Anti Semites and Twitter

The censorship on Twitter has become more about suppressing conservative thought and has little if anything to do about protecting people’s Twitter experience.  Olberman, Rosie, Alyssa Milano, Michael Moore and a host of others hurl invective and profanity around like there was no tomorrow.  These cretins never get their account features limited. Their racism, sexism and anti-semitism is an acceptable form of free expression to Twitter.  Yay First Amendment!  Go get ’em Rosie!

But let someone say something ugly about the Poor Palestinians (yeah, you know, the ones firing rockets into kindergartens in Israel) and suddenly the gloves come off.  We can’t have you spreading the truth about the Poor Palestinians.  They are so oppressed! Break out the crying towel, or the prayer rug, or something.

On June 2nd I posted a tweet where I expressed the view that the IDF should simply give the Hamas rioters what they wanted, martyrdom.  Not only does that thin the herd in the immediate time frame, but it also reduces the gene pool of extremists going forward.  Think of it as anti-social Darwinism if you want.  That’s my view.  If you’re trying to kill Israelis (and that’s what they were doing) then you should absolutely be fair game for someone to kill you.  Israelis have a right of self defense.  Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.  Here’s Your Darwin Award!

Twitter must not agree, because my account privileges were limited for a period of either 12 hours or 1 hour and 57 minutes depending upon whom you believe.  The original message said 12 hours, but when I deleted the message it said it would restore me in one hour and 57 minutes.  I don’t know who to believe, and I really don’t care. I am pretty sure I can find something to do with myself for the remainder of the evening.  But, come on, a tweet on June 2 gets pinged on June 7?

Here’s what happened. Some Palestinian Snowflake who believes every bit of fecal matter spewed by that festering pot of anti-semitism that is Hamas saw my response to Bernie Sanders. He posted a video from the Poor Palestinians about how maligned they were, and how we shouldn’t believe anything Israel says.  They don’t have food.  They don’t have water.  They don’t have medicine.

Oh bullshit!  Cry me a river dude.  Maybe if you weren’t rioting 24/7 and setting fields on fire with kamikaze kites, maybe, just maybe, you’d be able to find a way to live in peace with the Israelis.  Maybe they’d let trucks with medicine in if you weren’t also hauling in rockets, rifles and ammo.  I’m just saying… its a thought, huh?

But, of course, that’s not what they want.  They have only the intention of destroying Israel.  That’s what they want to do.  That’s what they mean to do.  And they think they should have catered meals and spa nails courtesy of the Israelis in the meantime.

So, maybe my tweet was in bad taste.  Check out any tweet from Rosie and see if mine was worse.  Not gonna happen.

No, the bottom line is that Twitter is letting the tail wag the dog.  The Snowflakes rule.  The time has probably come for me to get on Gab and stay on Gab so that I don’t have to deal with rebukes from people whose IQ can be measured in negative numbers, and who hate Jews for the sole reason that they are Jewish.

And, by the way…I’m not Jewish.  I’m just a guy who understands fairness.

Disproportionate, Hell!

We’ve all had that annoying little brother or sister that just couldn’t leave us alone.  They’d poke at us, kick us under the table, pinch us, even bite us, and as the older brother we were expected not to retaliate. But there’s only so much crap a person can take, and so when they pushed it too far, we’d smack ‘em.  No bruises, no broken bones, just a not-so-polite smack upside the head to let them know they’d crossed the line.

And what happened?


Mom, who of course was not paying attention because The Young and the Stupid was on television (and Kate was busy explaining to Jim how she was forced into the affair with Fred, because Fred knew she was previously a left-handed lesbian, and that was why it was alright for Jim to have sex with Miranda).  Mom sees the human ambulance siren wailing and immediately assumes we’re in the wrong.  We try to explain, but we always heard “two wrongs don’t make a right.”

No, but they do make a point.  And the next time the little bugger decided to stir up some shit, we raised that smacking hand and sure enough, they slunk away, not wanting to receive their just desserts.  This because they knew that even with Mom sending us to our room “to think about your bad behavior” we were still more than capable of dishing it out again.  And as we’d subtly remind them, “you have to sleep sometime….”

Okay, so I was a terrible big brother, but the point is just this.  Sometimes you actually have to resort to violence to stop violence.  And the new game in town is for antagonists to claim that a response was “disproportionate” to the violence they dished out.  It isn’t, and that’s the point.

Let’s take what happened in Ferguson, Missouri for example.  You have a big thug, one with a history of gang activity, strong-arm robbing a grocery store, and then trying to disarm a police officer.  In that attempt he made the bad decision to charge a cop that he outweighed by 100 pounds, and as a result he was shot and killed.

Then there were riots. And the big bowl of jello that was the Missouri Governor (who thankfully did not become Missouri’s senator) sent in the Highway Patrol with handcuffs…for the police.  They allowed a bunch of radicals to burn down a large chunk of a city.

Now you tell me. Whose response was disproportionate there?

It may be that racism played a role in the shooting. I don’t pretend to know.  I know that if a white guy that size tried to take my gun away and then charged me, he’d be dead too. It may be that blacks in Ferguson were treated unfairly for years.  I am sure the latter is probably true based on statistics and the way the Municipal Court system worked.  But you change those through political action, not violence. But violence is easier, requires less thought, and apparently is more fun.  So we had an entire summer and half the next year, until the Criminal in the Pantsuit was defeated, with leftists of every stripe telling anyone who would listen that all white people were racist.

Then what happened? Heard of Black Lives Matter recently? Of course not: there is no election to be swayed through racism just yet.  Look for additional agitation near August/September and for more attempts to obtain a disproportionate response.  Because, that’s what the game is.  Create martyrs.

All of the foregoing, however, is meant to convey a message.  You cannot agitate, wage violence, and then expect to get a slap on the wrist and your popsicle taken away.  Yet amazingly, in spite of terrorists armed with small arms, bombs, Molotov cocktails, fire-dropping kites, and rocks the size of tea kettles being thrown at Israelis, we expect the Israelis to say “bad dog, no biscuit,” instead of actually taking care of the problem.  But Israel isn’t so stupid.

Here is the Israeli security situation borrowed from the website at the bottom of the graphic:

Screen Shot 2018-05-15 at 10.08.54 AM

As you can see, nearly every region in Israel is under rocket attack threat, and if you look at Jerusalem, Israel’s capital is ringed in on three sides by hostile forces.  The security fence where the shootings occurred are very close to population centers, and Facebook allowed Palestinians to post messages urging each other to invade and kill Israelis.  Here is one drawing showing the fence and its location vis a vis population centers:Screen Shot 2018-05-15 at 10.12.00 AM

The IDF can read. They warned the Palestinians that if they took that terror tactic, they’d be killed.  So when someone came across that line, or moved to assault an IDF soldier, plant a bomb, or engage in other violence, they were killed.  58 were dead at last count, which is an amazingly small number given the violence they tried to inflict.

Yet the international media blames Israel and Trump.

It should place the burden on Hamas to explain why its “mostly peaceful protesters” were carrying small arms, bombs, firebombs, etc.

You see, protesters carry signs, chant slogans, and generally make a pest of themselves, but they do not engage in violence.  If you engage in violence, you deserve to receive violence returned to you.  That’s how you stop violence!

Given that there were more than 100,000 protesters out there, and that hundreds if not thousands tried to come through the wire, 58 dead demonstrates remarkable restraint. Because if those “mostly peaceful protesters” had overrun the wire, and gotten into the populated areas of Israel, the body count would have been much higher.  Only it would have been innocent Israelis, not devil-worshipping terrorists that would be bleeding out in the streets.

So, I commend Israeli marksmanship.  Way to go fellas!

The Compromise Deception

You are Being Deceived

As gun owners we are told we need to compromise.  Compromise is not always a bad word.  Suppose Lawmaker A wants to raise your taxes by 10% to pay for needed infrastructure improvement. Lawmaker B wants to lower your taxes by 5% and pay for infrastructure improvements by cutting the budget in areas where there is rampant waste and abuse.  Let’s suppose that the infrastructure improvements are actually needed and not a give-away to some political pal.  Let’s further assume that there is waste in government (hardly a stretch!) and that a 5% tax cut would be a welcome idea.  Is there room for compromise?

As a lawyer, I see this kind of negotiation six or seven times a year with cases.  The Defendant knows or suspects he will lose at trial, and doesn’t want to pay the $350,000 that the Plaintiff is demanding.  So he pokes as many holes in the case as possible and goes to mediation crowing about the plaintiff (a 65 year old grandmother) being “a lying snake.”  The plaintiff knows that even with the best jury they could lose, and that there is little likelihood that they will get $350K.  So the start exchanging offers and responses and the case settles for $200,000.  Both sides buy their peace.

In the legislative example, both sides try to build coalitions and the final bill comes out with a 2% tax increase and budget cuts in other areas.  If we look at these situations graphically what we have is tension between two competing goals (infrastructure improvement and fiscal responsibility) and the tension is resolved through “compromise.” Slide1

That’s because both positions are reasonable and supportable, and neither position violates the Constitution or any higher laws.  Compromise is not only possible here, it’s a great way to make sure that the greatest good gets done for the greatest number.  But it also assumes that everyone on both sides is acting in good faith, without a hidden agenda.  In the gun debate, that is not the case.

There is a popular metaphor about the frog in the water.  If you put the frog in a pot of boiling water it jumps out.  If you put it in room temperature water and heat it slowly, the frog boils to death eventually.  For the moment, accept the metaphor’s basis (even though there is no scientific basis for the metaphor: the frog jumps out).  The metaphor illustrates that incremental changes over time produce the same end result as sudden changes implemented immediately, just with less public outcry.  Except, of course, for the canaries in the coal mines: the parties actually aware of the hidden agendas.

This is the problem with the gun control debate.  The public assumes that there is a valid argument for limiting ownership of certain types of weapons, and that same public likely has never read the Second Amendment.  So, when they hear “we need to ban assault weapons,” there are a series of thoughts that go through their heads:

  • Assault sounds really ugly.
  • Weapons are used to hurt people; not like hunting rifles.
  • Lots of people have been killed, we need to do something.

What the public does not do, however, is actually think critically about what they’re being told. Common sporting rifles like the AR-15 and the AK-47 are not assault weapons.  Assault weapons are weapons capable of automatic fire: bullets keep firing until you release the trigger.  Sporting rifles fire one bullet per trigger pull.  Unfortunately, and in spite of nearly every gun advocate screaming about it, the media keeps using the term “automatic” instead of semi-automatic. The distinction is critical.  An “automatic weapon” is automatic because both the loading and firing of the weapon are automated. A “semi-automatic” automates only the loading of the next round. The lazy media use the word “automatic” relentlessly either out of stupidity or malevolence: take your pick.

If the public thought critically they might wonder when when they go into the sporting goods store there is not a sign that advertises “assault weapons.”  That’s because to get one, you need a tax stamp from the ATF, and you have to have some reason for a weapon that is effectively a weapon of war. But they see a scary black rifle and they automatically think “the only purpose that has is to kill people.”

And, of course, that’s wrong.  They’re fun to shoot, cheaper to shoot than other rifles, and useful in hog hunting, deer hunting, and varmint hunting.  Equipped with an EOTech sight, they are an excellent tool for getting rid of everything from snakes to coyotes.  Yet, the media tries very hard not to tell anyone that, because that goes against the “scary assault weapon” narrative.  The fact that the weapon is underpowered when considered next to a .308, 30-30, or even a 45-70, matters not to the people who are paid to deceive.

The same people are paid to offer up this “compromise” narrative.  The narrative goes something like this:

  • We want to have a “conversation.”
  • We are willing to “compromise” on reasonable regulations.
  • Why won’t the NRA members compromise with us?

And the reason is clear. The Second Amendment is hard-wired into the Constitution because our forefathers saw the need to arm citizens against the power of government.  There is absolutely no competing, reasonable principle on the other side.  All competing principles are in fact antagonistic to the Constitution. This can be represented graphically as follows:Slide2

Our forefathers were brilliant and wise.  They knew that power corrupted, and that absolute power corrupted absolutely.  So they armed every citizen.  Over the years, we’ve lost sight of the fact that guns help ensure that no one person, or group of persons, can thwart the will of the people.  Missouri, in fact, has as its motto “Let the will of the people be the supreme law of the land.”  A great motto, and an appropriate sentiment in this discussion.

Here is the problem with the left’s “compromise” narrative.  It has a ratcheting effect, sort of like a boa constrictor.  Every time we breathe out, they tighten up.

Background checks are needed, we have to have them, compromise with us!

            We did.  And what did it get us.  It got us a system that doesn’t work, and doesn’t stop people like Nicholas Cruz.  So, what’s the Left’s response:

Background checks on new guns won’t do enough, we need “universal” background checks!

            Uh, no.  You haven’t shown us that any of these shootings were done with weapons acquired outside the current system.  And we want national conceal carry reciprocity.


See the deception?  They only want to compromise when we give up something.

In essence, we give up our rights, and all they do is take more rights.  Like most every other gun owner other than the ones deceived by the leftist rhetoric, I am tired of having my rights stripped.  I am tired of seeing rights taken with no analysis of whether the rights-depriving measures actually work.  I am tired of when those measures do not work, and do not stop the carnage, that the next “solution” is more draconian regulation aimed not at the evildoer, but the common citizen.  It’s almost like the left recognizes that criminals don’t obey the law, and that their goal is not “reasonable regulation” but rather, outright confiscation.

To the left, it is reasonable to ban AR-15s because they look scary, not because they are the most powerful rifle.  To the left, it is reasonable to require all gun sales, even between father and son, uncle and nephew, etc., to be background checked.  But the real goal of these “universal background checks” is a national firearms registry.  The left knows that criminals don’t go through the system, they steal them, or buy them from other criminals.  And it’s worth noting that when New York passed its draconian law outlawing weapons with more than 5 rounds in the magazine, New York used its gun registration lists to go after the owners and confiscate the weapons.

No more.  We have our backs to the wall, and you can’t push us any further.  Do not fall for the “we need to compromise” deception. It will not stop with that compromise.  It will not stop until you are disarmed, and no longer a citizen, but a subject.

Day 3 – Saturday – NRA Dallas

The morning dawned bright and dry today here in Dallas.IMG_3728

The Exhibit Hall opened at 9 am today, and I spent most of the day wandering around it looking at all the various offerings.  Some of them were quite novel, and some were overpriced.  But by and large it was a very good day.


One interesting item is the Ammo Armor fired to protect us from “dirty magazines.”  The TSA requires that ammunition be in a covered condition such that the primers cannot be struck.  This product satisfies that need, and they are quite inexpensive at $10 a cover.  I got two!

The next Item I found worth buying was this Bore Sticks package for a 9 mm handgun.  The bore sticks can be pushed or pulled through a pistol or rifle (the demonstrator was using a rifle barrel and an AR bolt carrier group) and the product is lint free.  It can be used to clean and lube a pistol or rifle.  I would suggest going to their website and looking at their videos.  This is an interesting product.

Ammo-Up is another interesting product.  It’s designed to solve that problem at the range where you have to police your own brass.  No one likes raking and shoveling and sifting. This product eliminates that.  It mops up the brass inside the device, and with a flick of the level, deposits the brass into a bucket. They have the small size pictured here, as well as the larger size (shown behind it).  The smaller unit is $59, while the larger one is $350. It is an excellent tool for those who maintain ranges, as well as those of us who are forced to collect our own brass.  And of course, if you reload and want brass others leave behind, it’s an efficient way to collect it.

Although I did not buy one, El Paso Saddlery produced some excellent tooled leather holsters that were works of art.  They were on full display at the NRA, and they had lots of traffic at their booth.  They would be a good choice for a hand-made custom holster for someone you care about.

5.11 Tactical was in its booth, and it was serving Black Rifle Coffee Company coffee there.  This was in addition to all the different products they offered.  I picked up a small sling pack, and a pair of jeans.  But one of the things that impressed me most about this company is the fact that the Flag goes over the door, and they remain committed not only to the NRA, but to the tactical folks who use and rely on their gear.  I love 5.11, and I wear it whenever I go shooting.IMG_3744

Olympian Julie Golob was in the Smith and Wesson booth greeting folks.  She is a sweet young lady who won gold at the Olympics this past year.  She was a delight to listen to as she discussed her shooting.IMG_3746

As in years past Daniel Defense drew a huge crowd to its booth as it gave away two of its AR platform rifles.  It was standing room only around the booth, and Daniel Defense did not disappoint.  Mixing just the right amount of showmanship and generosity, they weren’t satisfied giving away the one rifle they promised; they gave away a second one too.  Big kudos to Daniel Defense.

Now on to two products I did buy and why I got them.

Several years ago I got an Urban Carry holster basically because the videos made it look like a great way to carry.  I found I could not carry using the device because it was simply too kludgy to draw from.  I am sure it works for skinnier people, but for me, it did not work.  Not even a little.

Enter the Ultimate Concealment Holster.IMG_3758

Designed better than the Urban Carry, the holster features a cell phone case that goes on the outside of the pants, and that serves as a handle for drawing the firearm.  Videos on the website make it easy to learn how to use the holster, and I found the instruction I received at the NRAAM to be very helpful too.  This is an excellent deep concealment option for folks who are not scared of AIWB carry, and who can learn to follow a simple set of steps to draw.  It’s not as fast as a kydex on the right hip, but it is much more concealed, and much better for getting into and around in areas where the property owner might not want you carrying.

I have mentioned on here several times how hard it is to find a holster that will fit a Sig P320RX with the Romeo sight.  The Q series grabs on to the trigger guard of the pistol, clips on to the belt for IWB carry, and doesn’t interfere with the Romeo Sight.


I did not bring my P320 to the show, but I intend to report back when I get home on how well this option worked out.

That’s the update from the NRAAM today.

Rest well America.  Your freedoms are safe.

NRA Meeting – Day 2

Today was the day that everyone came for.  It was part revival meeting, part cheerleading session.  It was the NRA doing what the NRA does best.

Constitutional Law

The day started for me at 8 a.m. at the Firearms Law Seminar at the Hyatt.  This is an annual event that the NRA has for firearms-interested lawyers and it provides Continuing Legal Education credit for the attendees.  It began with an excellent summary by Professor O’Shea of the current state of Constitutional Law.  This alone was worth the price of admission.  O’Shea contextualized things very well, and provided insights that were useful.  And, there were lots of lawyers present.


Professor Goldstein took over next discussing the Fourth Amendment and Justice Gorsuch’s jurisprudence.  Again, it was an opportunity to learn something about an area of law where I seldom practice.  The materials were given out on jump drives.  It was a great start to a very busy day.

The Convention Center

It rained this morning in Dallas, and so I took the bus back to the Convention Center.  At the center I found this rather interesting balloon sculpture.


Of note, the US Border Patrol was there recruiting NRA members, which ought to tell you something about whose opinions they value.  In addition, there were lots of other vendors and groups outside the exhibit hall offering different items.  And of course, the NRA Store remained open (which was a good thing: I had to buy a sweatshirt to keep the rain off me while I put my pistol in the car).

The Massive Protest Demonstration …..(not)

Of course, no NRA meeting would be complete without the hell hounds from Mom’s Demand around to protest.  I can’t wait to see the coverage tomorrow because the protesters were less than impressive.  At the opening of the meeting this is the HUGE group of protesters that was in place:


Yep, that’s right, four of them.  The protesters kept switching signs.  And when I would get up close enough to them to take a photo (and could avoid the police who were trying to keep things civil), the cowards would put their signs up over their face.  This leads me to believe that the protesters were probably paid temp workers hired by Bloomberg’s Moneybags Demand group being PAID to protest.  Even these employees wanted no part of their actions!

The Leadership Forum

I got in line for the NRA-ILA Leadership Forum at 11 a.m, knowing that we’d have to clear security to get to see the President and Vice President.  I met a great guy named Randy and we walked in line together about half a mile from where the line started to the point where we were being admitted to the Arena.  I had come prepared with a wallet and camera and nothing else.  I cleared security easily.  Lots of people with keychain pocketknives did not.  The line, by the way, was massive.


We got in about 11:40, and the NRA videos were already playing.  Every time I see Dana, Bongino, Stinchfield, and Noir take their rhetoric right up the ass of the liberal cowards, I am reminded of what my dues to the NRA actually buy: a voice that cannot, will not be silenced.  A voice for truth.

Lt. Col. Oliver North gave the invocation (he is always terrific) and the pledge of allegiance and the national anthem followed.  It always chokes me up to hear those words, and the singer was lovely.  It made my heart swell with American Pride to hear those words done so artfully.

Chris Cox then get things started with a bit of a cheering session.  He announced that for the first time in 147 years the NRA had both the sitting vice president and the president at its annual meeting.   Cox then called out Stephen Willeford, the hero of Sutherland Springs, and asked him to speak.  His message was simple: I did no more than what any one of you would have done.  I ran toward trouble because I’m a sheepdog.  Be sheepdogs!  He then thanked his Shepard (Jesus Christ) for protecting him that day.  The NRA gave him both a Texas Stock Certificate as well as a Life Membership to the NRA.  It was nicely done.

Of the politicians, Pence spoke first, and revealed something I did not know: he is a card-carrying member of the NRA.  That impressed me.  He gave a rousing speech that also impressed me.  He talked about visiting with the families of Sutherland Springs in the days and hours after the tragedy, and how their firm belief in God and faith in each other brought a perspective of hope to him and his wife, Karen.  He spoke about the need to protect schools with real security, not security that makes us feel like we’re doing something.  He talked about the need to stop violent video games and the rampant disrespect for human life that permeates games that reward killing.  He talked about the need to protect the unborn.  Pence was the leader of the revival meeting.  He left me feeling good about the office of head of state.  It is my firm hope that he follows President Trump to the Oval Office in 2024.  And not before!

Then it was time to bring out the master showman.  IMG_3712

Mr. Trump walked on stage to raucous applause.  The building practically shook with the love being thrown out by all those in attendance.  His words did not disappoint.  He was flamboyant, direct, colorful, and funny as hell at points.  He lampooned everyone from Hillary to John Kerry, whom he described as someone who should never have entered a bike race at 73.  He promised to build the Wall.  He promised to get tough on immigration.  He again assured us our gun rights were safe, and then ended with saying that we needed to help ensure that we keep Republicans in Congress if we want to see that agenda move forward.  It was a call to action, and I am pretty sure that all of us in attendance knew we needed to invest both time and money on the mid-terms.

The Exhibits

Other speakers followed, including Wayne LaPierre and Dana Loesch.  They were all good, all motivational, all directly on point.  I did not stay for most of them because I wanted to get to the Exhibit Hall.  And Wow!  What an exhibit hall!

One of the things that really amazes me about folks who work in the firearms industry is how darned clever and innovative they are.  In support of that I offer, as exhibit 1, the SnagMag spare ammo carrier.


The SnagMag hooks on the outside of your pocket while dropping into the well of your pocket.  It is cleverly designed so that when you slide your index finger down the side of the magazine and pull up and back, a hook on the SnagMag grips your pocket, keeping the holder in the pocket, while your index finger pulls the magazine out and you are already indexed to the magazine for a magazine change.IMG_3725

This image with the circle shows the hook that “snags” the mag carrier on your pocket.  It is an innovative design.  And the president of the company asked me to pass along the code shown in the first photo above.  People who go to the website ( and purchase a SnagMag will get at 20% discount with that code.

Another company displaying their wares at the NRAAM is 1791, the holster company that makes premium leather holsters.  The great thing about these holsters is not only are they good holsters that hold the most commonly available weapons, they’re sold by good people.  Here is the IWB I purchased for my Smith and Wesson M&P 2.0 9 mm.

They unfortunately do not have a holster that fits the Sig P320RX with the Romeo sight, but then again, neither does Aliengear.  I hope tomorrow to find a manufacturer that does support that weapon, and if so, will report here.

After a full day of browsing the Exhibit Hall, I found I had missed the larger part of the Exhibit Hall at the far other end of the Convention Center.  I hope to be able to bring you finds from there tomorrow.

Good night America.  Sleep well. Freedom is in the hands of the NRA, and we never sleep.

Day 1 – NRA Meeting – Dallas


Kay Bailey Hutchinson Convention Center, Dallas.

The Convention Center here in Dallas is close to the south side of town, and the south side is where the Dallas PD has its headquarters.  A stroll along the street in front of my hotel makes me very glad that Texas recognizes my Florida conceal and carry permit.

There wasn’t very much going on at the Meeting today, other than a few fund raisers.  I did get to visit the NRA Store.  I toyed with the idea of getting a “SHOOT ME FIRST” vest but it practically screamed “I AM CARRYING A WEAPON.”  Instead I found these two nice SHOOT ME FIRST tee shirts that really made my day.

My favorite of the two is the “Dana Speaks For Me” shirt.  Dana Loesch has become a force of nature on the right, speaking her mind on NRA TV and destroying the liberal left on a daily basis.  It’s the least I can do to show my respect.

Among the people here exhibiting are the Texas Rifle Association.  While not an affiliate of the NRA, it is the Texas state NRA-like organization, and they deserve great credit for moving the ball forward on gun rights in Texas.  You can join the Texas State Rifle Association even if you are not a Texan.  You just pay your $35 and support the work of this grass-roots organization.  I joined. There website is here.  Give it a look.

Of course, the Exhibit Hall does not officially open until tomorrow at 9:00 am, and at this point the vendors were still setting up.  The hall was crammed with crates and boxes displaying all the latest goods of the big names in firearms.  Tomorrow I intend to make a careful recon of the Exhibit Hall and report here on the new and exciting things I find there.

Naturally the NRA Store was already open and that’s where the shirts came from.  They were also selling Orca coolers and cups.  You may recall that Yeti, that tower of Jello that manufactures coolers for sportsmen, pulled its support from the NRA, and as a result has suffered severely in terms of sales.  None of the Mom’s Demand soccer moms are going to drop $200 on a Yeti cooler (or even $45 on a Yeti coffee cup), but apparently Yeti thought it was a great idea to piss off the entirety of their customer base by disrespecting the nation’s oldest civil rights organization. This is as stupid as Delta Airlines dropping a discount program that no one used, only to suffer backlash from both the state legislature and those of us who fly to places like, well, the NRA convention.

Anyway, Orca could not be happier to be replacing those Yeti coolers with their own brand, which probably do not come with annoying virtue signaling from the company.  I bought one of their cups, and it certainly is keeping my Coke Zero good and cold!IMG_3697

Tomorrow will be an early day.  I’ll be getting up early and heading over to the NRA meeting, but tomorrow I’ll be leaving the firearm in the car.  That’s because I’ll be going to the NRA-ILA Leadership Forum and listening to President Trump and Vice President Pence extol the virtues of the Second Amendment, and drive liberals crazy.

Oh, and I met a photographer from the New York Times.  He was not happy that the NRA meeting looked like a big mall in a normal US city, and that there were not one-eyed, bearded men in camo looking like they just got off the FBI ten most wanted list.  Since he couldn’t tell that story, he was photographing the signs on the convention center.  Go figure.

The NRA Annual Meeting: a cross-section of America

At the end of this week I am going to the NRA Convention in Dallas.  Last year I went to hear President Trump speak; this year I am going to show my support for the NRA, and to see all the things that are new and exciting in the world of firearms.  I’m really looking forward to it!

Last year, what surprised me the most, was how the population of the convention was like any small town in America.  There seemed to be a slightly larger number of men than women (perhaps only 30% women) but women were there in abundance, and they were having a good time. This is so unlike what the media portrays as the membership of the NRA, which, if you listen to them, is all men over 50 in camo that look like they just got off the 10 Most Wanted List.

Of course, the other media lie is that only white people own firearms.  You know the drill.  We pick up our sheets and hoods first, then we go get our ropes and rifles.  Except that, at the NRA, there were lots of black, brown, yellow, and red folks there.  One African-American individual had a great patch on his jacket showing an AR-15, and below it, the moniker: “it’s because I’m black, isn’t it.”  Imagine that: a fellow whose people have historically been oppressed in this country can poke fun at the gun banners, and do so with a clever line indicating the gun banner’s simmering racism.

Asians and Hispanics made up a large number of the other ethnic minorities I saw there.  In other words, all the lies the media tells about the NRA (we hate people of color, we are all racist, we are all misogynists, and we want to kill children) are debunked simply by going to the convention and watching/talking with the attendees.

The NRA is the nation’s longest-serving civil rights organization.  They are the best champion of the Second Amendment, and indeed, preserve the First Amendment through their actions.  Yet the media gives no respect.

I look forward to live blogging from the NRA this year.  I hope to showcase the most interesting things I find at the NRA.

The Death of American Journalism

Gun Violence

Recently I perused the “Gun Violence Archive.”  It’s a website that catalogs the toll from “gun violence” without distinction: if a thug trying to stab a woman is shot by the police, well, that’s “gun violence.”  Personally I think of it as smart policing.  But while the website is long on statistics, it sure is short on follow up.

The one good thing about the site is that it links to the news story that reports the incident of “gun violence.”  If you had any doubt that the media is unfairly characterizing everything as “gun violence” and believes that only the NRA is responsible for it, all you need do is look at the reporting of these incidents to find the truth.

Incomplete Reporting

First we have an report about a man arrested in a fatal north Minneapolis shooting.  See the additional reports here.

Here is what’s interesting: there is no information about shooter other than who he is.  What he did, what weapon he used, whether he had a record, or anything else is not reported.  Just “man arrested after shooting.”  So, would a little detective work tell us more about this?  Probably, but that assumes that the media is interested enough in the crime to report on it through the charging and trial stages. Clearly the television media are not. A more complete report of the incident is found here.  In that report we learn that the violence involved a woman, and that two handguns were used. Curiously, no one thought to inquire about whether Brown was a prohibited possessor.  Amazing, no? Given the individuals involved and the tenor of the reporting, it is clear no one wanted to know the answer.

Another story on the site talks about a domestic violence episode that killed a young woman.  Here is the story.  And it sticks in my craw as an example of negligent prosecution.

Deferred Prosecution?  Really?

One of the things that gun control advocates talk about is how important background checks are, but they omit the fact that even the best legal system can be gamed.  That appears to be what the shooter here did. According to the story, “In 2001, Thompson was charged with unlawful carrying of a handgun in Dallas County; that charge was dismissed in 2003 after he completed deferred-adjudication probation.” In other words, there was no conviction because the prosecutor allowed a guy charged with unlawful carrying of a handgun to get a deferred prosecution agreement.  In those cases the charge is dismissed if the person completes the probation.  But, here’s the rub: clearly the guy had an arrest record, just not a conviction, and should never have been in possession of a firearm.  In short, no gun crime of any kind should ever get deferred prosecution because it is unlikely in the extreme to be a situation where things will work out down the road.

Then we have the story of a young man who had just been released from prison for involvement in gang activity.  He had spent two years there, and told his mother that people were gunning for him when he got out. Sure enough, he was shot to death:

Again, the article here talks about the gang violence, but never points out that gang members don’t buy their firearms at the local Bass Pro.  They steal them, or pay someone else to steal them.  And as story after story on this site demonstrates, follow up on these cases is almost non-existent.  Many of the stories end with “anyone with information should call….” Right!  Like that’s going to happen in a gang-related homicide.

The Sob Story

But the media is not scared to tell us a sob story when it advances the gun control narrative.  Read this one:


There is no question that this incident of domestic violence should never have happened, but while the article does not explicitly say he used a handgun, that is a fair understanding based on the police saying they found the gun in his hand.  Curiously, no one in the media ever mentions that a 19 year old cannot lawfully buy a pistol, and cannot lawfully carry a pistol.  The one good thing about the story is that the scumbag saved the taxpayers the money of a trial and shot himself to death.

Other than posting the original story, the archive offers only the raw statistical information.  So, I wondered if there were stories from several months ago with more involved reporting.  Picking several different stories at random from the week of April 14, I tried to google for additional information about the murders, and the suspects where they were identified.  Little to no additional information was available, indicating that when a person is murdered in many of the larger cities in this country, and the murderer is not immediately caught, there is almost no chance that a suspect will be identified and caught.  Numerous “gang-related” shootings (many where the newspaper states “witnesses say…”) had no useful leads for police.  In many of these gang-related shootings is seems that police simply collect the remains, process the evidence, and chalk up the death to gang activity.

Given that there are so many of these murders committed in the US every day (we’re over 4,800 for the year) I cannot imagine why anyone who was legally able to carry a firearm for protection would not do so.  But, of course, that aspect of the reporting would never be published because it goes against the main media narrative that you, and I, and the NRA are responsible for all these deaths.  It seems pretty obvious from some of these crimes that if guns were not available people would still be dead, they’d just be dead from a different cause.

I think we can officially say that American Journalism is dead.

Supreme Court Watch

The “Muslim Ban”

It’s funny, in a “knowledgeable observer” sort of way, to see the headlines today on the New York Times. News writers aghast that the Supreme Court would do the unthinkable and uphold the “Muslim Ban.”  Of course, the ban isn’t really a muslim ban.  It’s an exercise of the President’s lawful authority under the Constitution as Commander in Chief and his legislatively-enacted ability to restrict entry to the country.  But, of course, to the leftist-gun-grabbing-sky-is-falling news writers, it’s the apocalypse.

From the first opinion written by the first judge presented with the ban (liberal judges, in liberal states, like California and Hawaii) it was clear the injunctions would never hold up and that the judges were legislating from the bench in their quest to undermine the President.  Make no mistake, there was never any legitimate legal reason that the President could not do what he did.  The judges knew that, but they wrote their opinions for the newspapers, not for the Supreme Court.

Then the Ninth Circuit weighed in.  The Ninth, where serial sexual harassers go to exercise judicial power, is the most reversed circuit in the country.  The bench is overpopulated with die hard liberals from the Berkeley campus. Again, their opinions, championed by newspapers everywhere as evidence that Mr. Trump had lost his mind, were written for public consumption, not to withstand review by the Supreme Court. In the initial opinions they did not even cite to the relevant statutes that permitted the President to do what he did. Instead, they filled it with a lot of liberal angst about how awful we were treating a class of invaders who want nothing more than to kill us where we live, sleep, and worship.  But little by little the walls erected by these inferior courts (inferior in the truest sense here) have been disassembled by the Supreme Court which allowed large parts of the travel restrictions to go into force when they overturned the temporary injunctions.  Now the wall will crumble completely.  Look for the opinion to be written by Gorsuch or Thomas, and look for it to excoriate the lower courts for their arrogation of judicial power – power that truly does not exist under case law.

Death for DACA

The next major test will be the DACA injunctions put in place by the same malignantly liberal judiciary.  I can’t wait to see how that gets argued at the Supreme Court.  “Let me see if I understand this right:  you believe that what Mr. Obama did, which he admitted he had no power to do, and which he did unlawfully, cannot be lawfully undone by the President?  You would have us continue the unlawful program because it comports with your views?” Oh, yes, the tickets for that oral argument will sell out in a day, I can assure you.  I wonder if you can get them on StubHub?

Gun Bans Will Fail

And the next major challenges will be to the bans enacted in Vermont, Illinois, Florida and elsewhere over the Parkland Shooting.  Another example of “feelgood lawmaking” gone bad, the bans will fail because they go against the settled law announced by the Supreme Court.  Whether this will happen at the district court level or the appeals court level remains to be seen, but look for the Supreme Court to need to review that issue too.  Here’s what will happen.

In Illinois the corrupt federal system will ensure that the challenge to the Illinois statute goes to a hand-picked liberal federal district court judge who will take a minimum of six months to issue an opinion.  They know they’re wrong, and they will be hoping for a sea change at the Supreme Court before the issue gets there.

The Seventh Circuit will then take up the challenge after the liberals uphold the statute.  Although it could go favorably to the Second Amendment there, I predict that the statute will be upheld in spite of Heller and its progeny.  That will set up an appeal to the Supreme Court where that ban, along with all the bans related to specific types of “assault weapons” (that are not actually assault weapons) will fail.  Again, the left will push to repeal the Second Amendment, and the sane people of the United States will properly say “Uh, no thanks!”

What Needs to Happen

But, here’s what I would really like to see out of the Supreme Court.  I would like to see the Supreme Court personally rebuke the judges who issued the bad opinions in the earlier cases.  I want to see them called out and put on notice that if they continue to play politics with the law the Supreme Court will recommend their removal from office.  If you want the courts to work right, the Supreme Court needs to be able to police the lower courts and impose sanctions with teeth.  I would suggest restricting the offending judges to criminal matters and restricting their ability to act on requests for injunctive relief for a period of four years while the judges read case law and learn what the law is, instead of what they would like it to be.  It will never happen, I realize, but that’s what I’d like to see.  And, if you’re going to dream, dream big.

Lies, Damned Lies, and Politics

There are lies, damned lies, and statistics….  Mark Twain

A Kansas labor lawyer, Brent Welder, running for Congress sent me the following email:

Screen Shot 2018-03-22 at 10.23.49 AM

No one holds politicians to account for their lies, but I am going to do so here.  Mr. Welder starts with the proposition that 67% of Americans support a complete ban on “assault weapons.”  Perhaps Mr. Welder would like to look in the United States Code that, as a labor lawyer he should be familiar with.  An “assault weapon” is capable of fully-automatic fire.  No assault weapons are sold to the general public.  The only way to secure an automatic firearm is to pay for the tax stamp and go through the paperwork for the ATF.  The idea that “assault weapons” even exist, or that the AR-15 is one, are in fact creatures of marketing and advertising gurus working for the Evil Empire (aka, the Democratic Party).

Have you ever noticed that when people cite “the latest polling” they never cite the actual poll, or list the actual polling questions.  That’s because when you ask the question this way:

Do you support a total ban on fully automatic firearms firing multiple big bullets out of a big scary black-looking rifle designed only to kill lots of people?

You get a different answer than if you ask the question this way:

Do you support a total ban on modern sporting firearms?

But, you see, they do not ask the question in a reasonable manner, because when they do the answer is almost always reasonable.  As every lawyer knows, sometimes, the answer is not important, it’s the question!

Here’s the other part of that problem:  Did you ever notice they don’t disclose the demographics of who they polled.  A “nationwide poll” could simply be a poll of people in Hollywood and people in New York City.  That’s “nationwide” from a polling perspective, and it skews remarkably the results in favor of gun control because urban dwellers have different view than us rural folk.

And they also do not disclose how many Democrats, Republicans, and Independents they surveyed because, again, that would give away the game.  When you survey 67% Democrats, you get a 67% Democratic response.  Duh!

Then there is this giant canard about “97% support background checks for all gun buyers.”  Maybe Mr. Welder should read the Brady Bill which required this very thing.  If you go into a gun store to buy a gun, you get a background check.  The idea that there are gaps in the system is again, a creature of marketing.  But, here we can expose the real hidden agenda behind the “Universal Background Check” pushers:  Gun Registration.

Let’s suppose that if I sell you my Glock 21, I have to get a background check on you.  If I bought that from another person, and there is no record of the transaction, how is anyone going to know I sold it to you?  Unless…

Yes, that’s right, unless you and I have to both go to a gun store, pay a transaction free, and fill out federal paperwork, or what is de facto registration of all firearms.  You see, it is not the background check they care about, it’s knowing who has guns, and who doesn’t.  That makes them easier to confiscate when that is really the end game of the gun control crowd.

Also, it would be a really good thing if people like Mr. Welder, the politician du jour who wants to grab your guns, actually knew a thing or two about guns in the first place.  You can find out all about Brent Welder’s hardscrabble upbringing in Iowa on his website.  You can learn that he ate hot dogs for every meal because it was all they could afford (I’m crying my eyes out, seriously). But, one wonders why, being from Iowa, he didn’t simply go hunt deer.  Perhaps because, like many left-wing Iowans, he grew up in a gun-free family, doesn’t know the first thing about guns, hasn’t shot a gun, and doesn’t even know which end the cartridge goes into, let alone where the bullet comes out.  You discern this from his rags to riches story and the fact that he has supported every far-left-wing nutjob that has ever campaigned for public office.  At least there are no phony pictures of him bird hunting.

Could Brent Welder field strip an AR-15?  Could he perform immediate action?  Could he do a tap & rack on a Glock 19?  Doubtless reading this Mr. Brent would come to the conclusion that I’m speaking a foreign language.  So….if he doesn’t understand guns, why is he trying to regulate them?  I mean, my house uses electric heat, but that doesn’t qualify me as an expert on utility rates or nuclear power plants.  But, sure enough, this is exactly the kind of “experience” Democrats are pushing.  Not real-world, practical experience, but the experience of running campaigns, organizing labor unions that steal worker’s money to fund big-wig pensions, and supporting candidates that would make Karl Marx grin with glee.

Still, I admire the way the left goes at this issue.  They lie, cheat and steal with absolute glee, and it is “ungentlemanly” to call them out on it.  So our Republicans just harrumph a little and ignore them.

The hell with that.

Let’s take them on.

If just a dozen well-informed gun-rights-supporting people would attend a rally for these misfits, and take them to task, and tell them up front how wrong they are (or, how about this:  invite them to go shooting) we could make some progress here.

Getting solicitations like this from Kansas makes me very glad to live in Florida where, we may not be perfect all the time, but we sure get a lot more right on guns than we get wrong.