bearingarms--2020-12-17--The Real Causes Of Violent Crime Spike Don't Involve Guns

There ’ s been a massive surge in gun buying this year .
It started when it became clear that COVID-19 was going to become a pandemic and has kept on going thanks to riots and uncertainty about the election .
Now , with Biden set to take office , that will further fuel gun purchases in the foreseeable future .
There has also been a surge in violent crime .
Ignorant folks have tried to make the case that the two are related .
After all , if you believe more guns mean more crime , then why wouldn @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ?
However , the gun buying surge started months before the violent crime surge began .
Further , there ’ s been no evidence that criminals have taken part in the increased gun sales to any appreciable degree .
No , something else fuels this .
I wonder what that could be .
Oh , I don ’ t know…maybe stuff like this ?
Eighty eight percent .
Of all inmates who were arrested on gun charges in New York City this year , 88 percent of the 3,793 who were arrested were @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s new bail reform law ( which eliminated bail for many crimes ) and/or 2 ) the city ’ s COVID-related jail release policy .
Meanwhile , shootings in The Big Apple are up a whopping 96 percent .
It ’ s all a mystery .
“ We have made staggering numbers of gun arrests , taking guns off the streets from felons … but when you look , three days later , four days later , those individuals are back on the street committing more gun violence , ” NYPD Commissioner Dermot @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , while announcing shootings have climbed to 1,433 and are on track to reach a 14-year high by the end of 2020 .
By Thursday , the NYPD had logged an additional 18 shootings , bringing the total to 1,451 , the department said .
That ’ s 1,451 shooting incidents , leaving 1,756 dead or wounded New Yorkers .
But does this 96-percent surge in shootings truly have a direct connection to “ bail reform ” and releasing inmates willy nilly due to the ‘ rona ?
See , governors all over @ @ @ @ @ @ @ thousands of prisoners out early .
Oh , some took care to make sure they were non-violent offenders , but not everyone convicted of a non-violent offense is non-violent .
Couple that with the fact that mask mandates make it easier for criminals to escape detection–eyewitnesses are kind of useless when they can ’ t actually see the person ’ s face–and you ’ ve got a recipe for criminal activity .
Hell , once upon a time , a guy in a mask would get stopped on general principle .
Now , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ stopped on the street if you ’ re not wearing one .
As if that ’ s not enough , we ’ ve got the Soros-inspired push to decriminalize pretty much everything that ’ s not a felony , something Tucker Carlson took aim at earlier this week , and you ’ ve got a recipe for disaster .
Look , it ’ s not all these released inmates that represent a problem .
Many of them may well have seen this as an early second chance and are trying to make the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ does it really take to create a massive problem in communities all over the country .
While the above-quoted story is from New York , inmates were released from pretty much every prison in every state .
We also see an increase in violence in just about every city in every state .
While anti-gunners want to blame the guns , there are much simpler explanations for the violence .

There’s been a massive surge in gun buying this year. It started when it became clear that COVID-19 was going to become a pandemic and has kept on going thanks to riots and uncertainty about the election. Now, with Biden set to take office, that will further fuel gun purchases in the foreseeable future.
There has also been a surge in violent crime.
Ignorant folks have tried to make the case that the two are related. After all, if you believe more guns mean more crime, then why wouldn’t you think they were related? However, the gun buying surge started months before the violent crime surge began. Further, there’s been no evidence that criminals have taken part in the increased gun sales to any appreciable degree.
No, something else fuels this. I wonder what that could be.
Oh, I don’t know…maybe stuff like this?
Eighty eight percent. Of all inmates who were arrested on gun charges in New York City this year, 88 percent of the 3,793 who were arrested were released due to 1) NYC’s new bail reform law (which eliminated bail for many crimes) and/or 2) the city’s COVID-related jail release policy. Meanwhile, shootings in The Big Apple are up a whopping 96 percent. It’s all a mystery. From the New York Post: “We have made staggering numbers of gun arrests, taking guns off the streets from felons … but when you look, three days later, four days later, those individuals are back on the street committing more gun violence,” NYPD Commissioner Dermot Shea said Tuesday [December 8th], while announcing shootings have climbed to 1,433 and are on track to reach a 14-year high by the end of 2020. By Thursday, the NYPD had logged an additional 18 shootings, bringing the total to 1,451, the department said. That’s 1,451 shooting incidents, leaving 1,756 dead or wounded New Yorkers. But does this 96-percent surge in shootings truly have a direct connection to “bail reform” and releasing inmates willy nilly due to the ‘rona?
Yep.
See, governors all over the country opened the prisons and let thousands of prisoners out early. Oh, some took care to make sure they were non-violent offenders, but not everyone convicted of a non-violent offense is non-violent.
Couple that with the fact that mask mandates make it easier for criminals to escape detection–eyewitnesses are kind of useless when they can’t actually see the person’s face–and you’ve got a recipe for criminal activity. Hell, once upon a time, a guy in a mask would get stopped on general principle. Now, you’re more likely to get stopped on the street if you’re not wearing one.
As if that’s not enough, we’ve got the Soros-inspired push to decriminalize pretty much everything that’s not a felony, something Tucker Carlson took aim at earlier this week, and you’ve got a recipe for disaster.
Look, it’s not all these released inmates that represent a problem. Many of them may well have seen this as an early second chance and are trying to make the most of it. But how many does it really take to create a massive problem in communities all over the country. While the above-quoted story is from New York, inmates were released from pretty much every prison in every state.
We also see an increase in violence in just about every city in every state.
While anti-gunners want to blame the guns, there are much simpler explanations for the violence.


bearingarms--2020-12-18--BA Gift Guide - Eye And Ear Protection For The Range

Good quality eye and ear protection is a must for any gun owner , and there are lots of options out there ; from custom-molded ear plugs and high-end shooting glasses that can set you back $ 1,000 or more to your basic foam ear plugs and safety goggles .
I always have some of those basic options available when friends visit and want to do some shooting , but for my own personal use I prefer something a step or two above entry level ( though still far less expensive than the Pilla shooting glasses I referenced above ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ visiting the range on a regular basis in 2021 , these products deserve a spot in your range bag when you go .
XAegis Tactical Eyewear With Three Interchangeable Lenses – This is actually three sets of shooting specs in one , thanks to the easily swappable polycarbonate lenses that come in clear , smoke , and yellow , allowing you to use the glasses in a variety of light conditions .
The semi-rimless frame is made of lightweight and durable material with a rubber nose bridge that will help keep the glasses @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sweatiest ) of summer days .
The shooting glasses also come with a hardshell zippered case to help keep them scratch-free for years to come .
Howard Leight by Honeywell Impact Sport Electronic Shooting Earmuff – The built-in directional microphones amplifies ambient sounds and human speech to 82 dB , which allows for easier communication with others at the range .
Above 82 dB , however , the earmuffs automatically shut off , protecting your hearing from the sharp report of a rifle , pistol , or shotgun .
There ’ s also @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ( though no Bluetooth connection ) in case you want to listen to some music while you send some rounds down range .
The muffs are powered by three AAA batteries , which provide approximately 350 hours of use .
There ’ s even an automatic shutoff that kicks in after four hours of usage to help save your batteries if you forget to turn off the Impact Sport earmuffs when you put them back in your range bag .
SolidWork Shooting Glasses with Ballistic Impact Protection – This eye protection features a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and offers ballistic impact protection from both the shatterproof lenses and a soft foam seal that keeps them secured in place .
One nice feature is an interchangeable temple and strap that offers even more security , and the glasses also come with a one-year money back guarantee if you ’ re not satisfied with their fit .
Pro For Sho 34dB Shooting Ear Protection – These industrial grade cans offer 34 dBs of sound reduction , and are extremely lightweight and compact , so they ’ ll fit easily into your range @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with a lot of fancy features ; but if you ’ re just looking for inexpensive , yet high quality ear protection this is a fantastic choice .
Bertoni Shooting Glasses with Four Interchangeable Lenses – These shooting glasses from Milan-based Bertoni feature a TR90LX flexible nylon carbon and rubber frame as well as four interchangeable shatterproof lenses , each designed for use in specific light settings for maximum visibility on your target .
Also comes with a hard shell carrying case .
Decibullz Custom Molded Earplugs – These low-profile ear plugs offer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to customize to your own ears .
Just heat up the plugs in boiling water then let them cool , and you shape them to your ears .
In fact , if you ’ re not happy with the fit the plugs are re-moldable , so you can start the process over and try again without having to get a new pair .
The Decibullz come with three sets of triple flange tips in a variety of sizes , along with one set of Max Protect medium foam tips and a carrying pouch @ @ @

Good quality eye and ear protection is a must for any gun owner, and there are lots of options out there; from custom-molded ear plugs and high-end shooting glasses that can set you back $1,000 or more to your basic foam ear plugs and safety goggles. I always have some of those basic options available when friends visit and want to do some shooting, but for my own personal use I prefer something a step or two above entry level (though still far less expensive than the Pilla shooting glasses I referenced above). If you’re planning on visiting the range on a regular basis in 2021, these products deserve a spot in your range bag when you go.
XAegis Tactical Eyewear With Three Interchangeable Lenses – This is actually three sets of shooting specs in one, thanks to the easily swappable polycarbonate lenses that come in clear, smoke, and yellow, allowing you to use the glasses in a variety of light conditions. The semi-rimless frame is made of lightweight and durable material with a rubber nose bridge that will help keep the glasses secure even on the hottest (and sweatiest) of summer days. The shooting glasses also come with a hardshell zippered case to help keep them scratch-free for years to come.
Howard Leight by Honeywell Impact Sport Electronic Shooting Earmuff – The built-in directional microphones amplifies ambient sounds and human speech to 82 dB, which allows for easier communication with others at the range. Above 82 dB, however, the earmuffs automatically shut off, protecting your hearing from the sharp report of a rifle, pistol, or shotgun. There’s also an auxiliary input and a 3.5mm jack (though no Bluetooth connection) in case you want to listen to some music while you send some rounds down range. The muffs are powered by three AAA batteries, which provide approximately 350 hours of use. There’s even an automatic shutoff that kicks in after four hours of usage to help save your batteries if you forget to turn off the Impact Sport earmuffs when you put them back in your range bag.
SolidWork Shooting Glasses with Ballistic Impact Protection – This eye protection features a rubber, no-slip frame and polycarbonate lenses and offers ballistic impact protection from both the shatterproof lenses and a soft foam seal that keeps them secured in place. One nice feature is an interchangeable temple and strap that offers even more security, and the glasses also come with a one-year money back guarantee if you’re not satisfied with their fit.
Pro For Sho 34dB Shooting Ear Protection – These industrial grade cans offer 34 dBs of sound reduction, and are extremely lightweight and compact, so they’ll fit easily into your range bag. They don’t come with a lot of fancy features; but if you’re just looking for inexpensive, yet high quality ear protection this is a fantastic choice.
Bertoni Shooting Glasses with Four Interchangeable Lenses – These shooting glasses from Milan-based Bertoni feature a TR90LX flexible nylon carbon and rubber frame as well as four interchangeable shatterproof lenses, each designed for use in specific light settings for maximum visibility on your target. Also comes with a hard shell carrying case.
Decibullz Custom Molded Earplugs – These low-profile ear plugs offer 31 db sound reduction and are easy to customize to your own ears. Just heat up the plugs in boiling water then let them cool, and you shape them to your ears. In fact, if you’re not happy with the fit the plugs are re-moldable, so you can start the process over and try again without having to get a new pair. The Decibullz come with three sets of triple flange tips in a variety of sizes, along with one set of Max Protect medium foam tips and a carrying pouch for storage.
When you make a purchase, Townhall Media receives a revenue share from qualifying purchases as an Amazon Associate.


bearingarms--2020-12-18--Pittsburgh's Peduto Joins Anti-"Ghost Gun" Bandwagon

The way Pittsburgh Mayor Bill Peduto seems to frame it , his anti-gun push was because of what happened at the Tree of Life Synagogue a couple of years ago .
After all , a mayor is supposed to do something after a mass shooting in his community , and so trying to ban so-called assault weapons in defiance of state law falls under the heading of “ doing something.
” Yet Peduto ’ s implication is nothing but a lie .
After all , if it were really all about the Tree of Life shooting , he wouldn ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bandwagon right about now .
Pittsburgh Mayor Bill Peduto is throwing the City ’ s support behind a national , multi-city push to get the Bureau of Alcohol , Tobacco , Firearms and Explosives ( ATF ) to regulate what are called “ ghost guns.
” “ The cities lending their support for this litigation are not asking for anything unreasonable .
Firearms regulations should be applied to all guns , including ghost guns , ” said Peduto .
“ It ’ s unfair to those who comply with regulations- regulations that exist @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
We just ask that the ATF apply these rules to all gun sales.
” Actually , they are .
You see , there are guns and then there are things that aren ’ t guns .
What Peduto and his fellow travelers are doing is trying to push the ATF to unilaterally declare certain non-firearms–things that can be easily turned into firearms–as guns .
That ’ s despite any real evidence that this type of thing constitutes a legitimate threat .
We get media report after media report about how this is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ these reports are remarkably short on specifics .
When those specifics do pop up , it should how laughably minor the problem actually is .
Peduto , though , has been trying to couch his personal anti-gun jihad as being about a single incident .
His support for this endeavor , one that has nothing to do with the Tree of Life shooting , betrays his true motivations .
Peduto is precisely what most of us believed , an anti-gunner to the core .
He just couldn ’ t do anything without a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mass shooting .
Now , he ’ s going to do everything he can to interfere with your right to keep and bear arms , regardless of where you live .
It ’ s not enough to foul up the right to keep and bear arms for Pittsburgh residents .
Oh no , Peduto has to try and mess with everyone else ’ s rights as well .
At the end of the day , Bill Peduto is just another politician who cares absolutely nothing about your constitutionally protected rights .
He ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and leave the rest of us defenseless against the very same maniacs who he uses to justify his actions .
He ’ s not about stopping shootings .
He ’ s about making it impossible for ordinary citizens to push back against the horrors .
Now that the genie is out of the bottle , I ’ d be surprised to see him oppose any gun control measure you care to name .
Even confiscation , though I doubt he ’ d outright admit his fondness for such a thing .
Don ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ admit you want them all .
We already know .

The way Pittsburgh Mayor Bill Peduto seems to frame it, his anti-gun push was because of what happened at the Tree of Life Synagogue a couple of years ago. After all, a mayor is supposed to do something after a mass shooting in his community, and so trying to ban so-called assault weapons in defiance of state law falls under the heading of “doing something.”
Yet Peduto’s implication is nothing but a lie.
After all, if it were really all about the Tree of Life shooting, he wouldn’t be jumping on the anti-ghost gun bandwagon right about now.
Pittsburgh Mayor Bill Peduto is throwing the City’s support behind a national, multi-city push to get the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) to regulate what are called “ghost guns.” … “The cities lending their support for this litigation are not asking for anything unreasonable. Firearms regulations should be applied to all guns, including ghost guns,” said Peduto. “It’s unfair to those who comply with regulations- regulations that exist to protect the safety of our communities. We just ask that the ATF apply these rules to all gun sales.”
Actually, they are.
You see, there are guns and then there are things that aren’t guns. What Peduto and his fellow travelers are doing is trying to push the ATF to unilaterally declare certain non-firearms–things that can be easily turned into firearms–as guns. That’s despite any real evidence that this type of thing constitutes a legitimate threat.
We get media report after media report about how this is a “growing” threat, but these reports are remarkably short on specifics. When those specifics do pop up, it should how laughably minor the problem actually is.
Peduto, though, has been trying to couch his personal anti-gun jihad as being about a single incident. His support for this endeavor, one that has nothing to do with the Tree of Life shooting, betrays his true motivations. Peduto is precisely what most of us believed, an anti-gunner to the core. He just couldn’t do anything without a pretext and he got in in the mass shooting.
Now, he’s going to do everything he can to interfere with your right to keep and bear arms, regardless of where you live. It’s not enough to foul up the right to keep and bear arms for Pittsburgh residents. Oh no, Peduto has to try and mess with everyone else’s rights as well.
At the end of the day, Bill Peduto is just another politician who cares absolutely nothing about your constitutionally protected rights. He’d much rather pander to certain groups and leave the rest of us defenseless against the very same maniacs who he uses to justify his actions. He’s not about stopping shootings. He’s about making it impossible for ordinary citizens to push back against the horrors.
Now that the genie is out of the bottle, I’d be surprised to see him oppose any gun control measure you care to name. Even confiscation, though I doubt he’d outright admit his fondness for such a thing.
Don’t worry, Bill. You can admit you want them all. We already know.


bearingarms--2020-12-18--The Devil In The Details Of ATF's Proposed Rules On Pistol Braces

We ’ ve got more details on the ATF ’ s new proposed rules for pistol stabilizing braces on today ’ s Bearing Arms ’ Cam & Co. Alex Bosco of SB Tactical joins the show to break down all of the problems for gun owners and the firearms industry contained within the ATF and DOJ ’ s proposed guidance on pistol stabilizing braces , as well as what gun owners can do to try to stop the attempt to coerce Americans to register millions of guns under the National Firearms Act .
As we reported on Thursday , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t really hard and fast rules at all .
Instead , the ATF says it will use a number of things to determine on a case-by-case basis whether or not a firearm is a pistol under federal statutes , or a short-barreled rifle which would have to be registered as an NFA item .
There ’ s no way for existing gun owners to know exactly what the ATF would consider their AR-style pistol to be , but the agency is taking a “ better safe than sorry ” approach by recommending that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ register their guns without paying the normal $ 200 tax stamp .
Bosco tells me that if the rule does take effect early next year , he ’ s intent on suing the agency over the new regulation .
I ’ m glad to hear it , and I ’ m sure that sharper legal minds than mine can craft an argument against the proposed regulations .
If it comes down to that I ’ ll be happy to support litigation challenging the regulations , but I ’ m of the mindset that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nip bad proposals in the bud first before attempting to get a court to overturn a bad reg or law that ’ s already taken effect .
We don ’ t have much time to use our voices , however .
Bosco points out that the public comment period for the rule change is only 18 days long , and that includes both the Christmas and New Year ’ s holidays .
Comments must be received by midnight on January 4th , 2021 , which makes it even more imperative for gun owners @ @ @ @ @ @ @ comment to the ATF as well as contacting their members of Congress , U.S .
Senators , and the White House as soon as possible .
To submit your comment to the ATF via email , click here , and then use the “ comment now ” button the upper right hand of the website .
Note that these comments are public , so your name will be available for all to see .
If you ’ d rather submit your comment in writing , you ’ d better write fast , but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : If you want to fax your comments instead , use a cover letter with your personal information and a separate page for your comment .
It ’ s also important when submitting written or faxed comments that you include the specific docket number for the pistol brace rules , which is ATF 2020R-10 .
According to the ATF : Keep your comments civil , please .
No matter how much you might want to use this as an opportunity to tell the ATF what you really think of the agency , that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ much help right now .
I ’ ll be submitting my comments this weekend , and I plan on objecting to the arbitrary guidelines that the ATF has laid out to determine whether or not an AR-style pistol with a stabilizing brace is actually a short barreled rifle that requires registration under the National Firearms Act .
This not only affects manufacturers of pistol braces like SB Tactical , but makes it virtually impossible for owners of guns with pistol braces to know if they ’ re in compliance with the law .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the NFA disappear completely , that ’ s not going to be the subject of my comments .
I ’ m going to stick to the issue at hand and focus only on the arbitrary nature of the ATF ’ s planned determination about firearms with pistol braces .
There may be some gun owners out there who don ’ t see this as a big deal .
Maybe they don ’ t own any firearms with pistol braces , or maybe they ’ re pleased that they can register their guns without @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Whatever the reasoning , when you look at all of the ATF ’ s recent actions , including the raid on Polymer80 and the agency ’ s apparent crackdown on unfinished frames and receivers , it ’ s pretty clear that the agency ’ s career bureaucrats are gearing up for a series of administrative actions that will have a chilling effect on our Second Amendment rights .
From ignoring their own previous determinations to issuing vague standards that are impossible to comply with , the agency is building a web of red @ @ @ @ @ @ @ owners , and we need to speak as one in opposition to this power grab .

We’ve got more details on the ATF’s new proposed rules for pistol stabilizing braces on today’s Bearing Arms’ Cam & Co. Alex Bosco of SB Tactical joins the show to break down all of the problems for gun owners and the firearms industry contained within the ATF and DOJ’s proposed guidance on pistol stabilizing braces, as well as what gun owners can do to try to stop the attempt to coerce Americans to register millions of guns under the National Firearms Act.
As we reported on Thursday, the proposed rules for stabilizing braces aren’t really hard and fast rules at all. Instead, the ATF says it will use a number of things to determine on a case-by-case basis whether or not a firearm is a pistol under federal statutes, or a short-barreled rifle which would have to be registered as an NFA item. There’s no way for existing gun owners to know exactly what the ATF would consider their AR-style pistol to be, but the agency is taking a “better safe than sorry” approach by recommending that all AR-style pistol owners be allowed to register their guns without paying the normal $200 tax stamp.
Bosco tells me that if the rule does take effect early next year, he’s intent on suing the agency over the new regulation. I’m glad to hear it, and I’m sure that sharper legal minds than mine can craft an argument against the proposed regulations. If it comes down to that I’ll be happy to support litigation challenging the regulations, but I’m of the mindset that it’s better to try to nip bad proposals in the bud first before attempting to get a court to overturn a bad reg or law that’s already taken effect.
We don’t have much time to use our voices, however. Bosco points out that the public comment period for the rule change is only 18 days long, and that includes both the Christmas and New Year’s holidays. Comments must be received by midnight on January 4th, 2021, which makes it even more imperative for gun owners and concerned citizens to submit their public comment to the ATF as well as contacting their members of Congress, U.S. Senators, and the White House as soon as possible.
To submit your comment to the ATF via email, click here, and then use the “comment now” button the upper right hand of the website. Note that these comments are public, so your name will be available for all to see. If you’d rather submit your comment in writing, you’d better write fast, but the address to send your comments is:
Office of Regulatory Affairs, Enforcement Programs and Services, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives 99 New York Ave. NE, Mail Stop 6N-518, Washington, DC 20226
If you want to fax your comments instead, use a cover letter with your personal information and a separate page for your comment. It’s also important when submitting written or faxed comments that you include the specific docket number for the pistol brace rules, which is ATF 2020R-10. According to the ATF:
Both the cover sheet and comment must reference this docket number (2020R-10). For comments submitted by mail or facsimile, information contained on the cover sheet will not appear when posted on the internet but any personal identifying information that appears within a comment will not be redacted by ATF and it will appear on the internet.
Keep your comments civil, please. No matter how much you might want to use this as an opportunity to tell the ATF what you really think of the agency, that’s not going to be of much help right now.
I’ll be submitting my comments this weekend, and I plan on objecting to the arbitrary guidelines that the ATF has laid out to determine whether or not an AR-style pistol with a stabilizing brace is actually a short barreled rifle that requires registration under the National Firearms Act. This not only affects manufacturers of pistol braces like SB Tactical, but makes it virtually impossible for owners of guns with pistol braces to know if they’re in compliance with the law.
While I’d love to see the NFA disappear completely, that’s not going to be the subject of my comments. I’m going to stick to the issue at hand and focus only on the arbitrary nature of the ATF’s planned determination about firearms with pistol braces.
There may be some gun owners out there who don’t see this as a big deal. Maybe they don’t own any firearms with pistol braces, or maybe they’re pleased that they can register their guns without paying the usual $200 tax. Whatever the reasoning, when you look at all of the ATF’s recent actions, including the raid on Polymer80 and the agency’s apparent crackdown on unfinished frames and receivers, it’s pretty clear that the agency’s career bureaucrats are gearing up for a series of administrative actions that will have a chilling effect on our Second Amendment rights. From ignoring their own previous determinations to issuing vague standards that are impossible to comply with, the agency is building a web of red tape to ensnare legitimate and lawful gun owners, and we need to speak as one in opposition to this power grab.


bearingarms--2020-12-18--Armed Paramedic Shoots, Kills Gunman In Arkansas Attack

Over the last few years we ’ ve seen a number of state legislators around the country introduce bills that allow EMTs , paramedics , and firefighters to be armed while they ’ re on the job .
First responders may show up at crime scenes or emergencies before police officers , and can face aggressive and violent individuals without any means of self-defense .
That ’ s one reason why legislation in West Virginia was overwhelmingly approved in 2018 .
“ Definitely the drug epidemic is making it worse , ” Delegate David Pethtel , who helped introduce the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t know what type of situation they ’ re going to come under.
” Pethtel said first responders came to him about the issue .
“ They told me that they have transported people by ambulance before and when they got to the hospital sometimes hospital personnel removed weapons from them , ” Pethtel said .
Fire Chief Dave Caudill said he fully supports the bill as it helps keep first responders safe .
“ On more than one occasion , I ’ ve had a knife pulled on me inside a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” Chief Caudill said .
“ It ’ s a very dangerous world out there and you really never know what you ’ re going to get into .
It ’ s not for everybody to do , but the ones who have the ability and have the training .
It would be a way to protect our people and also to protect the public.
” This isn ’ t just a theoretical exercise , as a recent incident in Pine Bluff , Arkansas shows us .
Earlier this week two paramedics @ @ @ @ @ @ @ woman who was receiving treatment became violent towards them .
Thankfully , one of the paramedics was able to fight back .
Paramedic Joshua Godfrey , 35 , was sitting in the back of an ambulance bleeding and John Spriggs Sr. , 21 , was lying on the ground beside the ambulance when police arrived , the release states .
The paramedics told officers they were rendering aid in the back of the ambulance to a 20-year-old woman complaining of knee pain , when her boyfriend , Kevin Curl Jr. , walked up @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said .
Spriggs told police Curl refused to back up , and pushed him and asked what he was going to do about it , police said .
Spriggs punched Curl , who then pulled out a gun and shot both paramedics approximately three times each in the chest , pelvic and abdomen areas , according to the news release .
Spriggs was able to return fire with his own gun , hitting Curl in the chest at least once .
Curl retreated inside a nearby home , and when officers arrived they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the residence .
While police continue to investigate , at this point it would appear to be clear-cut case of self-defense .
Curl , according to the paramedics , was the first to use physical force as well as the first to use deadly force , and the 21-year old paramedic only used his gun after he himself had been struck by Curl ’ s bullets .
It sounds like the two paramedics are thankfully going to recover from their injuries , but their story is a perfect example of why first @ @ @ @ @ @ @ enforcement , need to be able to protect and defend themselves and others while on the job .
Paramedics don ’ t need to have the power to arrest people , but they shouldn ’ t lose their right of self-defense when they clock in .

Over the last few years we’ve seen a number of state legislators around the country introduce bills that allow EMTs, paramedics, and firefighters to be armed while they’re on the job. First responders may show up at crime scenes or emergencies before police officers, and can face aggressive and violent individuals without any means of self-defense. That’s one reason why legislation in West Virginia was overwhelmingly approved in 2018.
“Definitely the drug epidemic is making it worse,” Delegate David Pethtel, who helped introduce the bill, said. “They don’t know what type of situation they’re going to come under.” Pethtel said first responders came to him about the issue. “They told me that they have transported people by ambulance before and when they got to the hospital sometimes hospital personnel removed weapons from them,” Pethtel said. Fire Chief Dave Caudill said he fully supports the bill as it helps keep first responders safe. “On more than one occasion, I’ve had a knife pulled on me inside a house with basically nowhere to escape to,” Chief Caudill said. “It’s a very dangerous world out there and you really never know what you’re going to get into. It’s not for everybody to do, but the ones who have the ability and have the training. It would be a way to protect our people and also to protect the public.”
This isn’t just a theoretical exercise, as a recent incident in Pine Bluff, Arkansas shows us. Earlier this week two paramedics were shot after the boyfriend of a woman who was receiving treatment became violent towards them. Thankfully, one of the paramedics was able to fight back.
Paramedic Joshua Godfrey, 35, was sitting in the back of an ambulance bleeding and John Spriggs Sr., 21, was lying on the ground beside the ambulance when police arrived, the release states. The paramedics told officers they were rendering aid in the back of the ambulance to a 20-year-old woman complaining of knee pain, when her boyfriend, Kevin Curl Jr., walked up to them “aggressively,” police said. Spriggs told police Curl refused to back up, and pushed him and asked what he was going to do about it, police said. Spriggs punched Curl, who then pulled out a gun and shot both paramedics approximately three times each in the chest, pelvic and abdomen areas, according to the news release.
Spriggs was able to return fire with his own gun, hitting Curl in the chest at least once. Curl retreated inside a nearby home, and when officers arrived they found him dead on the kitchen floor of the residence.
While police continue to investigate, at this point it would appear to be clear-cut case of self-defense. Curl, according to the paramedics, was the first to use physical force as well as the first to use deadly force, and the 21-year old paramedic only used his gun after he himself had been struck by Curl’s bullets.
It sounds like the two paramedics are thankfully going to recover from their injuries, but their story is a perfect example of why first responders, even those not in law enforcement, need to be able to protect and defend themselves and others while on the job. Paramedics don’t need to have the power to arrest people, but they shouldn’t lose their right of self-defense when they clock in.


bearingarms--2020-12-18--New Gun Buyers Aren't Who Most Think They Are

Ever since the pandemic was clearly going to be a pandemic , we watched as gun sales increased exponentially .
Millions of Americans went and bought guns .
To make matters even more interesting was that despite the media telling us more and more Americans wanted gun control , most of the gun buyers were first-time customers .
They were people who ’ d never owned a gun before in their life , but now wanted something .
A summer and autumn filled with riots did nothing to quell the unease people felt , nor their desire to arm themselves @ @ @ @ @ @ @ election and it ’ s no mystery that guns were rolling out the door as fast as stores could get them in .
Yet there are some misconceptions about just who all are buying those guns , even now .
That ’ s a fair point .
For all that 2020 has been , it ’ s also been an object lesson in why one should have at least one gun , if not multiples .
Further , the overall point about just who is buying those guns stands .
The truth is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the socio-economic spectrum and may have lasting ramifications on the gun debate for decades to come .
As black Americans are preached to about the evils of police and how everyone wants them dead , it ’ s no surprise that more than a few are out there buying firearms .
They should , especially if they fear being targeted for a hate crime or something of the sort .
The truth is , guns are no longer all about middle age white dudes with pickup trucks and a wad of tobacco in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , mind you , but that ’ s what people had in mind when you talked about gun owners .
It ’ s well past time to drop that stereotype and recognize that guns cross all such boundaries .
Now , if only we could make politicians realize it .

Ever since the pandemic was clearly going to be a pandemic, we watched as gun sales increased exponentially. Millions of Americans went and bought guns. To make matters even more interesting was that despite the media telling us more and more Americans wanted gun control, most of the gun buyers were first-time customers. They were people who’d never owned a gun before in their life, but now wanted something.
A summer and autumn filled with riots did nothing to quell the unease people felt, nor their desire to arm themselves. Couple that with concerns about the election and it’s no mystery that guns were rolling out the door as fast as stores could get them in.
Yet there are some misconceptions about just who all are buying those guns, even now.
The firearm industry surveyed gun retailers this year to find out just who is buying these guns and why. Astonishingly, 40% of those buying guns today are buying one for the first time in their lives. Before 2020, these individuals never owned a gun. Across the nation, that equates to nearly 7.7 million people. Here in Maryland that’s over 109,000 of us. Today’s gun buyer isn’t the stereotype critics would have Marylanders envision. Of those people buying guns in 2020, 40% are women. The largest demographic increase is among African Americans, who are purchasing guns at a rate 58% higher this year than in 2019. Why are gun sales so popular this year? The survey that identified just who is buying guns this year also asked that question. Overwhelmingly, the answer came down to a single word — safety. Marylanders, like the rest of America, took responsibility for providing for the safety of their family and themselves. This year gave them plenty of reasons to make that decision. In March, firearm sales spiked to their highest month on record. More than 2.3 million background checks were conducted for a gun sale then, which was also the same month COVID pandemic measures set in. Gov. Larry Hogan declared a State of Emergency and “Stay at Home” Executive Order that same month. Police were triaging 911 calls to reduce exposure to infection, and some officers were pulled from duty because they’d tested positive. In May, our nation witnessed the horrific death of George Floyd. The protests that arose morphed into rioting and looting. Rioters burned and vandalized property, including a police union hall in Baltimore. Some elected officials openly called for defunding police departments and several actually did so, literally taking the tools of community safety away from the people who needed them the most.
That’s a fair point. For all that 2020 has been, it’s also been an object lesson in why one should have at least one gun, if not multiples.
Further, the overall point about just who is buying those guns stands. The truth is that new gun owners come from across the socio-economic spectrum and may have lasting ramifications on the gun debate for decades to come. As black Americans are preached to about the evils of police and how everyone wants them dead, it’s no surprise that more than a few are out there buying firearms. They should, especially if they fear being targeted for a hate crime or something of the sort.
The truth is, guns are no longer all about middle age white dudes with pickup trucks and a wad of tobacco in their mouth. They never actually were, mind you, but that’s what people had in mind when you talked about gun owners.
It’s well past time to drop that stereotype and recognize that guns cross all such boundaries.
Now, if only we could make politicians realize it.


bearingarms--2020-12-18--Spokane Wants Local Law Banning Armed Protesters

City council members in Spokane , Washington think they ’ ve come up with a way to target armed demonstrators who ’ ve been engaged in protests in the city for the past several months ; a local law to ban the “ unlawful assembly of private militias ” inside the city limits .
Local officials have been trying for weeks now to get local police to enforce a similar state law that ’ s been on the books for more than a century , but Spokane County Prosecutor Larry Haskall poured cold water on the idea , telling local @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to enforce and subject to a constitutional challenge .
In November , as the City Council passed a resolution imploring the Spokane Police Department to enforce the state law , Haskell warned in a post on Facebook that militias “ are not subject to prosecution for mere presence ” and that the bar to prosecute the state law is high .
Incorporating the state militia law into city code would be the second of Beggs ’ two-part response to the gathering of militia members in downtown Spokane during protests over the May 25 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and racial injustice earlier this year .
In a nonbinding resolution , Beggs and the council called for city police to enforce the Washington state law , which says militias unrecognized by the state can not “ associate themselves together as a military company or organize or parade in public with firearms.
” But law enforcement officials , including Haskell and Spokane Police Chief Craig Meidl , have questioned the viability of prosecuting someone under the century-old law and have expressed concern about infringing on Second Amendment rights .
Haskell essentially argued that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are constitutionally protected both federally and in Washington , and can not be prosecuted simply for gathering downtown .
The prosecutor rightfully pointed out that in order to successfully bring a case against an armed protester , his office would have to prove that the individual was a member of a militia not recognized by the state .
Spokane City Council President Breean Beggs , on the other hand , apparently believes that those accused of a crime should be considered guilty until they prove themselves innocent .
Beggs disagrees with Haskell ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t have to prove a negative in order to prosecute.
” “ The defendant would have to prove that they were in a recognized militia , ” Beggs said .
State law , he said , “ makes it clear that when somebody is acting as a private military that ’ s a crime , essentially , and there ’ s a few exceptions that are listed pretty clearly.
” Beggs , who ’ s an attorney himself , should know better than to claim that in a criminal trial the burden @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not the prosecutors .
Someone charged with violating the city ’ s proposed ordinance on unlawful assembly of a militia wouldn ’ t have to prove that they ’ re in a recognized militia .
They don ’ t even have to testify in their defense .
It would be up to the city attorney ’ s office to prove the membership in an unrecognized militia , and that ’ s if the law were to be upheld in the inevitable legal challenge that would follow .
We have a First Amendment right @ @ @ @ @ @ @ our Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms , and there ’ s nothing in the Bill of Rights or the Constitution that says citizens can only exercise one right at a time .
We don ’ t lose our Fourth Amendment rights when we exercise our freedom of speech , so why should we lose our freedom of speech when we ’ re exercising our right to keep and bear arms ?
Sadly , it looks like common sense isn ’ t on the city council ’ s agenda in Spokane @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ignore the words of warning from both the county prosecutor and the city ’ s police chief in order to crack down on protests that offend his sensibilities at the expense of the Bill of Rights and the rule of law .
I hope that more rational minds prevail before a final vote is taken , but if this local ordinance does go into effect , the legal challenge will be one to watch .

City council members in Spokane, Washington think they’ve come up with a way to target armed demonstrators who’ve been engaged in protests in the city for the past several months; a local law to ban the “unlawful assembly of private militias” inside the city limits.
Local officials have been trying for weeks now to get local police to enforce a similar state law that’s been on the books for more than a century, but Spokane County Prosecutor Larry Haskall poured cold water on the idea, telling local lawmakers that the statute would be difficult to enforce and subject to a constitutional challenge.
In November, as the City Council passed a resolution imploring the Spokane Police Department to enforce the state law, Haskell warned in a post on Facebook that militias “are not subject to prosecution for mere presence” and that the bar to prosecute the state law is high. Incorporating the state militia law into city code would be the second of Beggs’ two-part response to the gathering of militia members in downtown Spokane during protests over the May 25 police killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis and racial injustice earlier this year. In a nonbinding resolution, Beggs and the council called for city police to enforce the Washington state law, which says militias unrecognized by the state cannot “associate themselves together as a military company or organize or parade in public with firearms.” But law enforcement officials, including Haskell and Spokane Police Chief Craig Meidl, have questioned the viability of prosecuting someone under the century-old law and have expressed concern about infringing on Second Amendment rights. Haskell essentially argued that militias – both organized and unorganized – are constitutionally protected both federally and in Washington, and cannot be prosecuted simply for gathering downtown.
The prosecutor rightfully pointed out that in order to successfully bring a case against an armed protester, his office would have to prove that the individual was a member of a militia not recognized by the state. Spokane City Council President Breean Beggs, on the other hand, apparently believes that those accused of a crime should be considered guilty until they prove themselves innocent.
Beggs disagrees with Haskell’s interpretation and said “you don’t have to prove a negative in order to prosecute.” “The defendant would have to prove that they were in a recognized militia,” Beggs said. State law, he said, “makes it clear that when somebody is acting as a private military that’s a crime, essentially, and there’s a few exceptions that are listed pretty clearly.”
Beggs, who’s an attorney himself, should know better than to claim that in a criminal trial the burden of proof is on the defendant and not the prosecutors. Someone charged with violating the city’s proposed ordinance on unlawful assembly of a militia wouldn’t have to prove that they’re in a recognized militia. They don’t even have to testify in their defense. It would be up to the city attorney’s office to prove the membership in an unrecognized militia, and that’s if the law were to be upheld in the inevitable legal challenge that would follow.
We have a First Amendment right to peaceably assemble and protest along with our Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms, and there’s nothing in the Bill of Rights or the Constitution that says citizens can only exercise one right at a time. We don’t lose our Fourth Amendment rights when we exercise our freedom of speech, so why should we lose our freedom of speech when we’re exercising our right to keep and bear arms?
Sadly, it looks like common sense isn’t on the city council’s agenda in Spokane. The council president is willing to ignore the words of warning from both the county prosecutor and the city’s police chief in order to crack down on protests that offend his sensibilities at the expense of the Bill of Rights and the rule of law. I hope that more rational minds prevail before a final vote is taken, but if this local ordinance does go into effect, the legal challenge will be one to watch.


bearingarms--2020-12-18--NY State Senator Blames Gun Industry For "Killing Black America"

A firearm is a tool .
It ’ s a device that , in and of itself , does nothing .
Guns don ’ t just go off .
They don ’ t hurt people out of the blue .
They don ’ t really do anything .
No , for them to do something , a person has to enter the picture .
Yet despite this inescapable fact , guns and the industry that produces them are continually vilified , as if they ’ re somehow responsible for all the issues .
At least in 2020 , some things @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Last month , Brooklyn District Attorney Eric Gonzalez announced the indictment of an alleged gun trafficking ring that sought to illegally sell weapons in Brownsville .
According to the indictment , the defendants purchased guns legally from dealers in Virginia and South Carolina and trafficked them to Brooklyn along the so-called “ Iron Pipeline , ” the well-worn route from the legal gun market in Southern states to the streets of New York .
OK , let ’ s start by noting that if the defendants purchased the guns with the intention @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t buy them legally .
They might have appeared to buy them legally , but by lying on the form 4473 , they committed an illegal purchase .
Meanwhile , shooting incidents have nearly doubled in Brooklyn over the past year — a rise emblematic of the gun violence epidemic faced by communities like the one I represent .
And while the suffering is felt locally , the guns used in these crimes are exported to our streets by bad actors in the gun industry who profit from their reckless business practices and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ long tradition of distant profiteers growing rich at the expense of Black and Brown communities who pay the price in blood and tears .
They count their money ; we count the bodies .
Except , that doesn ’ t describe the firearm industry at all .
See , the gun industry sells to individuals , distributors , and retailers who are eligible to purchase these firearms .
A few , such as those noted above , pretend to be lawful purchasers with the intention of using those guns for illicit purposes , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of all gun buyers .
Instead , most of those guns used in crimes are illegal in some other way .
They ’ re stolen , for example , or purchased from a black market seller .
What they ’ re generally not is lawfully purchased .
In an article titled , “ The gun industry is killing Black America .
It ’ s time we do something about it , ” you ’ d expect a least an attempt to link the firearm industry to actual misdeeds .
Yet , NY State @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Probably because he can ’ t .
If you want to get deep into who or what is killing black America , then perhaps Myrie would be better served looking at gang culture .
After all , that ’ s who does most of the killing and , to be frank , most of their victims are from that culture as well .
Not all , by any stretch , but most .
Yet that would require Myrie to have to hold people accountable for their own actions , for their own @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in that if you ’ re a politician .
Not in this day and age .
Instead , it ’ s much better to find someone else and blame them .
If the black community feels there are too many black men and women being killed , then maybe they should do something about the fact that so many of their murderers are other black men and women and stop trying to pretend that ’ s on anyone else .

A firearm is a tool. It’s a device that, in and of itself, does nothing. Guns don’t just go off. They don’t hurt people out of the blue. They don’t really do anything. No, for them to do something, a person has to enter the picture.
Yet despite this inescapable fact, guns and the industry that produces them are continually vilified, as if they’re somehow responsible for all the issues.
At least in 2020, some things just don’t seem to change.
Last month, Brooklyn District Attorney Eric Gonzalez announced the indictment of an alleged gun trafficking ring that sought to illegally sell weapons in Brownsville. According to the indictment, the defendants purchased guns legally from dealers in Virginia and South Carolina and trafficked them to Brooklyn along the so-called “Iron Pipeline,” the well-worn route from the legal gun market in Southern states to the streets of New York.
OK, let’s start by noting that if the defendants purchased the guns with the intention to traffic them, they didn’t buy them legally. They might have appeared to buy them legally, but by lying on the form 4473, they committed an illegal purchase.
Moving on…
Meanwhile, shooting incidents have nearly doubled in Brooklyn over the past year — a rise emblematic of the gun violence epidemic faced by communities like the one I represent. And while the suffering is felt locally, the guns used in these crimes are exported to our streets by bad actors in the gun industry who profit from their reckless business practices and remain largely unscathed. America has a long tradition of distant profiteers growing rich at the expense of Black and Brown communities who pay the price in blood and tears. They count their money; we count the bodies.
Except, that doesn’t describe the firearm industry at all.
See, the gun industry sells to individuals, distributors, and retailers who are eligible to purchase these firearms. A few, such as those noted above, pretend to be lawful purchasers with the intention of using those guns for illicit purposes, but they represent something like one percent of all gun buyers.
Instead, most of those guns used in crimes are illegal in some other way. They’re stolen, for example, or purchased from a black market seller. What they’re generally not is lawfully purchased.
In an article titled, “The gun industry is killing Black America. It’s time we do something about it,” you’d expect a least an attempt to link the firearm industry to actual misdeeds. Yet, NY State Senator Zellnor Y. Myrie doesn’t. Probably because he can’t.
If you want to get deep into who or what is killing black America, then perhaps Myrie would be better served looking at gang culture. After all, that’s who does most of the killing and, to be frank, most of their victims are from that culture as well. Not all, by any stretch, but most.
Yet that would require Myrie to have to hold people accountable for their own actions, for their own failures. There’s no profit in that if you’re a politician. Not in this day and age.
Instead, it’s much better to find someone else and blame them.
If the black community feels there are too many black men and women being killed, then maybe they should do something about the fact that so many of their murderers are other black men and women and stop trying to pretend that’s on anyone else.


bearingarms--2020-12-18--2A Orgs Outspending Gun Control Groups In GA Elections

Early voting has already started in the Georgia runoff elections that will determine control of the U.S. Senate for the next two years , and voters in state are hearing far more from pro-Second Amendment organizations than gun control groups at the moment .
CNBC reports that groups like the National Rifle Association and Gun Owners of America are spending heavily in the state in the weeks before the January 5th election , but gun control groups like Everytown for Gun Safety , which spent tens of millions of dollars in the 2020 election cycle , have been mostly quiet @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the NRA ’ s political arm has spent more than $ 2.2 million in independent expenditures such as billboards , ads , postcards , texting and canvassing that support Perdue and Loeffler or oppose Ossoff and Warnock , according to Federal Election Commission data .
“ The NRA has spent millions with more to come , ” NRA spokeswoman Amy Hunter said in an email .
Other gun rights groups have also invested in outside spending for the Senate runoff races , FEC data show .
Gun Owners of America has spent more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and text messages supporting Loeffler and Perdue .
Gun Rights America , the super PAC of the National Association for Gun Rights , has spent more than $ 22,000 on digital advertising and voter contact by phone , mail and text that opposes Warnock and Ossoff .
A PAC called God , Guns & Life has spent more than $ 36,000 on ads supporting the Republican senators .
On the anti-gun side , CNBC notes that Brady PAC has dropped about $ 100,000 on a digital ad attacking Kelly Loeffler and supporting Raphael @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the only real spending by any gun control group in the Senate elections .
Later today Everytown for Gun Safety , Giffords , and Moms Demand Action are holding a “ virtual rally ” for both Jon Ossoff and Raphael Warnock , where they ’ re hoping to raise $ 100,000 for the their campaigns .
The gun control groups also say that while they ’ re not spending on advertising , they ’ re engaged in voter outreach and turnout efforts .
“ After a year of saturated airwaves , Georgians know @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , so the election is going to come down to turnout .
We ’ ve got one of the largest , most active , and effective grassroots networks in the country — that ’ s why we ’ re focused on connecting with voters and wearing out our shoes , our keyboards , and our dial-pads , ” said Andrew Zucker , a spokesperson for Everytown .
As of Dec. 16 , Everytown and Moms Demand Action reported their volunteer network has made at least 115,000 voter contacts in Georgia for the Ossoff @ @ @ @ @ @ @ text banking , canvassing , sending postcards and distributing literature .
That ’ s a change in tactics for the Left since the general election , when gun control groups spent far more money and effort on digital ads than voter contacts , only to fail to achieve any real victories at the state level .
2A groups , meanwhile , are engaged in voter outreach as well , with gun owners across the state engaged in both face-to-face and remote contacts with voters .
The Georgia senate races are going to be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to be high on both sides .
For those who care about their Second Amendment rights the choice is clear ; both Warnock and Ossoff back Joe Biden ’ s gun ban plans , while David Perdue and Kelly Loeffler back the right of the people to keep and bear arms .
Since the outcome of the elections will determine who controls the U.S. Senate for the next two years , gun owners in Georgia can ’ t afford to sit out this election , even if their concerns about voter fraud and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to their satisfaction .
Stay home and you guarantee that anti-gun activists will win .
Vote and we ’ ve got a chance to defeat them .
Ultimately , it ’ s really that simple , and I ’ m hopeful that Georgia ’ s gun owners are getting that message loud and clear .

Early voting has already started in the Georgia runoff elections that will determine control of the U.S. Senate for the next two years, and voters in state are hearing far more from pro-Second Amendment organizations than gun control groups at the moment.
CNBC reports that groups like the National Rifle Association and Gun Owners of America are spending heavily in the state in the weeks before the January 5th election, but gun control groups like Everytown for Gun Safety, which spent tens of millions of dollars in the 2020 election cycle, have been mostly quiet in Georgia.
Since Nov. 15, the NRA’s political arm has spent more than $2.2 million in independent expenditures such as billboards, ads, postcards, texting and canvassing that support Perdue and Loeffler or oppose Ossoff and Warnock, according to Federal Election Commission data. “The NRA has spent millions with more to come,” NRA spokeswoman Amy Hunter said in an email. Other gun rights groups have also invested in outside spending for the Senate runoff races, FEC data show. Gun Owners of America has spent more than $126,000 on ads, emails and text messages supporting Loeffler and Perdue. Gun Rights America, the super PAC of the National Association for Gun Rights, has spent more than $22,000 on digital advertising and voter contact by phone, mail and text that opposes Warnock and Ossoff. A PAC called God, Guns & Life has spent more than $36,000 on ads supporting the Republican senators.
On the anti-gun side, CNBC notes that Brady PAC has dropped about $100,000 on a digital ad attacking Kelly Loeffler and supporting Raphael Warnock, but that’s been the only real spending by any gun control group in the Senate elections.
Later today Everytown for Gun Safety, Giffords, and Moms Demand Action are holding a “virtual rally” for both Jon Ossoff and Raphael Warnock, where they’re hoping to raise $100,000 for the their campaigns. The gun control groups also say that while they’re not spending on advertising, they’re engaged in voter outreach and turnout efforts.
“After a year of saturated airwaves, Georgians know what the candidates in this race represent, so the election is going to come down to turnout. We’ve got one of the largest, most active, and effective grassroots networks in the country — that’s why we’re focused on connecting with voters and wearing out our shoes, our keyboards, and our dial-pads,” said Andrew Zucker, a spokesperson for Everytown. As of Dec. 16, Everytown and Moms Demand Action reported their volunteer network has made at least 115,000 voter contacts in Georgia for the Ossoff and Warnock campaigns through phone banking, text banking, canvassing, sending postcards and distributing literature.
That’s a change in tactics for the Left since the general election, when gun control groups spent far more money and effort on digital ads than voter contacts, only to fail to achieve any real victories at the state level. 2A groups, meanwhile, are engaged in voter outreach as well, with gun owners across the state engaged in both face-to-face and remote contacts with voters.
The Georgia senate races are going to be closely contested, and turnout is expected to be high on both sides. For those who care about their Second Amendment rights the choice is clear; both Warnock and Ossoff back Joe Biden’s gun ban plans, while David Perdue and Kelly Loeffler back the right of the people to keep and bear arms. Since the outcome of the elections will determine who controls the U.S. Senate for the next two years, gun owners in Georgia can’t afford to sit out this election, even if their concerns about voter fraud and stolen elections haven’t been addressed to their satisfaction.
Stay home and you guarantee that anti-gun activists will win. Vote and we’ve got a chance to defeat them. Ultimately, it’s really that simple, and I’m hopeful that Georgia’s gun owners are getting that message loud and clear.


bearingarms--2020-12-18--South Texas Democrat Stands Up For Carrying In Capitol

Democrats , as a rule , don ’ t like guns .
Unless you ’ re wearing a badge , they don ’ t want anyone with a firearm within 200 or so miles of them .
It ’ s why they ’ re so vehement in their gun control policies .
The buildings in which they were are pretty locked down on the firearm front , too .
The average citizen can ’ t carry a gun into the Capitol , for example .
Yet there are exceptions to every rule .
Members of Congress can carry a gun @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t necessarily get Secret Service protection , but they do get an awful lot of death threats .
They have reason to carry a firearm .
Yet they ’ re now trying to prevent that , oddly as control of the House seems to slip from the Democrats ’ fingers .
However , not all Democrats are alright with this kind of thing .
McAllen Rep. Vicente Gonzalez is making clear his opposition to an effort by some of his fellow House Democrats to overturn a decades-old regulation that allows lawmakers to carry @ @ @ @ @ @ @ soon-to-be three-term Democrat said Thursday that he trusts the existing policy .
“ There is a clear history of members of Congress being targeted with violence , ” Gonzalez , a relative moderate who this year won a closer-than-expected reelection race , said in a news release .
“ And if we want to carry for an added layer of protection , we should be able to do so.
” His argument is the flip side of the case offered by a group of more liberal Democrats , including El Paso Rep. Veronica @ @ @ @ @ @ @ gun ban .
“ Threats of political violence are on the rise , and it makes all of us less safe if members of Congress don ’ t have to comply with gun safety standards , ” said Colorado Rep. Jared Huffman , who ’ s been leading the effort to change the gun rule .
In other words , what Huffman wants is his opposition to be less safe when traveling between their office and the Capitol .
Of course , members of Congress don ’ t have to go out into @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on their way to the Capitol itself as there are tunnels between them all , but not everyone wants to go that route .
They might have reasons not to take the tunnels .
What Democrats are calling for is to make sure their opponents–the very people who may be armed as a response to a potential threat–are disarmed .
Gonzalez and I probably disagree on a great deal , but I have to respect him standing up against members of his own party over the Second Amendment rights of his fellow congressmen @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , I think it ’ s bull that congressmen and women get to play by a different set of rules than the rest of us .
I just don ’ t think the direction to take is to disarm people .
Instead , it should open up carry for any American citizen .
Now , I suspect that Gonzelez ’ s stand might have a touch of politics to it .
He won a tight election and is probably feeling some conservative heat .
Making a pro-gun stand that is really nothing but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a no-brainer .
It ’ ll likely help him at home .
At a minimum , it ’ s unlikely to hurt his chances in pro-gun Texas .
In the meantime , this push now is nothing more than an attempt to make Republicans more vulnerable to leftist mobs and anyone with half a brain knows it .
While members of Congress aren ’ t saints , House or Senate Republicans aren ’ t exactly the most likely to start gunning down their opponents , either .
Again , we all know it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ enough Democrats like Gonzalez who will help shut down this stupidity ?

Democrats, as a rule, don’t like guns. Unless you’re wearing a badge, they don’t want anyone with a firearm within 200 or so miles of them. It’s why they’re so vehement in their gun control policies.
The buildings in which they were are pretty locked down on the firearm front, too. The average citizen can’t carry a gun into the Capitol, for example. Yet there are exceptions to every rule. Members of Congress can carry a gun. After all, they don’t necessarily get Secret Service protection, but they do get an awful lot of death threats. They have reason to carry a firearm.
Yet they’re now trying to prevent that, oddly as control of the House seems to slip from the Democrats’ fingers.
However, not all Democrats are alright with this kind of thing.
McAllen Rep. Vicente Gonzalez is making clear his opposition to an effort by some of his fellow House Democrats to overturn a decades-old regulation that allows lawmakers to carry firearms on the Capitol grounds. The soon-to-be three-term Democrat said Thursday that he trusts the existing policy. “There is a clear history of members of Congress being targeted with violence,” Gonzalez, a relative moderate who this year won a closer-than-expected reelection race, said in a news release. “And if we want to carry for an added layer of protection, we should be able to do so.” His argument is the flip side of the case offered by a group of more liberal Democrats, including El Paso Rep. Veronica Escobar, who are pushing for the gun ban. “Threats of political violence are on the rise, and it makes all of us less safe if members of Congress don’t have to comply with gun safety standards,” said Colorado Rep. Jared Huffman, who’s been leading the effort to change the gun rule.
In other words, what Huffman wants is his opposition to be less safe when traveling between their office and the Capitol.
Of course, members of Congress don’t have to go out into the open when they leave their offices on their way to the Capitol itself as there are tunnels between them all, but not everyone wants to go that route. They might have reasons not to take the tunnels. What Democrats are calling for is to make sure their opponents–the very people who may be armed as a response to a potential threat–are disarmed.
Gonzalez and I probably disagree on a great deal, but I have to respect him standing up against members of his own party over the Second Amendment rights of his fellow congressmen.
Don’t get me wrong, I think it’s bull that congressmen and women get to play by a different set of rules than the rest of us. I just don’t think the direction to take is to disarm people. Instead, it should open up carry for any American citizen.
Now, I suspect that Gonzelez’s stand might have a touch of politics to it. He won a tight election and is probably feeling some conservative heat. Making a pro-gun stand that is really nothing but maintaining the status quo is something of a no-brainer. It’ll likely help him at home. At a minimum, it’s unlikely to hurt his chances in pro-gun Texas.
In the meantime, this push now is nothing more than an attempt to make Republicans more vulnerable to leftist mobs and anyone with half a brain knows it. While members of Congress aren’t saints, House or Senate Republicans aren’t exactly the most likely to start gunning down their opponents, either. Again, we all know it.
The question is, are there enough Democrats like Gonzalez who will help shut down this stupidity?


bearingarms--2020-12-19--BA Gift Guide - Best EDC Carry Knives

BA Gift Guide - Best EDC Carry Knives

A good folding knife is an invaluable tool , and I generally carry one on me at all times .
Sure , it ’ s most often useful for practical things like opening packages , but an every day carry knife can also be an actual life-saver in emergency situations as well .
What should you look for in a good carry knife ?
Generally speaking , you want something that ’ s not too big , has a lockable blade and is constructed out of durable material .
A high end blade can cost you several hundred dollars , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for less than $ 50 if you know what to look for .
Here are a few of our favorite options .
Ned Foss Damascus Folding Pocket Knife – I ’ m a sucker for the look of Damascus steel , and this 2.6″ blade is a thing of beauty .
The 67-layer Damascus steel blade is set in a 3.4″ rosewood handle , and features a thumb hole in the blade to help with opening the blade quickly if needed .
Kershaw Brawler Folding Pocket Knife – This lightweight ( 3.9 oz @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for the 3″ blade , and the black oxide coating offers a little extra protection from corrosion while improving the overall look of the knife itself .
Kershaw ’ s SpeedSafe Assisted Opening system allows for one-handed blade deployment , while the liner locking system will keep the blade securely in place both open or closed .
SOG Salute Mini Folding Knife – Featuring a 3.1″ stainless steel blade , this knife measures 4″ closed and weighs in at just 3.6 oz .
The Salute Mini also comes with a reversible pocket clip @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the adjustable thumb stud on the base of the blade .
The stainless steel liners provide for extra stability , and the lockback mechanism ensures that the blade will stay in place once the knife is open .
TNZ Knives TNZ-479 – The perfect blend of form and function , this 4″ blade from TNZ is hand-crafted from 352 layers of Damascus steel and is set in a camel bone handle .
The knife also comes standard with a leather sheath , and TNZ offers a 60-day money back guarantee if the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
CRKT CEO EDC Folding Pocket Knife – This slim and stylish knife is just 2.1 oz in weight , but packs a 3.1″ blade inside the glass reinforced nylon handle .
The low-profile design and lightweight materials mean you can carry it in a shirt pocket if need be , while the knife opens smoothly thanks to the thumb stub and lubed ball bearings in the pivot .
Leatherman FREE K2 – The only knife/multitool on our list , but it ’ s there for a reason .
Leatherman ’ s FREE @ @ @ @ @ @ @ blade along with seven other tools ; from a Phillips-head screwdriver to a bottle opener , and is designed to allow users to easily access both blade and tools with one hand .
The magnetic locking system keeps the blade and tools in securely in place , and the aluminum body will help keep the American-made knife in good shape for years to come .
Benchmade Griptilian 551 – The 3.4″ stainless steel blade is one of the largest on our list , but at just 1.9 oz the Griptilian is also the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ re featuring .
The blade is housed in a glass-reinforced nylon handle , and is locked in place with Benchmade ’ s ambidextrous AXIS sytem .
Made in America and comes with a lifetime limited warranty and LifeSharp service that allows you to ship your knife back to the Oregon-based company any time you need the blade resharpened .

A good folding knife is an invaluable tool, and I generally carry one on me at all times. Sure, it’s most often useful for practical things like opening packages, but an every day carry knife can also be an actual life-saver in emergency situations as well.
What should you look for in a good carry knife? Generally speaking, you want something that’s not too big, has a lockable blade and is constructed out of durable material. A high end blade can cost you several hundred dollars, but a good knife can be had for less than $50 if you know what to look for. Here are a few of our favorite options.
Ned Foss Damascus Folding Pocket Knife – I’m a sucker for the look of Damascus steel, and this 2.6″ blade is a thing of beauty. The 67-layer Damascus steel blade is set in a 3.4″ rosewood handle, and features a thumb hole in the blade to help with opening the blade quickly if needed.
Kershaw Brawler Folding Pocket Knife – This lightweight (3.9 oz) knife uses precision heat-treated 8Cr13MoV steel for the 3″ blade, and the black oxide coating offers a little extra protection from corrosion while improving the overall look of the knife itself. Kershaw’s SpeedSafe Assisted Opening system allows for one-handed blade deployment, while the liner locking system will keep the blade securely in place both open or closed.
SOG Salute Mini Folding Knife – Featuring a 3.1″ stainless steel blade, this knife measures 4″ closed and weighs in at just 3.6 oz. The Salute Mini also comes with a reversible pocket clip, and the knife opens easily thanks to the adjustable thumb stud on the base of the blade. The stainless steel liners provide for extra stability, and the lockback mechanism ensures that the blade will stay in place once the knife is open.
TNZ Knives TNZ-479 – The perfect blend of form and function, this 4″ blade from TNZ is hand-crafted from 352 layers of Damascus steel and is set in a camel bone handle. The knife also comes standard with a leather sheath, and TNZ offers a 60-day money back guarantee if the knife doesn’t meet your expectations.
CRKT CEO EDC Folding Pocket Knife – This slim and stylish knife is just 2.1 oz in weight, but packs a 3.1″ blade inside the glass reinforced nylon handle. The low-profile design and lightweight materials mean you can carry it in a shirt pocket if need be, while the knife opens smoothly thanks to the thumb stub and lubed ball bearings in the pivot.
Leatherman FREE K2 – The only knife/multitool on our list, but it’s there for a reason. Leatherman’s FREE K2 features a 3.3″ high carbon knife blade along with seven other tools; from a Phillips-head screwdriver to a bottle opener, and is designed to allow users to easily access both blade and tools with one hand. The magnetic locking system keeps the blade and tools in securely in place, and the aluminum body will help keep the American-made knife in good shape for years to come.
Benchmade Griptilian 551 – The 3.4″ stainless steel blade is one of the largest on our list, but at just 1.9 oz the Griptilian is also the lightest of the knives that we’re featuring. The blade is housed in a glass-reinforced nylon handle, and is locked in place with Benchmade’s ambidextrous AXIS sytem. Made in America and comes with a lifetime limited warranty and LifeSharp service that allows you to ship your knife back to the Oregon-based company any time you need the blade resharpened.
When you make a purchase, Townhall Media receives a revenue share from qualifying purchases as an Amazon Associate.


bearingarms--2020-12-19--California Gun Rationing Law Faces Federal Court Challenge

The California law limiting residents to one handgun purchase every 30 days is now facing a federal court challenge after several Second Amendment organizations and individual plaintiffs filed suit against Attorney General Xavier Becerra and other state officials on Friday .
The Second Amendment Foundation and Firearms Policy Coalition , along with San Diego County Gun Owners PAC , several businesses , and six individuals brought challenge months before the state ’ s gun rationing law is set to expand to include purchases of centerfire semi-automatic rifles next July .
Second Amendment Foundation executive director and founder Alan Gottlieb says @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The policy discriminates against private citizens because it does not apply to motion picture , television or video production companies , which we call the ‘ Hollywood exemption.
’ The way Becerra and Lopez enforce the law amounts to an infringement on the individual right to keep and bear arms under the Second Amendment , and a violation of the 14th Amendment ’ s equal protection clause.
” I suppose we shouldn ’ t be surprised that California ’ s anti-gun lawmakers have carved out an exception to the law for the entertainment @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Gavin Newsom did the same when it came to shutting down outdoor dining , leading to scenes like a huge catering tent for entertainment industry workers set up within view of a restaurant ’ s outdoor tent that had been declared off-limits to the public .
If it weren ’ t for double standards , in other words , the Democrats in control of California wouldn ’ t have any standards at all .
“ California ’ s ban on multiple-firearm purchases in a thirty day period is without rhyme or reason , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ those who are exempt from the ban , ” explained Adam Kraut , FPC ’ s Director of Legal Strategy .
“ Such a restriction on the acquisition of arms plainly violates an individual ’ s Second Amendment rights .
We look forward to challenging this ban and are cautiously optimistic that the Court will find , as the D.C .
Circuit already has , that the restriction is unconstitutional.
” As attorney Adam Kraut notes , back in 2015 the D.C .
Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in a 2-1 decision that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ infringed on the rights of residents , though the city had claimed that the gun rationing scheme was a valuable public safety tool .
Writing for the majority , Judge Douglas H. Ginsburg said the government ’ s claim that registration limits reduce the number of guns on the street “ does not justify restricting an individual ’ s undoubted constitutional right to keep arms ( plural ) in his or her home.
” “ Taken to its logical conclusion , that reasoning would justify a total ban on firearms kept in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was appointed by President Ronald Reagan .
Ginsburg was joined by Judge Patricia A. Millett , who was appointed by President Obama .
“ Today I fear the majority has initiated a retreat — at least in part — from the practice of restraint , ” wrote Henderson , who was appointed by President George H.W .
Bush .
The plaintiff ’ s argument , she wrote , “ has no stopping point : it would authorize everyone to possess his own Rambo-style armory.
” We call that a gun collection , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ prohibiting citizens from keeping and bearing as many arms as they want and can afford .
A Washington , D.C. or California resident amassing their own personal armory may be “ extreme ” to some , but it ’ s constitutional , unlike an extreme gun rationing law that arbitrarily governs imposes limits on the Second Amendment rights of American citizens .
You can check out the initial filing in the new case known as Nguyen vs. Becerra here , and I wish the SAF , FPC , and all the other plaintiffs @ @ @ @ @ @ @ California gun owners who are being subjected to the throttling of their right to keep and bear arms .

The California law limiting residents to one handgun purchase every 30 days is now facing a federal court challenge after several Second Amendment organizations and individual plaintiffs filed suit against Attorney General Xavier Becerra and other state officials on Friday.
The Second Amendment Foundation and Firearms Policy Coalition, along with San Diego County Gun Owners PAC, several businesses, and six individuals brought challenge months before the state’s gun rationing law is set to expand to include purchases of centerfire semi-automatic rifles next July. Second Amendment Foundation executive director and founder Alan Gottlieb says the law is simply unconstitutional.
“The policy discriminates against private citizens because it does not apply to motion picture, television or video production companies, which we call the ‘Hollywood exemption.’ The way Becerra and Lopez enforce the law amounts to an infringement on the individual right to keep and bear arms under the Second Amendment, and a violation of the 14th Amendment’s equal protection clause.”
I suppose we shouldn’t be surprised that California’s anti-gun lawmakers have carved out an exception to the law for the entertainment industry. After all, Gov. Gavin Newsom did the same when it came to shutting down outdoor dining, leading to scenes like a huge catering tent for entertainment industry workers set up within view of a restaurant’s outdoor tent that had been declared off-limits to the public.
If it weren’t for double standards, in other words, the Democrats in control of California wouldn’t have any standards at all.
“California’s ban on multiple-firearm purchases in a thirty day period is without rhyme or reason, particularly when that prohibition is compared to those who are exempt from the ban,” explained Adam Kraut, FPC’s Director of Legal Strategy. “Such a restriction on the acquisition of arms plainly violates an individual’s Second Amendment rights. We look forward to challenging this ban and are cautiously optimistic that the Court will find, as the D.C. Circuit already has, that the restriction is unconstitutional.”
As attorney Adam Kraut notes, back in 2015 the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in a 2-1 decision that Washington, D.C.’s one-gun-a-month law infringed on the rights of residents, though the city had claimed that the gun rationing scheme was a valuable public safety tool.
Writing for the majority, Judge Douglas H. Ginsburg said the government’s claim that registration limits reduce the number of guns on the street “does not justify restricting an individual’s undoubted constitutional right to keep arms (plural) in his or her home.” “Taken to its logical conclusion, that reasoning would justify a total ban on firearms kept in the home,” wrote Ginsburg, who was appointed by President Ronald Reagan. Ginsburg was joined by Judge Patricia A. Millett, who was appointed by President Obama. Judge Karen LeCraft Henderson disagreed, calling the one-gun-a-month limit a temporary, acceptable burden. “Today I fear the majority has initiated a retreat — at least in part — from the practice of restraint,” wrote Henderson, who was appointed by President George H.W. Bush. The plaintiff’s argument, she wrote, “has no stopping point: it would authorize everyone to possess his own Rambo-style armory.”
We call that a gun collection, and there’s nothing in the Constitution prohibiting citizens from keeping and bearing as many arms as they want and can afford. A Washington, D.C. or California resident amassing their own personal armory may be “extreme” to some, but it’s constitutional, unlike an extreme gun rationing law that arbitrarily governs imposes limits on the Second Amendment rights of American citizens.
You can check out the initial filing in the new case known as Nguyen vs. Becerra here, and I wish the SAF, FPC, and all the other plaintiffs luck in their pursuit of justice for California gun owners who are being subjected to the throttling of their right to keep and bear arms.


bearingarms--2020-12-19--CT Gun Store Own Sparks Controversy Over Sign

There are a lot of people who are less than pleased about how the election turned out .
For some , it ’ s really just a matter of their guy losing .
For many others , though , they ’ re not so sure their guy did .
After all , there were a lot of sketchy things taking place , and while it hasn ’ t played out well for the right in court so far , there ’ s a reason so many people are less than comfortable with the outcome .
Among those is a Connecticut @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Amendment rights , he put up a sign , and it ’ s upset some of his neighbors .
First Selectman Mark Nickerson said he ’ s received more than a dozen complaints over a sign recently erected in front of the home of town resident and Ron ’ s Guns owner Ron Rando .
The sign reads “ Scumbag Democrats Have Stolen the Election !
Lying – Cheating – Ballot Padding !
” It ’ s in the yard of Rando ’ s Boston Post Road home , which is adjacent to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Nickerson , a Republican , wrote in a post on his personal Facebook page Tuesday morning , “ The good citizens of our town are disgusted and outraged by the hateful message … AND I AM TOO.
” He went on to say he contacted the town attorney to ask if anything can be done but said Rando ’ s “ free speech rights ” “ unfortunately will probably win the day.
” Nickerson included a photo of the sign and two pictures of the Grinch in his post , as he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in every meaning of the word .
He is obviously damaged and bitter.
” The first selectman removed the post later in the day .
In a separate post , Nickerson apologized for offending anyone and said he took down the first post “ because I don ’ t want my post to be the reason we turn on one another … but that is exactly what happened .
My ( original post ) was meant to promote peace and unity and I am removing the message for the same reason.
” Nickerson @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said he was taking issue with the tone of the message , which is all fine and well , except that it ’ s clear he doesn ’ t actually value Rando ’ s freedom of speech .
Saying his rights will “ unfortunately win the day ” [ Emphasis added ] tells us all you really need to know about where Nickerson ’ s values really are .
Rando being able to say what he wants to say and win the day isn ’ t unfortunate .
It ’ s what makes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ over two centuries .
The idea that we can criticize and react to thinks without worrying about the government coming down on us like a ton of bricks is central to the United States , just like our Second Amendment rights .
Of course , Nickerson is a Republican , so we can ’ t put this on the people with “ D ” after their names , but that doesn ’ t change the absolute reality .
The truth is that politicians don ’ t value your rights .
If they ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to freedom of speech , there ’ s no reason to trust them with your right to keep and bear arms .
You should just people by their actions , how they respond to threats against your rights–and I mean all of your rights–and not what flowery words they might say .
Make no mistake .
The lawmakers who would shut down Rando ’ s sign would also shut down his business in a heartbeat if they thought they could get away with it .

There are a lot of people who are less than pleased about how the election turned out. For some, it’s really just a matter of their guy losing. For many others, though, they’re not so sure their guy did. After all, there were a lot of sketchy things taking place, and while it hasn’t played out well for the right in court so far, there’s a reason so many people are less than comfortable with the outcome.
Among those is a Connecticut gun store owner. Using his First Amendment rights, he put up a sign, and it’s upset some of his neighbors.
First Selectman Mark Nickerson said he’s received more than a dozen complaints over a sign recently erected in front of the home of town resident and Ron’s Guns owner Ron Rando. The sign reads “Scumbag Democrats Have Stolen the Election! Lying – Cheating – Ballot Padding!” It’s in the yard of Rando’s Boston Post Road home, which is adjacent to Ron’s Guns and other businesses. Nickerson, a Republican, wrote in a post on his personal Facebook page Tuesday morning, “The good citizens of our town are disgusted and outraged by the hateful message … AND I AM TOO.” He went on to say he contacted the town attorney to ask if anything can be done but said Rando’s “free speech rights” “unfortunately will probably win the day.” Nickerson included a photo of the sign and two pictures of the Grinch in his post, as he wrote that Rando is “a GRINCH in every meaning of the word. He is obviously damaged and bitter.” The first selectman removed the post later in the day. In a separate post, Nickerson apologized for offending anyone and said he took down the first post “because I don’t want my post to be the reason we turn on one another … but that is exactly what happened. My (original post) was meant to promote peace and unity and I am removing the message for the same reason.”
Nickerson later, in a phone interview, said he was taking issue with the tone of the message, which is all fine and well, except that it’s clear he doesn’t actually value Rando’s freedom of speech. Saying his rights will “unfortunately win the day” [Emphasis added] tells us all you really need to know about where Nickerson’s values really are. Rando being able to say what he wants to say and win the day isn’t unfortunate. It’s what makes this country what it has been for over two centuries. The idea that we can criticize and react to thinks without worrying about the government coming down on us like a ton of bricks is central to the United States, just like our Second Amendment rights.
Of course, Nickerson is a Republican, so we can’t put this on the people with “D” after their names, but that doesn’t change the absolute reality. The truth is that politicians don’t value your rights. If they’ll try and take away your right to freedom of speech, there’s no reason to trust them with your right to keep and bear arms.
You should just people by their actions, how they respond to threats against your rights–and I mean all of your rights–and not what flowery words they might say.
Make no mistake. The lawmakers who would shut down Rando’s sign would also shut down his business in a heartbeat if they thought they could get away with it.


bearingarms--2020-12-20--Texas Woman Uses Gun To Hold Burglars For Police

A pair of thieves picked the wrong house to break into , and are now behind bars thanks to the armed homeowner who held them at gunpoint until police arrived .
The 67-year old woman in Weatherford , Texas told police that she found the men in an outbuilding on her family ’ s property one morning earlier this week , but thankfully had her firearm with her .
The woman told Weatherford police she arrived home and saw a vehicle in her driveway that she did not recognize .
Two other people were with her when she arrived home @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on how the woman captured the suspects , but they said her friends helped take the men into custody .
Weatherford police said the incident occurred on private property so no license-to-carry laws would be in effect , and a police report did not state whether she had a concealed carry permit .
It ’ s completely irrelevant as to whether or not the woman had a concealed carry license , but I ’ m guessing the reporters at the Fort Worth Star-Telegram may not have the firmest grasp on the intricacies ( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ laws in Texas .
I can ’ t help but wonder what Texas Rep. Terry Meza thinks of this story .
It was Meza , you may remember , who introduced a bill in the Texas legislature just a few weeks ago to repeal the state ’ s Stand Your Ground law .
While Meza ’ s had some fake quotes attributed to her regarding her new bill , the truth of what she ’ s had to say is actually bad enough .
She said the legislation is intended to require a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ retreating into their habitation before using deadly force in defense of themselves or their property , and that she believes the current law “ emboldens people to people to take justice into their own hands.
” She continued , “ While theft is obviously wrong , we have laws to address that .
I don ’ t believe that stealing someone ’ s lawn ornament should be an offense punishable by death.
” In the self-defense case involving the 67-year old woman , the trigger was never pulled and no shots were fired @ @ @ @ @ @ @ defensive gun uses .
I ’ m curious though ; does Meza believe that the 67-year old acted recklessly in holding the burglars at gunpoint for police ?
Does the Democrat lawmaker think that the armed homeowner should have turned tail and hid out in her house while burglars ransacked her outbuilding ?
I know what I think , and I ’ m glad that this woman was armed for self-defense and had the presence of mind to keep the suspects detained until police showed up .
The bad guys are behind bars @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is safe and secure .
That ’ s about as happy an ending as a story like this can have , but if anti-gun lawmakers like Meza had their way , we would have seen a very different conclusion .

A pair of thieves picked the wrong house to break into, and are now behind bars thanks to the armed homeowner who held them at gunpoint until police arrived. The 67-year old woman in Weatherford, Texas told police that she found the men in an outbuilding on her family’s property one morning earlier this week, but thankfully had her firearm with her.
The woman told Weatherford police she arrived home and saw a vehicle in her driveway that she did not recognize. Two other people were with her when she arrived home. Police did not release detailed information on how the woman captured the suspects, but they said her friends helped take the men into custody. Weatherford police said the incident occurred on private property so no license-to-carry laws would be in effect, and a police report did not state whether she had a concealed carry permit.
It’s completely irrelevant as to whether or not the woman had a concealed carry license, but I’m guessing the reporters at the Fort Worth Star-Telegram may not have the firmest grasp on the intricacies (or even the basics) of gun laws in Texas.
I can’t help but wonder what Texas Rep. Terry Meza thinks of this story. It was Meza, you may remember, who introduced a bill in the Texas legislature just a few weeks ago to repeal the state’s Stand Your Ground law. While Meza’s had some fake quotes attributed to her regarding her new bill, the truth of what she’s had to say is actually bad enough.
She said the legislation is intended to require a homeowner to exhaust the potential of safely retreating into their habitation before using deadly force in defense of themselves or their property, and that she believes the current law “emboldens people to people to take justice into their own hands.” She continued, “While theft is obviously wrong, we have laws to address that. I don’t believe that stealing someone’s lawn ornament should be an offense punishable by death.”
In the self-defense case involving the 67-year old woman, the trigger was never pulled and no shots were fired, just like the vast majority of defensive gun uses. I’m curious though; does Meza believe that the 67-year old acted recklessly in holding the burglars at gunpoint for police? Does the Democrat lawmaker think that the armed homeowner should have turned tail and hid out in her house while burglars ransacked her outbuilding?
I know what I think, and I’m glad that this woman was armed for self-defense and had the presence of mind to keep the suspects detained until police showed up. The bad guys are behind bars, and the good gal from Weatherford is safe and secure. That’s about as happy an ending as a story like this can have, but if anti-gun lawmakers like Meza had their way, we would have seen a very different conclusion.