems with the Minneapolis Police Department. The untimely death of George Floyd was really just one in a series of incidents in which police officers horribly overreacted and ordinary citizens paid the price. From an outsider’s perspective, it appears clear that the Minneapolis Police Department needs some attention.
Yet since George Floyd’s death, many have been attacking law enforcement in general. They’ve also demanded the Minneapolis Police Department be completely defunded. That isn’t exactly helping the problem.
Then again, neither is this (from RedState):
Now with crime spiraling out of control, the Minneapolis Police has issued advice to residents on how to deal when facing a robbery or a carjacking. The Daily Caller’s Kyle Hooten tweeted a copy of their advice. Here’s the not cropped, unmarked version of that message pic.twitter.com/Dpf1nqRknc — Kyle Hooten (@KyleHooten2) August 1, 2020 The letter includes the information that in addition to the increased robberies and carjackings, that some robbery victims have been “maced, dragged, assaulted” or threatened with a gun. So they counsel to “be prepared to give up your cell phone and purse/wallet” and “do as they [the criminals] say.” What’s odd about that is that it’s under “robbery prevention.” Doesn’t sound much like “prevention.”
Now, don’t misunderstand me. If you’re unarmed, much of this is actually good advice. Even if you are armed, it may still make more tactical sense to just give up your wallet or cell phone.
But it ain’t “prevention” by any stretch of the imagination.
Robbery prevention tips might well have been things like being alert as you walk around. Criminals tend to prefer people who are looking at the ground or won’t meet them in the eye. They like their victims passive. That might have been a good tip to include.
Instead, the Minneapolis PD’s version of “prevention” is to just roll over and let the criminals who are already running rampant over the city win.
My own advice? Do this if you have to, but you also need to get a firearm because sometimes, that might not be enough. Be prepared to defend yourself and others. Train with that firearm so you know how to use it correctly and efficiently. Learn when to use it and when not to. Then follow through should that time come when you’ll need to use all that learning.
The truth of the matter is that while there are times when compliance actually does make the most sense, it doesn’t always. Further, compliance doesn’t dissuade criminals from finding another line of work. People who are going to steal from others typically aren’t all that worked up about the look of fear in someone else’s eyes. Hell, they may well get off on it.
No one gets off on staring down the barrel of a firearm when they thought they were the ones with the power, though. That’s the wakeup call that many of these criminals need.
And that, ladies and gentlemen, will work as a robbery prevention tip. It won’t just prevent you from being robbed, but it may prevent legions of others from being robbed…or worse, if we’re completely honest.
Unfortunately, the Minneapolis Police Department isn’t about to acknowledge that fact.


bearingarms--2020-08-04--MI Man Protesting Violence By His Lonesome

Violent crime is , unfortunately , on the rise .
It ’ s not just in Chicago or New York , either , but pretty much every major city .
It ’ s even happening in a lot of the minor cities as well .
For whatever reason , violence is spreading and it ’ s not going to be pleasant for anyone .
In Flint , Michigan , they have enough other problems going on .
That ’ s not enough to stop people from shooting at one another , though .
Now , one man has taken it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
When 52-year-old , Derrick Nunn heard about a pop-up party that left six victims shot , he knew he had to visit that same corner where it happened .
“ The day after the shootings , I ended my quarantine and came out here man .
I can ’ t take it no more man .
We got to do something man , and it starts with the man in the mirror , you know ?
You have to get off Facebook and stop complaining .
I call them finger activists , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ Put down those guns !
Pick up your sons !
Stop the violence in Flint !
” However , let ’ s be realistic here .
I don ’ t see this having a hope in hell of accomplishing anything , even if he draws legions of supporters .
You see , protesting violence is usually one of two things .
First , it ’ s because the protestor doesn ’ t know what else to do , but they feel like they have to do something .
The second thing is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ feel good about yourself without actually having to do much of anything .
For what it ’ s worth , I think Nunn is more of the first case .
He seems genuine in his desire to end the violence , but protesting isn ’ t going to do it .
Protesting has an impact on politicians because it conveys public opinion to them .
For violent criminals , though , it doesn ’ t .
In fact , those criminals don ’ t actually care what the public thinks of their actions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they believe to be a completely justified reason to commit that violence .
Maybe they feel that being “ disrespected ” or something similar warrants the violence .
Maybe it ’ s something else .
It doesn ’ t matter , though , because they have rationalized the violence to such a degree that they can shrug off protests .
Especially since protests like this are impersonal .
You see , this is a general protest .
The people responsible for the shooting that spurred Nunn to action aren ’ t feeling targeted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ much of anything , really .
So , while I respect Nunn for not just sitting around and complaining about the problem but trying to do something about it instead , I also recognize that he won ’ t be successful .
It ’ s a shame , too , because people like him actually can change the world , but not if they ’ re not actually addressing the problems .
With luck , Nunn will learn of some more concrete ways to address the very real problem and he ’ ll @ @ @ @ @ @ @ way that will make the changes Flint clearly needs .
I wish him the best of luck , too , because his city needs him .

Violent crime is, unfortunately, on the rise. It’s not just in Chicago or New York, either, but pretty much every major city. It’s even happening in a lot of the minor cities as well. For whatever reason, violence is spreading and it’s not going to be pleasant for anyone.
In Flint, Michigan, they have enough other problems going on. That’s not enough to stop people from shooting at one another, though.
Now, one man has taken it upon himself to try and change things.
When 52-year-old, Derrick Nunn heard about a pop-up party that left six victims shot, he knew he had to visit that same corner where it happened. “The day after the shootings, I ended my quarantine and came out here man. I can’t take it no more man. We got to do something man, and it starts with the man in the mirror, you know? You have to get off Facebook and stop complaining. I call them finger activists,” Nunn said. He chanted, “Put down those guns! Pick up your sons! Stop the violence in Flint!”
I like the enthusiasm.
However, let’s be realistic here. I don’t see this having a hope in hell of accomplishing anything, even if he draws legions of supporters.
You see, protesting violence is usually one of two things. First, it’s because the protestor doesn’t know what else to do, but they feel like they have to do something. The second thing is that it’s a way to feel good about yourself without actually having to do much of anything.
For what it’s worth, I think Nunn is more of the first case. He seems genuine in his desire to end the violence, but protesting isn’t going to do it.
Protesting has an impact on politicians because it conveys public opinion to them.
For violent criminals, though, it doesn’t. In fact, those criminals don’t actually care what the public thinks of their actions. Many times, they have what they believe to be a completely justified reason to commit that violence. Maybe they feel that being “disrespected” or something similar warrants the violence. Maybe it’s something else. It doesn’t matter, though, because they have rationalized the violence to such a degree that they can shrug off protests.
Especially since protests like this are impersonal.
You see, this is a general protest. The people responsible for the shooting that spurred Nunn to action aren’t feeling targeted. They probably don’t feel much of anything, really.
So, while I respect Nunn for not just sitting around and complaining about the problem but trying to do something about it instead, I also recognize that he won’t be successful. It’s a shame, too, because people like him actually can change the world, but not if they’re not actually addressing the problems.
With luck, Nunn will learn of some more concrete ways to address the very real problem and he’ll redirect that enthusiasm and drive in a way that will make the changes Flint clearly needs. I wish him the best of luck, too, because his city needs him.


bearingarms--2020-08-04--Another Virginia County Passes "No Local Gun Control" Law

Once upon a time , Virginia was a pretty pro-gun state , all things considered .
They were purging their legal system of bad gun control laws that did little to inhibit criminals but interfered with law-abiding citizens ’ constitutionally-protected rights .
They were moving in the right direction .
Unfortunately , that came to a screeching halt .
While most of the state still harbors pro-gun sentiment , the legislature has taken a definite anti-gun slant following the last election .
Among the laws passed by them is a repeal of the preemption law that barred local governments from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , that law hasn ’ t shaken out quite like the anti-gunners hoped .
Some gun owners in Rappahannock and indeed across the commonwealth will be happy to hear that the Rappahannock County Board of Supervisors ( BOS ) unanimously passed the “ No Local Gun Control ” resolution at Monday night ’ s regular meeting .
The resolution , drafted by the Virginia Citizens Defense League and added to the agenda last minute by Chair Christine Smith of the Piedmont District , is a symbolic response to new state legislation which grants @ @ @ @ @ @ @ firearm restrictions .
“ I think it ’ s important that we take a stand , ” Smith said , adding that she believes it important for the supervisors to express publicly that they do not intend to enact any further gun control measures .
Rappahannock isn ’ t the only county to pass such a law .
They ’ re also not likely to be the last .
What this does is essentially reestablish preemption , but on a county level where the state legislature has little say on the matter .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ ended up becoming sanctuary counties , I suspect that preemption will still , ultimately , be the rule pretty much everywhere except for Richmond and the D.C. suburbs .
It ’ s an interesting bit of rebellion , to be sure , and quite legal as well .
The truth of the matter is , though , that preemption is about making it so people can comply with the law .
If travelers are forced to learn the local gun laws of every community they travel through , there ’ s going to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , unified code , people can comply far more easily .
Unfortunately , that doesn ’ t go away with county preemption .
People still have to check local laws .
But it does help speed up the process a bit since counties that bar communities from passing their own gun control are relatively safe for gun owners .
I can ’ t help but think , though , that this push on gun control that Governor Ralph “ Blackface ” Northam and his allies have been ramming through won ’ t come @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
It really does seem that a large number of Virginians oppose his anti-gun measures , and yet he keeps ramming them through .
We ’ ll have to see how things shake out come election time , but don ’ t be surprised to see a lot of these county preemption laws become irrelevant shortly after the next batch of elections .
But , until then , counties have to do what they can to preserve the Second Amendment rights of their citizens .

Once upon a time, Virginia was a pretty pro-gun state, all things considered. They were purging their legal system of bad gun control laws that did little to inhibit criminals but interfered with law-abiding citizens’ constitutionally-protected rights. They were moving in the right direction.
Unfortunately, that came to a screeching halt.
While most of the state still harbors pro-gun sentiment, the legislature has taken a definite anti-gun slant following the last election. Among the laws passed by them is a repeal of the preemption law that barred local governments from passing their own gun control.
Well, that law hasn’t shaken out quite like the anti-gunners hoped.
Some gun owners in Rappahannock and indeed across the commonwealth will be happy to hear that the Rappahannock County Board of Supervisors (BOS) unanimously passed the “No Local Gun Control” resolution at Monday night’s regular meeting. The resolution, drafted by the Virginia Citizens Defense League and added to the agenda last minute by Chair Christine Smith of the Piedmont District, is a symbolic response to new state legislation which grants localities the authority to enact their own firearm restrictions. “I think it’s important that we take a stand,” Smith said, adding that she believes it important for the supervisors to express publicly that they do not intend to enact any further gun control measures.
Rappahannock isn’t the only county to pass such a law. They’re also not likely to be the last.
What this does is essentially reestablish preemption, but on a county level where the state legislature has little say on the matter. Considering how many counties in the state ended up becoming sanctuary counties, I suspect that preemption will still, ultimately, be the rule pretty much everywhere except for Richmond and the D.C. suburbs.
It’s an interesting bit of rebellion, to be sure, and quite legal as well.
The truth of the matter is, though, that preemption is about making it so people can comply with the law. If travelers are forced to learn the local gun laws of every community they travel through, there’s going to be problems. By creating a single, unified code, people can comply far more easily.
Unfortunately, that doesn’t go away with county preemption. People still have to check local laws. But it does help speed up the process a bit since counties that bar communities from passing their own gun control are relatively safe for gun owners.
I can’t help but think, though, that this push on gun control that Governor Ralph “Blackface” Northam and his allies have been ramming through won’t come back to bite them come election time. It really does seem that a large number of Virginians oppose his anti-gun measures, and yet he keeps ramming them through.
We’ll have to see how things shake out come election time, but don’t be surprised to see a lot of these county preemption laws become irrelevant shortly after the next batch of elections.
But, until then, counties have to do what they can to preserve the Second Amendment rights of their citizens.
Good for them.


bearingarms--2020-08-04--Guns Siezed In VA's First "Red Flag" Case

We here at Bearing Arms haven ’ t been real fans of “ red flag ” laws .
That ’ s not likely to change , either .
While it may have sounded good in the immediate aftermath of Parkland , during the cold light of day , the whole idea falls apart .
It ’ s still taking guns from people who haven ’ t broken any laws , no matter how you cut it .
This has been the case in every state it ’ s been implemented in .
Unfortunately , there ’ s an issue that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ individual in question was such a risk to himself , then why wasn ’ t he hospitalized instead ?
There have been laws on the books for decades allowing people who are suicidal to be admitted to the hospital involuntarily .
If he was such a threat , why didn ’ t they admit him instead ?
After all , there are still other means he can use to kill himself .
“ But guns are more effective for suicides , ” some might counter , and that ’ s not untrue .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ on Monday , that ’ s not to say that other methods aren ’ t nearly as effective .
There are still some pretty surefire ways to kill yourself that don ’ t involve firearms .
Yet , with a red flag order in place , everyone can pat themselves on the back and delude themselves into believing that they ’ ve saved this man ’ s life .
Either he ’ ll kill himself with another method or he won ’ t .
If he doesn ’ t even try to commit @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pretty good indication that maybe he wasn ’ t that suicidal to begin with .
After all , a lot of people feel that way–that they want to die and don ’ t see a point to go on living–without actually wanting to commit suicide .
And that ’ s likely why he wasn ’ t admitted .
After all , you don ’ t admit people against their will for being depressed , you admit them because they ’ re likely to do something .
But proponents of red flag laws will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ve done some good .
I wonder if they ’ ll feel the same way when someone dies because of this nonsense ?

We here at Bearing Arms haven’t been real fans of “red flag” laws. That’s not likely to change, either. While it may have sounded good in the immediate aftermath of Parkland, during the cold light of day, the whole idea falls apart. It’s still taking guns from people who haven’t broken any laws, no matter how you cut it.
This has been the case in every state it’s been implemented in.
Now, it’s happened in Virginia.
The new law, which went into effect July 1, is designed to keep guns away from potentially violent people. There are approximately 36,000 gun deaths annually in the U.S. including about 1,000 in Virginia, according to the Gifford Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, which analyzed Centers for Disease Control and Prevention statistics. That includes about 22,000 suicides and nearly 13,000 homicides.
Unfortunately, there’s an issue that’s being ignored.
If the individual in question was such a risk to himself, then why wasn’t he hospitalized instead? There have been laws on the books for decades allowing people who are suicidal to be admitted to the hospital involuntarily. If he was such a threat, why didn’t they admit him instead?
After all, there are still other means he can use to kill himself.
“But guns are more effective for suicides,” some might counter, and that’s not untrue. However, as noted in a post on Monday, that’s not to say that other methods aren’t nearly as effective. There are still some pretty surefire ways to kill yourself that don’t involve firearms.
Yet, with a red flag order in place, everyone can pat themselves on the back and delude themselves into believing that they’ve saved this man’s life.
They haven’t.
Either he’ll kill himself with another method or he won’t. If he doesn’t even try to commit suicide, then it’s a pretty good indication that maybe he wasn’t that suicidal to begin with.
After all, a lot of people feel that way–that they want to die and don’t see a point to go on living–without actually wanting to commit suicide. And that’s likely why he wasn’t admitted. After all, you don’t admit people against their will for being depressed, you admit them because they’re likely to do something.
But proponents of red flag laws will look at this and pretend they’ve done some good.
I wonder if they’ll feel the same way when someone dies because of this nonsense?


bearingarms--2020-08-04--Federal Judge Calls For More Privacy Following Son's Murder

I can ’ t imagine what it must be line for U.S. District Judge Esther Salas .
While she was elsewhere in the house , a maniac came to her home and opened fire , killing her son and injuring her husband .
It ’ s something that would paralyze many of us , just the thought that someone would come to our home and murder those we love .
Now , Salas is speaking out about the horrific events .
In particular , the things she thinks should be done to prevent this kind of thing .
In her @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for his misogynistic screeds shot and killed her son and seriously injured her husband at their home , a federal judge in New Jersey called for more privacy and protections for people in her field in the face of mounting cyberthreats .
In a video statement released Monday , U.S. District Judge Esther Salas noted that serving as a judge involves “ making tough calls ” that sometimes leave people angry and upset .
But she said judges should not have to “ live in fear for our lives ” because personal information @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be easily obtained by anyone seeking to cause them or their families harm .
“ There are companies that will sell your personal details that can be leveraged for nefarious purposes , ” Salas said in the video .
In my case , the monster knew where I lived and what church we attended , and had a complete dossier on me and my family .
At the moment , there is nothing we can do to stop it , and that is unacceptable.
” Salas is , unfortunately , right .
It @ @ @ @ @ @ @ where someone lives if you know what you ’ re doing .
There are websites you can go where , for just a bit of money , one can find all kinds of personal information about someone .
While this is especially problematic for someone like Salas–a judge who makes enemies on a daily basis–this lack of privacy affects all of us to some degree .
Her calls for increased privacy should be heeded , but it shouldn ’ t be limited to judges .
Instead , it should extend beyond such privileged @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , I ’ m talking for myself here , to be fair .
One of my concerns is people in my line of work being targeted for violence using these exact same techniques .
After all , it ’ s not like it hasn ’ t happened before .
That said , I do agree that judges should have this kind of privacy .
They ’ re much more likely to be the target of a violent nutbar like Salas was than the average American .
I just don ’ t think that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
It ’ s not like the government won ’ t still have access to that kind of information , now is it ?
It ’ s not like they can ’ t find folks if they need to .
I ’ m just saying that not everyone should be able to load up someone ’ s name into Google along with any other known information and figure out someone ’ s entire life story is all .

I can’t imagine what it must be line for U.S. District Judge Esther Salas. While she was elsewhere in the house, a maniac came to her home and opened fire, killing her son and injuring her husband. It’s something that would paralyze many of us, just the thought that someone would come to our home and murder those we love.
Now, Salas is speaking out about the horrific events. In particular, the things she thinks should be done to prevent this kind of thing.
In her first public comments since a lawyer known for his misogynistic screeds shot and killed her son and seriously injured her husband at their home, a federal judge in New Jersey called for more privacy and protections for people in her field in the face of mounting cyberthreats. In a video statement released Monday, U.S. District Judge Esther Salas noted that serving as a judge involves “making tough calls” that sometimes leave people angry and upset. But she said judges should not have to “live in fear for our lives” because personal information, such as home addresses, can be easily obtained by anyone seeking to cause them or their families harm. “There are companies that will sell your personal details that can be leveraged for nefarious purposes,” Salas said in the video. In my case, the monster knew where I lived and what church we attended, and had a complete dossier on me and my family. At the moment, there is nothing we can do to stop it, and that is unacceptable.”
Salas is, unfortunately, right. It’s not overly difficult to find where someone lives if you know what you’re doing. There are websites you can go where, for just a bit of money, one can find all kinds of personal information about someone.
Including where they live.
While this is especially problematic for someone like Salas–a judge who makes enemies on a daily basis–this lack of privacy affects all of us to some degree. Her calls for increased privacy should be heeded, but it shouldn’t be limited to judges. Instead, it should extend beyond such privileged individuals and cover all Americans.
Honestly, I’m talking for myself here, to be fair. One of my concerns is people in my line of work being targeted for violence using these exact same techniques. After all, it’s not like it hasn’t happened before.
That said, I do agree that judges should have this kind of privacy. They’re much more likely to be the target of a violent nutbar like Salas was than the average American. I just don’t think that such a risk is exclusive to them.
It’s not like the government won’t still have access to that kind of information, now is it? It’s not like they can’t find folks if they need to. I’m just saying that not everyone should be able to load up someone’s name into Google along with any other known information and figure out someone’s entire life story is all.