bearingarms--2020-08-24--Protests Rock Kenosha Following Police Shooting

Right now isn ’ t a good time to be a police officer .
Officers are perpetually under a microscope , constantly being locked at for any sign of stepping out of line .
In some places , that microscope seems to work better than most , of course , but it ’ s a job where anything you do has the potential for landing you on the news .
Note , however , I didn ’ t say anything you do wrong can land you in the news .
Oh no .
It ’ s actually not required for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ can do everything right and still end up there .
Which is what it looks like happened in Kenosha , Wisconsin .
In other words , what likely happened was that while talking to police , he failed to listen to police instructions and tried to get into his car .
Either they believed he may have been reaching for a weapon or he was going to start the vehicle…which is a weapon .
As a result , they opened fire .
Governor Tony Evers , without knowing any details , had to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Evers , a Democratic governor , said in a series of tweets : “ While we do not have all of the details yet , what we know for certain is that he is not the first black man or person to have been shot or injured or mercilessly killed at the hands of individuals in law enforcement in our state or our country .
“ We stand with all those who have and continue to demand justice , equity , and accountability for Black lives in our country—lives like those of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Tony Robinson , Dontre Hamilton , Ernest Lacy , and Sylville Smith .
“ I have said all along that although we must offer our empathy , equally important is our action .
In the coming days , we will demand just that of elected officials in our state who have failed to recognize the racism in our state and our country for far too long.
” In other words , Evers has already decided not only are the officers at fault but that it ’ s clearly the result of racism .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ much of anything except that a black man was shot by police .
That ’ s it .
We don ’ t know the ethnicities of the officers , for example .
I mean , is it really racist if it was a black officer who opened fire ?
And let ’ s be clear , reaching into your car when police are telling you not to ?
That ’ s contraindicated if you want to die peacefully in your bed .
Why ?
Because , as I mentioned , that ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ re going to respond by assuming you ’ re reaching for a firearm , even if you ’ re not .
Need something out of the car , something the police want ?
Tell them , then move very , very slowly to get it for them , making sure they can see your hands the whole way .
“ We understand that the cops have a job to do .
But we understand that the cops have their job to do with restraint , ” said witness La-Ron Franklin .
CBS 58 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ forced out more than a dozen officers guarding the scene.
” CBS 58 reported right before that , someone started a fire and an officer was attacked .
The station reported a CBS 58 photographer was hit in the leg by a brick that someone threw at an exiting police car .
People at the scene told CBS 58 that Blake was a father .
“ I know he ’ s got kids and a girl .
I never had a problem with him .
I always see him every day .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” Aaron , a neighbor , told the station .
“ It goes back to the Emmett Tills .
We ’ re tired of it .
Rodney King .
We ’ re tired of it .
And right now , this is the wrong generation that this is happening to .
The frustration is boiling to the top and we ’ re sick and tired , ” Clyde McLemore , Black Lives Matter of Lake County , Illinois , told CBS 58 .
Again , though , we don ’ t know @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , that doesn ’ t really matter , now does it ?
Not to the mob .
They have another reason to jump up and down about how unfair the system is and that ’ s all they really wanted .
Luckily for them , the media is on their side .

Right now isn’t a good time to be a police officer.
Officers are perpetually under a microscope, constantly being locked at for any sign of stepping out of line. In some places, that microscope seems to work better than most, of course, but it’s a job where anything you do has the potential for landing you on the news.
Note, however, I didn’t say anything you do wrong can land you in the news. Oh no. It’s actually not required for you to do anything wrong. You can do everything right and still end up there.
Which is what it looks like happened in Kenosha, Wisconsin.
Protests broke out overnight in Kenosha, Wisconsin, on Sunday afternoon after a police officer shot a Black man a number of times in the back as he tried to get into a car, leaving him fighting for his life and prompting the state’s governor to condemn police violence.
In other words, what likely happened was that while talking to police, he failed to listen to police instructions and tried to get into his car. Either they believed he may have been reaching for a weapon or he was going to start the vehicle…which is a weapon. As a result, they opened fire.
Governor Tony Evers, without knowing any details, had to stick his Democratic nose into the story.
Evers, a Democratic governor, said in a series of tweets: “While we do not have all of the details yet, what we know for certain is that he is not the first black man or person to have been shot or injured or mercilessly killed at the hands of individuals in law enforcement in our state or our country. “We stand with all those who have and continue to demand justice, equity, and accountability for Black lives in our country—lives like those of George Floyd, of Breonna Taylor, Tony Robinson, Dontre Hamilton, Ernest Lacy, and Sylville Smith. “I have said all along that although we must offer our empathy, equally important is our action. In the coming days, we will demand just that of elected officials in our state who have failed to recognize the racism in our state and our country for far too long.”
In other words, Evers has already decided not only are the officers at fault but that it’s clearly the result of racism.
Meanwhile, we don’t know much of anything except that a black man was shot by police. That’s it. We don’t know the ethnicities of the officers, for example. I mean, is it really racist if it was a black officer who opened fire?
And let’s be clear, reaching into your car when police are telling you not to? That’s contraindicated if you want to die peacefully in your bed. Why? Because, as I mentioned, that’s considered an aggressive act. They’re going to respond by assuming you’re reaching for a firearm, even if you’re not.
Need something out of the car, something the police want? Tell them, then move very, very slowly to get it for them, making sure they can see your hands the whole way.
Regardless, protests broke out.
“We understand that the cops have a job to do. But we understand that the cops have their job to do with restraint,” said witness La-Ron Franklin. CBS 58 reported that late Sunday evening, protesters “forced out more than a dozen officers guarding the scene.” CBS 58 reported right before that, someone started a fire and an officer was attacked. The station reported a CBS 58 photographer was hit in the leg by a brick that someone threw at an exiting police car. People at the scene told CBS 58 that Blake was a father. “I know he’s got kids and a girl. I never had a problem with him. I always see him every day. Parks right behind me on the street,” Aaron, a neighbor, told the station. “It goes back to the Emmett Tills. We’re tired of it. Rodney King. We’re tired of it. And right now, this is the wrong generation that this is happening to. The frustration is boiling to the top and we’re sick and tired,” Clyde McLemore, Black Lives Matter of Lake County, Illinois, told CBS 58.
Again, though, we don’t know that it’s racism.
However, that doesn’t really matter, now does it? Not to the mob. They have another reason to jump up and down about how unfair the system is and that’s all they really wanted. Luckily for them, the media is on their side.


bearingarms--2020-08-27--Chaos Is Contagious. Can We Find A "Vaccine"?

I ’ ll warn you right up front that this isn ’ t the cheeriest of shows , but I ’ m really glad that Jon Stokes , editor of ThePrepared.com and Open Source Defense could join me on today ’ s show to talk about the political violence taking place across the country and what , if anything , can be done to ratchet down the tensions and restore some semblance of calm to the chaotic streets of Kenosha , Portland , Minneapolis , Seattle , Chicago , Detroit , New York , and so many other communities that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and over the past three months .
Go check out the entire conversation with Jon Stokes above , which touches on much more than what I ’ m able to cover here .
It was this tweet by Stokes that prompted me to invite him on today ’ s show , and that ’ s where our lengthy discussion began .
Chaos is contagious , and I think the radicalization on both ends that Stokes talks about is real .
On the Left , every officer-involved shooting is now another sign that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ( as LeBron James said the other day ) .
On the Right , every building burned in “ protest ” is another sign that revolution is right around the corner .
Each incident brings a few more people off of the sidelines or the muddled middle and into one tribe or another , our anger and rage at our fellow Americans grows , and our empathy and understanding wanes .
Is there any way to stop the spiral ?
Stokes isn ’ t optimistic , and I ’ m more pessimistic than @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
I firmly believe that most Americans aren ’ t interested in a civil war , but we ’ re also not okay with burning down our communities in the name of progress .
Most of us believe in the right of peaceful protest , just as most of us believe in accountability for police officers when they themselves violate the law .
So why doesn ’ t it feel that way ?
Part of the problem is that many politicians , the media , and celebrities seem intent on pushing us forward @ @ @ @ @ @ @ give you a couple of examples just from today .
When the Speaker of the House infers that the president is illegitimate , that ’ s a problem .
Democrats don ’ t like Republicans .
Republicans don ’ t like Democrats .
That ’ s not new .
The willingness to destroy institutional norms like presidential debates , however , is a pretty recent addition to our political establishment .
Then we have this tweet by Democratic congresswoman Ayanna Pressley of Massachusetts .
100,000 retweets as I type this , but zero @ @ @ @ @ @ @ old charged with two counts of murder in Kenosha , Wisconsin , is a white supremacist domestic terrorist .
We also don ’ t know the motivations of the two individuals who had assembled on the streets of Kenosha .
Were they there to “ affirm the value , dignity , and worth of Black lives , ” or were they there to stir up some trouble ?
It could be that both of Pressley ’ s statements turn out to be true .
It could also be that one or both of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
What is absolutely certain is that Rep. Pressley doesn ’ t have any sort of inside scoop on the character or motivation of Rittenhouse or Anthony Huber and Joseph Rosenbaum at the moment .
She ’ s creating the narrative that she wants to see , and the truth is a secondary concern at best .
Whatever new information we learn about those involved in the Kenosha shooting will be ignored or highlighted , depending on your point of view .
You won ’ t hear Pressley mention the previous criminal histories @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in Kenosha , but she very well might bring up the fact that Rittenhouse was in a police cadet program in Illinois .
Still , we ’ ve had awful politicians in the past , but rarely have we reached this level of mutual contempt .
A lack of leadership alone can ’ t explain all of our issues .
Honestly , it would take a book to highlight everything that ’ s led up to this point , but Stokes and I spend a little time on how social media is playing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ divisiveness .
The constant deluge of data and information makes it difficult to sit and wait for the facts to be known .
We ’ ll see a ten-second video clip and think we know the whole story .
We ’ ll read tweets from some of our favorite commentators and believe we have a firm grasp on all of the pertinent facts .
Rarely is that the case .
I was talking with a friend of mine not long ago and they said we ’ ve become a “ subject line society.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ in other words .
I don ’ t need to know what ’ s in the body of the email ( or the fifth paragraph of a news story ) .
Add in the endless stream of people online saying dumb , false , inflammatory , or just plain awful things that can be replied to instantaneously , and we ’ ve got a quick and easy way to ramp up our mutual aggression .
By the way , I ’ m not calling for a ban on smartphones or demanding an end @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The idea of banning or restricting technology to solve our problems is just as silly when we ’ re talking about our laptops as it is when Shannon Watts or Joe Biden calls for a gun ban .
Whether we ’ re talking about political violence or personal violence , the answer ultimately lies within us .
Do we even want to get along anymore , or have we convinced ourselves that somehow things would be better if we were at war with each other ?
Do we imagine some brighter day on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ without thinking much about the conflict itself ?
As I half-seriously suggested to Jon Stokes , since Hollywood is now officially rebooting virtually everything , maybe the answer is in a reboot of American Gladiators , only this time with real gladiators .
Perhaps we need a space where Americans who have fundamental political disagreements with each other can get together and beat the snot out of one another without neighborhood businesses being destroyed or a massive police response .
Red versus Blue , half an hour in the arena , may the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ?
Probably not .
Is what we ’ re doing now working ?
Absolutely not .
I live not far from the Appomattox Courthouse National Battlefield , and it ’ s become one of my favorite places to go and walk around while I ponder the state of the nation and the words of Abraham Lincoln in his first inaugural address , four years before Lee surrendered to Grant in the front parlor of Wilmer McLean ’ s home ( the one McLean moved to after his first home ended up in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Run ) .
It may be that our differences are so large that conflict is inevitable , but I truly hope that ’ s not the case .
If it does come down to red vs. blue , I know which tribe will be mine , but for now my allegiance is to the red , white , and blue , and I suspect that ’ s the case for the vast majority of us who aren ’ t lighting fires , smashing windows , or trying to accelerate our descent into what @ @ @ @ @ @ @

I’ll warn you right up front that this isn’t the cheeriest of shows, but I’m really glad that Jon Stokes, editor of ThePrepared.com and Open Source Defense could join me on today’s show to talk about the political violence taking place across the country and what, if anything, can be done to ratchet down the tensions and restore some semblance of calm to the chaotic streets of Kenosha, Portland, Minneapolis, Seattle, Chicago, Detroit, New York, and so many other communities that have seen businesses burned, lives lost, and over the past three months. Go check out the entire conversation with Jon Stokes above, which touches on much more than what I’m able to cover here.
It was this tweet by Stokes that prompted me to invite him on today’s show, and that’s where our lengthy discussion began.
I'd put this differently & say that there is a contagion effect at work in this radicalization, & that the contagion is spreading nightly with all the scenes on our feeds and in our streets. There's an inflection point out there somewhere, & unless the contagion is arrested soon https://t.co/OQmL9G8Yq0 — jonstokes.com (@jonst0kes) August 26, 2020
Chaos is contagious, and I think the radicalization on both ends that Stokes talks about is real. On the Left, every officer-involved shooting is now another sign that police are hunting and targeting Black men (as LeBron James said the other day). On the Right, every building burned in “protest” is another sign that revolution is right around the corner. Each incident brings a few more people off of the sidelines or the muddled middle and into one tribe or another, our anger and rage at our fellow Americans grows, and our empathy and understanding wanes.
Is there any way to stop the spiral? Stokes isn’t optimistic, and I’m more pessimistic than I was just a few months ago. I firmly believe that most Americans aren’t interested in a civil war, but we’re also not okay with burning down our communities in the name of progress. Most of us believe in the right of peaceful protest, just as most of us believe in accountability for police officers when they themselves violate the law. So why doesn’t it feel that way?
Part of the problem is that many politicians, the media, and celebrities seem intent on pushing us forward into the abyss. I’ll give you a couple of examples just from today.
"I don't think that there should be any debates," says @SpeakerPelosi. "I wouldn't legitimize a conversation with him nor a debate in terms of the presidency of the United States." #Election2020 — Steve Herman (@W7VOA) August 27, 2020
When the Speaker of the House infers that the president is illegitimate, that’s a problem. Democrats don’t like Republicans. Republicans don’t like Democrats. That’s not new. The willingness to destroy institutional norms like presidential debates, however, is a pretty recent addition to our political establishment.
Then we have this tweet by Democratic congresswoman Ayanna Pressley of Massachusetts.
A 17 year old white supremacist domestic terrorist drove across state lines, armed with an AR 15. He shot and killed 2 people who had assembled to affirm the value, dignity, and worth of Black lives. Fix your damn headlines. — Ayanna Pressley (@AyannaPressley) August 27, 2020
100,000 retweets as I type this, but zero evidence that Kyle Rittenhouse, the 17-year old charged with two counts of murder in Kenosha, Wisconsin, is a white supremacist domestic terrorist. We also don’t know the motivations of the two individuals who had assembled on the streets of Kenosha. Were they there to “affirm the value, dignity, and worth of Black lives,” or were they there to stir up some trouble?
It could be that both of Pressley’s statements turn out to be true. It could also be that one or both of her statements end up being demonstrably false. What is absolutely certain is that Rep. Pressley doesn’t have any sort of inside scoop on the character or motivation of Rittenhouse or Anthony Huber and Joseph Rosenbaum at the moment. She’s creating the narrative that she wants to see, and the truth is a secondary concern at best.
Whatever new information we learn about those involved in the Kenosha shooting will be ignored or highlighted, depending on your point of view. You won’t hear Pressley mention the previous criminal histories of the two men who were killed in Kenosha, but she very well might bring up the fact that Rittenhouse was in a police cadet program in Illinois.
Still, we’ve had awful politicians in the past, but rarely have we reached this level of mutual contempt. A lack of leadership alone can’t explain all of our issues.
Honestly, it would take a book to highlight everything that’s led up to this point, but Stokes and I spend a little time on how social media is playing a major role in today’s divisiveness. The constant deluge of data and information makes it difficult to sit and wait for the facts to be known. We’ll see a ten-second video clip and think we know the whole story. We’ll read tweets from some of our favorite commentators and believe we have a firm grasp on all of the pertinent facts. Rarely is that the case. I was talking with a friend of mine not long ago and they said we’ve become a “subject line society.” Just give me the headline, in other words. I don’t need to know what’s in the body of the email (or the fifth paragraph of a news story).
Add in the endless stream of people online saying dumb, false, inflammatory, or just plain awful things that can be replied to instantaneously, and we’ve got a quick and easy way to ramp up our mutual aggression.
By the way, I’m not calling for a ban on smartphones or demanding an end to “high capacity data plans.” The idea of banning or restricting technology to solve our problems is just as silly when we’re talking about our laptops as it is when Shannon Watts or Joe Biden calls for a gun ban. Whether we’re talking about political violence or personal violence, the answer ultimately lies within us. Do we even want to get along anymore, or have we convinced ourselves that somehow things would be better if we were at war with each other? Do we imagine some brighter day on the other side of the conflict, without thinking much about the conflict itself?
As I half-seriously suggested to Jon Stokes, since Hollywood is now officially rebooting virtually everything, maybe the answer is in a reboot of American Gladiators, only this time with real gladiators. Perhaps we need a space where Americans who have fundamental political disagreements with each other can get together and beat the snot out of one another without neighborhood businesses being destroyed or a massive police response. Red versus Blue, half an hour in the arena, may the best team win. Would it work? Probably not. Is what we’re doing now working? Absolutely not.
I live not far from the Appomattox Courthouse National Battlefield, and it’s become one of my favorite places to go and walk around while I ponder the state of the nation and the words of Abraham Lincoln in his first inaugural address, four years before Lee surrendered to Grant in the front parlor of Wilmer McLean’s home (the one McLean moved to after his first home ended up in the middle of the First Battle of Bull Run).
We are not enemies, but friends. We must not be enemies. Though passion may have strained it must not break our bonds of affection. The mystic chords of memory, stretching from every battlefield and patriot grave to every living heart and hearthstone all over this broad land, will yet swell the chorus of the Union, when again touched, as surely they will be, by the better angels of our nature.
It may be that our differences are so large that conflict is inevitable, but I truly hope that’s not the case. If it does come down to red vs. blue, I know which tribe will be mine, but for now my allegiance is to the red, white, and blue, and I suspect that’s the case for the vast majority of us who aren’t lighting fires, smashing windows, or trying to accelerate our descent into what would be a very uncivil war.


bearingarms--2020-08-27--"Guardian" Stops Armed Intruder At Florida School

An armed staffer at a Florida high school ended up holding an intruder for police on Thursday after the suspect hopped a fence and entered the Leesburg High School campus .
According to Fox 35 in Orlando , Florida , the would-be intruder was found with both drugs and ammunition on him , as well as a flare gun with a shotgun shell inside .
According to the arrest affidavit , the man — identified as 30-year-old Jabari Scott — had a flare gun in his right waistband but it contained a 410 shotgun shell in the barrel , “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ shell , nine rounds of .380 ammunition , one 9mm round , one .223 round , and one 12 gauge shotgun slug shell were also in the man ’ s possession .
In addition , police said that Scott had a white , powdery substance on him too , which tested positive for cocaine .
It was said to be in five , small Ziploc-style bags .
He also had an unidentified brown powder substance on him , which did not test positive for heroin or meth .
The Leesburg Police Department said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ above were actually his little brother ’ s and that he did not want him to get caught with them .
I don ’ t know if Scott ’ s little brother has a criminal record , but Jabari Scott has multiple felonies to his name , according to police , and this bust is likely going to be bad news for him .
Possession of a single round of ammunition by a convicted felon can be punished by up to a decade behind bars in a federal prison , though it ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ U.S. Attorney will take an interest in this case .
Classes are taking place at Leesburg High at the moment .
In fact , the school year kicked off this week , so there were students on campus when the armed intruder appeared .
The Guardian program worked exactly as it ’ s supposed to ; the armed school staffer identified and stopped the threat before any students could possibly be harmed .
In this case , no trigger was pulled and Mr. Scott went off to the local jail instead of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as normally as they can thanks to the COVID-19 virus .
Florida ’ s Guardian program was put in place after the shootings at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in 2018 .
The program is officially called the Coach Aaron Feis Schoo Guardian Program , after the MSD teacher who lost his life while trying to protect students from their assailant .
Lake County is one of 43 counties in Florida that have put the Guardian program in place , and it looks like it ’ s already paying off for students , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the way , the activists at Everytown and Moms Demand Action despise the Guardian program because “ gUnZ aRe BaD.
” I doubt this story will change any minds over at Gun Control , Inc. but I bet you won ’ t find too many critics of the program wandering the halls of Leesburg High tomorrow .
When it comes to protecting the lives of students , an armed response is a very good thing .

An armed staffer at a Florida high school ended up holding an intruder for police on Thursday after the suspect hopped a fence and entered the Leesburg High School campus.
According to Fox 35 in Orlando, Florida, the would-be intruder was found with both drugs and ammunition on him, as well as a flare gun with a shotgun shell inside.
According to the arrest affidavit, the man — identified as 30-year-old Jabari Scott — had a flare gun in his right waistband but it contained a 410 shotgun shell in the barrel, “ready to fire.” An additional shotgun shell, nine rounds of .380 ammunition, one 9mm round, one .223 round, and one 12 gauge shotgun slug shell were also in the man’s possession. In addition, police said that Scott had a white, powdery substance on him too, which tested positive for cocaine. It was said to be in five, small Ziploc-style bags. He also had an unidentified brown powder substance on him, which did not test positive for heroin or meth. The Leesburg Police Department said that Scott claimed that the items listed above were actually his little brother’s and that he did not want him to get caught with them.
I don’t know if Scott’s little brother has a criminal record, but Jabari Scott has multiple felonies to his name, according to police, and this bust is likely going to be bad news for him. Possession of a single round of ammunition by a convicted felon can be punished by up to a decade behind bars in a federal prison, though it’s unknown at this point whether the U.S. Attorney will take an interest in this case.
Classes are taking place at Leesburg High at the moment. In fact, the school year kicked off this week, so there were students on campus when the armed intruder appeared. The Guardian program worked exactly as it’s supposed to; the armed school staffer identified and stopped the threat before any students could possibly be harmed. In this case, no trigger was pulled and Mr. Scott went off to the local jail instead of the local hospital, and classes went on as normally as they can thanks to the COVID-19 virus.
Florida’s Guardian program was put in place after the shootings at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in 2018. The program is officially called the Coach Aaron Feis Schoo Guardian Program, after the MSD teacher who lost his life while trying to protect students from their assailant. Lake County is one of 43 counties in Florida that have put the Guardian program in place, and it looks like it’s already paying off for students, parents, and educators alike.
By the way, the activists at Everytown and Moms Demand Action despise the Guardian program because “gUnZ aRe BaD.” I doubt this story will change any minds over at Gun Control, Inc. but I bet you won’t find too many critics of the program wandering the halls of Leesburg High tomorrow. When it comes to protecting the lives of students, an armed response is a very good thing.


bearingarms--2020-08-27--Aussie Gun Control Comes From Country Now Penalizing Rape Victims

Many gun control supporters like to point to Australia as an example of what we should be doing .
After all , they argue , Australia reacted to a mass shooting quickly and enacted extremely draconian gun control and all their mass shootings went away .
They didn ’ t , but that ’ s beside the point .
What matters is what they want you to think .
However , it ’ s important to recognize that Australia doesn ’ t have the same relationship with civil liberties the United States has .
They have a tendency to take @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sure , you may have them in theory , but the government can infringe in any way imaginable and you just have to suck it up .
“ Oh , that ’ s unfair .
You just don ’ t like them infringing on your precious gun rights , ” some might say , and they ’ re not wrong .
I don ’ t like them infringing on gun rights , but it actually is fair to say .
After all , this is the same country where some lawmakers decided it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ law penalizing rape victims for speaking out .
Victorian sexual assault survivors could be jailed for up to four months or face fines exceeding $ 3000 for telling their stories using their real names .
The Judicial Proceedings Reports Act was changed in February , prohibiting victims from identifying themselves publicly if their attacker has been found guilty .
The new law applies retrospectively , meaning victims who have lawfully spoken out previously are now censored from speaking out publicly .
Media outlets who defy the law can also be prosecuted and face @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The only way for victims to identify themselves and tell their stories is to obtain a court order – which is not only time consuming , but would cost more than $ 10,000 in legal fees .
Now , note that this applies if the attacker was found guilty .
In other words , it ’ s protecting pedophiles and rapists , not the public at large .
Moreover , it prevents the victims from identifying themselves .
It doesn ’ t just protect the identity of the attackers , but actively seeks @ @ @ @ @ @ @ speak out about what happened to them , even in a general sense .
And these are the people you ’ re looking to for how to proceed on gun control ?
Seriously ?
Anti-gunners are seriously going to tell me that Australia ’ s gun control somehow takes consideration for the rights of gun owners when parts of this same country are actively trying to punish people for speaking out about the crimes for which they were the victims of ?
Please tell me how the public is better served by forcing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dare you to try .
So no , I ’ m not going to support Australian-style gun control .
I wasn ’ t going to before , of course , but if you can ’ t see this as downright evil and start questioning anything they do with regards to civil liberties , you need your head examined .
If you can see this as evil and still think Aussie-style gun control is a winner , you need to ask yourself why you are so unquestioning on that issue .
The truth is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for civil liberties our nation has .
It ’ s why so many of us refuse to give any ground on these issues .
There ’ s literally nowhere else to go if they matter to you .
You damn sure can ’ t look to Australia , that ’ s for sure .

Many gun control supporters like to point to Australia as an example of what we should be doing. After all, they argue, Australia reacted to a mass shooting quickly and enacted extremely draconian gun control and all their mass shootings went away. They didn’t, but that’s beside the point. What matters is what they want you to think.
However, it’s important to recognize that Australia doesn’t have the same relationship with civil liberties the United States has. They have a tendency to take a more European model of rights where sure, you may have them in theory, but the government can infringe in any way imaginable and you just have to suck it up.
“Oh, that’s unfair. You just don’t like them infringing on your precious gun rights,” some might say, and they’re not wrong. I don’t like them infringing on gun rights, but it actually is fair to say.
After all, this is the same country where some lawmakers decided it was a good idea to pass a law penalizing rape victims for speaking out.
Victorian sexual assault survivors could be jailed for up to four months or face fines exceeding $3000 for telling their stories using their real names. The Judicial Proceedings Reports Act was changed in February, prohibiting victims from identifying themselves publicly if their attacker has been found guilty. The new law applies retrospectively, meaning victims who have lawfully spoken out previously are now censored from speaking out publicly. Media outlets who defy the law can also be prosecuted and face fines of up to $8,000. The only way for victims to identify themselves and tell their stories is to obtain a court order – which is not only time consuming, but would cost more than $10,000 in legal fees.
Now, note that this applies if the attacker was found guilty. In other words, it’s protecting pedophiles and rapists, not the public at large. Moreover, it prevents the victims from identifying themselves. It doesn’t just protect the identity of the attackers, but actively seeks to keep victims from being able to speak out about what happened to them, even in a general sense.
And these are the people you’re looking to for how to proceed on gun control? Seriously?
Anti-gunners are seriously going to tell me that Australia’s gun control somehow takes consideration for the rights of gun owners when parts of this same country are actively trying to punish people for speaking out about the crimes for which they were the victims of? Please tell me how the public is better served by forcing rape victims to be quiet. I dare you to try.
So no, I’m not going to support Australian-style gun control. I wasn’t going to before, of course, but if you can’t see this as downright evil and start questioning anything they do with regards to civil liberties, you need your head examined. If you can see this as evil and still think Aussie-style gun control is a winner, you need to ask yourself why you are so unquestioning on that issue.
The truth is, no other country has the respect for civil liberties our nation has. It’s why so many of us refuse to give any ground on these issues. There’s literally nowhere else to go if they matter to you.
You damn sure can’t look to Australia, that’s for sure.


bearingarms--2020-08-27--NYC Gun "Buyback" Nets Fewer Than 50 Firearms

As New York City gets ready for what promises to be another violent and bloody weekend , a couple of local politicians are patting themselves on the back for a so-called gun buyback in Queens that resulted in 44 firearms being turned over to the NYPD in exchange for $ 200 , no questions asked .
As residents of New York City continue to be tormented by a wave of gun violence this summer , Assemblywoman Stacey Pheffer Amato joined Queens District Attorney Melinda Katz and the NYPD ’ s 100th and 101st precincts for their latest “ Gun Buyback @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Arverne section of Rockaway .
“ This is an incredible event hosted by DA Katz and the NYPD as they work to combat increasing gun violence in our community in a tangible and meaningful way , ” Pheffer Amato said .
“ Forty-four guns off the streets is a significant number and will save countless lives .
Programs like this are so vital as they incentivize the turning in of dangerous weapons with no questions asked.
” Programs like this aren ’ t vital to the community , though they may be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Melinda Katz .
After all , compensated confiscation efforts like these don ’ t reduce crime , but they do allow officials to claim they ’ re “ doing something ” to address the shootings and killings that have skyrocketed in New York City over the past three months .
“ We can not prosecute our way out of this .
We need everyone to work together , my office , law enforcement , our faith leaders and everyone in the community , to stop the violence , ” Katz said .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to get as many guns as possible off the streets of Queens County and make our community safe for everyone .
We are all partners in this mission.
” If you can ’ t prosecute your way to safety , then why not work on revising New York City ’ s gun laws to actually allow the average citizen to both keep and bear arms for self-defense ?
Instead of taking that common sense step , Katz and virtually every other elected official in the Big Apple is content to keep the draconian @ @ @ @ @ @ @ few people as possible can exercise the privilege to exercise their Second Amendment rights .
I ’ ve got news for the D.A .
; you can ’ t “ buy back ” your way out of this either .
The solution to stemming the rising tide of violence in New York City is simple , though it ’ s not easy .
The NYPD and prosecutors across the city have to focus on the most violent offenders .
They have to ensure that arrests are made when a shooting takes place , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are consequences for the violence .
Trying to turn New York City gun-free won ’ t work .
Criminals will continue to obtain firearms on the illicit market , and the shootings will continue while law-abiding residents are unable to protect themselves .
It ’ s the worst possible way to try to address violent crime , so of course it ’ s the route that the politicians in charge of the city are wholeheartedly embracing .

As New York City gets ready for what promises to be another violent and bloody weekend, a couple of local politicians are patting themselves on the back for a so-called gun buyback in Queens that resulted in 44 firearms being turned over to the NYPD in exchange for $200, no questions asked.
As residents of New York City continue to be tormented by a wave of gun violence this summer, Assemblywoman Stacey Pheffer Amato joined Queens District Attorney Melinda Katz and the NYPD’s 100th and 101st precincts for their latest “Gun Buyback” program at Macedonia Baptist Church in the Arverne section of Rockaway. “This is an incredible event hosted by DA Katz and the NYPD as they work to combat increasing gun violence in our community in a tangible and meaningful way,” Pheffer Amato said. “Forty-four guns off the streets is a significant number and will save countless lives. Programs like this are so vital as they incentivize the turning in of dangerous weapons with no questions asked.”
Programs like this aren’t vital to the community, though they may be vital to politicians like Pheffer Amato and Melinda Katz. After all, compensated confiscation efforts like these don’t reduce crime, but they do allow officials to claim they’re “doing something” to address the shootings and killings that have skyrocketed in New York City over the past three months.
“We cannot prosecute our way out of this. We need everyone to work together, my office, law enforcement, our faith leaders and everyone in the community, to stop the violence,” Katz said. “The ultimate goal of this initiative is to get as many guns as possible off the streets of Queens County and make our community safe for everyone. We are all partners in this mission.”
If you can’t prosecute your way to safety, then why not work on revising New York City’s gun laws to actually allow the average citizen to both keep and bear arms for self-defense? Instead of taking that common sense step, Katz and virtually every other elected official in the Big Apple is content to keep the draconian gun laws in place so that as few people as possible can exercise the privilege to exercise their Second Amendment rights.
I’ve got news for the D.A.; you can’t “buy back” your way out of this either. The solution to stemming the rising tide of violence in New York City is simple, though it’s not easy. The NYPD and prosecutors across the city have to focus on the most violent offenders. They have to ensure that arrests are made when a shooting takes place, and then they must ensure that there are consequences for the violence.
Trying to turn New York City gun-free won’t work. Criminals will continue to obtain firearms on the illicit market, and the shootings will continue while law-abiding residents are unable to protect themselves. It’s the worst possible way to try to address violent crime, so of course it’s the route that the politicians in charge of the city are wholeheartedly embracing.


bearingarms--2020-08-27--Facebook Jumps To Shut Down "Kenosha Guard" Page

Facebook tries to present itself as neutral .
The social networking giant will actively tell anyone that their rules are universally applied and that there ’ s no favoritism based on political ideology .
Everyone gets the same treatment no matter where they stand… …well , except for certain people .
Despite their claims , the site has taken down a page following the shooting in Kenosha .
Facebook Inc said on Wednesday it removed the page for the Kenosha Guard , a group which had posted a “ call to arms ” following days of protests in Kenosha , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ policy against “ militia organizations.
” A 17-year-old was charged with homicide on Wednesday after the shooting deaths of two people and wounding of a third during those protests , which broke out in response to the police shooting of a Black man earlier this week .
A Facebook spokeswoman said the platform was also removing content and accounts tied to the shooting .
The suspect ’ s page , which had featured photos of a young man holding guns , was unavailable as of midday Wednesday .
Before its removal , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ calling for volunteers to “ protect our great City ” and warning police its members would be out on the streets .
However , a “ call to arms ” is not synonymous with a call for violence .
Asking people to help protect a city may not be the best move in the world , but it ’ s not illegal either .
While the shooting is troubling , there ’ s still a lot we don ’ t know .
It ’ s a complicated situation .
While the actions sure @ @ @ @ @ @ @ going to be needed to untangle the mess and determine whether or not it really is .
That ’ s going to be muddled with other potential factors as well .
Yet for Facebook , that ’ s not an issue .
They ’ ll just yank everything down .
Let ’ s keep in mind that despite the long list of violence by Antifa , numerous pages still exist for the militant anarchist group .
They ’ ve assaulted people , destroyed millions upon millions of dollars worth of property , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ city , but there ’ s almost no effort to address their hateful rhetoric , rhetoric which often does call for violence .
In other words , Facebook is yet again being uneven with its rules as they apply to groups that support things like the Second Amendment and the rule of law .
As per usual .
Now , don ’ t get me wrong .
I understand that Facebook is a private entity and can do pretty much whatever they want .
I get that .
However , that doesn ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ uneven handling of the rules .
Besides , they might be a private company , but they ’ re publicly traded .
That means there are members of the public they answer to , namely their stockholders .
Maybe if enough of them get sick of Facebook ’ s anti-gun nonsense , they can force Mark Zuckerberg to suck it up and stop trying to shift public perception of the truth by manipulating what they get to see .

Facebook tries to present itself as neutral. The social networking giant will actively tell anyone that their rules are universally applied and that there’s no favoritism based on political ideology. Everyone gets the same treatment no matter where they stand…
…well, except for certain people.
Despite their claims, the site has taken down a page following the shooting in Kenosha.
Facebook Inc said on Wednesday it removed the page for the Kenosha Guard, a group which had posted a “call to arms” following days of protests in Kenosha, Wisconsin, saying the page violated its policy against “militia organizations.” A 17-year-old was charged with homicide on Wednesday after the shooting deaths of two people and wounding of a third during those protests, which broke out in response to the police shooting of a Black man earlier this week. A Facebook spokeswoman said the platform was also removing content and accounts tied to the shooting. The suspect’s page, which had featured photos of a young man holding guns, was unavailable as of midday Wednesday. Before its removal, the Kenosha Guard had posted messages on Facebook calling for volunteers to “protect our great City” and warning police its members would be out on the streets.
However, a “call to arms” is not synonymous with a call for violence. Asking people to help protect a city may not be the best move in the world, but it’s not illegal either.
While the shooting is troubling, there’s still a lot we don’t know. It’s a complicated situation. While the actions sure look like self-defense, an investigation is going to be needed to untangle the mess and determine whether or not it really is. That’s going to be muddled with other potential factors as well.
Yet for Facebook, that’s not an issue. They’ll just yank everything down.
Let’s keep in mind that despite the long list of violence by Antifa, numerous pages still exist for the militant anarchist group. They’ve assaulted people, destroyed millions upon millions of dollars worth of property, and even hijacked part of a major American city, but there’s almost no effort to address their hateful rhetoric, rhetoric which often does call for violence.
In other words, Facebook is yet again being uneven with its rules as they apply to groups that support things like the Second Amendment and the rule of law. As per usual.
Now, don’t get me wrong. I understand that Facebook is a private entity and can do pretty much whatever they want. I get that. However, that doesn’t make them immune to criticism for uneven handling of the rules. Besides, they might be a private company, but they’re publicly traded. That means there are members of the public they answer to, namely their stockholders.
Maybe if enough of them get sick of Facebook’s anti-gun nonsense, they can force Mark Zuckerberg to suck it up and stop trying to shift public perception of the truth by manipulating what they get to see.
Hey, a guy can dream, right?


bearingarms--2020-08-27--Enough With The Soundbite Solutions To Violent Crime

Providence , Rhode Island is like many Democrat-controlled cities at the moment ; protests on a regular basis ( including agitators accosting people who are eating and demanding they show solidarity with demonstrators ) and a rising violent crime rate .
There ’ ve been five homicides in the past two weeks ( none of which have drawn any protests of their own ) , and local officials are promising to “ do something ” to address the growing chaos in some of the city ’ s high-crime neighborhoods .
Unfortunately what they ’ re offering is what I call @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that sounds good in front of the cameras , but does absolutely nothing to actually address the problem .
In this case the soundbite solution is a so-called gun buyback .
City councilwoman Jo-Ann Ryan is proposing that the city collect firearms , no questions asked , in exchange for a gift card or a small amount of cash .
Her hope is that the compensated confiscation event will lead to “ fewer guns on the streets , ” though local news website GoLocalProv recently pointed out that there ’ s not much @ @ @ @ @ @ @ anyone other than the politicians who garner a few headlines for proposing them .
After GoLocal asked Ryan why she thought a gun buyback program would be effective , she said in a statement , “ My proposal for a gun buyback program is part of a larger goal in which the City would continue its work with organizations like the Institute for Non-Violence , and the Council continuing to advocate for and support both state and federal sensible gun legislation .
Some past studies have shown that gun buybacks by themselves were @ @ @ @ @ @ @ violent gun crime.
” She added , however , there has been “ more recent research that shows when buybacks are coupled with a more holistic approach , it can help in the reduction of gun violence overall.
” GoLocal requested links to the research , Ryan did not respond .
It sounds like Ryan has been reading this piece from Journalists Resource , which also claims that “ recent research frames gun buybacks in a more favorable light .
On their own , buybacks might not be effective if the goal is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ crime .
But research shows buybacks can help if they ’ re part of a broader effort to reduce gun violence.
” What evidence do they cite ?
Not much , honestly .
Garen Winmute , director of the Violence Prevention Research Program at the University of California , Davis , told the news outlet Governing in 2013 that violent crime rates might not be the best measure of success for gun buybacks , and that community engagement and education on gun safety during buybacks also have value… A 2013 evaluation of a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ New York , found no effect on violent gun crime , including homicides .
The authors also note that different parties , like law enforcement officers and politicians , may measure the success of gun buybacks in different ways .
“ Given the empirical evidence , police agencies may use gun buyback programs not with the expectation of reducing violent crime , but to satisfy the public ’ s expectations , ” the authors write .
“ When serious crime problems occur , mayors and police chiefs are under pressure from their constituents @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ about the violence.
” None of the “ more recent research ” shows that compensated confiscation programs do anything to reduce violent crime .
Instead , anti-gun researchers like Garen Wintemute have to claim that the buybacks help with “ engagement and education on gun safety , ” which sounds like something that could be done without offering up cash or gift cards for firearms .
The study of Buffalo ’ s buyback got it right .
These programs are most often put in place to satisfy the public ’ s expectation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ something ” about the violence .
Gun buybacks are neither dramatic nor effective , however .
They ’ re a soundbite solution meant to benefit the approval ratings of politicians far more than the safety of the general public .

Providence, Rhode Island is like many Democrat-controlled cities at the moment; protests on a regular basis (including agitators accosting people who are eating and demanding they show solidarity with demonstrators) and a rising violent crime rate. There’ve been five homicides in the past two weeks (none of which have drawn any protests of their own), and local officials are promising to “do something” to address the growing chaos in some of the city’s high-crime neighborhoods. Unfortunately what they’re offering is what I call a “soundbite solution”: something that sounds good in front of the cameras, but does absolutely nothing to actually address the problem.
In this case the soundbite solution is a so-called gun buyback. City councilwoman Jo-Ann Ryan is proposing that the city collect firearms, no questions asked, in exchange for a gift card or a small amount of cash. Her hope is that the compensated confiscation event will lead to “fewer guns on the streets,” though local news website GoLocalProv recently pointed out that there’s not much evidence to suggest that buyback events benefit anyone other than the politicians who garner a few headlines for proposing them.
After GoLocal asked Ryan why she thought a gun buyback program would be effective, she said in a statement, “My proposal for a gun buyback program is part of a larger goal in which the City would continue its work with organizations like the Institute for Non-Violence, and the Council continuing to advocate for and support both state and federal sensible gun legislation. Some past studies have shown that gun buybacks by themselves were thought to be ineffective in directly reducing violent gun crime.” She added, however, there has been “more recent research that shows when buybacks are coupled with a more holistic approach, it can help in the reduction of gun violence overall.” GoLocal requested links to the research, Ryan did not respond.
It sounds like Ryan has been reading this piece from Journalists Resource, which also claims that “recent research frames gun buybacks in a more favorable light. On their own, buybacks might not be effective if the goal is to use them to directly reduce violent crime. But research shows buybacks can help if they’re part of a broader effort to reduce gun violence.”
What evidence do they cite? Not much, honestly.
Garen Winmute, director of the Violence Prevention Research Program at the University of California, Davis, told the news outlet Governing in 2013 that violent crime rates might not be the best measure of success for gun buybacks, and that community engagement and education on gun safety during buybacks also have value… A 2013 evaluation of a multiyear gun buyback program in Buffalo, New York, found no effect on violent gun crime, including homicides. The authors also note that different parties, like law enforcement officers and politicians, may measure the success of gun buybacks in different ways. “Given the empirical evidence, police agencies may use gun buyback programs not with the expectation of reducing violent crime, but to satisfy the public’s expectations,” the authors write. “When serious crime problems occur, mayors and police chiefs are under pressure from their constituents to ‘do something dramatic and effective’ about the violence.”
None of the “more recent research” shows that compensated confiscation programs do anything to reduce violent crime. Instead, anti-gun researchers like Garen Wintemute have to claim that the buybacks help with “engagement and education on gun safety,” which sounds like something that could be done without offering up cash or gift cards for firearms.
The study of Buffalo’s buyback got it right. These programs are most often put in place to satisfy the public’s expectation that officials are going to “do something” about the violence. Gun buybacks are neither dramatic nor effective, however. They’re a soundbite solution meant to benefit the approval ratings of politicians far more than the safety of the general public.


bearingarms--2020-08-27--Lies, Damn Lies, And Violent Crime Statistics

If you listen to gun control advocates , you ’ re likely to hear a great deal about how there ’ s just so much violent crime that we don ’ t have a choice but to step in and pass gun control .
There ’ s an epidemic , you see .
An epidemic of violence .
Now , to be fair , there sure does seem to be a spike in violent crime in recent months .
However , these last few months haven ’ t been typical .
Nor is there any way to know if this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ societal anxiety or something more long-term .
Yet the anti-gunners often aren ’ t even talking about recent events .
They can ’ t since their claims predate COVID-19 and everything that fell apart from there .
The question is , is there such an epidemic ?
Not really .
During last week ’ s Democratic National Convention , party leaders decried the “ epidemic of gun violence ” to justify their calls for ever more draconian gun control .
While this surely makes a compelling sound bite , the facts expose it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Homicides with guns in the U.S. hit a historic high of 17,075 in 1993 before falling to 7,803 in 2014 , a drop of 54 % .
They rose again from 2015 to 2017 , and fell in 2018 , at that point still 40 % below 1993 totals .
The gun homicide rate ( deaths per 100,000 ) fell even more precipitously , to 3.1 — half the 1993 rate .
An astute historian might note that these homicide rates peaked the year before the Democrats ’ 1994 “ assault weapons ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a result of the ban .
But there is a flaw in that logic ; namely , the data doesn ’ t support it .
The so-called “ assault weapons ” ban ended in 2004 , and despite rising levels of gun ownership following its expiration , the number of homicides committed with guns continued to plummet for another decade , including a more than 30 % decline between 2005 and 2011 alone .
It ’ s also worth noting that more people are murdered by hands and feet each year than by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ expiration of the “ assault weapons ” ban in 2004 , and the Supreme Court ’ s decisions in Heller ( 2008 ) and McDonald ( 2010 ) , which established the Second Amendment ’ s true meaning , the accessibility of firearms for private citizens increased .
If the Democrats ’ claims were correct , we should have seen an explosion in deaths by firearm .
Instead , gun homicide totals have stayed relatively constant ( between 8,000 and 11,000 per year ) as gun sales have drastically increased over the last @ @ @ @ @ @ @ million firearms have been sold in the last 18 months alone , placing the total number of privately held firearms in the U.S. at well over 400 million .
In other words , if the claim that accessibility to guns spurs an increase in gun-related crimes , then you would expect to see a correlation between the two .
While correlation doesn ’ t equal causation , if something is causation , it does create a corollary .
While some pockets within the nation as a whole might be seeing a prolonged increase @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has been downward for decades now , mostly during a time when gun rights have actually expanded .
Instead , anti-gunners must sell a doom-and-gloom version of the world where action must be taken or your children will be gunned down a hundred times a day .
They can ’ t win on the facts–as noted above by author Louis DeBroux–so they have to try and win on emotion .
They can ’ t push their agenda unless they make you scared .
They can ’ t win if they don ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ re not going to feel scared or hurt if you find out that violent crime has been trending down for ages at this point , now will you ?

If you listen to gun control advocates, you’re likely to hear a great deal about how there’s just so much violent crime that we don’t have a choice but to step in and pass gun control. There’s an epidemic, you see. An epidemic of violence.
Now, to be fair, there sure does seem to be a spike in violent crime in recent months. However, these last few months haven’t been typical. Nor is there any way to know if this is a short-term spike brought on by societal anxiety or something more long-term.
Yet the anti-gunners often aren’t even talking about recent events. They can’t since their claims predate COVID-19 and everything that fell apart from there.
The question is, is there such an epidemic? Not really.
During last week’s Democratic National Convention, party leaders decried the “epidemic of gun violence” to justify their calls for ever more draconian gun control. While this surely makes a compelling sound bite, the facts expose it as nothing more than Democrat fearmongering. Homicides with guns in the U.S. hit a historic high of 17,075 in 1993 before falling to 7,803 in 2014, a drop of 54%. They rose again from 2015 to 2017, and fell in 2018, at that point still 40% below 1993 totals. The gun homicide rate (deaths per 100,000) fell even more precipitously, to 3.1 — half the 1993 rate. An astute historian might note that these homicide rates peaked the year before the Democrats’ 1994 “assault weapons” ban and argue the rate fell as a result of the ban. But there is a flaw in that logic; namely, the data doesn’t support it. The so-called “assault weapons” ban ended in 2004, and despite rising levels of gun ownership following its expiration, the number of homicides committed with guns continued to plummet for another decade, including a more than 30% decline between 2005 and 2011 alone. It’s also worth noting that more people are murdered by hands and feet each year than by rifles of any type. With the expiration of the “assault weapons” ban in 2004, and the Supreme Court’s decisions in Heller (2008) and McDonald (2010), which established the Second Amendment’s true meaning, the accessibility of firearms for private citizens increased. If the Democrats’ claims were correct, we should have seen an explosion in deaths by firearm. Instead, gun homicide totals have stayed relatively constant (between 8,000 and 11,000 per year) as gun sales have drastically increased over the last decade and a half. Nearly 27 million firearms have been sold in the last 18 months alone, placing the total number of privately held firearms in the U.S. at well over 400 million.
In other words, if the claim that accessibility to guns spurs an increase in gun-related crimes, then you would expect to see a correlation between the two. While correlation doesn’t equal causation, if something is causation, it does create a corollary.
There isn’t one.
While some pockets within the nation as a whole might be seeing a prolonged increase in violent crime, the national trend has been downward for decades now, mostly during a time when gun rights have actually expanded.
But that doesn’t sell gun control.
Instead, anti-gunners must sell a doom-and-gloom version of the world where action must be taken or your children will be gunned down a hundred times a day. They can’t win on the facts–as noted above by author Louis DeBroux–so they have to try and win on emotion. They can’t push their agenda unless they make you scared. They can’t win if they don’t make you hurt.
Yet you’re not going to feel scared or hurt if you find out that violent crime has been trending down for ages at this point, now will you?


bearingarms--2020-08-27--TX Rep Believes Constitutional Carry Could Draw Support From The Left

I think a lot of folks automatically assume that a red state like Texas must already allow residents to carry a firearm without a license , but that ’ s not the case .
Even open carrying of a handgun requires a license in the Lone Star State , but some Republicans are hoping to change that with the passage of a constitutional carry law during the next legislative session .
Rep. Kyle Biedermann knows that some in his own party are likely to oppose the measure , but he also believes that the recent civil unrest around the country @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his bill .
“ We ’ ve been selling so many firearms and so much ammunition and a lot to people for the first time , ” said Rep. Biedermann .
Biedermann represents District 73 , which encompasses Comal , Gillespie , and Kendall counties .
The state representative owns a hardware and hunting store in Fredericksburg and says he ’ s seeing gun and ammunition sales soar as efforts to defund the police continue to grow .
“ They ’ ve doubled or probably tripled , ” said Rep. Biedermann .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with support for constitutional carry .
“ I ’ m very , very confident that there are a lot of new people and a lot of people that maybe were not as in favor of constitutional carry before that will be in favor of it this time , ” said Rep. Biedermann .
According to TheTexan.com , Biedermann even believes that some on the Left would support constitutional carry , which sounds kind of absurd at first but does make some sense .
If you believe that policing is rife with racism , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the need for encounters between police and black gun owners should be something that you support , right ?
Unfortunately , I think Rep. Biedermann may be a little too optimistic in his assumptions .
While there is absolutely a disconnect between the idea of defunding the police and adding more gun control laws to the books , the Left has mostly been able to ignore the inherent contradiction between the the two .
Gun control groups like Everytown will even claim that “ police violence is gun violence , ” while lobbying @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that will be enforced by armed law enforcement officers .
There is a portion of the Left that ’ s embraced the Second Amendment , but at the moment their position doesn ’ t hold much sway in the Democratic Party , which has wholeheartedly endorsed the Biden/Harris anti-Second Amendment agenda .
As things stand , I suspect that the legislation will be a pretty partisan bill in the state house , and constitutional carry may prove to be an uphill fight , even in the Lone Star State .

I think a lot of folks automatically assume that a red state like Texas must already allow residents to carry a firearm without a license, but that’s not the case. Even open carrying of a handgun requires a license in the Lone Star State, but some Republicans are hoping to change that with the passage of a constitutional carry law during the next legislative session.
Rep. Kyle Biedermann knows that some in his own party are likely to oppose the measure, but he also believes that the recent civil unrest around the country could help get some bipartisan support for his bill.
“We’ve been selling so many firearms and so much ammunition and a lot to people for the first time,” said Rep. Biedermann. Biedermann represents District 73, which encompasses Comal, Gillespie, and Kendall counties. The state representative owns a hardware and hunting store in Fredericksburg and says he’s seeing gun and ammunition sales soar as efforts to defund the police continue to grow. “They’ve doubled or probably tripled,” said Rep. Biedermann. The state representative says sales are growing along with support for constitutional carry. “I’m very, very confident that there are a lot of new people and a lot of people that maybe were not as in favor of constitutional carry before that will be in favor of it this time,” said Rep. Biedermann.
According to TheTexan.com, Biedermann even believes that some on the Left would support constitutional carry, which sounds kind of absurd at first but does make some sense. If you believe that policing is rife with racism, then any policy change that would reduce the need for encounters between police and black gun owners should be something that you support, right?
Unfortunately, I think Rep. Biedermann may be a little too optimistic in his assumptions. While there is absolutely a disconnect between the idea of defunding the police and adding more gun control laws to the books, the Left has mostly been able to ignore the inherent contradiction between the the two. Gun control groups like Everytown will even claim that “police violence is gun violence,” while lobbying to put more gun laws in place that will be enforced by armed law enforcement officers.
There is a portion of the Left that’s embraced the Second Amendment, but at the moment their position doesn’t hold much sway in the Democratic Party, which has wholeheartedly endorsed the Biden/Harris anti-Second Amendment agenda. As things stand, I suspect that the legislation will be a pretty partisan bill in the state house, and constitutional carry may prove to be an uphill fight, even in the Lone Star State.


bearingarms--2020-08-27--OH Supreme Court OK's Armed School Staff.. For Now

An Ohio school district has been given the green light by the state Supreme Court to resume its policy of arming trained and vetted school employees while a lawsuit targeting the practice makes its way through the legal system .
Madison Schools introduced the policy in 2018 , and shortly thereafter several parents , aided by Everytown for Gun Safety ’ s in-house law firm , filed suit to block the practice .
The first judge to hear the case rejected the argument by Everytown attorneys that teachers in the district should receive the same 728 hours of training required @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , but an Ohio appeals court found in the parents ’ favor earlier this year .
The school district appealed to the state Supreme Court , but also asked the high court to stay the appellate court ’ s decision while the case is under review .
“ Madison has made the policy decision that its students and staff are safer with its policy in place .
A stay while this Court decides the merits of this appeal not only honors that policy choice until and unless this Court decides that policy choice @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that the district is not made less safe in the meantime by what might turn out to be an erroneous lower court decision , ” the motion reads .
“ Put another way , a stay will help ensure there is no irreparable injury while this appeal is pending.
” While the granting of the stay doesn ’ t automatically mean that the state Supreme Court will ultimately rule in Madison ’ s favor , the school district has a very strong case .
As Bearing Arms reported earlier this year , state @ @ @ @ @ @ @ both believe the district ’ s current policy should remain .
The brief by attorneys for Madison Schools argues that the 12th Appellate Court panel erroneously read Ohio law as requiring armed staff to undergo law enforcement training , and Sean Maloney , an Ohio attorney who ’ s part of the FASTER Ohio organization that has trained thousands of educators in the state , told Bearing Arms back in April that the state legislature has actually approved funding in recent years for the FASTER program .
If lawmakers are approving money to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the legislature must believe that these school districts have the ability to set their own training requirements .
The state ’ s Attorney General agrees , and says if teachers are required to undergo hundreds of hours of law enforcement training , it will simply result in a ban on armed school staff .
Staffers for Attorney General Dave Yost noted that the district would have to pay $ 7,265 to send a staffer through peace officer training , with the training lasting eight hours a day , five days a week , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ filed with the state Supreme Court , Yost argued that “ the reality is that few if any teachers or school administrators can train to become police officers while maintaining their day jobs .
Thus , as a practical matter , the Twelfth District ’ s erroneous decision strips schools of an effective means they have to defend schoolchildren from a school shooting.
” The reality is also that armed school staff aren ’ t law enforcement .
They don ’ t have the power to arrest , they don ’ t investigate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ engage in high speed pursuits , or anything like that .
There ’ s simply no need for these teachers to undergo hundreds of hours of training on issues that will never come up in the course of their duties as educators and school guardians .
Imposing that requirement on armed school staff is simply a way to get rid of these policies entirely .
There ’ s no word on when the state Supreme Court might issue a final ruling in the case , which could have an impact on dozens of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ adopted policies putting trained and armed school staff in classrooms .
Legislators in the Republican-controlled legislature in Ohio have also been working on a bill that would specifically state that armed school staff do not need the full 728 hours of law enforcement training in order to carry , but the bill has been stuck in a Senate committee while the case is under review .

An Ohio school district has been given the green light by the state Supreme Court to resume its policy of arming trained and vetted school employees while a lawsuit targeting the practice makes its way through the legal system. Madison Schools introduced the policy in 2018, and shortly thereafter several parents, aided by Everytown for Gun Safety’s in-house law firm, filed suit to block the practice.
The first judge to hear the case rejected the argument by Everytown attorneys that teachers in the district should receive the same 728 hours of training required for law enforcement before they could carry, but an Ohio appeals court found in the parents’ favor earlier this year. The school district appealed to the state Supreme Court, but also asked the high court to stay the appellate court’s decision while the case is under review.
“Madison has made the policy decision that its students and staff are safer with its policy in place. A stay while this Court decides the merits of this appeal not only honors that policy choice until and unless this Court decides that policy choice is not permitted – it also ensures that the district is not made less safe in the meantime by what might turn out to be an erroneous lower court decision,” the motion reads. “Put another way, a stay will help ensure there is no irreparable injury while this appeal is pending.”
While the granting of the stay doesn’t automatically mean that the state Supreme Court will ultimately rule in Madison’s favor, the school district has a very strong case. As Bearing Arms reported earlier this year, state lawmakers and Ohio’s Attorney General both believe the district’s current policy should remain.
The brief by attorneys for Madison Schools argues that the 12th Appellate Court panel erroneously read Ohio law as requiring armed staff to undergo law enforcement training, and Sean Maloney, an Ohio attorney who’s part of the FASTER Ohio organization that has trained thousands of educators in the state, told Bearing Arms back in April that the state legislature has actually approved funding in recent years for the FASTER program. If lawmakers are approving money to provide training for armed teachers, clearly the legislature must believe that these school districts have the ability to set their own training requirements. The state’s Attorney General agrees, and says if teachers are required to undergo hundreds of hours of law enforcement training, it will simply result in a ban on armed school staff.
Staffers for Attorney General Dave Yost noted that the district would have to pay $7,265 to send a staffer through peace officer training, with the training lasting eight hours a day, five days a week, for eighteen weeks. In a brief filed with the state Supreme Court, Yost argued that “the reality is that few if any teachers or school administrators can train to become police officers while maintaining their day jobs. Thus, as a practical matter, the Twelfth District’s erroneous decision strips schools of an effective means they have to defend schoolchildren from a school shooting.”
The reality is also that armed school staff aren’t law enforcement. They don’t have the power to arrest, they don’t investigate crime scenes, they don’t engage in high speed pursuits, or anything like that. There’s simply no need for these teachers to undergo hundreds of hours of training on issues that will never come up in the course of their duties as educators and school guardians. Imposing that requirement on armed school staff is simply a way to get rid of these policies entirely.
There’s no word on when the state Supreme Court might issue a final ruling in the case, which could have an impact on dozens of school districts around the state that have adopted policies putting trained and armed school staff in classrooms. Legislators in the Republican-controlled legislature in Ohio have also been working on a bill that would specifically state that armed school staff do not need the full 728 hours of law enforcement training in order to carry, but the bill has been stuck in a Senate committee while the case is under review.


bearingarms--2020-08-27--Teen Arrested For Kenosha Shooting

Teen Arrested For Kenosha Shooting

Kenosha has been something of a hot mess .
Several nights of violence , though last night was reportedly peaceful , over what sure looks like a clean officer-involved shooting .
Then again , in this day and age , no police officer can shoot a black man no matter how justified without some segments of society completely flipping their lids .
Tuesday night ’ s shooting in Kenosha , where an armed individual the media has identified as a member of a militia killed two people and injured one , it ’ s likely to cause things to settle @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ve seen , it sure looks like a justified shooting , at least to some degree .
However , the young man at the center of all of this has still been arrested .
A 17-year-old Illinois resident connected to an overnight shooting during a protest in Kenosha , Wisconsin , was taken into custody Wednesday morning , according to police in Antioch , Illinois .
Wisconsin authorities issued an arrest warrant charging Kyle Rittenhouse with first-degree intentional homicide , Antioch Police said .
He is in the custody of the Lake County @ @ @ @ @ @ @ transfer him from Illinois to Wisconsin .
Antioch is located about 15 to 20 miles from Kenosha , just across the state border .
Kenosha Police Chief Daniel Miskinis confirmed that a 17-year-old Antioch resident has been charged in a shooting incident and said that the man “ was involved in the use of firearms to resolve whatever conflict was in place.
” He called the killings “ senseless violence ” and said he couldn ’ t say what led to the shooting .
Except , they weren ’ t that “ senseless.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ a guy slinging a Molotov cocktail–a deadly weapon–in Rittenhouse ’ s direction .
The second victim was trying to beat the kid with a skateboard , also a deadly weapon .
The wounded individual had a freaking pistol .
So yeah , let ’ s not pretend Rittenhouse was just running down the street gunning people down all willy-nilly .
However , despite the clear evidence of the video , Rittenhouse isn ’ t out of the woods .
There may actually be a case .
You see , while the act itself @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Rittenhouse is only 17 .
The fact that he ’ s a minor may mean he couldn ’ t legally be carrying a firearm openly like that in Kenosha .
There ’ s also the fact that he crossed state lines with that rifle .
Granted , the entire trip was only a few miles , but it may well be enough to add to the young man ’ s predicament .
In fact , him crossing state lines will likely be used to try and prove intent with the first-degree murder charges @ @ @ @ @ @ @ saying he should do time over this , mind you .
The video of the incident makes it look like a clear case of self-defense regardless of how old he was and where he came from .
However , that doesn ’ t mean some prosecutor isn ’ t going to try and hammer him .
Then again , authorities almost had to try and prosecute him .
If they didn ’ t , the violence would likely intensify .
As it is , things appear to have settled down on Wednesday night @ @ @ @ @ @ @ these seem to have been actually peaceful instead of mostly peaceful .
My guess is that no one wanted to risk getting shot in the face again .
Even though the “ militias ” stayed home , I suppose no one wanted to risk it .

Kenosha has been something of a hot mess. Several nights of violence, though last night was reportedly peaceful, over what sure looks like a clean officer-involved shooting. Then again, in this day and age, no police officer can shoot a black man no matter how justified without some segments of society completely flipping their lids.
Tuesday night’s shooting in Kenosha, where an armed individual the media has identified as a member of a militia killed two people and injured one, it’s likely to cause things to settle down.
From the videos I’ve seen, it sure looks like a justified shooting, at least to some degree. However, the young man at the center of all of this has still been arrested.
A 17-year-old Illinois resident connected to an overnight shooting during a protest in Kenosha, Wisconsin, was taken into custody Wednesday morning, according to police in Antioch, Illinois. Wisconsin authorities issued an arrest warrant charging Kyle Rittenhouse with first-degree intentional homicide, Antioch Police said. He is in the custody of the Lake County Judicial System pending an extradition hearing to transfer him from Illinois to Wisconsin. Antioch is located about 15 to 20 miles from Kenosha, just across the state border. Kenosha Police Chief Daniel Miskinis confirmed that a 17-year-old Antioch resident has been charged in a shooting incident and said that the man “was involved in the use of firearms to resolve whatever conflict was in place.” He called the killings “senseless violence” and said he couldn’t say what led to the shooting.
Except, they weren’t that “senseless.” The first shooting appears to be a guy slinging a Molotov cocktail–a deadly weapon–in Rittenhouse’s direction. The second victim was trying to beat the kid with a skateboard, also a deadly weapon. The wounded individual had a freaking pistol.
So yeah, let’s not pretend Rittenhouse was just running down the street gunning people down all willy-nilly.
However, despite the clear evidence of the video, Rittenhouse isn’t out of the woods. There may actually be a case.
You see, while the act itself sure as hell looks like self-defense, Rittenhouse is only 17. The fact that he’s a minor may mean he couldn’t legally be carrying a firearm openly like that in Kenosha. There’s also the fact that he crossed state lines with that rifle. Granted, the entire trip was only a few miles, but it may well be enough to add to the young man’s predicament.
In fact, him crossing state lines will likely be used to try and prove intent with the first-degree murder charges he faces.
I’m not saying he should do time over this, mind you. The video of the incident makes it look like a clear case of self-defense regardless of how old he was and where he came from. However, that doesn’t mean some prosecutor isn’t going to try and hammer him.
Then again, authorities almost had to try and prosecute him. If they didn’t, the violence would likely intensify. As it is, things appear to have settled down on Wednesday night in Kenosha. While protests continued, these seem to have been actually peaceful instead of mostly peaceful. My guess is that no one wanted to risk getting shot in the face again. Even though the “militias” stayed home, I suppose no one wanted to risk it.


bearingarms--2020-08-26--Some Women Are Carrying Guns On CO Trails, And That's Good

Right now , there are millions of new gun owners .
As many as 40 percent of those new gun owners are women .
We can expect that at least some of those other 60 percent represents “ family firearms , ” or guns used by both a husband and his wife , meaning there may be many more armed women than accounted for in the official numbers .
In Colorado , it seems that many women–both new gun owners and old one ’ s alike–are taking to the trails in the state while armed .
Every time they go @ @ @ @ @ @ @ inherent risks — including those from man and beast who share the paths .
Some women are choosing to pack heat for protection .
“ I carry a handgun when I am hiking alone on a trail that is more secluded , or at night , or ( when ) I am backpacking alone , ” said Cierra LeVan , a 27-year old teacher in Mesa County .
“ I do this for personal protection and self-defense , from both potential animal and human predators.
” LeVan is not alone ; Rather than @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have a companion , some women are opting for more than bear spray for protection when they hit the trails .
The question of whether or not one should carry a gun while hiking has long been a topic in online group chats , and there is a Facebook group just for women who hike with guns .
The Colorado Bureau of Investigation does not tally gun ownership by gender , so it ’ s not possible to see how many women in the state are gun owners .
A couple of recent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ brought the issue up for many hikers : • In July , a man ’ s concealed gun in his backpack discharged and shot him in the leg on a popular trail in Rocky Mountain National Park .
• That same month , a woman was sexually assaulted while hiking alone on the Walker Ranch Trail in Boulder on a weekday afternoon .
“ Most women I know have been touched or grabbed by men when in the woods .
It ’ s too common , ” said Sara C. , a 35-year-old @ @ @ @ @ @ @ her full name used for fear of being targeted .
“ A creepy guy sees a girl fishing or hiking alone , tries to grab her arm or her body … dogs and guns will scare people off.
” I have to agree with LeVan and Sarah , guns are good things for women who are out and about in the wild alone .
No , it shouldn ’ t be necessary .
In a perfect world , women wouldn ’ t have to worry about being accosted or attacked while enjoying nature @ @ @ @ @ @ @ live in a perfect world .
We live in this one .
On Tuesday , Cam wrote about a female hunter who thwarted a kidnapping attempt .
That ’ s another side to the story here .
Women can also end up being witnesses to acts .
While being a good witness is important , there ’ s also the possibility that waiting and watching means seeing someone be horribly murdered or worse .
Being armed allows someone to act , to actually stop a traumatic event from taking place .
Regardless of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to see more armed women taking to nature .
If enough head out with weapons , it can create a form of herd immunity and protect those who don ’ t or can ’ t .

Right now, there are millions of new gun owners. As many as 40 percent of those new gun owners are women. We can expect that at least some of those other 60 percent represents “family firearms,” or guns used by both a husband and his wife, meaning there may be many more armed women than accounted for in the official numbers.
In Colorado, it seems that many women–both new gun owners and old one’s alike–are taking to the trails in the state while armed.
Every time they go out on Colorado trails, hikers face inherent risks — including those from man and beast who share the paths. Some women are choosing to pack heat for protection. “I carry a handgun when I am hiking alone on a trail that is more secluded, or at night, or (when) I am backpacking alone,” said Cierra LeVan, a 27-year old teacher in Mesa County. “I do this for personal protection and self-defense, from both potential animal and human predators.” LeVan is not alone; Rather than avoid hiking because they don’t have a companion, some women are opting for more than bear spray for protection when they hit the trails. The question of whether or not one should carry a gun while hiking has long been a topic in online group chats, and there is a Facebook group just for women who hike with guns. The Colorado Bureau of Investigation does not tally gun ownership by gender, so it’s not possible to see how many women in the state are gun owners. A couple of recent incidents on the Front Range trails have brought the issue up for many hikers: In July, a man’s concealed gun in his backpack discharged and shot him in the leg on a popular trail in Rocky Mountain National Park.
That same month, a woman was sexually assaulted while hiking alone on the Walker Ranch Trail in Boulder on a weekday afternoon. “Most women I know have been touched or grabbed by men when in the woods. It’s too common,” said Sara C., a 35-year-old Denver business owner who did not want her full name used for fear of being targeted. “A creepy guy sees a girl fishing or hiking alone, tries to grab her arm or her body … dogs and guns will scare people off.”
I have to agree with LeVan and Sarah, guns are good things for women who are out and about in the wild alone. No, it shouldn’t be necessary. In a perfect world, women wouldn’t have to worry about being accosted or attacked while enjoying nature. Unfortunately, we don’t live in a perfect world. We live in this one.
On Tuesday, Cam wrote about a female hunter who thwarted a kidnapping attempt. That’s another side to the story here. Women can also end up being witnesses to acts. While being a good witness is important, there’s also the possibility that waiting and watching means seeing someone be horribly murdered or worse. Being armed allows someone to act, to actually stop a traumatic event from taking place.
Regardless of the reasons, I’m glad to see more armed women taking to nature. If enough head out with weapons, it can create a form of herd immunity and protect those who don’t or can’t.
That’s a win for everyone.


bearingarms--2020-08-26--MO Bill That Ends Ban On Giving Guns To Kids Advances

A Missouri law that imposes penalties for handing a firearm to a child without the parents ’ permission may sound like a no-brainer .
Especially when you know that the practice such a law is trying to halt is something criminals do in order to escape steeper penalties .
You see , rather than just dump a gun , they ’ ll hand it to a child knowing full well that the child won ’ t be penalized like an adult .
A bill seeking to end that recently advanced in the state legislature , though .
A bill to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people from giving children firearms without their parents ’ permission advanced Monday .
Gov .
Mike Parsons sought to increase the penalty for the crime , which is currently a misdemeanor , but the GOP-dominated state House disagreed .
Parsons , also a Republican , had asked lawmakers to increase the penalty to a felony offense during a special session last month to address gun violence .
The intent , he said , was to crack down on criminals who commit gun crimes and then hand the weapons over to minors to avoid @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the bill , saying anyone who gives a minor a firearm in good faith , such as a grandparent who takes a child hunting without parent permission , could be charged with a crime .
You see , part of the problem here is that the law was way too broad .
It was possible for a family member to break the law by simply allowing the child to use a firearm at a backyard gun range or while hunting , none of which falls under what the law intended .
Especially since @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s not out of the realm of possibility that a parent might call the police on that family member in a pique of outrage .
While few are in favor of allows criminals to hand their guns over to kids to try and escape prosecution for their crimes , we need to put some kind of constraints on any law so as to protect those who are doing so in an effort to educate and provide recreation to young people .
I mean , it ’ s even possible a Boy Scout camp @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to shoot at their range without realizing Mommy didn ’ t approve .
So yeah , the law as it stands is a real problem and it needs to go .
Luckily , the legislature is working on that and gaining some steam .
My hope is that they ’ ll push the new bill through and the law is repealed .
After that , maybe they can look at how to address the issue without turning law-abiding and well-meaning adults into criminals for doing what they might honestly believe to be a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ kept separate from guns completely .
It ’ s far better to allow them to be educated about them instead .
Yes , even if the parent disagrees completely with the idea .
The moment their child sees a firearm and responds correctly because they ’ d been educated on it might be the moment they change their mind .

A Missouri law that imposes penalties for handing a firearm to a child without the parents’ permission may sound like a no-brainer. Especially when you know that the practice such a law is trying to halt is something criminals do in order to escape steeper penalties. You see, rather than just dump a gun, they’ll hand it to a child knowing full well that the child won’t be penalized like an adult.
A bill seeking to end that recently advanced in the state legislature, though.
A bill to reverse a Missouri state law that prohibits people from giving children firearms without their parents’ permission advanced Monday. Gov. Mike Parsons sought to increase the penalty for the crime, which is currently a misdemeanor, but the GOP-dominated state House disagreed. Parsons, also a Republican, had asked lawmakers to increase the penalty to a felony offense during a special session last month to address gun violence. The intent, he said, was to crack down on criminals who commit gun crimes and then hand the weapons over to minors to avoid being caught. Republicans voiced concerns about the bill, saying anyone who gives a minor a firearm in good faith, such as a grandparent who takes a child hunting without parent permission, could be charged with a crime.
Has Missouri lost its mind?
Not really.
You see, part of the problem here is that the law was way too broad. It was possible for a family member to break the law by simply allowing the child to use a firearm at a backyard gun range or while hunting, none of which falls under what the law intended. Especially since in these contentious times, it’s not out of the realm of possibility that a parent might call the police on that family member in a pique of outrage.
While few are in favor of allows criminals to hand their guns over to kids to try and escape prosecution for their crimes, we need to put some kind of constraints on any law so as to protect those who are doing so in an effort to educate and provide recreation to young people. I mean, it’s even possible a Boy Scout camp could be held responsible for allowing scouts to shoot at their range without realizing Mommy didn’t approve.
So yeah, the law as it stands is a real problem and it needs to go. Luckily, the legislature is working on that and gaining some steam. My hope is that they’ll push the new bill through and the law is repealed. After that, maybe they can look at how to address the issue without turning law-abiding and well-meaning adults into criminals for doing what they might honestly believe to be a good thing.
Kids cannot be kept separate from guns completely. It’s far better to allow them to be educated about them instead. Yes, even if the parent disagrees completely with the idea. The moment their child sees a firearm and responds correctly because they’d been educated on it might be the moment they change their mind.